Whenever the superpowers decide on an international conference, the Palestinians are caught in a dilemma: they can't afford not to go, but they are worried about what could happen if they do go. The shadow of Arafat's participation in Camp David II hovers very profoundly; there is a feeling that, although the American president promised not to point fingers if the conference failed, he then did exactly that in an unjustifiable fashion.

The Palestinians’ power lies in the power to say no. They may not be able to impose what they want, but they can reject a peace plan or treaty that they feel does not meet their minimum national requirements. Rejection, however, has a steep cost because it would anger both the American hosts and, of course, the Israelis, who still have so many levers controlling Palestinian lives. Just two weeks ago, the chief Palestinian negotiator Ahmad Qurei got a feel for one of these levers when he was held up at a checkpoint while on his way to meet his Israeli counterparts.

Palestinians want and yearn for peace, but the most important accomplishment they can make is to get the Israelis to suspend their settlement activities. Ending the hemorrhage of Palestinian lands is the Palestinian’s biggest demand; it has been the chief source of criticism of the Oslo process, which failed to gain a settlement freeze in the hope that it wouldn't matter since in five years there would be a Palestinian state. The five years have become thirteen and the number of settlers in the Palestinian territories has doubled. In addition, we have also been cursed by an illegal (according to the international court at the Hague) wall that cuts deep into Palestinian lands and which separates the entire city of east Jerusalem from its natural place in Palestine.