TODAY's summit between President Clinton and the Israeli Prime Minister, Mr Benjamin Netanyahu, could decide the fate of the Middle East peace process. Mr Netanyahu's predecessor as prime minister, Mr Shimon Peres, has warned that failure to find a formula to bridge the wide gap between Palestinians and Israelis would result in Israel being isolated.
The peace process, launched in Madrid in October 1991 was based on two parallel sets of negotiations: first, bilateral talks to achieve separate settlements with the Palestinians and the front line Arab states - Jordan, Syria and Lebanon; second, complementary multilateral discussions designed - to achieve wider regional accommodation on Palestinian refugees, water sharing, economic development and environmental protection.
The multilateral talks brought Israel into direct contact with most Middle Eastern and North African Arab states. Syria and Lebanon, however, absented themselves until progress had been achieved on the bilateral plane. This did not happen because the Israeli Prime Minister who went to Madrid, Mr Yitzhak Shamir, rejected the land for peace formula and stalled progress on all fronts.
The absence of Syria, Israel's main military antagonist, diminished the usefulness of the multilateral talks, which were designed to build confidence and promote normalisation between the Arabs and Israel. From the outset, the separate sets of negotiations did not mesh properly and there was no simultaneous progress towards a comprehensive regional settlement.
The election of an Israeli Labour government in June 1992 and the conclusion of the first Oslo Accord in September 1993 gave a boost to the moribund Madrid initiative. Jordan concluded a peace treaty with Israel in October 1994. But deadlock in discussions with Syria compelled Lebanon to suspend its bilateral talks.
Israel froze negotiations with Syria in March 1996, and the Palestinians froze negotiations with the new Likud government last month. The collapse of the bilateral talks forced the Arab League to recommend on March 31st that its member states suspend participation in multilateral talks, freeze diplomatic ties with Israel and reactivate the economic boycott. The peace process ground to a halt.
This does not take the situation back to the status quo ante Madrid, however, for peacemaking has transformed the region. The wall of sand and stones erected by the Arabs round Israel has come down. Israel has a second peace treaty, with Jordan, boosting the legitimacy of the 1979 treaty with Egypt. And a formula has been agreed for reaching a settlement with the Palestinians.
For their part, the Palestinians have achieved general recognition of their right to self determination and statehood.
Jordan has secured an agreed border with an Israel previously reluctant to define the limits of its territory. Syria informally agreed with the previous Israeli government a settlement involving the return to Syria of the Golan Heights, a deal now rejected by the present government.
The freeze in the peace process most seriously affects the Palestinians, who must endure continued occupation and economic distress, and the Israelis themselves, who are facing renewed terrorist attacks and violent protests.
