Terry, I would agree with the term "tenuous," but disagree that is it peace, but only a temporary truce with no valid predictions IMHO as to whether there is within this truce a long term solution to what is even a far more long term problem. The question remains and will continue to whether either side, Hamas, any group who represents Palestinians, or the current Israeli government, is willing to take the steps required to end the violence that has continued since the partition, now over 60 years ago.
Over that historical period, attempts have been made to work out a two state solution, sometimes appearing to reach a state of relative success, but in the end one side or another, has in a variety of ways chosen violence, rather than peace. Neither is guilt free and neither is totally complicit. Were it not for very serious implications, particularly,
related to the acquisition of Israel of the ability to use their atomic weaponry to create a new type of holocaust in the Middle East, my first inclination would be to suggest a pox on all and move on with avoiding the whole topic.
I believe my personal basis for a greater concern related to atomic war is the result of my experiences living through the long "cold war" when the threat was brought home more because of my residence on U.S. military installations with the experience of regularly being aware of the take off of the aircraft designed for the purpose of delivering atomic weaponry and never knowing if it was merely a drill or if in the end it signaled the beginning of an world wide atomic war. That fear remains and with recent events has become more urgent which effects my opinions, perhaps a factor those of latter generations have little understanding of?
But rather than continue with the disagreements on this forum, as I have done in the past and may choose to continue to do in the future, my response is to simply share an essay that for me makes valid points. One singular opinion from an individual, a computer scientist, not a governmental advocate for either side in this long and possibly continued violent conflict.
Currently, I would hope since the cease fire brokered by Egypt, rather than the U.S., as I believe most have been previously, that nation will take relevant steps to attempt to enforce the agreement. While the Egyptians share a peace treaty with Israel, I suspect there is little to be accomplished by any action related to any Israeli choices, but perhaps there can be effort made to influence Hamas, if not Fatah nor the various independent militant groups who might choose to take steps against any realistic efforts, made by the parties to the agreement.
So sharing this writing which may not sit well with those who have pre-determined the results of the current circumstances, I will add this for those who might choose to read and give this opinion any form of serious consideration and then bow out of further discussion on this thread and the one where you requested some "peace" among forum members out of mutual respect I share with you. Cass
Why Israel Won't Accept a Two-State Solution
by Bernard Chazelle
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is often narrated as a morality play, where offers are generous, lessons are taught, consciousness is seared, terrorism is rewarded, etc. Let's quit the blame game and focus, instead, on what's feasible and what's not. For starters, one can safely notch the right-wing fantasy of a Jordanian absorption of Palestine in the "Dream on, settlers" column. Ethnic cleansing is passé.
What about a one-state solution? Within 10 years, Jews will be a clear minority in the population west of the Jordan, so a democratic unitary state (eg, modeled on South Africa) would mean the end of Israel as a Jewish state, an outcome not everyone would greet with cartwheels. Though rarely discussed, a federal alternative could be envisaged. Besides the sticky issue of land division, however, the physical laws of politics work against it. Absent a modicum of trust and a desire to share a common fate, centrifugal forces might prove too powerful to forestall an eventual breakup. If Belgium, a model of harmony by Mideast standards, can barely pull it off, what chance does a (con)federal "Isratine" have? Don't expect a democratic binational state any time soon.
The two-state solution has its appeal. It would satisfy a majority of Palestinians and confer upon Israel the statehood legitimacy that it craves. It would bring the Jewish state peace with the Arab world along the lines of the 2002 Saudi Initiative, as well as a recognized right of self-defense against Palestinian cross-border attacks. Unfortunately, 40 years of history have gamed the system against the two-state solution. Once the only realistic road to peace, it is now a challenge likely beyond Israel's ability. This leaves the region with two options: Apartheid or war. Barring a miracle, it will get both. So let's talk about the miracle.
The complete essay by Chazelle is available on the link.
http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~chazelle/politics/wb08-essay.html 
