The peace process was not delivering. Arafat was “keeping his powder” dry, leaving Hamas and his own bloated police force intact for when they’d be needed.

True, after 1996 he arrested many leaders of Hamas, but in early 1997 when Netanyahu didn’t agree with Arafat’s interpretation of the Hebron Accords he gave a “green light” to Hamas to strike (and they did.)

To be a little more precise, he released leading members of terror groups from jail prior to the “Aqsa intifada,” which actually started before Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount.

To the Palestinians Israel was “illegitimately foisted” upon them and they still believe that. As long as that tenet remains central to their political program there will never be peace. It makes no difference what Israel does or does not do.

“The other part of the problem is ‘we had 95 percent of Palestine.’ Who is ‘we?’” “We” either refers to Arabs generally, or Mahmoud is anachronistically applying a Palestinian identity to Arabs who lived in what is now Israel and the territories. Either way, his implication is clear: most of the territory was under Arab control originally and should have remained under Arab control.

“OK, so what happened when Israel ceded territory under the terms of of a bilateral agreement?… Starting in February 1996 Israel was struck with a series of suicide bombings that killed over 60 people and injured hundreds more.” I believe this distorts the record, for there was a period of about two years, from 1997 to 1999, when Hamas didn’t pull off any suicide bombings at all. For a while the PA belatedly did what they were supposed to and cracked down on terrorism. Only later did Arafat revert to his old form and allow Hamas terrorism (while also sponsoring terrorism himself). Recall that a lot of Hamas people were in Palestinian jails for a spell, but Arafat sprang them when the second intifada started in 2000.

So in the late ’90s the Oslo Peace Process was delivering, and it wasn’t until the year 2000 that things really fell apart, mostly due to Arafat’s duplicitous character and his poor decisions.

I agree that Mahmoud comes off not only as a politician in a weak position, but simply as a weak politician. But it’s not hard to understand his totally inflexible position on the ‘67 borders. In the Palestinians’ view, Israel was illegitimately foisted upon the Arabs so accepting Israel now IS a huge concession.

In one paragraph the stupidity of the “peace process” is shown.

It’s also called “right of conquest”, and until recently territory gained in a war was considered fair game.

Israel should keep ALL the territory she has gained. And warn the arab world if they attack again they should be prepared to lose more.