Why the path to peace runs through Palestinian statehood

In one of its most consequential essays in recent memory, Foreign Affairs makes the case that the war unleashed by Hamas’s October 7 massacre has not only reshaped the Middle East—it has exposed the bankruptcy of Israel’s current strategy and revived a long-buried truth: only a credible, internationally backed path to Palestinian statehood can break the region’s cycle of violence. The article doesn’t dwell on the horror of October 7 or the devastation in Gaza for shock value; instead, it charts a political, historical, and moral argument that what comes next must be nothing less than transformative.

The piece begins by diagnosing Israel’s critical failure: a war waged without a political vision. Despite the Israel Defence Forces’ significant degradation of Hamas’s military infrastructure, the Israeli government has no clear plan for Gaza’s “day after.” That vacuum has only intensified the humanitarian crisis and allowed the conflict to metastasise across the region. With cease-fire talks stalled and famine looming in Gaza, foreign powers—led by France, Saudi Arabia, Canada, and the UK—are stepping into the breach, moving toward recognition of a Palestinian state unless the war ends by September.

The article skillfully situates October 7 within the broader arc of Middle East upheaval, arguing that it joins the Arab Spring as one of the two most strategic turning points of the 21st century. The region’s publics—once treated as irrelevant by autocratic rulers and Western diplomats—have reasserted their political weight. As Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman bluntly told the U.S. Secretary of State: “Do I care personally about the Palestinian issue? I don’t, but my people do.” Foreign Affairs rightly interprets this moment as a death knell for the old “conflict management” model that ignored Palestinian aspirations while pursuing normalization with Arab states.

The article warns that Israel is at a “historic T-junction.” Continue along the current path, and the country risks losing peace with Egypt and Jordan, triggering regional radicalization, and eroding its U.S. alliance. But choose a different route—anchored in the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative—and a future of mutual recognition and regional cooperation is still possible. The piece doesn't sugarcoat the political obstacles: Israel’s current government opposes Palestinian statehood, and Hamas remains a spoiler. But it outlines a pragmatic interim roadmap, beginning with a cease-fire, release of hostages, and a technocratic Palestinian authority backed by a regional security force.

What elevates the piece is its insight that this isn't just about territory—it’s about psychology and narrative. Both Israelis and Palestinians must be allowed to imagine victory. For Palestinians, that means dignity and sovereignty. For Israelis, it means secure borders and enduring recognition. Only a framework with regional buy-in and global legitimacy can provide the incentives and pressure needed to make those goals compatible.

Ultimately, Foreign Affairs argues, Hamas thrives on hopelessness. If the international community offers Palestinians a real alternative to endless occupation and war, Hamas’s ideological appeal collapses. Israel has regained military deterrence. Now it must pivot to political strategy—or risk winning every battle while losing the future.

By Vugar Khalilov