We have no way of telling whether Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's pursuit of a two-state solution is just a tactical maneuver that is designed to lay blame on Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. What's clear is that Abbas does not want this solution to materialize, as this would require him to announce an end to all claims against Israel. Abbas has assumed this posture since 2000, when he pressured then-PA President Yasser Arafat to bolt from the talks precisely after then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak had finally put Jerusalem on the table. Abbas also ran away from the deal then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered him in 2009. Now he wants everything but won't give anything in return. Instead of engaging Israel in U.S.- and European-led talks, he wants to challenge the Jewish state in the U.N., hoping his statehood bid would cost him nothing. Abbas may have realized that rising tensions with Israel bolsters him at home and helps him deal with his various adversaries. Even if the talks U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has led unravel, Abbas will continue to hold mock negotiations with Justice Minister Tzipi Livni and special envoy Isaac Molho because he fears a bloody confrontation. The battlefield is the only place where he is weaker than Israel. Abbas held meetings with opposition MKs this week. There is nothing wrong with that; all forms of discourse are good, even if the meeting was used to create the false impression that he has come out against the murder of the Israeli man earlier this week and that he wants to seal a deal with Israel. The fact of the matter is that he is willing to talk the talk(s), but he is unwilling to walk the walk. As far as he is concerned, his role in the negotiations is to present a laundry list of demands: give us prisoners; declare a settlement moratorium; present maps. Too bad Economy and Trade Minister Naftali Bennett and Housing and Construction Minister Uri Ariel don't see where Abbas is coming from. Had they listened to their own rhetoric they would have realized that Abbas is not genuinely interested in peace. If they were students of history, they would have recalled what happened some 79 years ago, when a group of Zionist moderates said they could bring about a reconciliation with the Arabs. A group of five prominent Jews, led by Hebrew University President Judah Leib Magnes, met with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Husseini to talk about the establishment of a binational state. The proposal they put on the table made sure Jews remained outnumbered. Jewish Agency head David Ben-Gurion and other Jewish leaders were adamantly against his idea, but they nevertheless let Magnes do as he pleased. In fact, they essentially told him that he and his delegation members could talk all they want so long as they reported back to the Zionist leaders. Magnes and his cohorts kowtowed the mufti only to be rebuffed outright. The Arabs did not want a deal. Bennett and Ariel should take a page from Ben-Gurion's playbook: They should let Netanyahu gauge Abbas' peacemaking credentials. Netanyahu, like Ben-Gurion in 1935, cannot just walk away from a peace plan; he must first determine whether its provisions could actually be translated into a real deal. Magnes could not strike a deal with the Palestinians; neither can the opposition MKs or the Netanyahu government. But Bennett and Ariel are making it harder for Israel to convince the world of this truism. A distinguished police Violent clashes at the Temple Mount and the Western Wall area go back to the early days of the conflict. The Holy Basin set the region ablaze on multiple occasions, even before the Arabic word intifada (popular uprising) became a household name in Israel. The first clashes to originate in the area were in 1928-1929. They culminated with British-led committees of inquiry. In 1996, when Israel added another exit to the Western Wall tunnels in the Muslim Quarter, clashes also erupted. In 2000, then-Opposition Leader Ariel Sharon prayed on the mountain, he triggered the Second Intifada. And this week rocks were hurled on visitors, for the umpteenth time. This will undoubtably happen again. This place, where the Binding of Isaac took place and where the Prophet Mohammed ascended to the heavens on the back of al-Buraq, represents the heart of the conflict. Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook once said, "Just as there are hearts made of stone, so too are stones with a heart." Netanyahu once called the Temple Mount "the bedrock of our existence." The late Israeli songwriter Naomi Shemer was inspired by the sound of a ram's horn on the mountain after the Six-Day War and added a special verse to her famous song "Jerusalem of Gold." The Muslims on the mountain have never missed an opportunity to instigate violence. The police, however, refused to be provoked this week, despite the barrage of rocks they sustained. They stood there, without being drawn in. This is what I call extreme self-discipline. Such restraint and forbearance is almost unbearable for a human being. This impossible situation could have prompted some to defy their commanders by shooting at the rock throwers and running after them. No one would have taken them to task had they done that. The police made a wise decision by holding fire. The Palestinians would have relished any footage of dead protesters; Abbas would have made the rounds at the U.N. with such graphic pictures. The police's conduct serves Israel well. Israel wants the world to see it can accommodate all faiths in the area and wants to make sure things remain in control. This low-key response is diametrically opposed to the immense firepower each and every one of the police officers had. But nevertheless, they chose to stand down their weapons. The security forces at the Temple Mount should be awarded a citation, each and every one of them. As Pirkei Avot says, a hero is someone who knows how to hold back. I can't think of a better manifestation of that adage.
