■"After Sharon: The death or departure of Israel's superhawk will darken hopes for peace,"The Economist, 7 January 2006, p. 11.

■"Iran's Nuclear Decision Starts Shock Wave: U.S. and EU to Call for IAEA Emergency Session, Demand Action by U.N. Security Council," by Carla Anne Robbins and David Crawford, Wall Street Journal, 11 January 2006, p. A4.

Sharon was the latest peace messiah for Israel: the superhawk who gets all dovish, but realistically so, in last years of life. His departure makes everyone pessimistic on hopes for a two-state solution with Palestine, especially since Abbas has proven so weak at controlling his own.

Meanwhile, Iran breaks the seats on its nuke site and a showdown with the West (and the East, sorta-maybe-sometimes-you-never-know), that will get expressed first in the UN, which, as always, chooses to express its "dismay" first. If really pissed, here comes the sanctions, and we know how all-powerful and compelling those can be.

So the hardliner-turned-dove departs in Israel and the hardliners in Tehran see little cost in pursuing the nuke option, which best guesses estimate they're still three to five years away from achieving.

Same as it ever was.

So our inventive diplomacy will be to: 1) feel lost without Sharon; and 2) the same-old, same-old with Iran.

This is the most depressing pair of articles signaling the slowdown of the Big Bang strategy in the Middle East that I've seen yet. I really get the feeling Bush is done in the region, with the slimmest of hopes for rock-star Condi to do something besides be really admired for the fabulous woman and role-model she is.

But I think the Middle East now awaits the new administration.