Benyamin Netanyahu is not Yitzchak Shamir (Likud PM from 1983-84 and 1986-92). Netanyahu has accepted the two-state solution in the form of a demilitarized Palestinian State existing peacefully alongside Israel. Shamir said "No" to all Bush Sr. Administration suggestions and peace initiatives and made it clear he would never accept a Palestinian State of any sort. Although secular, Shamir was fully committed to the Greater Land of Israel and even voted against the Camp David Peace Accord with Egypt and the Framework for Peace in the Middle East in 1979.

The great Revisionist ideologue and spiritual father of the Likud Zev Jabotinsky spoke of "willing" and "unwilling agreement" whereby one could force an adversary to accept his terms either through agreement or force. He understood this to be the way nations functioned and that the Jewish national entity must play the same game if it wanted a state to ensure its survival. But as a small and weak people, he understood the Jews needed a patron and in the 1920s and 30s he looked to Great Britain to fulfill that role and was severely disappointed.

The same principle works in reverse. Netanyahu broke with the original Revisionist ideal of the Greater Land of Israel when faced with an American patron dictating the need for a Palestinian State as part of an overall policy of "conflict resolution" serving Washington's interests in the Middle East. Israel's position is getting weaker, especially on the demographic front. During Shamir's reign 100,000s of Soviet Jews made aliyah, today virtually no one considers it, rather Israelis are "relocating" abroad. Only a tiny fraction of Western Jewry has any interest in moving to the Jewish State and most return after five years. Each year the proportion of the Arab population from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River grows larger in relation to the Jewish percentage. Jews are not the majority anymore, but rather the plurality when calculating in the non-Jewish, non-Arab Eastern Europeans who arrived with Russian immigration during the 1990s.

Netanyahu who represents the Likud as much as anyone had no choice, but as a loyal Revisionist he battled until he realized his agreement to a Palestinian State could be forced on his government with increased damages to be suffered by the Jewish State. Not expecting Messianic intervention on his behalf he has begun making the best deal possible with the Palestinians through the Obama Administration.

Others who supported in theory the "Greater Land of Israel" understanding, whether they be Labor or Likud came to such conclusions previously including Yigal Allon, Shimon Peres, Moshe Dayan, former PM Ariel Sharon, former PM Ehud Olmert and Kadima Chairwoman Tsipi Livni. PM Menachem Begin agreed to Palestinian Autonomy in 1979 although no Palestinian sovereignty. During his first administration Netanyahu himself made concessions to limited Palestinian sovereignty in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) when signing the Wye Accords (Oslo III if you like) in 1998 and several times voted for the Gaza and Northern Samaria Disengagement before deciding against the move when he left the Sharon government in 2005. As a result he led what was left of the Likud and was crushed by Sharon's break off Kadima faction in elections half a year later. Netanyahu is following a natural progression, first of others and then of his own.

With 69 MKs supporting him the PM has no coalition worries. Faction partners have no interest in collapsing a government less than three months in power. Furthermore even should the Jewish Home (3 seats), United Torah Judaism (6) and Shas (11) leave the government they could be easily replaced by Tsipi Livni's opposition Kadima with 28 mandates. Add to that the five Labor rebels whose faction is in the government they refuse to support. But rest assured neither UTJ nor Shas will leave, they have far too much at stake in yeshiva funding, ultra-orthodox education, child allowances, housing subsidies and draft deferments. Several years ago Shas rebelled against Ariel Sharon's government and were thrown out. The financial consequences were so grave it is said that spiritual leader Rabbi Ovadia Yosef has determined never to pursue such a policy again. There could be a rebellion in the Likud but the faction's heavyweight right wingers Benny Begin and Moshe Ya'alon were appraised of the speech beforehand, disagreed with the Palestinian State declaration but are not expected to revolt. So who remains - a few back benchers trying to make a name for themselves?

And the Palestinians? Saab Erekat condemned the speech explaining they needed to know final borders, status of Jerusalem and that Netanyahu must acquiesce to everything former PM Ehud Olmert and his then foreign minister Livni agreed to. Yet they know that Netanyahu made the ideological compromise of his life and that he represents a dyed in the wool Revisionist/Likud loyalist.

With reality stacked against him Netanyahu read the international, economic and internal political map and came to the conclusion there is no choice. The Americans are supportive and consider it "an important step forward" even if their demand to halt all "natural population growth" in the settlements was rejected. If the Palestinian Authority truly wants peace they must enter negotiations, obviously presenting their perspectives, conditions and perspectives. Should the Palestinians remain negatively inclined, Pres. Obama can apply the same pressures he used on Israel.

And finally, there are those who criticize the speech as being for "Israeli ears". Let's hope so. When a prime minister announces a major foreign policy shift one would think he should be addressing his own population first and only afterwards everyone else.