Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's talk of unilateral separation from the Palestinians has drawn a diplomatic rap on the knuckles from Washington. 

But analysts say US President George W. Bush may only get seriously upset if Israeli actions provoke an explosion of violence that could compromise US efforts to pacify Iraq.

Preoccupied with Iraq and November's presidential election, the Bush administration is unlikely to launch any major drive to revive the Middle East peace "roadmap" it has endorsed.

Yet it may exert just enough muscle to restrain Sharon from irreversibly pre-empting the international consensus on the shape of a two-state solution for the Middle East conflict.

Neil Partrick of the Economist Intelligence Unit in London said Sharon's speech on Thursday, in which he pledged to sever Israeli-held territory from Palestinian land within months if peace talks fail, came as no surprise to Washington.

"It equates with a US sense that the roadmap, if not dead, has not got off the ground," he said. "So there is not going to be great US pressure on Israel."

The roadmap itself calls for reciprocal measures leading to a Palestinian state by 2005, but lays heavy emphasis on security action by Palestinians to kickstart a process that would also see Israel halt all settlement activity in the occupied lands.

Israel and the Palestinians have endorsed the roadmap, but accuse each other of failing to implement its provisions.

"Sharon says he is committed to the roadmap, but he does everything he can to undercut it," said Jihad al-Khazen, editor of the London-based pan-Arab newspaper al-Hayat.

"He says he wants security and an end to terrorism, but he has nearly destroyed the Palestinian security services and is always provoking Islamic resistance groups," he said.

Israeli analyst Yossi Mekelberg, an associate fellow of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, argued Sharon wanted to reshape the roadmap, and was under pressure from a frustrated Israeli public to produce a plan of his own.

Palestinians say Sharon's plan would effectively destroy prospects for a credible two-state solution and bring no peace.

It would give Palestinians less land than envisioned in the roadmap, speed construction of a separation barrier through the West Bank, redeploy troops and shift Jewish settlers away from Palestinian cities, in what Sharon says is a quest for security.

Mekelberg said it was wrong to assume the Americans, who swiftly condemned the plan and urged Sharon to meet his Palestinian counterpart Ahmed Qurie to discuss reviving the roadmap, would let Sharon have things all his own way.

"To a degree they will have to stand up to Sharon. It's an important issue. If it's unilateral and looks irreversible, even in an election year, they will have to do something."

Mekelberg said there were many ways for Washington to make life hard for Israel, given the vast web of US-Israeli co-operation and US financial assistance to the Jewish state.

Gary Samore, of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said Bush might have more freedom of action on the Middle East than most US presidents striving for re-election.

Bush is not dependent on the votes of Jewish Americans, themselves divided on Middle East policy, however useful they might be in important, evenly balanced states like Florida.

"The stronger Bush looks, the easier it is for him to prevent Sharon from taking unilateral action. Unilateral actions that kill the roadmap will not be welcome," Samore said.

Other unilateral actions, such as removing isolated Jewish settlements, however, could help the roadmap and establish what could prove a useful precedent, Mekelberg said.

"The irony is that Sharon might start something that will lead, in the far future, to something not far from the Geneva accord," he said, referring to a far-reaching peace plan reached informally by prominent Israeli and Palestinian figures.

Samore said the Bush administration was likely to press Israel and the Palestinians to keep the region relatively calm until a new US administration takes over in 2005.

The Americans would want to head off any fresh surge in Israeli-Palestinian violence that might damage their struggle to stabilize postwar Iraq and present the war as a success.

"The foreign policy they really need to focus on is how to capitalize on Saddam's capture to break the resistance and put in place a credible Iraqi government by June," Samore said.

(China Daily December 22, 2003)