He made it very well. If someone considers that to be an obstacle to an agreement then making it fait accompli can help the agreement happen. This was the same argument some said regarding the US embassy. It is a reasonable train of thought, but there are reasons why it may not apply here.
Except the idea of a State of Palestine hasn't been the obstacle. It's what that means in reality that has been the sticking point.
Who and what are they recognizing? Who is the government? Who are the citizens? What are the borders?
Saying, "We recognize the State of Palestine," without saying who or what you are talking about accomplishes nothing.
In short, it's not the same thing, because one recognizes a physical reality and reinforces it, while the other recognizes an idea, which clarifies nothing.