CRAWFORD: Israel-Palestine peace talks worth the effort

One of President Obama's foreign policy initiatives in recent days is the attempt to restart the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. A first response to this might be, "Been there. Done that. Why try again?"

After all, every American president in recent memory, from Richard Nixon on, has tried to mediate this conflict. While there have been some successes — the Camp David accords under Carter and the Oslo accords under Clinton — the problem seems as intractable today as when Henry Kissinger was practicing shuttle diplomacy. Why should we bother?

There are good strategic and moral reasons why the United States needs to continue to work toward a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.

First, in the international hotbed that is the Middle East, the "Palestinian question" is considered the major unresolved issue in the region — an issue that the governments of the Arab states cannot afford to ignore. These states include important U.S. allies like Egypt, Jordan and the U.S.'s biggest oil supplier, Saudi Arabia.

Second, terrorist organizations like al-Qaida use Palestinian suffering under Israeli occupation as a recruitment tool.

Third, the government of Iran (not technically part of the Middle East) makes Israel a scapegoat for all of the problems in the area. This is especially worrisome since Iran is on the verge of nuclear weapons capability. It is widely accepted in the foreign policy community that Israel possesses an unacknowledged nuclear arsenal, and the scenario of two hostile nuclear powers in the region pointing weapons at each other is truly frightening.

And last, Israel is the United States' closest ally in the Middle East, and we have an obligation to work toward their peace and security.

Peace and security, however, seem further than ever out of reach in Israel and the Palestinian territories. Two generations of Palestinians and Israelis have now grown up during what has been essentially a low-level war in their midst. Each has learned to see the other as the enemy, and any understanding of the other's position seems more remote each passing year.

Palestinians see their land and water slowly eroded by settlement activity; their economic opportunities stunted by Israeli security measures; their freedom of movement constantly curtailed and their faith in their own leaders ruined by endemic corruption in the Palestinian Authority. Many have given up hope; some have embraced violence as the only solution.

Israelis, meanwhile, feel much less secure than a generation ago in spite of their massive military capability. The latest solution offered by the Israeli government, the security wall, has had the immediate desired effect of almost eliminating suicide bombers but leaves a restless, hostile Palestinian population that must be constantly controlled by harsh measures. Most Israelis acknowledge that the ongoing occupation of the Palestinian territories is a moral and financial drain on their country. Their political will to change, however, is held hostage by right-wing fringe parties, for which compromise is anathema.

In this situation, the United States must be a tough and honest broker. Israel must stop settlement activity, return land and water rights to the Palestinians and allow economic opportunities in the territories. The Palestinians must officially eschew violence against Israel, give up the right of return and accept a demilitarized state. Both sides must compromise on the final status of Jerusalem. These are difficult choices for both sides but the only basis I can see for the longed-for peace agreement.

Dr. Sidnie White Crawford is the Willa Cather Professor of Classics and Religious Studies and the Chair of the Classics and Religious Studies department at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln