News reports from Jerusalem this week were aflutter with a half-hearted offer from Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to the Palestinian Authority to extend a [Jewish] building ban in West Bank Jewish communities. Mr. Netanyahu asked his quasi-partners in these tortuous talks to “say unequivocally to its people that it recognizes Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people.”

That was met by a patently offensive response by P.A. President Mahmoud Abbas. “If we showed flexibility on these [core] issues the peace agreement would have been signed a long time ago,” he said.

Israel, he added, must agree upfront to create a Palestinian state on all West Bank territory captured in the stunning 1967 Six Day War. (Click here: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/abbas-we-ll-never-sign-deal-demanding-recognition-of-israel-as-jewish-state-1.319329 .)

In other words, give us what we want before we talk and then we can negotiate on more. (And hey, I’m for a Palestinian state and look how angry this makes me!)

And here is the nexus of the problem: Despite actual progress since August, both sides are again negotiating on how to negotiate. That is, they cannot even agree to disagree and try to work it out face-to-face.

Let’s start with Israel. Mr. Netanyahu demands that the Palestinians embrace Zionism. Doing so might help him with the increasingly reluctant Israeli middle voter – those willing to compromise but with no faith in the Palestinians, which is quite understandable seeing as how a 2005 withdraw from Gaza was met with about 8,000 rockets, the violent 2007 takeover of Gaza by Hamas and the 2010 renaming of a West Bank square for terrorists.

But come on Mr. Netanyahu, Mr. Abbas was not going to accept this. In fact, he cannot in part because he has failed to cultivate a “peace camp” within the Palestinian community (which I believe cannot be achieved without a massive emphasis on people-to-people projects such as school field trips and visiting one another’s religious festivals – yes, I’m a dreamer, but such is the lot of those who love Jewish history). That’s just reality.

Now Mr. Abbas needed a response along these lines: “We don’t expect you to define us so we’re not going to do it for you. We know we have to compromise and you know it, too. So let’s get back to talking and ignore theatrics. As for extending your settlement freeze, start by taking down the more than 100 illegal, tiny settlement outposts that you, Olmert and Sharon said should be dismantled. That would show us that democracy is actually respected in Israel, which we watch closely.”

I add: Only people who smoke stuff with the Bedouins 24-hours a day think that Israel is not a Jewish state. (Surely it’s not a Buddhist one.) The Palestinians (and Israeli Arabs) know this most of all. And yes, there is inherent tension in the words “Jewish democracy.” But tension brings the opportunity for creativity, not a rejection of what is.

And what could Mr. Netanyahu have said? Perhaps this: “For the 10-month unilateral settlement freeze, which truly put me out on a limb with my base, the Palestinians did nothing but complain. Only toward the end did they agree to talk. Now they’re not getting their way and are upset. Let’s do this: We’ll keep settlement growth to a minimum, meaning natural growth that was already in the planning stages. And we’ll dismantle those illegal outposts because we’re a society of law, including jailing those who resist. And we’ll ask the Palestinians to have their text book passages on Israel analyzed by outside experts since we’re willing to do the same about how we teach about them. This is because their society must deal with incitement. We’ve repeatedly said we’ll live with a Palestinian state side-by-side. When it comes to ultimate borders, isn’t that what these negotiations are about?”