The death of Assad, a leader who styled himself as the standard-bearer of Arab nationalism and anti-Zionist sentiment since the day he took power in 1970, ushers in a new era for Syria, its vassal Lebanon, its enemy Israel and the entire Middle East.

The news, which came less than three weeks after Israel's military pullout of southern Lebanon -- ending two decades of protracted war and occupation -- left analysts guessing at the possible consequences of the new Mideast configuration of power: Does Assad's death, combined with Israel's unilateral withdrawal, spell peace for the region?

Wrestling with that $1 million question, the Israeli press expressed cautious optimism rather than fear or sorrow in its coverage of Assad's death. In sharp contrast to the mournful Israeli response to the death of friend and ally King Hussein of Jordan last year, Assad's passing represents the loss of a leader Israel has long viewed as a stubborn enemy, a barrier to peace.

"We Israelis have no reason to shed tears over the death of Hafez Assad. It's a waste of water," wrote Nahum Barnea, a veteran columnist at Yedioth Ahronoth, Israel's biggest daily newspaper. "The man who missed so many trains, and through his intransigence and hesitation stopped all of the processes, has concluded his role in Middle Eastern history."

During his 30-year rule, Assad championed Arab opposition to Israel, bitterly criticized Egypt and Jordan for signing separate peace deals with the Zionist state and poured scorn over Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat for negotiating a gradual and partial return of Israeli-occupied land to the Palestinians. Assad considered these independent diplomatic moves treacherous to the Arab cause, and supported instead Palestinian organizations in Syria and in Lebanon that rejected the peace process begun in Oslo, Norway, in 1993.

When Assad himself entered into peace talks with Israel, he made clear that his aim was to regain possession of the Golan Heights -- a strategic plateau overlooking the Sea of Galilee, which Syria lost to Israel in the 1967 war -- not normalizing Syria's diplomatic relations with Israel. The tensions between the two countries were apparent last winter, when during negotiations in the United States, Assad instructed Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk Charaa not to shake hands with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. The Syrian president also allowed the official Syrian press to carry virulently anti-Semitic articles even as peace talks went on.

Many Israelis read those signals as proof that Assad was not interested in real peace. That view was seemingly vindicated when the leader refused to compromise on the boundaries of the Golan Heights during a meeting with Bill Clinton in Geneva in March. While Israel was ready to give up the Syrian territory (as defined by a 1923 international border) in exchange for peace, Assad insisted that Israel return the entire Golan, including the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee, a crucial water supply for Israel.

Given those expectations, many Israeli and foreign analysts greeted Assad's passage on Saturday as the lifting of a hefty obstacle to peace in the Middle East. According to conventional wisdom, only an embrace from Assad, the Lion of Damascus (as his name means in Arabic), could provide Israel with the kind of regional recognition and lasting peace it seeks.

That belief fueled a sense of urgency in renewing negotiations over the Golan last fall, after a four-year hiatus, while the ailing Assad was still alive and Clinton still had time in the White House to broker a deal. But that opportunity was lost this spring when the negotiations foundered.

The question now is whether Assad's son and heir apparent, Bashar, will be able to remain at the helm of the country of 17 million people and do better than his father if and when Syria resumes peace negotiations with Israel.

Politics 2000: Unflinching daily political news, analysis and commentary.