Zvi Bar'el

From Israel's point of view, an independent Lebanon is a lost cause, now that with Syrian assistance, Hassan Nasrallah has taken over Beirut's center of power, including the presidency and the cabinet.

Olmert is another prime minister fading away as a Syrian and Palestinian partner, but he can and should leave a legacy for the public and political dialogue - a legacy that will force Livni, Mofaz, Barak or Netanyahu to accept, reject or adopt in part.

Peace is an internal Israeli matter and has no political or even strategic significance in the United States.

Israel may be able to say with satisfaction that it succeeded in joining yet another framework with Arab members, that France is once again a close friend and that its position in the world has never been better.

With Syria, the discussion and the agreements and disagreements are technical and tactical, and concern the precise borderline. Not anything insurmountable. It can quickly be resolved.

It is not only in Lebanon and the Palestinian Authority that policy-making has passed on to groups when the state is paralyzed. In this case, Israel too has passed on political decisions to an organization. Here they call it "the Israeli public."

Six years after the signing of the Arab initiative in Beirut, Israel still believes in cease-fires more than in better relations.

Israel needs to say that it is willing to release Palestinian prisoners in exchange for Shalit and lift its siege on Gaza, on the condition that Egypt properly oversees the border crossings.

Kadima has nothing to worry about. It has no political platform for elections, but it has two winning candidates.

But somewhere between the preparations for legal defense and passing thoughts of vengeance, Olmert still has two debts to pay.

Because of their difficulties, Olmert and Assad talk of peace or at least of negotiations to achieve peace. It is best to take them seriously.

Hamas wants its prisoners in exchange for Shalit, and the Rafah crossing in exchange for an end to the Qassam rocket attacks.

A prime minister who is under criminal investigation - not to mention a trial - should not expect that his busy involvement with a diplomatic process, and pledges of peace or war, will shield him.

Thus, while Israel continues to view Hezbollah as nothing but a militant organization that can be crushed by a military operation, it is ignoring the possibility that Lebanon will shortly be run by that very organization.

Israel prefers the stance of the one who is granting the cease-fire, not the one who desperately needs it.

Why did Israelis need to hear about their prime minister's intentions to relinquish the Golan Heights from the Syrian media, Syrian cabinet ministers and the Syrian President?

While Hamas is no peace partner, it is integral to 'non-warfare,' and a Palestinian unity government is necessary for Hamas to carry out that job.

If Syria is really a threat and is planning war, what is the meaning of the panic that miscalculation may lead to war?

Israel is demanding that Syria cut its ties with Iran, with Hezbollah, with Hamas and the rest of the groups as a precondition for negotiations. This is a dream.

Washington may be punishing Syria for not keeping its border with Iraq sealed, but its tactical conduct with Damascus is strategically punishing the whole Middle East.

Israel could conduct two-headed talks: one with Hamas, over the important issues such as security, and the second with the PA - over nothing.

Mahmoud Abbas and the PA are not responsible for Israel's security; Israel's own intelligence service is.

Even if Abbas is not moved by this reality - because of his tremendous personal anger at Hamas - Israel should be very, very moved.

This misleading premise has been in operation for far too long. Look closely at the picture of Israeli-Palestinian reality. Washington isn't in it.