Bush, Kerry sidestep ME conflict

With less than two weeks to go before the November 2 election, the Bush and Kerry campaigns appear to have made a concerted effort to avoid discussion of what has been a hallmark of US diplomatic efforts for the past 30 years.

Perhaps preoccupied with the insurgency in Iraq and fearful of compromising the support of Jewish voters -- key to victory in the battleground state of Florida, where the 2000 election was decided -- neither Bush nor Kerry have enunciated any new proposal for the Middle East.

As violence continues to rage and Bush's once-vaunted "roadmap" for peace flounders amid a sea of mutual Israeli-Palestinian recriminations, the candidates have refused to address the matter beyond platitudes, analysts say.

"The most revealing foreign policy aspect of this foreign policy debate was what was not discussed and what neither candidate chose to raise on (his) own," said Robin Niblett of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think-tank.

Speaking shortly after Bush and Kerry squared off in their first televised debate last month, Niblett suggested that the rivals were intentionally avoiding the Middle East for political reasons.

Omitting the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is likely explained by "a desire by both candidates to avoid upsetting an important electoral constituency," he said, referring to the Jewish vote.

Indeed, in the days since the first debate, the candidates have marched in lockstep supporting Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and denouncing what they say is Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's failed leadership.

"Mr. Arafat has proven his unwillingness and incapacity to be able to act as a legitimate partner in the peace process," Kerry said in Florida on October 9 in remarks strikingly similar to those Bush made 24 hours earlier.