MIDDLE EAST: Palestinians, Egyptians and Jordanians want yesterday's summit to generate enough momentum to carry the peace process beyond the security sphere. This is essential for the Arabs, because they are not ready to press Palestinian security forces to disarm and disband Palestinian militants - seen by most Arabs as the legitimate resistance to Israel's occupation - in order to provide Israel with security before the occupation ends, writes Michael Jansen
Consequently, the informal verbal commitments to cease hostilities fell short of the requirements of the three Arab leaders attending the summit. Sour faces as the final statements were delivered revealed dissatisfaction.
Egypt and Jordan registered this by refusing to give a date for the return to Israel of their ambassadors, who were withdrawn in 2002 in protest at what they regarded as Israel's disproportionate use of force against Palestinians.
The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, the Egyptian President, Hosni Mubarak, and Jordan's King Abdullah need more than declarations to justify their pursuit of the elusive peace. The Palestinian, Egyptian and Jordanian people are totally disillusioned with carefully-staged events which do not lead to an easing of the harsh occupation regime or negotiations on the core issues of Israeli settlements, territory, Jerusalem and refugees. The June 2003 summit in the Jordanian resort of Aqaba, attended also by President George Bush, was the last to come to nothing.
A Saudi English newspaper, the Arab News, summed up the broad Arab view. "Mr Abbas needs to see Israeli action on many fronts if he is to consolidate Palestinian support for his leadership and policies," it said.
While Israel has promised to pull its troops out of five West Bank cities and towns, eliminate some checkpoints and barricades and release 900 of the 8,000 Palestinian prisoners, these confidence-building measures are unlikely to convince the Palestinians and Arabs that Israel is serious about negotiating a political settlement unless talks begin soon.
Analysts say that the Palestinian Authority should be drawn into Mr Sharon's unilateral plan to withdraw from the Gaza Strip and four minor West Bank settlements. They also argue that Mr Sharon must halt the seizure of Palestinian land in East Jerusalem and construction of the West Bank wall and dismantle Israeli settlement outposts deemed illegal by the Israeli government.
Mr Mubarak laid his political credibility on the line when he issued the surprise invitation to Mr Abbas and Mr Sharon to hold talks in Egypt. Mr Mubarak, who has refused to meet Mr Sharon since he took office in 2001, braved condemnation by domestic and Arab opponents when he offered to play host to the Israeli leader, who is seen by a majority of Arabs as the instigator of Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon and massacre of Palestinians at the Sabra and Chatila refugee camps as well as other aggressive actions against Arabs. Mr Mubarak took this risk in the hope that he could relaunch the moribund "road map" plan for the creation of a Palestinian state.
If Mr Mubarak's gamble pays off, he could regain a central role for Egypt on the Arab stage. This would boost his controversial bid for a fifth six-year term in office, which has been criticised both domestically and internationally.
Progress would also strengthen the public persona of Egypt's intelligence chief, Mr Omar Suleiman, who stage-managed the summit. Mr Suleiman has mediated between rival Palestinian leadership groups and has brought together figures from Islamist factions with the aim of ending attacks on Israel. He is seen as a possible successor to Mr Mubarak.
It is significant that both Mr Mubarak and Mr Abbas spoke of the March 2002 Arab summit decision to recognise and normalise relations with Israel in exchange for a full withdrawal from Arab land occupied in 1967 and that they called for the inclusion of Syria and Lebanon in the peace process. Arab commentators point out that there can be no overall Arab-Israeli settlement unless there is a deal on all fronts.