[andyfox]

I don't understand the logic of the article. The first poll Pipes cites, taken in 2002 when relations between Israel and the Palestinians were not exactly at a high point, says that the Palestinians are split roughly 50/50 on whether they want a state in the West Bank and Gaza or in all of historic Palestine. From this, he concludes that Palestinian rejectionism flourishes. One might just as logically conclude that since roughly 50% of the American elctorate voted against George Bush, American rejectionism of the proposed Rupublican administation, our current government, flourished in 2000.

Then, he cites two other polls, one showing that only about one in five in Israel believe that the Palestinians have accepted Israel's existence, and the other showing that only about one in five in the U.S. believe that the Palestinian Authority wants only a small state alongside Israel.

But if the Palestinians themselves are split 50/50, how can he say that Israelis and Americans demonstrate in these polls that they view the situation "realistically?" Only those who didn't answer or said they didn't know would have a chance to be correct, since the actual answer is that half of Palestinians want one thing and half want another. To conclude that "the Palestinians" want either would therefore be wrong.

Also, since the third poll Pipes cites refers to what Americans believe about the Palestinian Authority, it cannot be a realistic assessment of the feelings of the residents of the West Bank and Gaza.

And what is Pipes' solution for the problem? Well, what Israel does is irrelevant to the conflict. So, by Pipes' logic, we shouldn't worry about what Israel does. We should stop pressuring them to make concessions. Israel should move its capital to Jerusalem. This will certainly calm things down and lead to peace.

What is the vital point you see Pipes making that should not be ignored? I'd rather see everything Pipes say ignored.