President Bush’s hesitation to outline a specific timetable for the creation of a Palestinian state put a damper on what was increasing expectation of an imminent breakthrough in the current Middle East deadlock. When Bush meets Ariel Sharon in Washington today, whatever hopes there were of a break in the logjam could be all but snuffed out.

Though he has affirmed the principle of creating a Palestinian state, Bush would not go along with a reported proposal by visiting Egyptian President Mubarak to support the declaration of an independent state by the beginning of 2003. Then — as a UN member recognized by the international community — it would negotiate over the next three years outstanding issues with Israel: Israeli withdrawal to pre-1967 borders, the borders of the nascent state, the future of Jerusalem, refugees and settlements.

While Bush might be against marking the calendar of the future state, Sharon is resolutely opposed to the very idea. The prime minister fully supports erasing the institutions and realities bequeathed him by the Oslo accords. His notion of a peace plan repudiates all the progress made at the Madrid conference, Oslo and subsequent accords and negotiations.

Sharon also seeks to impose impossible choices upon the Palestinians and to topple and replace the legitimate Palestinian leadership.

Aside from not committing himself to deadlines for a state, Bush connected any future Palestinian nation to present-day reforms within the Palestinian Authority. The reconstruction of Palestinian institutions in preparation for a Palestinian state is a ticklish issue at a time when Sharon insists that Yasser Arafat be removed. Obviously, change that would strengthen his adversary’s ability to confront him is not what Sharon wants. Ideally, he would destroy Arafat and his Palestinian Authority altogether on the ostensible ground that Israel, as he puts it, cannot deal with such a regime.

The reforms Sharon has in mind are the exact opposite of what the Palestinians have in theirs. Sharon’s notion of reforms is one that would consecrate all existing facts on the ground under yet another interim agreement during which Israel would be free to create even more new ones.

For Sharon, the reforms are a cover for altogether different reasons. He would rather that Arafat be swept from the picture or, if that cannot be done, see him in nominal charge of a PA whose security services have been reformed in accordance with his own specifications.

Whatever does eventually become of Palestinian reforms, they will not, on their own, advance the peace process. For that, there would have to be far-reaching Israeli reforms as well. In a distorted sense, there are such reforms being made; Sharon is quietly bringing about a fundamental change in the geographical map of the region. The sweeping incursions to which many cities in the West Bank were subjected to in March and April were not, as Israel claimed, temporary punitive measures aimed at destroying “terrorist infrastructures” but a systematic and deliberate attempt to destroy one of the key features of the Oslo accords — withdrawal for peace. What took place during those two months, and what continues to take place as Israel rolls in and out of Palestinian cities, appears to be the first step toward abandoning the accords altogether and replacing the peace process with a military solution.

An independent Palestinian state must be acknowledged as a necessary step on the way to peace. That Bush is standing somewhat in the way and Sharon against the idea all the way are obstacles for sure, as is the resolution recently passed by the central committee of the Likud Party, the majority partner in Israel’s coalition government, rejecting the establishment of a Palestinian state ever. Whatever may be the reasons for Bush’s hesitation in outlining a specific timetable for the creation of a Palestinians state, it goes well with Sharon’s plans for perpetuating the infrastructure of occupation. One can only hope the two are not acting in unison.