NEWS ANALYSIS : U.S. in a Quandary as Mideast Peace Effort Stalls : Diplomacy: Will President Bush throw in the towel? Or will he issue a dramatic summons to talks?

With the Administration’s hope of parlaying the Persian Gulf War victory into lasting Middle East peace hanging by a thread, U.S. officials say President Bush is contemplating suggested next steps ranging from a frank admission that the effort has failed to a dramatic presidential summons to free-wheeling and unplanned negotiations.

Conspicuously absent from the list of options--at least for now--is more shuttle diplomacy by Secretary of State James A. Baker III. He has been unable, despite four grueling trips to the region since the end of the war, to bridge the gap between Israel and its Arab adversaries over procedures for a peace conference.

Baker responded with an uncharacteristically terse “no” this week when asked if he was planning another trip to the Middle East.

A senior Administration official said that Bush now must either devise a way to revive the U.S. initiative or return the Arab-Israeli conflict to the diplomatic back burner where it was left to simmer for the first year and a half of his presidency.

The official said Bush might call a press conference to announce that he is washing his hands of the whole issue. Or, he might try to preempt the procedural deadlock by inviting Israeli and Arab leaders to a peace conference at which Washington would set the agenda.

Although Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir and Syrian President Hafez Assad--the most important antagonists--disagree sharply on most matters, they apparently are united in their opposition to either step. Both Shamir and Assad repeatedly have urged the United States to continue its active support for the peace process. And neither man wants to be forced to choose between attending a conference that he cannot control and staying away from a meeting where the other might score important points.

Shamir apparently is so worried about the possibility of American shock therapy that he sent his foreign minister, David Levy, to Washington this week to seek assurances that the Administration would not take Jerusalem by surprise. Levy said he received such a promise, although Administration officials say the President has not ruled out steps that Jerusalem might oppose.

According to one U.S. official, Baker suggested even before the war began that Bush should move immediately after the conclusion of fighting to invite Arab and Israeli leaders to a meeting in the United States under conditions determined by Washington. This official said White House National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft opposed the idea, forcing Baker to move to his fall-back position of trying to obtain Arab and Israeli agreement on rules and procedures for a conference. But with the fall-back plan deadlocked, the original idea has resurfaced.

Nevertheless, there is substantial sentiment within the Administration to simply walk away from a failed attempt. A senior Administration official noted that Washington promised before the fighting began to make an all-out effort after the war to settle the Arab-Israeli dispute.

“We have made a good-faith effort,” the official said. “We have given it our best shot. We have done what we said we would do.”

But some experts, both in and out of the Administration, argue that it is too early to give up.

“I hope it is not dead because this is the best opportunity the region has had to move ahead since 1979 (when Israel and Egypt signed a peace treaty),” said Richard Murphy, the State Department’s top Middle East expert during the Ronald Reagan Administration.

William B. Quandt, a former National Security Council specialist who was a key staff member at the 1978 Camp David conference when then-President Jimmy Carter mediated between Egypt and Israel, said that although Middle East negotiations are often frustrating for American go-betweens, there is little chance of peace without a U.S. role.

Bush sought to break the impasse earlier this month by outlining U.S. proposals to break the deadlock. Shamir rejected the U.S. idea, but Assad has not replied.

A senior official said the Syrian president has asked for a series of clarifications, something which the United States considers a sign that he is serious.

Times staff writer Robin Wright contributed to this story.