US diplomats scramble to save Middle East peace process

US diplomats are scrambling to prevent the Middle East peace process from unravelling after the devastating stroke suffered by Ariel Sharon, their closest and most influential ally in the region.

But administration officials admit that little will be clear until after the scheduled March elections in Israel at the earliest.

At a breakfast with correspondents yesterday, Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, insisted that, despite the near-certain departure of the Israeli prime minister from the political scene, the Israeli people still strongly desired a permanent settlement with the Palestinians, ensuring peace and security for both sides.

She also pressed the Palestinians not to use the power vacuum in Israel as another reason to postpone their own legislative elections scheduled for January 25, and seen in Washington as a vital step in creating a credible Palestinian political identity.

In building a stable society, "elections have to be held when they are expected to be held," Ms Rice said.

The White House refused comment on how Mr Sharon's condition might affect prospects for peace in the Middle East peace process or about the transfer of power to Ehud Olmert, the deputy prime minister.

The focus, said Mr Bush's spokesman, Scott McClellan, should remain on Mr Sharon's health.

But there was no concealing the void that has been left.

In his nearly five years as Prime Minister - almost exactly coinciding with Mr Bush's White House tenure - he has had a huge influence on US Middle East policy, especially after the 9/11 attacks.

Both men already shared such deep aversion to Yasser Arafat, the former Palestinian leader that they refused to negotiate with him.

After September 11 2001, Mr Sharon seemed to convince Mr Bush that terrorism against Israel was to all intents and purposes the same radical Islamic extremism that was the target of his own wider 'war on terror.'

At least until Mahmoud Abbas succeeded Mr Arafat as PLO chairman in November 2004, Mr Bush pursued the most pro-Israeli policies of any recent US President.

In 2002, amid a particularly harsh Israeli crackdown, he famously described Mr Sharon as 'a man of peace' - even as Israel's tactics were being bitterly criticised elsewhere.

As gravity of the prime minister's condition became apparent on Wednesday evening, Mr Bush used a similar formulation, praising him as "a man of courage and peace." Despite periodic tut-tutting, the White House basically acquiesced in the building of the concrete and wire security 'fence' separating Israeli and Palestinian territories.

It also accepted the continuing growth of settlements under Mr Sharon, and his intention of incorporating some West Bank territory into Israel - even though this would leave the Palestinians with a piecemeal and probably unviable state -- under any final settlement.

Most recently, by securing of Washington's backing for his policy of a unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, he succeeded in supplanting the virtually moribund 'road map' approach of the White House with his own policy.

In the event, the Gaza pull-out did breathe fresh life into the 'peace process.' It also coincided with a more hands-on approach by Washington, including several trips by Condoleeeza Rice to the region since she replaced Colin Powell as Secretary of State in January 2005.

However chaotic and partial, the Gaza move - sealed only after the involvement in person of Ms Rice - did give the US something to work with in its pursuit of a settlement.

Even so, not only many Palestinians but outside experts on the region warned that the ceding of Gaza, as far as Mr Sharon was concerned, might be not only the first, but also the last significant concession he planned.

What happens next is unpredictable.

The departure of Mr Sharon "raises a big question mark over the future of Israel and therefore over the future of the peace process," Martin Indyk, a former US ambassador to Israel, said.

Many US analysts doubt that the openly centrist Kadima party, founded by Mr Sharon after his breakaway from Likud and which had been leading in the polls for the March elections, can fare as well without him.

Some fear it may disintegrate entirely.

- INDEPENDENT