There is no starker reminder of the inability of Palestinians and Israelis to live together than the recent revelation by the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem that both sides cannot even agree to purify their regional sources of drinking water. Without such a joint effort, neither community can thrive in the often parched region. That’s why finding agreement on such relatively uncontroversial matters should be a barometer of future cooperation. Indeed, it is to this and similar projects that U.S. mediators must turn their focus as they seek to build the confidence of both Israelis and Palestinians as to the fruits of dialogue.

In short, nearly 2 million of the 2.8 million Jews and Arabs living in Jerusalem and the West Bank is not being treated. The failure to act could result in “permanent contamination” of the region’s mountain aquifer, a main water source for both Jewish and Palestinian communities. In addition, only 81 of the 121 West Bank Jewish settlements are connected to a wastewater treatment plant. Worse, many of those operations are outdated and cannot handle the full load, according to B’Tselem.

For their part, the Palestinians suffer a double blow: The waste from the Jewish communities, mostly built on hilltops, flows down to them and into their springs and wells. Meanwhile, an astonishing 95 percent of Palestinian wastewater is not treated. Not only that, but the Palestinians reportedly have refused attempts by Israel to jointly deal with wastewater. The fear, according to the Palestinians, is this would legitimize the settlements.

Regardless of what does or does not happen in the peace negotiating arena, Israelis and Palestinians need to learn how to become drinking buddies.

The latest flare-up in Catholic-Jewish ties was an unexpected one. That’s because I’ve met too many bright, well-intentioned Catholic theologians along the way to think that their official body could take such a dangerous step backwards in the fragile Catholic-Jewish rapprochement, which after about 1,900 years of bad blood – often spilt blood at that—began in earnest less than five decades ago.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops appears – according to the Anti-Defamation League – to have given a “green light” for the missionizing of Jews. And it certainly seems that way.

The twist comes in a document called “A Note on Ambiguities Contained in Covenant and Mission,” which says that interfaith dialogue with Jews (and others) is a prime opportunity to spread the good word of the Catholic faith. The document was jointly released on June 18 by the USCCB Committee on Doctrine and Pastoral Practice and the Committee on Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs.

This seems to overturn a 2002 statement in “Reflection On Covenant and Mission.” In that text, interfaith dialogue was called “a mutually enriching sharing of gifts devoid of any intention whatsoever to invite the dialogue partner to baptism.”

Now there’s a weird thing about all this that Jews often forget; Christians are supposed to evangelize, and a whole branch of Christiandom, which happens to be the spiritual home of some 60 to 70 million Americans, is known as Evangelical Christianity. So let’s not criticize Christians for spreading the good word in general, but let’s hold them accountable for the context in particular.

After all, the very sordid history between Christians and Jews has seen Jews numerically and often physically overwhelmed since the first century C.E. Further, in Europe this led to Jews living precariously amidst Christian xenophobia, slander and outright slaughters, all of which I believe in part – not in entirety – laid the groundwork for the Holocaust. So it’s more than fair to say that the Catholic Church needs to back off here.

We have a gargantuan amount of work to do together to make life on God’s good [and not green enough] earth better, something which will take many centuries because we didn’t arrive at this mess yesterday. Indeed, our fractured world – to borrow a phrase from the late Emil Fackenheim (who took it from kaballah) –needs immediate attention from our spiritual leadership, which means we don’t need stupid distractions.

Maybe after we relieve all of the poverty, hunger, educational inequalities, racism and other hatreds that lead to such insanity, maybe then we can worry about whose theology trumpets whose. And maybe then God will even send us a text message weighing in.

Until then, let’s cut the narrishkeit. (Note to Catholic friends: It’s Yiddish; look it up. After all, I have to look up your Latin phrases.)

One would excuse Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for seeking medical relief after the self-induced pain of political deja vu.

On Sunday, June 14, he did it again – gaining a coveted pat on the back from a U.S. president, and angering Israel’s right and left (and their supporters abroad) for respectively selling out and not going far enough. Meanwhile, the Palestinians’ predictable “not good enough and violence is coming” quickly followed.

The same thing happened back in 1998 when Mr. Netanyahu was prime minister and he negotiated the Wye Accord, which promised to give 13 percent more of the West Bank to the Palestinians (which never occurred as the deal imploded Mr. Netanyahu’s governing coalition).

The new flare-up came after the Israeli leader’s speech at Bar Ilan University – interestingly the political home of the religious nationalist camp, including its most infamous student, Yitzhak Rabin murderer Yigal Amir.

Bibi’s speech deserves serious attention by American Jews for what was said and what it means in our efforts to help the Jewish state as we have more power than we often believe.

For starters, Mr. Netanyahu called for immediate, unconditional negotiations with the Palestinians, talks that will eventually lead to a Palestinian state aside Israel. This was the long-awaited (by the Obama administration) endorsement of a “two-state solution.” It is anathema to the right-wing roots that watered Mr. Netanyahu’s intellectual upbringing.

Not so fast, critics cry. Mr. Netanyahu dumped heavy conditions into the mix, merely making this a long delaying tactic. They include: the Palestinian state being demilitarized, Jerusalem being recognized as Israel’s undivided capital, the end of the Palestinian refugees’ demand to return to pre-1967 Israel and formal Palestinian agreement that Israel is “the Jewish state.”

On West Bank Jewish settlements, Mr. Netanyahu said “natural growth” in existing communities would go on, but new settlements will not arise.

The predictable Palestinian response from P.A. President Mahmoud Abbas: “The speech has destroyed all initiatives and expectations.” For good measure, a top aide added, “in the aftermath of this speech, we are headed toward another round of violence and bloodshed.”

In such quick denunciation, the Palestinians sadly proved an inability to negotiate even before the process begins. No one expects them to embrace Israel’s opening positions any more than vice versa. Would they need the dialogue were they in agreement?

Rather than offer a knee-jerk defense toward Israel’s positions, American Jews and their organizations should go beyond their general congratulating Mr. Netanyahu on his historic two-state concession. They also must push him on the details. In particular, they need him to outline – and then to politically and financially support – economic progress for the Palestinians.

Most of all, they need to keep asking: Why the delay in dismantling the 101 West Bank outposts? These small clusters of ramshackle homes are often populated by the “hilltop youth,” the current vanguard of the settler movement. But Bibi and his immediate two predecessors have agreed the outposts are illegal. Likewise, they have to date lacked the political will and strength to move against them.

We also need definitions of “natural growth” for existing settlements. It is a valid concept, and this week – surprise, surprise – even former President Jimmy Carter agreed that many Israeli settlements around Jerusalem would not leave Israeli control, which means they can grow within their borders.

At the same time, American Jewish groups need more outreach to Palestinian groups and their allies in this country. And we need to deliver this message:

“There are more words than ‘no.’ Stop negotiating through the media, and start doing it with Israel. Make the West Bank a `Hamas-free zone.’ Build bridges with American Jewish groups. U.S. support is critical and no one follows your plight more closely than we do and, yes, we do know how to work the political system, and for the right reasons.

“So drum up a realistic list of confidence building measures. Yours start with stopping incitement toward Jews, a cesspool that breeds violence; Israel’s starts with the maximum freedom of movement possible (within legitimate security limitations) on the West Bank, and encouraging development projects that will employ Palestinians.

“Do this, and push us to realistically push Israel. In doing so, you will dare Netanyahu, the Jewish state and the Jewish people into trusting you, which will be a path toward peace.”

The old stereotype of American Jews having white Ashkenazi backgrounds is slowly being whittled away to the reality that we are diverse in every way imaginable. Yet another important milestone in bringing this to fore came last week with the ordination of Alysa Stanton, 45, from the Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion.

Rabbi Stanton, one of 14 spiritual leaders of the Jewish people who graduated that day, is the first African-American woman rabbi in the United States. Not only that, but the trained psychotherapist is a former Pentecostal Christian. She converted to Judaism 20 years ago while in college.

It would be a vast understatement to say that this mother to an adopted 14-year-old daughter brings a new perspective to the Jewish people. But when she takes the pulpit as the spiritual leader of Congregation Bayt Shalom in Greenville, S.C. in the coming weeks, she will help enforce the notion that Judaism is about the spirit and the heart, not about one’s skin color and ancestors.

In congregations throughout our country, Jews with ethnic backgrounds in Asia, Africa and elsewhere are enriching our communal lives. (My Jewish friends include people who hail from Nicaragua, Nigeria and Asia – not your typical gefilte fish munching crowd.)

In fact, according to the San Francisco-based Be’chol Lashon (Hebrew for “In Every Tongue”) http://www.bechollashon.org/, the diversity of the Jewish people continues to grow around the world. Some were born Jewish; others willing chose to join the Jewish people. All are Jews, and all give credence to the notion that Judaism welcomes all.

While everyone in the world is chiming in on what was in and out of President Barack Obama’s speech in Cairo yesterday, I wonder why no one is taking his travel agent to task.

That is, how can it be that after such a major initiative – in which the section on the pressuring Israel on settlements gained some of the largest applause – the president didn’t then go to Israel where he could directly take the case to Israelis and Palestinians? After all, President Bill Clinton was wildly popular in Israel (meaning he could push Israeli prime ministers a little more) because he went directly to the Israeli people in talking about the need for sacrifice.

After speaking in the Knesset – Israel could not deny such a request to do so – Mr. Obama could then have gone to Ramallah (another first for a U.S. President; Mr. Clinton went to Gaza City) to speak with Palestinians and say, “You must end all support for terror – physical, financial and emotional. And you must end all incitement against Jews and Israel. You can talk about policy differences, but the vitriolic hate that is endemic to your P.A. controlled media must be halted.”

That could have really kick started the sluggish peace process, giving this phase more than a media cycle or two.

The White House would likely respond that this didn’t happen because Mr. Obama had just met in Washington in the past few weeks with both Binyamin Netanyahu and Mahmoud Abbas. But that just doesn’t fly. It’s not the leaders who need to buy into his philosophy, it’s the people who will press them up from the street.

So Mr. Obama, you are indeed an extremely bright person who can deliver a great and weighty speech. But this is the Middle East my friend; if you don’t push the personal relationships – and that means getting yourself out in front of the people – it’s going to be more of the same old game.