Geopolitical and military implications
The current deadlock in Israeli-Palestinian relations is not the result of a refusal to compromise between the two authorities – on the contrary, the two entities have tried to reach a consensus on various occasions. The central issue is the suspicion that the two sides have signed bilateral agreements on various occasions that have proved infallible and difficult to respect. Ultimately, this adversity of trust-based bargaining pushes Israel towards uni- versality and the Palestinians towards violence.
In this context, the bilateral relations between the two sides were marked by:
1. The initiation of superficial bargaining efforts, which have proved to be impossible to respect. The main aspect that permanently amplifies these military confrontations is the existence of an impressive military arsenal that can be used anytime.
2. The irreconcilability between the two authorities was amplified by the 2005 Hamas electoral gain, which in fact meant the uprooting of the organization’s terrorist actions based on popular support.
3. One main cause of the failure of the agreements signed between the two parties is that the penalties stipulated for the reopening of the armed conflict were not respected and the international community had a pale reaction.
4. Apart from the security and geopolitical aspects, the impossibility of reconciling the two sides is also strongly supported by ethnic, social and especially religious differences.

Conclusions and solutions

Knowing the complexity of the situation, the tensions in the area as well as the political, religious and social implications, as the author of this article, provide for the following situations:

1. Concluding an agreement aimed at the immediate cessation of violence. – Establishing a permanent peace.
This is an issue that would be of interest to both parties – Hamas would have the opportunity to administer the territory under its authority and to settle accounts with Al Fatah, while Israel would be able to handle the Iranian issue. Such bargaining attempts have taken place since the Clinton administration in 2000, the Taba Negotiations in 2001 or the 2003 Geneva Initiative. A resumption of these diplomatic discussions is hindered by Hamas for two reasons – 1. This peace would mean recognizing Israel’s legitimacy over the confluence territories of th