Quotes of the Day

A Scandinavian Palestine?
(June 27, 1pm)
Thus the "political horizon" laid out by President Bush: The Palestinians can have their Palestine, at least "provisionally," but only after they've turned their 42 percent of the West Bank — which will mark its provisional borders, along with Gaza — into the most advanced democratic polity in the Arab world. (And never one to dwell on irony, Bush intends to enlist the authoritarians and monarchists of Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia to tutor the Palestinians in the ways of liberal democracy.) The Guardian's Jonathan Freedland offers a ferocious critique of the new Bush policy, warning that it will lead only to further misery and bloodshed: The U.S. is now "demanding that Palestine become Sweden before it can become Palestine," he writes, and they must achieve this transformation while under lockdown by the Israeli military. The fact that Bush offers nothing concrete by way of guidelines on ending the current cycle of terrorism and reoccupation, Freedland warns, will simply reinforce hard-line views on both sides.

Gloomy Peaceniks

Freedland's view was common among Israeli peaceniks, most of whom saw Bush's speech was an unqualified victory for Sharon. To quote leading Israeli columnist Nahum Barnea, "The voice was Bush's, but the hand that wrote the speech was Sharon. The Prime Minister can demand intellectual property rights." Even foreign minister Shimon Peres was reportedly left depressed and angry by the speech. A commentator in Maariv suggests Bush's new policy is unlikely to bring an end to terror or even Arafat's removal, but may instead signal a discreet U.S. withdrawal from peacemaking efforts. That view is underscored by the Economist, which warns that the Bush's approach is unlikely to have any significant impact on the violence, which creates the impression that the President's true intent is to disengage from the messy conflict.

But Haaretz's Ari Shavit broke ranks with many of his colleagues in the beleaguered Israeli peace camp by praising Bush's vision, although not as a peace plan but as a set of war aims. He argues that the demand for Palestinian democracy is part of the administration's plans for wider Arab democracy, starting in Iraq. And that just as Israel won't survive with an authoritarian, corrupt Palestinian state as a neighbor, nor will it survive as a democratic Jewish state if it maintains its occupation. That reiterates the longstanding view of Israeli cabinet minister Natan Sharansky, who berated Israeli governments of the left and right for accepting and even encouraging Palestinian authoritarianism. Their argument against him, says Sharansky, was that Oslo required a Palestinian enforcer. But the cabinet minister who had been jailed as a Soviet dissident before immigrating to Israel insists that Palestinian democracy is the only basis for a durable peace.

Arafat Cashes In

It's not only among ponderous Israeli peaceniks that Bush found himself under fire. Even his most dependable European ally, Britain's Tony Blair, openly challenged Bush over the fate of Yasser Arafat. The Europeans see Bush as having blundered by insisting on Arafat's ouster rather than simply on democracy and reform. The Palestinian leader was quick to reap the benefits, calling new elections and allowing an aide to announce that he plans to stand for reelection. And in light of Bush's demands, it's even less likely that any credible challenger will step forward to stand against him. Palestinian academic Khalil Shikaki told a Brookings Institution briefing that as a result of the speech, Arafat is more popular today than he was yesterday. He warned that Arafat remains the key player in Palestinian politics, and reform will be dead in the water if he's made to believe that the U.S. wants to get rid of him no matter what he does from now.

While he dismisses much of the Arab response to the speech as denial from regimes who had invested much political capital in their failed efforts to swing the Bush administration, Shikaki does see some positive steps potentially flowing from the speech. The most important may be for greater U.S. involvement in remaking the Palestinian security services, to create conditions that allow for Israeli withdrawal from PA territory and a de-escalation of violence. Arab leaders may have been shortchanged by Bush, but their domestic concerns lead them to primarily on those nuggets of Bush's speech that allow them to put a positive spin on the policy. Whatever their frustrations, Arab opinion makers also clearly recognize that Bush is their only hope for a solution. Beirut editor Joseph Samaha summed up the view of the Arab intelligentsia as follows: "If the man wasn't the leader of the world's sole superpower, his speech would belong in the rubbish bin. But that is a luxury we cannot afford."

Song of the Doomed?
(June 21, 3pm)

Yasser Arafat is either catastrophically tardy in the conduct of diplomacy, or else he's sensing that he's about to be cut adrift by everyone that matters in the Mideast political equation — the Israelis, the Americans, the Europeans, the Arabs and the Palestinian street. In a wide-ranging interview with Haaretz, the Palestinian leader enthusiastically endorses the proposals put to both sides by President Clinton in December 2000 for a final peace agreement — a Palestinian state in 97 percent of the West Bank and Gaza with territorial swaps to make up the remainder; shared sovereignty over Jerusalem and Palestinian refugees being allowed to return only to the new Palestinian state. Of course when Clinton first made the proposals, Arafat's response was a sort of grudging "maybe" that, in effect, was as good as a "no." Who knows how things might have turned out differently if his answers to Clinton, back then, had been the same as those he gave Haaretz? If Ehud Barak had been able to fight an election two months later over a concrete peace plan rather than over an intifada? Maybe different, maybe not.

No matter, Arafat insists he can do a peace deal with Ariel Sharon. Maybe Arafat's aides are insulating him from the awareness that nobody's listening to him anymore — not the Americans, not the Israelis and not the Palestinians. That's not to deny the extent to which the ideas presented by President Clinton correspond with the likely shape of the eventual political settlement between Palestinians and Israelis. It's simply to point out the mounting odds against the signatures on such an agreement being those of Yasser Arafat and Ariel Sharon.

Israel's Nightmare is Bush's Nightmare

Thirty six Israelis killed in three days, and Ariel Sharon is forced to act. The problem is that he has few good options before him, and his cabinet is deeply divided. Voices ranging from Foreign Minister Shimon Peres to some senior army officials are questioning the wisdom and viability of the long-term reoccupation of Palestinian cities. And yet April's massive West Bank invasion managed to slow down the rate of terror attacks for all of three weeks. Reoccupation requires large-scale mobilization of reservists disrupting Israeli civilian life, and reentering Palestinian towns runs the risk of major civilian casualties and resultant diplomatic isolation — already on Friday, three Palestinian civilians were reportedly killed when tanks erroneously opened fire on a crowded Jenin marketplace. "Operation Defensive Shield" eventually brought diplomatic pressure even from an administration that has been generally supportive of Sharon, and yet it failed to restore Israelis' sense of security in their own cities. There's little reason to suspect a new round of military operations that include longer stays in Palestinian cities will be much different, except perhaps to the extent that they force the militants to confront Israeli troops in their midst rather than civilians inside Israel. And if Israel has now discovered that "Defensive Shield" failed to stem the tide of Palestinian attacks, the Bush administration may be discovering that the diplomacy it initiated in response at the time has also failed to stop the confrontation once again escalating to the point of spiraling out of control.

Back to the Future (June 19, 12pm)
No wonder President Bush is holding back on announcing a new Mideast policy: Even before they're uttered, his words have already been eclipsed by Ariel Sharon's own new policy. The President has been planning to urge recognition of a 'provisional' Palestinian state as early as September, but the consequences of Tuesday's terror attack that killed 19 people aboard a Jerusalem bus may have forced a rewrite. In response, Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon has declared his intention to reoccupy Palestinian territory until terror attacks cease — and if he keeps his word, that reoccupation will essentially be permanent. That's certainly the way ministers from across his coalition cabinet's political spectrum see the move. After all, there's little reason to believe full-blown reoccupation will end attacks on Israelis — those responsible, after all, have repeatedly declared their hostility to any return to negotiations with Israel, believing that "armed struggle" is a more effective strategy. Reoccupation will almost certainly swell their ranks, and render Yasser Arafat increasingly irrelevant. The Oslo peace process is now a thing of the past.

The question before the Bush administration is whether to simply reconcile itself for the foreseeable future to the current pattern of violence in the region — and the pressure that creates on U.S. allies in the Arab world — or else to accept that pursuing President Bush's two-states-for-two-peoples vision right now will require the international community to act more forcefully to separate them. This columnist is betting on the former. The problem with that option, though, is that the logic of the current pattern of violence is one of escalation, which is exactly what forced the Bush administration to intervene in the first place.

(June 14, 4pm)
Word in the corridors of power is that President Bush will, next week, call for the establishment of a 'provisional' Palestinian state without defined borders and under international supervision. According to Haaretz's Israeli government sources close to Washington, the proposal would set the Palestinians targets in areas of governance, financial accountability and security enforcement, and their performance would be judged by the U.S. That's designed to meet Ariel Sharon's insistence on a 'long-term interim' solution rather than the final-status agreement demanded by the Palestinians, at the same time as restore a political horizon that would give hope to the Palestinian people. But it may include some form of timeline that would make Sharon uncomfortable.

Washington believes after discussions with Egypt and Saudi Arabia that it can find Arab support for this schema, but Lebanon's Daily Star warns that the Bush administration's skittish Mideast policy will leave Arab regime cautious over signing on. Moreover, the repeated pattern of aides rushing to 'clarify' President Bush's utterances on the Middle East has made Arab editors cynical of the spin doctors — they're now inclined to take Bush at his word, and they're pretty pessimistic about what he's saying.

The Bush administration may also struggle to convince Israel to end military operations in areas under PA control — as Jerusalem Post's Herb Keinon points out, even an provisional Palestinian state would mean no more raids on Ramallah. The administration is also reportedly debating a settlement freeze, to which Sharon is fiercely opposed. Still, the Israeli leader is not particularly worried, according to the Israeli media, because he believes the Bush administration's electoral concerns will preclude it from cracking the whip in the Middle East. And who else is going to rush to boot up a virtual Palestine?

Et Tu, Edward?

It's not only President Bush and Ariel Sharon that believe Yasser Arafat is a disaster whose ouster is essential to generate hope in the Middle East. Edward Said, dean of the Palestinian left-wing intelligentsia, says that even though the call for PA reform and Arafat's replacement is endorsed by elements hostile to Palestinian interests, that doesn't make it a bad idea. For Sharon, says Said, PA reform is a means of hobbling Palestinian nationalism; for Bush — well, Bush has no coherent policy at all, and the Europeans aren't much better; for the Arab moderates it's a way of cozying up to Washington; and for Yasser Arafat it's a means of saving himself and his administration of "defeat and incompetence." But the Palestinians have plenty reasons of their own to get rid of Arafat: Said accuses the Palestinian leader of having knowingly provoked a war "whose victims would be mostly innocent people when (he had) neither the military capacity to fight one nor the diplomatic leverage to end it" — and it's the third time he's done so. But Sharon shouldn't think he's found an ally. The reason the Palestinians need a new leadership, says Said, is to resist plans being hatched in Washington, Jerusalem, Cairo, Riyadh and elsewhere, and instead mount a non-military struggle against the occupation.

What Does Bush Want?
(June 12, 12.30pm)
Either there's something to the perception popular on both sides of the Mideast conflict that President Bush tends to parrot the line of whichever leader he spoke with last, or else prospects for the U.S. achieving any momentum towards a peace agreement are dead in the water. Indeed, the editors at Haaretz believe Sharon's greatest political achievement has been to bend the Bush administration to his line that the Israelis can't deal with Arafat, and that puts prospects of peace talks on the backburner for the foreseeable future.

The first casualty of President Bush's new position will be the proposed regional peace conference. The President on Monday endorsed Sharon's view that peace talks are premature and that the agenda of any conference should be confined to security matters and a cease-fire. Under those circumstances, Monday's Bush-Sharon meeting was the conference, because none of the Arab states would bother to turn up unless the purpose of the gathering was rapid movement towards a political agreement. Moderate Arab frustration over Bush's remarks was diplomatically expressed in a Jordan Times editorial warning that Washington has sent the region the wrong message, and that President Bush's position leaves the Palestinians without any hope. It also warns that the positions taken by Washington regarding timetables and political negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians have rendered the proposed regional conference pointless. Secretary of State Powell now has his work cut out for him salvaging a policy of Mideast engagement. That may be why Powell on Monday suggested to an Arabic newspaper that Bush's words hadn't really conveyed what he meant to say.

Arafat Has His Uses

So where does this leave Yasser Arafat, he who these days shall go unmentioned when the U.S. and Israel discuss the Palestinians? Flailing, by all accounts. Bush and Sharon weren't the only ones unimpressed by his recent cabinet reshuffle — Arab and Palestinian critics have pilloried Arafat for making mostly cosmetic changes while clinging doggedly to his autocratic power. Does that mean Sharon is about to expel the Palestinian leader from the West Bank? Not necessarily. The respected Yediot Ahoronot columnist Nahum Barnea writes: "What is the point of taking the risk of expelling Arafat when, even if his replacement is a saint, the gaps between him and Israel will remain equally unbridgeable?" This columnist agrees: By securing Washington's agreement that Arafat the obstacle to peace, Arafat becomes useful to Sharon as a reason to avoid negotiations.

Sharon's Lonely 'Peace Plan'

And judging by the vision of peace offered by Sharon in the New York Times on Sunday, Sharon certainly needs reasons to avoid negotiations — because sitting down to talk about where to draw the line between Israel and Palestine would expose the extent of his differences not only with all the moderate Arab regimes, but also with the U.S. and even his Labor Party coalition partners. It's not only Sharon's revival of the notion of no talks before violence has ended or his refusal to countenance any short term political talks that puts him at odds with pretty much everyone else who'd attend a regional peace conference; it's his refusal to accept the 1967 borders as the basis for negotiations. When Sharon says he has no partner for peace, he means he won't talk to Arafat. But given the limits of his own conception of peace, it's true in a far wider sense: Even if Arafat retired to the Riviera tomorrow, there simply isn't a single credible Palestinian or Arab leader who would engage on the terms offered by Sharon. Back to you President Bush?

Uh, President Bush?

Some Israeli commentators believe President Bush shares an interest with Arafat and Sharon in maintaining the current impasse. Sharon needs it because it keeps his limitations as a peacemaker off the agenda; Arafat needs it because it keeps him in power. And, says Haaretz's Gideon Samet President Bush's domestic political concerns militate against rocking the boat at least until 2004. And until then, warns Samet, Bush's inability to master the precision of language required by the complexities of the Mideast will have his aides constantly playing cleanup. And the President's forthcoming policy statement "won't depart from reiterations of Bush's 'vision' of a Palestinian state. It will mostly be cliches of goodwill."

Palestinian Views Hardening

Treading water may now have become the administration's policy in the Middle East, but the waves are likely to get ever choppier. Suicide bombings and attacks on settlers are back up to an almost-daily clip, and the conditions of siege under which most West Bank Palestinians now live are likely to fuel rather than dampen Palestinian rage. Haaretz's Amira Hass warns Israeli readers that a policy being undertaken in pursuit of their security may have the effect of imperiling it in the long run.

Hass's view is confirmed by a new survey of Palestinian public opinion, which found that two thirds of respondents continued to favor suicide bombings and those who support continuing the intifada remained at 78 percent — down only five percent from March, before the devastating impact of Israel's "Operation Defensive Shield." Even more alarming is the growing sentiment in favor of a fight for all of "historic Palestine," (i.e. including Israel) rather than simply to end the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Support for that view has risen from 43 percent to 51 percent.

U.S. Mideast Policy: Look Busy
(5.15pm)

Cynics may be tempted to suggest that the reported delaying of the proposed regional peace conference reflects a diminished urgency in U.S. mediation efforts, brought on, perhaps, by the Bush administration's postponement of any immediate offensive against Iraq. But those cynics would be wrong — or, at best, only partially right. The reason for postponing the conference is that under present conditions and commitments, such a conference would fail dismally to achieve any progress. And a failed conference would be more damaging than no conference at all. The conference idea was originally premised, in part, on the U.S. and its international allies forcefully proposing the broad outlines of a peace agreement based on existing U.N. resolutions, the agreements tentatively reached at Taba and the recent Saudi proposals. The Bush administration, however, remains undecided on whether to outline proposals of its own, and Ariel Sharon has given no indication thus far that he'd accept anything close to what the Arab parties would consider a starting point for dialogue. Trying to bring the parties together at a conference to discuss a settlement would, therefore, highlight the differences between them, which the Bush administration may be politically reluctant to even try and resolve right now. Better to simply tread water. The problem is, the situation on the ground is threatening to reignite the crisis that forced the Bush team to moot the idea of a conference in the first place.

Arafat as Cheese Doodle, Dahlan as U.S. Poodle
(May 30, 5.15pm)

He may be struggling to maintain the affections of his own people, right now, but Yasser Arafat is an unqualified success in the Egyptian snack food market. A new cheese puff named for Arafat's nomme d'guerre and whose bag bears his likeness is reportedly the hot-selling snack in Egypt right now. But will anybody dare import them to the West Bank? Meanwhile, as the Bush administration searches for Palestinian other than Arafat to deal with, they may be applying the kiss of death to the prospects of Gaza security chief Mohammed Dahlan. According to Israeli reports, the U.S. has approved Dahlan as head of a unified Palestinian security structure and likes him as a potential successor to Arafat. But that may not be the sort of information the ambitious young Palestinian strongman would want spread around the West Bank and Gaza, where he's been engaged in a bitter power struggle. Already, the obstacles facing his ascent are not inconsiderable: As the PA's top policeman in Gaza, he's not exactly a favorite among the rank-and-file Palestinians pushing for a more democratic Authority. And the majority of Palestinians are residents of the West Bank, who aren't necessarily inclined to accept leadership from Gaza. Given the dim view Palestinians have taken of the Bush administration, an implicit endorsement by Washington may hinder rather than help Dahlan.

New Attacks Pose Dilemma for Sharon
(May 29, 5.15pm)

A new wave of suicide bombings and attacks on settlers has left Ariel Sharon facing some tricky choices. The new attacks highlight the limits of the Israeli tactical advantages achieved by "Operation Defensive Shield," and there's a clamor for further action on his right flank. But Washington is trying to restore the fundamentals of a peace process by reforming the PA and restoring its security capability, and a new offensive would put paid to those efforts. But attacks are likely to continue since Hamas, Islamic Jihad and even the rank-and-file of Arafat's own Fatah organization are showing no inclination to heed the calls of the PA leadership to stop terrorism. Indeed, Washington may find that when it sends Messrs. Burns and Tenet to the region later this week to breathe new life into the PA in order to restart dialogue with the Israelis, it's flogging a dead horse. Meanwhile, Israeli chief of staff General Shaul Mofaz has drawn Sharon's ire by suggesting that Arafat be exiled. Frankly, looking at the precipitous drop in Arafat's domestic popularity since being freed from his Ramallah compound, exile would probably restore his standing among Palestinians. But it would be unlikely to resolve Israel's basic problem.

Shattered Calm
(May 22 3pm)

Today's suicide bombing at Rishon Letzion near Tel Aviv — the third in as many days — is a sharp reminder of the limits of the optimism surrounding the comparative calm of recent weeks and preparations for a regional peace conference in June. But the current security situation on the West Bank is the tinder for a new explosion of Israeli-Palestinian violence. Unable to rely on PA security structures to stop terror attacks, Israel has settled in for a long-term, de facto reoccupation of most of the West Bank's major cities. Its troops surround those cities and enter them at will, and travel restrictions require any Palestinian wishing to leave one town for another to seek special permission from the Israeli authorities. Businesses moving goods in or out of those towns are forced to unpack their trucks and repack their cargo onto different trucks on the other side of the Israeli checkpoints. Those conditions create a pressure cooker that will almost certainly explode, once again — the Palestinian street rallied to Arafat when he was under siege, because he shared their plight. Now word on the street is that Arafat dispatched a number of Palestinians to prison or exile to achieve his own freedom, while his own people remain effectively imprisoned. And as long as that situation persists, Washington and Riyadh could bend Arafat entirely to their will without having any significant effect on the inclination of Palestinian youths to strike out violently. And Hamas is quite happy to play to the sentiment on the streets even when Arafat isn't.

Sharon's Shas Gambit
(May 22, 3pm)

How serious is the Sharon-Shas divorce? Many Israeli commentators suspect reconciliation is inevitable, although they're worried about a high-stakes game that could go wrong. After all, Sharon has alienated the ultra-Orthodox party that has carved itself the role of kingmaker over the past decade, and it's hard to stay in power without them. Still, would an election be so bad for Sharon right now? Or, at least, could there be a better time? He's riding a political high having faced down his most powerful challenger, Benjamin Netanyahu, making the former prime minister look as if he placed his personal ambition above the national interest. That earned him points with the Israeli public, as did slapping down Shas, whose habit of demanding extensive financial support for its welfare structures as the price for joining coalitions is resented across the political spectrum. Moreover, Sharon appears to enjoy the favor of the Bush administration. It's not inconceivable that the prime minister is calculating that this could be his best moment to face the electorate.

What Palestinians are Thinking
(May 22, 3pm)

The respected Palestinian Center for Policy Survey Research has released a new study of Palestinian public opinion, which finds that 91 percent of Palestinians support reforming the PA and Arafat's personal popularity is in the doldrums — but not for reasons Israelis would find comforting. Although support for suicide bombing is down to 52 percent, 67 percent still believe armed confrontation has been more effective than negotiation in pursuing Palestinian national rights. A majority of Palestinians opposed the deal reached to end the siege of the Church of nativity, and may have helped drag Arafat's personal approval rating back down to the 35 percent figure recorded before Sharon first besieged him last December.

Watch Barghouti
(May 22, 3pm)

More bad news for Arafat in the survey cited above is that Militant Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti's popularity is on the rise — at 19 percent, he's the second most popular Palestinian leader (up from 11 percent in December). And if Arafat thought the fact that Barghouti languishes in an Israeli prison was enough to silence his challenge, he has another think coming. Despite Arafat's latest calls for restraint, Barghouti has sent a message from prison urging Palestinians to fight on against Israel. And earlier in the week, it was reported that Arafat's police in Ramallah had torn down giant posters of Barghouti in the town's central square by Fatah militants, only to see them replaced hours later.

PA Reform vs. Israeli Security Operations
(May 17, 2.40pm)

Yasser Arafat's insistence that Palestinian elections must wait until after the Israelis withdraw may be designed to strengthen his hand against domestic challenges, but it's also an effort to redirect away from PA reform, where Sharon had managed to focus it, and on to the unresolved security crisis which leaves the conflict perennially poised on the edge of chaos. The Israelis want to continue to operate inside PA territory in the West Bank, and pooh-pooh the Bush administration's plans to rebuild PA security structures to do that job. Also, they say, an attack on Gaza is inevitable — and there'll be no shortage of pretexts: Hamas has made clear that despite pressure from the PA and the Saudis, it plans to send further suicide bombers. But continuing Israeli operations in the West Bank or an invasion of Gaza are likely to impede any progress towards restoring security cooperation, as Washington desires. And Israel's plans to maintain its current stranglehold of Palestinian cities for the foreseeable future suggests that all talk of PA reform may be rendered moot by the inevitable rekindling of confrontation.

Sharon as Arafat's Insurance
(May 17, 2.40pm)

Yasser Arafat is under mounting Palestinian pressure to loosen — although not relinquish — his own grip on power, but Ariel Sharon may well turn out to be his savior. Not only did the Israeli leader's siege on Arafat that began last December rescue Arafat from the domestic political doldrums, Sharon's repeated insistence that PA reform include Arafat's removal is simply reinforcing Arafat's grip on power — the Arab press is full of warnings that any move to weaken the Palestinian leader's role may be part of an Israeli-American plot. And when Sharon floats the preposterous suggestion that the "free world" must "force" an "interim government" on the Palestinians (tailored to Sharon's specifications, no doubt), it's Arafat rather than the PA reformers that benefits.

PA Reform Battle: Arafat Wins a Round
(May 15, 11.00am)

Ariel Sharon is, as ever, willing, to make "painful concessions"— but only, as ever, after certain preconditions have been satisfied: in this instance, fundamental reform of the Palestinian Authority (PA). Indeed, Sharon said, he would negotiate only with a 'new authority,' by which he means one not led by Yasser Arafat. But Arafat, not always known for his political agility, has quickly turned the tables on Sharon. In a speech to the Palestinian Legislature, he admitted "mistakes" on the part of his administration and called for new elections. Smart move, because there's little doubt that he'd easily win those, and thereby moot any further talk of removing him as part of a reform process. Instead, it would put Arafat himself in charge of reforming the PA. Meanwhile, Sharon's Labor Party coalition partners aren't backing the prime minister's peace perspective. Party leader Benjamin Ben-Eliezer has resurrected the Clinton proposals discussed at Taba as the basis for a final agreement in the near future. And Foreign Minister Shimon Peres is proposing that Israel negotiate a deal on these terms with the international 'quartet' — the U.S., the European Union, Russia and the U.N. That would remove PA reform as an obstacle to progress on a peace agreement, since the international community would provide the necessary guarantees required by Israel. Peres's favorite Palestinian interlocutor, Ahmed Qurei (Abu Ala), is reportedly pushing the same idea on the Palestinian side. All of which suggests those "painful concessions" may be on the table a lot sooner than Sharon intends.

Intrigue, Anger in Arafats Domain
(May 13, 10.45am)

If you think Ariel Sharon is having a tough time with his own political base, consider the situation of Yasser Arafat: The Palestinian leader is under growing pressure from all sides to reform his autocratic administration. The Saudis and Egyptians are pushing him to mount a serious crackdown on terrorism, and even in his own Fatah organization there are moves to limit his power. But there are growing signs that the shakeup in Palestinian politics will be anything but smooth — two senior Arafat aides have come under attack from unknown assailants in recent days, including Arafat financial adviser Muhammad Rashid. Rashid is reportedly close to Muhammad Dahlan, the Gaza security chief who is more and more openly challenging his West Bank rival Jibril Rajoub on Rajoub's home turf for overall control over PA security forces. Rashid was in Europe at the time of the attempted assault, and Arafat has urged him to stay there until the situation calms down. Also, the Palestinian leader's decision to cancel a visit to the Jenin refugee camp for "security reasons" appears to have been not unrelated to the militant sentiment of the crowd.

Bracing for Retaliation
(May 8 1pm)

The keywords in most speculation over Israel's likely response to the Rishon Letzion massacre are 'Arafat' and 'Gaza'. Domestic political pressure is mounting on Sharon to retaliate for the bombing by sending Yasser Arafat into exile, despite Washington's longstanding opposition to such a move. And Gaza, the Hamas stronghold which was left untouched during "Operation Defensive Shield" may be the target of a new military offensive. But some Israeli commentators fear the retaliation could play into the hands of Arafat and Hamas, by deepening Israel's diplomatic crisis and reinforcing Arafat's political standing. But Sharon may be assuming that the U.S. will acquiesce to Arafat's ouster: In the Israeli leader's account of his discussion with President Bush, the U.S. leader agreed with Sharon's position rejecting talks with the Palestinian Authority as long as Arafat remains its leader. The Bush administration certainly appears to have tilted back towards the Israeli position that security and terrorism are the primary issues on the Israeli-Palestinian agenda, and that political negotiations will have to wait. The latest bombing, and Israel's expected response, are likely to make that the practical reality. Problem is that it leaves the Bush administration without a viable policy to stabilize the region.

Abdullah's Dilemma
(May 8, 1pm) Tuesday's events don't bode well for the White House visit by King Abdullah of Jordan. Abdullah wants rapid movement towards a final political settlement along the lines envisaged by the Arab League, warning that any further interim agreements will fail at great cost to all parties. And the King has plenty of reason to be nervous as a Hashemite ruling over a population that is 60 percent Palestinian, wedged between Israel and Iraq.

Sharon's Plan
(May 7, 4.30pm)

Ariel Sharon doesn't want a final-status agreement with the Palestinians any time soon, but how does he see the outline of an eventual Palestinian state? Senior Israeli correspondent Aluf Benn writes in Foreign Affairs that Sharon's map of a final settlement keeps two large chunks of the West Bank in Israeli hands to ensure Israel's security and water supply. Benn offers fascinating insights into the Israeli leader's thinking, and how it differs from that of many of his predecessors. The problem for President Bush is how to reconcile Sharon's version of peace with that adopted by the Arab League, which requires Israeli withdrawal to 1967 borders.

?In What Capacity Would They Come to Italy?'
(May 7 12.30pm)

The deal to end the siege at the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem before Ariel Sharon and George Bush's heart-to-heart Tuesday hit an unexpected snag over an EU spat. Italy is the proposed destination for 13 of the gunmen inside the church; 26 will be sent to Gaza. But the Italians say they weren't consulted and were kept in the dark by the British, who were involved in the negotiation. And they're not going to simply comply. "This thing about hosting Palestinian terrorists to facilitate the process will be studied," said a spokesman. "There are still things to clarify: for example, in what capacity would they come to Italy?" As gunmen, silly.

Clinton Backs Mideast Peacekeepers
(May 7, 12.30pm)

Perhaps the fact that he'll never have to face another election has allowed former President and presumptive talk-show host Bill Clinton the intellectual freedom to embrace a view of the Middle East gaining ground abroad, but anathema to Israel's leaders and inside the Beltway: Deploying U.S. peacekeepers as part of a wider peace agreement that will have to be, "if not imposed, at least strongly pushed." That has Israeli hawks such as Army chief General Shaul Mofaz warning of "creeping internationalization" of the conflict. But that's exactly what a growing number of those involved in previous mediation efforts are advocating. For example, in the current issue of Foreign Affairs, former U.S. official Robert Malley, who was part of Clinton's team at Camp David, joins Palestinian negotiator Hussein Agha to argue that an internationally imposed solution is the only way to save the situation.

'Martyrs' for the Christian Right?
(May 7, 12.30pm)

Many Israelis have welcomed the support of Christian conservatives in their battle to sway U.S. foreign policy. But Jerusalem Report columnist Gershon Gorenberg has some qualms over just why the Christian Right backs Israel. He suspects this support is based on a reading of Christian prophecy that requires an apocalyptic war in the Middle East as the precondition for Christ's return. In other words, he warns, many Christian conservatives are not interested in the argument that Israel's survival requires reaching an accommodation with the Palestinians. Instead, he believes, they'll back the most hard-line positions in Israel precisely because these accord with the apocalyptic vision. Gorenberg's message to these Christians: "I'm not interested in being your shahid (martyr)."

Why Sharon's Feeling Lucky
(May 6, 10am)

Ariel Sharon is coming to the White House feeling lucky, because he believes that President Bush's domestic political concerns sets strict limits on the extent to which the U.S. is able to pressure Israel. The Bush administration recognizes that protecting its interests throughout the Middle East requires rapid progress towards settling the conflict by creating a Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza. But Sharon has made abundantly clear that he's not interested in any near-term political settlement nor in any version of Palestinian statehood that would satisfy even the most moderate Arab and Palestinian leaders. The Israelis hope that a dossier of evidence purporting to prove Yasser Arafat's links to terrorism will convince Washington to support Sharon's refusal to negotiate with the Palestinians under his leadership. But that's unlikely, since the administration has already made clear that no matter how bad Arafat has been, he remains the only address for dialogue with the Palestinians. Still, the bipartisan groundswell of support for Sharon on Capitol Hill last week signals the potentially damaging domestic political cost for Bush attached to any pressure on Israel to resume talks.

Ethnic Cleansing and the GOP
(May 2, 4pm)

To make effective foreign policy in the Middle East, President Bush has had to learn to ignore the leadership of his own party on Capitol Hill. And it's not hard to see why: Last week, House Republican whip Tom DeLay proclaimed that the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights were not occupied, as U.S. foreign policy maintains, but are in fact part of Israel. Now House Republican leader Dick Armey has reportedly upped the ante, suggesting that Israel had no reason to hand over occupied territory to the Palestinians and that instead "the Palestinians should build their national home within a neighboring Arab country." Problem is that there are 3.5 million Palestinians who don't share Armey's view that they should just pack up and leave their homes because of some conservative Republican's ideological fancy. Indeed, someone may want to gently remind the House GOP leader that ethnic cleansing is just the sort of thing that got Slobodan Milosevic into all that trouble.

Department of Hyperbole: Jenin-on-the-Volga?
(May 2, 4pm)

Reveling in his newfound freedom, Yasser Arafat has allowed his imagination to run wild. The West Bank city of Jenin, he told journalists while surveying the ruins of Ramallah, would henceforth be known by Palestinians as "Jeningrad" (in reference to the epic World War II battle of Stalingrad in which more than 1 million people died). Perhaps he simply wanted to underscore that his sense of humor had survived the Israeli siege.

An International Solution?
(May 2, 4pm)

The key to resolving the Ramallah standoff was the insertion of a few British and American prison warders, and many diplomats and Palestinian officials want that to serve as a model for achieving a broader truce by sending some form of international force to the West Bank. The Israelis remain resolutely opposed and so far the Bush administration is inclined to agree with them. Still, international pressure is likely to mount, particularly in the fallout from the collapse of the U.N. mission to investigate the battle of Jenin.

Bibi Sets a Trap for Sharon
(May 2, 4pm)

Ariel Sharon is expected at the White House next week, where President Bush will press him to start negotiating the terms of Palestinian statehood. Sharon says he's ready to offer what he considers a far-reaching plan. But the central committee of Sharon's own Likud Party — the majority of whose members want former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rather than Sharon as their candidate in the next election — is having none of it. The party committee looks set to adopt a resolution two weeks from now rejecting any Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. And Netanyahu has taken to the Israeli airwaves, mercilessly chiding Sharon for caving in to U.S. pressure to limit Israel's "Operation Defensive Shield." The intensifying leadership struggle between Sharon and Netanyahu may turn out to be a key factor shaping Israel's negotiating position in the weeks to come. And Sharon may wish he could ignore the Likud rank and file as easily as Bush can ignore the House GOP.

Gaza's Gendarme Stakes his Claim
(May 2, 4pm)

Gaza security chief Mohammed Dahlan is reported to have played a major role in negotiating an end to the siege of Yasser Arafat. Now he's calling on his leader to make big changes in the way that the Palestinian Authority does business. And you hardly have to read between the lines to know that one of those changes is to put Dahlan, rather than his West Bank rival Jibril Rajoub, in charge of the Palestinian security forces.

Bush, Sharon, Saddam and the U.N.
(Apr 30, 11.30am)

Having proved over the weekend that he can, when push comes to shove, prevail on Ariel Sharon to do his bidding, President Bush may have inadvertently made 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue the address for complaints over Israeli behavior. First up: Israel's effort to limit the terms of a U.N. fact-finding mission established to investigate the recent battle at Jenin. Israel is holding off for fear that it is being set up for prosecution or a smear campaign. But European Union commissioner Romano Prodi says he'll use Sunday's Washington summit to press President Bush to "use his influence" to persuade Israel to back down on its "unacceptable" response to a U.N. Security Council resolution backed by the U.S. Even stronger language came from Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak, who warned in a nationally televised address Tuesday that Washington's support for Israel's offensive in the West Bank has "shake(n) the people's faith in (the war on terrorism) and in its credibility in the Arab and Muslim worlds." He applauded President Bush for prevailing on Sharon to lift the siege on Yasser Arafat, but used that achievement to underscore his "can do better" tirade.

Although the Bush administration has endorsed the U.N. fact-finding mission, it urged the international body on Monday to consider Israel's objections — a political bone thrown, says the Israeli media (see below) in exchange for Sharon's compliance with the Ramallah deal. But Arab and European skeptics point out that Washington responds differently when the man seeking to limit the terms of U.N. inquiry, is Saddam Hussein.

Was Jenin the Price of an Arafat Deal?
(April 29, 11am)

President Bush applied what Israeli officials described as "brutal" pressure on Ariel Sharon to back down over the siege of Yasser Arafat's Ramallah compound. According to Haaretz, however, the U.S. may have provided some political cover for Arafat against the rightwing backlash led by Benjamin Netanyahu — Sharon reportedly told his cabinet that in exchange for letting Arafat go free, the Bush administration would support Israel in its confrontation with the United Nations over the Jenin fact-finding mission. Having backed down on Arafat, Sharon may be even more inclined to dig in his heels over Israel's objection to the terms of the Jenin fact-finding mission, whose members remain in Geneva as Israel's cabinet continues to debate whether to approve their visit.

Who's Besieging Whom?
(April 26, 5pm)

Under pressure from the Bush administration — or, at least, that part of it concerned to restore a peace process — Ariel Sharon is now suggesting that Arafat can leave his compound, and go anywhere in the West Bank, but without those besieged there with him. That would suggest Washington is pressuring the Israeli leader to end the standoff in Ramallah. But Arafat has little incentive to accept Sharon's conditions. Being besieged in his office has made him the most popular leader in the Middle East, while it's proving increasingly troublesome to Sharon. Meanwhile, the U.N. is pressing ahead with its fact finding mission to Jenin, despite Israeli efforts to delay the inquiry to secure guarantees of indemnity from prosecution for any of its personnel who give evidence.

The Economy, Stupid
(April 26, 5pm)

Haaretz sees Israel's multibillion dollar budget deficit and zero growth as the "price of the occupation." An editorial warns, "While the developed world, and particularly the United States, is showing clear signs of recovery, Israel is sinking deeper and deeper into recession. In the absence of any political horizon to the conflict, which would include an end of the occupation, this decline is liable to become permanent." Things look even worse on the Palestinian side. The BBC reports that a meeting of international donors in Oslo agreed to provide $1.2 billion in aid to rebuild Palestinian infrastructure destroyed by the Israeli military campaign — and that's $800 million short of the World Bank's estimated requirement of the cost of restoring basic services. A Norwegian finance official added wanly that the international community hoped Israel would not "destroy the investment that we are financing."

After "Defensive Shield"
(April 26, 5pm)

Israelis are united behind Ariel Sharon's offensive in the West Bank, which they see as proactive self-defense against suicide bombers. But they're sharply divided over what comes next. Many have expressed concern that Sharon appears to lack a political endgame, and some of those are now stepping forward with plans of their own. The Jerusalem Post reports growing enthusiasm for proposals by various non-partisan groups for getting out of the West Bank, withdrawing many of the Israeli settlements there and building a border fence to separate Israel from the Palestinians. That, of course, dovetails to some extent with what the Arab League has proposed. And also with the thinking of Israel's leading military theorist, the Hebrew University's Martin Van Creveld, who argued recently that "Whether because Mr Arafat does not want to end terrorism or because he cannot do so, another Oslo Agreement is not on the cards. Therefore Israel's one salvation is to get out and build a wall — a wall so high not even the birds can fly over it — and permit the Palestinians to establish their state on the other side of it, as the Saudi peace plan suggests? Few terrorists succeed in breaking through the security fence that surrounds the Gaza Strip. In fact the only reason why Israel still faces problems in that part of the country is because, against all military logic, it insists on maintaining a presence on both sides of the fence instead of withdrawing to one side of it." He insisted earlier this week (see below) that not a single settlement will be withdrawn on his watch.

Sharon Floats a Balloon
(April 25, 4.30pm)

Despite Washington?s efforts to rekindle some form of peace process, Ariel Sharon appears determined to rid himself of Yasser Arafat and cement his own hold over the West Bank. The Israeli prime minister told the New York Times that he may consider letting Arafat leave his Ramallah office and go to Gaza, saying "with Arafat, no one will be able to make peace." But right now Arafat isn?t looking for a new address, and Palestinian leaders scoffed at the suggestion — after all, Sharon himself is as much a prisoner of the current standoff in Ramallah as Arafat is. And Sharon?s view of the Palestinian leader as anathema to peace is pretty much the same view as the Palestinians and even Israel?s Arab peace partner Egypt has of the Israeli prime minister. But the fact that Sharon is discussing the prospect of relocating Arafat suggests he may be preparing the ground for a move to eject the Palestinian leader, despite Washington?s opposition.

Theater of the Absurd at Arafat HQ
(April 25, 4.30pm)

Four Palestinian militants wanted for the killing of Israeli cabinet minister Rehavam Zeevi have been tried and convicted by a military court — inside Yasser Arafat?s besieged Ramallah compound. One of them was even sentenced to 18 years hard labor, and there?s certainly no shortage of manual work to do in the ruins of Ramallah. Unimpressed by the proceedings, Israel continues to demand their extradition, although the Palestinian Authority insists that under the Oslo agreements it is the proper authority to try the men. But it?s not lost on wider Palestinian society that not only the accused, but also the judges, prosecutor and the PA security men summarily appointed as 'lawyers' are all, in fact prisoners of the Israelis, right now. The Economist quotes a Fatah member saying that in the wake of the Israeli offensive, the PA itself is something of an illusion, now.

Jenin: Israel Won the Battle; Who Will Win the PR War?
(April 24, 5pm)

Israel's demand to renegotiate the composition and terms of a U.N. inquiry into the events at Jenin are proving to be grist to the mill for the Palestinian PR campaign. The Israelis expressed the fear that a panel composed of one senior diplomat and two humanitarian officials would be insufficient to understand the military dimension of the problem Israel faced in Jenin, and be more inclined to reach negative conclusions on the humanitarian consequences of the operation. The Palestinians decry the Israeli demands as part of a cover-up effort. But Secretary General Kofi Annan appears inclined to accommodate Israeli concerns by adding a U.S. general to the panel and widening its terms of reference to include investigation on the activities of Islamic Jihad and other groups in the camp before the Israeli attack. And the Bush administration has warned Sharon that despite understanding Israeli concerns, the U.S. believes it is in Israel's best interests for the fact-finding mission to proceed.

Mapping the Next Suicide Bombings
(April 24, 5pm)

The Palestinian leadership is plainly aware that Israel's offensive has turned international public opinion strongly against Sharon, and they hope to hold onto that PR advantage by restraining suicide bombers from crossing Israel's 1967 borders. An Al Aksa Martyr's Brigade commander told the New York times two days ago that his group would refrain from sending bombers into Israel proper, focusing their attacks only on soldiers and settlers in the West Bank and Gaza. And the Palestinian Authority appears to have extracted a similar promise from Hamas in order to avoid a Palestinian civil war — because the PA's very existence would be on the line if there were further attacks in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. Palestinian leaders believe attacks on soldiers and settlers outside Israel's 1967 borders play quite differently in international public opinion. And besides, getting the militants to confine their attacks to the West Bank and Gaza may be as far as the PA is able to go politically in restraining militants right now.

Portrait of the Terrorist as a Young Man
(April 24, 5pm)

Press conferences held by prisoners with their interrogators present should always be taken with at least a pinch of salt. Still, Islamic Jihad's Thabet Mardawi offered some fascinating insights to Haaretz on the battle for Jenin, and the politics and mechanics of suicide bombing.

Marwan Mandela?
(April 24, 5pm)

By arresting Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti, Israel may have given him the inside track in the race to succeed Yasser Arafat, argues Haaretz's Danny Rubinstein. Imprisoning Barghouti will only increase his moral authority over Palestinian militants, Rubeinstein says, and that will likely make his endorsement necessary for the success of any long-term peace agreement — once the 73-year-old Arafat has passed from the scene, the imprisoned Barghouti's importance in Palestinian politics could become the equivalent of that of the imprisoned Nelson Mandela in South Africa.

Sharon's Next Move
(April 24, 5pm)

Israel's media is filled with speculation over what Prime Minister Sharon will do next — particularly concerning the fate of Yasser Arafat. The U.S. and Sharon's Labor Party coalition partners have warned against any move to oust Arafat. But Sharon may instead heed the advice of the Israeli right, outlined in this Jerusalem Post editorial. "Israel stood up to American dictates and the sky did not fall," writes the Post in an editorial on the lessons of the Powell visit. The lesson drawn is that Sharon should get on with booting out Arafat, and Bush will fall into line. From the other end of the spectrum, Haaretz warns the Bush administration that Sharon's repeated vows in recent days to maintain every Israeli settlement in the West Bank and Gaza "cast a dark shadow" over President Bush's claim that the Israeli prime minister is a "man of peace." In the mean time, they warn, he may be about to launch a new offensive in Gaza.