I was listening to the latest blather about the “Quartet Roadmap” and the “cycle of violence” on NPR this morning. The commentator went on about whether Hamas would accept a cease fire, whether the PA Prime Minister could enforce no attacks on Israel from Gaze, etc. What I found distinctily missing was any concept of consequences. The key question for Israel is, to me, obvious: if Israel accepts a cease fire in Gaza, what are the consequences if it is broken by Hamas? It seems to be a key problem in this process that when such an agreement is broken, there are no consequences, the negotiations just start over. One actually wonders why Hamas doesn't agree to a cease fire and then ignore it. Is it because Hamas feels no need to even bother with such petty subterfuge?

It reminds me most of the Tarantula Wasp. To reproduce this wasp stings a tarantula, paralyzing it, then the wasp drags the tarantula to just outside the tarantula's burrow, pops inside to check out the burrow, then goes back and drags the tarantula in so that it can serve as a food source for larva. What's similar here is that if, while the wasp is in the burrow, you move that tarantula back a ways, the wasp will reset to the “drag the tarantula near the burrow” step in the process. The wasp will drag the tarantula over to just outside the burrow and check out the burrow again. One can repeat this process indefinitely. Moreover, the wasp will never sting you for doing this. This is because it's not smart enough to make the connection between you moving the tarantula and its endless labors. What does this say about the Middle East peace negotiators?