I've written before about the back channel talks between Syria and Israel.
With the Annapolis tallks coming up, there is some quiet chatter the real possible outcome will be to bring some of these ongoing contacts and talks to the forefront.
Surprisingly, for those who follow the Bush administration's anti-Syria/don't-talk-with-Syria attitude, Syria is likely to be attending, along with many others from throughout the Arab world. This may be more important and more likely in the medium term future than anything between Israel and the Palestinians.
Reports on BBC and Haaretz suggest that there have been continuing talks between Syria and Israel, with Turkey and Russia as intermediaries.
One advantage Syria has is the ability to deliver. If Syria makes a deal, they can enforce it. Abbas and the PA, alas, have no such ability. They are too incompetent, corrupt and lacking support of their own people.
Similarly, the current Israeli government is notably weak and divided, and has not shown itself to be serious about freezing existing larger settlements or dismantling smaller settler outposts.
On the BBC World Service this morning, Yossi Alpher (a former IDF intelligence officer, senior Mossad official, aide to former prime minister Barak, and longtime peace advocate and co-foudner of Bitter Lemons, was interviewed and claims that the entire Israeli security and intelligence establishment believes Syria is serious about wanting real talks. This confirms my reading over the last several months at Haaretz (and even the Jerusalem Post), that much of the Israeli Government including the Foreign Minister Livni and Defense Minister Barak and most of the intelligence services, think that the time is right for talks with Syria. Until now the Bushies and Neocons have been opposed.
Such talks are in principle easier then those with the Palestinians. No religious claims to land. Relatively few settlement and settlers. It is more purely a geo-political-military-security-stategic negotiation, involving control of the "high ground" as well as water resources. Israel has to give up the land, the Golan Heights. Syria has to provide enforceable assurance of demilitarization.
Beyond the Golan itself their are critical Middle East wide implications. Part of Syria's leverage has always been its ability to exert de facto veto on Israeli-Palestinian or Israeli-Lebanon peace making. Syria is an important backer of the rejectionist elements in Hamas and other Palestinian groups that reject a two-state solution. Similarly they are an importnat backer of Hezbollah in Lebanon and strategic partner with the Iranian government.
Part of any Israeli peace agreement with Syria, would have to also involve Syria's taking their finger off the veto button for all these other parties.
In addition, the backing of the rest of the Arab world is critical. One excuse for Arafat saying "no" in 2000 was that he did not have such backing. The Arab League memorandum, led by the Saudis, in support of land for peace and a two-state solution based on the pre-1967 borders is great advance.
One ongoing problem is that the right wing among U.S. Jew, as represented by AIPAC has been opposed to such talk. AIPAC infamously helped shoot down talks between then Prime Minister Rabin and Syria in the late 1990s.
Regardless: If Annapolis happens at all, watch who shows up and at what level they are represented. And watch for signs of Israel-Syrian talks.