plications, 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 the two sides. 2. Hamas would lose the conflict initiative that provided its popular support, losing ground to Al Fatah rivals.

2. Israel’s withdrawal from the West Bank and the presence of delegated troops from the international community at the border between the two territories.

These terms of negotiation would help both camps. First, Israel would benefit from long-term secured security and Hamas could benefit from the possibility of establishing a state recognized by the international community. In the case of such an agreement, the issue of holy places and the problem of refugees could be regulated by evacuating Israelis from the West Bank and creating a separation route whose Israeli boundaries do not include the neighboring Arab territories of East Jerusalem, Ariel and the Ma’aleh region Adumin.
Returning to Islamic contexts, Islamic fundamentalist terrorism, as we have shown, is forbidden by the Quran and other Islamic laws, and fundamentalism is only a form of extreme manifestation of highly politicized Islamic beliefs and exegetical interpretations Of spiritual leaders. However, the main cause of Islamic terrorism is not the above-mentioned thesis, but rather the social conditions in the area and the Western interference in matters of domestic politics of some states, which has led to the emergence of nationalist feelings and repulsion, intolerance and fanaticism towards newcomers. Therefore, a clear distinction must be made between Islamic beliefs and Islamic fundamentalism, between which there is a deep abyss, both principles and action. Islam in any way does not legitimize attacks or bloodshed against the fundamentalist belief that legitimizes violence, and therefore any association between a Muslim