This article is distributed by Agence Global and is republished with permission.

A Palestinian schoolgirl walks near the ruins of a mosque in the southern Gaza Strip town of Rafah that was destroyed during Israel's 22-day offensive. (Wissam Nassar, Maan Images)

Does anyone remember 2002? Israeli-Palestinian violence spiraled out of control, culminating in the Israeli invasion and reoccupation of Palestinian cities in the West Bank. There was terrible loss of life and injury (far higher among Palestinians than Israelis), vast destruction of Palestinian homes and infrastructure, and investigation of war crimes.

The point is not to compare today's horrors in Gaza with older horrors, but to recall that those were the years when it was "All About Arafat." From the breakdown of negotiations at Camp David in 2000 until Yasser Arafat's death in 2004, there was an international "consensus" that there could be no movement toward peace until Arafat no longer led the Palestinian people.

Never mind that Arafat signed a dozen agreements with Israel that put most Palestinian rights on the back burner in exchange for a two-state solution. Never mind that Arafat jumped through hoops to change the Palestinian Charter. Never mind that Israeli-Palestinian negotiations in fact continued after Camp David and made very good progress at Taba in January 2001.

Ariel Sharon and George W. Bush refused to deal with Arafat after they came to power in 2001. By making it "All About Arafat," they froze the peace process. Meanwhile, Israel's relentless colonization of the West Bank continued.

With the election of Mahmoud Abbas as Palestinian Authority president in January 2005, the world had its wish: There was no more Arafat at the helm. And, by the way, there was not yet any Hamas. Yet for a whole year, Sharon refused to work with Abbas. Sharon withdrew unilaterally from Gaza in August 2005, weakening Abbas' PA and setting the stage for the Hamas electoral win of January 2006.

Since then, it has been "All About Hamas." The international community imposed sanctions and Israel tightened its siege on Gaza.

	Related Stories
	Video: Time running out for a two-state solution Memories of Gaza Henry Siegman: Israel's lies Alarm spreads of use of lethal new weapons Special coverage: Crisis in Gaza

Never mind that Hamas leaders repeatedly said they wanted a two-state solution. And never mind that Hamas upheld several ceasefires with Israel. Or that, writing about the June 2008 ceasefire, the Israeli Intelligence and Terrorism Information Centre stated, "Hamas did not take part in any rocket fire and sometimes prevented other organisations from attacking." Or that the ceasefire only broke down after Israel killed six Palestinians in an incursion in Gaza on November 4.

And never mind that in Israel's assault on Gaza the ratio of the dead was 100 Palestinians to 1 Israeli, that homes and civilian infrastructure became rubble, and that international human rights organizations are calling for investigation of war crimes.

The leaders of Europe and America still maintain it is "All About Hamas." They joined Israel to identify the most pressing issue of the day as preventing arms smuggling to Hamas.

It is long past time to refocus: "All About Hamas" and "All About Arafat" are what are known as red herrings. Irrespective of whether the Palestinian people have good or bad leaders or none, there are some basic principles of international law that must be applied to this conflict.

The most basic one is this: The Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories that began in 1967 is illegal under international law and must end. The Palestine Liberation Organization made one of its greatest blunders when it linked an end to occupation to negotiations about the peace process. It is time to break that link.

Under international law, occupation of territory is seen as something that happens during wartime, but it is defined as a temporary state of affairs governed by conventions that, among other things, forbid changes to the character or the occupied territories and moving any of the occupier's people to the occupied territories.

Israel should begin removing its soldiers and settlers from the West Bank and East Jerusalem and hand over control to international bodies. This must happen separately from the issue of Palestinian leadership and the final settlement of the conflict.

Negotiations could certainly continue on how to achieve Palestinian rights and Israeli-Arab peace, but this must not impede the withdrawal of Israeli soldiers and settlers.

As for Israel's occupation-through-siege of Gaza, it too must end and crossings fully reopened under international control to establish the freedom of movement of people and goods.

Israel is a state member of the UN and a signatory to the conventions governing the rules of war. Its leaders must be held accountable to them. Those with long memories in the Middle East - the majority - can tell of unequal battles and war crimes from 1948 to the present. Except for a slap on the wrist given then-Defense Minister Ariel Sharon - after the massacre of Palestinians in the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila in 1982 - Israel's leaders have never been held accountable. And so the pattern repeats itself.

Europe and the United States are also signatories to conventions that require them to act to uphold international law. They must refocus on the principles of these laws to bring justice, peace and security to the Middle East. Otherwise they, too, are complicit in Israel's international lawlessness.

Nadia Hijab is a Senior Fellow at the Institute for Palestine Studies in Washington D.C.