I am also regretfully suspicious of Israel's willingness (particularly of Ariel Sharon's) to be remotely lenient on some of the critical issues vis-a-vis their conflict with the Palestinians, namely a. status of the refugees, b. Jerusalem, and c. the creation of a VIABLE Palestinian state. I agree. Although, I am not very familiar with the issues in the region, and all my knowledge comes from Fridman's and Bernard Lewis's books, ma pani 1-2 point thokidinchu, if it is OK with the informed sajha visitors. 1-2 ota lekhera 3-4 ota naya kura sikna paryo: 1. Given Ariel Sharon's impressive (?) history, I too, doubt this peace aggreement will be implemented seriously and entirely. However this shouldn't automatically imply that the Palestanians, all of them, want peace either. Will there be a viable Palestanian state? I highly dount this. Maybe the Palestanians will be a little better than they are now, but I don't see them having their own state with state powers anytime soon. The settlement dwellers whom Sharon created are the people oppisng a Palestanian state. So If Sharon now makes a U-turn, then he will be "betraying" his own people, who live by the Torah! Will Sharon be able to do it? 2. Israelis have suffered a lot. The jews have ben prsecuted throughout the history.. everywhere. Its the first time the Jewish people have their own state. Its a matter of immense pride for them. Although they have a state now, they are faced with hostile neighbors.. which makes them see themselves as victims. When you start consiedring yourself a victim, you shun every rational option. Why should I compromise now when I have suffered for this long? This attitude in the majority of Israelis or those who have the political power will do anything to thwart the agreement. It won't take much: One Plaestanians shot in the West Bank.. and Hamas will send a suicide bomber to Tel Aviv.. Again back to where we were before! 3. The Palestanians are divided too. This, in part can be blamed on Yaseer Arafat. Yaseer Arafat's uncompromising attitude actually confined the Palestanians more. Their choices were more limited by Arafat, not widened/broadened. [ I already amde it clear that I am a total idiot when it comes to Middle East.. and my knowledge comes from the afore-mentioned 2 books. I lack the confidence that I have when I talk about China/East Asia when talking about the Middle East]. Since Arafat was popular outside Palestine, and he was the only PR person the Palestanians had, they had to deal with his "uncomp[romising" attitude. But when it came to the West Bank and other areas, Arafat was not considered important when dealing with internal Palestanian issues/protests. The Palestanians made it clear when they staged INTIFADA. If my memory serves me right, Arafat didn't even know that the people were planning on that. Some of The group members who clearly dsliked but not hated Arafat for his handling of things, turned to the HAMAS. Hamas if I am not mistaken, was created because of Arafat's mishandling of things. 4. Therefore, one has sufficient reasons to believe that the Palestanians are divided now, partly because of Arafat's leadership and partlky because of Israeli policies. The result: Hamas and other organbziations gained significant influence among the people, which continues to this day. The Palestanians cannot unite, the Israelis cannot decide. This is the biggest problem. HAMAS too wants its share in the "liberation" of Palestine. Although a terrorist organziation, and rightfully declared one by the international community, it does enjoy a popular support in Palestine because of its charity works. So any agreement without HAMAS's support, if not involvement, is, I am afraid, going to be a failure. 5. A Plestanian State, an Arab state next to a jewish state is not very likely at this point (nor it was likely before). The majority of the Israeli population do no wnat to divide the land what they claim to be rightfully theirs. Even if a state is created, the Israelis will insist that the new state hands in its defense and foreign affairs to Israel, i.e., Israel will take care of those. This means becoming more of an Autonomus region, than a state. And will the Palestanians accept that? 6. Just as not all of Palestanians' are liberal and peaceful, not all Israelis' are accomodating. This is a major problem. La hai, as I wrote earlier, I alck the confidence when I have to talk about the Middle East(not that anybody forced me to show my stupidity here. Its just I am tempted to leran more about the region in a comfortable/relaxed setting). I might be totally off given my limited knowledge.. aaba aaruko kura sunera/padhera sikna paryo..