Moshe Phillips is the national chairman of Americans For A Safe Israel (www.AFSI.org), a leading pro-Israel advocacy and education organization.

French President Emmanuel Macron’s announcement in April that France would recognize a Palestinian state by June is deeply disappointing. This decision reflects a troubling inconsistency in Europe’s approach to Israel — one that is both morally and strategically flawed.

Israel’s ongoing military campaign in Gaza is a direct response to the horrific October 7 attacks by Hamas. The goal is clear: to eliminate Hamas’s capacity to launch terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians and to secure the release of hostages. Over 1,700 Israelis have been killed since that day.

France, as a member of the European Union, officially designated Hamas as a terrorist organization in 2003. That makes Macron’s current stance all the more baffling.

What will arise from the so-called “Palestinian Authority” is not a democratic state but a PLO-dominated regime steeped in terror — regardless of whether Mahmoud Abbas or any other PLO figure holds the title of chairman, president, or prime minister. A Palestinian state, under current conditions, poses a danger not only to Israel but to regional and global security.  A Palestinian state is unsafe at any size and under any leadership be it PLO or Hamas.

Recognising and/or creating a Palestinian state is wrong not only because it threatens Israel’s security, but because it would signal a broader victory for international terrorism — particularly Islamic extremist groups. A Palestinian state would quickly become a hub for state-sponsored terror, emboldening radicals worldwide.

The PLO’s long history of cooperation with global terror networks — from the Japanese Red Army and Red Army Faction to elements of the IRA — is well documented. It has also collaborated with every major state sponsor of terrorism in the last 30 years. Recognizing a PLO-led Palestinian state would be perceived as a reward for decades of international terrorism.

Mahmoud Abbas is now entering the 20th year of his original four-year presidential term. His likely successors, Hussein al-Sheikh and Rawhi Fattouh, are deeply problematic figures. Fattouh, nominated in November 2024 to assume the presidency should Abbas become incapacitated, is a bombastic figure who makes even Yasser Arafat seem urbane. In June 2023, Fattouh bizarrely claimed: “We say that we have been here for more than 1.5 million years.” The oldest known human fossils, for reference, are estimated to be about 300,000 years old.

Abbas also recently signaled that Hussein al-Sheikh is his preferred successor by appointing him vice president of the PLO. Al-Sheikh’s record is deeply troubling. At a 2023 event honoring “Palestinian Martyrs’ Day,” he declared: “Even if we have one penny left, it will be spent on the families of the martyrs and prisoners… They are our purest, most permanent, loftiest, and most precious jewel.”

Macron’s aggressive push for recognition of Palestinian statehood illustrates a dangerous refusal to confront the reality: a Palestinian state, east of the Jordan River, under PA leadership, is an existential threat to Israel. Any agreements made by a Palestinian Authority “statelet” would be quickly undermined by Hamas when it seeks to claim power as experts have said that it will.. Believing that Abbas or his successors can restrain Hamas is a dangerous illusion. They could not in Gaza in 2007 and we are now living with their failure.

Indeed, Hamas official Ghazi Hamad has already warned that the October 7 massacre was “just the first time,” promising a second, third, and fourth wave of attacks, saying, “The existence of Israel is illogical.”

Every proposed map of a two-state solution demands that Israel return to the pre-1967 borders, reducing it to a mere nine miles wide at its center. PA controlled cities like Tulkarm and Qalqilya, which the PA would never relinquish at a negotiating table, are within easy rocket range of Israel’s major population centers.

What would Israel’s fate have been on October 7, 2023, if it were confined to those narrow borders?

Such a configuration would leave Israel’s strategic heartland indefensible. Major cities, including Tel Aviv, and critical infrastructure like Ben-Gurion Airport would fall within immediate range of rocket fire from across the border.

If the Israeli army were then forced to cross into “Palestine” to defend their citizens, the international backlash would be swift. The EU, led by figures like Macron, and the United Nations, would almost certainly threaten sanctions.

And who would stop “Palestine” from importing Iranian missiles or “volunteer” Houthi fighters from Yemen?

Macron — and those who share his view — must come to terms with the new geopolitical reality. The U.S. has recognized the inherent risks in establishing a Palestinian state. The European Union would do well to follow suit. A two-state solution would expose Israel to an October 7 scenario every single day.

No rational nation would accept that future. Neither should Israel.

*The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Israel365 News