[T]he celebrations once again prove that a Palestinian who murders a Jew is a hero, whereas one who seeks peace with Israel is a traitor.

Here is an inconvenient truth for Blinken: the poll that was conducted one week before he arrived in Ramallah, the de facto capital of the Palestinians, showed that most Palestinians (58%) are opposed to the two-state solution. Why? They do not believe in Israel's right to exist.

These Palestinians want peace without Israel, not peace with Israel. The only peace they envision is one where Israel would cease to exist.

That is why -- as this and previous polls have shown -- most Palestinians continue to support Hamas, whose charter openly calls for the elimination of Israel.

Praising the recent wave of terror attacks in Israel, Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar said on April 9, "These recurring heroic operations prove a clear fact -- that there is no future for the Jews on our Palestinian land."

[I]t is leaders such as Zahar whom the Palestinians would prefer as their president. A Palestinian leader who talks about destroying Israel or murdering Jews has a better chance of being elected than one who states that he is opposed to terrorism and wants to work towards achieving a two-state solution.

Palestinians have been radicalized... by their leaders to the point where peace with Israel or a two-state solution is seen as an opportunity to murder.

The Biden administration, meanwhile, continues to pretend that Abbas and his government are credible partners, and that Israelis and Americans can do business with them.

It would have been more useful had Blinken denounced the celebrations and publicly pressured the Palestinian leadership immediately to halt the massive campaign of incitement against Israel and the glorification of Palestinians who murder Jews.

It is time for the Biden administration and other Western donors to start banging on the table and demanding an end to the poisonous campaign to delegitimize Israel and demonize Jews. Until that happens, we will continue to see Palestinians dancing and handing out candy because Jewish blood flows at their feet.

What is "integrated deterrence"? It sounds better than leading from behind, which was Obama's version of it, but it's not too different from the failed approach of the Obama administration.

Like a lot of organizational jargon, "integrated deterrence" is a collection of meaningless buzzwords that no one understands concealing the same old thing that dresses up failure as success because under the exciting new approach, no one was even trying to succeed.

Or, as Austin put it during a visit to Poland, integrated deterrence uses "the capability and capacity that's resident in our partners and allies." Or, you know, leading from behind.

Announcing that our true asymmetric advantage is that we have allies is just an excuse for dumping the problem on them and then leading from behind. That's what Biden keeps doing.

And it isn't working.

Integrated deterrence asks top defense officials and military leaders to act as if non-military solutions are military ones. But just as it's not the job of diplomats to fight wars, diplomacy is not the work of generals.

We want generals to win wars, not negotiate with enemies. That absurdity is how Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley ended up assuring his Chinese opposite number that he would warn him of any attack. It's bad enough when diplomats act like this, it's much worse when generals do.