It was no coincidence that the latest spat of attacks against Israelis occurred as US President George Bush was about to make his policy statement regarding the Middle East. Among other things, the statement was expected to include a road map to solving this century old conflict on the basis of a free independent Palestine alongside a safe Israel within secure borders.

It was also no coincidence that the attacks by militant Islamic Palestinians occurred despite a plea by leading Palestinian intellectuals calling for an end to attacks against Israeli civilians. I signed the public statement drafted by PLO representative in Jerusalem Professor Sari Nusseibeh in the hope that we can show Israelis that there is real opposition among Palestinians to these senseless killings.

Instead the timing of the recent attacks against Israeli civilians seems to be aimed at thwarting US attempts at peace making and to weaken Palestinian moderation. While Israelis and Palestinians are suffering those behind these attacks are benefiting from the status quo.

Israel’s prime minister Ariel Sharon is also benefiting from this vicious cycle of violence. Collective punishment, apartheid-like travel restrictions, daily tank incursions and assassinations of Palestinian leaders contributes to the sense of desperation and hopelessness that has produced these attacks. The continuation of building illegal Jewish settlements in Palestinian areas simply adds fuel to the already raging fire.

Ideally it would make sense for Palestinian and Israeli moderates, which ought to reflect the majority to work together against the radicals. Unfortunately this has not happened. Instead of the violence spurning more efforts for peace, the hard-line Sharon government uses the attacks against Israelis as an excuse for lack of effort on the political front. The Israeli leader continues to move the goal post putting one condition after the other before agreeing to consider a return to peace talks. Sharon, however, is very active on the military front. The harsh Israeli actions simply depend the cycle of violence, killings and most importantly hatred between our peoples. Terror and violence against civilians on both sides should not be condoned and must stop. But it is inexcusable not to negotiate as soon as possible a peaceful end to the conflict.

Israelis claim that the Palestinian thwarted their so-called generous offer at Camp David. Returning illegally occupied lands can never be described as generous. The fact is that according to a joint statement in the Egyptian resort of Taba in January 2001, Palestinian and Israeli negotiators were very close to a historic settlement. They took a break for the Israeli elections and since then Israel under Sharon had not agreed to return to negotiations. The hard-line Israeli leader has been unwilling to go back to the talks until the Palestinian unilaterally stop their anti Israeli attacks. Palestinians insist that resistance to the Israelis and their occupying army is the only means to press Israel to accept UN Security Council Resolutions that define occupation as "inadmissible" and called on Israel to withdraw from Palestinian territory occupied in 1967. A cease-fire, Palestinians say, must be bilateral be observed by a neutral party, and strengthened by parallel peace talks.

The late Yitzhaq Rabin used to say, "we will fight terror as if there is no negotiations, and negotiates as if there is no terror." A genuine peace leader would adopt a simultaneous political and security policy for the sake of his own people and that of regional peace. Sharon has refused to talk politics and Arafat has been unable to stop the militants.

With such inability by Palestinians and Israelis, the role of the US becomes that much more important. America can’t only declare the vision of peace but must do all it can to implement it, including if need be, publicly criticizing the party obstructing to a fair peace deal.

Last May when I met former US peace envoy Dennis Ross, he told me that what he regrets most is that he and the Clinton administration covered up too much to the mistakes both sides were committing. In the interest of an overall settlement, he told me, we overlooked the wrongs of Palestinians and Israelis. In retrospect, he confide to me, we should have publicly exposed any side that failed to carry out commitments they made.

Such an active US involvement is needed now more than ever. We, Israelis and Palestinians, are exhausted and unable to move out of the boxes we have trappe ourselves in. The US with its historic support for peoples freedoms and human rights and its strategic power and special relations with Israel can do what no other nation in the world can.

What the Bush administration must do is lay out a fair deal on the table, draw up a reasonable road map and timetable and then work tirelessly on the ground until it’s implemented. America must know that radicals on both sides (both within and outside current leaderships of both people) will do what they can to derail such a process. This should not deflect the Americans from pursuing their ultimate goal. If radicals see any hesitation they will increase their destructive efforts. US resolve must be based on America saying what it means and meaning what it says.

The insanity of the Palestinian- Israeli conflict must be stopped immediately even if foreign forces have to be flown in for this purpose. Palestinians and Israelis yearn for that. The Middle East wants it, and the world will support it.

I should have been angry but I wasn’t. Israeli soldiers at the Qalandia checkpoint slashed all four wheels of my car. Apparently they didn’t like where I and many other Palestinians had parked our cars as we dismounted and traveled by foot to cross the dreaded occupation checkpoint.

The reason I was not so angry was not a newfound appreciation for the Israeli occupation but rather a reflection of the new mood in Palestine. This mood refuses to be surprised by anything that the Israeli occupation force carries out. Before seeing my car I had been in my Ramallah office during which rumors had circulated all day about an imminent Israeli incursion into the city. People had lost count whether this would be the fifth or sixth incursion in as many months. Most people seem to have stocked up basic foods to last for some time.

Discussions in the office had not been on whether another incursion will take place nor was it on the period of the incursions. Rumors were talking about an incursion up to six months or however it will take to erect the Israeli fence separating the West Bank (while taking more Palestinian lands) and Israel. Instead the discussions were centered on whether the Israelis will place the city under a continuous curfew or not. If there would be no curfew, this would be fine with me, said Ayman, a colleague.

In other parts of the West Bank, Palestinian sentiment didn’t vary. The threat of deporting President Arafat or his top aides didn’t seem to concern many and no one was holding their breath waiting for the expected speech of US president George Bush.

The overwhelming attitude of Palestinians seems to center on making do. On Thursday and despite the Israeli incursion into parts of Ramallah, I was surprised to see everyone working as usual in the office. People were in the streets and restaurants were seeing brisk business. In one Ramallah restaurant, the stones, not a single table was free late in the evening despite the rumors of incursions. Responding to the expectations of an Israeli incursion the owner of the restaurant said, we will continue working until a tank stops outside our restaurant and forces us to close.

In Bethlehem I found similar thoughts. The owner of a dance hall in Beit Sahour said that they weekly Saturday night dance had record number of clients. "We had to refuse more people than we allowed because of the high turnout," said Yousef Shomali. Two days earlier the Israeli army had withdrawn from the city after yet another incursion.

This apathy means that the actions of the occupying forces against the Palestinians has failed in raising the level of deterrence. While Palestinian intellectuals were unhappy with the latest attack against civilians, most people are unable to see any light at the end of the tunnel. The statement, which was published on a full-page ad in the leading newspaper Al Quds was drafted by Sari Nusseibeh and included signatures of leading moderate Palestinians including Hanan Ashrawi, called for an end to attacks against Israeli civilians. The ad, which had 55 signatures on Wednesday, was repeated on Thursday with over 70 signatures and it seems that additional signatures will be added to this public announcement.

After being content to the fact that I couldn’t fix my car with all four wheels down, I went to the nearest tire store and found that he has been doing brisk business during the past few weeks. It was not only cars like mine that have been slashed but also they have sold plenty of tires (mostly used ones) to cars and trucks whose tires were shot at or became flat from driving on all kinds of dirt roads to circumvent the Israeli checkpoints.

But the apathy towards incursions and the public call for an end to attacks against Israeli civilians have done little to change the Israeli mindset which seems to be stuck with its own formula of finding military solutions to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. And the Israeli attempts to somehow expect that the pressures on all Palestinians will produce a solution to their conflict have once again shown that they will not work.

The apathy, which I and others are experiencing, is very scary because it reflects a level of numbness in regards normal feelings. In order to regain our normal human feelings of anger, love and even hate a total end to the violence and counter violence is necessary.

To stop the cycle of violence we need to get out of the mindset of revenge and punishment and begin the process of giving people hope based on genuine confidence that this illegal occupation and all that has resulted as a consequence to it will end soon. This is the only hope for all of us to regain our humanity.

During the past weeks I attended two conferences in New York and Vienna, which were aimed at finding ways of using the media to improve dialogue and understanding. In New York, the longest running children’s television production company rounded up some of the world’s best creative people and media producers in order to see how they can improve respect and understanding. The Sesame Workshop which co produces with tens of countries and whose children’s puppets appear in over 120 countries wanted to know what can be done to improve understanding and mutual respect between the peoples of the world. In Vienna the foreign minister invited representatives from the Mediterranean basin to discuss the role of media in improving Euro-Med dialogue.

There is no doubt that the sudden flurry of high powered conferences are in part a result of the shock that the western world received after September 11, a theme that was repeated on the mouths of most speakers and facilitators. The fact that it has taken eight months for such meetings is an indication that we seem to have passed the phase, which was reflected with the words of many Americans "why do they hate us?"

Searching for answers to questions of what is needed led to a discussion about the arrogance and isolationism that peoples in the west have been moving towards until they were shocked into waking up to the rest of the world. A speaker at the New York meeting admitted that more than half of the United States senators or congressmen don’t even possess a valid passport, a statements that reflected the apathy American people and their leaders have to the world around them.

While Islam and September 11 were among the key features of the discussions, the Arab-Israeli conflict also received much attention in both meetings. In New York keynote speakers included former US peace envoy Dennis Ross and a veteran Palestinian journalist. In Vienna former UN Secretary General Butrus Butrous-Ghali was the keynote speaker and one of the sessions was entitled: CNN versus Al Jazzera.

Discussing ways of improving dialogue and understanding between peoples showed that it is next to impossible so long as violence and repression continue to be the rule of the day. I explained to those attending the New York meeting that it is useless trying to introduce values of mutual respect and understanding while one party continues to occupy and repress the other party. How can we teach children to respect the ‘other’ when the other has tanks shelling our children’s homes I explained. We can discuss such lofty goals only when our children enjoy the freedoms and independence that other children around the world enjoy.

The Vienna meeting reflected a much more sophisticated understanding of what is needed to bridge the gap between the northern and southern shores of the Mediterranean. The senior Egyptian diplomat spoke extensively about the asymmetry between the two banks of the Mediterranean, listing economic and social differences as the main cause of this divide.

Technology was also discussed both in its reflection in the digital divide as well as in the opportunities it gives all people. The speed in which technology has moved from developers to users has in many ways evened the playing field even though only an elite group of developing countries had access to it.

In order to bring peoples closer together a number of practical ideas were discussed both in the form of content as well as in methods of delivery. From teenage television programs, to international chat sessions and interactive CD ram participants toiled as they sought ways as to how to get children and youth from around the world to better understand each other. Ironically and despite the pacifist nature of these discussions, the most popular idea for improving dialogue and breaking stereotypes was a spying game.

The idea of this game is that players win more and more points if they are able to successively infiltrate enemy territory. The deeper the player gets into the others territory the more he or she gets grilled about the history, culture and life style of the enemy. If the player reflects any hint of stereotyping of the enemy or show ignorance to the ‘enemy’s history and culture they get caught and lose the game.

While learning by playing might be a clever way of understanding the other, theological and philosophical thinkers were recalled as the needed ideological model for such an endeavor. A number of participants quoted the opposite of the golden rule. "Don’t do unto others what you would not want done to you."