So good for the common reasons. Because many elements are also splitting the two players.

On the one hand Washington is willing to implement a very pro-active policy using classical instruments (sticks and carrots) to push Arab regime towards American-style democratic systems, using the shockwawes of Iraq invasion to oblige Arab regimes to change. Meanwhile it looks at a region which goes far beyond the Arab world as it has a clear priority which is to enhance Israel protection; while it is integrating in its plans countries like Iran, Afghanistan or Pakistan (which are belonging to totally different cultural areas).

On the other hand the European Union is willing to use its existing ties with the region especially the ‘EuroMed’ policy which developed in the 90s a specific set of agreements between the EU and 12 countries from Southern and Eastern Mediterranean area and is based upon cooperation with local governments; while it does not consider at all to include Central Asia or Iran inside such a Middle East policy because they share very different issues; and on the contrary the EU wants to include Israel as part of the Middle East problem.

Obviously diplomats from both sides of the Atlantic have a long way to go before they may agree on any concrete action. But those important differences are nevertheless nothing compare to the major flaw of both strategies: they do not have any credible levy to reach out Arabic population.

To shape up a different future for any human community, you need a strong and attractive “dream” which will allow this community and the individuals it gathers to push for changes, accept short term negative consequences and stay deaf to all those voices which are going to call for refusing the change. You need this “dream” to motivate the youth, and in particular, the “young elites” which are going to provide the local or sectorial leadership you need to implement the changes.

Without such a “dream” the “sticks and carrots” will be as effective as it has been with nation building or regime change in past decades: that is to say totally ineffective. Without such a “dream”, cooperation with local governments will just lead nowhere as there will be no internal pressure.

And in this region, not only do we need a “dream” to implement democratic changes, but we need two “dreams”: a dream for the Arabs as such (see report of Europe 2020 seminar of future relations between EU and Arab world) and a “joint dream” for Arabs and Israelis together (see Middle East 2020 project). At least in Europe after WWII, we only needed one: European unity. It was simpler.

But let’s face the challenge of Middle East: two “dreams” are needed. If nothing is done with younger generations to shape them up, the Arab unity dream on one side, the Arab-Israeli common dream on the other side, both Europe and the US may keep on discussing: their summits will lead nowhere, but to more conflicts involving more and more directly both the US and the EU.