Tony Blair is not the only foreign dignitary to have shuttled through the Middle East’s war-weary capitals in recent days. The Russian, German, Spanish and Italian foreign ministers preceded him to Israel and the Palestinian territories. But Mr Blair’s visit may prove to have been particularly well timed. On his arrival two days ago, the prospects for a resumption of Israeli-Palestinian talks were negligible and the Palestinian leadership offered by Mahmoud Abbas, the President, and Hamas appeared too dysfunctional to warrant serious negotiations. By yesterday, Ehud Olmert, the Israeli Prime Minister, and Mr Abbas had signalled their willingness to hold talks without preconditions. And the Fatah movement that Mr Abbas leads had announced a deal for a “unity” government with Hamas.
In a diplomatic desert, this is progress. It is true that Day 2 of the Blair visit, predictably, yielded protests at his presence in Beirut; true, too, that relations between Israel and the Palestinians are at such a nadir that improvement is built on a low base. The plans for unilateral withdrawal from parts of the West Bank that Mr Olmert inherited from Ariel Sharon are dormant if not shredded. Deepening economic paralysis threatens a humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip because of the isolation that Hamas has effectively decreed for the 1.5 million Palestinians living there, and Hamas itself has ruled out the quickest route to ending that isolation, by its refusal to accept Israel’s right to exist.
But the hints at rapprochement of the past two days — from Mr Olmert and Mr Abbas on the one hand, and Mr Abbas and Hamas on the other — do constitute a window of opportun-ity, as Mr Blair asserted. Furthermore, the goal for moderates on all sides is clearer than ever, if not immediately attainable: Hamas must be induced to confront reality and accept the over-riding responsibility that its success at the polls conferred on its erratic leadership. Without finding a form of words to recognise Israel, a Hamas administration will remain isolated. No Palestinian government, elected or otherwise, can claim a role in charting the future of the region as long as it retains as a core principle the use of violence to destroy its neighbour.
There is no shortage of influential Palestinians, even among those who have spent time in Israeli jails, who recognise that the only possible basis for future stability is a two-state solution such as that set out in the “road map” agreed by Mr Sharon, Mr Abbas and the Quartet of the US, the UN, Russia and the European Union. These moderates can best be empowered by continued international resolve to show that the extremists who seek to marginalise them do not prevail. That means no direct negotiations with Hamas until it abandons the rhetoric of hate. It also means cultivating private communication channels with those in the Palestinian leadership who seek realistic compromise. As Mr Blair knows from Northern Ireland, such communications are always complex and seldom glamorous, but they are the only route to peace.