The first step on the road to substantive negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians on a comprehensive settlement of their conflict has been taken at the Annapolis summit in Maryland in the United States. They are to meet on a biweekly basis between now and the end of 2008 and are pledged to deal with all issues. Flanking supervision and monitoring mechanisms have been agreed and a programme of confidence-building measures put in place.
All this is welcome news, going beyond what many expected from the Annapolis encounter. But sceptics have a strong case in saying political weakness of the major players, US unwillingness to put pressure on Israel in an election year and the exclusion of Hamas militate against likely success. The ambitious vision of regional peace in the Middle East voiced by President Bush is still not matched by a commensurate strategy to achieve it.
Even from this relatively weak political base one can legitimately hope that a sober realisation of how dangerous inaction can be will guide these negotiations. Mr Bush hinted at that yesterday when he warned that failure could well "lose a generation to radicals and extremists" in the region. Many Israelis despair of the perpetual security tension they have to endure. They and many educated Palestinians are tempted to leave the region if it continues and are lucky to have that opportunity to search elsewhere for employment and a peaceful life. Less privileged people - the great majority - do not have that option.
In response to such pessimism various scenarios for transforming the region have recently been floated. Prominent among them is a plan floated by former British prime minister Tony Blair on behalf of the United States, the United Nations, the European Union and Russia for a multi-billion euro economic aid package consequent on a settlement. Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert spoke of his hopes to see peace agreements reached with all states in the region, based on mutual recognition. For their part the more conservative Arab states, including Egypt and Saudi Arabia, are deeply anxious to see a regional transformation which would legitimise their own regimes.
The problem with the process agreed at Annapolis is that it is not sufficiently inclusive to deliver such an outcome. All concerned participated in the knowledge that Hamas was to be excluded from this process, despite its electoral victory over Mr Mahmoud Abbas's party last year and its dominance of Gaza. Iran, likewise, is outside the pale, despite its growing regional power arising from the war in Iraq. Both are capable of undermining whatever is agreed over coming months if they are not encouraged to participate. That would be a tall order indeed for Mr Bush, Mr Olmert and Mr Abbas, all of whom have hostile interests breathing down their necks as these talks proceed. But if they can make substantial progress on the core issues of Jerusalem, Israeli settlements, final borders and the return of refugees it would become easier to broaden the talks in pursuit of an overall deal.