Britain, the US and moderate Arab countries will begin a concerted drive this week to push Palestinian president-elect Mahmoud Abbas towards a historic post-Arafat compromise with Israel.
But what these states and their leaders want does not necessarily coincide with Palestinian needs and aspirations, or with what Abbas can deliver in practice.
Like any politician, Abbas made numerous election promises. They included the return of millions of refugees and of territory lost in 1967, and a Palestinian capital in east Jerusalem.
Ordinary voters who put their faith in the democratic process will hold Abbas to these pledges. Many Palestinians feel they have already compromised enough.
And even allowing for campaign hyperbole, Abbas's room for manuever is limited. From the moment he takes office later this week, the heat will be on. Expectations are running dangerously high.
Anxious to exert influence and prioritize the issue, Britain will soon convene a conference to help the Palestinian Authority prepare for statehood. It is also working through the EU.
But much is at stake for British Prime Minister Tony Blair personally. He is one of those who argued that the road to Jerusalem ran through Baghdad. He has expended political capital, often in vain, on persuading the US to pursue the "road map" for peace.
"If we can help the Palestinians to develop that basic infrastructure of a viable state, then [the US] is prepared to do the negotiations that make it viable in terms of its territory too," Blair claimed on BBC television last weekend.
Having mostly stood aside during his first term, US President George W. Bush now says he wants a Palestinian state by 2008.
But Bush also has other motives. His broader aim is creating a stable, democratic, pro-American Middle East, including Iraq. He is not about to seriously squeeze his main regional ally, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, whatever Blair says.
Instead, the onus in Washington and London remains on the Palestinians to be "realistic" and give ground on core issues.
"The definition of `realistic' in this context is what Israel will put up with," said Rosemary Hollis, a Middle East expert at the Chatham House think tank.
"That is so ingrained in US and British thinking that they just don't realize that it might not be possible for Abbas, because he can't bring his people with him," Hollis said.
"The Israelis don't put much store by the road map. The Palestinians could get stuck at stage two, meaning a virtual state with borders still to be defined and no guarantee they'll get what they want," she said.
Attitudes in the Arab world remain deeply ambivalent. Egypt and Jordan are broadly supportive of a compromise. But rejectionist Syria and Lebanon, backed by Iran, may encourage Abbas's hardline opponents, and hope that he fails.
A fatal Hezbollah attack launched at the weekend from southern Lebanon was their contribution to democracy.
Israel's immediate priority is a complete cessation of terrorism. Abbas, who says Intifada violence was a mistake, is a man of peace who claims -- perhaps over-optimistically -- that a lasting ceasefire can be agreed with militant factions such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
Sharon's other priority is the Gaza withdrawal later this year.
Some Palestinians see this as a trap entailing the permanent loss of large swaths of the West Bank. In a Knesset speech on Gaza last autumn, Sharon exacerbated such fears. While reiterating his commitment to a two-state solution, he said: "I truly believe that this disengagement will strengthen Israel's hold over territory that is essential to our existence."
Achieving a ceasefire and peacefully regaining control of Gaza would significantly boost Abbas's leadership while giving Sharon what he wants.
But even if that happens, the clear danger for Palestinians is that the peace process, such as it is, will grind to a halt again.
Then the men of violence could overwhelm the man of peace.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS