Every major German daily on Tuesday comments on Mahmoud Abbas's victory in Sunday's Palestinian presidential elections, and almost all begin with a sentence about his margin of victory being a clear mandate. Yet while the conventional wisdom is united on this point, it splinters from there. Is Abbas's victory a bright beacon for peace, or merely a dim hope for the distant future? It's a cornucopia of mixed metaphors as commentators mostly go gaga over the prospect of peace.

The center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung sees a chance for Abbas, if he plays his cards right and if he is dealt a good hand from Israel and America. Palestinians themselves have realistic hopes for what Abbas can do. "Most Palestinians don't believe that Abbas can quickly achieve what for many years hasn't been possible -- the creation of an independent Palestinian state," the paper writes. However, he can help to move the peace process along. "It depends on stopping the disastrous spiral of terror of Palestinian suicide attacks and Israeli 'liquidations' that have plagued the last few years." This difficult task requires well-orchestrated cooperation, with both concrete steps by Israel towards normalization and a firm approach towards Hamas by Abbas. Not only that, but "the Americans should offer generous help soon."

The conservative Die Welt sees former Palestinian Authority head Yasser Arafat's legacy as the thing that Abbas most needs to overcome. "Mahmoud Abbas must break with the 'Arafatism' of the Palestinians," it writes. He needs to forge a democratic state and restrict the use of power, while at the same time dealing with extremists, "through talks and deals, but with force if necessary." The paper compares this daunting task to driving from Jerusalem to Jericho while juggling ten balls. To help him, "he should take two people as examples: Kemal Ataturk and Nelson Mandela." One created a modern Islamic democracy, the other brought freedom to his people. It may be too early to hope for peace, but "nevertheless, with his victory, a policy of small steps can begin."

With Abbas's victory, the Palestinians, writes the German financial newspaper Handelsblatt, "have unmistakably voted for a change." The change doesn't only have to do with Israel, either. They are growing tired of the infitada, and want internal changes -- a fight against corruption and nepotism -- to be made, the paper writes. "Therefore, Abbas will only last if he can meet these expectations." The paper also argues that Abbas must overcome Arafat's legacy, and the new administration's motto must read "competence instead of compliance." If Abbas, through reforms and talks, can convince Hamas to take part in the political process, that will be a great step towards peace. Israel, meanwhile, most overcome it's own internal difficulties, namely the growing resistance to the planned pull out from the Gaza strip. Sharon's ability to handle this will be key for the Palestinians as well. "[Abbas] can prove his good intentions only if Israel gives him a fair chance."

The newspaper Berliner Zeitung goes out of its way to remind people that just because Abbas was elected, "the difficulties standing in the way of peace between Palestinians and Israelis haven't disappeared overnight." Though Israel has lost the excuse of not having a willing negotiating partner, Abbas must somehow take all the hopes being projected onto him and turn them into real power. "Whether his majority will convince the radical minority, and -- more important still -- whether the majority will stand by him while being forced to accept inevitably painful compromises, will quickly be seen." A lot will depend on how the world, and most importantly Israel, turn their lip service toward Abbas into action. And here there are no guarantees. "It would be a catastrophe if, in the figure of Abbas, Sharon were only to see someone with whom he could negotiate the terms of a Palestinian capitulation."

The Financial Times Deutschland talks of doors and windows to peace, but delivers the reminder that "in the face of the almost frictionless election, one can easily forget how real the danger of chaos and a bloody power struggle was following the death of Yasser Arafat." Now, though, the chances for peace are better than they've ever been. "Two months after Arafat's death, it seems that a new era is actually beginning." The paper mixes in a bit of skepticism, though, noting that "during the election, Abbas often made more promises than he can keep. He now stands before the difficult task of preparing his people for painful compromises."

The left-wing daily Die Tageszeitung is highly skeptical of all the high hopes being bantered around. While it agrees that the Palestinian people are tired of fighting and corruption, it doesn't see Abbas as the savior. "Abbas doesn't stand for real political change," the paper writes. "As an experienced apparatchik and a likely beneficiary of corruption, he'll build a fragile arrangement ... with the old guard, the powerful Fatah youth and the military gangs of various security services." To the outside world, though, "he'll say what the international community wants to hear." And because of that, "the new face of Palestine will ... be enthusiastically accepted." Only the Palestinian people know better, and are keeping their hopes in check. "Abbas is a transitional president, and the Palestinians know that."

The other issue in Tuesday's editorials are the scandals that have lately rocked the United Nation's public image. With child prostitution in Congo and corruption in the Oil for Food program, United States Republicans are circling, and people the world over are losing faith in the organization.

That, says Financial Times Deutschland, is the UN's fault, and it must do something about it soon. "The scandals in Congo and with the Iraq program aren't just little mistakes that happen in every large organization. They harm the very core of the UN's work, and the causes lie in the structure of the United Nations itself." To keep an organization that operates in almost 200 countries in line requires an iron fist, something Kofi Annan hasn't yet managed to develop. Therefore, wide reforms are going to be necessary. "For this reason, the running debate in the UN -- especially from the German point of view -- can't be reduced to the question of who will get which seats and what rights in the Security Council."