No matter what Tony Blair says, and no matter how many times we tell ourselves that the world will never be the same again after the terror attacks on America, one depressing fact remains unaltered. There is now nothing that can sensibly be referred to as the Middle East “peace process”. It was moribund before the hijacked Boeings smashed into the World Trade Centre And it is moribund now. No matter what Tony Blair says, and no matter how many times we tell ourselves that the world will never be the same again after the terror attacks on America, one depressing fact remains unaltered.

There is now nothing that can sensibly be referred to as the Middle East “peace process”. It was moribund before the hijacked Boeings smashed into the World Trade Centre. And it is moribund now.
These days, when George Bush uses the phrase, he does so not because he thinks there is the slightest chance that Ariel Sharon and Yasser Arafat can sit down together and finally settle the differences between their two warring peoples, allowing a viable state of Palestine to spring into life on the west bank of the River Jordan and in Gaza, alongside the national home of the Jews.The phrase has become a genie, to be spirited up by the US and its allies when they need to send a comforting message to the Muslim and Arab world in the hope that this will subdue the street-level anger over the American-led war in Afghanistan. It is summoned by both the Israelis and the Palestinians, when they are seeking to gain an advantage in the eyes of the outside world; by international diplomats, trying to create the illusion of activity; by TV correspondents and American pundits, as a substitute for addressing the conflict’s chronic fundamental problems.Tony Blair rubbed away furiously at the rusty magic “peace” lamp when Mr Arafat met him in Downing Street nearly a fortnight ago, hoping to show the Muslim world that the West does, after all, care about one of the chief concerns on the street: the dispossessed Palestinians and the UN resolutions on which they pin their nationalist hopes.It was time to “seize the moment”, time to “push forward” with the “peace process”, he said. The goal would be to create a “viable Palestinian state as part of a negotiated and agreed settlement which guarantees peace and security for Israel”.The prime minister may have meant it.

He may sincerely believe that the extraordinary political climate in the US brought about by the horrors of 11 September means that the White House now has a unique chance to play hardball. The Palestinian leadership is anxious to distance itself from terror, and America’s usually powerful pro-Israel lobby has lost some of its muscle – not least because Israel has made clear that it places its conflict above the US’s new war.But – if this is Mr Blair’s view – the Bush administration declined the challenge. It was always reluctant to be drawn into the Middle East, having seen Bill Clinton venture in energetically, only to emerge from last year’s failed Camp David summit with flames licking at his heels That has not changed. Despite reports that they have a new initiative on the blocks, strategically leaked to the US press to encourage Arab and Islamic acceptance for the “war on terror”, the Americans have no intention at present of moving ahead with substantive peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians. They appear privately to have concluded that there is no chance of success while Mr Sharon is in power in Israel, and to have profound doubts about Yasser Arafat’s willingness or ability to sign off on a deal. They have no desire to enter negotiations, especially in the midst of a crisis in the West’s relations with Islam, unless they are convinced these will succeed.