The Biden administration is hard at work putting together a deal for Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the Palestinians that would involve the normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia alongside certain “irreversible” steps towards the creation of an independent Palestinian state.
There are many good reasons to support such an initiative. There are also many good reasons to oppose it. Palestinian support for Hamas is high and the possibility that a Palestinian state would be an existential threat to Israel is not to be lightly dismissed.
There are also bad reasons to oppose this initiative, one of which is that any talk of Palestinian statehood now—so soon after October 7th—would constitute a reward for Hamas for committing terrorist atrocities.
I’m not unmoved by this argument. The fact that October 7 and the subsequent war has put Palestinian statehood back on the international agenda could be said to send a powerful message that terrorism gets you what you want. But this line of thinking rests on the faulty assumption that Hamas wants a Palestinian state.
If Hamas wanted a state, they would have used Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza as an opportunity for state building and diplomacy. If they had demonstrated any intention to live as peaceful neighbors, it’s likely that further Israeli withdrawals in the West Bank would have followed.
They do not. If Hamas wanted a state, they would have used Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza as an opportunity for state building and diplomacy. If they had demonstrated any intention to live as peaceful neighbors, it’s likely that further Israeli withdrawals in the West Bank would have followed. Instead, they turned an opportunity into a nightmare—both for their own people and for the residents of Israel’s southern towns—a nightmare that has culminated in the horrors of the current war.
That anyone fails to grasp this is beyond my comprehension. Hamas has said this plainly, to the New York Times no less. Their goal is that “that the state of war with Israel will become permanent.”
Statehood would be a disaster for Hamas’ cause. If the Palestinians had their own sovereign state, the world would have much less patience for their belligerence against Israel. They might still have allies among the radical campus left, who would agree that Israeli Jews must be cleansed from all the land “from the river to the sea,” but most people would see Palestinian statehood as the end of this long bloody story and would hope to never hear of it again.
Were the new Palestinian state to demand that Palestinian refugees be allowed to “return” to Israel, it’s hard to see such a demand being taken seriously. Most people would take it for granted that Palestinian refugees may be repatriated to the newly formed Palestinian state and would be confused by demands for anything else.
Were the new Palestinian state to attack its neighbor, the international community would not see this as the justified lashing out of a subjugated minority. Rather, most people would start to view the Palestinians the way they view Iran today—as extremist troublemakers.
Hamas knows this. So long as there is no Palestinian state, their case against Israel remains open. Once there is a Palestinian state, it’s closed. For good.
There is reason to believe that the October 7 attacks were timed to disrupt previous normalization talks between Saudi Arabia and Israel. That deal, it was speculated, would have included “major concessions” to the Palestinians. If Israel lets Hamas’ horrifying assault succeed in extinguishing this progress towards regional peace, that truly would be a reward for terror. To continue with the negotiations—to push through war towards a better future—is a far more effective strategy.
A Palestinian state is chiefly desirable because Palestinians deserve to be in control of their own destiny. It’s also desirable because it would send a message—to extremist Palestinian factions and to the international community—that the debate about Israel’s existence is over.
Implementing such a state in a way that won’t devolve into another Gaza and put Israelis at risk is a complicated problem to solve, but not an impossible one. Most importantly, it wouldn’t be a concession to Hamas. Indeed, it may be the only real way of defeating their ideology.
Matthew Schultz is a 91ý Journal columnist and rabbinical student at Hebrew College. He is the author of the essay collection “What Came Before” (Tupelo, 2020) and lives in Boston and Jerusalem.
A Palestinian State Isn’t a Reward for Hamas. It’s a Punishment.
Matthew Schultz
The Biden administration is hard at work putting together a deal for Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the Palestinians that would involve the normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia alongside certain “irreversible” steps towards the creation of an independent Palestinian state.
There are many good reasons to support such an initiative. There are also many good reasons to oppose it. Palestinian support for Hamas is high and the possibility that a Palestinian state would be an existential threat to Israel is not to be lightly dismissed.
There are also bad reasons to oppose this initiative, one of which is that any talk of Palestinian statehood now—so soon after October 7th—would constitute a reward for Hamas for committing terrorist atrocities.
I’m not unmoved by this argument. The fact that October 7 and the subsequent war has put Palestinian statehood back on the international agenda could be said to send a powerful message that terrorism gets you what you want. But this line of thinking rests on the faulty assumption that Hamas wants a Palestinian state.
They do not. If Hamas wanted a state, they would have used Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza as an opportunity for state building and diplomacy. If they had demonstrated any intention to live as peaceful neighbors, it’s likely that further Israeli withdrawals in the West Bank would have followed. Instead, they turned an opportunity into a nightmare—both for their own people and for the residents of Israel’s southern towns—a nightmare that has culminated in the horrors of the current war.
That anyone fails to grasp this is beyond my comprehension. Hamas has said this plainly, to the New York Times no less. Their goal is that “that the state of war with Israel will become permanent.”
Statehood would be a disaster for Hamas’ cause. If the Palestinians had their own sovereign state, the world would have much less patience for their belligerence against Israel. They might still have allies among the radical campus left, who would agree that Israeli Jews must be cleansed from all the land “from the river to the sea,” but most people would see Palestinian statehood as the end of this long bloody story and would hope to never hear of it again.
Were the new Palestinian state to demand that Palestinian refugees be allowed to “return” to Israel, it’s hard to see such a demand being taken seriously. Most people would take it for granted that Palestinian refugees may be repatriated to the newly formed Palestinian state and would be confused by demands for anything else.
Were the new Palestinian state to attack its neighbor, the international community would not see this as the justified lashing out of a subjugated minority. Rather, most people would start to view the Palestinians the way they view Iran today—as extremist troublemakers.
Hamas knows this. So long as there is no Palestinian state, their case against Israel remains open. Once there is a Palestinian state, it’s closed. For good.
There is reason to believe that the October 7 attacks were timed to disrupt previous normalization talks between Saudi Arabia and Israel. That deal, it was speculated, would have included “major concessions” to the Palestinians. If Israel lets Hamas’ horrifying assault succeed in extinguishing this progress towards regional peace, that truly would be a reward for terror. To continue with the negotiations—to push through war towards a better future—is a far more effective strategy.
A Palestinian state is chiefly desirable because Palestinians deserve to be in control of their own destiny. It’s also desirable because it would send a message—to extremist Palestinian factions and to the international community—that the debate about Israel’s existence is over.
Implementing such a state in a way that won’t devolve into another Gaza and put Israelis at risk is a complicated problem to solve, but not an impossible one. Most importantly, it wouldn’t be a concession to Hamas. Indeed, it may be the only real way of defeating their ideology.
Matthew Schultz is a 91ý Journal columnist and rabbinical student at Hebrew College. He is the author of the essay collection “What Came Before” (Tupelo, 2020) and lives in Boston and Jerusalem.
Did you enjoy this article?
You'll love our roundtable.
Editor's Picks
Israel and the Internet Wars – A Professional Social Media Review
The Invisible Student: A Tale of Homelessness at UCLA and USC
What Ever Happened to the LA Times?
Who Are the Jews On Joe Biden’s Cabinet?
You’re Not a Bad 91ý Mom If Your Kid Wants Santa Claus to Come to Your House
No Labels: The Group Fighting for the Political Center
Latest Articles
Hope in Faith, Faith in Hope
Finding Communal Comfort
Leaving Behind a Better World
Boy George Releases Song Calling Out Israel’s Critics
Was Our Golden Age Fool’s Gold?
Genocide Shmenocide
Bibi’s Visit: Spin in the Air, Facts on the Ground
From Trump’s standpoint, the nuclear issue has been overtaken by the bedeviling problem of the Strait of Hormuz. What Trump sees now in Iran is a mess, not a victory.
The Obsession with Israel Is Becoming Creepy
The world’s fanatical fixation with a group that is less that 0.2 percent of the world’s population has crossed the boundaries of moral vocabulary and into creepiness.
What Will It Take?
An open revolt for 91ý rights and protections is going to have to come from Jews finally making demands and fighting back—or not at all.
Mamdani Needs to Pay a Price for Harming Jews
It’d be one thing if Mamdani were a lowly Israelophobe with a few hundred followers. But he’s not. He’s mayor of the city with the world’s largest 91ý population.
Rabbis of LA | Rabbi Geller’s Feminist Education
Third of three parts
Rabbi Artson Honored by WLCJ, Mem Global’s Embark Names Executive Director
Notable people and events in the 91ý LA community.
I Can’t Always — A poem for Parsha Va’etchanan
You Can’t Always Get What You Want came out the year after I was born.
A Bisl Torah — Senseless versus Sensible
The 9th of Av is an annual reminder to look inward and ask if any hatred has taken root within our hearts.
Moment in Time: Tisha B’Av – A Time to Comfort
Poussin’s Menorah Chimes Without Jews at Midnight
Print Issue: Haredim at War | July 24, 2026
The Haredim who break out of their bubbles to join the IDF are often caught between faith, family and country. Here are some of their stories.
The Inversion of History
Molly Crabapple has written a work of great inversion and of ultimate betrayal.
From ‘The Chosen’ to ‘Imaging Torah’: Jeremy Kagan’s Journey to Bring Torah to Life
For the director/artist, creating images inspired by Torah is a way of engaging with the stories, ideas and interpretations that have shaped 91ý life for thousands of years.
Three Dates to Dataland
I took three different dates, ages 6, 72 and 35, to see Dataland, the unusual digital art experience in downtown Los Angeles.
Hakol Shalom, All Is Shalom
This is the transcript of the speech Rabbi Dr. Bradley Shavit Artson gave at the 2026 AJU Gala on May 19, 2026.
A Slice of Aussie Heaven for the 91ý Day of Love
A classic Australian dessert chocolate coconut slice features a rich, dense, fudgy chocolate base packed with dried coconut, finished with a thick cocoa frosting and generously dusted with even more coconut.
Recipes that Celebrate Love for Tu b’Av
This roundup has recipes from two matchmakers: one is perfect for a special date night, the other is the perfect representative of lasting love.
Table for Five: Va’etchanan
Secret Sauce
The Haredi Soldiers Caught Between Faith, Family and Country
For decades, the question of Haredi enlistment has remained one of Israel’s most sensitive and unresolved conflicts.
Why Are Jews Not Suing Mamdani for Slander and Defamation?
At the very least, the case would provide a global stage to debunk the genocide lie that is devastating world Jewry.
More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.