Some of the language used by United States, Israeli and Palestinian officials in recent days sounds more like the escalating rhetoric between opponents at a World Wrestling Federation grudge match than the serious diplomacy demanded by these critical times.

The situation in Jerusalem has become increasingly volatile in the aftermath of the terrorist shooting of Rabbi Yehuda Glick, who has aggressively pushed for greater access to the Temple Mount for Jewish worshippers. Last Thursday, Islamic Jihad, an extremist Palestinian faction, claimed that the attack on Glick was in retaliation for Israeli actions in Jerusalem, which in recent weeks has seen a sharp increase in violent clashes between Palestinians and Israeli police.

Adding fuel to the fire is the statement by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas that any change in the status quo of the administration of holy sites in and around the Temple Mount would amount to a “declaration of war.”

If all of the above were not enough, an unnamed U.S. official quoted in an article in The Atlantic by Jeffrey Goldberg, described Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a “coward” and a “chickens*** leader.” U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry offered an apology to Netanyahu by telephone and called the comment totally inappropriate and said it does not reflect his views or those of President Barack Obama.

The current strife in Jerusalem relates to the Israeli victory in the 1967 Six-Day War. Israel liberated the Old City of East Jerusalem and Jerusalem became the reunited capital of the Jewish State. However, the Palestinian Authority, which also considers Jerusalem a holy site, would like the city, which it calls Al Quds, to become a joint capital of Israel and a Palestinian state once peace is achieved.

After the Six-Day War, Israeli officials wisely decided to let the Islamic Waqf continue to administer the Al-Aqsa Mosque and Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount. Jewish religious authorities were given authority over the Western Wall, or Kotel, the last remaining segment of the Second Temple and the holiest site in Judaism. The various Roman Catholic, Protestant, Eastern Orthodox and Coptic Christian churches were put in charge of the Christian holy places and churches in and around Jerusalem.

For the most part the tripartite governance of important religious sites established after the Six-Day War worked to allow the three major monotheistic faiths to administer their respective holy places. When the late Ariel Sharon was defense minister of Israel and made an unannounced visit to the top of the Temple Mount in 2000, however, it set off days of violent demonstrations by Palestinians, which led to the Second Intifada.

That incident showed just how sensitive the situation is. Then Rabbi Glick and his followers have further peeled the bandage off the wound with their efforts to allow Jews to worship and bring religious objects to the Temple Mount, in violation of the existing rules and with little care for the violence swirling through the region.

For his part, Netanyahu said he would not change the status quo on the Temple Mount and addressed the rising histrionics of the situation.

At his weekly Cabinet meeting, Netanyahu warned, “Let us not play into the hands of our extremist enemies.” He added, “At this time we must show responsibility and restraint,” noting that his government is “committed to the status quo for Jews, Muslims and Christians” on the Temple Mount.” He also warned, significantly, “it is easy to start a religious fire, but much more difficult to extinguish it.”

Netanyahu’s call for restraint is both timely and urgent. Secretary of State Kerry was equally responsible and statesmanlike in his prompt apology to Netanyahu for the slur against him, Kerry himself was the victim of a slur by Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon who said Kerry was naively “messianic” and that he should “take his Nobel Prize and leave us alone.” His fellow minister Naftali Bennett had made comments that bordered on accusing Kerry of being anti-Semitic. Ya’alon apologized for his intemperate and insulting remarks after he was criticized by some of his own hard-line colleagues in the Netanyahu coalition, including Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman.

While the rest of the Middle East is engulfed in bloodshed in Iraq at the hands of ISIS and the horrific situation in Syria, not to mention the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian tensions, it would be a good time for leaders to shun anti-peace extremists on both sides and resume in earnest the quest for a two-state solution. Anything else, including deliberately provocative and inflammatory words and actions, is a waste.