This week's creative and disciplined actions by young and unaffiliated Palestinian men and women resemble very much the creativity and experimentation that had been the hallmark of the first Intifada.
History shows that in the delicate arena of foreign policy, actions often have unintended, if not devastating, consequences. It is for this reason that I fear that Israel's response to the Palestinian Authority's successful bid for non-member observer state status at the U.N. does not serve its long-term interests.
Anyone who thinks that there is a possibility of peace between Israelis and Palestinians is either delusional or just hasn't been paying close attention to that part of world for the last 65 years.
Renewed regional and international attention requires Palestinians to step up and present a more unified position regarding the formulas that are needed to help provide a political answer to the violence.
For those on the periphery in the western world and across the region battling for their respective sides please do not confound this tragic and frightening situation. Beneath it, all of us, Israelis and Palestinians, are simply people living in fear.
The mind-boggling complexities of the current Israeli-Palestinian situation may offer the U.S. a possible opportunity for a diplomatic coup. Here's how.
While two American leaders were trying to out-do one another on how well they could manage policy towards the Middle East, a far-away leader was actually leading a shift in that policy.
After more than five years since Gaza seceded and the failure of repeated attempts at reconciliation, Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has decided to introduce his own initiative.
Hamas, which has for years opposed the PLO, agreed to join the efforts to reform the PLO. Talks behind the scenes produced positive results. A new PLO will soon see the light, provided that reconciliation continues and that elections take place in Palestine.
A third intifada could have disastrous consequences for all parties involved. Yet it remains unclear if a new uprising would be directed against Palestinian leaders for failing to deliver realistic change and reform or against Israel -- or both.
King Abdullah has frequently gone out of his way to assert that "Jordan is Jordan" and "Palestine is Palestine." He has also encouraged Hamas to dispel the possibility of Jordan serving as a substitute homeland.
It is time for Hamas to realize that it holds the key to the future of its own people. Israelis will not move towards peace as long as Hamas, a central player and crucial part of Palestinian society will not endorse peace explicitly.
While the agreement in Doha was not the first public display of reconciliation between leaders of the largest Palestinian factions, many felt that this time, the agreement was for real. Why?
If anything, recent months saw Hamas move much more to the political center, accepting de facto an Israel based on the 1967 borders and agreeing to reach that goal through "popular struggle" rather than "military means."
Perhaps the true reason behind Hamas' new pragmatism is the realization that Gazans and West Bankers could mimic Arab Spring protestors and channel their rage against Palestinian leaders if they fail to deliver change.
Whoever agrees that the preferred solution to the conflict are two-states-for-two-peoples needs to realize that this possibility to implement is gradually slipping away while no progress, however small or incremental, is being made.