Better Late Than Never

(4 of 4)
Bush officials expect both Israeli and Palestinian positions to harden before they crack. That may explain why so many experts now believe the U.S. should come up with an ultimatum--a solution imposed from on high with new rules, sweeteners for every camp and unbearable penalties if they balk. It's an approach favored in one form or another by such old hands as Zbigniew Brzezinski, National Security Adviser in the Carter Administration, and Robert Malley, a former Clinton peace negotiator. Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres thinks the U.S. should at least impose terms for a cease-fire, because "the alternative is another bazaar that will waste time and opportunities." Says Brzezinski: "The U.S. has to face the fact that the parties to the conflict are incapable of reaching a comprehensive peace on their own." But Dennis Ross, a former Bush and Clinton Middle East expert, says an ultimatum won't work. "You're not going to get them to compromise on Jerusalem now, you're not going to get them to compromise on refugees now, and you're not even going to get them to compromise on borders now," he says. "What you will produce is both sides focusing on the issues that give them the hardest line." Watching events unfold from the West Wing last week, one U.S. official sighed and said, "Better late than never." When it comes to the Middle East, that qualifies as optimism.