WASHINGTON (AP) – President Bush’s uncompromising support for Israel in its battle with Hezbollah, a stance now backed by Congress, is threatening to isolate the United States even further from the international community.

It is also putting the administration at odds with fragile democratic governments in the Middle East that it is simultaneously trying to prop up, and sowing increasing anger across the Arab world.

The democratically elected prime ministers of both Iraq and Lebanon have been among the most vocal critics of U.S. policy in the 10-day Israeli bombardment of Lebanon.

Some foreign policy analysts question whether Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice can make much headway on her trip to the region early next week – especially given U.S. rejection of international calls for a cease-fire and refusal to talk to key players such as Hezbollah or its Iranian and Syrian sponsors.

“You don’t just negotiate with your friends. Sometimes you negotiate with your enemies, or at least your adversaries,” said Sandy Berger, former national security adviser in the Clinton White House. “We negotiated with the Soviet Union for 50 years.”

Both the first President Bush and President Clinton met directly with then-Syrian President Hafez al-Assad in efforts to advance Mideast peace prospects.

But the current Bush administration is adamant in resisting any direct contact with Syrian President Bashar Assad, son of the former president, or with Hezbollah leaders.

“The track record stinks” in terms of what both former Presidents Bush and Clinton achieved in their meetings with Assad’s father, White House press secretary Tony Snow said. And Rice told reporters on Friday, “Syria knows what it needs to do, and Hezbollah is the source of the problem.”

Hezbollah is an Islamic militant group based in southern Lebanon that is supported by both Syria and Iran. The crisis began when Hezbollah kidnapped two Israeli soldiers and Israel retaliated by widespread bombing in Lebanon and with a naval blockade.

Hezbollah upped the ante by firing hundreds of missiles into northern Israel, provoking more Israeli counterattacks and displacing what the U.N. estimates as a half-million people.

Arab anger is rising toward both Israel and the United States, even though moderate governments throughout the region do not wish to see Hezbollah’s tentacles grow any further, viewing the group as an extension of Iran’s ambitions to increase influence throughout the Middle East.

The U.S. has not yet been able to capitalize on that Arab ambivalence toward Hezbollah.

“The administration does the rhetoric of war well, but is not very good with diplomacy,” said Judith Kipper, a Middle East specialist at the private Council on Foreign Relations in Washington.

Trips by Rice to the region “don’t accomplish anything,” she said.

Both the House and Senate passed resolutions this week by overwhelming margins supporting Israel – and Bush administration policy – in the conflict.

But the votes were probably more of a reflection of midterm election year politics – and a desire not to offend Jewish voters – than any newfound appreciation of Bush’s foreign policy skills.

The combined effect of the administration’s hardline pro-Israel stance and Congress’ echoing of it is to undermine U.S. diplomacy, said Shibley Telhami, a Mideast scholar at the University of Maryland.

“We’re acquiescing in what is obviously a humanitarian disaster, regardless of who’s to blame. And that is not a message that helps the United States,” Telhami said.

While leaders of Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan have condemned Hezbollah’s tactics, “they’re going against public opinion in their countries. You have an overwhelming outpouring of public support for Hezbollah.”

Daniel Ayalon, Israel’s ambassador to Washington, said Israel understands public opinion has been inflamed in the Arab world. He said he expects “a spike against us” in the days to come, but he emphasized that Israel was not prepared to give up its campaign until Hezbollah is sufficiently weakened.

At that point, Israel might consider supporting an international peacekeeping presence, Ayalon said in an interview with The Associated Press. But not before.

For the Bush administration, it’s a hard balancing act.

It wants to show it is reaching out to allies in the Middle East and in Europe, as with Rice’s trip to Israel and the Palestinian territories and then to Rome for a broader meeting. But the administration also doesn’t want to meet with Syria, Hezbollah or Iran – and it wants to give Israel time to try to find and destroy Hezbollah command centers and weapons stockpiles.

It all results in what critics suggest is a one-sided form of shuttle diplomacy.

Rice defended the style of her diplomacy – as well as the late start. “I could have gotten on a plane and rushed over and started shuttling and it wouldn’t have been clear what I was shuttling to do,” she said Friday.