In July 2013, the resolution negotiations between Israel and Palestine were initiated with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry mediating and went on for nine months until April 2014, when a historic event took place. After the negotiations, that were supported by Turkey, the conflict between Hamas and Fatah came to an end and a compromise unity government was founded in Palestine.
Thanks to the formation of a unity government, presidential and general elections could now be held in Palestine. The end of the Hamas-Fatah conflict also helped the resolution process. The U.S. and EU did not conform to Israel's call for non-recognition of the Hamas government. They even announced on numerous accounts that they would observe the process and showed an interest in operating with the unity government.
After that, Israel withdrew from the negotiations. Israeli settlements were carrying on their policies and were not releasing the Palestinian convicts. Kerry made warnings against Israel.
The tension between Palestine and Israel seems to have started with the abduction of three Jewish young men on June 12. After the abduction, Israel arrested more than 500 Palestinians. On June 30, the bodies of the Jewish men were found and Israel blamed Hamas for the incident. Tension increased after a revenge attack was made against a young Palestinian man, Mohammed, who was brutally killed on July 2.
The number of Gazans killed has now reached 420. In the al-Shujaya district alone 60 people were killed. Israel does not allow people to flee from Gaza.
Obviously, the murder of three Israeli men is a provocative action. The real problem lies behind whom this action favors rather than who made the provocation. Instead of solving the problem through legal channels, Israel kicked off a large scale bombardment and a ground operation. Seemingly, the aim of this attack is to ruin the Hamas-Fatah unity and leave Hamas without any support on the world scene.
Since Hamas won the 2006 elections, just like when Ikhwan won the elections in Egypt, they actually had a considerable opportunity. After urging those organizations to become politicized, it was not fair to see the steps taken as a threat. It is actually a paradox for the security of Israel. As a result of Palestinians being killed, the hate and reactions increase, while politics is undermined. Dismantling the addressee and organizing attacks to kill civilians are based on the concept of "invincibility." It could be assumed that this situation could go on forever with their propaganda tools and obvious military dominance. However this is not true; it is a fatal mistake of the Israeli state in the name of Israeli public.
No sane man would believe that they could solve the Palestinian matter through this method. The bitter experience of the last 60 years verifies that. If peace is desired, the politicization of the addressee and its steps regarding the civilian struggle methods would be supported rather than being prevented. In such an unequal condition, Israel cannot justify its claims.
So, the only way to introduce peace to the Middle East is leaving the concept of combat and invincibility. Through this way, anti-Israel discourse and strategies would be marginalized. The war could only trigger radicalism. For Israel, this radicalism could be seen as a ground for sticking to the concept of combat. However, it is vital to see that this poisonous equation is already outdated.
Neither peace nor security could be achieved in a place where civilians, children and women are killed. There could only be an uneasy dominance, and there is no guarantee for the timing and ways of change in conditions. When the Israel is dominant, it had better be rational and show the courage to establish peace.