The final stage of his tour was marred by some tragic developments: a record number of victims in the Israeli military operation in Gaza and a terrorist attack targeting Americans in Beirut, not to mention the weakened positions of the Israeli government and more blasts in Iraq.
Even so, George Bush was pleased with the results of the visit and even called it a success. On face value, he has something to show for it. He visited six countries and the Palestine National Authority, was accorded a warm welcome by Middle East leaders and did a lot of sightseeing. He said all he wanted to say about peace, democracy, the Iranian threat and oil prices. In addition to leaders, he met with young people, women and businessmen who lent him an attentive ear. Indeed, Bush's trip was unprecedented for the region in terms of the number of talks, the range of the problems discussed, the possible scale of future economic deals and strategic alliances.
As for the immediate fallout from the trip, it depends on who had been expecting what.
Washington diplomats warned that the visit would not bring any dramatic change to the region even before the President boarded his plane to the Middle East. But surely they hoped to get high-profile and promising statements from local leaders, above all the Arabs, on three things: support for the Arab-Israeli peace process, the creation of an anti-Iranian coalition and the prospect of more stable oil prices. Measured by these criteria, the most that can be said is that Bush's interlocutors did not disagree with him.
Unlike the high-ranking officials, the majority of people in the region felt that the U.S. President's words about a future peace sounded hollow against the background of intensified Palestinian bombardment of Israel and the Israeli military operation in the Gaza Strip, which did not stop even during Bush's visit. On the day that the U.S. President bid farewell to the Middle East, Israel expected new strikes and Gaza was burying its dead. Nineteen people died in a single day - that was a kind of end-of-the year record timed for the Bush visit.
An opinion poll showed that 17% of Israelis fear that the U.S. President's trip will worsen the relations between Israelis and Palestinians, and 77% think that it will make no difference. The Arab public opinion is also skeptical, judging from the media.
Yet despite the popular mood and the deteriorating situation, the Palestinian and Israeli leaders have agreed to continue the peace talks to resolve all the issues.
That surely owes much to American pressure, but can Washington keep it up? The decision to continue talks already cost Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert an ally in the government coalition; the Israel, Our Home party, led by Minister Avigdor Lieberman, joined the opposition. It has not yet brought about a crisis or a cabinet resignation, but it further undermined the prime minister's already shaky position.
Bush's predecessor, Bill Clinton, never managed to achieve a final settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, stumbling on differences within the Israeli and Palestinian camps. Given the character of the current president, he is likely to ignore the obvious facts that stand in the way of his goal.
Bomb blasts and a government crisis? But did anyone promise that the road to peace would be easy? In Iraq, terrorist attacks happen almost every day and it takes more than a year to get a law passed. So what? Washington declares that the situation in the country is gradually improving, that there is progress in the security sphere and in moving toward reconciliation within Iraq.
In Lebanon, the government paralysis which has lasted more than a year and constant terrorist attacks do not prevent the Bush Administration from claiming that the country is moving towards genuine democracy. But for the pernicious influence of Syria and Iran, everything would be fine, according to Bush.
But as regards Iran, he drew a blank. He failed to piece together an Arab coalition against Iran. El-Riyadh thus summed up the response to Bush's calls: "Tehran must abide by international law as regards its nuclear program and avoid escalation in the region, but we don't harbor any evil for Iran. It is our neighbor and an important regional player." That is the shared Arab position.
Similarly, the Saudis were speaking for all the Arabs when they said that the Arabs had already done everything possible to promote a Palestinian-Israeli settlement when they came up with a peace initiative in 2002, which later became part of the "road map" developed by the Quartet of international mediators (the U.S., Russia, the EU and the UN). Now the Arabs need proof that Israel is genuinely committed to peace, but the continued settlement policy and military operations on Palestinian lands prove the opposite.
The Arab world's reaction to all of Bush's calls was generally lukewarm, including his call on the OPEC countries made in Riyadh to increase oil supplies to world markets to decrease prices. "We will increase production when the market warrants it. That is our policy," said the Saudi Oil Minister Ali Naimi.
All this may suggest that the Bush visit was a total failure. However, as he told the ABC, "history will tell." The interview mentioned that Bush's approval rating inside the U.S. was at an all time low (32%) and that in the Middle East he had the reputation of a "warmonger."
Whether or not the trip was useless will be known in a year's time because Bush has promised that a Palestinian state will appear on the world map before the end of his presidency. If that happens, success may overshadow everything else, at least for a while. Winners are not judged.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
