When Barack Obama came to power there was optimism that there could be a breakthrough in the stagnant Middle East peace process, especially after his appointment of George Mitchell as his special envoy, his support for a two-state solution and his Cairo speech.

Obama was given more impetus thanks to the candid and unprecedented critique by the Pentagon, which said that Israel's intransigence and the stalled Middle East peace process was endangering US interests and eroding US credibility among its Arab allies. Even more ominous were the views voiced by many Arab leaders, who informed a Pentagon delegation last year that the US seemed incapable of standing up to Israel, and that Arabs were losing faith in American promises. But all of that sadly fell on deaf ears, and Washington continued with politics as usual.

Now, Palestinian National Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has urged Obama to impose a solution to the Middle East conflict that will give the Palestinians an independent state.

Further analysis of US policy in the Middle East was aired recently by US National Security Adviser James Jones. In a speech at the Washington Institute, Jones' speech focused on "two defining challenges" confronting the United States and its allies in the region: "preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them, and forging a lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians as part of a comprehensive peace in the region." Jones did not mince his words in making a connection between the two challenges, which are intertwined. He argued that any progress in brokering a settlement, whether between Israel and the Palestinians or between Israel and Syria, was dependent on successfully containing Iran.

This simplistic belief that the US can succeed by limiting Iran's influence and preventing it from meddling in Arab affairs is a recipe for disaster. Instead, Israel should be compelled to adhere to the letter of Annapolis Conference consensus and the road map introduced by Mitchell himself, on behalf of presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

Playing into Iran's hand

Sending Vice-President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Mitchell on numerous visits without pressuring Israel to freeze colony construction, especially in occupied east Jerusalem, is shortsighted. This plays into Iran's hand and strengthens its influence and legitimacy in the eyes of Arabs.

The Pentagon as well as numerous think tanks and opinion polls indicate that the failure of the US to achieve a lasting and comprehensive peace in the Middle East and its bias in favour of Israel are the main reasons for the country's low standing in the region. These same factors are responsible for repeated failure in the battle for hearts and minds in the Middle East — and yet the US does nothing about it.

When Jones argues that Iran exerts influence in the Middle East by exploiting the ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict, keeping US allies in the region on the defensive and limiting its isolation, he is only half right. The other half of the equation is that the US is not doing enough to pressure Israel, which is becoming a costly liability, endangering US interests and undermining US strategic objectives in the Middle East.

As I have argued in a previous column, these US military concerns were voiced in a forthright manner by the briefing of United States Central Command commander General David Petraeus before the influential Armed Services Committee in the US Senate in mid-March. Petraeus argued on record that "the enduring hostilities between Israel and some of its neighbours present distinct challenges to our ability to advance our interest in the AOR [area of responsibility]. Israeli-Palestinian tensions often flare into violence and large-scale armed confrontations. The conflict foments anti-American sentiments, due to the perception of US favouritism for Israel. Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of US partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world. Al Qaida and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilise support. The conflict also gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hezbollah and Hamas."

The US has diagnosed the disease but it has thus far failed to take the medicine to cure itself and remedy the situation. It is beyond logic to continue with this misguided approach, thereby shooting itself in the foot. When will the US put its own interests first in the Middle East and break away from the influence of narrow-minded lobby groups? As long as this misguided policy continues, the US has to expect its influence to wane and its popularity to diminish. Furthermore, it will fail to defend its national interests and continue to lose the long and arduous battle to win the hearts and minds of Arabs and Muslims, even with a moderate administration and a president such as Obama.