Analysis: The Middle East labyrinth

When will the turmoil in the Middle East finally come to an end? No one knows.

Events seem to rush at such a high speed that key players, especially the Arabs, seem incapable of adopting a common stance on what is going on in the Occupied Territories.

The Arab Peace Initiative launched at the Beirut Arab League Summit in March this year failed to generate some sort of consensus. Arab diplomacy has a reputation of missing opportunities due to a traditional tendency among them to impose supremacy in the region.

During his recent visit to Washington, rumours circulated that President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt would present an alternative proposal. The Saudis were cautious in their statements.

The Syrians, on the other hand, voiced concerns that it was premature to offer such deals when Arab lands are still occupied and Israelis incursions are killing Palestinians.

Diverging attitudes are a common practice in Arab politics. Arab leaders had, for example, to wait for years to bury their feud to summon an Arab summit since the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.

Who would carry the burden of resolving the longest running conflict in the world?

The answer came as expected from Washington, and it was far from responding to the demands of the Arabs. Rather, it echoed Bush's frustration with the output of Palestinian President Yasser Arafat who, as he sees it, "betrayed the hopes of his people".

Thus it was decided that Arafat must go and Palestinians should elect a new leadership as conditions for the establishment of a provisional Palestinian state.

After being criticised for its hands-off policy, the U.S. administration is once again trapped by the quagmire of the Middle East.

Bush and his top advisors have come to the conclusion that a framework for transformation is a pre-requisite for halting violence in the region. This vision calls for a reform of the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) and an end to the legacy of Arafat.

The Palestinian leader is now caught between the U.S. pressures to tame the Intifada and his ambitions to remain the icon of the Palestinian cause. In both cases, he has to pay a price but he is not willing to be the scapegoat.

While the Arabs saw many positive elements in Bush's vision for the Middle East, they blamed him for siding with the Israelis. He said in his June 24 speech that Israel was justified in occupying the West Bank until security improves.

This was interpreted by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon as a green light to continue incursions, and by the Arabs as a flagrant U.S. bias.

Why did Washington not follow up with more public statements after the Bush statements on the Middle East? This silence fuels speculations that Bush is waiting for Arafat to bid farewell and a new leadership to emerge.

But Arafat who is depicted by his foes and admirers alike as the "maestro of tactics" won't yield that easily and will have his last say. The man has ruled the Palestinians for more than three decades and has become in the minds of his people the symbol of the struggle for freedom.

Who would pretend to be able to replace him under these circumstances? The Americans are aware of this fact and they know they need the Arab leaders' help to implement a new leadership.

Amid heavy pressure on him to introduce reforms, Arafat declared he would organise elections by the beginning of the next year. He removed top security chiefs, a move seen as an attempt to get rid of potential rivals.

His popularity seems to be plummeting, but Palestinians are rallying around him, saying they won't allow outsiders impose their will on them.

In what looks like a breakthrough, Palestinians and Israelis agreed to a series of meetings, breaking the ice at their first high-level talks in months. These meetings are far from providing hope that peace talks would resume. It may be part of measures to ease the harsh situations of Palestinians, suffering tough blockades, curfews and sweeping incursions.

At least 1,437 Palestinians and 548 Israelis have been killed in the Palestinian uprising since September 2000.

Three questions have cast a shadow on the future of the region: Will the Arabs go on with their peace initiative? Do the Americans seriously think that Arafat no longer fits the new U.S. approach to the region? But if so, who would fill the post of the leader of the Palestinian people?

Sharon, in a recent comment on peace, said: "It looks distant at this time. It seems to me that maybe some type of window has been opened."

Even in their wildest dreams, optimists know that peace won't come with the next rising sun when occupation persists and defeatism prevails.

Hashem Ahelbarra is an Abu Dhabi television journalist.