LAWRENCEVILLE, NJ -- The recent opening of an ancient tourist tunnel in the City of Jerusalem was more than just a final straw which led to the shattering of the three-year-old Middle East peace accords and may even have been strategically planned to incite the reaction it drew, according to a Rider University professor.

Dr. Jonathan Mendilow (left), professor of political science at the University, believes right-wing Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu knew the Palestinians were near a breaking point in their peace negotiations with the new right-wing government, and planned a provocation to reverse the blame on the PLO and its chairman, Yasser Arafat.

"This was a strategic plan implemented very successfully by the Israeli government geared to produce exactly what it did produce," said Mendilow, a former press officer for the City of Jerusalem and the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). "After the tunnel opened, the Arabs began to fire and throw stones, and Israel could say 'Look, they're threatening Jerusalem. It's not us -- they are the reason the (1993) Oslo Accord is strained.'"

The peace outlined in the Oslo Accord which was sealed with the memorable White House handshake between former prime minister Yitsak Rabin and Arafat has declined since Rabin's assassination and Netanyahu's rise to power in Israel. With Netanyahu's regime came a reversal of policy toward the Palestinians.

The basic premise of the peace process was a land-for-security deal. Israel would relinquish the territories under its control on the condition that the war against it would come to an end. The dire problems -- such as what to do with Jerusalem -- would be solved at a later time.

Jerusalem, however, was a problem that would not wait. Out of the 600,000 inhabitants of what the Jews' consider their eternal capitol, about 120,000 -- 20% of the population -- are Palestinian Muslims. They also consider Jerusalem their home, and their shrines within the city make it the third holiest place in the Islamic faith.

From late February through early March, a series of bombings in Jerusalem by Hamas, an Islamic fundamentalist terrorist group against making peace with Israel, shook the peace to its foundation. Syria, which feared the stability of an Israeli state which would leave it isolated as the only Arab republic in the region not to achieve peaceful relations with Israel, allowed the Hisbullah to begin shelling Israel proper. The combination of outside attacks and internal terrorism put a damper on the campaign of left-wing prime minister Shimon Peres, who was left clinging to a broken olive branch.

Enter Netanyahu and the right-wing government, which sold the public on its offer of peace and security, albeit at the cost of the Oslo Accord and negotiations to that point.

"Netanyahu wanted to continue the peace process, but to achieve a secure peace, where the other side gives what it is supposed to. With the bombings, obviously the security agreed upon was not there," said Mendilow. "His means of security were the aggregate the process by closing the dire questions which the Oslo agreement saved for last.

"One, the question of Jerusalem will be taken out of the last phase of negotiations and determined now -- it is eternally Jewish, period. Two, the question of settlements will not be negotiated in the final phase, but right now -- Israel will expand its settlements into army-civilian outposts, and there is nothing else to negotiate. Three, there will be no negotiating over the final status of the Palestinian entity -- it will never be a state, period.

"In a word, this is a government based on paradox, because it accepted the peace process on the condition that Israel would be secure, and defined security as the negation of the entire peace process."

This stance leaves the Palestinians in a position where they have recognized Israel and conceded its right to exist, but are worse off than ever. They have gained nothing from the now-defunct peace

process, and are looking for Arafat to deliver on what was promised for their concessions.

Mendilow says this volatile situation, along with Netanyahu's past experience in government, make it almost impossible for him to not be fully aware of the consequences of opening the controversial tunnel. As it turned out, Netanyahu may have simply been waiting for the perfect time -- right down to the nighttime hour -- to toss the match into the furnace.

"Netanyahu was a deputy prime minister in 1988 when the Israeli government tried to open that tunnel and had to close it because of Palestinian unrest," he said. "He knew well -- extremely well -- that this was a tinderbox. He knew that one side opening the tunnel so close to the Harim Sharif without negotiating with the other is not only contrary to the Oslo agreement, but would be viewed by the other side as an assertion of sovereignty over Jerusalem.

"The Palestinians were cornered into a position where they were forced to react, but at their weakest place and at the worst time for them -- shortly before an American election. Netanyahu couldn't time this too close to the election because his motives would be very clear, but he couldn't time it too soon before whereas the Americans could twist the Israeli arm to back off. He wanted to create a situation related to Jerusalem because of its nationalistic backing and historical significance where the Palestinians would be caught red-handed in a lie claiming the tunnel undermines their holy places when it can be proven it is nowhere near them."

Although both sides have tried to patch up their recent differences at a White House summit, Mendilow sees a perpetuation of the status quo for at least the next four years, until the next Israeli elections. Even with the US looming as a police force to prevent the Middle East from plunging into a situation worse than that which preceded 1993, the fate will rest with how far Netanyahu is willing to bend and how desperate Arafat is accept concessions.

"Netanyahu has the least to lose," he said. "What he wants is to avoid collapse into a civil war. He is ready for the Palestinians to have a limited autonomy in Gaza, as long as Jews will be able to settle along the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and the Palestinians do not have a claim to be a state. He will try to give something which is just enough for Arafat to go home and not be discredited.

"In a way, the Palestinians can blame Arafat as well. Hamas practiced blowing up busses in the streets of Gaza and boasted about it, and Arafat did nothing to stop it, let alone dismantle the infrastructure of Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank cities which were under his control. This allowed Hamas to engage in the state of bombings which helped bring Netanyahu to control. Arafat created the pit in which he fell. The end result is that in the eyes of his own constituency, who's to blame is not the question -- they've got nothing, and it's getting worse today."