The Palestinian negotiating team expressed deep disappointment over the failure of the London talks to achieve a breakthrough in the peace process.
Dr Nabil Shaath, a leading member, who called the two-day event a "moment of decision" for the Israeli Prime Minister, Mr Netanyahu, accused him of trying "to destroy the rules of the game under Oslo" and replace them with an Israeli diktat.
The Palestinian President, Mr Yasser Arafat, remarked, somewhat uncertainly: "I cannot say that the London talks failed because I have heard from Madame Albright that there was some progress" - although he was waiting for evidence of this. And he said he was prepared to continue the contacts "in Washington or elsewhere" in order to "secure positive results and preserve the peace process".
Mr Arafat had no choice but to adopt such a positive attitude. For he has become the prisoner of the stalled peace process. His survival depends on its success.
Palestinian and Arab commentators blame the US, the sole sponsor and guarantor of the process, for failing to compel Israel to honour its treaty commitments due to domestic pressures exerted by the pro-Israel lobby.
The Minister of Information, Mr Yasser Abel Rabbo, was sharply critical of the fact that the Clinton Administration has refused to table formally its own proposal (see panel on this page) or "place the blame on any party for obstructing progress".
As a result of this US approach to peacemaking, few ordinary Arabs expected a breakthrough in London. Dr Ghassan Khatib, a leading Palestinian analyst, told The Irish Times: "All those involved, our own people, the British and the Americans, all said not to expect much. So we did not."
Most Arabs also believed there would be no outright breakdown. "The US will not allow the talks to collapse because that means an end to the entire peace process." He continued: "I think there will be some progress in the near future. After all the Palestinians have adopted the US proposal as their position. There will be some kind of agreement on the next phase of redeployment. This was in the cards after our side reduced its demand from 30 per cent of the West Bank to the US figure of 13 per cent and after Palestinian security made some serious improvements. I believe we will reach 11 per cent, the figure which the Israelis say they will accept. And I've heard our side has made concessions to the Israelis on security and other issues during these talks."
Dr Khatib does not consider serious threats made by various Palestinian spokesmen of "chaos and violence" if there is no progress soon. "These are hollow threats," he said.
The Palestinians do not seek confrontation and conflict with Israel even though their political situation and standard of living has fallen dramatically since the Oslo Accord was signed in 1993. This is because the militants have not shown they can deliver more than Mr Arafat and his Authority. Since last autumn, when the Hamas spiritual mentor, Shaikh Ahmad Yassin, was released from an Israeli prison, the Islamic resistance movement has devoted its energies to reaching a modus vivendi with the Authority rather than mounting attacks against Israel. This did not, however, discourage Shaikh Yassin from saying yesterday that the "evil" Oslo process was dead.
Few Arabs have any faith in the stop-and-start negotiations which one columnist in a Gulf newspaper referred to as an illusory "virtual peace process".
The US has already paid a high price for its refusal to become actively and seriously engaged in securing progress. Traditionally friendly Arab rulers now seek to distance themselves from Washington which found itself alone and out on a limb when it sought allies to launch a military attack against Iraq earlier this year. While accepting US protection, the Gulf states are increasingly adopting an independent line in regional politics, seeking rapprochement with Washington's antagonist, Iran.
