High expectations for Obama in Cairo
Except for Jimmy Carter, who brokered the enduring Camp David Accords, American presidents have known nothing but failure in the Middle East, largely because they have almost always sided with Israel while pretending to be honest mediators.
It's now Barack Obama's turn to discover the Arab world, as the American head of state delivers what will surely be a meaningful address this afternoon in Cairo.
On the heels of earlier 'conversations' with this prized audience, first on the Al Arabiya television network, and second to the Turkish parliament, Obama will now show his mettle in Cairo.
He will clearly want to improve his country's image, which is tarnished in most Islamic societies, but must do better than his bland Ankara declaration that "the United States is not, and never will be, at war with Islam". That much should be a given.
In Egypt, Obama will outline his personal commitments to build mutual trust but, again, beyond platitudes, he must deliver something more than standing by moderates against extremists.
Mercifully, his tone will be less preachy and far less ideological than that of George W. Bush's chaotic pronouncements, which reflected incoherence and narrow-mindedness.
Most Muslims were appalled by the tragic events of 9/11, as they thoroughly condemn terrorism. If Bush relied on 9/11, Obama ought to disassociate the US from the many policies that were adopted in its wake, which hang like a giant albatross around the neck of American-Muslim dialogue.
Towards that end, several key concerns, led by the perennial search for Arab-Israeli peace, will challenge Obama. As several of his predecessors were bogged down by interminable negotiations, which are likely to confront him too, his main focus ought to be on how best to persuade the Israelis to forego the dream of military domination.
Obama may not go into detail as far as any new Israeli-Palestinian peace initiatives are concerned, but we are way past the time when more even-handed approaches might be called for, even if these were of the "tough, direct diplomacy" variety.
Every new American administration goes through a period of retraining and this one is no exception, though some wonder why the people of the Middle East must pay the ultimate price for such perpetual education.
Obama seems to favour a two-state solution, which only requires that major Western powers acknowledge Palestine's existence, foregoing discussions of where it could be located, what kind of a state it might be, and whether it would be allowed to defend itself.
Obama must also convince sceptical Arabs and Muslims that the changes he promised will be real. In Egypt, for example, he must confront President Hosni Mubarak's three-decades-long emergency rule that stifles human rights.
It is critical to remain consistent, for preaching to Arabs about basic freedoms from a compromised Cairo will not echo well. Of course, Obama does not carry a magic wand.
Uniformity should likewise be displayed towards all Arabs and Muslims seeking freedom, without imposing Western-style democratisation. In Lebanon, for example, where democratic institutions exist and seem to function well, American support for freedom would go a long way to restoring stability.
Beirut needs the freedom to make patriotic choices, to liberate its occupied lands, and elect a parliament that will strive to serve its citizens.
By siding with Israel against the Lebanese, the US empowers Hezbollah and others to place freedom in abeyance, arguing that security is a priority.
Finally, Obama will need to come to terms with Iran's nuclear ambitions. The reason for this is simple, as Tehran is seeking parity with Israel, Pakistan and India, precisely to create a deterrence capability.
As it is likely that Obama will be president until January 20, 2017, he may think that he has a lot of time to come to terms with these fundamental issues.
But, just like Bill Clinton before him, he will soon discover that time flies. Still, Obama is a sincere man, although he has to find the honesty his predecessors lacked.
What does such integrity entail? Is it, as he recently claimed, about speaking candidly with good friends even when such allies ignore you?
Because neither Obama nor any other Western leader will pressure Israel, one simply wonders what such honesty is worth, which raises an epochal question.
How can the US come to terms with the truth that Israeli/Western hegemony over the Arab/Muslim world is on the wane? If one is honest with oneself, and Obama certainly is, then Washington ought to distance itself from Donald Rumsfeld's "we are defending our way of life" mentality. Only such candour will allow Obama to succeed where so many others have failed.
Dr Joseph A. Kechichian is a commentator and author of several books on Gulf affairs.
Sign up for the Daily Briefing
Get the latest news and updates straight to your inbox