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.
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS