Israeli police recommended indicting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Sunday. Police say they have collected enough evidence to indict the PM with corruption charges in two different cases.

They said they had ‘gathered enough evidence to indict Olmert on charges of accepting bribes and breaching public trust over suspicions he had unlawfully accepted cash-stuffed envelopes from a US businessman.’ (more…)

Via the Jerusalem Post comes the news that an Israeli official ‘close to [Israeli]
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said that the
prime minister will keep working towards a peace
agreement with the Palestinians until he leaves office.’ (more…)

Robert D. Novak wrote a good column for today’s edition of the Washington Post:

An overriding melancholy here this Holy Week follows Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s mission to Jerusalem last week. To Arabs and Jews seeking meaningful peace negotiations, it confirmed that no progress toward a two-state solution is likely for the remainder of George W. Bush’s presidency.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert rejected Rice’s offer to participate in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations for a permanent peace treaty. The word in the Olmert government is that the prime minister’s reluctance even to begin talks at this time is fully shared by Bush. Rice is sincere in her desire for peace, but she can accomplish nothing important without the full support of her chief.

The aphorism (originated by Israeli statesman Abba Eban) that Arabs “never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity” now can be applied to Israel. Last week’s Riyadh declaration indicated the willingness of the Arab world to consider a peaceful solution. Now, belief here among peace-seekers is that nothing will happen until a new president enters the Oval Office in 2009.

Read the entire column at the Washington Post.

Nancy Pelosi recently said that she “had relayed a message from Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, to the effect that Israel was ready for peace talks with Syria.” Syria responded that it’s ready for talks. There is but one little problem: Israel denies “that [it] relayed a message to Syria”.

In fact, Olmert’s office said that: “what was discussed with the House speaker did not include any change in Israel’s policy, as it has been presented to international parties involved in the matter.”

And, according to the prime minister’s office, Olmert told Pelosi that “Israel continued to regard Syria as ‘part of the axis of evil and a party encouraging terrorism in the entire Middle East’.”

I wonder, like Hot Air’s A.P., whether “she bungled the offer unintentionally, out of sheer, royal stupidity, or she didn’t bungle it at all and there’s simply been a miscommunication somewhere.”

This is quite unbelievable. I am not sure what to think of it. Miscommunication, stupidity… intentional?

Ed Morrissey comments: and this is exactly why foreign policy belongs in the executive branch.

I believe that Pelosi should never have traveled to the Mideast, and especially not if she wants to do more than just chitchat. This is none of her business. If Israel wants to give a message to Syria, it would do so through the President of the U.S. or, more likely, its secretary of state.

This is truly a sign of major incompetence.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert invited “Arab leaders to a regional peace conference, saying that he would look there for an exchange of views about solving the Mideast conflict.”

He said: “I would even take advantage of this important opportunity to be with the EU president to invite all Arab heads of state, including the king of Saudi Arabia, to a meeting.” And added: “I think the readiness to accept Israel as a fact and to debate the terms of a future solution is a step that I cannot help but appreciate.”

An interesting poll:

Among those respondents who had heard about the Saudi proposal (62 percent of the Israeli public), 56 percent are in favor of responding to the initiative, while 38 percent are opposed. Among those who had not heard of the plan, 42 percent supported an Israeli response and 48 percent objected. However, 72 percent of respondents believe that the Olmert government does not have the public support required to negotiate over a final status agreement.

In essence, lack of public support for Olmert will make a final agreement even more difficult than such an agreement is anyway.