CARL P. LEUBSDORF Politics driving Bush's Mideast policy

For three decades, American presidents of both parties have steered a careful course in the Middle East, supporting the region's only democracy, Israel, while encouraging Palestinian aspirations for an independent state.
Until last week.
That's when President Bush embraced Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to scale back any commitment to give up Jewish settlements in the West Bank in return for total withdrawal from settlements in the Gaza Strip.
In doing so, Bush substantially reduced the likelihood that he and the United States will be able any time soon to play the role of honest broker between the Israelis and Palestinians. He antagonized Arab countries and reinforced the perception that, when push comes to shove, he will side with Sharon.
And he showed once again the degree to which re-election politics drive decision-making in the Bush White House.
Just as his desire to create stability before the November election explains the June 30 deadline for ceding civil control in Baghdad to Iraqis, this decision seems designed to bolster Bush's electoral standing with the small but strategically located Jewish vote and Christian conservatives who fervently back Israel.
It showed this president is willing to do what his father wouldn't, when he risked losing Jewish votes in the name of principle. Responding to a prior Likud government's intransigence on settlements, the elder Bush withheld U.S. loan guarantees for housing until Israel elected a more flexible government.
Sadly, Bush isn't the only one playing politics. His Democratic rival, Sen. John Kerry, quickly endorsed the new U.S. stance, so Bush can't outflank him among Jewish voters who generally vote heavily Democratic.
In a sense, the president's decision is consistent with his stance since taking office. While he is the first president to propose the formal creation of a Palestinian state, he has made only intermittent attempts to push the peace process.
Undercutting Arafat
At the same time, he has worked to undercut Yasser Arafat's stance as the top Palestinian leader and given rather perfunctory backing to the more moderate Palestinians installed as possible negotiating partners.
Indeed, the central aspect of Bush's involvement in the region isn't his role as peacemaker but the relationship he formed with Sharon before either gained power.
That relationship got a powerful boost when both took office within the same month, amid escalating Arab violence and the collapse of Bill Clinton's peace effort. That tie remains the overriding factor in U.S.-Israeli relations, pending Sharon's ability to survive a domestic scandal and Bush's to fend off Kerry.
The president's latest move is just one factor in the dim outlook for peace. Arafat's rejection of Clinton's plan at Camp David triggered a downward spiral. And the United States has had little choice but to back Israel's stand against Palestinian terrorism as it fights al-Qaeda terrorism directed at the United States and its allies.
Besides, the degree to which many members of Sharon's party are resisting withdrawal from Gaza illustrates how hard it would be for any Israeli government to make more far-reaching concessions in the West Bank under any final settlement.
The president's stance also threatens further damage to U.S. ties with Arab nations that already have suffered from the Iraq war. That was underscored when Jordan's King Abdullah postponed a visit to Washington.
Still, the administration continues to insist that the United States remains committed to the road map that laid out a path toward a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and would require substantial Israeli withdrawals from the West Bank.
But the road map didn't seem to be going anywhere before the latest U.S. initiative, so in a sense, it is hard to say Bush's embrace of Sharon's plan has damaged the peace process' prospects.
X Carl P. Leubsdorf is Washington bureau chief of the Dallas Morning News. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.