Palestinians deserve a state despite Hamas, not because of it

Following Hamas’s horrific terrorist attack against border communities in Israel on Oct. 7, some people on the far left have sought to politicize this tragedy by arguing that the cold-blooded murder of more than 1,000 Israelis justifies recognition of a Palestinian state.

This argument, best articulated by Daoud Kuttab in the Washington Post, posits that Israel’s structural violence in the form of settlements and defensive measures warrant a violent backlash, apparently without any limit, that is better addressed with recognition rather than punishment. Kuttab is not the only one making this backwards argument. Rather, it manifests itself in one form or another in list servs, social media posts and rallies around the world.

This pro-Hamas argument is both dangerous and complete hogwash. Palestinians deserve a state despite Hamas’s war crimes, not because of them. Predicating recognition on terrorism, rather than state-building does nothing to advance the situation of Palestinians or Israelis. Instead, it sidelines diplomats, peace activists and moderates across the region who have eschewed violence in favor of the far braver tasks of state building and diplomacy, which are the only ways to bring about a lasting solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The argument that Hamas’s terrorist attack justifies recognition of a Palestinian state also turns a blind eye toward Hamas’s charter, history and immoral values. Hamas was founded in the late 1980s as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. The preamble to its charter states that “Israel will be established and will stay established until Islam nullifies it as it nullified what was before it.”

Such wording leaves no room for interpretation, nor does it solely fault Israel’s post-1967 territorial expansion. Hamas has acted on its charter, killing thousands of innocent civilians over the course of decades. Some of its victims have been rival Fatah members, whom Hamas killed to consolidate power following its only election more than 15 years ago.

This pro-Hamas argument further ignores decades of peace negotiations, jumping to the conclusion that violence is the only solution. Yet, Israel and the Palestinian Authority have made numerous attempts to resolve the conflict. At times, these involved sizeable offers of land for peace. To be sure, more could have been desired at times, but such is how negotiations often operate. This is very different from a reality in which no credible offer was ever on the table.

Another fatal flaw among those who seek to justify Hamas’s terrorism is that they deny Israel’s right to exist. Israel is the successor state to an ancient kingdom that was driven away by force. It has been recognized by the international community and fits all the criteria for a modern nation state. Without mutual recognition, there can be no peace.

Finally, the pro-Hamas far left provides no prospective agenda, other than justifying brutal violence against civilians. It offers no vision for the future nor a viable path toward achieving better lives. The conflict will not resolve itself overnight. However, pretending that targeted violence against civilians is the answer relegates those who have viable non-violent solutions to the margins and makes prospects for peace all the more distant.

Harry William Baumgarten previously served as legislative director and counsel to members of Congress, where he advised on foreign policy. The views expressed here are his own and do not necessarily represent those of any other party.