/ BARAK / 90 “because for him, Jerusalem was sacred from a strictly national and historic point of view.” It was for me as well. In fact, I think its religious significance probably resonated more strongly. Still, the major change from the summit was that even those Israelis who found a compromise on Jerusalem unacceptable recognized that, if they did want to negotiate a definitive end to the conflict, talking about it was unavoidable. At least for now, however, there wasn’t going to be a peace deal. As our El Al 707 descended over the Mediterranean for our approach back to Ben-Gurion Airport, I faced the more immediate issue of ensuring my government survived. This was partly in case, against all odds, Arafat showed a readiness to revive the search for peace — but also because of the real prospect he would choose violence instead. * * * Since the Knesset was about to go into recess until late October, I would have a three-month window to reshape and stabilize my coalition — but only if we could weather a no-confidence motion introduced by Arik Sharon after Camp David. We did weather it, barely. Arik needed a majority of the Knesset’s 120 seats to bring down the government. The vote ended in a 50-50 tie. The other 20 MKs abstained, or didn’t show up. This was not because of any enthusiasm for my efforts to get an agreement at Camp David, but because of a /ack of enthusiasm for an early election in which they feared losing seats. Still, that did allow me to focus on the challenge of the inevitably altered situation with Arafat after the summit’s collapse. My main concern was the possibility of violence. Even before returning home, I’d phoned Shaul Mofaz and Avi Dichter, the former Sayeret Matkal officer who was now head of the Shin Bet. “Let’s hope the violence doesn’t come,” I told them. “But if it does, make sure we are ready.” Though there was no sign of violence in the weeks immediately after the summit, there was equally little sign of diplomatic engagement