NEWS ANALYSIS : Clinton Didn’t Sow Seeds, but He May Reap Benefits : Politics: President’s luck may have changed. Historic events could show up later in campaign commercials.

For decades, Presidents have struggled to win foreign policy triumphs that could pay domestic political dividends. As of Monday, Bill Clinton has been blessed by a triumph he did relatively little to obtain but from which he may profit handsomely.

In contrast with such former Presidents as Jimmy Carter, who spent hundreds of hours working on the details of negotiations leading up to 1979’s Camp David peace agreement, Clinton’s chief role in the current agreement was to have the wisdom and forbearance to play a behind-the-scenes role and not to try to reshape a process that was begun by the previous Administration and was proceeding apace without him.

But Presidents, who often must suffer the political pain for problems they did not cause, are also entitled to reap the benefit of successes they did not create. Clinton aides clearly hope to do so now--although not all of them are eager to talk about it.

“That’s really a story for tomorrow,” said Clinton’s senior adviser, George Stephanopoulos. “I don’t want to talk about politics today.”

Despite that reticence, politics is seldom far from the surface in a place as political as the White House.

As Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres and Palestine Liberation Organization official Mahmoud Abbas signed the historic peace agreement on the sturdy oak desk that once served as a Cabinet table for President Ulysses S. Grant, a White House camera recorded each moment for posterity--and for possible campaign commercials.

As members of Congress excitedly filed into the South Lawn to witness the historic events, White House aides contentedly smiled at the sight of legislators feeling happy. And as guests marveled at everything from the crisp, sunny weather to the smoothness of the ceremonials, Clinton’s staff could be forgiven for wondering if the sour luck that had plagued them last spring had changed.

In fact, Clinton’s luck--or at least his poll ratings--may already have begun shifting before the peace agreement. After plummeting to an unusual low in June, Clinton’s popularity had recovered by August to about the same level of approval he gained in last November’s election--roughly 43%.

More recently, according to surveys by Clinton’s pollster, Stanley B. Greenberg, those approval ratings have edged up somewhat. Greenberg’s latest survey, completed just before the peace agreement was announced, shows slightly more than half of Americans approving of Clinton’s performance in office, according to White House officials.

Both Democratic and Republican strategists assume that Clinton will receive at least some boost out of the Middle East developments, although few were quite as carried away as former Democratic Rep. Mary Rose Oakar of Ohio, who gushed to Stephanopoulos that “if this doesn’t catapult him to a second term, I don’t know what will.”

The events of the last several days, culminating in Monday’s ceremony, also have had a clear psychological effect on Clinton himself, giving him a boost of energy as he heads into the crucial period in which he plans to launch his Administration’s health care package and to dive into the controversial fight over the proposed North American Free Trade Agreement with Canada and Mexico.

Much could still go wrong, of course. As George Bush discovered, the political benefits of foreign policy success, such as he enjoyed in the 1991 Persian Gulf War, can disappear rapidly.

And even this current success brings problems. Clinton will now have to go to a reluctant Congress and ask for yet more foreign aid to help in rebuilding the West Bank and, especially, the Gaza Strip. Administration officials hope to minimize that pain by getting contributions from other countries but concede that any additional funds will be hard to raise.

Moreover, foreign policy--even successful foreign policy--is not something that most Americans care deeply about these days, said Fred Steeper, who served as Bush’s pollster during the last election.

“It’s not on the list of their top five concerns,” Steeper said. “The public is still in an America-first mood.” Similarly, Steeper noted, Bush had hoped that the 1992 announcement of his agreement with Russian President Boris N. Yeltsin to sharply reduce the nuclear arsenals of both the United States and Russia would gain him support in the polls.

“He didn’t get a blip,” Steeper said.

Clinton, however, may benefit more from a foreign policy success than Bush. The public had little doubts about Bush’s competence in foreign affairs but worried deeply about his willingness to grapple with domestic problems. From a political standpoint, therefore, foreign policy triumphs were somewhat hollow for Bush.

By contrast, foreign policy has generally been an area in which Americans have had great doubts about Clinton’s experience and abilities. It has also been an area in which most of the news so far this year--from places such as Bosnia-Herzegovina and Somalia--has been bad. For those reasons, Monday’s events may serve to reassure people about Clinton.

In addition, Greenberg noted, the event put Clinton into what Americans traditionally have seen as a “presidential” event.

“Presidents have to struggle to establish their presidency now because they don’t have the Cold War” to automatically give them the stature of “leader of the Free World,” Greenberg said. “I have to believe that most Americans were struck by the historic moment, and he’s part of it.”

Still, White House aides, who have seen their fortunes rise and fall with dizzying speed over the last nine months, were reluctant to claim too much. Asked before Monday’s ceremony if he thought the day’s events would give Clinton two weeks of grace, the President’s longtime friend and White House counselor Bruce Lindsey laughed.

“About two days,” he said.

Another White House aide standing nearby shook his head.

“About two hours,” he said.