The Peace Maker

But Emanuel has often proved a pragmatist. Leaks from meetings Emanuel has had with Jewish leaders since January suggest his role is to nudge the Israelis toward a more accommodating stance on the issue of a Palestinian state and negotiations with Iran. Emanuel begins his meetings with Jewish leaders with a warning: if anything leaks, he says, according to several participants in such gatherings, neither he nor anyone else in the White House will ever speak to the leaders again.

Earlier this month, at the annual conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, Emanuel left a number of delegates feeling uneasy when he pressed for progress on the Palestinian issue. Like Obama last week, he began by touting the "special relationship" between America and Israel and a "rich friendship, rooted in shared values." But according to Emanuel's talking points, which were obtained by NEWSWEEK, he also declared that "this is a moment of truth for the state of Israel and the prospects for peace." Whereas Netanyahu has sought to deemphasize the Palestinian talks and focus on stopping Tehran's nukes, Emanuel said that Obama "believes that our ability to confront the major challenge of Iran will be affected by our ability to show progress in the Arab-Israeli and Israeli-Palestinian arenas."

Emanuel has taken moderate, even dovish stances in the past. In November 2003, he was one of two Jewish House members to cosponsor a resolution to support the Geneva Accord, an unofficial framework agreement for a two-state solution reached between moderate Palestinians and Israelis. A decade earlier, while a domestic counselor to Bill Clinton, Emanuel was the eager behind-the-scenes organizer of the White House handshake between Yasir Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin that cemented the Oslo peace process, according to participants. "Rahm ran the signing; he was in charge," says a former Clinton administration official who did not want to be quoted revealing White House discussions.

Emanuel's unusual broker's role might be especially useful in the coming year as Obama tries to forge an agreement with Iran on its nuclear program that could fall well short of Israeli expectations. The Obama administration has already begun to use milder language toward Iran than the Bush administration did. The Bush team had insisted on a cessation of all uranium enrichment, period. Obama administration officials also say they want to eliminate Tehran's enrichment capacity, but they're more focused on the larger goal: to prevent an Iranian nuclear weapon. There are also indications that new ideas are being considered. One was outlined in a Senate Foreign Relations Committee report earlier this month: allowing Iran to continue enrichment at civilian levels, provided it comes clean about its alleged weapons program and agrees to very strict inspections. Asked about that and other proposals, two senior administration officials who would not be identified discussing sensitive issues said a halt to enrichment is preferred, but other possibilities have not been ruled out.

Any deal is still far off and would require a huge shift in relations between Iran and the West. So far, the Iranians have yet to agree on a start date for talks. But the Israelis are nonetheless wary. "I would be very surprised if legitimized enrichment in Iran under any circumstances is an acceptable outcome for this or any Israeli government," says Robert Satloff, whose Washington Institute for Near East Policy tends to reflect Israeli thinking. Add to that contradictory views on how best to achieve peace with the Palestinians, and you have the potential for what Satloff describes as "the greatest disagreement between the two countries in the history of their relationship."

All that will present political problems for Obama at home as well—with Emanuel playing his familiar role of fireman for his boss. Rep. Eric Cantor, the only Republican Jewish member of Congress, says the Obama administration is taking a position "that's vastly different from the mainstream American Jewish community" in trying to engage with Iran. "The pro-Israel community has consistently been for keeping sanctions pressure on the terrorist regime in Iran … The administration has indicated in all ways I can tell that we ought not to be pursuing sanctions while talks go on." (Administration officials deny they intend to let up on sanctions if talks go forward.)

Netanyahu wants a fixed timetable for the talks—something like three to six months—to prevent Iran from stalling even as it enriches weapons-grade uranium. At last week's summit, Obama appeared to concede rhetorically to Netanyahu when he said he would insist on seeing "some progress" by the end of the year. Officials close to Netanyahu, who did not want to be named discussing sensitive diplomacy, also say Israel wants to know now what measures Obama will be willing to take against Iran if the talks do fail. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton talked about "crippling sanctions" in Congress in recent weeks but administration officials have declined to elaborate further.