In his speech to the Muslim world, President Obama offered little that was new. And he didn’t connect the dots in his bullet-point lecture. He failed to recognize how the multiple problems that hover over the region are increasingly linked and feed dangerously off each other.

This was most apparent when it came to the questions of democracy and the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Obama spoke about his “commitment to governments that reflect the will of the people,” even going so far as saying, “We would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election.”

That it is extremely hypocritical, since the United States participates in the international blockade of the people of Gaza after they peacefully and democratically elected their Hamas-led government.

Meanwhile, the United States continues to provide billions of dollars of foreign aid, including hundreds of millions in direct military aid, to Egypt’s autocratic government.

This same government, in collusion with Israel, refused to open its Rafah border crossing with Gaza earlier this year to ease the human misery of an assault that killed more than 1,400 people, the majority of them defenseless civilians.

In the eyes of most Egyptians, not only does their government not represent them, it also actively works against their interests and the interests of the Palestinian people.

By bestowing legitimacy on Hosni Mubarak, Egypt’s ruler, President Obama dealt a setback to Egyptian democracy.

Obama’s tough talk on halting Israeli settlements was welcome, though, as was his insistence on seeking “a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons.” But here again the president stopped short of issuing the direct call for a nuclear-free Middle East, which would apply to Israel, which has about 200 nuclear weapons, and Iran, which may be seeking one.

Iran is championing the Palestinian cause, in very stupid words more than deeds (Iranian military support of Hamas is often exaggerated).

Israel then threatens to attack Iran for its nuclear program, diverting attention from its own brutal military occupation of the Palestinians. And the Palestinians fight each other, Hamas battling the CIA-trained but woefully unpopular Palestinian Authority.

Hence one repression feeds another, which feeds yet another.

Obama’s address also contained some worthy language of mutual respect and offered valuable recognition of Islamic civilization and even of the role that American Muslims have played in U.S. history. And he did seek to chart a new relationship between peoples on the premise that our identities are not mutually antagonistic, let alone mutually exclusive.

But it’s not only clashing identities that drive the conflicts in today’s world, which unfortunately is how the Middle East is almost always portrayed in the United States.

In reality, historic and structural inequalities play a much larger role in why people fight with one another. To paper over these issues with too much talk about identity is to think that peace can be had with a handshake and a hug.

But it cannot, and the sooner we recognize this, the better.

Obama’s speech sought to convince the world of something it already knew, that peace is desirable. But peace without justice is merely the calm between wars.

Moustafa Bayoumi, an associate professor of English at Brooklyn College, is author of the recent book “How Does It Feel to be a Problem: Being Young and Arab in America” (The Penguin Press). He can be reached at pmproj [at] progressive [dot] org.