Rewarding terror with statehood

On Tuesday, July 29, the global stage was illuminated by a contentious diplomatic maneuver as the United Kingdom, following France’s lead, announced its intention to recognize a “State of Palestine” in September—contingent upon Israel agreeing to a ceasefire with Hamas. Delivered by Prime Minister Keir Starmer, this move is presented as a bold step toward peace. Shortly after, Canada’s prime minister echoed this stance, declaring his intention to follow suit. In response, President Donald Trump firmly opposed these Western allies' plans to recognize Palestinian statehood.

While these actions are framed as responses to the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, they mask a premature and troubling endorsement of violence under the guise of diplomacy. By failing to place proper blame on Hamas and its atrocities, this approach risks rewarding the blood-stained hands of terrorists and paves the way for a dangerous future.

The timing is revealing. This declaration arrives less than two years after Hamas’ devastating Oct. 7, 2023, massacre, during which over 1,200 Israelis were brutally killed in an assault reminiscent of history’s most heinous anti-Semitic atrocities. Instead of isolating the offenders, some Westerners dangle the promise of legitimacy, implying that terrorism yields rewards. What message does this send to Hamas and its supporters? That orchestrating carnage—raping, murdering, and abducting civilians—can accelerate the path to statehood. It is a geopolitical signal that could embolden extremism, potentially enabling Hamas leaders to plot future attacks, while Gaza’s schools continue to prioritize jihad over coexistence.

This move reeks of virtue signaling, as France, the United Kingdom, and possibly other nations seek to bestow international legitimacy upon malevolent actors, effectively rewarding Hamas for its barbaric acts while it continues holding hostages. The delay until September raises questions—perhaps a calculated pause to assess the fallout from this performative announcement.

Such recognition is less about constructing a viable state and more about propping up a symbol hijacked by corrupt elites and extremists. The beneficiaries of this gesture warrant scrutiny. Neither the Palestinian Authority (PA) nor Hamas, the supposed recipients, exemplifies honorable or effective governance. For decades, evidence of corruption within both entities—nepotism, money laundering, and the misappropriation of public funds—has been well-documented, with serious investigations by the Coalition for Transparency in Palestine dating back to 2013.

Many Palestinian leaders reside in opulent isolation while their people endure hardship. These so-called leaders have enriched themselves, siphoning U.S. taxpayer funds via USAID contracts, while allocating significant portions of their budget to stipends for convicted militants, including members of Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Meanwhile, Gaza’s educational system indoctrinates children with Islamic hatred rather than peaceful living and harmony.

This is no foundation for nationhood; it is a recipe for chaos, with offshore bank accounts and luxury Parisian retreats as the true prizes for PA elites. Compounding this, while Gazans face dire humanitarian conditions, Hamas leaders have reportedly amassed vast personal fortunes. Just two Palestinian leaders are collectively worth an estimated $11 billion, accumulating funds from global donations, tunnel taxes, and support from Qatar and Iran into their personal coffers, enjoying lavish lifestyles far removed from Gaza’s suffering. In a right move, Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that the United States is going to impose sanctions on the Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization. But now several Western nations appear poised to reward these corrupt figures with statehood, prioritizing virtue signaling over justice.

This potential September recognition aims to pressure Israel to accept a ceasefire, as if Hamas is a reasonable actor willing to negotiate while Israel is the rebellious actor who resists it. History, however, dismantles this fanciful optimism. France has hosted a Palestinian mission in Paris and maintained a presence in Ramallah for decades, yet violence persists unabated. Additionally, the so-called 1967 borders, once envisioned for a Palestinian state, remain elusive amid the refusal of Hamas to disarm. State recognition should not be a bargaining chip; without dismantling the infrastructure of terror, it becomes an empty gesture.

The French and U.K. actions seem driven more by domestic political pressures—appeasing rebellious backbenchers—than by strategic diplomacy.

Yet the implications grow graver. This endorsement risks giving rise to a jihadi Islamic Republic of Palestine, a nightmare scenario not only for Israel but also for Jordan and Egypt. Envision a future where another Bin Laden prevails in a Palestinian election—do not feign surprise. By legitimizing a movement that thrives on violence rather than law, the international community may inadvertently forge a neo-Bin Laden’s regime, while we are trying to deal with a potential jihadi disaster in Syria.

Before endorsing a Palestinian state, the groundwork for statehood must be laid. The obsession with delusional Islamic martyrdom must be replaced with a commitment to coexistence. Palestinians must learn about and advocate for living peacefully with their neighbors. The solution lies not in premature recognition but in mindset reform—in a rejection of ancient religious texts that treat the Jews as infidels and stigmatize anything Jewish. The Palestinian leaders must denounce and eradicate corruption, Hamas must disarm, and Gaza’s youth must be educated in peace and coexisting in harmony, not jihad and Islamic supremacy.

Without these changes, recognition is not diplomacy but a hollow spectacle—flashy, fleeting, and pursued for political and social media acclaim rather than lasting impact.

Editor’s note: WORLD has updated this column since its initial posting.