WhatsappWashington’s visa revocation was a message meant just as much for the Western leaders who’d planned on hailing Abbas at the U.N. as it was for those denied entry.
(Aug. 31, 2025 / JNS)
Kudos to the administration in Washington for its dramatic announcement on Friday—ahead of the 80th session of the United Nations General Assembly—that it is denying and revoking visas for members of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority. In other words, neither P.A. leader Mahmoud Abbas nor his entourage of bad actors will be able to travel to New York City to attend the annual event they’d been anticipating with such glee.
Naturally. This year, the chief terrorist-in-a-tie in Ramallah wasn’t merely going to be showered with accolades. He was going to be honored by a number of Western countries declaring their intention to recognize the “State of Palestine.”
First among these paragons of immoral political expediency was French President Emmanuel Macron, who came out of this proverbial closet on July 24. Next in line was British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who followed suit on July 29.
Then came Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and Malta’s Robert Adela on July 30. Australia’s premier, Anthony Albanese, joined the dubious club on Aug. 11. Yet all were a bit late to the endeavor, since Norway, Spain and Ireland were the trailblazers in May 2024. Much to the delight of Hamas, by the way.
Notable about the handful of left-leaning heads of government is their desperate attempt to remain relevant internationally, while catering domestically to a growing anti-Israel sentiment and/or Islamist electorate. This isn’t how they frame their stunt, of course.
No, they profess to be on the side of, you know, “peace” in the Mideast by way of a “two-state solution.” This is code for massive Israeli territorial concessions to an entity sworn to the annihilation of the Jews. One whose henchmen and fellow travelers in Gaza perpetrated the Oct. 7 massacre, and whose counterparts in Judea and Samaria have yet to condemn the atrocities of that Black Sabbath nearly two years ago.
This makes sense. Though the rulers in Ramallah are rivals of Hamas, which is wildly popular in the P.A., they encourage, fund and reward that group’s terrorists.
They also issue the antisemitic textbooks used in schools to indoctrinate Palestinian-Arab children to glorify martyrdom in the name of Allah—for anyone who murders Jews and Israelis. And let’s not forget that the institutions of such learning in Gaza are run by the U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) for so-called “Palestinian refugees.”
These are the only refugees in the world with a special status that perpetuates their plight, rather than alleviating it through permanent resettlement. Not surprisingly, the very bleeding hearts who claim to care about human rights ignore this travesty. Or welcome it.
After all, it’s far more lucrative financially and beneficial ideologically to buy into and spread the propaganda that Israel is at fault. And this is despite the repeated efforts by the Jewish state to meet the conditions of both friends and foes ranting about the need for Israel to remove the “obstacles” responsible for a lack of peace with the Palestinians.
Instead of acknowledging that every Israeli peace overture and goodwill gesture has increased Palestinians’ incentive to destroy Israel, Western liberals—including Jewish ones at home and abroad—have spent decades doubling down on their belief in failed policies.
This can be chalked up to naïve “kumbaya” fantasies or genuine malevolence aimed purposely in the wrong direction. Macron, Starmer, Carney, Adela and Albanese no longer deserve the benefit of the doubt, if they ever warranted it, about which of the two categories best describes them.
Just observe how quick they were to vilify Israel for fighting the jihadists who invaded the country on the Simchat Torah weekend in 2023 and went on a slaughter spree.
Their championing of Palestinian statehood—which, as JNS Editor-in-Chief Jonathan Tobin recently pointed out, “everybody wants except the Palestinians”—was simply another way of pouring salt in Israel’s literal and figurative wounds.
Had Kamala Harris won the U.S. presidential election in November, the United States may have jumped on this bandwagon, as well. Though more symbolic than concrete, it’s significant in terms of how Israel and the P.A. continue to be perceived and treated.
By nixing the entry of the latter into America for the UNGA, President Donald Trump is conveying just as much of a powerful message to the gang of Western terrorism apologists who’d planned on hailing Abbas in the halls of the United Nations as to those denied the visas.
The State Department’s Office of the Spokesperson worded the warning, in part, as follows: “The Trump Administration has been clear: It is in our national security interests to hold the PLO and P.A. accountable for not complying with their commitments, and for undermining the prospects for peace. Before [they] can be considered partners for peace, they must consistently repudiate terrorism—including the Oct. 7 massacre—and end incitement to terrorism in education, as required by U.S. law and as promised by the PLO.”
In addition, the statement went on, “The P.A. must … end its attempts to bypass negotiations through international lawfare campaigns, including appeals to the ICC [International Criminal Court] and ICJ [International Court of Justice], and efforts to secure the unilateral recognition of a conjectural Palestinian state. Both steps materially contributed to Hamas’s refusal to release its hostages, and to the breakdown of the Gaza ceasefire talks.” [Emphasis added.]
However, it concluded, signaling a way forward the likelihood of which is nil, “The United States remains open to re-engagement that is consistent with our laws, should the P.A./PLO meet their obligations and demonstrably take concrete steps to return to a constructive path of compromise and peaceful coexistence with the State of Israel.”
It remains to be seen whether some U.N. maneuver will override the administration’s decree. But the outcry it evoked in anti-Israel circles indicates how brilliant and crucial a move it was.
