Israel has had plenty of votes since then to elect another Prime Minister who would push for peace.
Why is this considered a success of one assassin instead of a failure of a broad democratic electorate to push for peaceful resolution?
In fact, the protests against Netenyahu and young people refusing to serve the IDF shows that Israel was trying to push for peace internally.
Then Hamas decided to attack a music festival of teenagers and young adults who want a free palestine. They spent over a year planning this operation all to kill a bunch of Israeli's who didn't exactly disagree with their cause.
If Hamas hadn't attacked, Bibi might already be in prison. You know, I'm not convinced Hamas wants peace any more than Bibi does.
multiple rounds of negotiations happened after rabin death. camp david in 2000 for example which resulted in second intifada. taba. etc. negotiations continued till 2013 or so.
even Netanyahu, which was elected after Rabin death signed follow up agreements to Oslo as result of which Israel handed over Hebron and additional areas in west bank to PA.
It wasn't failure of "broad democratic electorate to push for peaceful resolution" but violence of second intifada and non-compliance of PA with oslo accords from very beginning: http://israelvisit.co.il/BehindTheNews/WhitePaper.htm
You’ll see the one you posted was unrepresentative of what was actually on the table and what the Israeli’s would agree too wouldn’t deliver a viable state and it was divided up by Israeli roads and other security apparatus
I’m not claiming it was a good deal. I’m claiming that since he walked away from the deal Israel has decided that it will slowly consume all of the West Bank and make living there and in Gaza a hell for Palestinians. It’s a slow genocide. Though now in Gaza it’s been sped up.