No one was expecting what happened on Oct. 7 — 50 years and one day after the start of the October War of 1973 — or thought it would happen. To quote the highly regarded journalist Nik Gowing, we must now think about how we can turn this radical uncertainty and disruption into a way forward. No one in Israel or the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah, the US or Europe, or Arab leaderships stretching from Morocco to the Gulf, anticipated the extent of the offensive. Most of all, people on the street across the globe did not expect it. It did happen, however, and the reaction across the globe has been bad news going forward. Following the Hamas attacks on Oct. 7, a big question has been posed about what would constitute an equivalent response to the 1,400-plus deaths and capture of more than 200 hostages. What would be acceptable to the Israelis on the one hand and the court of public opinion on the other? What has resulted is a green light given by the US and European leaders for Israel to respond in accordance with international law (though this could be considered by some as a contradiction in terms, since Israel has not respected international laws since 1967 vis-a-vis the oppressed Palestinians in the Occupied Territories). Where is the limit? This is a question that people in the positions of leadership in the Arab world have not been good at responding to, whereas the people in the streets and on social media have made their voices clear. However, sooner rather than later, those people in leadership roles need to be ready to deal with the street in the Arab world. This is also the case for the rest of the world, particularly those countries with their own restless populations, notably in Western Europe. At the time of writing, more than 5,000 Palestinian had been killed in Gaza since Oct. 7. We are already seeing a cycle of retaliations and this is begetting responses, be it more rockets from Gaza or acts of protest and violence across the world, whether directed at Israeli and Jewish targets or at Arabs and Muslims, such as the fatal stabbing of a six-year-old Arab child in the US. The streets of so-called Western democracies and social media threads across the Arab world are now flooded with protesters, who have memories stretching back beyond Oct. 7, referring to the transgressions and war crimes committed by both sides. This includes the collective punishment on Gaza’s civilian population, who are also known as, unsympathetically, collateral damage. This cycle of violence is costing lives on both the Israeli and Palestinian sides. This is a moment when we need to think the unthinkable and cut through the distractions of the myriad of media and geopolitical narratives that we have seen in the past few weeks. The media, including Western outlets like CNN and the BBC, which are supposed to be less biased than many of the Arab outlets that are seen as extensions of regional governments, have shown that they too can get facts wrong and report stories in a one-sided manner. These outlets have powerful platforms in terms of their audience reach and ability to influence and sway public opinion. The recent Piers Morgan interview with Egyptian comedian Bassem Youssef was infused with satire and was a notable outlier — an example of true free speech in broadcast journalism. It went viral with millions of views. During the 30-minute segment, Youssef called out the contradictions in the statements made by the host and an evident one-sided bias. He also used dark humor to hold to account the show’s previous American guest for making dangerous and controversial statements that insinuated that further deaths were inevitable in Gaza and were even necessary.As a nonpolitical person myself, I was surprised how the US and French governments immediately defended Israel following the Gaza hospital bombing, despite the absence of verified evidence. With all the rockets being launched from Gaza toward Israel causing minimal damage, it was surprising to see one single rocket resulting in 500 deaths; something did not add up. Rather than blaming one side at an early juncture, these world leaders could have instead insisted upon verification based on a full investigation using satellite images. We are still waiting for the Israeli authorities to officially release the images that substantiate their narrative that the rocket was fired by militants rather than the Israel Defense Forces. The Abraham Accords have served as the framework for regional progress on Arab-Israeli peace for the past four years. This initiative of the Trump administration is now showing its limits. The accords were seen as a step to further peace negotiations in the region and a means to establish more economic initiatives that benefit all the signatories, but they did not resolve the painful history of the Palestinians. What was strikingly left out of the accords was the question of annexation and occupation. The benefits of the accords have accrued to Israel and the signatory countries, as well as the US, but shockingly not to the Palestinians themselves. From a purely business perspective, the accords should have been designed as a win-win for all parties involved, which others besides me undoubtedly understood as well. The simple reality remains that the Abraham Accords have not resolved any issues and were signed at the government-to-government level. Citizens in all signatory countries, as well as the Palestinians, must be involved and encouraged to voice their own ideas and opinions, as transforming people’s lives is a required part of this peace process. While the accords were working and benefiting leaders in the relevant countries, as well as the Israelis, no one thought Hamas would do what it did and precipitate the situation we are now facing. The countries of the Abraham Accords thought they were in a position of strength with respect to the Palestinians, including the democratically elected Hamas in Gaza and the PA in the West Bank. This is not the case now and we are staring down an ongoing saga. The time has come for a real peace. Peace does not mean the Trump administration’s way of “Peace to Prosperity” — it needs to be people-to-people and reflected by the facts on the ground. Today, it is a fact that the West Bank contains many Israeli settlements. These settlements could change hands, however, as part of a negotiation process to create a two-state solution. All possibilities should be on the table for people on both sides to come together. The real question on the Palestinian side is who speaks for them. It cannot be the PA because the perception on the street is that it operates at the behest of the Israeli government and its leaders are seen as corrupt. At this point, what is necessary is to bring the most extreme elements together — the enemies. And what was reaffirmed by the events of Oct. 7 is that Hamas is the enemy of Israel, the West and even many Gulf states. It must, however, be engaged and a deal must be done, even via interlocutors. In this moment of opportunity, only a country like Saudi Arabia is well positioned to take a leadership role and is able to influence all parties. It has done so before with the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative and, if Vision 2030 proves anything, it is that the Saudis are playing to win and are willing to do whatever is necessary to make it happen. This once-intractable conflict can be resolved, but the parties must approach a resolution not only from the perspective of real people, but also from a position of empathy, particularly those who have long been in a position of power and are perceived to be invincible. If they want a different future, they may have to do what was previously considered unthinkable.