We know the story of the nail that was not available, the horseshoe that was lost, the horse that fell, the battle and kingdom lost. Details can count in the lives of nations. Usually not. I teach that individual men (or women) seldom change the course of things in great ways. It is usually the big things that count: rich countries tend to be more democratic, offer more generous services, and are less likely to fight one another than poor countries. Most things that governments do continue from year to year, with only minor changes. But every once in a while . . .

Arguably, the Democratic Party lost a great chance to unseat a president that many Americans had come to distrust. If only they had chosen a more appealing candidate. And if only the issue of single sex marriages had not emerged to excite the religious right.

Will Kerry's loss make a great difference in world history? Maybe not. One of his problems was not having a clear way of dealing with Iraq.

But Bush's election four years ago was important, like it or not. The United States probably would not have found itself in Iraq if it had not been for some flawed chads in Florida, and judges who ruled in ways to put George W. in the White House. And who can predict the outcome of that for us all?

Israel and Palestine are both in the middle of some details now. It is not beyond imagining that how they flow can affect one or both societies in big ways.

For the Palestinians, the important detail is their choice of a president. Marwan Barghouti has entered himself as a candidate, and he has considerable support on the street. It is more accurate to say that his wife and some supporters entered his name, insofar as he is in an Israeli prison, sentenced to four consecutive life terms for involvement in murder. Hard to imagine that Israel will release him. Palestinians are pressuring him to withdraw, and many of their leading voices are endorsing Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazzan). He is supposed to be a moderate, willing to deal with Israel. So far he has indicated that he will insist on the right of return for Palestinian refugees (a sure deal breaker), and denied that he said that. Spokesmen for Hamas indicated that they support the Palestinian political process and will boycott the election. If Abbas is elected, he will enjoy international support and something between Israeli support and sympathy. But he will have to find a way to deal with the Israelis, not inclined to be overly generous after four years of Palestinian violence, and Palestinians demanding more than the Israelis offered before the violence began. It will be a time for wisdom, balls, and political skill.

It will also depend on the flow of details on the Israeli side.

A combination of personal and party rivalries have brought the Sharon government to the point where it cannot continue. Desertions and dismissals have produced a condition where it cannot even count on the support of all Likud members in the Knesset, and there are only 40 of those (out of 120 MKs). Right now there is no other party in the governing coalition.

This week Ariel Sharon will ask the support of his party's central committee for the idea of adding the Labor Party to his government. Many Likudniks have been firm in opposing that idea, but Sharon has maneuvered them to the point where if they refuse, the government will collapse, there will be an election, and who knows which Likud members of Knesset will find themselves still in office, or which parties will form the next government.

Sharon has succeeded in making things worse in order to make them better. It is a risky political move. So far, so good. But if he does not get the vote he wants in the Likud central committee (equivalent to an American party convention), he is more than in trouble. And so is Mr Abbas.