The Israeli peace movement had a major relaunch last week. What, you didn’t hear about it? It was a big deal. Slick media campaign led by Haaretz; a couple of thousand delegates in a Tel Aviv hotel; cabinet ministers on the programme; even a message from Barack Obama. I am not making this up. It really did happen.

You may have missed it in the rapid escalation between Israel and armed groups in the Gaza Strip. In fact the conference delegates themselves were sent fleeing for cover as Hamas targeted Tel Aviv for with an unprecedented barrage of rockets.

The peace camp was under fire – literally. There could be no better symbol of the challenges it faces in making its case.

It is nearly 10 years since Israel unilaterally withdrew its forces and settlements from the Gaza Strip. Hamas took over within a year and the threat posed by armed extremists there to Israel’s security continues to grow.

This latest escalation highlights not only the threat posed by Hamas, but by even more extreme Islamist groups. Palestinian Islamic Jihad and others somewhat dragged Hamas into this round, likely thrilled by the site of ISIL charging through Iraq.

The central argument of the Israeli peace camp, that ending the occupation – and Israel’s rule over two and half million Palestinians – is necessary for Israel’s future as a Jewish and democratic state, is correct. The problem is that those who argue that territory evacuated by Israel becomes a base for terrorists to attack are also correct. Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has explicitly acknowledged both sides of the dilemma: ‘We don’t want a binational state, and we don’t want a Palestinian-Iranian state next door.’

Read the article in full at Progress.