One approach would be to attempt a verbal fudge, but that will probably not work because whatever an eventual agreement says about Jerusalem is bound to be closely scrutinised by critics. Some Israelis would certainly reject that, but if he can come up with a solution which is acceptable to both sides it will be nothing short of a triumph. All the other failings of his presidency could deservedly be forgiven, if not forgotten. This is the most delicate part because Clinton not only has to demonstrate to both sides that he has some workable proposals and earnestly wants to strike a deal, but must also secure the confidence of the Palestinians who, up to now, have regarded his administration as more concerned with Barak s problems than their own. Apart from ideas, the main things the Americans can bring to the table are money and security guarantees.
Money can lubricate a deal by making minor concessions easier to accept.
Money would also be needed for construction work to provide sensible and secure movement within Jerusalem, between the West Bank and Gaza, and between Israel and any remaining settlements. The cost would certainly run into tens of billions of dollars. The most easily achievable outcome, an incomplete deal creating a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza but postponing the question of Jerusalem, seems the least likely. At this stage, neither side regards such a deal, on its own, as worth having. The Palestinians remain suspicious of Clinton s assumed role as an honest broker, and some suggest it would be better to wait for the next president.