Israel should fess up that it doesn't have the power to turn enemies into peacemakers. If such honesty spares us the pathetic spectacle of grown men pretending to make peace, that alone would be a miracle.
Skeptics will claim that a basic agreement in principle on which settlements are going to stay in Israel and which are going to be evacuated, is not possible in 60 days. So why should and might the parties accept this idea?
The Arab League's decision to give more time for efforts to resume the stalled Israeli-Palestinian negotiations signals they may have finally decided to collectively assume responsibility for its success or failure.
For nearly two decades, the contours of a final compromise that would enable the State of Israel to live alongside a new State of Palestine have been known, yet an actual agreement has remained elusive.
Are Israel's actions truly a reaction to hostilities against its existence and security? Let's look at this claim in the context of the ongoing negotiations between the Palestinian Fattah Movement and Iran.
It took 20 months to get each side to sit down again. It is imperative that both negotiating teams realize that they could be playing with the very last reserves of their respective peoples' faith in this process.
The objectives of the settlement enterprise have generally been achieved. Today, its continuation in areas which will inevitably be part of a Palestinian state would place Israel's security, and the nascent peace process, in jeopardy.
The current Israeli-Palestinian talks could mark the last serious attempt by a U.S. president to invest his (or her) own political capital and American diplomatic prestige in resolving the conflict based on a two-state solution.
It is easy to be pessimistic, or even apathetic, about the latest round of Palestinian-Israeli peace talks. Nevertheless, a breakthrough is possible this time -- thanks to the unshakable Palestinian peace strategy.