The Independent on the Bush peace plan.

Independent Argument Mr Bush's decision to turn his attention back to the Middle East, on the eve of the world leaders' summit in Canada, has had one positive effect. It has placed the subject on the international agenda and reopened a discussion about how the hideous cycle of violence might be halted. And in tackling the question of the Palestinian leadership head-on, Mr Bush has said no more than is acknowledged behind the closed doors of diplomacy: it is hard to envisage a lasting peace so long as Yasser Arafat holds the reins of Palestinian power. But what Mr Bush omitted to say, and is surely as true, is that the cause of peace is unlikely to be furthered while Ariel Sharon holds power in Israel. It takes two to make peace, and neither leader seems disposed to make the requisite concessions or show the requisite vision. This is what makes third-party intervention so urgent – and where all the inadequacies of Mr Bush's latest approach start to show.
Mr Bush's speech, and the lead-up to it, risks making matters even worse, if that were possible. By leaking selective details about support for a "provisional" Palestinian state, the White House raised expectations and trapped Mr Bush into having to say something at a time that was not of his choosing. The result was delay and the impression of indecision.