ISRAEL'S ARIEL SHARON can be a demagogue, and his military response to combat terrorism could be a prelude to more terror attacks. But the question the prime minister posed after surveying the scene of the latest suicide bombing in Israel deserves serious reflection. Referring to President Bush's expected call for the establishment of a Palestinian state, Mr. Sharon angrily stated: It would be interesting to know what kind of Palestinian state they mean. What Palestinian state?
The twin suicide missions that left 26 Israelis dead in two days reinforce the thesis in Israel and here that Palestinians prefer to have militants represent their interests than peace negotiators. And recent opinion polls of the Palestinian public support that claim.
The attacks carried out by two different groups - one tied to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement - reinforce the belief that the Palestinian leadership is morally bankrupt and powerless. Mr. Bush was right to delay his Middle East policy speech last week: Who can consider a provisional Palestinian state without asking what kind of state it would be, and more importantly, who would lead it?
Mr. Arafat's condemnation of the suicide bombings and his call to end terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians can only be viewed in the most cynical terms, given the expectation that Mr. Bush was to advance the Palestinians' call for a state of their own. Mr. Arafat is right, however, when he says that the terror attacks will result in Israel's reoccupation of Palestinian-ruled cities and towns. That is already under way.
Acknowledging the deadly stalemate driving the 19-month conflict, a group of 50 prominent Palestinians called on militant groups to cease their attacks on Israeli civilians. But the plea of these intellectuals won't have any impact if it remains solely the contents of a full-page ad in a Palestinian newspaper. They should take the initiative and lead a public debate on the issue in their towns, villages and refugee camps. The Palestinian people have to make a choice and speak out. To remain silent is to endorse the militants' terrorist ways and further delay any chance for an independent Palestine.
Mr. Bush has his own choices to make in these coming days.
His Mideast policy initiative must seek to break this stalemate. Setting performance goals for Palestinians to realize a provisional state won't work without strong Palestinian leadership, and the United States may have to take the initiative in bringing about that leadership.
The president also should emphasize to Mr. Sharon the need to think beyond the next military incursion. The hard-liners in his government may be content to police again the Palestinian territories. But if most Israelis want the terror attacks to end, they want as much to have their soldier sons and daughters safely at home with them.