When considering what the PA will "never" accept, consider all the things that were "never" supposed to happen: fall of Communism and breakup of the Soviet Union; aboltion of slavery; abolition of Jim Crow; end of Franco-German animosity; Europeon disarmement; Red Sox winning a world series. Things change, often whether we like it or not, and the certainties of one age become meaningless in another. Hamas's raison d'etre is destruction of Israel, and there's no reason to expect that to change. But can you say the same thing about Fayyad? What about all those polls in which a majority of Palastinians favor a two state solution? Are they all lying? Why should they do that? What about the Arab initiative? It certainly is different that Arab reaction after the '48 war and the '67 war. There's no reason to be sanguine. Arafat really and trully walked away from a two state solution at Camp David. Palastinain society has its own dynamics, and the question is whether (1) those dynamics are conistent with a sustainable peace, and (2) can a political solutino positively affect those dynamics. Holding onto certainties, whether from the inspiring or cynical sides of human nature, do nothing to answer what will happen next or how it can best be shaped to the extent that it can be shaped at all.
Law expanding definition of terrorist activity passes first Knesset reading (Haaretz)
from the article: Palestinian Authority: Israel must choose - peace or settlements