This result may be surprising in the view of the recent surge in support for the Likud and other hard line parties reported in other polls, but it reflects reality. Of course, "talking" doesn't necessarily mean negotiating peace. However, for example, Israelis want to get Gilad Shalit out of captivity. It is impossible to imagine how that would happen without negotiations, and since a Hamas faction is holding him, it is hard to see how there could be a deal without involving the Hamas. So we may expect that the Israeli policy will amount to having Abbas or another person act as a go between, of the kind well known in family fights:

"Tell the benighted terrorist genocidal warmonger, that we will give him 100 prisoners for Shalit."

"Excellency, Olmert says to tell you that the Israelis will give 100 prisoners for Shalit."

"Tell the infidel son of dogs and apes, that we want 2,000 prisoners for Shalit, plus right of return for refugees and Sandy Bar to be married to Khaled Meshal, and a Palestinian state with its capital in Tel Aviv."

"Excellency, Hanniyeh says to tell you that the Hamas want 2,000 prisoners for Shalit, plus right of return for refugees..."

This farce does not fool anyone. We understand that Israel can only get back Gilad Shalit and make progress on other issues by talking to Palestinians. On the other hand, the platform of the new unity government creates an impossible situation for peace. The Palestinians assert that they have the right to continue "resistance by all means" until their demands are met. If all their demands are met, then the Hamas will grant a "truce." Haaretz urges that this truce is better than war. But the truce is only offered if all the demands are met, and the demands include withdrawal of Israel precisely to 1967 borders, evacuating about half a million people who have settled in the greater Jerusalem area and the West Bank, and allowing several million Palestinian refugees to enter Israel as well. The last condition would mean the end of the Jewish state. Every fair person understands that these are not realistic conditions for peace and certainly not conditions for any cease fire. War is very bad, but suicide is worse. The Palestinian government will need to change its tune if it really wants to unfreeze the current situation.

Israel however, cannot expect the Palestinians to change unless it offers some quid pro quo, a concrete goal that is realistic, desirable and yet attainable, as opposed to the dream of destroying Israel held out by the Palestinian unity government. And Israel can't hope to dig itself in forever behind the position of no negotiations with the unity government, and to maintain the support of the US and European governments for this position, unless it offers something in return. The Arab League will most certainly express support for Palestinians at their upcoming summit, and hold out Israeli concessions as the price of cooperation regarding Iraq and Iran, as well as those nice low oil prices. The US, Russia and Western Europe will be tempted by these pressures, as well as lucrative trade opportunities. The Arab peace plan calls for recognition of Israel, but like the Palestinian unity platform, it insists on return of all territories conquered in 1967 and right of return for Palestinian refugees. It is therefore not a realistic basis for peace, but it is attractive as "the only game in town and as a concrete set of principles. While neither the Arab plan or the Palestinian plan are a basis for peace, the current situation cannot continue indefinitely, nor can the Palestinians be moved from their obdurate folly by vague talk about a political horizon or generalities about a better future.

Most of the non-Muslim nations of the world are probably agreed that a reasonable solution to the conflict will be along the lines of the Clinton bridging proposals or the Geneva accord or the Ayalon-Nusseibehplan, which are alternate ways of stating approximately the same thing. They all posit a territorial exchange that will give the Palestinians a demilitarized state in about 100% of the pre-1967 territory, a capital in Jerusalem, and settlement of Palestinian refugees outside of Israel, in return for a formal and genuine peace agreement and an end to the conflict that has plagued both peoples for nearly a hundred years. A real and final end, not a "Hudna" like the Hudna of Hudibiyeh that will be terminated by a Muslim conquest. Palestinians must understand and accept that there will not be a second battle of Khaybar, in which the Jews are vanquished, not now and not in the future.

Israel accepted the Clinton bridging proposals in principle, but the precise offer was never made publicly and was never official. Now is the time for Israel to launch a broad, detailed public peace offensive on those lines, and to seek the support of the Quartet, the EU and all fair-minded countries for the same program. The proposal should be sufficiently detailed so that everyone can understand what it entails. Maps and major proposals must be spelled out publicly, so that people like Jimmy Carter cannot falsify the truth. There will be no "Bantustans" in the offer and no possibility to dismiss it as Bantustans. Everyone will know exactly what they are being asked to support. Negotiations, when they are held, will be within a framework that is known in advance. The Palestinian side will understand that they cannot get a state without offering peace, and the Israeli side will understand that they can't get peace without ending the occupation. If a large coalition unites behind the same plan it has a reasonable chance of success. If it fails, if the Palestinians do not agree, at least there will be an international peace camp that is united around a concrete program and holds out that program as a goal.

But what if it succeeds? The conclusion of such an agreement should be a victory and a cause for national celebration by both the Palestinians and the Israelis. The occupation will come to an end. The Palestinians will get their own state at long last, and the refugees will end their long exile. The Israelis will get the peace we have dreamed of since 1948 and before, the negotiated settlement that was the stated object of the Six Day War. The Middle East and the world will be able to turn their attention to other more urgent problems.

If you will, it is no legend.

Ami Isseroff