The messiah came to Israel yesterday, but chances are that, as Shalom Hanoch sings, he's (probably) not going to call. For someone who is convinced that change won't come from within Israeli society and that Israel has no chance of becoming a state of justice without U.S. President Barack Obama, all that remains is the dream of the white knight on the horse who will pressure Israel to pull out of the territories, as described by Haaretz editor in chief in his recent opinion piece in this paper, "Leftists, stop fantasizing."

Israel is so complacent and blind that international pressure is the only reasonable hope. True, it's not democratically sound, for change should have come from within. True, the world isn't supposed to do Israel's job, but more than 3 million individuals won't continue having their rights trampled as this country thrives. This situation will change in one of two ways: terror and bloodshed, or international pressure and boycott. Pressure is better.

As a rule, the swaths of society that are free and content aren't the ones that start revolutions; they benefit from injustice. If men had their way, in some societies women still wouldn't have the vote. If the end to apartheid in South Africa and to slavery in the United States required the support of all the whites in those countries, those institutions would still be intact. And if it were up to European colonialists, half the world would still be a colony. Only the combination of a revolt – almost always a violent one – and, in some cases, international pressure brought about the necessary change.

Obama, who arrived in Israel on Wednesday, could have – and should have – filled the role of the knight in pursuit of justice, but he is not doing so. As Benn wrote, this isn't about the construction of a few apartments in Itamar or Modi'in Ilit. It's about historic justice, and when that justice is not carried out, the world must have its say. Sometimes, when the world wants to, it knows how to have its say, and sometimes it looks away. That is what it is doing in the face of the Israeli occupation, and the hope that the world will change its way is legitimate.

Obama can, as Benn wrote, tell the Israeli left the truth: that change must come from within. But Israeli society is just fine with the occupation, and there are some Israelis who are actively keeping the occupation as hidden as possible. As long as Israeli society is fine and comfortable with the occupation, why should Israelis put an end to it? Will society end the occupation just because a few leftists are nudging them or because the so-called anti-Semitic world is grumbling?

Yes, I and those who share my views wish for external pressure. I admit it with my head bowed in shame; we have no other country, as those on the right like to say – and we also have no other way to save it. We hold this place dear to our hearts no less than other Israelis do, and so we yearn for pressure.

Is that a worn sentiment? Support for the occupation is much more worn out. This message about saving our country isn't one that can be freshened up; this isn't some copywriter's slogan. No leader of the left will arise to bring the masses out into the streets. They are too busy watching the reality song contest "The Voice." It's also impossible to connect with the mainstream, as Benn argues the left should do, because the mainstream doesn't pay any price for the occupation and doesn't want to know anything about it.

The occupation must come to an end, not because of the demographic threat or because an agreement may be within reach but because of justice, the violation of which has outraged a handful of Israelis and most of the world for 46 years. Is morality not enough? It is also in the American national interest and in that of the rest of the world to resolve the Middle Eastern conflict.

We will continue doing it our way. In the words of Ze'ev Jabotinsky, when he railed against the Histadrut labor federation in 1932: Yes, break it. Break the occupation, in any way that will prevent more bloodshed. Four years ago, we hoped the white knight would be black, and though the expectation was not and is not unrealistic, he has been a disappointment so far.

Obama came to win the favor of Israelis (and American Jews), and I wish him success. But the question is what he will do with that success. He is a visitor in the land depicted by Channel 2 television, with its good life and entertaining quiz shows; it is a land whose society won't awaken or sober up until rivers of blood flow through its streets, or until it feels real presidential pressure.

Maybe it really is a fantasy that Obama will exert the necessary pressure, but the alternative is a nightmare.