One of the smartest political analysts I know, who happens to be deputy speaker of the Israeli Knesset, sums up the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in five words.

“There is no military solution,” Nomi Chazan told the World Affairs Council of Philadelphia on Thursday. “There is no military solution. If anything proves this, it is the last 17 months.”

What Chazan means, in a week where Israel killed more than 20 gunmen and civilians in Palestinian refugee camps and a Palestinian suicide bomber killed at least nine civilians in Jerusalem, is that neither side can defeat the other by force. Bombs won’t win the Palestinians a state, nor can Israel defeat a nationalist guerrilla war with tanks.

“The time has come to wake up,” said Chazan, a member of the opposition party Meretz. “This can’t continue much longer without full-scale war after which we’ll sit at the table anyway. So can’t we stop it before that?”

This is the question of the hour.

Whatever has gone before, Israel and the Palestinians will have to work out a deal at the table someday. But if fighting continues, it may drag Israel into a bloody reoccupation of the entire West Bank, which in turn would affect the whole region and U.S. interests. Must we witness such new horrors before talks can restart?

It is this conundrum that stirred wide interest in the proposal put forward by Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia: The Arab states would offer Israel full normalization in return for withdrawal from territory occupied in 1967. His initiative electrified the region because everyone else had run out of ideas.

Make no mistake, there is something fresh and important about the Saudi initiative, even though the concept of land-for-peace isn’t new. Unlike a proposal made in 1981 by the then crown prince (and current, incapacitated king) Fahd, Abdullah suggests that the Arabs offer “full normalization.” This means full acceptance of Israel, a vision that speaks to the deepest Israeli concerns about Arab willingness to accept their country.

Such a vision matters when proposed by the de facto ruler of the country that guards Islam’s holiest places, a man who is also highly respected for his personal rectitude and piety. If  as Saudi sources predict  Abdullah outlines this vision at a March 27 Arab summit in Beirut, his speech could stir Israeli support for a new peace process.

But this vision of the future doesn’t tell us how the sides can retreat from violence back to negotiations. It doesn’t lay out an operational plan.

The obstacles are huge. Both publics are enraged and fearful, and there is a dearth of leadership. Yasser Arafat blew a rich opportunity for a negotiated peace in 2000 and gambled on a failed strategy of military pressure. Ariel Sharon has made clear he doesn’t want to dismantle settlements or return any more land to Palestinian control.

Neither man has a workable strategy. Arafat’s popularity was sinking (until Sharon’s effort to isolate the Palestinian leader boosted his standing). Fifty-three percent of Israelis are dissatisfied with Sharon’s performance, and a small but potent number of military reservists are refusing to serve in the occupied territories.

Yet the time may be ripe for change  if Abdullah leads the Arab states to endorse his vision. The question would then become how to link his proposal to the Mitchell Plan, a more immediate road map that calls for a cease-fire and confidence-building measures that would precede new talks.

The Bush administration, distracted by the war on terrorism, has tried half-heartedly to get both sides to abide by the Mitchell Plan. It is time to appoint a special negotiator who reports directly to President Bush.

His task: To squeeze Arafat on a cease-fire and an end to terrorism, while pressing Sharon to drop unmeetable preconditions to getting on with the Mitchell plan, like a seven-day period of absolute calm. (Sen. George Mitchell specified that his plan should be adopted without any additions.)

Once a cease-fire is in place, the Bush team should fully back the plan’s call for a complete Israeli freeze on settlement building in the West Bank and Gaza. Talks can proceed only if Palestinians believe that more land won’t be taken for settlements even as they negotiate.

The bargaining will be tough. Success may not be possible under Arafat and Sharon. It will take time for Abdullah and other Arab leaders to ready their publics for normalization with Israel  an effort long overdue.

But if the Bush administration fails to take advantage of the opening provided by Crown Prince Abdullah, it will soon face a more disastrous situation. Better to intervene now, before a full-scale war breaks out between Israelis and Palestinians with awful consequences for us all.

 Trudy Rubin is a columnist and editorial-board member for the Philadelphia Inquirer. Her e-mail address is trubin@phillynews.com.