The first step is the hardest

You heard about it, you've read about it. Even so, I couldn't let it pass without noting it. Let CNN have the headline.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon announced a cease-fire Tuesday, hailing it as a new opportunity for peace in the Middle East.

"We have agreed with Prime Minister Sharon to cease all violence against the Israelis and against the Palestinians, wherever they are," Abbas said after talks at their summit in Egypt. ...

Sharon said Israel will cease its military operations in all locations in return for Palestinians' ending violence against Israelis.

What's more, Egypt and Jordan will soon return their ambassadors to Israel.

As gladdening as that news is, we have to keep in mind that, as the Guardian (UK) noted, it was a verbal agreement. There is nothing formal, nothing written, nothing signed. Rather, the two men made speeches stating they had an agreement.

But that may be to the good. I said the other day that the sides needed to be wary of moving too fast, and it seems they are aware of just that.

This time, all sides are proceeding cautiously[, the New York Times reported,] avoiding triumphant announcements that might prove hollow. A senior Israeli official said the Israelis and Palestinians were heading toward "understandings, not a formal agreement."

And the Jerusalem Post reported that

Sharon said: "We must move forward cautiously. This is a very fragile opportunity, one that the extremists will want to exploit. They want to close the window of opportunity for us and allow our two peoples to drown in their blood." He said if the two sides did not act now, the extremists "may be successful in their scheme."

(Which, it seems to me, is something else I just said.)

For his part, Abbas said the agreement "is simply the beginning of the process of bridging the gap," AP said. And there is still a yawning divide to be crossed, including the cynicism and suspicion among the people on both sides, not to mention their governments:

A furious debate has erupted in Mr. Sharon's cabinet [and among Israeli politicians generally - see the Jerusalem Post article] between advocates of responding to the cease-fire with positive steps and opponents who fear that the cease-fire is only "a timeout" from violent attacks, giving the Palestinian attackers time to regroup.

So far, Israeli officials say, the advocates of concessions have won the day, but Mr. Sharon is not going to be able to go much further - for example, to meet American and Palestinian demands for dismantling scores of illegal settlement "outposts" in the West Bank and freezing the growth of settlements near Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.

Not, at least, until Abbas can show he is not only serious about a ceasefire, which I think can be safely accepted, but is able to keep Hamas, which pointedly noted it was not a party to the agreement and didn't feel bound by it, on board.

But still, overall, the meeting brings some cautions hope - and the very caution is one of the more hopeful things about it.

According to Israeli diplomatic officials, the tone of Sharon's meeting with Abbas was very "serious," there was no euphoria, no elation, and the meeting was held in a very sober and business-like atmosphere. It lasted about an hour and a quarter.

Another Israeli official said "there was a great atmosphere in the talks ... smiles and joking." Those two statements are somewhat contradictory, but there's no reason things couldn't be smiles and jokes but sober when they got down to business.

Two things from the Israeli side struck me as significant. One was that

[p]rivately, Israeli officials made clear their halt in military operations depended on an end to Palestinian violence. And although they do not expect the Palestinian leadership to crack down on militants immediately, that must be done in the long-term, they said. [emphasis added]

That is a much more realistic response than earlier demands that the "infrastructure" of the militants be "dismantled" before any progress can be made. It also suggests to me that the Israelis believe Abbas is sincere in his intentions (or at least are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt), even if they continue to question his ability to carry them through.

The other came from Sharon himself.

Addressing "our Palestinian neighbors," Sharon made clear that Israel has given up its dream of Greater Eretz Yisrael.

"I assure you that we have a genuine intention to respect your right to live independently and in dignity," he said. "I have already said that Israel has no desire to continue to govern over you and control your fate. We in Israel have had to awaken from our dreams, painfully; we are determined to overcome every obstacle that might stand in our path in order to realize the new chance that has been created."

If he intends to be true to his word, including the possibility of compromises even more painful than surrendering the idea of Greater Israel (I'm thinking of Jerusalem), he could be a man who proves key to ending nearly 50 years of war, blood, fear, and oppression. And how would that be for a legacy?

Footnote: One other good thing is the proposal by the White House

to provide the Palestinian Authority with $350 million in U.S. funds to help rebuild infrastructure damaged or destroyed in the Palestinian territories after four years of Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In addition, another $40 million will be "reprogrammed" from money already authorized for a desalination plant and used for immediate assistance in similar infrastructure programs, Rice said.

See? Even Shrub can't be wrong all the time.