The New York Times examines the changing attitudes towards Syria by the U.S. in light of Syrian attendance at Annapolis (1.) A Forward editorial draws hope for the future from the Annapolis meeting (3.) Reuters looks at the post-Annapolis challenges facing Palestinian president Abbas in terms of the question of Hamas (5.) The Guardian reports on frank statements by Israeli PM Olmert linking Israel's future survival with the two-state solution (8.) An Economist (UK) editorial is critical of President Bush for not offering more detail of his vision for a Palestinian state at Annapolis (9.) A Daily Star (Lebanon) opinion by Brandeis University visiting senior fellow and Palestinian economist Mohammed Samhouri stresses the importance of movement on the political front in facilitating Palestinian economic and development reform (11.) A Khaleej Times (UAE) opinion by Claude Salhani emphasizes the need for serious U.S. engagement and for both Israelis and Palestinians to compromise if Annapolis will result in success (12.) An Asharq Alawsat (pan Arab) opinion by editor-in-chief Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed argues that current peacemaking efforts hinge on President Bush (13.) A Haaretz (Israel) editorial draws a link between the Israeli settlement project and increasing parallels between Israel and South African apartheid (14.) In a Jerusalem Post (Israel) opinion, Israeli government minister Ami Ayalon sees the significance of Annapolis as being a critical juncture between the diminishing or strengthening of Hamas (16.)