For over 60 years, people have dreaming of peace here. In 1993, when Obama joined a large law firm, the Oslo Accords were signed on the White House lawn, and peace appeared more tangible than ever. Since then, the sides have been fighting mainly to prevent a vacuum from being created in the peace process, which would only strength, heaven forbid, the extremists in our region (as if peace talks ever prevented them from gaining strength).

At the end of the ten-month Israeli construction freeze in the territories-which brought us close to exactly the same point we were at before-the US president is demanding three additional months from Israel. In exchange, Israel will receive a package of military and political incentives, and as a bonus, compliments from the president to the prime minister as well. Washington has given Netanyahu everything, but failed in one main point: There is an American expression that says: Put your money where your mouth is. In other words, prove that you’re serious, and make a commitment in writing.

Netanyahu, his aides say, is insisting that Israelindeed receive in writing what he received orally, in his marathon talks in New York with Hillary Clinton last week. But the Palestinians, those with whom we are about to make peace, are opposed to the package of incentives that Israel received, and preventing these assurances from being put down on paper, in black and white.

Netanyahu’s demand for a document of guarantees from Obama attests to the “great trust” between the sides. But it should be said that Obama has earned this skepticism fair and square, after he renounced the letter of commitments that his predecessor, Bush, gaveSharon in April 2004. This was a letter that could be read as American confirmation, or at least tacit consent, to the Israeli demand that in any future peace agreement, the settlement blocs in the West Bank (in which most of the settlers live) would remain within the borders of the State of Israel. This, incidentally, teaches us the value of a letter.

In the end, if the freeze is not extended, it will be Netanyahu who will suffer the criticism and be defined as obstructing the peace process. However, in this story it is Obama who caused us to regress by turning clear facts into contingencies, such as an American veto in the UN for any diplomatic initiative that harms Israel, and inflated the issue of the freeze.

Obama believes that during the additional months of the freeze, the sides will reach understandings on the issue of borders, and therefore the continuation of Israeli construction will not pose a problem, since it will be within the framework of the border agreement that will be reached by the sides. According to Obama, within three months we are supposed to succeed in achieving what we have not achieved for 62 years.

It was Colin Powell, of all people-the former secretary of state and a moderate Republican who even supported Obama-who criticized him on Monday in an interview to CNN, saying that he failed to focus on what is truly important. This was well put, and also correct.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR