Now is the time for Turkey to play a meaningful role in curbing Iran's ambition to acquire nuclear weapons. As sanctions intensify – and before Israel or the United States seriously consider taking more coercive (including military) action against Iran's nuclear facilities – Turkey's unique position, influence over and experience with Iran could be utilized. But for Turkey to play such a role, it must display the moral equivalence and the kind of pragmatic leadership that can engender confidence in its meditation efforts in the region.

As direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians are launched this week, it will be critical that the talks address the religious dimension of the conflict. This has been given only scant attention thus far, despite the fact that it has, and will continue to have, a tremendous impact on the ultimate outcome of the negotiations. Religious radicals – both Jewish and Muslim – seek to transform the Israeli-Palestinian dispute from a territorial and national conflict to a religious one, fueled by the conviction that God bequeathed the land exclusively to one faith. It is a view that prevents rational discourse between the sides and leads to the conclusion that agreeing to a two-state solution to the conflict would be tantamount to defying God's will. However, it is time that leaders on both sides – with the assistance of the United States – begin to challenge those who purport to seek God's will to consider that Jews and Muslims may be intended to share the land after all.

The Obama administration's success in moving the Israeli-Palestinian talks from proximity to direct negotiations is an important achievement for making real progress. However, direct talks will not produce substantive results unless the United States takes a number of pivotal steps to insure that the progress made in the negotiations is irreversible, and will eventually lead to a final agreement. This is the only way the United States can avoid the pitfalls of past bilateral negotiations, so that if-for whatever reasons-the negotiations stall or break down, they can be resumed from where they were left off.

Israel's chief reservation regarding the Arab Peace Initiative is the way in which the text addresses the issue of Palestinian refugees. Specifically, the Initiative calls upon Israel to affirm: "achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with U.N. General Assembly Resolution 194." Israelis have largely rejected this passage, believing that it in effect is calling for the "right of return" of Palestinian refugees to Israel, something that would destroy the Jewish character of the state. But a closer look at the Initiative indicates that its mention of 194 need not be the Achilles' heel that Israel has made it out to be.

Earlier this summer I was in Jerusalem meeting with various officials and catching up with old friends. Minutes after meeting a friend, a former high-up official in Israel's Foreign Earlier this summer I was in Jerusalem meeting with various officials and catching up with old friends. Minutes after meeting a friend, a former high-up official in Israel's Foreign Ministry, he ran back to see me. "Alon, come quick, you have to speak with this guy," he told me. After our meeting, he had walked into a pharmacy where the pharmacist saw that he was carrying the brochure I published, "Israel and the Arab Peace Initiative." I went to the pharmacy to speak with the pharmacist and after I confirmed that I was the author of the brochure, he said, "You do not really believe that peace with the Arabs is possible, do you? ‘Arab' and ‘peace' are oxymoronic. There is no such thing."

While the world reacts to the recent flair-up of violence along the Lebanon-Israel border, other developments in the area could present an opportunity to advance regional peace if pursued. The recent visit by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and President Assad of Syria to Lebanon has in effect restored Damascus' dominance over Lebanon, thereby impacting the internal political dynamic in this fractured country. While Syria is likely to maintain its bilateral relationship with Iran for its own strategic and tactical reasons, the new undeclared understanding between President Assad, King Abdullah and Prime Minister Hariri of Lebanon was that Lebanon would remain outside of the Iranian orbit of influence. The message to Tehran was quite clear: Syria – with the backing of the Arab states – will resume its hegemony over Lebanon and both Iran and its proxy Hezbollah must accept this new political reality.

The Arab foreign ministers meeting on July 29th in Cairo to discuss the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations must keep in mind that endorsing direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians is not necessarily a favor to the Israelis. In fact, the opposite is true; direct negotiations will compel the Netanyahu government to deal with substantive issues-such as borders-as a precursor to negotiating a two-state paradigm. The Arab states should link direct talks to negotiating borders, instead of waiting to make more progress in the proximity talks. The United States in particular, along with the leading Arab states, Israel and the Palestinians must do all they can to change the current dynamic of the negotiations. To that end there are specific realistic steps that must be taken not only to avoid failure but to set in motion the inevitability of establishing a Palestinian state.

Israel's national security and self-preservation as a democracy, if not its very existence, depend on its ability and willingness to come to terms with the reality of coexistence with the Palestinians on the basis of a two-state solution. Unfortunately, instead of seeking to promote the creation of a Palestinian state, the current Israeli government has sought to impede it. Although Prime Minister Netanyahu's endorsement of the two-state solution at Bar Ilan University last summer offered a good start, it fell far short of the kind of vision needed to achieve a sustainable, lasting agreement. What he and his government have proposed amounts to an autonomous Palestinian entity, lacking territorial contiguity, with ultimate security responsibility remaining in Israel's hands.

When the Palestinian Authority's Prime Minster Salam Fayyad first introduced his plans to build the infrastructure for a future Palestinian state, many Israelis and Palestinians thought of it as nothing more than another Middle Eastern mirage that will leave no lasting impression. A little more than a year later, the plan is showing not only tremendous promise, but has become indispensable to the emergence of a democratic Palestinian state-one living side-by-side with Israel in peace and security.