Most of the elements that make the Middle East such a volatile region were dramatically in play yesterday. There was a grave deterioration in relations between Israelis and Palestinians following the public murder of three Israeli soldiers and retaliatory action by helicopter gunships against a police outpost at Mr Yasser Arafat's headquarters in Gaza. In a separate event in Yemen a US warship was bombed, killing at least 20 sailors. International oil prices reached a 10-year high and markets fell. It is all a sharp reminder that the world has a common interest in stability and peace in the Middle East region.
After the escalation of tension and confrontations between Palestinians and Israelis in recent weeks, which has left nearly 100 people dead, yesterday's events were a disaster waiting to happen. Popular feeling on both sides has been stoked up to fever pitch, making it more and more difficult for political leaderships to exert control or calm passions down. The horrifying death of the Israeli soldiers in Ramallah - at the hands of a crowd of Palestinian youths returning from a funeral of a young man killed in the violence - was responded to by the Israeli military in a classically pre-emptory manner by attacking such a sensitive target. Despite the disclaimers of escalation, it is not surprising that this should have been described as a declaration of war by Mr Arafat's spokesman.
These events must make it extremely difficult for the Israeli Prime Minister, Mr Barak and Mr Arafat to create the political space in which to resume their negotiations for a settlement based on the Oslo peace process. They were tantalisingly close to reaching one at Camp David during the summer under United States tutelege. Just before yesterday's events it had been agreed by the United Nations Secretary General, Mr Kofi Annan, that a security committee of top Israeli and Palestinian officials would meet to explore how to de-escalate the confrontations. Such contact is all the more necessary now to contain the violence and preserve regional peace; but it is also all the more difficult, given the collapse of trust and political will on both sides and the constraints imposed on political leaders by inflamed public opinion. Mr Barak, without coalition partners, has only a few days left before the Knesset reconvenes. Mr Arafat's credibility requires him to associate with his people's militancy.
Although that is very specific to Israeli-Palestinian relations, the collapse of their peace process would have grave consequences indeed for the region. It could lead to all-out battles between the Israeli military and Palestinians and the eruption of terrorist attacks in the occupied territories, within Israel and in Lebanon. Other states could rapidly be drawn into these confrontations politically and in security affairs. Issues that are relatively separate, such as Iraq's isolation (highlighted by the fact that the warship attacked in Aden was en route to enforce sanctions) and support for fundamentalist movements from Iran, could become more joined. Oil security and pricing would also be endangered. It would be hard to predict how international markets would respond.
All this underlines how pressing and urgent it is for the international community to contain these events. President Clinton's efforts to secure a settlement have been severely set back. The US remains the most important mediator, despite its clear tilt towards Israel as the presidential election approaches. There is room for a more assertive effort by European Union leaders at their summit today and tomorrow in Biarritz to underline their interest and role in calming such inflamed passions. And Mr Annan's efforts to intercede must be supported by all sides.