It’ll be interesting to see what tone is struck at the meeting — who hits it off with Obama, who makes compelling arguments to Obama, and who doesn’t. Will the subject of faster-paced withdrawals from Iraq and into Afghanistan come up? If so, who will advocate them, and who will push back? Will the Petraeus-Odierno alliance on cautious withdrawals from Iraq remain in place, or will there be some divergence of views now that Petraeus is responsible for more than just Iraq?

Karen DeYoung of The Post adds a good point about Israel/Palestine, which is that Obama “is expected to name” former Sen. George Mitchell as his envoy to the Middle East. That looks something like a return to form, as Mitchell was a Mideast troubleshooter during the early days of the Bush administration. In early 2001, he put together a report assessing how the second Palestinian intifada of 2000 came to be, and issued rather even-handed recommendations for resuming the peace process that were subsequently ignored by all parties. His appointment — sorry, Dan Kurtzer — would, at the least, indicate a renewed commitment to the widely-agreed-upon-but-difficult-to-implement principles of Palestinian security reform, counterterrorism enforcement and Israeli settlement freezes.

The panel starts off with the disturbing news that rockets have been fired on Israel from Lebanon, though they’re not presumed to have come from Hezbollah. Moderator Sam Lewis says Kurtzer is “constrained” in his remarks because he’s still mentioned as a candidate for an important diplomatic position. But Kurtzer — who, if I’m not mistaken, is the only diplomat ever to serve as ambassador to Israel and Egypt — holds forth on the regional picture for peacemaking beyond the Gaza war. “What are the goals the various protagonists [in the Gaza war] are pursuing?” he asks, and he says “no one” has a good answer. Post-conflict, “there will be an unacceptable situation on the ground, no matter how this particular phase” wraps up, because Israel and Hamas are like “that Monty Python sketch with the 100-meter dash with runners for no sense of direction.” As a result of this ambiguity, Kurtzer sees little likelihood that either side will be satisfied with a ceasefire. “You have the goals and objectives of these two players moving in different directions,” making it hard to “lead to a conclusion where a mutuality of interest will emerge from it.”

So the question is whether “there is a mutuality of interest in the larger Arab-Israeli” conflict that the United States can work toward. He holds as self-evident that resolving the conflict “is a core American interest, not a favor we do for the parties.” If so, then it’s incumbent on the U.S. to bring about “a concrete end” to the conflict, not just between Israel and Palestine but between Israel and Syria. “Exploratory phases or consultative phases can probably can be telescoped” so that “parties can actually confront tough decisions” about the substance of peace — land, water, borders, etc. “The diplomatic toolbox is not a mystery anymore,” he says.

But does Palestine need to have one leadership, not split between Hamas and Fatah? Kurtzer thinks it “would be impossible to implement an agreement” if not, but “I don’t think we have fully tested the proposition” of negotiating an agreement with the Palestinian leadership — he doesn’t come out and say Fatah, but it’s probably what he means — and then subjecting it to a Palestinian national referendum. Clearly, he’s thought about working around Hamas.

“One cannot ignore the fact that this chessboard is populated by people who have to endure [this crisis] every day,” Kurtzer says, pointing out how Israel considers it absolutely unacceptable to come under constant rocket bombardment from Palestinian areas and how Palestine considers it absolutely unacceptable for Israeli reprisals to carry such “civilian cost.”

Kurtzer couches the position of the Obama administration in conditional terms, but it’s not unreasonable to interpret his remarks as saying that the incoming administration sees it this way. To stick with the Monty Python analogy, Kurtzer’s essentially going “wink-wink-nudge-nudge-knowwhatImean.”

Accordingly, the event will offer a glimpse of how likely Obama appointees view the challenges ahead: speakers include Wendy Sherman, often mentioned as a possible State Department troubleshooter in east Asia; Daniel Kurtzer, a possible Israel/Palestine policy czar; Anne-Marie Slaughter, who may become the State Department’s chief of policy planning; noted counterinsurgency expert Janine Davidson, who’s part of President-elect Barack Obama’s Pentagon transition team; as well as two military officers you may have heard of: Gen. David Petraeus and Adm. Michael Mullen.

Rice’s imminent speech won’t be the only one offering a defense of the Bush administration’s record. Former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage is in the lineup, as is outgoing Pentagon Undersecretary for Policy Eric Edelman and proliferation official Bob Joseph (he of the Sixteen Words). Naturally, I will be riveted. Dispatches will come throughout the day.

Update: Never mind! Rice, it was just announced, is in New York working with the U.N. Security Council on a Gaza ceasefire. However, I just saw former Secretary of Defense Bill Perry walk in, so there you go.