On Friday, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is expected to formally ask the United Nations to recognize Palestine as an official state. Palestinian statehood -- a goal supported by the United States and most world governments -- is long overdue.

But President Obama took the appropriate tack on Wednesday, reminding the U.N. that "there are no shortcuts" to peace between Palestine and Israel. Instead, direct negotiations that finally and fully resolve territorial, security, refugee and many other issues -- including the status of Jerusalem -- are needed in order to truly establish a viable Palestinian state.

The Obama administration will, and should, stand by Israel and try to round up enough abstentions to block recognition in the U.N. Security Council. Absent that, the United States should be prepared to go it alone and exercise its Security Council veto power.

Whichever method plays out -- or if Abbas can be convinced that a U.N. bid would be met with an international response that is counterproductive to the Palestinian people -- it's what happens next that matters most, lest a diplomatic crisis become a military one.

For diplomacy to work, Israelis and Palestinians need to make difficult choices. Unfortunately, neither group's leader has prepared his citizens for necessary compromises. And the emergence of Israel as a divisive 2012 U.S. presidential campaign issue is hurting, not helping, that country's cause.

Palestine itself is riven with divisions between the West Bank, which is led by the more moderate Abbas and his Fatah party, and Gaza, led by Hamas, which is rightly considered by the United States and many European governments to be a terrorist organization.

Before Israel can be expected to make peace, Palestine must make peace with itself. Any acceptable reunification must mean that Hamas fundamentally changes its approach to Fatah, let alone Israel. To date, the outlook is grim.

Just last Sunday, Hamas Premiere Minister Ismail Haniyeh said, "We support establishing a Palestinian state on any part of Palestinian land without giving up an inch of Palestine or recognizing Israel."

Israeli leadership and society also needs to make moves necessary to achieve peace. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is hemmed in by his right-leaning coalition, which shows no signs of freezing the construction of Israeli settlements or meeting other requirements for peace.

Unlike a leader from the more left-leaning Labor or center-left Kadima parties, Netanyahu is uniquely positioned to lead his governing partners to realize that continued intransigence is counterproductive to Israel's security.

If he can't convince his current coalition, Netanyahu should form a new one with more-moderate, realistic partners.

The current trajectory has not only led to a stalemate with the Palestinians, but also has dangerously deteriorated the few good regional relationships Israel has had with countries such as Turkey and Egypt.

And further destabilization could result from the unpredictable changes rapidly sweeping the region as a result of the Arab Spring protest movements in North Africa and the Middle East.

Here in the United States, Republican presidential candidates, as well as several key GOP congressional leaders, are playing a dangerous game with American foreign policy. Obama's efforts to achieve peace are not "appeasement," as absurdly stated by Texas Gov. Rick Perry.

Nor are they "repeated efforts over three years to throw Israel under the bus and undermine its negotiating position," as cynically stated by Mitt Romney.

Obama is living up to the definition of an ally by being a true friend to Israel, both by working to block Palestine's U.N. bid, as well as by pushing both sides to make the necessary compromises to legitimately achieve a two-state solution.

* * *

Readers, what do you think? To offer an opinion considered for publication as a letter to the editor, please fill out this form. Follow us on Twitter @StribOpinion and Facebook at facebook.com/StribOpinion.