There are western misconceptions, which result in misguided assumptions, leading to senseless expectations from the same redundant attempts. Contrary to what we would like to think, the Palestinian people are neither oppressed by Israel nor by their own leadership. The western refusal to honestly understand and deal with cultural differences leads to the inevitable excuse we provide the Palestinians with - OPPRESSION. Cultural behaviors that result from being in a different evolutionary stage of development, which would be defined as evil in the western society, force the Americans into making up a reasonable excuse for that behavior. The simplest most reasonable excuse for western minds would be oppression. Once that is assumed the oppressed are "guiltless" and "helpless" and the American knight in shining armor rises to the rescue, in the adamant pursuit of happiness, which would always translate to the pursuit of freedom.
In my opinion the Palestinians were always trust worthy. As far as I can remember and as far as I can tell they have always been truthful about their intentions. None of the main organizations representing the Palestinians has changed a word in their charters. The fact that PLO has been laundered by the western media since Hamas has been denounced doesn't change the declared purpose of Fatah, which is the "Liberation of Palestine". An honest look at what we are unable to achieve at the opening of the 2010 "peace negotiations", will reveal all about the honesty on the Palestinian side.The right of Israel to exist, as a Jewish State, side by side with a Palestinian state, in a two state solution! The Palestinian honest refusal to acknowledge this obvious foundation as a means of achieving their "desired state" speaks volumes of their honesty. Don't you think that a dishonest party would have concealed its true intention of taking over the whole of Israel, and would have temporarily accept the Jewish state, at least until they build enough power to be able to overturn reality?
As you might know, the fundamental law of smart negotiation is to "offer the least important to you, while asking for the most important". Whatever you might think of the Palestinians, negotiations is their middle name. What the Arabs forgot about negotiating the western world doesn't even know yet. With that in mind, would you think that giving up the Israel recognition to exist as a Jewish state would be a reasonable sacrifice as a means to getting the "most important" a Palestinian State? That is what any reasonable negotiator, who has an independent state living in peace, would do. Her comes the Palestinian honesty to our aid, and helps us better understand their proclaimed intentions. For decades they have been sacrificing the chance of their own independent state as long as they would not recognize Israel's right to exist. Apparently Israel's nonexistence has always been more important to them then their own state. If that is not honest I don't know what is.
The main challenge on the way to resolving this catch 22 is the western selective hearing and site. Americans cannot process situations and declarations that are beneath their evolutionary developmental stage. So when facing declarations like slaughter the Jews, Israel should be exterminated, America and Israel are satanic, etc', the western mental filter kicks in and refuses to accept it directly without decoding it to familiar "civilized" terms. Same goes for all horrible sites we are flooded with without the ability to fully compute them to be able to react reasonably. Depending on their severity, the most extreme encounters might result in total "blindness" and "deafness" on the western part. This is why I have no basis to claim that the Palestinians ever lied in the past. When Arafat was leading the PLO to kill Jews in Israel he honestly announced it all over the world. Then when he made his strategic decision to re-conciliate with Israel he engaged in peace talks with full honest intentions to achieve a resolution for both people.
However, Arafat had overestimated his power and influence, and underestimated the power and influence of global Islam. Even though he truly meant to follow through his commitments to Rabin, he was forced to realize that the Palestinian street complexity was stronger then his anticipated. As I often indicated, the division between Hamas, Jihad, and Fatah, that looks clearly defined in western perception, is much more complicated when it comes to the community reality. The struggle for domination is ongoing as deep as the family and clan level. families are being torn apart all over the West Bank between the different organizations and ideologies, when siblings are persecuting one another, and are being executed on the suspicion of belonging to either, or worse for working with Israel as traitor. In this situation of chaos and anarchy, which is quite the opposite then oppression, the only obvious aid and leadership comes from religion. Physical and spiritual assistance is provided daily at times when the "secular" leadership has been proving extremely corrupt and unreliable time and time again.
Nothing that "has been happening in the west bank in last 3 years" would change the above described situation. The grasp of the hot global Islam over the Palestinian destiny is what has been preventing this situation from resolving. Unless a strong brave leader, who is pragmatic enough to want freedom and independence more then to get rid of Israel, is found, we are pounding sand over and over again, in a ritual that is predetermined to fail. There is a desperate need for an Atta Turk, Churchill, Sadat, or Ben Gurion in the Palestinian reality. Imagine a situation in which the Israeli policy would have been governed by the most orthodox Jewish community or by the Rabbi Cahanah leadership. What would the chances of reaching any agreement with anybody in that situation? I would like to remind you that there has been a signed agreement between Israel and the Palestinians since 1993. Why would we need another one? What is wrong with the one that resulted in 3 Nobel Peace prices? So the answer is that, in my opinion, the chances of achieving a solution currently is zero.
As to the question of internal Israeli elections I wouldn't know the answer being here in San Diego, however I believe it is much less relevant then the consequences of the 2000 vote count in the US between Gore and Bush. In light of my remarks above, there wouldn't be any difference who is on the Israeli side, since the Palestinians are sending the cashier to negotiate for the supermarket without allowing him any real authority. Israel has nothing more to give up over what has already been agreed upon by Barak in Camp David. If that wasn't sufficient for the Palestinians something else will need to change before this ship moves again.
I am not clear about the question regarding the Arabs of East Jerusalem. We don't seem to have any choice in that matter. Jerusalem is undoubtedly the eternal capital of the Jewish nation, and was established by King David to be returned to Jewish government after 2000 years. We can either deport the Arabs of east Jerusalem to whoever will accept them, or accept them as citizens as we did with all the rest of the Israeli Arab population. I don't think you have the right image in mind when referring to that population. On my last visit only a month ago, I noticed that all Arab youth under the age of 20 in the old city were wearing ipod earphones. Some had Mohacs, and all had a western demeanor. The youth I encountered would not survive a week in the Palestinian Authority. Besides our historic right to Jerusalem we also bare a responsibility towards these Arab kids, and most of all we bare the responsibility of keeping all holy places open to all, which might not end up being the case under Palestinian authority.
To learn more, visit our website at http://www.tibizohar.net