• President Obama pays tribute to the uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa as "a moment of opportunity" for change in the region, and that "America values the dignity of the street vendor in Tunisia more than the raw power of the dictator"

• Obama bluntly tells Syria's leader Bashar al-Assad to accept democratic reform and transition "or get out of the way"

• "Mass arrests and brute force are at odds with the universal rights of Bahrain's citizens," Obama tells Bahrain's rulers

• Any peace deal between Israel and Palestine should accept Israel's 1967 borders and agreed land swaps, and "permanent" borders between Israel, Jordan and Egypt and Palestine

• Obama pledged a four-point economic plan to bring growth to the region

You can read a full transcript of Obama's speech here.

Good morning from Washington DC, where Barack Obama's speech on the remarkable 'Arab spring' and the shape of US foreign policy in the region is eagerly awaited. Obama is scheduled to begin speaking at 11.40am eastern time, that's 4.40pm BST and 6.40pm EEST in Damascus.

Here's how the Guardian's Washington bureau chief Ewen Macaskill previewed the speech earlier today, saying it is Obama's most important speech on the region since his visit to Cairo in 2009:

The speech will deal mainly with the Arab spring, hailing the benefits of democracy and respect for human rights, in spite of America's long-time support for authoritarian regimes in the region. Senior Obama administration officials, briefing on the speech, said he will take a fresh look at the Middle East after a decade of tension and division. With the winding down of the Iraq war and the death of Osama bin Laden, "we are turning a page", one official said, adding that the democracy movements reinforced this.

My colleague Matthew Weaver has done an excellent job blogging the latest Middle East unreast and anticipation of Obama's speech today, which you can read right here.

If you want to watch Obama's speech from the State Department from the comfort of your computer or iPad, the White House is offering a live video stream here.

The New York Times puts Obama's speech today into the context of a busy week for Middle East diplomacy:

Thursday's speech at the State Department is designed to be the first in a series of rhetorical opportunities for the president. On Friday, he will meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for a conversation that will be closely watched by the Jewish community in the United States. And this weekend, Mr Obama will address the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the largest pro-Israel lobby in the United States. Together, the post-speech events will give the president a chance to assert his support for Israel early in the 2012 campaign cycle.

PJ Crowley, the former State Department spokesman, tweets his thoughts on what Obama needs to do today:

#Obama should not just reaffirm the aspirations of people in the #MiddleEast. He should call out leaders who oppose the change they seek. Philip J. Crowley

PJCrowley

We'll find out in about 20 minutes or so.

The buzz in Washington is that the speech will have some big new US positions on Israel/Palestine, and will be a long speech, maybe an hour long. So stay tuned.

Waiting for the president to take the podium, and he's slightly late, as usual.

In the meantime, the Associated Press has an intriguing piece of analysis that the United States and Saudi Arabia are "quietly expanding defense ties on a vast scale", and mentions an "an elite force" to protect Saudi oil and future nuclear sites:

The US also is in discussions with Saudi Arabia to create an air and missile defense system with far greater capability against the regional rival the Saudis fear most, Iran. And it is with Iran mainly in mind that the Saudis are pressing ahead with a historic $60bn arms deal that will provide dozens of new US-built F-15 combat aircraft likely to ensure Saudi air superiority over Iran for years. Together these moves amount to a historic expansion of a 66-year-old relationship that is built on America's oil appetite, sustained by Saudi reliance on US military reach and deepened by a shared worry about the threat of al-Qaida and the ambitions of Iran. The quiet US moves in Saudi Arabia form part of the backdrop to President Barack Obama's speech Thursday, which is intended to put his imprint on the enormous changes sweeping across the greater Middle East.

It seems Obama hasn't even left the White House yet so we're about another 15 minutes away from him speaking. Can I just point out that George Bush was almost always on time? Draw your own conclusions from that.

Meanwhile: Twitter users can take part in questions and answers immediately after Obama's speech, when the White House's live-stream will switch to a follow-up Twitter chat with deputy national security advisor Ben Rhodes, one of the speechwriters, and monitoring the #MESpeech hashtag if you want to follow the debate or ask questions.

The Guardian's Jack Shenker emails:

In case any of your readers need something to distract them while waiting for the big man's speech, this interview with Egypt's antiquities chief Zahi Hawass has just gone up on the Guardian website – part of the Guardian's three-day special series assessing the state of Egypt 100 days on from the fall of Mubarak.

The UK's Amnesty International has issued an unusually pointed press release ahead of Obama's speech, saying the speech must "make clear that the US government is committed to promoting freedom, justice and accountability with friend and foe alike":

The US President must use his speech on the Middle East to commit to the pursuit of a more even-handed approach to Arab states, one which has the protection and promotion of human rights at its heart, Amnesty International said today. Barack Obama is set to make the speech, his first major address following the wave of mass protests that has swept the Middle East and North Africa, later today. Amnesty International Middle East and North Africa Director Malcolm Smart said: "The US President must make clear that the US has learnt from the mistakes of the past when it supported governments such as those in Egypt and Tunisia whose claim to provide 'political stability' was based on wide-scale repression and abuse of human rights. "The US administration has rightly condemned the gross abuses that have been committed by Colonel al-Gaddafi's forces in Libya and the Assad government in Syria, and continuing repression in Iran. "It has been far less outspoken and effective in addressing the current clampdowns in Bahrain and Yemen or on pressing the Saudi Arabian authorities on the need for change, giving an impression that the US gives special favour to its allies and friends, regardless of their human rights violations. "The President must make clear that the US government is committed to promoting freedom, justice and accountability with friend and foe alike. "There should be no more 'easy rides' for governments such as those in Bahrain and Yemen, as they try to crush popular protests and calls for change; likewise, the Israeli government must know that it will be held to account by the same standards as other states to deliver justice and accountability.

The Washington Post has a list of questions to look to be answered by Obama's speech today:

1. What is the US vision for how the region will look two, 10 and 50 years from now? 2. How and when does the US decide to call for a leader to step down or intervene militarily? 3. How do the events in the Middle East affect the United States? 4. Does Obama view the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as central to the broader events in the Middle East? Either way, how much energy will he invest in resolving it? 5. How does the president view these events in the context of his four or eight years in office?

Two minute warning given to journalists at the State Department.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is now speaking as warm-up act for Obama's arrival. She'll probably tell a few jokes to get the crowd going.

Hillary Clinton is having to pad it out to play for time while Obama is en route. She's now talking about a gift from Tunisia in the State Department venue.

More seriously, Clinton says that the US has an "indispensible role" in the MIddle East.

Here's Obama now.

Obama takes the podium, and thanks Hillary Clinton for all her travel, and jokes that she's got a million air miles.

Now the serious stuff starts:

For six months, we have witnessed an extraordinary change take place in the Middle East and North Africa. Square by square; town by town; country by country; the people have risen up to demand their basic human rights. Two leaders have stepped aside. More may follow. And though these countries may be a great distance from our shores, we know that our own future is bound to this region by the forces of economics and security; history and faith.

After some brief remarks about the extraObama quickly turns to the death of Osama bin Laden: "Bin Laden was no martyr. He was a mass murderer who offered a message of hate," and continuing:

But even before his death, al-Qaida was losing its struggle for relevance, as the overwhelming majority of people saw that the slaughter of innocents did not answer their cries for a better life. By the time we found bin Laden, al-Qaida's agenda had come to be seen by the vast majority of the region as a dead end, and the people of the Middle East and North Africa had taken their future into their own hands.

Obama pays tribute to Mohamed Bouazizi, the street vendor who set himself on fire and so helped launch the uprisings in Tunisia – and compares Bouazizi and his compatriots to the US civil rights activists and American revolutionaries of 1776:

On December 17, a young vendor named Mohammed Bouazizi was devastated when a police officer confiscated his cart. This was not unique. It is the same kind of humiliation that takes place every day in many parts of the world – the relentless tyranny of governments that deny their citizens dignity. Only this time, something different happened. After local officials refused to hear his complaint, this young man who had never been particularly active in politics went to the headquarters of the provincial government, doused himself in fuel, and lit himself on fire. Sometimes, in the course of history, the actions of ordinary citizens spark movements for change because they speak to a longing for freedom that has built up for years. In America, think of the defiance of those patriots in Boston who refused to pay taxes to a King, or the dignity of Rosa Parks as she sat courageously in her seat. So it was in Tunisia, as that vendor's act of desperation tapped into the frustration felt throughout the country. Hundreds of protesters took to the streets, then thousands. And in the face of batons and sometimes bullets, they refused to go home – day after day, week after week, until a dictator of more than two decades finally left power.

The Guardian's Chris McGreal – just back after months of reporting on the uprisings in Egypt and Libya, reacts to Obama's point about Osama bin Laden:

Obama is right about Bin Laden losing his struggle for relevance. The Bin Laden factor was almost entirely absent from the revolutions I saw in Libya and Egypt except as a consciousness among rebel leaders that the west needed to be reassured that Islamic extremism had no part in the uprisings.

Obama then moves on to the wider geo-political consequences of the uprisings and their consequences: "The question before us is what role America will play as this story unfolds."

But "the narrow pursuits" of US interests doesn't help development in the region and fuels mistrust that America is only interested in its own goals, Obama warns:

We must acknowledge that a strategy based solely upon the narrow pursuit of these interests will not fill an empty stomach or allow someone to speak their mind. Moreover, failure to speak to the broader aspirations of ordinary people will only feed the suspicion that has festered for years that the United States pursues our own interests at their expense.

The US must be prepared to respect the hopes of the street vendor – another reference to Bouazizi – as much as the region's rulers, Obama says:

So we face an historic opportunity. We have embraced the chance to show that America values the dignity of the street vendor in Tunisia more than the raw power of the dictator. There must be no doubt that the United States of America welcomes change that advances self-determination and opportunity. Yes, there will be perils that accompany this moment of promise. But after decades of accepting the world as it is in the region, we have a chance to pursue the world as it should be.

On Twitter, the initial reaction to Obama's speech so far is sceptical:

"America's interests are not hostile to people's hopes: they're essential to them." - except in Bahrain Kal

themoornextdoor

Let's see what Obama has to say about Bahrain: that's a litmus test of seriousness.

Obama is moving through the governments of Libya, Syria and Iran for their repressive regimes.

On Syria, Obama mentions Bashar al-Assad, its president, but rather than calling for him to go Obama says Assad has "a choice":

President Assad now has a choice: he can lead that transition, or get out of the way. The Syrian government must stop shooting demonstrators and allow peaceful protests, release political prisoners and stop unjust arrests; allow human rights monitors to have access to cities like Daraa, and start a serious dialogue to advance a democratic transition. Otherwise, President Assad and his regime will continue to be challenged from within and isolated abroad.

Bahrain does get a mention from Obama in the roll-call of repressive states:

But if America is to be credible, we must acknowledge that our friends in the region have not all reacted to the demands for change consistent with the principles that I have outlined today. That is true in Yemen, where President Saleh needs to follow through on his commitment to transfer power. And that is true, today, in Bahrain. Bahrain is a long-standing partner, and we are committed to its security. We recognize that Iran has tried to take advantage of the turmoil there, and that the Bahraini government has a legitimate interest in the rule of law. Nevertheless, we have insisted publically and privately that mass arrests and brute force are at odds with the universal rights of Bahrain's citizens, and will not make legitimate calls for reform go away. The only way forward is for the government and opposition to engage in a dialogue, and you can't have a real dialogue when parts of the peaceful opposition are in jail. The government must create the conditions for dialogue, and the opposition must participate to forge a just future for all Bahrainis.

Obama now mentions the influence of technology:

Real reform will not come at the ballot box alone. Through our efforts we must support those basic rights to speak your mind and access information. We will support open access to the internet, and the right of journalists to be heard – whether it's a big news organization or a lone blogger.

He goes on:

In the 21st century, information is power, the truth cannot be hidden, and the legitimacy of governments will ultimately depend on active and informed citizens.

[cough] Bradley Manning? [cough]

Moving from politics and human rights to economics, Obama now sets out four points for action to help the Middle East's economies and growth:

First, we have asked the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to present a plan at next week's G8 summit for what needs to be done to stabilize and modernize the economies of Tunisia and Egypt. Together, we must help them recover from the disruption of their democratic upheaval, and support the governments that will be elected later this year. And we are urging other countries to help Egypt and Tunisia meet its near-term financial needs. Second, we do not want a democratic Egypt to be saddled by the debts of its past. So we will relieve a democratic Egypt of up to $1bn in debt, and work with our Egyptian partners to invest these resources to foster growth and entrepreneurship. We will help Egypt regain access to markets by guaranteeing $1bn in borrowing that is needed to finance infrastructure and job creation. And we will help newly democratic governments recover assets that were stolen. Third, we are working with Congress to create Enterprise Funds to invest in Tunisia and Egypt. These will be modeled on funds that supported the transitions in Eastern Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall. OPIC will soon launch a $2bn facility to support private investment across the region. And we will work with allies to refocus the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development so that it provides the same support for democratic transitions and economic modernization in the Middle East and North Africa as it has in Europe. Fourth, the United States will launch a comprehensive Trade and Investment Partnership Initiative in the Middle East and North Africa. If you take out oil exports, this region of over 400 million people exports roughly the same amount as Switzerland. So we will work with the EU to facilitate more trade within the region, build on existing agreements to promote integration with US and European markets, and open the door for those countries who adopt high standards of reform and trade liberalisation to construct a regional trade arrangement. Just as EU membership served as an incentive for reform in Europe, so should the vision of a modern and prosperous economy create a powerful force for reform in the Middle East and North Africa.

Obama now turns to Israel and Palestine and the peace process – and the big news here is that Obama is committing the US to affirming the 1967 borders for Israel – not in itself a change but because of the growth of the Israeli settlements issue, this is a big deal:

But what America and the international community can do is state frankly what everyone knows: a lasting peace will involve two states for two peoples. Israel as a Jewish state and the homeland for the Jewish people, and the state of Palestine as the homeland for the Palestinian people; each state enjoying self-determination, mutual recognition, and peace. So while the core issues of the conflict must be negotiated, the basis of those negotiations is clear: a viable Palestine, and a secure Israel. The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state.

In this part of his speech, Obama is setting out the parameters of a possible Middle East peace deal:

These principles provide a foundation for negotiations. Palestinians should know the territorial outlines of their state; Israelis should know that their basic security concerns will be met. I know that these steps alone will not resolve this conflict. Two wrenching and emotional issues remain: the future of Jerusalem, and the fate of Palestinian refugees. But moving forward now on the basis of territory and security provides a foundation to resolve those two issues in a way that is just and fair, and that respects the rights and aspirations of Israelis and Palestinians.

The Guardian's Jonathan Freedland reacts:

Israel-Pal section much the best part of the speech: concrete, rather than abstractions. #MEspeech Jonathan Freedland

j_freedland

Elsewhere on Twitter, the neocons appear to be happy.

Obama is getting close to the end now:

For all the challenges that lie ahead, we see many reasons to be hopeful. In Egypt, we see it in the efforts of young people who led protests. In Syria, we see it in the courage of those who brave bullets while chanting, 'peaceful,' 'peaceful.' In Benghazi, a city threatened with destruction, we see it in the courthouse square where people gather to celebrate the freedoms that they had never known. Across the region, those rights that we take for granted are being claimed with joy by those who are prying lose the grip of an iron fist.

Not a word about Saudi Arabia, then, it would appear.

Obama reaches his conclusion, with a nod to his domestic audience, the voters back home, by drawing a comparison between the events in the Middle East and the past political struggles in the US:

For the American people, the scenes of upheaval in the region may be unsettling, but the forces driving it are not unfamiliar. Our own nation was founded through a rebellion against an empire. Our people fought a painful civil war that extended freedom and dignity to those who were enslaved. And I would not be standing here today unless past generations turned to the moral force of non-violence as a way to perfect our union – organizing, marching, and protesting peacefully together to make real those words that declared our nation: "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal." Those words must guide our response to the change that is transforming the Middle East and North Africa – words which tell us that repression will fail, that tyrants will fall, and that every man and woman is endowed with certain inalienable rights. It will not be easy. There is no straight line to progress, and hardship always accompanies a season of hope. But the United States of America was founded on the belief that people should govern themselves. Now, we cannot hesitate to stand squarely on the side of those who are reaching for their rights, knowing that their success will bring about a world that is more peaceful, more stable, and more just.

And that's it: just over 50 minutes long by my watch, so not as long as some people expected.

First impressions – to me the most powerful part of Obama's speech was when he traced the origins of the movement that began in Tunisia:

We have embraced the chance to show that America values the dignity of the street vendor in Tunisia more than the raw power of the dictator.

That was probably the most eye-catching phrase.

Elsewhere, it was significant that he picked out Bahrain – and equally significant (in a disappointing sense) that Saudi Arabia escaped without being named by Obama.

Then there was the reaffirmation of a long-standing US policy that recognised the 1967 lines for the state of Israel – one that is meaningful in the light of the settlement activity and just a day before Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu visits the White House – and Obama made an effort to sketch the outlines of an Israel/Palestine peace deal.

You can read a full transcript of Obama's speech here.

The Guardian's Chris McGreal reacts to Obama's comments on the Israel/Palestine issue, that "No peace can be imposed upon them, nor can endless delay make the problem go away":

Obama misses the point. Endless delay has suited Israeli governments just fine while they expand Jewish settlements in the West Bank and reinforce control over all of Jerusalem, and grind down the credibility of Palestinian leaders among their own people in a strategy to secure yet more concessions in a final agreement.

PJ Crowley, the former State Department spokesman, has some good points to make about Obama's speech, asking:

It remains unclear why #Assad still merits a chance to lead the transition in #Syria when #Qaddafi forfeited that right in #Libya. Philip J. Crowley

PJCrowley

In an another tweet Crowley also said: "Obama committed the United States to supporting reformers. He was also specific about who has fallen short, particularly Bahrain.

The Washington Post's Glenn Kessler – the paper's resident fact checker, which implies that the rest of the paper's journalists don't bother – highlights these lines from Obama's speech:

The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine.

and

The full and phased withdrawal of Israeli military forces should be coordinated with the assumption of Palestinian security responsibility in a sovereign, non-militarized state.

These words, says Kessler, "will send shockwaves in the Middle East" because the Israelis want to keep Israeli military forces in the Jordan Valley.

While shockwaves are unlikely, Obama's mention of Jordan is a reference to the status of the border between it and a future Palestinian state, which is inevitably going to be an issue in such peace talks.

The Guardian's Ewen Macaskill has his take on the site now:

"The status quo is not sustainable," Obama said in a major speech at the state department in Washington on Thursday, the first on the Middle East since he spoke in Cairo in 2009. In a speech dubbed Cairo Two, he threw US weight behind the protesters, saying: "We face a historic opportunity. We have embraced the chance to show that America values the dignity of the street vendor in Tunisia more than the raw power of the dictator ... After decades of accepting the world as it is in the region, we have a chance to pursue the world as it should be."

Carl Bildt, Sweden's foreign minister and European diplomatic heavyweight tweets:

Pres Obama: "The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps." Yes, fundamental! #MEspeech Carl Bildt

carlbildt

Bildt says it's "important that the US and the EU now clearly agree on peace in Middle East based on 1967 lines" and negotiated territory swaps.

Tony Blair, the special envoy of the Quartet on the Middle East, pops up on CNN. Asked about the possibility of territory swaps between Israel and Palestine on the 1967 lines, Blair says the size of the Palestinean state should be "comparable" to the size of the 1967 area, to make a viable state.

Reaction from Israel to Obama's speech – Reuters are filing snaps on the response from Binyamin Netanyahu:

• NETANYAHU "APPRECIATES" OBAMA PEACE MESSAGE BUT REJECTS ANY WITHDRAWAL TO "INDEFENSIBLE" 1967 BORDERS

• NETANYAHU SAYS A PALESTINIAN STATE SHOULD NOT BE ESTABLISHED AT THE "EXPENSE OF ISRAEL'S EXISTENCE"

More to come on this, obviously. In lower case.

Reaction from Libya – the Guardian's Martin Chulov in Tripoli reports that Obama's speech was an official non-event:

The Libyan regime didn't watch it. Government spokesmen weren't interested and it wasn't on state TV.

Politico rounds up the key words and phrases in Obama's speech – and finds that Israel won first prize with 28 name checks:

President Obama mentioned Israel 28 times on Thursday, more than twice as often as any other country he named, despite the White House's preemptive effort to cast the Middle East speech as geared not toward the peace process, but broader democratization efforts in the region. In his 45-minute address at the State Department, Obama said "Palestinian" 18 times and "Egypt" 13 times. Other countries in the region that he mentioned include Tunisia (9), Syria (6), Libya (5) and Iran (5). Yemen got one mention, the same as Brazil and Switzerland. Obama also said the word "peace" 20 times. He called on at least five people by name, including Osama bin Laden (4) and the newly sanctioned president of Syria, Bashar al-Assad (3).

J Street, the US-based "pro-Israel, pro-peace" lobby group, has its reaction to Obama's speech, from president Jeremy Ben-Ami:

J Street commends President Obama for his important speech today outlining his approach to the changing Middle East and stating that efforts to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through a two-state solution are "more urgent than ever." We are grateful that the President reiterated that America's friendship with Israel is rooted in shared values and that the United States maintains an unshakeable commitment to Israel's security. We share, however, the President's deep concern that the status quo today between Israel and the Palestinians is unsustainable, and that "the dream of a Jewish and democratic state cannot be fulfilled with permanent occupation." He is correct in saying that Israel will only find security through granting the Palestinian people their freedom, and the Palestinian people will only achieve freedom if Israel finds security. J Street wholeheartedly endorses the approach to resolving the conflict outlined today by the President, namely, to address borders and security first. This is an approach which J Street first advocated when negotiations stalled last year. He also clearly established that those borders must be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps – an essential component of the ad J Street ran this morning in the New York Times.

More on the reaction from Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu. Reuters reports:

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said on Thursday Israel would object to any withdrawal to "indefensible" borders, adding he expected Washington to allow it to keep major settlement blocs in any peace deal. In a statement after President Barack Obama's speech outlining Middle East strategy, Netanyahu said before heading to Washington that "the viability of a Palestinian state cannot come at the expense of Israel's existence". "That is why Prime Minister Netanyahu expects to hear a reaffirmation from President Obama of US commitments made to Israel in 2004," the statement added, alluding to a previous letter from Washington suggesting Israel could keep larger settlement blocs as part a peace deal with the Palestinians.

The respected Aluf Benn writes on Haaretz's website that "Obama granted Netanayhu a major diplomatic victory" in his speech today:

These points came straight out of the policy pages of the Prime Minister's Bureau in Jerusalem. Netanyahu could not have asked for more: Obama outright rejects Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' recognition campaign, as well as the Palestinian reconciliation agreement. It seems that the new Fatah-Hamas unity has saved Netanyahu from a much more aggressive and binding speech on the part of Obama.

Meanwhile, over on the Guardian's Cif America site, James Zogby says that Obama's speech didn't have much to get Arab viewers excited:

I believe that most Arabs did not need help in understanding the significance or the consequences of this moment in their history. Arabs were not looking to the US president for an analysis of their circumstances. What they want from America may differ in some details from country to country, but a core concern shared by most Arabs is that America demonstrates leadership in resolving the Palestinian issue.

The Guardian's Harriet Sherwood in Jerusalem has more on reaction from Israel:

Israel's prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, who is en route to the US to make a key speech to Congress next week, said in initial reaction that there would be no withdrawal to the "indefensible" 1967 borders. He added that a Palestinian state should not be established at "the expense of Israel's existence". That is a reference to Israel's major settlements in the West Bank, which Netanyahu insists must remain part of Israel following any peace deal. Netanyahu also said that the US must reaffirm a past pledge that Israel can retain the main settlement areas when borders are agreed. Netanyahu is scheduled to meet Obama at the White House on Friday, and will also deliver a speech on Friday to Aipac, an influential pro-Israel lobby group. Obama is also addressing the Aipac conference over the weekend. Meanwhile reports are emerging of the approval of 1,500 new homes in two key East Jerusalem settlements - a move likely to deepen tensions over the issue of settlement expansion. Saeb Erekat, the Palestinians' former chief negotiator, said that Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas "affirms his appreciation for President Obama's declaration regarding people's right to self-determination, freedom and dignity, as well as ensuring freedom of worship. The Palestinians need more than any other people such issues to get rid of occupation." Ismail Radwan, a Hamas spokesman, told AFP that US policies were biased in favour of Israel.

Most eyebrow raising reaction of the day comes from the Simon Wiesenthal Centre, which headlines its response: "Israel Should Reject a Return to 1967 'Auschwitz' Borders".

Time to close this live blog, thanks for reading.

There will be continuing coverage of the reaction to Obama's speech and other events in the Middle East and North Africa on the Guardian's world news pages.