Rupert Cornwell: Bush learns for himself the brutal realities of the Middle East

WASHINGTON - It has taken just seven days for George W. Bush to learn for himself the brutal, unyielding realities of the Middle East.

A week ago in the Jordanian resort of Aqaba, a smiling President, flanked by the Israeli and Palestinian prime ministers, emerged from a three-way summit to launch his roadmap to peace.

That roadmap now may not quite be in shreds.

But after the double blow of Israel's attempt to assassinate a leader of the Hamas miltiant group, and yesterday's devastating suicide bombing in Jerusalem followed by deadly Israeli retaliatory strikes in Gaza, the vision of a comprehensive Middle East settlement by the end of 2005 has never looked as remote.

It misses the point to talk of the tragic events of the last 48 hours as a "failure" by Mr Bush which has cost precious political capital.

No US president will ever be blamed for trying to secure peace - indeed until the launch of the road-map in April, the primary criticism of the administration was that it had not committed sufficient energy to resolving the Middle East crisis.

If any assumption has perished amid the latest bloodletting, it is that words alone suffice.

The Bush style has been to lay down goals (most strikingly the creation of a proper Palestinian state) and leave the tricky details to the others.

Indulging his taste for Western imagery, the President spoke of his role as "riding herd." He would merely whip the two parties along, to make sure they honoured the timetable, and that would be it.

The necessary conditions moreover seemed in place.

A new Palestinian prime minister was in office, of whom Washington approved, and who had condemned violence.

The elimination of Saddam Hussein's regime, long urged by Israel, meant that the Jewish state now 'owed' Mr Bush, big-time.

But in the Middle East nothing is ever straightforward.

Washington might pretend that Yasser Arafat had been marginalised. But is Arafat really out of the picture? Instead it is Mahmoud Abbas, the new Palestinian premier, who now risks marginalisation, unless he can tame the terrorists.

Israel, too, has signalled that, roadmap or no roadmap, it will not shrink from violence.

Events have shown, yet again, that a tacit community of purpose exists between Palestinian extremists and Israel's hardliners, to ensure that a compromise solution is impossible.

Violence by a hardline Israeli regime only serves the arguments of Hamas, and vice versa.

So what does Washington do? To align itself unequivocally with Israel will prompt familiar charges that the US is irredeemably tilted towards Jerusalem.

Anything less however will draw the ire of the Jewish lobby and the Christian conservatives who have already declared that the road map is too generous to the Palestinian cause.

Not surprisingly, some look to the internationalisation of the peace enforcement effort.

Amid the impotent handwringing here, John Warner, the influential chairman of the Senate armed services committee, called for Nato to be sent in.

The US alone would not be a credible honest broker, he argued, but Israelis and Palestinians alone have utterly lost control of events.

On that at least, everyone could agree yesterday.

- INDEPENDENT