WE were eating excellent fish with chilled Lebanese red wine when the bomb detonated. A sudden flashback to 1970s Belfast. The Iraqi official didn't break sentence. The retired French diplomat and waitress ignored it. We stayed for fruit but not coffee . . . telltale strain undermining traditional hospitality.

We drove hard on a carpet of broken glass over metal chunks and masonry . . .the Lexus must have solid tyres. The army waved us through stunned bystanders nursing superficial wounds. Only the fast drive and hurried goodbyes marked the incident.

Should I text people to assure them we're OK, or is it better to ignore the incident and hope they don't worry? Every visit shows a different

Beirut: early 2006 was buzzing and tolerant . . . the civil war politely ignored as history. I stayed in the beachside Muslim west without concern. Everyone from waitresses to beggars seemed delighted to be addressed in Arabic.

Last July, smart money considered an attack on Iran . . . using Israel as a proxy . . .likely. The attack came . . . on Lebanon . . . and backfired. Last November many Shia neighbourhoods were smashed and infrastructure destroyed even in posh Christian areas, to which we retreated.

Now Arabic greetings are answered in French.

My run takes me through the southern part of the city, where I get odd looks.

Partly to make a point, I chat to a scowling Hezbollah guard outside a damaged but official-looking building. He ignores my query about what happened but relaxes when I say we're Irish . . . he's from southern Lebanon and fondly remembers Irish troops playing football and their gifts.

Apparently they invited him to Galway . . .imagine the immigration officer's face when this bearded warrior appears at the airport!

By day we drive around the city. Many locations were bombed by the Israeli air force. Now army bridges have been erected and life goes on.

Pragmatic optimism returns. Security staff look closely at passport stamps.

People sit within earshot in restaurants.

But Lebanon is again open for business.

Now the consensus is that attack plans on Iran are thankfully off. Negotiations between the US and Iran open in Baghdad soon. Risk has fallen, but it's quicker to destroy than build.

19 May: Dead Sea

Jordan King Abdullah lends gravitas to our signing ceremony. He manages to be simultaneously friendly and formal.

We congratulate his minister on $2.5bn of investment. They reply that they're emulating Ireland!

Jordan thrives despite a dearth of water and resources. Even regional problems are turned to advantage: entrepreneurs and capital enter from every troubled neighbour. The Jordanian flag's starburst seems apt.

Though Jordan is liberal, it remains male-dominated. Women are well groomed but confined to clerical duties.

The venue is the world's deepest point: 300 metres below sea level. Nearby is where John the Baptist immersed Jesus in the River Jordan. No fish can survive the salt content, but the Dead Sea is alive economically. At night you can see the lights of Jericho, whose walls tumbled doubtless due to earthquake and shoddy construction. Similar builders operate today. No one knows how to get to Sodom and Gomorrah!

Security is tight but intelligent: my bags are not searched.

18 May: Amman Newstalk's

Eamon Keane calls for a comment on Wolfowitz's resignation from the World Bank. He seems surprised at my take that Wolfowitz was suckered into undoubted ethical and governance breaches. He was targeted because he was a neocon who wanted to reform international aid. Incumbents are for progress as long as it doesn't involve change. It's hard to build consensus for a shake-up.

When Wolfowitz was appointed, his girlfriend's job was affected through no fault of hers. Mistresses shouldn't 'yell, swell or tell' . . . but they were single.

Normally you would recuse yourself from a conflict and whatever sweetheart deal your girlfriend could cut would be nodded through. Here, apparently, Wolfowitz had alienated everyone to the point where no peer would play ball.

He tried to recuse himself, but was saddled with the problem. When, naively, he solved it too generously, he was ambushed.

Wolfowitz's was not a hanging offence. If he's guilty of war crimes, then prosecute him for war crimes.

Ironically, Wolfowitz had the interest and experience to drive through necessary reform. He could have become another McNamara, who used the post to make amends for Vietnam.

The battle to fire Wolfowitz was really a proxy fight against the Bush White House . . . but also against change.

Sound familiar? Would-be Irish semistate reformers had similar experiences:

At Eircom, Brendan Hynes and even Michael Smurfit were isolated and outmanoeuvred. At Aer Lingus, Michael Foley was forced out while Willie Walsh was corralled. There were ethical cover stories in each case. The system is most effective at protecting itself. But organisms survive only by adaptation.

The record of tough businesspeople inserted into semi-states with a mission to change is not a happy one. One by one their mission impossible is undermined by vested interests.

Our own monoliths need shaking up but history warns commercially-driven managers not to get involved. As secretary of state Roy Jenkins used to say of British ministers trying to improve Northern Ireland, the system will destroy you. It took Hume-Adams to change the calculus . . . against strident opposition.

The use of formal procedures to settle management differences is an established art. Clever players, such as Bernie Cahill, took care to follow the rules.

14 May: Dublin

A researcher extracts my views on global warming: Climate is complex and poorly understood. Environmental debates are more about politics and emotion than science. Human activity is energyintensive. People will not give up growth or reduce overall energy consumption.

Greater efficiency cuts consumption per unit of work but increases overall consumption.

Geological evidence shows periods of global warming and cooling, of surging and falling sea levels. There are complex feedback loops, but the earth's orbits seem the main factor. Nearly all of this happened before humans evolved.

We are emerging from an ice age so you'd expect long-term temperature increases. That will melt glaciers and flood plains. Has human activity exacerbated that trend?

Overall CO2 levels fell as plants produced oxygen . . . till the evolution of animals reversed this trend. Humans are a small factor in the mix . . . but flipped the earth from a marginal CO2 consumer to marginal CO2 producer. This was first argued in the 1970s. Since then the evidence has grown.

We can do little about nature.

If you can halt emissions easily, as with CFCs and the ozone layer, it would be foolish not to. It's like an insurance policy.

Ozone was a serious problem, successfully addressed cheaply and quickly.

Stern argued that it's in our long-term, overall interest to address the problem.

But it's unlikely that his proposals will be implemented. Some might, but the world will not.

We may end up surrendering growth without much benefit.

When prohibitively expensive, it's more practical to adapt to inevitable change rather than to try and fail to halt emissions. Build less on flood plains and low-lying areas. Build sea walls.

What is practically achievable? Cap emissions as an insurance policy but not at excessive cost; China will swamp Ireland's efforts.

Survivors adapt.