What else did Israel lose in the Oslo Accords?

A pedantic Israeli wrote an article enumerating Israel's gains after the Oslo Accords, summarizing that by saying that Israel advanced economically, opened up to the world, got rid of the burden of occupation, and reduced the importance and centrality of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and that the Oslo Accords were peace and relief for Israel, contrary to all opinions that It was launched by the Israeli right at the time, and that article was accompanied by secret documents published about the nature of the dialogues between Israeli labor leaders at the time, as they wanted from the Oslo Accords exactly what is in place now, that is, redefining the occupation so that it lasts forever and ending the idea of a Palestinian state. And besieging the Palestinian and domesticating him through both soft and rough means.

It seemed as if Israel had achieved what it wanted and that it had defeated us several times, once with this agreement, which it made a tool for subjugation, subjugation and control, and a second time by dismantling the Palestinians into multiple groups geographically and legally, and a third time with geographical and political division, and a fourth time with the ability to We crossed over or crossed through us into the Arab world, but despite all that, despite our performance, despite our confusion, and despite our contradictions, did Israel lose with the Oslo Accords as well?

In my opinion, Israel also lost on the tactical and strategic levels, as follows:
First: Israel killed forever the idea of moderation, the idea of settlement, and the idea of negotiation because Palestinian and Arab moderation did not lead to satisfactory solutions or even defensible results.

Second: During the thirty years of the agreement, Israel turned into a brutal, violent, and aggressive entity that ended in fascism, meaning that everything that Israel claims regarding peace projects and trains is a camouflage of a destructive and desolate image of this entity. Israeli brutality threatens the Israeli political system. The same, as there are forces that want to hijack the regime for their own benefit and to become dependent on power and possess it as an expression of the height of fascism.

Third: During the course of thirty years, Israel also lost security and safety, meaning that the Oslo Accords did not grant Israel personal or collective security at all.

Fourth: The incomplete Oslo Accord, which did not achieve peace, exempted Israel for a very long time from searching for solutions other than renewing the security measures that prompted the Palestinians and others to prepare and engage. Therefore, Oslo increased the risks and did not reduce them.

Fifth: Over the course of thirty years, Israel has created a generation of Palestinian people who did not and will never see in it anything except the brutal occupier with whom no dialogue is possible. That is, Israel has not been able to rise to the moral level capable of addressing the Palestinians as human beings. Rather, it confirms the prevailing colonial view of considering them a security problem or Demographics: Thus, the Oslo Accords did not provide any horizon.

Sixth: In my opinion, everything that Israel Katz mentioned and Israel’s leadership of the region and control of its trade routes to establish what he called security, peace and development does not mean anything at all thirty years after the Oslo Accords, because every solution does not guarantee or herald an end to the occupation and the establishment of the state. The Palestinian Authority is just another bypass road that leads to nothing, and Israel is skilled at building bypass roads that turn over time into ordinary dusty roads with many bumps and bumps that lead to nothing.