I think that it might be a challenging element to make the case that Israel is more to blame. It can be done, but it will be difficult because there is so much blame to go to both sides. A case can be made that the consistent rejection of the "two- state solution" might be one element where blame can be issued. The fact that the land in question concerns Arabs who had been living there for generations in an area seen as predominantly Arab, the two state solution is a diplomatic and political move that might suggest some room for compromise between both. Along these lines, Israel's refusal to open diplomatic channels with the ruling Palestinian leadership which was democratically elected is another element where blame might be able to be parceled out to Israel. Perhaps, another argument could be the expansion of borders and the building of settlements on lands that have been where Arabs have lived for so long would be another element that can be seen as an area of blame for Israel. The Palestinian areas are so economically challenged and so devoid of jobs for Arab youth, I think that it might be in Israel's interest to develop economic opportunities where greater cooperation can be evident between both nations, and perhaps some blame can be seen on Israel's part in refusing to pursue this option. As I said, this is not going to be easy, but in terms of an academic exercise, it can be seen as doable.