A year ago Prime Minister Tony Blair, on leaving No. 10 Downing Street, was appointed the leading international envoy in the Middle East. It seemed that Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, had pushed for it, with the support of the White House. He was not the right choice for the job, with his main legacy being the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the shocking chaos there that followed. Kofi Annan, the then UN secretary-general, had suggested Joschka Fischer, the former German foreign minister - who did not carry half the political baggage of Tony Blair.

On June 5 Tony Blair, who has left Parliament, appeared before the House of Commons Select Committee on International Development to tell them what he had been doing in the Middle East and to take their questions. While I am critical of his political judgment, his ability to communicate - as with his friend former US President Bill Clinton - is awe-inspiring, and he quickly charmed the members of the All-Party Committee.

He described to them the arrangements he had made in May, on behalf of the Quartet (the United Nations, the European Union, the United States and Russia) for the removal of some checkpoints on the West Bank - which is covered with them - to assist with economic activity, while insisting that the Palestinians should make progress on security. The Palestinian economy remains at a seriously low ebb. He had to concede little progress had been made with this deal on the ground.

He warned that the severe blockade of Gaza - regarded by many as an illegal punishment under international law of a whole people - in retaliation for the endless firing of rockets into Israel "could overwhelm everything ... the current situation won't hold and isn't acceptable."

While reminding those present that most Palestinians and Israelis still back a two-state solution (as do most outsiders) he commented:

"If the only alternative ... is a one-state solution, then there's going to be a hell of a fight."

Inevitably, the question of talking to Hamas even though it is not prepared to recognize Israel came to the fore. After all Hamas is the fairly and properly elected government in Gaza. Tony Blair said:

"I totally understand people who say that, (although) it's not the Quartet's position."

He then added: "You can't dispute that Hamas has a military grip on Gaza and if they want to stop these (rocket) attacks they could."

His last observation interested me. Hamas' spokesmen deny Hamas could prevent these rocket attacks but are they convincing?

Tony Blair thinks Israel "has to go further and faster, especially on the West Bank".

He drew attention to the fact that some of its settlements there "are illegal under Israeli law, never mind international law."

This needs saying over and over again. A sensible Israeli government should surely enforce Israeli law and improve its international standing, which is extremely low, at the same time? It is difficult, if not impossible, to believe Israel is really seeking an agreement with the Palestinians when, year by year, it ducks the settlement issue on the West Bank.

In her excellent "World Briefing" in The Times (June 6) Bronwen Maddox wrote of Tony Blair:

"He overstates the parallels with Northern Ireland. He put a lot of weight on the unknown future: The next American president, the next Israeli prime minister, the reaction of the militant Islamic Hamas to events yet to unfold. But his account's strength lay in not pretending to influence more than a sliver of the picture. In recommending tiny steps and low expectations, he struck the right tone ..."

She contrasted favorably Tony Blair's approach with that of Barack Obama's "pro-Israel gesture" before the Israeli lobby in Washington a few days ago. At present, such is the political scene in the United States, that no serious presidential candidate is going to be anything other than an ardent Israeli supporter.

Tony Blair warned the Select Committee:

"There will be a real problem if a new president takes a couple of years ..."

to get going on Arab/Israel.

He thought the issues to be addressed were: "fundamental to security in the region and to peace between Islam and the West."

Tony Blair, an ex-prime minister who is still only 55, gives the impression of enjoying being the spokesman for the Quartet, and I am sure he appreciates being back in the limelight. Washington makes it clear it is the American secretary of state and not Tony Blair who is responsible for bringing the Palestinians and Israelis together. Tony Blair has not been authorized to talk to Hamas.

What Tony Blair can do is to seek to reduce the damage, step by tiny step, of the present deadly impasse.