Terrorists changed everything when they flew planes into the twin towers. Larry Silverstein thinks his rights as the World Trade Center leaseholder should survive what his buildings couldn’t.

That’s why Mr. Silverstein is now taking such a painful hit on his reputation and his legacy – and part of the reason that binding arbitration would make sense as a way out.

The “greedy” accusation lodged against Mr. Silverstein by Governor Pataki’s loyal lieutenant, Charles Gargano, was the opening salvo. Mr. Pataki’s follow-on assault accused the World Trade Center developer of “betraying the public’s trust.” Mayor Bloomberg chimed in that Mr. Silver stein should “focus on what’s best for New York City.”

If Mr. Silverstein didn’t already know, he should now understand clearly: The mayor and the governor and their staffs don’t like him. They never have.

And now Mr. Silverstein has really ticked them off.

Mr. Silverstein overplayed his hand in this week’s negotiations over the World Trade Center site because he took Mr. Pataki’s Tuesday deadline seriously. If Mr. Pataki had really needed a deal in place by this week, Mr. Silverstein would have had real leverage. But why did Mr. Silverstein take the deadline seriously? Mr. Pataki’s favorite pastime is setting deadlines and then blowing right past them.

Mr. Silverstein was caught blindsided at midnight the other night when Mr. Gargano accused him of negotiating in bad faith over the future of the World Trade Center site. What Mr. Silverstein doesn’t seem to realize is that the attack – along with Mr. Bloomberg’s and Mr. Pataki’s piling on over the last couple of days – was long in the making.

I’ve interviewed Mr. Gargano on live television countless times. The former ambassador simply doesn’t say anything he doesn’t want to say – and hadn’t planned to say. Mr. Silverstein was caught in a trap. He could either make a deal he didn’t want to make or face an assault on his character that will only become more relentless.

As I first reported a year ago, government lawyers believe they can cancel Mr. Silverstein’s lease and take control of the 16-acre site. Mr. Silverstein’s money, though, is another matter. He controls $3 billion worth of insurance money, and government lawyers have spent countless hours trying to concoct a legal theory that would allow them to seize that cash. They’ve concluded the government simply can’t take Mr. Silverstein’s money.

But the government can withhold $3.5 billion in Liberty Bonds that Mr. Silverstein needs to build all five buildings planned for the site. He also needs the Port Authority to help with infrastructure issues before he can start building three office buildings along Church Street.

Cash is king. It’s also a weapon.

“We have guns pointed at each other’s heads,” is the way one government official described the situation.

There is a way out of this dispute: binding arbitration.

The framework of a deal already exists. The Port Authority would take over building the Freedom Tower and another office complex planned for where the Deutsche Bank building now stands on the southernmost portion of the site. Mr. Silverstein would still build Towers 2, 3, and 4 along Church Street – the most desirable plots because they’re closest to the planned transit and retail centers.

The only obstacle is money: How much will Mr. Silverstein’s annual $125 million rent be reduced? How much will he have to contribute to infrastructure improvements on the site? How much of the $3 billion of insurance money would he have to share with the Port Authority? How much of the $3.5 billion in Liberty Bonds would be used for other projects?

These are legitimate questions that won’t succumb either to an artificial deadline designed to provide the illusion of gubernatorial leadership or to a developer’s inept attempt to exert power he doesn’t have. The thorniest issue shouldn’t be too tough to resolve: If the full amount of insurance money doesn’t come through for some reason, who picks up the difference?

There is a way to resolve these complicated issues. George Mitchell, the former senator from Maine who has tackled both the Irish Troubles and the Arab-Israeli conflict in his second career as a mediator, won wide praise for negotiating an agreement to dismantle the destroyed Deutsche Bank building. He could be brought into the mix. “Binding arbitration” is a phrase that never sounded quite so good.

Mr. Goldin’s column appears regularly in The New York Sun.