No. 1 Question Is Simple Now: Can Terrorism Be Stopped? : The image was grand, but Mideast summit must go past that

Whether this week’s extraordinary Middle East peace summit in Egypt will prove to be anything more than an occasion of evanescent imagery depends on whether Israel and the Palestinians can resume their negotiations with a reasonable expectation of making progress on political, territorial and other issues. That in turn depends heavily on the near-term security situation in Israel.

One or two more human bombs triggered by Hamas fanatics desperate to stop the move toward peace could be all it takes to counteract the encouraging words uttered in the summit. On Thursday, President Clinton told the Israelis, who hardly need reminding, that it’s impossible to guarantee a risk-free environment. But reducing the level of risk is possible, he said. The cooperation in antiterrorism measures agreed to at Sharm el Sheik and the new bilateral security arrangements pending between the United States and Israel can contribute to that goal.

The representatives of the 27 countries who met in Egypt were not there on behalf of an abstract principle. All of them, including the Western Europeans, Russia and not least the 14 Arab states in attendance, have suffered or are under threat from the kind of terrorism practiced by Hamas, which is in the forefront of the antipeace campaign against Israel. All have strong economic and security interests in the emergence of a stable and peaceful Middle East. The readiness of so many Arab leaders who until now have shunned all public contact with Israel to meet in common cause with Prime Minister Shimon Peres offers dramatic proof of how seriously the challenge is viewed.

Syria’s not-unexpected boycott of the international conference casts an inevitable shadow over the meeting’s effectiveness. Unlike Libya, Sudan, Iraq and Iran--the other, uninvited states most closely tied to terrorism--Syria has been on the front line in the war with Israel and is the least flexible of the confrontation states. Had Syria at last chosen to associate itself with an unambiguous public stand against terrorism, the symbolic effect throughout the region, perhaps especially in Israel, could have been enormous.

Now, for all the outside encouragement they have been given, it’s left chiefly to Israelis and Palestinians on their own to surmount the terrorists’ threat to the peace process. Peres and Yasser Arafat can urge perseverance. Ultimately it’s the people they represent who will decide whether it prevails.