At last there is something Bashar Assad and Morton Klein can agree on. Neither one cares much for Tony Blair's new role as Middle East envoy. The Syrian dictator thinks the former British prime minister is too friendly toward Israel, while the president of the Zionist Organization of America finds him too sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.

The Syrians blame him for bringing "catastrophes and ordeals" to the Arabs, and ZOA's Klein said Blair "sincerely believes" Arab-Israeli peace is possible, and that that attitude is "utterly incorrect."

Many on the Right share Klein's fear that Blair may try to do for the Middle East what he did for Northern Ireland — bring peace by reaching out to the militants and pressuring both sides to make serious compromises.

Not to worry, Mort. Peace negotiations are Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's turf, insisted her spokesman recently, and Blair's job is "building" Palestinian institutions and raising money to shore up the Palestinian economy.

No one knows just how much latitude Blair may have or what private agreement he has with Rice or George W. Bush, who sponsored him for the job. Unlike other envoys, if he wants to speak to the president he won't have to go through the State Department; Bush is indebted to the former PM big time for his staunch support in Iraq when no other world leader would stand with him.

Rice has said she intends to devote most of her remaining time in office working for Israeli-Palestinian peace. She will focus on final-status issues — borders, security, Jerusalem, refugees — so Palestinians can have a clearer view of what statehood will look like, and that will presumably strengthen Palestinian moderates like President Mahmoud Abbas and undercut the appeal of the terror group Hamas, now in control of Gaza.

But there is no indication Bush is willing to devote the personal attention essential to budging the peace process; instead it appears he has abandoned his vision of being the father of Palestinian statehood before leaving office.

Blair, on the other hand, has repeatedly said that resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the key to regional stability, and he once told a joint session of the U.S. Congress that Islamic "terrorism will not be defeated without peace in the Middle East."

Like Bush, his legacy is badly tarnished by the debacle in Iraq, and he sees progress on the Israeli-Palestinian front as critical to persuading Arab states and others to help Washington and London find a way out of Iraq. Israel and its supporters reject any linkage.

Along with his limited mandate, Blair is hobbled by having to work with three dysfunctional governments — Israeli, American, and Palestinian — and with Washington's impotent Quartet partners, the European Union, Russia, and the United Nations. The Quartet, like the Arabs, prefer kvetching from the sidelines to actual involvement.

Even without such handicaps, the chances of peace breaking out between the Israelis and Palestinians in the remaining months of the Bush administration are on a par with a bar mitzva taking place in Saudi Arabia.

Even peace among the Palestinians, now effectively divided between two political entities — secular and Islamist — and with the potential for Gaza-like civil war in the West Bank, is remote.

Blair, a confident and charismatic politician, wouldn't take the job unless he felt he could accomplish something, but the challenges are enormous, even if his mandate is confined to rebuilding institutions and persuading donor nations to pitch in.

His predecessor, former World Bank president James Wolfensohn, lasted barely a year before he quit, citing lack of help from Washington.

In the aftermath of the 1993 Oslo Accords, investment dollars poured into Gaza — there was a building boom in homes, hotels, a convention center, factories, and businesses — only to wind up in the rubble of Hamastan.

And with Hamas and the Islamists now challenging the inept and corrupt Fatah for leadership of the West Bank, Blair will have a much harder time enlisting donors and investors.

His greatest challenge will be persuading Fatah to clean up its act so it can hold on to the West Bank. The party was tossed out by voters last year who saw it as corrupt and ineffective — and party insiders admit a year and a half later that nothing has changed.

Only the terminally naive believe Palestinian statehood is the panacea for what ails the Middle East. Hamas could join Fatah in singing "Hatikva" and making peace with Israel but it would have no impact on the war in Iraq, the struggle against Islamist extremism, Iranian nuclear ambitions, or much else in the region. That doesn't mean peace shouldn't be a high priority, but the linkage that Blair and others see is not only wrong but potentially dangerous.