This paper compares and contrasts the strategies used by seven Israeli and Palestinian peace and justice groups working for a “just and lasting peace” during the al-Aqsa intifada. Based on nine months of field work and over 90 formal interviews in 2004-2005 and two weeks of follow up research and 14 formal interviews conducted in July 2008, the paper examines changes that have occurred over time as a result of changing domestic, regional, and international dynamics as well as differences across different types of groups (uninational vs. binational; religious vs. secular; NGO staff vs. voluntary activists). The paper first discusses the limitations of peace theory in addressing the options available to those working to resolve conflicts. It then explores how a mechanism-based approach to peacebuilding allows one to more systematically compare and contrast strategies across different types of activist groups. Using ideal typical mechanisms grounded in the literature on peace and conflict resolution, the paper explores how, why, and to what extent peacebuilding approaches changed between 2004-2005 and 2008. The findings highlight the on-going challenges facing peace groups in Israel/Palestine and their efforts to cope with a worsening socio-economic and political environment for peacemaking. The paper also suggests that those interested in progress towards a negotiated peace agreement at the official level should carefully analyze the social, political, geographic and economic contexts rather than assuming past policy instruments will work in the current environment.