Intentions of both sides doubtful

Even if talks do begin early next month, there is considerable cynicism on both sides of the fence regarding the seriousness, with which the prospective interlocutors will take that process.

"Let's see if (the Palestinians) stop talking and begin doing," said Jonathan Fighel, a senior researcher at the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism, which is located just to the north of Tel Aviv.

"Are the Palestinians going to carry on talking, messing about and confusing everyone or are they ready to enter a serious framework? Right now the ball is mainly in their court," he added.

Likewise, Golan wondered just how well-intentioned the Netanyahu team will be. She believed they are likely to drag out the initial phase of talks for as long as possible. She compared Netanyahu's likely tactics to those of Yitzhak Shamir, who was Israel's premier in the 1980s. Shamir was known for his diplomatic procrastination.

Even if Israel was led by someone other than the hawkish Netanyahu, the Palestinians would be sceptical regarding the negotiations because of their disillusionment with past parleys " that never went anywhere. They were a sham," she said.

Israel is ready to enter the proximity talks during which it is prepared to make some "cosmetic concessions," suggested Fighel.

In his opinion, moving quickly from proximity or indirect talks to real negotiations is in Israel's best interest.

Until Israel moves towards final-status talks, the Israeli- Palestinian conflict will remain center stage. With the advancement of the peace process will come a strategic benefit to Israel, he argued.

"If it doesn't, there are sufficient negative forces prepared to take advantage of the conflict to advance enmity in the region - - not just among the Palestinian people, also the Iranians, the Syrians and Hezbollah," warned Fighel.