At the end, you insist: "Riskin is wrong to justify further aggressive expansion of settlements because instead of creating an incentive for negotiations, is poisoning the atmosphere for negotiations, as well as relations with the international community, including American progressives."
Besides the matter of who cares about American progressives who are in lalaland on most issues American Jews should be involved in, what you seem to have done is ignore the fact that (a) even if a Pal. state gets established, it will not end the conflict and the Arabs have made that clear; (b) that a Pal. state will not permit Jews to live in it (while Israel does) which means an apartheid state? oh my!!; (c) why do the Arabs get to establish at least two Arab/Islamic states in former Palestine Mandated territory (Jordan & the New Palestine) but maybe even three states - Hamastan in Gaza, Fatahland in Judea & Samaria + Jordan) and why would progressives/liberals permit a uni-ethnic state? (d) since initiatives have always existed (Allon Plan, Begin Autonomy Plan, Oslo) as well as Bibi's Two-State announcement and the 10 month moratorium on construction period, how much more do you wish Israel to bend and bow? (e) and don't forget Jerusalem, refugees, too.
The only reason there's a "settlement" problem is because during the Mandated period and as a result of the 1948 War, Jews were systematically ethnically cleansed from those areas, from Hebron, Gaza, Shchem, Atarot, Neveh Yaakov, Gush Etzion, Bet HaAravah and Jerusalem's Old City and so those areas, where Jews had resided, in many cases, for centuries if not for over 1000 years, were emptied b y, to borrow your term, aggressive Arab behavior. That you want to award???