Palestinians Score Win With Image : Public opinion: Dogged by reputation as terrorists, they prove effective in ceremonial round of talks.

At one of the innumerable news conferences during the Middle East peace conference in Madrid, an Arab journalist asked a question of a Jordanian official in Arabic. “Do you mind if we conduct this in English?” the Jordanian replied.

The journalist paused, then rephrased the question in English so that a worldwide television audience could understand the answer.

All sides at the talks know that even if the Mideast peace process founders, the impressions they leave could have important and long-lasting implications for their global positions.

To the extent that any side has come out ahead in this early round, it appears that the Palestinians, taking their place at the negotiating table for the first time in recent memory, may have gained the most ground in the struggle for public opinion.

“It was probably a draw, with the exception of the Palestinians,” said Richard W. Murphy, a former assistant secretary of state who is a senior fellow at the Council of Foreign Relations.

Dogged by an image among many Americans as brutal terrorists and helpless refugees, the Palestinians have replaced Palestine Liberation Organization Chairman Yasser Arafat with such telegenic representatives as Hanan Ashrawi, 44, a university professor and poet.

In the ceremonial phase of the talks, the Palestinians proved effective in presenting themselves as “sober, sensible people,” said Robert Hunter of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

Moreover, in the view of some observers, Palestinian delegate Haidar Abdel-Shafi’s statement that his side is willing to accept proposals for a “transitional state” represents the only tangible evidence of flexibility at the talks.

“The only sign of hope any place is the Palestinians,” said Michael Lerner, editor of Tikkun, a leading liberal Jewish magazine in the United States. “They’ve won some more sympathy by showing themselves to be reasonable.”

Syria, on the other hand, is holding firm to its divisive rhetoric of the past, still playing more to its Arab constituency. Never was that more clear than at Friday’s session, when Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk Shareh brandished a 1948 British “wanted” poster showing Yitzhak Shamir, then 32.

“He kills peace mediators,” Shareh said, reminding the audience that the British had suspected the now-76-year-old Israeli prime minister of involvement in the assassination of a U.N. envoy. That sort of tactic, Hunter said, “is going to backfire in this country.”

Yet, Murphy added: “I don’t say they lost ground because the Syrian voice doesn’t really appeal to a Western audience.”

Hardest to gauge, observers said, is how well Israel has fared in the opening days of the talks. They noted that Israel has spoken with far more restraint than in the past.

“Some of the Israeli speeches have been rather hard-line but not as fierce as usual,” said Everett Dennis, executive director of the Freedom Forum for Media Studies in New York.

As Murphy put it: “Shamir avoided the no’s: There will be no withdrawals; There will be no halt to the settlements” on the West Bank.”

But others expressed disappointment. “The real question is whether there any openness on the part of Israel to negotiate seriously,” Lerner said. “There seems to be no indication whatsoever of that.”

International perceptions are crucial because every side relies so heavily on outside support, with the United States being seen as the pivotal influence. This reality, observers say, has been shown to some degree in almost every public statement, whether bitter recriminations from decades ago or anguished accounts of national suffering.

Israel is trying to stave off a slippage of its political position in the United States, which sends it $3 billion in foreign aid annually. The stakes grew even clearer when President Bush linked approval of $10 billion in housing-loan guarantees to the talks.

The Palestinians, meanwhile, are banking on international pressure to win long-sought recognition as a people deserving of a national identity. Syria and Jordan, as well, are hoping that the peace process will open more doors to the West.

Thus, the conference, although billed as a historic dialogue among long-feuding neighbors, has seen much of its rhetoric aimed elsewhere, particularly at the United States. “The parties have been speaking past one another to the American public,” says Rep. Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Middle East subcommittee.

Yet, Hamilton noted that these days were only the beginning of what promises to be a long drama, observing: “This is the opening shot. It’s the formal part of it. The bilateral talks are where the action will be. Those will be closed, so you won’t have this posturing going on.”