Was it Abbas' refusal to push the Goldstone report that makes him Israel's friend? Or was it his creation of armed thugs that attack peaceful demonstrations against the occupation? Or was it his attempted coup against the elected government of Hamas that makes Israelis giddy?

Either way, despite all everything he's done for Israel, he has got nothing to show for it. He recognizes Israel, clamps down on dissent, but can't even get a settlement concession out of Netanyahu.

Gotta love it.

It depends on what you mean by peace. Abbas and Bibi's vision of a Palestinians state completely dependent and submissive to Israel, vis a vis it's border, water, and land rights is simply untenable and unjust.

The reality is that it's Israel that needs a two state solution more than the Palestinians, they are the ones who care about demographics and ethnic hegenomy. And yet, the continued settlement expansion and the demolitions of Arab houses pretty much ensures that a two state solution will never come about. Which really leaves two options for Israel in the near future: either the complete ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian population or a one state solution. Palestinians recognize this, heck even Israelis like Olmert recognize it. Abbas is a relic of the failed Olso process, one which is now dead.

We should all be cheering the end of Mahmoud Abbas. Was he good for Israel? Sure, he was a good lackey, no one would deny that. But was he good for peace and was he able to deliver a single concession from Israel? 

Nada.

I do have to wonder, Dan, why you titled this as "Israel's best hope", as if Palestinian concerns and aspirations aren't even a consideration for you. I honestly was expecting this post to be satirical when I opened it, just kept waiting for the punchline. I'm simply baffled by the way you choose to frame this issue.

Dan, there was a time not too long ago when I had a pretty similar position as yours. That was a time before the war against Gaza, before the blockade, before the wall.I have finally realized that Israel is a colonial entity engaged in a vicious war against a largely defenseless population, and I realize now that there is no way way to sugarcoat that, no words to hide the reality on the ground.

I personally believe that people such as yourself, who apparently do care about the Palestinians, need to be start recognizing that we are talking about a group who is quite literally being ethnically cleansed. What peace process is going to stop this? It really doesn't matter whether petulant Bibi will walk away from the negotiations, screw him. There should be no negotiations regarding the bulldozing and explusion of a people from their land. This shouldn't even be up for discussion. Unfortunately, Israel is so deluded in itself, so caught up in it's insecurity, that only firm American pressure could possibly give it pause. But, like most things, Obama has proven rather spineless in this.

So what would I recommend for the US State Dept? Hamas has already said that they are willing to have a long term cease-fire with Israel if it withdrew to it's pre-1967 borders, and every Arab and Muslim state in the world said that they would have formal peace with Israel if it withdrew. The only thing in the way of this whole thing is Israel. There should be no negotiation regarding the settlements or the areas of the wall that are dividing Palestinian villages, those should be out without discussion. Everything else from refugees issues to Jeruselum should be negotiated later. 

Of course this will never happen, Congress is probably more pro-Israel than the Knesset, so that pretty much leaves the only viable alternative as a one-state solution.

The bottomline, is that  bloggers like yourself need to stop hyping up the peace process, there will be no process while a people are systematically removed from their land. Abbas is a moron, an absolute failure who did everything the Israelis wanted and got nothing in return. True peace can only happen when those in power  relent.

I wouldn't agree with a great deal of what Nadir Q says, but he does make an important point.

Focusing too much on the role of Abbas implies that the success of the peace process depends on having the right leadership in Palestine -- which it does. But it also depends on having the right leadership in Israel.

Forgetting about intra-Palestinian politics for the moment, I think it's pretty clear that there won't be any progress as long as Yisrael Beitenu forms part of the ruling coalition in Israel.

If Obama doesn't want to spend political capital unnecessarily, I think the right way for him to approach the Israeli-Palestinian peace process is by giving it a very low priority for the time being. Nothing positive is going to happen as long as Netanyahu's government is in power, regardless of who leads the Palestinian Authority. If Obama doesn't recognize this, he's in danger of setting up the perception a few years down the road that the US has somehow "failed" to achieve peace in the Middle East.

Sometimes the smartest approach is not to try.