January 20, 2007	Saturday	Zilhaj 29, 1427

LOS ANGELES: Having worked for six secretaries of State on Arab-Israeli negotiations, I nearly fell off my chair the other day when I read Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s comment to reporters that diplomacy wasn’t about making deals.

Maybe “making deals” is too glib a phrase for her, but it’s precisely what effective American diplomacy in the Middle East is mostly about. Her legacy may well be judged by that standard.

The secretary is absolutely correct in asserting, as she did, that diplomacy is more than deal making. Success or failure depends on a good reading of the circumstances and on a strategic grasp of whether and when to engage as a mediator. There’s a big difference between taking the initiative and wanting a US initiative. This is particularly true in the Arab-Israeli arena, where changing regional conditions have preceded every major breakthrough.

Henry Kissinger’s successful “disengagement” diplomacy — separating Syrian, Israeli and Egyptian forces in the early 1970s — followed the 1973 war, which had overturned every major assumption of US policy and forced the combatants to consider negotiations. Jimmy Carter’s success in brokering Egyptian-Israeli peace flowed from Anwar Sadat’s historic trip to Jerusalem; and Jim Baker’s success in putting together the 1991 Madrid peace conference grew out of the Persian Gulf War and the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Rice faces a tougher situation . Weak Israeli and Palestinian leaders, non-state actors (such as Hamas and Hezbollah) and Iranian troublemaking have produced a volatile mix. She’s also constrained by an administration that, in the face of 9/11, the war on terror, the Iranian challenge and the battle between Islamist radicals and moderates, views diplomacy as ineffective.

Rice’s decision to make the Israeli-Palestinian conflict a priority is a good beginning. To have any chance of succeeding, the administration will have to change its software, develop a sustained two-year effort and a strategy that — for both sides — is balanced, tough and reassuring. —Dawn/The Los Angeles Times News Service