Or whether this will be an entirely clinical public opinion. I dont see the u. S. Having a real hand in stopping the israelis from stopping what they want to do in gaza. Purex a more limited set of strikes may be the more obvious. Set of more limited strikes may be more obvious. In may be a good idea to escalate. From the past. S those we part of the mixture. But i do not think the american side of it will be a big rd equation, whether to launch this attack or not. I agree. Right now, the objectives for american diplomacy have to be conflict management. Rather crisis management, not conflict resolution. Lets be clear about the goals of american diplomacy, what they can and should be at the time. But we are trapped in thinking that either john kerry does or does not get it done. Diplomats. Usands of now is the time, i would argue for active american diplomacy at out,low john kerry to go to be seen, to being gauge, to be small to be engaged, to be small anecdotes. In palestine and turkey for that matter, the once it the one thing they said to me, where are you guys . You guys are not here. I got a call from the palestinian minister that said, is the u. S. Going to say anything . A call for america and the policy that is not there. But at what cost . A few thousand dollars for airplane tickets . I think that is a worthy cost. If israel does not go in, and i dont think it will go in. I think israel has a dilemma about gaza right now, it is not for thes willingness ground incursion or willingness to sustain casualties. Thomas as theo hamass to be the enforcer. It is looking for the political out or some kind of base saving out. Right now, it is refusing to be haveecause it wants to gotten something for it. That is a miscalculation. Israels reluctance to go into gaza right now is a fear, not for its own casualties, but rather in the essence absence of, scott there will be something even worse. , which is the absence of a real strategy right now on either side, the israeli or palestinian side. Strategic code to set, because there is no way out for reconciled and two sides or ending the Political Division that exists today. Im not completely convinced that this is only about israeli selfrestraint. Factionsk there are within, center happy to escalate. Within hamas that are happy to escalate. There are rockets coming from palestine into israel. You have hamas taking responsibility for the first time in a long time. There are factions that are interested in escalating. With, whore aligned is pushing them forward, i think that is anybodys guess. You could make an informed guess, but why bother . There is space for several parties to choose about escalation and deescalation. I would not have secretary kerry pack his bags. I would say that this whole inflagration that we are shows again, how and why the United States should not stop engagement with this issue. You draw them back down to the point where it seems to be a question of benign neglect below the level of conflict management and things tend to happen fairly quickly. And i already explained where i think the opportunities are for serious stuff that can have an days and weeks. Now to your questions. Please, wait for the microphone, which hopefully is coming. Presented by yourself and ask her question. It will be here in a second. I am josh rogan and im reporting with the daily beast. Wondering if you can put a finer point on this question. What exactly is the failure of to this. Talks john kerry rather publicly that if the two parties did not reach eight two state solution soon, there could be a problem with in intifada. Was he right . If so, does this government race mx bear some Response Party for raising expectations for what was the wrong way at the wrong time . First, i think the actual abduction of the israelis and then the palestinians, that could have happened any time, with no regard to the Peace Process. We have seen it historically. I do not think that it in itself is historically connected. What is connected is the mobilization that we see that is unbelievable. It is resonating. It is generating what we would not have known what happened. Match . L light up the match, can light of the but it does not always catch. The environment is ready for it to catch fire. That is, in part, a function of many things, including the collapse of the Peace Process, of a two state solution. I do not push that to say to raise the expedition to high and therefore, that is what happened. I think the expectations for incredibly low before. We have seen that. If anything, john kerry succeeded in extending the time of hope for a little bit longer. Years ago, three years ago, we were already seeing majorities of israelis and palestinians thinking it was too late for a twostate solution. It was not that this administration is saying, it is coming, and then he collapses. I think that is wrong. He should be committed and for trying. Commended for trying. Is not linear. You could look back to july of 2000. Had a fullfledged president ial summit. Expectations were at that point running, as my three colleagues note, and interest the high. There was a sense of drifting away from the failure of that summit. Even though the United States followed up to at the best of its capacity. Is the the failure absence of monopoly in the forces of violence. Clearly, when it comes to the Palestinian Authority but increasingly i think you see even on the rig the israeli side. That goes along way to explain the s is s cycle. Escalatory cycle. I would agree that the minister should be commended rather than not. To the granular level of politics, it was pressure side rather than the big picture negotiations. And the question of reality on in ground got sort of dumped favor of big picture stuff. There was a certain loss of way. The whole International Community, and all of third parties, and there were quite a few of them, combined to drop the ball and let the state and Institution Building become a ondary and in dispensable and indispensable project, when it was not at all. If there was any progression that i would draw, there was the collapse to palestinian politics and allowing the politics to constrict like this and allowing hope to dry up on the ground, on the one hand, and the sort of outofcontrol situation that we have today. I think there is a much more direct cause and effect between those two factors then then i think we have between those two factors and diplomacy now. One thing to keep in mind is the violence did not come out of nowhere. There had been a significant uptick in what is called price take uptick in what is called price tag violence. None of it had come to the point it had come to recently. But the violence is part of the landscape, unfortunately. What we have seen is a village is rendition in diminution and violence. Not an absolute wants. But i do not think it is fair to blame john kerry for the violence. But we do have a diplomatic vacuum. What is of concern is the way the violence culminated in april. There was no plan b. There should be some diplomatic fallback short of an all or nothing type of approach. And that is what we are trying to allude to in the previous. But there was no coveted to plan a. No alluded to plan a. There was no need for a to go to the rest of plan a. It was a perfect a viable part of plan a and it should have continued to thrive. There has been a lot of firstn of intifada intifada, second, and third. Conditions have changed in a major way. Now there is a new focus by the posting in by the palestinian leadership on the long struggle of leadership and International Agencies mobilizing supporters to put clinical and economic rusher on israel, specifically through the boycott and the sanction movement. Yet while this is happening we need a question. Yes, and the u. S. Has restricted these new efforts. Isnt it time for a new shift . Or a more nuanced position on the u. S. By the u. S. On these nonviolent oppositionists . I think the american position has been consistent. One of the biggest obstacles to progress and why the twostate solution is dying as a solution is opposition to settlement. There have been no teeth in the policy. Israelis are frustrated with the fact that there is no pressure to stop that from happening, even though it is eating up the two state solution every day. You can even argue, and i think probably credibly, that one of the reasons israelis agreed to get back to the negotiating table when john kerry started the negotiating process was this pressure from europe to boycott products from israeli settlements, expanding as we speak. Just in the past week, up to 17 European Countries have they have warned against dealing with israeli settlements. The administration itself, i think, actually looked at that. And one option on the table was, if they are not going to do it, if they are going to do, clearer allies in europe to do it. The settlements are something very specific as a poised to board cutting israel. Boycotting israel in europe and name the u. S. , how do you do this you . You you oppose the policy of israel and support israel at the same time . How do you do it . Europe ased action as opposed it relates to settlements matters. U. S. Or opinion poll in the about American Attitudes toward the israeliamerican israelipalestinian conflict, i asked people whether they supported if a two state solution was no longer a possibility, would they support occupation indefinitely, or israeli annexation of the territories, without full citizenship . Those people who said initially that they would support a two state solution, the majority of aem said they would support one state solution with the full citizenship. Americans have a problem with the idea that you have an indefinite occupation or a relationship with relationship of inequality. Any Peace Process, then maybe its going to come. If you do not have a Peace Process, then you have a resignation and it took like its not going to happen and you look like you have a permanent situation. People do not want to accept it. Including people who care a lot about israel. We see that in the perl in the polling. Something you see moving in that direction if you have a lot of violence. If you have a lot of violence, violence created completely different environment. It becomes a zerosum. Its about survival. Its about a narrative. It takes you in a different direction, and that is what we see potentially happening if there is an escalation. Next question. My name is herbert roseman. Im a retired judge. Thewould you think that state Department Officials could contribute to a peaceful solution there when you have no credibility with the israeli . Ide the state officials in the state department have always been antagonist and toward israel. People inthe working the state department, they have always been antiisrael. You have no credibility there. Got it. You first. To 56, you are speaking 56 5060 years of state department experience between us. It does not reflect the way the state bar state department is today. Things have changed. Tensiont, there may be between the Prime Minister stop us an the white house and the high this levels highest levels. In the broadspectrum, u. S. Israel relations, there is a working relationship that is close at all levels. The state Department Arabists who hate israel, so israel will never listen to us, that does not correlate to the relationship today. Yound the counterpart to would stand up here and stay say that the problem is the opposite. In the last 30 years, the state department as well as the white house has been consistently, fundamentally, and avowedly proisrael, to the degree that it tends to look at is really did is really requirements as the departure for any american policy. And i would argue that is, frankly, more correct and incorrect. I dont think that is the case. I am a Research Assistant at the eurasia center. With netanyahu coming out next week saying hes in favor of an independent kurdistan, what is your take on him being more prosettlement and everything . Isnt it ironic that he is prokurdish stand that but protwo state solution . Back dateay back further than the 2003 war. In recent years, they have always the obviously built a close relationship with kurdistan. It is a strong autonomous region regardless. From the israeli point of view, it is a strong Strategic Asset in that region. It is not surprising for me that they would call for that. The problem for them, for the israelis, is that they have a lot of other arabs that dont agree. Look at the new Egyptian Government under sec, for example, who has been asisi, forg under example, who has been cooperating with israel. I think they will have a lot of pushback, a lot of countries that they are trying to get close loop close to. They are trying to get close to sunni arabs versus the iranian influx in the region. I dont see that sitting very well, because most sunni arabs are opposed to an independent kurdistan. Not a particular meaningful thing, and problematic for the relationship. I see it as palmetto for as problematic for those who are trying to engineer it for the long run. Many israelis have come at it from independence. It israelis, before the kurds themselves, have made that a public goal. It is entirely unhelpful, frankly. We have an overflow room filled with at least 50 people. There are several questions. I will take that and they move go to you. Be avery be will there Peace Process between israel and palestine . If religion was taken off the table . Would there be a Peace Process . A presumably, would it be dimension . One of it one of you take it. For a long time that the minute you start adopting religious language to justify nationalism and conflict, them and it you are in trouble that is the minute you are in trouble. Because ultimately, you are allowing the most fanatic religious groups to claim the upper hand. Legitimacyave more to speak in the name of the religion and you will as a nationalist. And the israelipalestinian conflict went to a religion revolution over the years because it moved to a nationalist conflict, because people would be satisfied with a nation of their own rather than assuming religious claims. That is undoubtedly the case. Inclusion of religious symbols and meanings in the struggle have made it harder to resolve the conflict. Undoubtedly. Fascinating panel. Aic, you started this not channel about the two state solution, but about politics. Salam fayyad was in aspen last week. The people know he was Prime Minister of Palestinian Authority, and before that finance minister. He still is in the region. He drafted a twoyear plan for palestinians to earn statehood. It was enormously half popular with the west. Was not a lot of street credibility, but he is obviously still interested, very, in palestinian development. Outuestion is, could a phi fayad comeback make a difference . Fascinating question. Two powers that he is enacted are not his soul position. They could be put into powers power by others. The concept of having accountable, responsible government that looks to me the needs of the people as they exist today and to build the bottomup from the up as both the topdown, this can be enacted by anybody. I do not want to link it only to yad, whoout mr. Faa are respect enormously. Enacted with the thrust of a lot of what ive said today, and what ive said has been to suggest that the Donor Community and other parties have tried to promote that exact kind of thinking. It was a terrible pity that the space for that project was shut down. In a kind of fit of not understanding at all the consequences of International Policies on Palestinian National life in the aftermath of the unsuccessful the first unsuccessful and even other successful u. S. Bids on pf of the palestinians on behalf of the palestinians. And even at the cost of the appeal go of the plo. The cost of the Prime Minister to proceed. As i talk about lots of little projects through the occupied territories, many of them through the not high jacobousual nonhigh jackable usual bepects, not only will there a future, but in a big way, yes, for that. Collect there has been a backlighting of the bottom up approach, the faith approach. We have seen through palestinian politics a freedom of expression. And part of that is the topdown focus. Yad, theerence from fa degree to which his population is still measured. And unfortunately, his father passed away recently and the for populars called demonstration any approach he adopted. That is good news for the approach. The bad news is, there is no mechanism within palestinian transfer politics to thirdparty ethics. That is why i have been advocating throughout my comics part of a political through my comments part of a political change. We have talked a lot about the reform through 2006. They just has not happened. And most in the west bank are skeptical that it will ever happen. The good news is, the majority of palestinians are sick of just as fatah, they are sick of hamas. Tore is still no mechanism translate it. That is part of the reason we have no we have violence today. But i have i have respect ayad and still do. Part of the problem and he has is a political one. No one can transform it as far as occupation goes, and there is no political horizon. It is not something he can deliver. Im from the news network in kurdistan. Why is there some much more International Support for palestine as opposed to the kurds . Is it because they are primarily Kurdish People and not arabs, or primarily sunni people as well . May be on an emotional level you can find more people interested in the palestinian cause precisely because of the israelipalestinian conflict and because it is an international issue. Inyou look at the the way which the kr g has been steadily independence and i say this as unconnected from anyone unconnected to. Crossedic was caused in a way that it was not before. This is virtually a done deal and its a question of when, not if. While there are certainly a lot of players in the region i do not want it, the key ones either do or will.