Jimmy Carter visited the Middle East this week, and spoke at the American University of Beirut on the importance of a settlement between Israel and Palestine in the near future. He seemed optimistic regarding the capacity of the President of the United States to nudge the Israelis toward mutually agreeable conditions for settlement:

“I found that the American president has great influence with the leaders of Israel. That has grown and still holds, in my opinion, the foremost opportunity for progress,” he says.

But success, Carter said, largely hinges on Obama's commitment to Middle East peace, especially given the “tremendous pressure in the US to side completely by Israel.”

“It's not a hopeless case, but it depends on the commitment and political courage of the next president of the United States,” he said.

If that is in fact true, then that could be a good thing; if it is, though, then we have to wonder precisely why no US President has ever taken advantage of that power to do, well, much good really at all. If the conditions that make it expedient for the President not to push for concessions from the Israelis have not changed, then I would expect very little. Furthermore, the obvious strain on the President-elect from dealing with the economy will make it even less popular with the public for him to address the problems of the Middle East: all eyes will be trained on domestic issues in the forseeable future.