Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s recent comments in Washington — that Palestinians simply seek “to coexist peacefully in the region” — reflect a widely repeated diplomatic assumption. But that assumption is not supported by Palestinian political behavior, public messaging, or leadership decisions over the past century.

Israel, by contrast, has repeatedly taken risks and made painful concessions in the hope of achieving coexistence. Those concessions have consistently been met not with peace, but with violence, radicalization, and renewed calls to eliminate the Jewish state entirely.

Public Messaging Makes the Palestinian Goal Clear

Across Palestinian society and among its supporters globally, the slogan “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” is openly championed. It is not a call for coexistence — it is a call for Israel’s erasure. The phrase clearly refers to the whole territory from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, leaving no room for a Jewish state at all.

Hamas leaders remove any remaining doubt. Khaled Mashal has said plainly:
“For anyone who supports a two-state solution, we want ONE state… We will have no choice but to accept the two-state solution temporarily so we can prepare for the big war.”

This is not a peace strategy. It is a war strategy, articulated without euphemism.

Hamas’s charter is even more explicit:
“There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.”

The movement categorically rejects negotiations and frames the destruction of Israel as a religious obligation.

Israel Tested the Two-State Model — and Paid the Price

Israel has demonstrated more than once that it is willing to take enormous risks for peace. The clearest example is Gaza.

In 2005, Israel forcibly evacuated 10,000 of its own citizens from their homes and withdrew completely from the Strip. The goal was simple: give Palestinians territory they fully govern themselves, and let peaceful coexistence begin.

Instead, Palestinians elected Hamas, and Gaza quickly became a launching pad for attacks on Israeli civilians for nearly two decades. The experiment in unilateral peace ended not in coexistence but in the atrocities of October 7.

Israel offered land. Palestinians responded with terror.

The Palestinian Authority Also Incentivizes Violence

Even in the West Bank — where Israel worked closely with the Palestinian Authority for years to strengthen civil institutions — the PA continues to reward attacks on Israelis.

Through its “Martyrs Fund,” the PA devotes over $300 million annually to terrorists and their families. Mahmoud Abbas has been explicit:
“Even if we have [only] one penny left, it is for the prisoners and Martyrs.”

It is nearly impossible to claim a desire for peace while paying people to murder civilians.

A Long, Consistent Pattern of Rejecting Every Peace Plan

The rejection of coexistence is not new. It predates the State of Israel itself.

• In the 1930s, Mufti Hajj Amin al-Husseini told the Peel Commission that Jews should be denied citizenship or deported.
• In 1947, Palestinians rejected the UN Partition Plan and launched a war aimed at preventing Israel’s creation.
• Under Yasser Arafat, Palestinian factions waged terror campaigns from Jordan to Lebanon, and supported Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait.
• When Egypt signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1979, Palestinians sided with the Arab boycott instead of regional reconciliation.
• During the Oslo era, Israel transferred territory and authority to the Palestinians. The response was a wave of suicide bombings.
• In 2000, Israel made sweeping offers at Camp David; Palestinians refused and ignited the Second Intifada.
• In 2008, Israel presented an unprecedented statehood proposal; Palestinian leadership rejected it without counteroffer.

Even Trump’s “Deal of the Century” was dismissed before Palestinian officials had even read it.

Israel has repeatedly said yes to peace frameworks. Palestinian leaders have repeatedly said no.

Saudi Arabia’s Language vs. Palestinian Reality

The Crown Prince’s aspiration that Palestinians will “coexist peacefully” reflects the hopes of outside actors — not the conduct of Palestinian leadership. Hamas demands Israel’s elimination, and the PA finances attacks against Israeli civilians. These are policy choices, not misunderstandings.

Israel Has Sought Peace; Palestinian Leaders Have Sought Israel’s Elimination

The historical record is clear: when given opportunities to build a stable state next to Israel, Palestinian leaders have chosen violence, intransigence, and maximalist demands. Israel has shown willingness to compromise, withdraw, and negotiate. Palestinians have responded with terrorism, rejectionism, and calls for Israel’s destruction.

As the world discusses new diplomatic arrangements, one truth must be confronted honestly: peaceful coexistence has been Israel’s goal — not the Palestinians’.