Editor’s note: This interview was conducted on 22 September.

PP: The US was the only vote against the resolution for an immediate, unconditional ceasefire, and the Commonwealth states just recognised what they call a Palestinian state. What does it mean? What should we make of it? What do you think?

EW: I find it very curious that so many countries are intent on wanting for the Palestinians what they’ve never wanted for themselves, which is a state—if it has to live next to a Jewish state.

To the credit of the Palestinians, and long before they were known as Palestinians—just as the Palestine Arabs—they made it very clear that they are not interested in another Arab state on the lands of the defunct Ottoman Empire if that state has to live next to a Jewish state. They’ve made it repeatedly clear, and I wonder why no one is willing to give them the respect of taking them at their word.

The only kind of Palestinian state that Palestinians have enthusiastically embraced is one that I’ve come to call Schrödinger’s Palestine. Meaning: Is Palestine a state for the purpose of accepting responsibility for having invaded Israel and butchering Israelis? Is Palestine a state for recognising that no one in Palestine is a Palestine refugee into the fifth generation? That would be weird. Is Palestine a state for recognising that its people do not have a right to settle in another state of which they were never citizens—what they call the right of return? Is Palestine a state for all these adult, responsible purposes? No—the cat is dead.

Is Palestine a state for the purpose of harassing Israel in international bodies? Then yes—very much. Palestine is a state and the cat is alive. Even today, as Palestinians welcome the recognition, officials basically say: “Thank you, and now we need to work to isolate Israel in every way possible—and the US if it continues to support Israel.”

So, as far as they’re concerned, the value of the recognition is the only value they’re really interested in: the value of harassing Israel.

If the Commonwealth countries and others pretend that this promotes the two-state solution—one Jewish, one Arab—fine. Then be consistent. Create a recognition package. Say the following: “We recognise Palestine. We are therefore defunding UNRWA, because it’s really weird to claim that you’re a refugee into the fifth generation in your own country.”

“We are issuing a formal legal opinion of the Commonwealth that there’s no such thing as a right to settle in another country of which you were never a citizen—what Palestinians call the right of return. We reiterate that the Jews are indigenous, have a historical connection, and the right to self-determination.” That would be our recognition package.

Had they done that, it would have been a real, consistent recognition with the idea of a two-state solution—one Jewish, one Arab—and I doubt there would have been a single Palestinian celebrating it. I’ll correct: there would be four Palestinians whom I know and admire who would have welcomed such a recognition, but no official Palestinian would have. Who are those four?

By name: one of them is Mohammad Dajani. He’s been active for many years, trying to promote an Arab and Muslim vision of moderation.

It’s interesting—his family, the Dajani, were charged by the Ottoman Empire with guarding the tomb of King David. Maybe that helped him recognise that the Jews are not foreigners in this land; they have a historical connection. We’ve written and spoken together.

John Aziz is very active online and, to his credit, repeatedly makes it clear that the vision of peace is next to a Jewish state. There are people like Bassem Eid, Ahmad Abu Tamah, but they live in East Jerusalem.

And then the last one who joined the people I mentioned is Ahmad Faud Al-Hateeb. He’s not making it easy—he often makes incendiary claims at Israel—but, to his credit, he makes it very clear that he wants Palestinians to forgo the vision of return and what he calls endless resistance. He makes it clear it has brought nothing good to the Palestinians. He’s the first Palestinian in a century to establish an NGO that actually calls for changing the Palestinian ethos. It’s called Realign for Palestine.

Other than them—courageous individuals—who would have welcomed a recognition package that makes it clear there are no refugees, no right of return, and it’s about living next to a Jewish state? The Palestinian ethos remains, unfortunately, tied to the negation of a Jewish state in any borders, in any size.

PP: You mentioned two people in East Jerusalem. What is the intricacy of the fact that they’re in East Jerusalem?