America seems to have a fascination with the underdog--at least when the underdog isn't urinating on its own soil. So when the Palestinians erupted in bullets and stones against the authority of the State of Israel this week in outrage over the completion of a tourist tunnel, they garnered much sympathy from the American press and pundits. (The fretting of the State Department was but its manifest agony at the breakdown of an imperialist grand plan.)

The violence which rolled through the West Bank and the Gaza Strip has been squarely pinned on Israelis, who are portrayed as Goliaths, as if the uproarious Palestinians were righteous Davids. In particular, the new Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been cited as the instigator of crisis. He is condemned for being disinterested in the "peace" process; yet he is harangued for his resolve to secure a peaceful existence for the Israeli people in their own state.

The grievances of the Palestinians with regard to the tunnel should not have been aired through violence. Like cultural minorities in other nations, Palestinians should attempt to resolve disputes within the confines of constructive dialogue. Israel has the greatest interest in peace and would rejoice in the harmonious co-existence of the two peoples. But how can there be a legitimate peace when the minority faction refuses to adhere to law and abstains from the Israeli social contract?