Last week, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry revealed a series of steps to de-escalate the tension that has sprung up in Israel over the past few weeks. The plans came after Kerry’s meeting with Israeli, Jordanian, and Palestinian leaders. The highlight of the conversations was a plan to install surveillance cameras in holy sites in Jerusalem. Unlike previous conflicts in the region, the most recent sources of violence have come not only from in the city of Jerusalem, but from in and around its holy sites.

The implementation of a surveillance system at a holy site shared among religions is, apparently, the best and most important idea that came from the series of discussions amongst the Middle East nations. It is, therefore, now apparent that a two-state solution is nowhere on the minds of world leaders, including Kerry, and that the best-case scenario is the prevention of escalated violence in and around Jerusalem. Even this temporary solution, however, is difficult to imagine as Syria captures the attention of the world.

The Daily Iowan Editorial Board believes that Kerry ought to understand how the most recent events in Israel play a role in the broader spectrum of Middle East stability. While Syria appears to be of the utmost importance, and may be priority No. 1, the United States cannot give up on discussions with Israel and must focus on preventing further violence, if nothing more.

Over the past couple months, conversations of a two-state solution (though still distant) had began to rumble in the United Nations. The conversation was broached by many as a direct result of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas rejecting the Oslo Accords, largely responsible for any peace that has been held in the region in the recent past.

Now, however, as Kerry shifts his attention away from Israel and onto the developing crises in Syria, it’s almost as if the United States is saying, “This isn’t going to work right now, let’s worry about a two-state solution some other time.”

In fact, according to U.S. News & World Report, Ghaith al-Omari, an expert on Palestinian issues at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy contended, “On the Israel-Palestinian front, I don’t see any potential for any progress between [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu on the one hand and Abbas on the other. There is no sense if you start anything that these two leaders will play ball.”

Whether a two-state solution moves forward is beside the point now. It is true that such an agreement is unlikely in the coming months or even years, however, this does not give Kerry the right to place Israel lower on the priority list, or worse, off it all together.

The growing struggle in Jerusalem has taken a gruesome turn away from a secular fight between two religious states toward an all-out religious battle, as places of worship have become the focal point of violent occurrences. Perhaps a two-state solution is off the table right now, but this shouldn’t stop Kerry and other leaders from placing the necessary importance on maintaining relative peace in Israel.

Moreover, the importance of limiting more tragedy in Syria is obvious and imminent, but the country cannot turn its back on international issues in which the United States has a hand outside of Syria and this means not only Israel.