It is now time for sober diplomacy on all fronts. The three-week Israeli blitzkrieg that ravaged Gaza has claimed many victims, and they were not all hapless Palestinian refugees trapped in the overcrowded Strip. The immediate efforts should focus on aiding the survivors of the Israeli assault. Tens of thousands of Gazans have been left homeless, thousands are still recovering in hospitals and the humanitarian conditions remain critical.

But in addition to punishing mainly a civilian population, Israel’s assault has created new geopolitical realities. One can talk of the region in terms of pre- and post-Gaza war. While Israelis are still trying to figure out the strategic and political gains that their leadership had reaped from this war, one can single out a few prominent casualties.

Whether it was Israel’s intention or not, the war, initially waged to destroy, replace or weaken Hamas, has dealt an almost lethal blow to the two-state solution, which has been the center of US-sponsored negotiations between the PNA and Israel for years. The Israeli attack has failed to loosen Hamas’ stranglehold on the Strip. In fact some would say, including many Israelis and Palestinians, the war has only tightened the Islamist movement’s grip over the future of Gaza and its people.

The Palestinian political front is more divided than ever, the PNA’s leader, Mahmoud Abbas, is less credible today than he was a month ago, and the moderate Arab camp, which has been promoting peace with Israel, is silent and traumatized.

That is not to say that Hamas’ political leadership is doing much better. In the wake of the insecure cease-fire in Gaza, the head of the movement’s political bureau Khaled Mishaal appeared almost dazed by the extent of the Israeli destruction. While both sides declared victory, Mishaal went a bit further by laying out new, virtually impossible conditions, for Palestinian reconciliation.

Divisions between Hamas and the PNA have derailed a short-lived rapprochement between various key Arab leaders in the Kuwait economic summit. The inter-Palestinian rift has overshadowed efforts to kick-start a major rebuilding scheme in Gaza. So far that multi-billion-dollar project is still bogged down.

And whether Israel intended it or not, the Palestinian rift accentuated as a result of its war, has consolidated the political and economic separation between Gaza and the West Bank — both entities being the quintessential territory on which the sovereign Palestinian state is to be declared. If efforts to secure Palestinian reconciliation fail, Palestinians would end up with two potential states rather than one; the two would be geographically distant, politically diverged and economically challenged.

Some powers in Israel would consider this a sweet fruit of victory. But they would be mistaken to believe that dividing their enemy to such an extent would actually serve the Jewish state’s long-term interests. And naturally, Egypt and Jordan would not be happy with such an outcome. Each has a special tie with one of the entities; Jordan with the West Bank and Egypt with Gaza, and none would want to bear the historical liability of filling in for Israel’s occupation on any grounds.

But if that were the aim and depth of the Israeli “conspiracy”, one would assume that Hamas, the PNA and the rest of the Arabs are working round the clock to sabotage it. Egypt has now reclaimed its role as the main, if not the sole, arbiter between various Palestinian factions. It has also continued to play its part as the main mediator between Israel and Hamas with the aim of enforcing a long-term truce that serves the goals of both sides.

And for the time being most other parties have allowed Egypt ample legroom to follow through in its peacemaking endeavors. But if the Egyptians fail, it would not be their fault, or for lack of trying. Hamas itself is divided, with its Damascus flank raising the ante with the hope of gaining international recognition. How much is Mishaal’s political judgment influenced by Iran and, to a lesser extent, Syria, remains to be seen. But it is clear that he is now playing hardball, and taking a dangerous risk, hoping to attract the attention of a new US administration. The problem with Hamas is that it is now looking at itself as a potential replacement of the PNA. It is doing so by discrediting Abbas and his authority. But even if Abbas is weakened, he and his Prime Minister Salam Fayyad remain the legitimate Palestinian representative in the eyes of the West and much of the world.

It is a dangerous gambit for Hamas and so far it has yielded only meager results. The world wants the Palestinians to agree and form a reconciliation government so that the two-state solution can be salvaged and the reconstruction project for Gaza launched.

The Obama administration is coming in at a time when the prospects for an Israeli-Palestinian breakthrough are dismal. The president’s emissary to the region will witness new realities; Israeli elections potentially leading to a Likud-run government, deepening Palestinian rift rendering Abbas powerless, a radicalized Hamas that is firmly in control of Gaza, a growing Iranian influence affecting the fate of the Arab-Israeli conflict and a disorganized, and bitter, Arab peace camp with nothing to show for after years of moderate policies.

Israel’s war on Gaza has shuffled all the cards. In fact the players have walked away wondering if it is still worth being counted in. The cornerstone to resurrecting any peace deal lies in salvaging Palestinian reconciliation. It is tougher now than at any time before. The prospects for a two-state solution look dismal and the alternatives are even worse — for everybody!