Prof. Gerald M. Steinberg directs the Program on Conflict Management at Bar Ilan University in Israel. He is on the Board of Directors for Scholars for Peace in the Middle East spme.org

The broad optimism over recent improvements in Israeli-Palestinian relations, including the deployment of Palestinian troops to prevent terror attacks, and the Israeli responses in kind,obscures a number of major obstacles.

One of the most significant and predictable is the demand for the mass release of Palestinian prisoners primarily terrorists and their accomplices. During the Oslo era, each stage of negotiations was accompanied by an amnesty for terrorists (who even signed statements forswearing violence and endorsing peace). And each time, cease-fire declarations proved to be facades for rearming the terror groups, allowing them to prepare for the next and more deadly wave of attacks, with the ex-prisoners directing more Palestinian suicide bombers.

After 1996, when Prime Minister Netanyahu demanded an end to this “revolving door”, Palestinian leaders organized mass riots, which included attacks on Israeli soldiers, and escalating violence. This raised the emotions further, leading to full scale confrontations and numerous deaths. For Arafat and the leaders of Hamas, who thrived on such violence,demands for mass release of Palestinian prisoners were a direct route to bloodshed and escalation.

With this background, another round of conflict over demand for the release of terrorists was inevitable. When Marwan Bargouti, the popular al Fatah leader from Ramallah withdrew his candidacy in the Palestinian elections, Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) was bound to take up this cause.

Now, as in the past, the Palestinian claim is based on the general practice of peace negotiations after bitter wars, and the reconciliation process includes the exchange of prisoners on both sides. But from the Israeli perspective, these terrorists were not part of a defeated army that fought according to the rules of the Geneva Conventions instead, they violated all rules of civilized behavior. And, as was seen during the Oslo process, the violence kept going, with the participation of the newly released ex-prisoners. After over 1000 murders by suicide and other attacks, rather than a mass release of these terrorists, some Israelis argue that they should be tried for crimes against humanity and violations of basic human rights.

During the Arafat era, the initial demands were followed by violent mass demonstrations led by the families of the prisoners. Angry demonstrators sought out confrontations with Israeli soldiers, leading to attacks,responses, and, inevitably to casualties on both sides. The next day, Palestinian media whipped up emotions further, the demonstrations became more violent, and this led to more deaths, funerals, and vows of revenge. This was a simple and proven recipe for escalating the conflict.

If this scenario is repeated now, the fragile progress that has been made since Arafat’s departure will be quickly destroyed. A peaceful resolution of the disagreement over this issue must be found quickly, or two months of relative cooperation will disintegrate immediately.