A Palestinian Plea for Pragmatism: Rethinking the Path to Peace

The Failure of Extremist Rhetoric

Recently, I shared my family's tragic story—33 lives lost in the Gaza bombardment—with students in New Jersey. I spoke of the suffering in my homeland, advocated for Palestinian independence, and condemned the Netanyahu government's extremism. I also unequivocally denounced Hamas's hostage-taking and killing of civilians, atrocities that betray Palestinian values. My message was simple: condemning Hamas doesn’t diminish the validity of Palestinian rights.

Yet, pro-Palestinian activists, ironically, branded me a traitor. This experience highlights the deeply troubling state of the so-called pro-Palestine movement, a movement that silences Palestinian voices who challenge Hamas and advocate for coexistence with Israelis.

The Need for Introspection

The diaspora's failure to embrace diverse perspectives is a significant obstacle to Palestinian freedom. For too long, we've focused on Israeli actions while neglecting to examine our own missteps. This is not about blaming the victim; it's about recognizing the urgent need for new approaches.

Wishing for Israel's disappearance isn't a policy. Hamas's "armed resistance" has hijacked our discourse, and extremist voices within the diaspora, squandering international support, have further hindered our aspirations for independence. The blame for the current impasse doesn't rest solely with Netanyahu.

Embracing Radical Pragmatism

What we desperately need is pragmatism. The dire circumstances in both the West Bank and Gaza—limited resources, lack of political leverage, and the constant threat of expulsion—demand a shift away from maximalist rhetoric and unrealistic demands. It's time to acknowledge that the “right of return” to 1948 lands is no longer a viable option. This is a difficult truth, but clinging to the past prevents us from building a future.

My call for pragmatism isn't popular, often labeled “unrepresentative” by media outlets. However, Palestinian perspectives are diverse, and moderate voices deserve to be heard. We need a space to foster dialogue and develop more effective advocacy strategies.

A Vision for the Future

I envision a pragmatic approach centered on a two-state solution. This requires accepting Israel’s existence and viewing Israeli security as intertwined with Palestinian freedom and dignity. It also means recognizing Gaza as our home, the place where we will build our nation, not a temporary refugee camp.

This radical pragmatism echoes the Zionist movement's own compromises in 1948. We must reframe peace and coexistence as acts of courage, essential for preserving Palestinian lives, land, and heritage.

Radical pragmatism means acknowledging that Israel is here to stay, that being pro-Palestine doesn’t equate to being pro-Hamas, and that our national project must focus on building a viable state capable of providing jobs, fostering pride, and offering future prospects for our people.

Building a Shared Future

With security cooperation with Israel, we can unlock Gaza’s potential. Imagine an artificial peninsula harnessing the Strip’s geography, an airport and seaport built from repurposed rubble. These are not pipe dreams; they are possibilities within reach.

Thousands of Palestinians share my belief in a pragmatic path to peace. It's time for the diaspora to amplify these voices, not the rhetoric of extremists. We must present a new narrative, one that recognizes Jewish Israelis as vital partners in resolving this conflict and securing a prosperous future for both our peoples. This is not just a talking point; it's a matter of Palestinian survival and self-determination.