The pre-conference hoopla has been difficult to ignore. But when all is said and done, nobody is expecting much to come out of the Middle East peace conference hosted by US President George W. Bush in Annapolis, Maryland this week. After all, Israel and the Palestinians are even having trouble agreeing on the wording of a joint document to be presented at the conference.

But it hasn’t all been bad news. In a boost for host US President George W. Bush, Syria has announced it will participate in the conference, which begins on Tuesday. However the country -- which the US regards as part of the terrorism-sponsoring "Axis of Evil" -- is sending its deputy foreign minister, Faisal Mekdad, instead of Foreign Minister Walid Moallem, who the US had hoped would attend.

Saudi Arabia is also among the over 40 countries attending the summit. Its presence will boost US efforts to win Arab support for the conference. However neither Iran nor Hamas, the militant Islamist movement that controls the Gaza Strip, will be there.

The summit, which will be the first fully-fledged talks on Middle East peace since 2000, is to focus on producing a document on resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Among the key issues under discussion are Palestinian refugee rights, Jerusalem, security and the borders of a future Palestinian state.

"This conference will signal international support for the Israelis' and Palestinians' intention to commence negotiations on the establishment of a Palestinian state and the realization of peace between these two peoples," Bush said at the weekend as he welcomed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who are meeting the US president for private talks at the White House Monday ahead of the conference.

National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley said he expected both sides to recommit to the 2003 "road map" for peace. The road map, which has been hampered by ongoing Israeli-Palestinian violence, provided benchmarks for the peace process, including a halt to Jewish settlement in the West Bank and a Palestinian crackdown on militants.

However the Israeli and Palestinian sides seemed hard pressed to agree on a joint document to present at the summit. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met with Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and top Palestinian negotiator Ahmed Qurei on Sunday in a bid to reach an agreement on the document.

The US has been playing down expectations for the summit, stressing that the conference will be the start of the negotiation process and that a breakthrough is not expected.

All three key players -- Bush, Olmert and Abbas -- are weakened by domestic political challenges. Bush is to leave office in January 2009 and the presidential campaign to elect his successor is already in full swing, while Olmert is unpopular in Israel because of corruption scandals and the 2006 Lebanon war. Most crucially, it is unlikely that Hamas will abide by any agreement reached by Abbas, who lost control of the Gaza Strip to the Islamist group in June. Hamas has said that any decisions reached at Annapolis "will not be binding on the Palestinian people" and is holding a parallel, anti-Israeli event of its own on Monday.

Commentators writing in Germany's newspapers Monday are no more optimistic than anyone else.

The center-left Berliner Zeitung writes:

"In the weeks and days ahead of the Annapolis summit, there was much traveling around, telephoning, applying pressure and even making promises to some participants. Nevertheless, the meeting has been poorly prepared. Its goals are vague and its agenda is controversial …. But all of those who have been invited are likely to attend."

"There are vague noises about the summit intending to create the basis for the formation of a Palestinian state, and thereby -- somehow -- set in motion a solution to the Middle East conflict. Such a solution is possible, on paper and in principle, and could also be quickly agreed upon: Israel would withdraw to its 1967 borders, the Palestinians would establish their own state and cease terrorist acts against Israel. …"

"But … the outlined solution will remain only on paper. It requires more from all parties than they want to give. It demands a willingness to compromise and renounce ideology. It demands trust and the unconditional willingness of the United States to really act as an honest, impartial mediator."

"None of this is to be expected. But the conference will be held, and almost everyone is going. ... Everybody thinks that anything is better than doing nothing. But each party pursues its own interests."

The conservative Die Welt writes:

"With a deal between Olmert and Abbas appearing highly unlikely, all parties have now publicly scaled down expectations. What people are saying now is that the summit could set up a framework which will determine the direction of a definitive agreement. That agreement would then be reached within one year -- that is, within the term of office of President Bush."

"Nonetheless, there are reasons why the summit could be a success. On the one hand, both parties have looked into the abyss in recent years and learned what can happen when the chances for peace are not seized. … The crucial thing is, however, the fact that the Middle East conflict has in the meantime become the scene of a regional power struggle. It is no longer Arabs and Israelis who are divided into two opposing camps, but radical and moderate forces in the region. … A successful summit would not only provide a boost to the moderate Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, but also to the moderate states in the region. "

The center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung writes:

"The shrill noises coming from the camp of the militant Palestinians and Iran ahead of the start of the Middle East conference are revealing in two respects. First, the opponents of compromise apparently do not rule out the possibility that a process could be set in motion in Annapolis that could lead to a durable agreement -- which is why they are getting so hot under the collar. On the other hand, the radical forces see that Tehran's hegemonic ambitions are not a done deal which the other Gulf states will simply stand by and applaud. After all, the American government has managed to persuade numerous Arab countries to participate in the conference."