Arieli writes that "Israeli policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict during the past decades boiled and cooled during the plethora of genuine and fictitious attempts to achieve an agreement, all lacking the willingness to pay the price established by the United Nations, the United States, the Arab League and the Palestine Liberation Organization." Exactly what price have the above mentioned 4 groups decided that Israel should pay for "peace?'" There is not even a semblance of any consensus among them on the crucial issues of final borders, refugees and the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state. Moreover, why does Arieli only phrase the issue in terms of the price that Israel should be prepared to pay for peace, What about Palestinian policy on ending the conflict? There are certainly no solid committments there, Palestinian policy is either intentionally vague or explicitly hints at the eventual demise of Israel. Netanyahu's claims of his desire for a breakthrough agreement may indeed be dubious, but then again so is the entire foundation of Arieli's analysis.
12 killed in Mumbai, India after building collapses during heavy rain (AP)
from the article: What is Netanyahu hiding about the peace process?