The Palestinian Imperative: Statehood Demands Strategy, Not Slogans

For decades, I have written extensively about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, consistently advancing one central premise: neither Israelis nor Palestinians will ever achieve security, dignity, or permanence without a two-state solution. Absolute security for Israel is unattainable so long as Palestinians are denied statehood, just as Palestinian aspirations for sovereignty will remain unrealized without addressing Israel’s legitimate security concerns. The fates of the two peoples are inextricably linked.

In this context, I have repeatedly condemned Israel’s policies—particularly the nearly 58-year occupation. The relentless expansion of settlements, usurping Palestinian land, the permissiveness afforded to extremist settlers who terrorize Palestinian communities, and the systematic dehumanization of Palestinians have all but extinguished the Palestinians’ trust in Israel. These realities culminated in the horrific Hamas attack of October 7, 2023, followed by an Israeli military war in Gaza that many credible observers and scholars have characterized as bearing genocidal dimensions.

Successive Israeli governments, led by Prime Minister Netanyahu, have done everything conceivable to obstruct a viable peace process. Under his reign, for nearly two decades of political dominance, Netanyahu has pursued a strategy to prevent the emergence of a Palestinian state. Central to this effort has been a divide-and-conquer approach, empowering Hamas in Gaza while weakening the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, thereby ensuring that no unified Palestinian leadership could emerge to demand statehood.

Yet acknowledging Israel’s overwhelming responsibility does not absolve the Palestinians of their own failures. The Palestinian national movement has suffered from internal fragmentation, weak governance, endemic corruption, and strategic miscalculations. Most critically, it has failed to convincingly demonstrate—both to Israelis and to the international community—that it is fully committed to Israeli-Palestinian peace based on a two-state solution.

Violence, regardless of how it is rationalized, has not advanced the Palestinian cause. On the contrary, it has repeatedly strengthened Israel’s hardline factions, justified disproportionate retaliation, and deepened Palestinian suffering. Given Israel’s overwhelming military superiority, armed resistance has proven to be not only ineffective but a strategic failure. The path to statehood cannot be paved with violence; it must be built on political legitimacy, institutional reform, and sustained diplomatic engagement — directly or indirectly mediated by a party with a stake in ending the conflict.

If the Palestinians are to alter the trajectory of this conflict, they must adopt a fundamentally new strategy—one rooted in internal transformation and outward credibility. This requires a series of concrete, coordinated steps.

First, the Palestinians must renounce violence, although it seems unsavory to suggest, especially given Israel’s horrific violence against the Palestinians; the renunciation of violence must be consistent and reinforced through policy and practice. By renouncing violence, the Palestinians will put Israel on the defensive, especially now as the world is watching Israel’s egregious violence against the Palestinians. However distasteful that might be seen to Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and all other factions, they must come to terms with a simple but unavoidable reality: violence will not deliver liberation. It will only perpetuate devastation. Hamas’ savagery in October 2023 and Israel’s brutal response have demonstrated that so tragically.

Second, unity is indispensable. The enduring division between Fatah and Hamas has been one of the greatest impediments to Palestinian progress. All factions must recognize that without a unified national front, their cause will remain vulnerable to external manipulation and internal paralysis. Unity must be anchored in a clear and singular objective: achieving statehood through a peacefully negotiated two-state solution.

Third, new elections are imperative. Democratic renewal would provide legitimacy to the Palestinian leadership and signal to the world that Palestinians are prepared to govern themselves responsibly. Regardless of which faction or party emerges as the winner, it must still form a coalition government representing all Palestinians, led by the leader of the faction that garnered the most votes. A newly elected leadership must unequivocally renounce violence as a political tool and commit to a peaceful solution to the conflict with Israel. This is not merely a tactical adjustment but a strategic necessity.

Fourth, Palestinians must invest in mobilizing their civil society. Religious leaders, educators, youth organizations, and professional associations should be engaged in a sustained campaign to promote moderation, coexistence, and the pursuit of peace. This internal discourse is essential not only for societal cohesion but also for projecting a credible commitment to reconciliation with Israel.

Fifth, Palestinian leadership must make an unambiguous and public declaration of readiness to engage in unconditional negotiations with Israel. This message must be directed not only at Israeli leadership but at the Israeli public, particularly in the context of electoral cycles. Israelis must hear, repeatedly and clearly, that Palestinians are prepared to negotiate in good faith and to coexist peacefully.

Sixth, the Palestinians should rally around unifying figures capable of transcending factional divides. Marwan Barghouti, for example, remains one of the few leaders with broad-based legitimacy across Palestinian society. A coordinated and sustained campaign for his release could serve not only as a symbolic focal point but also as a catalyst for political renewal and unity. To that end, the Palestinians must appeal to the international community to pressure, persuade, and prevail upon Israel to release him.

Seventh, Palestinians must expand and professionalize their diplomatic outreach. The European Union remains a critical partner, capable of exerting political and economic influence on Israel. Concurrently, Palestinians should intensify their engagement in the United States, where public opinion—especially among younger voters—has shifted and has become increasingly sympathetic to their plight in the wake of the Gaza war. Effective advocacy campaigns can help reshape the political environment in ways that make progress more attainable.

Eighth, Palestinians should leverage international multilateral frameworks more strategically. Engagement with human rights bodies and UN mechanisms can build pressure for accountability, while reinforcing the Palestinians’ commitment to lawful and peaceful means.

Ninth, economic and sustainable development must not be neglected. Even under occupation, efforts to strengthen governance, improve public services, and foster economic resilience can demonstrate readiness for statehood and reduce dependency. A functioning institutional framework enhances credibility and lays the groundwork for eventual sovereignty.

Tenth, sine qua non to enacting any of the above, corruption within Palestinian institutions must be decisively addressed. Endemic corruption has eroded public trust and weakened governance from within. A reconstituted Palestinian Authority must emerge through transparent processes, with leadership that is accountable, competent, and genuinely committed to national interests.

Finally, the Palestinians must turn to Saudi Arabia in particular to begin a back-channel discussion with Israel. Saudi Arabia is the only conceivable intermediary that holds something Israel genuinely wants and cannot get anywhere else—normalization, regional legitimacy, and the economic architecture of integration—while being publicly bound to Palestinian statehood as the price.

None of these steps will yield immediate results. Changing Israeli perceptions—deeply shaped by decades of conflict and fear—will take time. However, a sustained and credible Palestinian transformation can gradually shift the Israeli political landscape, empowering those who recognize that occupation is not only morally indefensible but undermines rather than enhances Israel’s national security.

The Palestinians’ choice is not theoretical; it is immediate and consequential. The Palestinians cannot afford to wait for Israel to change course. Current Israeli political dynamics offer little reason to expect a voluntary shift toward peace. If anything, the status quo is being further entrenched. In this environment, the Palestinian agency becomes not just important but decisive in making statehood possible, or in remaining trapped indefinitely in a reality that only deepens with time.

The Palestinians must remember that statehood will not be handed to them; it must be earned through strategic clarity, political courage, and sustained commitment to peaceful engagement. The tools are available, and the international environment, despite its inconsistencies, offers opportunities that can be seized.