President Bush sets the bar high in the Middle East

January 12, 2008 at 12:00a.m.

Three days in to an eight-day trip, it’s difficult to gauge the likely success of President Bush’s peace mission to the Middle East.

From the outset, the president set his sights high, saying that he believes a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians is possible before he leaves office in a year. From some world leaders, such talk would sound audacious. But coming from President Bush, it simply seemed to reflect his natural and somewhat unbridled optimism.

In this instance, optimism might be such a bad thing, especially if the president follows up this visit with the kind of attention he has promised he will give to the latest — and late coming, for this administration — round of Mideast peace talks.

As he left Israel to begin a round of visits to Arab countries in the region, Bush promised he would return to the Middle East at least once and maybe more in the remaining year of his presidency.

Bush’s public optimism brought quick follow up remarks from his national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that painted the job of reaching a peace agreement in more stark tones. Rice cautioned against expecting a “blinding flash” of Arab backing for cooperation with Israel. “There will be a period of time, undoubtedly, in which the two sides continue to be very far apart,” Rice said.

Both sides challenged

President Bush set the bar high for both sides in the talks. He made it clear that he envisions a Palestinian state that is contiguous, meaning that Israel would have to abandon some of its settlements, but said that final borders would have to be negotiated to accommodate territorial changes, meaning that Israel would gain territory beyond that allotted to it in 1948. He also suggested international compensation for Palestinians and their descendants who claim a right to return to land they held before Israel’s formation.

Boundaries, the claimed right of return and the control of Jerusalem are huge issues, any one of which could prove to be deal breakers even if months of negotiations show progress in other areas.

We would love to share President Bush’s optimistic assessment for the possibility of peace in the region. But even if the president can overcome the suspicion with which many Palestinians view the United States, does he have the time to focus on peace talks during his last year in office?

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the deteriorating situation in Pakistan would be enough to challenge the time and attention of any president. At the same time, the United States is facing an economic downturn, the president continues to be locked in partisan battles with Congress on a multitude of issues and his party will be fighting to retain control of the White House and to beat back Democratic gains in Congress.

President Bush’s willingness to set the goals high in the Middle East and his stated commitment to reach those goals is admirable and ought to be an issue on which he has the complete backing of Congress. He will need that, as well as the support of the other partners in the peace process, Great Britain, Russia and the United Nations.