I watched PA head Mahmoud Abbas outline a ceasefire, “unconditional” aid through the UN on Thursday, “the release of all hostages and prisoners on both sides,” Palestinian Authority responsibility in Gaza with an international presence, elections within a year, and a world that finally recognizes Palestine. He reminded the hall that the PLO recognized Israel in 1993 and said he still “reject[s] antisemitism.” He closed with the flourish that Jerusalem is “our eternal capital.” We’ve heard these words; he just polished them for a global audience.
From Jerusalem, the debate is not about applause. It is about sequence and verification.
Abbas says “immediate and permanent” ceasefire. Israelis say hostages first. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s line has been consistent since the first weeks of the war: “There will be no ceasefire without the return of the hostages.” That was true in November 2023, and it remains the position in 2025 as he heads to the UN and meets world leaders on the issue. It’s the minimum threshold set by families whose children are still underground and by a public that believes a premature ceasefire lets Hamas reload.
Abbas wants an international presence to “protect civilians” and help the PA govern Gaza. Israelis hear the nouns and worry about the verbs. Who disarms Hamas? Who seals the tunnels? Who stops the next rocket factory in a clinic basement? When the UN General Assembly demanded a broad truce early in the war, Israel’s then-UN ambassador Gilad Erdan warned that a blanket ceasefire “would just give Hamas time to rearm… shame on you.” That anger was not theatrical. It came from the experience of leaving the territory and watching the threat grow closer. The PA had its opportunity to govern Gaza, but then Hamas took over. We all know where that brought us.
Abbas frames Gaza as a pure victim. Israelis answer that Hamas built a war machine inside civilian areas, turning homes, schools, houses of prayer, and hospitals into shields. You do not have to take Israel’s word for it. Independent analyses and expert testimony, including a detailed 2025 report, describe the systematic use of human shields and the embedding of tunnel networks and command sites under protected facilities. None of that absolves Israel of its own legal obligations. This is exactly why Israelis do not accept formulas that start with “stop fighting now” and skip how to make the next massacre impossible.
On recognition, Abbas clearly emerged as the winner of the diplomatic week. He thanked capitals that moved to recognize Palestine and pushed for full UN membership. In Israel, recognition without conditions will never pass. Netanyahu said it as it is before flying to New York, criticizing leaders who want to “give [Palestinian terrorists] a state” instead of condemning Hamas’s crimes. That is how it stands in this part of the Middle East as of October 7.
On money, Abbas demanded the release of Palestinian tax revenues “unjustly” withheld by Israel. Here is the paragraph he left out. Under a 2018 Israeli law, the cabinet deducts from those transfers an amount equal to what the PA spends on stipends for terrorists and the families of “martyrs.” Reuters and others have summed it up in one line, Israel withholds funds “to offset stipends paid to militants and their families.” Israelis call it “pay for slay.” As long as the PA pays salaries that rise with the length of a terror sentence, most Israelis view releasing the withheld sums as subsidizing future attacks, not supporting civil servants. Even as Ramallah has floated revised welfare criteria on paper this year, the core Israeli demand remains the same: stop the incentives that glorify and fund violence.
The wrong key
Abbas condemned settlements, spoke of “theft” of land, and drew a map of vanishing contiguity. Palestinian illegal building in Area C is also problematic. A responsible conversation would admit both sides and then talk borders, swaps, and security. Abbas did not. Instead, Israelis focused on a small symbol that made big waves. On his lapel, he wore the refugee “key” that, for many here, signals a mass “right of return” into Israel proper rather than into a future Palestinian state.
The oversized iron key has become the most potent emblem of the Palestinian narrative; a literal claim to homes inside Israel from before 1948, passed down through generations as a promise of “return.” At rallies and in UN corridors, the key signals that the conflict ends only when millions are allowed to “go back” to Jaffa, Haifa, and Safed. Don’t be fooled, this isn’t a two-state formula, but rather a one-state demand that would end Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.
Netanyahu should address that symbol directly. He can acknowledge Palestinian grief and displacement, and still state clearly that the “right of return” to Israel proper is a nonstarter. Refugees worldwide are resettled or compensated. No country has ever agreed to import a hostile electorate as the solution to a war it did not initiate. The path to peace cannot be paved by erasing Israel’s sovereignty or demographic self-determination.
He can also flip the key’s meaning. The true key to a Palestinian future is not the iron artifact of 1948, but a modern key: reliable self-government that rejects terrorism, a security architecture that protects both peoples, and an international plan that invests in jobs, housing, and education in a demilitarized Gaza and a reformed Palestinian Authority.
If recognition is now on the table, Netanyahu can challenge its content. Recognition must be tied to recognition in return. Any Palestinian state must recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, abandon maximalist claims like the “right of return,” disarm militias, and commit to ending incitement in schools and media. Without these clauses, the key is far from an entry to compromise.
History is where Abbas asked the world to remember, and also to forget. He invoked the “Nakba” of 1948, the decades of occupation, and the unfulfilled UN resolutions. Israelis remember a different ledger of choices, refusals, and explosions. The rejection of the 1947 Partition Plan. The suicide bombings that turned Oslo’s promise into concrete barriers and body scanners. The rise of Hamas in Gaza, then the rocket wars from civilian neighborhoods.
Still, Abbas included lines Israelis want to hold onto. “Release all hostages,” he said. Start there. He said, “We reject antisemitism.” Prove it in classrooms and broadcasts. He promised a “modern civilian state, free of weapons and extremism.” Show it now in Jenin and Nablus, not only at a ribbon-cutting. If he wants the goodwill of Israelis who have lost faith, he will need visible steps that change the incentives on the ground, not only the adjectives in New York.
So, what would a sequence look like that could move even skeptical Israelis, the ones who live with red alert sirens and the ones who send their children to reserve duty? First, a verified deal that returns every Israeli hostage. Second, a real security architecture that dismantles Hamas’s ability to rearm and smuggle, not just paper oversight.
Third, a PA that ends terror stipends completely, reforms its security forces, reins in incitement, and submits to serious financial oversight. International money should be tied to performance, not promises. Fourth, negotiations on borders and arrangements that keep Sderot and Kfar Saba safe while giving Palestinians real freedom of movement and dignity.
Fifth, an economic plan that rewards measurable calm with measurable prosperity on both sides. If children in Khan Yunis see that quiet builds clinics, schools, and jobs in months, not decades, violence loses its addictive pull. If children in Ashkelon see that quiet brings back normal life without rocket drills, politics begin to breathe again.
Abbas gave the speech that the UN member states wanted to hear, and it had lines worth saving. Israelis want actions. Until the order is hostages, security, reform, then politics, recognition – only then can we actually begin a real conversation.