The Americans hope that three months will be a long enough time to work out borders for the new Palestinian state. And while cynics point to potential foibles in this plan, Obama and Co. think that the pre-1967 borders can be reinstated. The Economist argues that the only way a border settlement can be reached is if Mr. Netanyahu reorganizes his coalition, and moves from his more conservative ties to more moderate ones. The Kadima party, under Tzipi Livni, seems to be a good choice.

Even though the Americans badly want peace, it’s not up to them. Peace can only work if both the Palestinians and the Israelis are behind it, because as history has shown, compromise between these two parties can be difficult to achieve.

The Palestinian Authority may recognize this, but not in exchange for a simple extension of the freeze – they want veritable peace. Nor will they negotiate unless the settlement freeze is extended.

Members of the left hope that this last step will prepare relations for the realization of the peace process.

In most games, there is a certain power structure based on recognition. In this peace game, power will be balanced based on a respect and appreciation of Israel as Jewish state, to ensure that the Arabs never overtake Israel, even if they do have a larger population, and a recognition of Palestine as national entity. But since Israel is the one who is calling the shots, they want their demands satisfied. If it were up to desperate Palestine alone, peace might occur, but being backed by a relatively extreme Arab League doesn’t speed the process. Sure Israel could be the bigger man and grant Palestine what they want, but fear holds them back. And so the games continue.

Jordan’s King Abdullah II and Egypt’s President Mubarak endorsed the conference at the White House last night, in hopes that regional support of the talks will continue. Both serve important roles: the former for securing Palestine’s eastern borders, reassurance which Israel needs, and the latter for more historical value, referencing the first Arab-Israeli treaty in 1979.

Mr. Abbas has said he will walk out if Israeli construction continues in the West Bank, after the 10-month moratorium ends on Sept. 26. Other issues include the possible sharing of the Old City of Jerusalem, a dismantling of the West End settlements to form  more concentrated settlements near the old border; and an outline of the border with the new Palestinian state.

Avigdor Lieberman, the actual foreign minister, is against most of this compromise, and promises to withdraw his party, Yisrael Beitenu, from the government if Mr. Netanyahu cedes too much. Mr. Barak, leader of the center left Kadima Party wouldn’t mind if that happened – he’s said that “Peace is more important than the composition of the government.”

Bret Stephens for the Wall Street Journal recently wrote an op-ed piece about Why Israel Hasn’t Attacked Iran. Although he has received numerous accolades from around the world, I am surprised at his war hawking in this piece.

First off, Israel completed a rocket tracker yesterday that can shoot Hezbollah and Hamas rockets out of the sky. Nice. That kind of defensive warfare not only sounds cool, but will likely keep Israelis safe.

Stephens runs through the ideas as to why Israel has not yet blown the Iranian reactor to pieces, of which include the unlikelihood of success, time biding, internally jarring Israeli politics, and a history of European intercessions, should anything arise.

He writes, “There is now talk that the Obama administration may be reconsidering its military options toward Iran. Let’s hope so.”  Oh, Mr. Stephens. I’m not the anti-Israel, give peace a chance toting blogger that you commonly come across, but at least I recognize that in the 21st century, any kind of “military options” for peace aren’t going to work.

The world is too interrelated – take the flotilla for example. What if Israel bombed Iran? The whole world would effectively abolish the Jewish state. But same goes for Iran – if they even touched Israel, the West would come down way hard on them. So everyone plays it cool. Israel’s got the defense, Iran can waste their money on W.M.D. Everyone’s happy, right?

Yesterday, Israel said that they would take steps to ease the blockade on Gaza. A list of items that are supposed to encourage economic growth in Gaza has been reviewed and repealed. Today President Obama said that the bond between Israel and the U.S. is “unbreakable.” Netanyahu said he looked forward to taking “concrete steps” to peace.

After March, when talks about how to diplomatically proceed with Palestine reached an impasse, relations were at their worst. Today marks a return to a relationship based on good appearances.

In the West Bank, the New York Times reports a list of groups that have given large, tax-deductible sums to Jewish development. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Netanyahu has stalled the building projects that were announced in March to be constructed in East Jerusalem in hopes of kick-starting a peace process.

While critics say that this is simply political posturing, the fact that cameras were allowed to photograph the Prime Minister and the President is reassuring to many Jews who hope for peace and a strong friendship between Israel and the U.S.

This geographic crossroads in no longer a mediating presence between East and West – today Turkey is representative of the East, and an extreme East at that. The Erdogan government is becoming increasingly anti-sectarian, anti-democratic and anti-Israel. Where does this place them? Right in the forefront of Islamic Extremism.

What can be done about this? For one, the U.S. could stand in and invite Erdogan as a mediating force between Israelis and Palestinians, where the West Bank is taking pragmatic steps towards a two state solution. Diplomacy seems to be the best move to make in this global world, where isolationism foments extremism.

Meanwhile, the E.U. passed sanctions on Iran that are stronger than the U.N.’s expected restrictions. Israel is moderating their sanctions on Gaza in response to international criticism.

Here’s hoping that moderation infects the rest of the Middle East.

Although he has supported the death sentence for Arab leaders who meet with Hamas and Hezbollah, and is often aligned with the far right, he favors a two state solution between Israel and Palestine. A trade of Arab populated Israeli regions for near-Jewish areas in the West Bank would reduce the number of Arab denizens, which currently number more than a million of the 7 millions Israelis.

Mr. Lieberman has often been pursued by Israeli police, most recently for his business dealings in 2008. While counts of breach of trust, bribery, and fraud have been pressed against him, he welcomes the attacks, due to the publicity he receives from the media. As a result, many align with his views, and support his ideas.

Elie Wiesel (Left).

For many on the right, supporting the Obama administration is akin to denouncing Israel as a state. But many young, liberal American Jews desire peace in the Middle East, and wish that the heads of government were more willing to compromise. This is actually the majority of American Jews, according to a New York Times article, which also notes that American Jews who voted for Obama still support his decisions, but that Israeli support of Obama has plummeted.

Today, Obama had lunch with Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel, to try to assuage some of the hostility directed towards his administration’s tactics. The writer pronounced tensions between the two states as over, but in Israel there are still feelings of animosity.

With talks set to begin in the region later this week, there is speculation as to how the Israeli government will lean when it comes time to compromise. Mr. Abbas, the Palestinian prime minister has reassured Israel that it will defend the border against Hamas attacks, but that doesn’t seem as dedicated as the Israelis want, especially with the necessary approval of the Arab League lingering in the background.

At the largest convention of world leaders in Washington in more than 50 years, President Obama can point to making progress. With Russia and Ukraine working to cut back on stockpiles of Uranium and bombs, and China with the U.S. on Iran sanctions, Israel should feel confident.

Israel remained absent from the meeting, however.  Speculations vary, but many suspect that the Obama administration’s censure of Israeli nuclear capability would have been discussed at length.  Others remarked that Prime Minister Netanyahu declined to attend because Arab countries would have focused on Israel’s nuclear program, goading Israel.

Meanwhile, Israel warned the U.S. that it will not accept any ultimatums regarding peace talks. While King Abdullah II of Jordan urged the U.S. that its engagement in the process is necessary, and that if the U.S. doesn’t impose a timeline on certain requisites, the process will be interminable.

On the other hand, Syria, it seems, has given Hezbollah Scud missiles. These rockets have a distance of 435 miles, which endangers Israeli cities and hurts Syrian-American relations, weak as they are.  All of these developments signal no further step toward compromise in the Middle East.

In Gaza, the tunnels that lead to Egypt are a key mechanism for the transportation of goods.  They have recently been multiplying like rabbits, fueling illegal trading of supplies that Israel has outlawed, in turn, dropping prices and leading to rebuilding of the areas that Israel bombed last year. Overall, Gaza is in much better shape than the West Bank, which often gets mired in Israeli bureaucracy. Yet Hamas remains politically isolated from the other Arab countries in the region.

In the West Bank, nonviolent efforts for peace are taking root – literally. Palestinians are planting trees and inviting peace mongers like MLK III and Gandhi’s grandson to the region in hopes that a peaceful resistance will lead to a Palestinian state. Public support for military approaches has dipped below 50%, a large factor in prompting these small efforts.

Meanwhile, in the U.S., President Obama has been discussing with officials the possibility for putting forth a treaty. Fears rest on possible Israeli rejection of a proposal, and the subsequent refusal of Palestinians to work with anything less than what the U.S. puts forth. While details remain uncertain, a sharing of Jerusalem and a return to 1967 borders would be certain. Likely would be an Arab recognition of Israel as a state and U.S. or U.N. troops stationed along the Jordan river to prevent paramilitary attacks.

With things going the way they have been, look for an American attempt at fostering peace talks in the imminent future.