Time for an "even-handed" foreign policy?

One thing which critics of Israel cite as a grievance of theirs is that the U.S. rarely enforces an "even-handed" policy in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict -- an ostensibly neutral outlook to solving the ongoing issue. I've never thought that even-handedness was a prerequisite for any proper foreign policy -- should we be even-handed between the Islamists and democrats in Afghanistan?

Regardless, here is an opportunity for American supporters of the Palestinian cause to dare the Obama administration to pursue an even-handed foreign policy: get the Palestinian government of Mahmoud Abbas to agree to something as necessary and overdue as the Israeli government just has. According to American and Israeli sources, the Israeli government will abide by a temporary freeze in settlement activity.

This is quite a step for the Israeli government. At no point even during the Oslo process was there an explicit agreement between the U.S. and Israel on settlement construction. And this comes on top of PM Netanyahu's previous endorsement of a Palestinian state. He has even kept his word on his campaign promise to ease Palestinian freedom of movement. One year ago there were 35 manned checkpoints in the West Bank; today there are 10. Say one thing about Netanyahu: he is expending significant political capital to protect his relationship with the United States. A country with a foreign lobbying movement so powerful and manipulative shouldn't have to rely on such political maneuvering on behalf of its patron, should it?

Alas, for Obama to push the Palestinian government into an equally needed act would prove fruitless; there is no Palestinian government. Netanyahu's promise to freeze settlement construction is a just act on its own. In fact, it is a pure act of altruism; what could Abbas promise now and deliver? If nothing else, this episode illustrates one crucially important point: Even the most dovish of Israeli leaders would not have a negotiating partner right now.