Published in the Jerusalem Post, 29 September 2025
"You’ve got to accentuate the
positive” ran the lyrics of the hit song of 1945, continuing with the equally
sound advice: “eliminate the negative, and latch on to the affirmative.”
There seemed to be little positive in the TV announcement by UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer on September 21, officially recognizing the “State of Palestine.” Starmer entirely sidestepped the fact, obvious to most, including Hamas, that recognition of a Palestinian state represented a clear reward to Hamas for its barbarous attack on Israel on October 7, 2023.
What is more, he was turning his back on the well-established principle, dating
back to the Thatcher-Reagan era, that terrorists should never benefit from
committing acts of violence. It simply encourages further atrocities. Starmer’s
action will certainly have convinced Hamas and like-minded jihadist groups that
terrorism produces results.
Starmer twisted his recognition of
Palestinian statehood to fit his agenda.
“Let’s be honest,” he said. “Hamas
is a ruthless terrorist organization. Advocating for a genuine two-state
resolution stands in stark contrast to their malevolent aspirations. Therefore,
we assert that this resolution is not a concession to Hamas; it signifies that
Hamas has no future, no role in governance, and no role in security.”
The state that Starmer was
recognizing, together with the clutch of nations that had agreed on a concerted
recognition initiative, is split between two areas, one of which was still
ruled by a proscribed terrorist organization. Starmer’s assertion that Hamas
would be barred from any future role in Gaza’s governance contained no
indication of how this was to be brought about.
An obvious conclusion is that he is leaving Israel to
achieve it through military action. The IDF’s prosecution of the war in Gaza
has often been described by UK spokespeople as “disproportionate.” There was,
significantly, no reference to this in Starmer’s statement.
However, all is not as absolutely negative as it may first appear. Starmer entertained Palestinian Authority leader, Mahmoud Abbas, in Downing Street on September 8. Was a series of concessions wrung out of the PA leader at that meeting?
On September 23, two days after
Starmer’s recognition statement, media reports indicated that Starmer, working
with France and other Western allies, is making his recognition of a
Palestinian state conditional on several “concrete, verifiable, and measurable
commitments” from the PA, and that Britain would desist from opening full
diplomatic relations until they are met. Foremost is that the PA must end its
notorious “pay for slay” policy.
For some 30 years, the PA has
been providing cash payments to the families of two distinct categories:
prisoners in Israeli custody, and “martyrs” (i.e., those killed while engaged
in terrorist activities). The worse the atrocity committed, the greater the
payment.
The sum dispersed annually
amounts to about $300 million, sourced from the PA’s general budget, which
receives tax revenues collected by Israel on its behalf, and foreign aid from
donor countries.
In February 2025, under pressure
from the US, Abbas signed a decree supposedly ending this “pay for slay”
policy. But the reform was merely cosmetic. Its effect was to maintain the
payments precisely as before, but to drop the connection to imprisonment or
martyrdom. In the future, they were to be labeled welfare support. In fact,
they are the same payments, to the same beneficiaries, but simply rebranded.
The demand from Starmer and other
Palestine recognition partners was specific. The PA must genuinely end payments
to families of prisoners and so-called martyrs killed in acts of violence
against Israelis.
On September 23, Abbas, having been refused a visa to visit the US, addressed the UN via video link.
“The State of Palestine is
pursuing a comprehensive reform agenda to strengthen governance, transparency,
and the rule of law,” he announced. “This includes… the cancellation of all
previous payments to families of prisoners and martyrs, now under international
audit by a specialized firm.”
Ending “pay for slay” was not the
only concrete commitment that Starmer and others demanded of Abbas. If full
diplomatic recognition was to follow the symbolic recognition of Palestinian
statehood, school curricula needed to be overhauled to remove content judged
antisemitic or incitement to violence. Additionally, steps are needed to
implement political reforms, most notably holding overdue Palestinian
elections, and excluding Hamas from future PA leadership roles.
The possible incompatibility
between the last two requirements may not have struck Starmer and his
co-recognitionists, but it has certainly been exercising Abbas and the PA
leadership for at least 15 years. The likely result of elections would have
been an overwhelming victory for Hamas and the overthrow of the Fatah-led PA
and its leader.
The last major poll of
Palestinian opinion, conducted in May 2025, revealed support for Hamas at
around 40% among Palestinians overall, with support higher in Gaza than in the
West Bank. Support for Fatah is about 20%. About 81% of all Palestinians want Abbas
to resign. So if free and fair Palestinian elections are held, the strong
likelihood is that Hamas or some clone terrorist organization would sweep the
board – one negative that needs to be eliminated somehow.
However, Abbas, in his video
address to the UN, was all positive. The PA’s reform agenda, he said, “includes
the financial system and school curricula in line with UNESCO standards within
two years… We also reaffirm our commitment to holding presidential and
parliamentary elections within one year after the end of the war, and to
drafting a temporary constitution within three months to ensure the transition
from authority to statehood.”
These positives have been
described by Western officials as “tangible, verifiable, measurable
commitments” to test whether the PA could oversee genuine statehood. Nations
recognizing a Palestinian state are working together to push through the plans.
Some of them might happen; for
example, those ending “pay for slay,” improvements in education, reducing
waste, and providing greater transparency in governance. The major political
reforms promised by Abbas, though – elections, a new constitution, full PA
control in Gaza – are much less likely within the time frame he suggested.
Anyone seeking something positive
to accentuate need look no further than Abbas’s closing remarks, however
sincere or otherwise one adjudges them.
“I say to the Israeli people: Our future and your future lie in peace. Let the violence and war end. Our generations deserve to live in security and freedom, so that the peoples of our region may live in lasting peace and good neighborliness. On this occasion, I wish all Jews around the world a happy New Year on the occasion of Rosh Hashanah.
Published in the Jerusalem Post, and the Jerusalem Post online titled: "Accentuating the Positive: Mahmoud Abbas's UN address", 29 September 2025:
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-868883
No comments:
Post a Comment