Until October 7, 2023, the creation of a Palestinian State alongside Israel seemed an inexorable issue to achieve peace in the Middle East.
That is no longer a realistic proposal.
However, important world leaders speak and act as if this were possible beyond the political reality on the ground.
After a visit to Buenos Aires by Mahmud Abbas in 2009, the Argentine Republic officially recognized during the presidency of Cristina Fernández - with Héctor Timerman being her chancellor - on December 6, 2010, the State of Palestine "within the borders of 1967."
Since then, the Argentine Foreign Ministry has not changed its position, also affirming the need to grant a “special status” to Jerusalem.
These official definitions of our country have been ratified by Foreign Minister Diana Mondino despite the repeated political statements to the contrary by President Javier Milei communicated in person to the highest authorities of the Israeli government last month.
Regardless of what third countries think, the political decision to create a Palestinian State depends on the will of the peoples who live together in the territory, today more distanced than ever.
On the one hand, the constitutional documents of Hamas and the PLO never recognized the State of Israel: like other countries and organizations in the region, such as Iran or Hezbollah, they call for its disappearance from the map.
The vast majority of Palestinian Arabs within Israeli borders (overwhelmingly followers of Hamas or Islamic Jihad) proclaim “Free Palestine from the river to the sea” which implies the destruction of Israel.
Since the October 2023 massacre, that slogan has become the flag of many political and social groups throughout the world, which has given unexpected strength to an idea so radicalized that until now seemed implausible.
In Israeli society, from the left through the center to the right, currently more than 90% of citizens reject the proposal to create an autonomous Palestinian State, the only proposal previously considered “politically correct” to end the conflict despite of the historic rejection of the counterparty.
The massacre of October 7 changed everything, with its devastating focus on the communities of southern Israel inhabited mainly by liberal people, secular or sympathizers of socialism, defenders of equal rights for all humanity, peace activists who invited their garden and the table in their homes to the Gazan neighbors who on that fateful day entered by surprise as if possessed by demons to attack them with mad hatred.
Almost no one today in Israel believes that Palestinian self-government is a path to peaceful coexistence, quite the opposite.
The Middle East divides the world politically.
There are those who demand an unconditional ceasefire from Israel, followed by the recognition of a Palestinian State (like Russia or Brazil) and those who understand that this is unviable in the face of the constant threat of international terrorism of Iranian origin.
Israel, with more or less help from some Western democracies, will soon finish off Hamas in Gaza.
Hopefully, then the focus can be put back on a new path for peaceful coexistence between Jews and Arabs based on an international coalition that radiates progress and stability from this very sensitive place for humanity.