it was one-sided. He visited only the place connected to the sufferance of one side. In the speech he quoted Ariel Sharon giving a wonderful assist to the settlers (their selective use of religion) and their idea that it is them that have to make concession of what is theirs. Obama supported the very controversial request of recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, he spoke often in hebrew without mentioning one word of arabic, he mentioned many times the historical right of Israel while he just mentioned the right of the Pals to have a decent life and to self-determinate their future. Again, why analysts are so superficial? Look like if they want to "sell" the speech.
from the article: Obama's visit to end all visits