President Bush and Prime Minister Olmert could hardly have a more dramatic backdrop to their meeting set for June 19 in Washington. The display of savagery between Hamas and the Fatah-faction among the Palestinian Arabs is so brutal, even nihilistic, that for many it will put Israel’s toughness in seeking to defend itself into a new light. The scuttlebutt is that Mr. Bush will use the fifth anniversary of his address of June 24, 2002, to re-articulate America’s position with respect to Palestinian rights and obligations, terrorism, and peace. It was during that speech in the Rose Garden that Mr. Bush aligned American policy with the goal of a Palestinian state. He stressed the importance of democracy of ridding the Palestinian Arab leadership of figures tainted by terrorism.

That speech led to the road map for Middle East peace, a document purporting to describe just how Israel and the Palestinians might negotiate themselves to a successful conclusion. Endorsed by the Quartet, a diplomatic construct of America, Europe, the United Nations, and Russia summoned into existence for the sole purpose of riding herd on the Palestinian issue, the road map began by insisting that Israel cease all settlement activity and Palestinians “dismantle the terrorist infrastructure.” The Palestinian Arabs failed abjectly in their obligation, and one, albeit only one, of the results is the bloodletting the world is witnessing today, with individuals being marched into the street and shot dead or thrown off buildings with their hands cuffed.

In Israel, Mr. Olmert’s coalition is under its own pressures, albeit ones that come with parliamentary democracy. Most of his coalition members do not want to risk new elections that might leave them out of power. Mr. Olmert was strengthened this week by the victory of his candidate for the presidency, Shimon Peres, and the election as head of the Labor Party of Ehud Barak, a close coalition partner to Mr. Olmert’s Kadima. Mr. Peres will no longer be available as interim prime minister, eliminating one scenario of how Mr. Olmert might be pried from office. Mr. Barak is more likely to keep Labor in the Kadima-led government coalition than the rival he defeated, Ami Ayalon.

But progress on matters Palestinian is blocked not by Israeli weakness or America’s focus on the Battle of Iraq, but by events unfolding among the Palestinians, where Hamas’s takeover in the Gaza district makes clear that the road map has reached a dead-end. It wouldn’t surprise — or disappoint — us were Messrs. Bush and Olmert to decide that, under the circumstances, connectivity between Gaza and the West Bank should be put on hold. Opening a connection had been the goal of a plan presented just recently by the American security coordinator, General Dayton. Israel’s security concerns will certainly be understood more clearly against the backdrop of a Hamas-run Strip.

Messrs. Bush and Olmert will no doubt review the Israeli approach to Syria and the dangers facing Lebanon’s fragile government, which is besieged on two fronts by radical Sunni terrorists and Shiites gathered under Hezbollah’s banner and by a Saudi Plan, also known as the Arab League initiative. Mr. Olmert has made positive noises about both opportunities. These columns oppose a peace with Syria under Bashar Assad’s terrorsponsoring Baathist dictatorship. Even Mr. Peres, a Nobel laureate in peace, recently told reporters, “The problem is the Syrians are not ready and are unwilling to negotiate directly with Israel.” It would be a tragedy to seek an entente with a Syria that is preparing for war against the Jewish state.

***

Some will say the violence in Gaza proves the error of disengagement. Others will suggest it proves the logic of disengagement. Our view is that it demonstrates the nature of our common enemy in the war that is being levied against us by both our Islamist foes and the remnant allies of the Soviet Union. Mr. Bush will be watching to see how the American relationships in the region — the Sunni Arab states of Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia on the one hand and Israel on the other — can work together against Iran. Syria’s Baathists are tied to Iran. Lebanon is terrorized by an Iranian-backed Hezbollah. Hamas is funded and armed by Iran. Containing Iranian power and influence is central not only to the American position in Iraq but to the entire region. That is the big game that overshadows all of the other diplomatic moves under contemplation.