This conflict, now on both sides, is moral and not strategic, and likely borne out by the fact that neither side has likely planned/thought through the consequences of their actions to a (strategically) reasoned conclusion. We have 4 sets of directly relevant findings:

1 We have an experiment with Israelis to show that if people view violence as morally mandated, they will support it even if all the hostages die.

2. We have another experiment with  Palestinians showing that extreme violence (e.g., suicide attacks) is met with joy when in the service of a perceived (violated) sacred value.

3. We have interviews with Israeli and Hamas leaders (including Netanyahu and the 3 major Hamas political leaders still operating today, Haniyeh, Meshaal, Marzouk) showing that only recognition of the moral imperative (sacred value) of the other side would lead to even the possibility of dialogue involving these players.

4. The Haram al-Sharif (temple mount) and Al Aqsa has been the moral focus of almost every major outburst of generalized Palestinian violence since 1919, whatever other major and proximate causes may be involved incl 1922, 1936-7 Arab Revolt (thawra), 1947-8 (naqba), 1967, Intifadas 1 &2, Gaza now).