The lead article in The New York Times this morning, “Mideast Talks: Scant Hopes for the Start,” describes the new beginning of direct talks between the Israelis and Palestinians, to start in Washington in just two weeks. But the article goes on to note the very low chance of any real progress, and it gives the feeling of “we’ve been here before, and we know how it’s going to turn out.”

The article notes the current positions of the Israeli and Palestinian governments and describes the talks as negotiations betweeen the unwilling and the unable — Prime Minister Netanyahu heads a right-wing coalition with little incentive or desire to make any compromises while Mahmoud Abbas is a weak leader of a divided people between the West Bank, where he rules, versus the Gaza Strip, where Hamas is ascendant.

The article provides several other reasons for despair — the settlement movement has just about reached a critical mass in terms of the number of sites and population to make dismantling it just about impossible; the Israelis twice placed generous offers on the table for the Palestinians only to have them rejected; Netanyahu won’t compromise on Israaeli sovereignty of Jerusalem and control of the Jordanian border, both anathema to the Palestinians, et cetera, et cetera.

The one thing neither the Palestinians or the Israelis have counted on, however, is Barack Obama. President Obama, who achieved a health care plan unobtainable for 30 years, may be a new force who can change the dynamics and prevent the talks from going in circles.

The lead story in The New York Times this morning, “Direct Dialogue Expected Soon on the Middle East,” describes the possible re-opening of direct talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians to attempt to forge a new peace agreement.

Expected to be announced by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, it will be the first direct negotiations for 20 months and represents a foreign policy victory for the Obama administration and more specifically, special envoy George Mitchell who has been engaged in fierce “shuttle diplomacy.”

Hope springs eternal. Despite unfavorable political realities on both sides — the Israelis have a right-wing coalition government and the Palestinians are split between Fatah and Hamas — there seems to be a real desire to get things done this time. If a pact was achieved, it would remove a major thorn in the side of the United States in terms of its relationships with other Arab countries.

Yet, in my opinion, for that very reason, peace might not occur. These other nations use the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a means of validating their own authoritarian governments. They can always stir up their supporters through an anti-Israeli rally instead of attending to poverty and other urgent domestic needs among their own citizens.

The Palestinians insisted on a one-year time limit on the talks, and maybe that will force some action. It remains to be seen …

The lead article in The New York Times this morning, “Civilians to Take U.S. Lead After Military Leaves Iraq,” describes a wholesale transfer of Army functions to diplomatic control and, as such, calls into question the plans to totally leave Iraq by the end of 2011 as currently planned.

The article includes some sobering statistics: 1,200 specific tasks carried out by the military will be transferred to the State Department and other civilian entities such as security contractors; the State Department will increase its fleet of armored vehicles to 1,320, 6,000 to 7,000 contractors will provide quick reaction forces, etc.

In addition, the State Department will open two new diplomatic embassies in Mosul and Kirkuk and will be responsible for maintaining the peace between Kurds and Arabs. The cost for all these plans is in the billions.

In addition, the article calls into question the ability of the State Department to carry out some of the chores it will be tasked to fulfill. For example, State Department diplomats have no skills in training the Iraqi police force and transferring their functions from counterinsurgency to crime control.

This issue is taboo among Obama administration officials because it calls into question our ability to extricate ourselves from messy military assignments overseas — e.g., Afghanistan.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “For Blagojevich, a Guilty Verdict on 1 of 24 Counts,” describes the final jury verdict in the trial of the former Governor after federal authorities had spent millions of dollars and taped 500 hours of his phone conversations.

The sole guilty verdict, on lying to the FBI, represented a pittance compared to the other accusations, including racketeering, wire fraud, bribery and extortion. The jury was deadlocked or split evenly on most of the charges except for an 11-1 vote regarding trying to sell President Obama’s former Senate seat.

Well. I’ve got to say there’s something admirable about Blagojevich. He’s got a lot of chutzpah, and he’s definitely not your run-of-the-mill politician. Some of the antics he’s pulled off since his indictment, appearing on celebrity apprentice with Donald Trump, impersonating Elvis, etc., show a lot of character in the face of adversity. His insistence on his innocence, true or not, and his ability to successfully fend off federal authorities, haven’t been seen since the days of Al Capone.

Blagojevich is well on his way to becoming a sort of folk hero in light of recent developments, and the federal prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, has got to be steaming about this turn in the case. Fitzgerald’s vow regarding a retrial has to be seen as a desparate attempt to save face.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Drilling Permits for Deep Waters Face New Review,” describes the implementation of new environmental reviews before approval of new offshore oil drilling.

The new procedure is a welcome change to bring multinational oil companies within the umbrella of public safety and a comprehensive regulatory system. The article describes the previous misuse of “categorical” exemptions widely accepted in the past. These exemptions allowed oil companies to forego environmental assessment requirements if they asserted a previous oil well with an assessment had already examined the issues involved for a similar location.

As expected, the American Petroleum Institute echoed its usual refrain about the regulations costing jobs, and even compared the new common-sense approach to the oil industry’s “Three Mile Island.” TMI, a nuclear plant that nearly underwent a meltdown, resulted in prohibitive regulations that halted the construction of new nuclear plants for 30 years.

In any case, the United States should be moving towards a system of clean energy promotion instead of trying to find oil in more and more difficult locations. It will not be a tragedy if we move away from offshore oil drilling with all its inherent difficulties to a more sustainable energy future for the United States and the world.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “General Opposes a Rapid Pullout in Afghanistan,” describes a much expected push by General David Petraeus to get more time to turn things around in Afghanistan. He appeared on Meet the Press, provided an hour-long interview to The New York Times and was also interviewed by the Washington Post.

The General claimed it had only been a few weeks since the U.S. policy was fully in place and reaffirmed he would provide unvarnished military advice to the President when the scheduled withdrawal date arrived, even to the point of recommending no withdrawal at all. He noted that the United States has been making progress on three fronts, fighting Taliban insurgents, increasing the skills of the Afghan military and reducing corruption in Afghanistan’s government, one of the main reasons some people have been supporting the Taliban.

Since General Petraeus was supposedly successful in executing a similar surge in Iraq, his remarks have some prima facie value. Yet we must remember other factors leading to the reduction of violence in Iraq as well, the Sunni Awakening among them, a fortuitous development unexpected at the time.

I believe that General Petraeus believes he can make a difference. But he has almost 11 months to show signs of progress, and that should be sufficient. Even the head of the Republican Party, Michael Steele, has opined that it’s impossible to win a ground war in Afghanistan. Let’s hope Mr. Steele was incorrect.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Detroit Goes from Gloom to Economic Bright Spot,” describes a new optimism about the prospects of Ford, General Motors and Chrysler. All three companies are expanding, and the hiring of automobile outsiders as CEOs looks like it’s having a major impact.

The article’s statistics create a compelling story. Ford made more money during the first six months of this year than the previous five years combined. The average price of an automobile has climbed by $1,350 to $30,400, statistically above the overall industry gain of $1,100. The reduction in output, from 13.7 million vehicles to eight million vehicles, has reduced the need to provide expensive incentives to increase sales volume. And the worker paychecks are more in line with foreign automakers in the U.S., $57 an hour at GM compared to $51 an hour at Toyota (they still have a little way to go).

At a time when the overall economy seems sluggish, the good news from the automobile industry must be welcome relief for the Obama administration. They largely shepharded the bankruptcies of General Motors and Chrysler and deserve at least some of the credit for this rebound. Whether the trend continues is still to be determined. But many industry analysts think the current restructuring has a more permanent feel to it than previous efforts in the past, partly because of the outsider CEOs and partly because of the “near death” experience for all involved. We can only hope that they’re right.

The lead story in The New York Times this morning, “Rare Sharing of Data Led to Results on Alzheimer’s,” describes the unique collaborative efforts required to discover how to reach an early diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease, basically a willingness to share all data and tests over the Internet, giving up any intellectual property or patent rights among a large group of scientists.

The scientists worked with drug companies and government agencies to create an unprecedented full-court press and even allowed the public, whom they were previously afraid would misinterpret the data, to follow the experiments. The National Institute of Health helped to coordinate all the groups and Foundation for the National Institutes of Health helped to provide funding. The effort was labelled ADNI, the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative.

The success of this effort so far — they’ve already discovered a 100-percent way to detect the disease using PET scans and spinal fluid — shows how far we can go when we work together instead of at cross-purposes. We can literally reach the moon.

The research structure created for Alzheimer’s is already being considered as a model for a similar campaign on Parkinson’s disease. I think it should be considered in other areas of endeavor as well. How about the U.S. Senate for a start? If Republicans could just give up their blanket opposition to anything proposed by the President, we could negotiate and do wonders to improve and transform our society in a way we could all agree on.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Trouble Abroad Adds to Worries for U.S. Recovery,” describes a broad-based drop in the Dow, down 265 points, after three reports indicating reduced economic growth overseas.

The three reports include a less rosy report from the Bank of England, signs of slowing economic growth in China and trade figures showing a decline in U.S. exports. When combined with the Fed’s decision to pursue quantitative easing, that is, using its portfolio to buy more government securities to keep interest rates low, it was enough to drive investors away from the stock market and into safer U.S. Treasury securities.

For those who fear a double-dip recession, there are increasing indications we may be heading that way. On a quarter-by-quarter basis, growth has slowed from five percent in Q4 2009 to 3.7 percent in Q1 2010 to 2.4 percent in Q2 2010.

The drop in the Dow –265 points equals a 2.5 percent drop — was matched by similar declines in stock markets around the world. Meanwhile, bonds continued to grow.

One wonders when the cascade of bad economic news is going to stop. It is disheartening both for the average American — Main Street — as well as the investor — Wall Street. One day, maybe Wall Street will learn that true economic prosperity will only come when the average American is included in the growth of the economy. When consumers drive two-thirds of economic growth, and those same consumers are increasingly informed by accurate reports depicting their condition in a 24×7 news cycle, the upper class can not achieve the greatest possible prosperity unless it lifts everyone in a rising boat. The days of the rich living in a different world than the rest of us are long over.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Fed to Buy Debt to Fight Slowing of the Recovery,” describes a new decision by the Federal Reserve to buy long-term Treasury securities with the proceeds of the portfolio it amassed in 2008 to fight the recession. The decision represented somewhat of a reversal by acknowledging the sluggish growth in the economy and focusing on that instead of a traditional concern about inflation.

The tactic, known as quantitative easing, is designed to increase the money supply and keep interest rates low to encourage economic activity. Previously the Fed had discussed “passive tightening” of the money supply as the securities in its portfolio came due without being replaced.

The words on everybody’s lips these days is “double dip” recession, and the Fed signaled a willingness to take more drastic action if that becomes a likelihood. The current action of purchasing $10 billion per month is small compared to the $700 billion in Treasury debt the Fed already holds. A big asset purchase may be on the horizon if the economic situation continues to worsen.

Of course, all these actions will be in vain if we are unable to restore consumer confidence in the economy. Consumers drive two-thirds of economic activity, and, in the end, Wall Street will suffer unless Main Street is considered.