Israel operates on a special calendar from the days before Rosh Hashana until the very end of Sukkot and Simhat Torah. It is known as aharei hahagim (after the holidays). It is virtually impossible to find people in their offices or to make appointments. Business, politics, and planning are all put on hold until the High Holy Day season is completed.

This year the unofficial hiatus began within a month of the establishment of a cease-fire in Lebanon. For Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, what was perceived as a state of frenzied activity, upon closer examination, appears to be little more than sound bites and press releases. In fact, until last week, when the winter session of the Israeli Knesset began and the prime minister went on a state visit to Russia, most of the Israeli government had been operating on a “holiday” schedule.

Before the “break” and after much political maneuvering, the government established a five-member commission of inquiry headed by retired justice Eliyahu Winograd to investigate the conduct by the government and the military of the 34-day Lebanon war. Many Israelis, army reservists, and other observers were disappointed that the government did not establish a toothier state commission of inquiry, and they are now waiting to see what conclusions the commission reaches. No report is expected for awhile.

The nuclear saber rattling continues to emerge from Tehran accompanied by a nonending anti-Israel diatribe. The possibility of international sanctions against Iran appears to be caught up in diplomatic posturing, with the likelihood of United Nations Security Council action remote at best. This leaves Israel, together with the rest of the world, waiting impotently for the next nuclear shoe to drop while President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad raves on.

Israel completed its withdrawal from Lebanon at the end of September as the Lebanese army and the UN international force moved into place. How effective this force will be in maintaining quiet in South Lebanon remains unclear, but most observers are skeptical beyond the short run. At the same time, Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora has, for the first time ever, suggested an interest in sitting down with the Israelis to discuss a peace arrangement, albeit with the Lebanese belief that the most important item on the agenda is the question of the control of the Shebaa Farms border area.

There are very confused and curious signals coming from Damascus. Whether they are genuine peace overtures or Iran-motivated distractions is unclear, but Syria knows that both the Lebanese government as well the world community are opposed to any reentry of Syria into Lebanon. Reopening talks with Syria, given the Assad government’s complicity in the Lebanon war and assistance to Hizbullah, is fraught with potential political land mines for Israel. It is also something that the U.S. government does not appear to be encouraging — at least at this time — given Syria’s unconstructive role in the Iraq war.

In addition, there have been moderate voices emerging in the Arab world, in Europe, and even on the Israeli Left recommending reconsideration and reopening of the Saudi peace initiative of 2002. Some European officials have been pushing for consideration of the reconvening of a Madrid-style conference. Finally, and perhaps on the top of the agenda of most Israelis, is the failure to see any progress being made on the return of the three kidnapped Israeli soldiers, plus the concern that a renewed confrontation with an invigorated Hamas is looming in the Gaza Strip.

For Olmert, the next few weeks will see three possibly pivotal events: the Nov. 7 U.S. congressional elections, the Baker-Hamilton Report, and the release of President Jimmy Carter’s new book, said to be highly critical of Israel.

Assuming current polls and trends continue, President Bush will be operating next year in Washington in a far less congenial political environment. Democratic control of one or more houses of Congress will initiate a reconsideration of not only domestic politics but also international issues. An evaluation of the war on terrorism will eventually lead to far greater scrutiny of the conduct of the Iraq war. This in turn will inevitably lead to a discussion of the United States’ role in the Arab-Israeli conflict, the peace process, and the future of a Palestinian state.

Similarly, late in November or December a report is expected by the study group headed by former Secretary of State James Baker III on U.S. policy in Iraq and the war on terror. It may well recommend that the Bush administration reconsider its approach to the Middle East peace “road map.” Baker and former congressman Lee Hamilton, the group’s cochair, have always argued that solving the Palestinian question may well lie at the heart of the entire Middle East conflict.

Carter’s book will not directly effect any policy change, but it will undoubtedly give the Olmert government another publicity battle to fight against Israel’s enemies.

Having lulled its way through the hagim, the Israeli government faces numerous challenges in the short and longer term. The holiday is over.