In one of the London papers a couple of days ago, I saw a headline that read something like, "Israel: If Palestine cannot stop suicide bombings from happening, then the peace deal is off."
But what does this really mean? After all, Israel has occupied Palestine for many years now. If stopping the bombings were simply a matter of willpower or good intentions on the part of the sovereign entity for the area, then why didn't Israel stop them a long time ago?
Now, it would be quite reasonable for Israel to demand that the new Palistenian government make a "good faith effort" to prevent attacks on Israeli targets, or, failing to have done so, that it should hunt down the perpetrators. But to demand that the Palistinian government "stop the bombings" is utter rubbish. It appears to me as, perhaps, the declaration of a pre-condition for peace which the Israeli government knows cannot be met, so that the failure to meet it can be held up as another example of what dirt-balls the Palestinians are, and how Israel tried its best, but really had no choice but to shoot rockets into their cities and drive tanks down their streets.
(By the way, I have no opinion about which side is most to blame for the Israeli-Arab wars, about the justice of various claims as to land ownership in the area, about whether Yassir Arafat was a good guy or a villain, etc. However, despite my lack of knowledge about and opinions on the area and the ongoing conflict there, I know bullshit when I see it. And to require that the Palestinian government stop all suicide bombings directed against Israel, despite the fact that they are all being carried out by deranged individuals supported by a handful of criminals, is bullshit.