Everything else is a sideshow.

That's certainly a position to take - but it's no more (or less) trying to change the world than people who think that promoting democracy and human rights should also be among the priorities the U.S. tries to advance. The latter isn't looking at the world through a cultural lens, as you put it. Trying to make the world different than it is today isn't the same as falsely believing the world is different than it really is. Whether the change you want to effect in the world is economic/military (as with China) or sociopolitical (as with human rights in the ME), you're still trying to effect a change in current conditions to a scenario you think is better.

Yes, they do. You think thousands of Palestinians are ever getting jobs inside of Israel sometime soon? Or that the border posts won't be manned and armed to the teeth from now on? Or that they won't have a lot more radar surveillance and cameras looking at their borders? Or having any compunctions on shooting first and asking questions later? Much like the US still hasn't adopted a relaxed posture in airports and in other secure areas the Israelis aren't going back there, either.

Oh, there will be tweaks. But there may not be a fundamental change in governance of Gaza the way that the Peace Plan optimistically contemplates. That's what I mean - we may end up back on 10/6, where Gaza is isolated but Hamas is in charge, rather than some any other party taking control of the area. The other ME countries may not be doing this because they want to be in charge of Gaza, but because they want to cut a deal with Israel; and Israel may not be doing this because they seriously think that someone other than Hamas will be in charge of Gaza, but because they want a deal with the other ME countries.