Editor’s Insight: Palestinian Clans Consider Joining Abraham Accords Post-October 7
It started with a statement that seemed less like the beginning of a diplomatic discussion and more akin to the introductory remarks at an accelerator showcase. The Economy Minister said it first.
Nir Barkat
— whose resume highlights two technology company exits before listing ” mayor of Jerusalem” — stepped onto the
Jerusalem Post
The conference venue in New York saw him stating that he had grown weary of people claiming the West Bank issue couldn’t be resolved.
If a product doesn’t meet expectations, he informed the audience, you either send an improved one or lose your customer base. In this case, his “product” referred to the Palestinian Authority, and his enhanced version would be a distinct Palestinian branch within it.
Abraham Accords
“One day — hopefully soon — Arabs in Judea and Samaria may grow tired of the Palestinian Authority and seek to become part of the agreements,” he stated.
If they collaborate with Israel, we will assist them in developing Dubai. If they oppose Israel, they might find themselves resembling Gaza.
Smartphones appeared as suddenly as periscopes. The usual talk of Saudi Arabia’s future normalization faded away. Barkat shifted his focus from Riyadh or Jakarta to places like Rawabi, Abu Dis, and possibly even Jenin.
According to his plan, groups of West Bank cities would circumvent Ramallah, connect directly with Israeli defense systems, and attract funding from Gulf investors. These areas would engage in commerce using frameworks similar to those employed by the UAE and Israel. There would be none of the secretive nighttime diplomatic efforts or flag-raising ceremonies at places like the White House Rose Garden; instead, everything would revolve around tracking container numbers, managing escrows, and monitoring financial statements.
Leaders from Arab nations are contemplating membership in the Abraham Accords.
He declined to identify which towns or clan elders were already engaging with him, adhering to the startup principle of “building outside the system and inviting it in once the prototype functions.” However, those spending time in Binyamin’s industrial areas hear the same calculations as Barkat does: funds from the Gulf circulate almost anywhere but this region; Palestinian Authority levies drain local producers; Israeli checkposts, despite being unpopular, still maintain some routes open.
LATER, BEHIND the scenes,
Barkat
presented me with clear proof – numerous local Palestinian leaders would be open to signing the Abraham Accords.
His boldness succeeded as Israelis have exhausted their tolerance for circumspection. A new survey from the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, which we posted on our website early that morning before the conference, underscores this point: Approximately 81% of Jewish Israelis dread a repeat of October 7 in the West Bank, 85% reject leaving Hamas in charge of Gaza under any circumstances—military or civil—and 78% are against establishing a Palestinian state along the borders set in 1967, even if Riyadh offers diplomatic recognition.
Surveyors may analyze the data throughout the week, but ultimately, everything boils down to this single guideline: henceforth, each proposition will be evaluated based on its impact on life expectancy rather than its diplomatic background. Barkat’s dichotomy—Dubai or Gaza—aligns with this fresh calculation.
Such ambitious ideas require collaborators. Enter Yisrael Gantz, leader of the Binyamin Regional Council, who engaged in an onstage debate with our news editor, Alex Winston, shortly after their initial conversation. During this exchange, when Alex mentioned potential sanctions from the UK, France, and Canada targeting settlements, Gantz initially amended the geographical reference—“Actually, it’s Judea and Samaria”—before redirecting the criticism towards Israel itself.
He stated that the true failure isn’t their statements but rather our hesitation. “Should we ever permit a Palestinian state right in the middle of Israel, it would encourage Gaza to breach the border near Kfar Saba.” He portrayed the PA as an armed force of 45,000 individuals situated just steps away from Highway 6.
His prescription mirrors Barkat’s but uses military terminology: implement Israeli law, disband what he refers to as the PA army, substitute it with community-sized local councils responsible for policing their areas while acknowledging an overarching Israeli security presence, and propose Gulf-financed industrial zones as a solution to counteract funding for terrorism. “No Hamas, no jihad—then we construct the health centers and manufacturing plants,” he stated. The enthusiastic response indicated that in the political landscape following October 7th, incentives for entrepreneurship and deterrents based on strategy are now seen as complementary ideas rather than opposing ones.
The conference’s additional keynote speakers provided essential insights. Former IDF Chief Benny Gantz, who now leads the National Unity Party, took the same platform to outline a grim timeline for events. He emphasized that eradicating Hamas from Gaza would require at least ten years, with purging their curriculum taking an entire generation. Gantz contended that establishing a flourishing Palestinian logistics center in Samaria could serve as both a demonstration project and strategic advantage: success here transforms Gaza’s plight into a warning sign instead of a template for others.
Adam Boehler, who previously served as Donald Trump’s special representative for hostage issues, proposed the use of a leveraging strategy: ”
Hamas negotiates
Only during the movement of the IDF.” Security comes first, followed by spreadsheets—an order familiar to every Gulf investor at an intuitive level. Congressman Brian Mast, a double-amputee combat veteran who previously worked as a dishwasher on an IDF base, distilled the message down to its core: “We don’t have time for trivialities. This concerns Judea and Samaria.” He emphasized that legitimacy starts with naming things correctly, which then draws investment.
Next up was Dan Diker from the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, who reiterated why Israelis seek an alternative approach. He argued that the Oslo Accords represent “the biggest strategic disaster since the establishment of the state.” By bestowing the Nobel Peace Prize upon Yasser Arafat, the perspective shifted erroneously; what once appeared as acts of terrorism now seemed like peace efforts, and those seen initially as victims were recast as hindrances.
Thirty years on, the notion that symbolism might come before security continues to appear in news stories. Barkat’s venture capital arm, Gantz’s move toward legal annexation, and Mast’s linguistic exactitude all resonate with weariness following the Oslo Accords: if a structure restricts Israel’s ability for self-protection, discard the structure but retain what proves effective.
Nobody claimed that the execution risks were insignificant. The Palestinian President, Mahmoud Abbas, would label any West Bank mayor who agrees to a deal with the Gulf as a traitor. Hamas would turn the initial agreement into an actual hit list.
In Tel Aviv, progressives worry that pursuing peace through economics could solidify the occupation. Nationalists, meanwhile, bristle at the idea that funds from the Gulf states might secretly finance a future Palestinian state. Meanwhile, European diplomats, who have long supported the two-state solution with funding since 1993, are beginning to prepare disapproving looks.
Money, however, remains obstinate. Following Barkat’s presentation, in the hallway, three Palestinian factory owners exchanged WhatsApp contacts with an Emirati supply chain manager—no retinue, no photographs, just discussions about freight charges and shipment timelines. Illusions do not populate order forms.
BARKAT also introduced another startup targeting Doha. He mentioned that Qatar has spent trillions of dollars buying sway through university endowments and think-tank forums, even going as far as accommodating Hamas leadership in luxury accommodations. Given that the current legal framework can’t keep up with these developments, he proposed introducing a new designation: “state supportive of enemies.” This move aims to penalize Doha similarly to cutting off funding for terrorist activities. It struck me then that only someone who is a technology entrepreneur would suggest crafting specific legislation rather than relying on outdated laws that fail to address such issues effectively.
Is the initial Palestinian addition to the Abraham Accords likely to be implemented next year? Unlikely. However, could a document titled “Jenin Industrial Cluster – Gulf Investment Phase 1” appear on my desk by the end of this year? I wouldn’t rule out that possibility. The PA cannot promote statehood when it struggles with basic governance issues like keeping electricity functional; Hamas cannot advocate for resistance when its smuggling tunnels are inundated and financial supporters are constrained; Israel now provides returns exclusively upon achieving outcomes. A focus on either Dubai or Gaza isn’t just rhetoric anymore—it’s become an actual assessment of their respective markets.
I exited the ballroom pondering Ben-Gurion’s remark that in Israel, being a realist means believing in miracles.
Today’s miracle would not be a handshake in the Rose Garden: it would be a freight manifest stamped in Hebrew, Arabic and Emirati Arabic rolling through an upgraded checkpoint that used to be a flash point.
Should that document surface someday, keep in mind that you initially learned about this proposal in a Midtown hotel, coming from a technology entrepreneur-turned-minister who viewed the West Bank merely as an underperforming marketplace desperately needing a groundbreaking disruption. Although the area might still reject his offer, nobody present that day questioned the thoroughness of his business strategy.