The Palestinian Authority Is the Biggest Threat to Israel

Why a new model for the region may be Israel’s best path forward

The shock of October 7th raised an urgent question: could something similar unfold in Judea and Samaria? For many Israelis, the answer depends not only on how the IDF operates today but also on the political and social structures that shape the region. When you look closely, Judea and Samaria are not Gaza. The risks are different, the players are different, and the path forward may require new thinking that moves past old frameworks.

Why Judea and Samaria Are Different From Gaza

Unlike Gaza, Judea and Samaria remain under daily IDF presence. Strong intelligence networks and routine operations have kept terror groups from establishing fully structured brigades.

Militants exist, but they are fragmented and constantly pursued. That makes the kind of large-scale, coordinated attack seen on October 7th far less likely. The military reality here is one of disruption rather than preparation.

The Overlooked Risk of the Palestinian Authority

The real danger, according to many security experts, may not come from Hamas or Islamic Jihad cells but from the Palestinian Authority itself. While weakened terror networks are scattered, the PA remains a structured, organized force. If it ever turned against Israel directly, the scale of conflict could be far larger than anything small cells could mount.

This perspective was highlighted in a recent One Jewish State interview with Brig. Gen. (Res.) Amir Avivi, who warned that Israel must rethink how it views the PA—not as a stabilizer, but as a potential threat.

Clan Alliances as a Security Model

One alternative already taking shape is cooperation with local Arab clans. In parts of Gaza, clans have stepped in to provide governance and stability outside of Hamas’ control. These alliances create order while weakening extremist influence.

Applied to Judea and Samaria, such clan-based systems could provide a new layer of local security and political structure. Canton-style governance, rooted in historic models across the Middle East, offers a way to empower communities that want independence from both Hamas and the PA.

A Shift Away From the Two-State Illusion

The two-state solution has long been the default policy framework, yet it is increasingly unworkable. Instead, Israel may move toward a “cantonization” model - building self-governing entities in cities like Hebron, Nablus, and Jericho while securing strategic areas such as the Jordan Valley.

This is more than just a tactical shift. It represents a new vision of how Israel can balance security with long-term stability. By investing in local partnerships and breaking the monopoly of the PA, Israel could reshape the region’s political map in a way that addresses both immediate threats and future governance.