Skydancer, please take a few moments and read this. The Jewish Yeshuv, i.e. Israel, recognized the right of a Palestinian State in November 1947 when it accepted UN Resolution 181.
Someone (can't remember who) said that the Palestinians had never
internalised the idea of a Jewish state. No matter what they said in 1988, until they
accepted a Jewish state in their hearts, there would never be peace.
You can say the same about Israel and a Palestinian state. It's just as true that Jewish leaders in 1948 saw partition as a neccessary first step to a Jewish state in all of Palestine. And it's just as true that until now Israelis have not accepted a Palestinian state in their hearts.
The truth is, both sides still want it all. Hopefully, the bloodshed of the last few years has convinced both sides that they will have to settle for something less.
Neither the left nor the right saw settlement as immoral or illegal. Indeed, the original League of Nations Mandate to Britain in 1922 permitted Jewish settlement in the territories that Israel later captured in 1967. Don't think much of the League of Nations? Sorry, that was what there was in those days.
They might not have seen it as illegal, but it was, and the rest of the world saw it that way.
Using the Mandate as justification is a bit weak. The mandate expired in 1948 (47?), and anyway the mandate made clear: "nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine"
Sharon also chose Gaza and not the West Bank, I believe for several reasons, one being that Arafat and his Fatah were not as strongly supported in Gaza as in the WB. I see Sharon's choice of Gaza was a strategic move to weaken Arafat's influence. Hamas is not great, but they don't have total control either.
This is a major mistake, that Israel has been making for 20 years or more.
I remember seeing an interview with a senior Israeli politician or diplomat in the mid 80s, after the invasion of Lebanon. It was concerning releases of Palestinian and Islamic prisoners. The Israeli position was that the Islamic prisoners would be released early, and generally would recieve favourable treatment compared to the Palestinians, who he described as permament enemies of Israel.
It struck me as folly then, because the Palestinians had a rational dispute with Israel, which could be solved by rational means, the Islamic groups had a religious dispute, which could not be solved.
A few years later Israel was actively promoting Hamas in Gaza, in order to weaken the power of the PLO.
And when the current intifada broke out, it was the PA that Israel destroyed first, and Hamas was largely ignored in the early years.
Israel stands a chance of peace with the PLO, in the same way they have achieved peace with Egypt and Jordan. They have no chance of peace with Hamas.
Peace for Israel will not come by keeping the Palestinians from forming a stable state, it will come from the Palestinians forming a strong state that can control Hamas (and will need to to avoid another war with Israel).
