With due respect, Zionism is an ordinary nationalist movement. Its goals merely came into conflict with those of Palestinian Arabs. Such conflict, however, was not an inevitability, inherent in the nature of the Jewish nationalist movement. And, even if it was, that does not let Palestinian Arabs off the hook for failing even to attempt prior to Israel’s creation, to reach an accord with that movement.

Recall that those small number of Palestinian Arabs who, in fact, tried to reach an accommodation with the Zionist movement were killed by the movement surrounding Mohammad Amin al-Husayni, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem - a man placed in power by the British but who later allied himself and his movement with the Nazis and who spent much of World War Two in Germany, supporting the Nazi movement. Perhaps, one might point a finger at the British for placing such a divisive figure in a position of authority, thus making it unlikely that Jews and Arabs might work together. And, one might points directly at al-Husayni, a man who’s divisiveness and hate knew no bounds.

Nowhere is there any semblance of recognition that Israelis have not forced Arabs to fight with each other. Such was, instead, the result of the different political agendas of Hamas and Fatah, with Hamas effectively opposed to a Palestinian Arab state and, instead, for an Islamic transnational state - something very, very different from a national state as envisioned by the somewhat less religious Fatah movement.

Israel has its share of blame in this dispute. But, Israel is not the full story. Israel did not tell the Palestinian Arabs to adopt, as their basic war strategy, a strategy to use war crimes (i.e. killing civilians as a matter of choice, not accident). Yet, Mr. Bahour has the temerity to ask the International community to insist that the Geneva Convention be applied against one side only, as if the Palestinian Arabs have no obligations to employ legitimate means.

The current leaders of Palestinians, if we go by the elections held, is Hamas. Hamas’ covenant needs to be understood, as it pertains to how Israelis view the conflict. The Hamas covenant cites to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, as if such were something other than a forgery. The Hamas covenant claims that Jews are behind all wars, going way back in history. And, the covenant calls for killing Jews everywhere, as a religious duty. That all impacts profoundly on what Israelis think.

If the parties are to settle the dispute, it must be based on understanding and accepting each other. It will not come from any of those who claim, at present, to lead the Palestinian Arab side. None on the Arab side appears to understand what minimally would be acceptable to the Israelis. And, without accommodating the legitimate needs of Israelis, the Israelis are not going to accommodate the legitimate needs of Palestinian Arabs.