The so-called "London summit", which the British Prime Minister, Mr Tony Blair, hoped would breathe a spirit of compromise and conciliation into the deadlocked Middle East peace process, seems more likely to end in discord and despair.
Far from marking a turning-point for the better in Israeli-Palestinian ties, it could be remembered only as another milestone in that relationship's deterioration, which can be traced back to the November 1995 assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, the four Hamas suicide bombings of February and March 1996, and the election of Mr Benjamin Netanyahu as Israeli Prime Minister almost two years ago.
The summit - which today brings together Mr Netanyahu with the Palestinian President, Mr Yasser Arafat, and the US Secretary of State, Ms Madeleine Albright - was initiated by Mr Blair when he visited Israel and the Palestinian areas two weeks ago. The original assumption was that, in the supporting presence of Mrs Albright and Mr Blair, the two Middle East leaders would knuckle down to serious negotiation, attempting to smooth away the obstacles that have delayed the next phase of the peace effort - a further Israeli withdrawal from occupied West Bank land - for well over a year.
Instead, the two leaders have drifted so far apart they are not even willing to commit themselves to meeting each other. A direct session between Mr Netanyahu and Mr Arafat, rather than the starting point of the summit, would, if convened today, represent a considerable, and unexpected, sign of progress.
Mr Netanyahu's spokesmen have worked energetically in recent months to portray the peace deadlock as a consequence of Palestinian betrayal: the Palestinian failure to disarm Hamas Islamic extremists, to approve a new peace-oriented PLO guiding charter, to extradite for trial in Israel dozens of Palestinians suspected of involvement in violent attacks on Israelis.
Obviously, the Palestinians view matters differently. They argue the root of the deadlock lies in Mr Netanyahu's abandonment of the land-for-peace equation. What is more remarkable is that the Americans, Israel's most loyal allies, tend to see things Mr Arafat's way as well.
Mr Netanyahu has rejected the latest US proposals for progress, which call for a 13 per cent Israeli withdrawal. During the weekend, Mr Arafat formally accepted the US plan.
"Netanyahu has manoeuvred himself into a remarkable position for an Israeli prime minister," wrote the Israeli analyst Chemi Shalev, in the Ma'ariv daily yesterday. "In London, he will be facing up to an agreed position, reached in advance, by the Americans and the Palestinians."
Mr Netanyahu's credibility with Mr Arafat and Mrs Albright will not be helped by the actions of a senior Israeli official, reputedly the army's chief of staff, Gen Amnon Shahak, who has been telling US and Egyptian officials: "Anyone who says that 2 or 3 per cent of the West Bank has an impact on Israeli security is making a fool of himself."
Mr Netanyahu, of course, has been saying precisely that. Before today's talks, he has been adamant that a withdrawal from more than 9 per cent of the West Bank is unconscionable at this stage.
The London summit's success, Mr Arafat said yesterday, "depends entirely on Prime Minister Netanyahu". If so, then it is destined to fail.