The IRA then VS now was also via Peace Process being a two way street and not one side doing something. You should study what happened to see that it was in fact both sides realizing the only way forward.

In this case what's happening is that neither side is pursuing that way, so nothing gets done. It's up to Israel to provide an avenue for a sensible peace if they want Palestinians to take it. Remember: Palestinians tried that path (see: The Oslo accords) but their philosophies on the matter are just different. Palestinians view the peace process as a way to take back part of what's theirs, while Israel is just giving them the bare minimum so they stop terror attacks. Until one of these changes (preferably Israel's) there'll never be peace.

For example this was part of the Israeli peace offer in the Camp David summit in 2000:

The Israeli negotiators proposed that Israel be allowed to set up radar stations inside the Palestinian state, and be allowed to use its airspace. Israel also wanted the right to deploy troops on Palestinian territory in the event of an emergency, and the stationing of an international force in the Jordan Valley. Palestinian authorities would maintain control of border crossings under temporary Israeli observation. Israel would maintain a permanent security presence along 15% of the Palestinian-Jordanian border. Israel also demanded that the Palestinian state be demilitarized with the exception of its paramilitary security forces, that it would not make alliances without Israeli approval or allow the introduction of foreign forces west of the Jordan River, and that it dismantle terrorist groups.[26] One of Israel's strongest demands was that Arafat declare the conflict over, and make no further demands. Israel also wanted water resources in the West Bank to be shared by both sides and remain under Israeli management.

I mean would any self-respecting state really approve these demands?