The Economist, a publication which I respect far more than the New York Times, now weighs in with it's advice to the world. Unfortunately, it's just as vapid as that of the Times. Below is their ending statement. Please, Economist, give us some idea of what you recommend. Overall, the piece suggests that Israel must take action to solve the crisis. What must the terrorist Hamas do? How about stopping the rockets and recognize Israel's right to exist.
Until Hamas and Hezbollah renounce that claim and stop arming themselves for a fight, fighting will continue and Israel will and should defend itself with the means it sees fit to choose.
I suppose the Economist would also say of Al Qaeda "some way must be found to change its mind." Terrorists do not change their minds. That is not their desire or aim. Thus, no amount of talk will convince them otherwise. Only death and lack of resources may change their actions, but not their beliefs as long as these groups receive the tacit and substantive support of Islamic countries who also hate Israel.
"and little progress is possible so long as half of Palestine’s people support an organisation that can still not bring itself to renounce armed struggle or recognise Israel’s right to exist. Since Hamas is not going to disappear, some way must be found to change its mind. Bombs alone will never do that."