Israel’s announcement of 1,600 new settlement units in Arab East Jerusalem, coming during Vice President Biden’s visit, and the previous day’s announcement of 112 new settlements elsewhere in the Occupied West Bank, should not be seen as one-off slaps at the United States.

In many ways they are a culmination of this Israeli government’s efforts to “teach” President Obama what he can and can’t do to defend American interests in the Middle East.

Vice President Biden came with two important messages for the Israelis: the first was to reiterate what Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and the national security adviser, James Jones, have reportedly already told them: that there is no military solution to the international community’s issues with Iran; his second and more immediate message was that President Obama remains committed to ending the occupation of Arab territory and thereby securing American and Israeli interests in the region.

The Israelis have been giving the United States a counter-message since Likud came to power in Israel last year.

That message has been that Israel demands that the United States take a military confrontational approach with Iran. Its second message, no less vociferous, has been that Israel has no intention of ending its control over the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. Settlements are the most important, but not only, element in that system of control.

The United States has been sending its messages with carrots and great diplomatic restraint. The current Israeli government, in stark contrast, has been responding like a petulant child, outraged that it hasn’t been able to get U.S. acquiescence to its own short-term political strategy.

There is a great deal at stake in this public and private dispute between Israel and the United States. President Obama should consider responding in a similar manner, by creating his own facts on the ground, and ending all forms of U.S. cover and support of the settlement enterprise and other policies that sustain the occupation.

Read more opinions on the New York Times' Room for Debate blog.