If someone didn't go to the table, the situation in the Middle East might be even worse than it is now.

Because "A" did something bad, we should excuse "B"?

I recall speculation of this sort when he died. Perhaps this is news again because what was once speculation is now fact.

Arafat was a product of circumstances. If he hadn't done what he did, someone else would have. There is no way a large body of long entrenched landholders such as the Arabs living in the area of Palestine/Judea would have quietly gone away upon being bought out from murky absentee landlords, anywhere else that is. I am generally more sympathetic to Jews than Pals but it is clear that the Pals have a legitimate complaint. The 'Jewish problem' in Europe was solved on their backs.

Faulty logic. B responded to the provocation of A, and then B was punished while A was rewarded.