Richard Beeston, Diplomatic Editor of The Times
Star musicians and your favourite Times writers at the Albert Hall
When President Bush set foot in Israel for the first time in a decade, he may have been tempted to believe that peace could finally be at hand in that tortured land.
On the apron of Ben Gurion Airport, Israeli leaders and dignitaries turned out in force to pay their respects to the man regarded as the Jewish state’s most powerful supporter.
Tomorrow, Mr Bush will receive a no less respectful reception when he travels to the West Bank to be greeted by President Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian leadership.
Unencumbered by domestic issues and free to focus on America’s top foreign policy priority, the President will have calculated that he has just over a year to deliver what has eluded successive presidents before him.
The prize would be huge. For 40 years the Holy Grail of US diplomacy has been the search for an Arab-Israeli peace agreement, that would see Israel living side-by-side with a Palestinian state and in return recognised by the broader Arab world.
The parameters of the deal were set out by Mr Bush five years ago at the Red Sea resort of Aqaba, when Ariel Sharon, the former Israeli Prime Minister, and Mr Abbas signed up to the “road map” for peace.
The initiative was given a fresh boost in November when Arab states, Israel and world powers gathered in Annapolis to press home the urgency of a deal.
The Bush Administration believes that a Palestinian state can be born by the end of 2008 if the two parties now engage seriously in negotiating the thorny issues of future borders, Jewish settlements, the status of Jerusalem and the fate of Palestinian refugees.
The reality on the ground, in places the presidential cortege will not be visiting, is very different. The Palestinian lands, which would form the future state, are divided by Jewish settlements and the Israeli security wall. Their inhabitants are trapped in a no man’s land that can barely support a poor rural economy, let alone become the foundation for a thriving sovereign state.
The Gaza Strip, a sizeable chunk of Palestinian territory, is now completely in the hands of the Islamic militant movement Hamas, whose fighters are engaged in daily rocket duels with the Israeli military. It is far more likely that the two sides will go to war in this crowded strip before it becomes part of a stable future Palestine.
The fragile security situation is matched by the frailty of the key players in the process. Ehud Olmert, the Israeli Prime Minister, remains weak and unpopular and could be forced out of office later this month with the publication of a report into his handling of the disastrous war in Lebanon in 2006.
As for Mr Abbas, he has failed to turn the Palestinian Authority into a viable government in spite of millions of pounds in aid and support from the West.
During his tenure the balance of power has shifted to the militant Palestinian cause, generously supported from countries like Iran and Syria, who reject any notion of a peace deal with Israel. Moderate Arab states like Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan stand ready to help, but none is likely to engage deeply in a process that seems doomed.
Finally, there is the problem of Mr Bush’s role. Middle Eastern leaders are past masters at sniffing out the strengths and weaknesses of those who visit their lands.
The point was graphically illustrated by Iranian gunboats which harassed US Navy warships travelling through the Gulf on Sunday. A year ago such a provocation would have been unthinkable because it would have met with a punishing response. Many will have concluded that power is ebbing away from Mr Bush by the day as America focuses on choosing its next leader.
Certainly he would do well to remember the experience of his predecessor, Bill Clinton. He tried and failed to clinch a peace deal in the dying days of his administration. Instead of an historic agreement at Camp David, the region was left with another conflict at the cost of thousands of lives.
Mr Bush’s already tarnished record in the Middle East could suffer even more if this delicate process is mishandled.
Follow our three athletes' progress in their preparations for the London Triathlon, and pick up training tips and more
Enjoy screenings of all the classic films you love, plus take advantage of two-for-one tickets
We explore leisure activities that are safe and suitable for all of the family
Times Online's new TV show helps you make the right decisions for your pet
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles


Overseas contacts and local business information

A treasure trove of baubles, booty and stylish quests


£129,500
Bentley Edinburgh
£79,850
Mercedes-Benz of Northampton
£26,995
Unit 1, Woodfield Business Unit, Kidderminster Road, Ombersley, Worcester.
Great car insurance deals online
90k + Bonus + Options
Confidential
London
£23,716 +
Highways Agency
National
£
£43,405 - £48,228 pa
Notting Hill Housing
London
£30,000 base, £100,000 OTE
Riches Consulting
London/South
with annexe accommodation and 5.25 acres
£1,100,000
Beautiful Gardens w/ stunning Thames Views
Studios £33K, 1 Beds £60K, 2 beds £79K
Mortgages, bank acc & money transfers to help you buy abroad
Explore mystical Jordan
From £1030 for 7nts 4*
to USA's Most Cosmopolitan City; San Francisco!
£POA
Book Now for Winter 08/09 and Get 10% off!
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Search globrix.com to buy or rent UK property. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
President Bush expects to achieve peace in the Middle East. I think his dream could not come true as long as Israel continues its occupation to the palestinian territories, expantion an/or building of illegal settlementsthis in addition to the daily death toll that is rising amongst the palestinians.
On daily bases, Israel kills not less than 5-10 civilian palestinians claiming they were fighters, or they opened fire.
What peace that coult be achieved between two different parties, one is strong having nuclear weapons and keeps threatining its neighbours, refusing their right in existance, despite the fact that it occupied their land. And the other party is weak, it has no weapons, beseiged, its people die everyday, children, youth, women and old people.
I would like all to watch the news, try to BBC or Aljazeera English or any other english channel that speaks for the reality on the ground and presents facts not the Israeli historical lies.
Hidi, NY,
The wars over again is it Bush?
rob Mc Hardy, Paris, France
There are too many people in the Mid-East who have no interest in peace. There are several generations of Palestinians who have grown up participating in violence. They are not interested because the will have no place in a world without violence where they can kill at will. The Arab states have always used the Palestinian issue
to keep the pot boiling. They have no interest in peace. If they did there would have been peace a long time ago. Bush is wishful thinking and hoping to bolster his totally discredited image.
Bruce L. Northwood, Washington, D.C., USA
Mr. Bush says nice things that lack any definition or clarity. He explicitly will not acknowledge that the only basis for peace between Israel and Palestine is already defined in Security Council 242, which means except as the parties may otherwise agree, a complete evacuation of the occupied territories. Israel will not do that, if judging from the continual annexation and development of new illegal settlements is indicative.
Neil of Gloucestershire is basicly correct, in that the US should terminate all funding to Israel until the completion of a peace implementation, and Lily of London is also correct in noting that this would not significantly harm Israel economically. But it would put them on notice to get this done.
tarquinis, Seattle, USA
Kinda like putting Hannibal Lecter in charge of the menu.
Udo, Melbourne, Australia
I am very skeptical that Bush declarations are something more that empty words with the real purpose of improving his image towards obtaining support for a stronger international position against Iran before his visit to some Arab countries.
If Us is really seeking peace in this region a lot more could be done besides fruitless meetings. Without real facts behind his declarations it is very unlikely that they will be believed and to mitigate the confusion that might appear in many arab citizens that will see his role in this visit more like as an special envoy of Israel seeking for a support that this country cannot directly obtain itself that seeing him as an independent US president seeking for a real peace.
C. Lunar, Madrid,
Neil, your lack of knowledge of the Islamist-Israeli conflict is matched only by your eagerness to blame America and Britain. Israel's GDP is $170 billion per annum, and American aid amounts to $2.3 billion. Only in 'Neil-speak' does that translate into Israel's survival being dependent on 'massive US financial aid'. But if you derive some comfort from lying to yourself, then go ahead...
Oil-rich Saudi Arabia has an annual per capita income of $13,800, while the equivalent figure for resource-poor Israel is $26,800. Think about why that may be instead of resorting to the tired claims concerning American aid. As for 'British colonialism', that ended 60 years or three generations ago. Get over it.
Lily, London,
I doubt that Bush or Blair are fit people to broker peace in the Middle East, after all most of the regions troubles can be traced back to British colonialism and American backing for political Zionists whose State only survives because of massive US financial aid.
Neil, Gloucestershire, England