Just today, his spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeina said "We will deal with any Israeli government that is committed to the decision of the General Assembly of the UN for a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders with Jerusalem as its capital."
(By the way, the UN did not declare Jerusalem to be the capital of "Palestine" in the relevant, operative part of resolution.)
I looked again at how the resolution referred to borders.
Here is the only part of the operative section that mentions it:
4. Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfils the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders
There is only one problem. There are no such things as "pre-1967 borders." The Green Line was never accepted by either the Arabs, Israel or the international community to be the legal borders of Israel.
Certainly UN diplomats are well aware of this fact. Indeed, UNSCR 242 says that Israel and its neighbors have the "right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force," a reference to the fact that the Green Line was not recognized as a border.
If the UN would draft a resolution based on the borders created by pink elephants in 1873, would it be worth the paper it was written on? Because that is exactly what this is.
In fact, not a single person debating the resolution noted this obvious error in the text itself.
This isn't the only mistake in the resolution, of course. It contradicts itself between two of the operative clauses, which also have to do with borders. On the one hand, it says the UNGA "Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967," which implies all of the territory. But then it says it wishes for "a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement between the Palestinian and Israeli sides that resolves all outstanding core issues, namely the Palestine refugees, Jerusalem, settlements, borders, security and water."
Did the UNGA determine the borders or is it a final status issue? It cannot be both. Yet this contradiction is embedded in the text, again, without a note of caution from a single member of the UN.
Instead of creating a committee to iron out these self-contradictory parts, the UNGA rubber stamped whatever the Palestinian Arabs wrote.
Which is another reason that the UN is worthless.