BY GABE MIZRACHI

President Obama has made it clear that he does not support Palestine’s efforts to achieve statehood and recognition from the United Nations. This is not because he believes that the Palestinian people do not deserve a state of their own, but because such a settlement will not create peace with Israel.

“Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the U.N.,” said Mr. Obama as he spoke to the U.N. General Assembly on Sept. 21. A resolution of conflicts between Palestine and Israel can only come, he believes, by encouraging them to engage in more peace talks. The four main issues that plague any progress in their relations are the fate of Jerusalem (a city considered holy by Muslims and Jews), the borders of the Palestinian state, Israel’s safety and the condition of Palestinians who were forced to desert their homes in Israel.

Over the course of his term in office, Mr. Obama’s opinion on Palestinian statehood has shifted. Just last year he expressed his enthusiasm for the territory’s recognition from the U.N., but now he has reversed his stance.

Mr. Obama’s current view on the conflict seems peculiar considering that he greatly lauded the sweeping democratic movements in North Africa (now known triumphantly as the “Arab Spring”), for Palestine is very close to the sites of rebellion; but though it may be another Arab nation standing up for itself (just like the nearby revolutionary countries), its situation is quite different from that of the North African nations.

The nations of North Africa and the Middle East that underwent democratic revolutions did not rise up because they were expelled from their lands, as the Palestinians were. They were unhappy with their rulers, who were ignoring their interests. There was an extreme lack of democracy in these nations that needed to be fixed, and the people did a fine job expressing that. However, their most pressing complaints had nothing to do with conflicts with other nations. The uprisings were based almost completely on domestic issues such as political corruption, police brutality, low minimum wage and high food prices. These are entirely different from the grievances of Palestinians, who maintain a grudge against Israel for expelling them from their land. But problems similar to those of the revolutionary nations may arise if Palestine is granted statehood.

The issues in Palestine are in almost every way different from those of the revolutionary nations of North Africa and the Middle East. So there is some sense in Mr. Obama’s rejection of Palestinian statehood, at least in the ways of Israeli-Palestinian peace, for such an affirmation would give Palestine legitimacy on a global scale. Peace between the two nations does not come from a sweeping statement (or a revolution), but from slow and careful negotiations.