If peace is left to Ariel Sharon, there will never be any. The Israeli prime minister has thrown up more hurdles to a settlement by ruling out the division of Jerusalem or the return of Palestinian refugees from negotiations. While Sharon reiterated what is still his vague motto about being prepared to make “painful compromises” for a lasting peace settlement, he was not prepared, he said, to surrender control of the city even if half of it is Palestinian. “We are guardians of Jerusalem for future generations,” Sharon said in recent public statements.

He also rejected the right of return for Palestinians. As for the Palestinian state Sharon has always spoken of, it would be smaller than ever proposed and would have only limited sovereignty, including complete demilitarization. Israel would control its borders and air space and it would be forbidden to establish diplomatic ties with any “enemy” of Israel.

Finally, Sharon has long made his core requirements for a peace deal clear — the removal of Yasser Arafat and the overhaul of the Palestinian political system.

This take-it-or-leave-it political stance is coupled with like-minded toughness on the field of battle. The toll has been brought to at least 30 Palestinians killed since activists blew up an Israeli tank on Saturday. The Israeli use of massive military force could pave the way for a reoccupation of the Gaza Strip. A reconquest of Gaza, taken together with last year’s reoccupation in the West Bank, would mean the fall of the last remnant of the Palestinian Authority and the Oslo peace process, placing all major Palestinian population centers under Israeli control.

However, the get-tough strategy is hurting Sharon domestically, preventing him from wooing the Labour Party into his government, a party he needs to make his coalition stable. In order to get the party to join, Sharon has shown signs of conciliation.

In recent days, he has held rare talks with senior Palestinian officials and has overturned his ban on Palestinian officials attending international conferences, allowing a delegation to attend the current talks in London. He even sent an Israeli team to London in the hopes that this tentative diplomacy is enough to persuade Labor to sign up to his government.

Despite the concessions, Mitzna is insisting on an acceptable timetable for negotiations with the Palestinians and the establishment of a Palestinian state. Sharon has repeatedly refused to commit himself to dates, a stand which serves him well with regard to the road map to peace. The quartet officials meeting in London have been urged to present their road map for setting up a Palestinian state as soon as possible. Publication of the final version was delayed by elections in Israel. Now it seems the US administration feels it should be put off further because a new Israeli government has not been formed.

The road map is the only available political tool which can bring the parties out of the abyss and back to the negotiating table. But to confirm the fears of skeptics on both sides who say Sharon is not serious about peace, he is demanding more than 100 changes to the road map and wants the timetable for implementation of the road map scrapped in favor of progress according to performance.

That could drag the process out for years, benefiting only hard-line groups who want blood to continue to flow.