I'm not persuaded that Rawls creates the right template for war. I would be happy to apply his experiment to 1947, but once hostilities begin, no one wants to find themselves randomly in any role.

Clearly, there are bad Palestinians and there are bad Israelis. Neither society is controlling its bad elements. The Palestinian people elected HAMAS. They may or may not rue that decision, but they own it. Israel, for its part, has been hijacked by thugs, and its population has not reined them in either.

I don't believe you have identified the dominant asymmetry. Yes, the Israelis have the power to change facts on the ground, but they cannot do that without the cooperation of the Palestinians. Israel would make peace in a heartbeat if it did not fear attack. Israel would pay for peace; it would cooperate, finance, and educate the Palestinians to enable them to prosper so that they don't need HAMAS and revanchism to get up in the morning. If the Palestinians change their goals, the Israelis should change their strategy. But until then, there is no good solution to imagine, so no role for Rawls's experiment as I understand it.