Israeli Prime Minister Ariel is likely to gain the conditional backing of the Bush administration for his Gaza disengagement plan at a time both leaders are eager for even small successes, Khaled Dawoud reports from Washington After months of delay, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel will meet US President George Bush next week, reportedly to finalise details of his unilateral disengagement plan from the occupied Gaza Strip. Although most observers and concerned parties are highly sceptical that war-minded could ever be the man to broker a peace with Palestinians, particularly following the assassination of Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and amid an extremely volatile situation in Iraq, US officials and informed diplomats say that a deal could be in the offing following weeks of intensive contact between the two sides. However, the same sources said they expect no "imminent" withdrawal from Gaza, and that no serious moves towards evacuation of illegal Israel settlements in the over-crowded Strip could take place before the beginning of next year -- namely after upcoming US presidential elections. American and Israeli officials leaked to the press that the deal which has been under discussion between the two sides involves an exchange of letters of assurance, setting the general guidelines that would allow the beginning of Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, and the evacuation of at least four settlements in the West Bank. The United States reportedly insists that any pledge by to pull out of Gaza should be linked to the roadmap -- the internationally agreed plan proposed by the United States last year -- where an outline for establishing an independent Palestinian state according to President Bush's vision has been laid out. But , it seems, has a different agenda. wants a US pledge that Israel will not be forced to return to 1967 borders, nor to rescind the annexation of Arab East Jerusalem or give up major settlements in the West Bank. Further, wants US recognition of the right to retaliation or "hot pursuit" in case of attacks stemming from Gaza, and a clear denial of the right of return of millions of Palestinian refugees forced to leave their villages and towns in 1948, US and Israeli press reports said. Contrary to 's wishes, however, US officials insist that the premier's plan has to be coordinated with the Palestinian Authority (PA), although definitely not Palestinian President Yasser Arafat. US officials were also ready to approve the annexation of settlements in the West Bank along the lines negotiated with the Palestinians in the summer of 2001 at Camp David, and later in Taba, while stating that any deal on final borders or Jerusalem should be negotiated by both sides. In other words, the United States is seeking to avoid any thorny, so-called final status issues at this stage, said former US Middle East Envoy Dennis Ross, and is mainly concerned to end the current stalemate which is only making things worse. Agreeing to meet at the White House for the ninth time since taking office in 2001 was another signal that President Bush was serious in his efforts to revive the Palestinian-Israeli track, Ross added. To date, President Bush has not met President Arafat once. , facing trouble at home and an evident failure to bring an end to the over three- year-old Palestinian uprising, has been seeking a visit to the White House since February to gain the backing of a traditional ally. US officials initially treated 's proposal on Gaza with suspicion, but after repeated assurances that he was serious, and several exchanged visits by senior officials, National Security Council spokesman, Sean McCormack, described the Israeli prime minister's ideas as "promising" and "potentially historic". In a briefing to reporters on Monday, one day after the return of a senior US delegation from Israel, McCormack refused to get into details of the deal that is being worked out between the two sides, noting that 's proposals have not yet been finalised or approved by his cabinet and parliament. However, to emphasise that the United States was serious in its current effort to revive the Palestinian- Israeli peace track, he pointed to the fact that the US has expanded its consultations beyond Israel to include the three other members of the so-called Quartet who sponsored the roadmap -- Russia, the European Union and the United Nations -- NATO, Arab countries and the Palestinian Authority. The US delegation which recently visited Israel, including Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley, Assistant Secretary of State William Burns and National Security Advisor responsible for the Middle East Elliott Abrams, "talked with leaders in the region about Prime Minister 's proposals for withdrawal, and they talked with Quartet members, members of NATO and leaders in the region about how we can use those proposals and their possible implementation in a way that would enhance progress towards the president's vision of two states living side by side in peace and security, as he outlined in his June 24th speech," McCormack said. With President Hosni Mubarak, Jordan's King Abdullah and visiting the United States this week, President Bush will hold further discussions on the Israeli plan, McCormack said. David Makovsky, director of the Project on the Middle East Peace Process at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and known for his close ties to the right-wing government in Israel, said he believed was serious about reaching a deal on Gaza at this stage. He pointed out to his recent statements in which he declared that it would be better to reach an accord now rather than being forced to reach a worse agreement by the international community. Although Makovsky backs the general consensus within the administration and in Washington that the PA, led by Arafat, has "practically collapsed", he did not support 's view that no deal can be negotiated with the Palestinians. In a tactic probably aimed at increasing pressure on the PA to crackdown on militant organisations such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad, the Bush administration and are repeatedly airing the threat of excluding it as a negotiating partner. However, both parties, according to Makovsky, recognise that any deal on Gaza must necessarily be negotiated with the PA. The PA, aware of this threat, is willing to prove itself a reliable negotiating partner, he added. Meanwhile, Egypt and Jordan are likely to play a major role in any expected deal on Gaza. "Egypt will not tolerate a Muslim Brotherhood state on its border," said Makovsky, referring to the possibility of a Hamas-led takeover in Gaza in the event that the PA's influence collapses. At a time when the Bush administration is looking for even minor successes in the Middle East region ahead of upcoming US elections, in order to counter Democratic Party charges that its Middle East policy has failed, "the US will welcome Egypt's role because it is playing a constructive role and willing to help," Makovsky adds. According to Makovsky, who ended a trip to Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories this week where he met with senior officials, some of the most difficult issues that were delaying a deal on Gaza were the control of its border with Egypt and restoring PA control over the Strip's harbour and airport. Ross, while agreeing with Makovsky that has no alternative but to coordinate any disengagement plan with the PA, also pointed out that this could be the only way to avoid a repetition of the Hizbullah scenario which claimed victory after Israel's pullout from south Lebanon in 2000. In order to avoid massive demonstrations by Hamas along the border with Israel after withdrawal, the PA should be in control of the Strip, he said.
