Israel and new realities

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has rejected US President Barack Obama's call for establishing a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders. He told journalists in Washington on Friday "for there to be peace, the Palestinians will have to accept some basic realities"; and that the Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas would have to choose between a new unity pact with Hamas and peace with Israel, adding "I hope he makes the right choice".
Earlier, officials accompanying the hard line Israeli leader had said Washington does not understand the realities their country faces. The truth though is that Israelis are refusing to understand the new realities that have sprung from the 'Arab Spring'.
Notably, although Egypt is yet to make a proper transition to democracy, the interim government has clearly demonstrated that the Mubarak regime's policy of maintaining the status quo in Israel's favour - in exchange for $1.3 billion annual US aid - no longer holds. It took two major steps that pronounced a complete departure from the past policy. One was the announcement early last month to "permanently" open the Rafah crossing, on the Egyptian-Gaza border, calling the Mubarak regime's decision to close the border as "shameful". Former president Mubarak, it may be recalled, had closed the Rafah crossing after Israel imposed a blockade on Gaza following the Hamas victory in the 2006 elections. Secondly, and equally important, the new government in Cairo made hectic behind-the-scenes efforts to bring about reconciliation between the two estranged Palestinian factions, Hamas which ruled Gaza and the Abbas-led Fatah governing the West Bank, brokering the unity pact Netanyahu now wants Abbas to disregard. Notably Abbas, as Palestinian Authority President, spent more than five years negotiating with Israel, but failed to deliver anything to his people.
The basic reality Israel needs to accept is that the Arab world is undergoing a monumental change. And that it is Israel which is trying to swim against the tide. Some of the pro-US authoritarian regimes have fallen; others are in a state of flux. It may no longer be possible for the US to provide Tel Aviv with unqualified support, like in the past, when it went on to trash peace accords with the Palestinians, making relentless land grabs through settlements policy, subjecting an occupied people to horrific violence and economic strangulation, and committing aggression against neighbouring countries, such as Lebanon. The US needs to reshape its old policy in order to secure its economic interests in the region. It is pertinent to recall here that soon after he became president, Obama had undertaken a new initiative to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict by urging Israel to stop settlement activity. Israel had flatly refused to comply with. Fearful of earning the ire of the powerful Jewish lobby in his country, Obama had backed down. The reason he has announced a fresh plan is the process of change in the Middle East. There is a lot at stake for the US. That though does not mean a radical policy shift. Obama's proposal for establishing a Palestinian state within 1967 borders is a mere outline. The devil is in the detail. Obama talked of land swaps, status of Jerusalem and the refugees' right to return. The US would still be inclined to put its weight behind a resolution that favours Israel. It is a moot question though whether it can still muster enough clout to do that or not.