Palestine Controversy
Palestine’s struggle to gain statehood has been a major international conflict for decades. From 1923 until 1948 Britain controlled several Arab nations as well as Palestine. The violence over Palestinian and Jewish claims to the land escalated to the point where Britain gave control of the situation to the United Nations. The UN proposed a resolution for a separate Israeli and Palestinian state. In 1948 Israel accepted the proposition and is now recognized as a state by most other international organizations. Palestine, however, rejected this petition and was forced to become part of the territory controlled by Israel. Dickovick and Eastwood define a nation as, “a group thought of as sovereign and equal, typically compromised of a
…show more content…
large, often geographically bound population” (614). In regards to this definition I believe Palestine can be classified as a nation but not as a state. Although
Palestine is closer than ever to becoming recognized as its own state I do not believe Palestine should have an independent state of its own. Palestine does not posses all of the qualities to be considered a sovereign State under international law. According to Article 1 set out in the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States “the qualities of statehood under international law consist of: a permanent population; a defined territory; government; and capacity to enter into relations with other states.” Although Palestine has completed some of these qualifications, there is clear evidence that it has not fulfilled all four requirements.
Palestine does have a population of people who share a common culture, history, and nationality. However, it is questionable whether a state can have a permanent population without exercising control over that population. Palestine lacks authority over its population, which creates controversy for whether they have “a defined territory.” The Palestinian borders are not yet a sufficiently defined territory; and Palestine does not have complete control over its population, therefore it has not met the second quality of statehood. “Security Council (UNSC) resolutions 242 and 338 call upon Israel to withdraw to the 1949 armistice lines, thus indicating that the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip occupied by Israel in 1967 constitute the territory of the Palestinian State, (Margalit & Hibbin 2013)” this meaning, that these areas are under Palestinian control. Palestine has been unable to control these areas independent of external …show more content…
involvement. Dickovick and Eastwood define a government as “a set of top elected executive officials and high-level political appointees that shape and orient policy; also refers to the broader administrative apparatus of the state” (613).
Although Palestine has a governing authority its “government” is not effectively controlling the West Bank or Gaza, which leads to an understanding that it is not ready to be its own state. Lastly, the question of whether or not Palestine has the capacity to enter into relations with other states is clearly written out in Article IX of the Interim Agreement. Palestine is unable to make foreign decisions or enter into foreign relations without the assistance of Israel. Palestine does not have the capacity to freely conduct foreign relations, so it does not meet the third requirement for statehood. “A state is considered to be the most important form of political organization in modern politics, which, in its ideal form, is characterized by centralized control of the use of force, bureaucratic organization, and the provision of a number of public goods” (Dickovick & Eastwood 617). Palestine does not have a centralized control of force nor does it have proper bureaucratic organization. Although Palestine has gained much independence, Palestine has not yet met the requirements of statehood; therefore, under international law it is not considered a
state.
Work Cited
Dickovick, J. T., & Eastwood, J. 2013. Comparative politics: integrating theories, methods, and cases. New York: Oxford University Press, 613-614.
Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States. (2008, Apr). Retrieved Sep, 2013.
Scobbie, I., Margalit, A., & Hibbin, S. 2011. “Recognizing Palestinian Statehood Yale Journal of International Affairs.” September 18. http://yalejournal.org/2011/08/25/recognizing-palestinian-statehood (August 25, 2011).
“This paper prepared in accord with the JMU Honor Code”
large, often geographically bound population” (614). In regards to this definition I believe Palestine can be classified as a nation but not as a state. Although
Palestine is closer than ever to becoming recognized as its own state I do not believe Palestine should have an independent state of its own. Palestine does not posses all of the qualities to be considered a sovereign State under international law. According to Article 1 set out in the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States “the qualities of statehood under international law consist of: a permanent population; a defined territory; government; and capacity to enter into relations with other states.” Although Palestine has completed some of these qualifications, there is clear evidence that it has not fulfilled all four requirements.
Palestine does have a population of people who share a common culture, history, and nationality. However, it is questionable whether a state can have a permanent population without exercising control over that population. Palestine lacks authority over its population, which creates controversy for whether they have “a defined territory.” The Palestinian borders are not yet a sufficiently defined territory; and Palestine does not have complete control over its population, therefore it has not met the second quality of statehood. “Security Council (UNSC) resolutions 242 and 338 call upon Israel to withdraw to the 1949 armistice lines, thus indicating that the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip occupied by Israel in 1967 constitute the territory of the Palestinian State, (Margalit & Hibbin 2013)” this meaning, that these areas are under Palestinian control. Palestine has been unable to control these areas independent of external …show more content…
involvement. Dickovick and Eastwood define a government as “a set of top elected executive officials and high-level political appointees that shape and orient policy; also refers to the broader administrative apparatus of the state” (613).
Although Palestine has a governing authority its “government” is not effectively controlling the West Bank or Gaza, which leads to an understanding that it is not ready to be its own state. Lastly, the question of whether or not Palestine has the capacity to enter into relations with other states is clearly written out in Article IX of the Interim Agreement. Palestine is unable to make foreign decisions or enter into foreign relations without the assistance of Israel. Palestine does not have the capacity to freely conduct foreign relations, so it does not meet the third requirement for statehood. “A state is considered to be the most important form of political organization in modern politics, which, in its ideal form, is characterized by centralized control of the use of force, bureaucratic organization, and the provision of a number of public goods” (Dickovick & Eastwood 617). Palestine does not have a centralized control of force nor does it have proper bureaucratic organization. Although Palestine has gained much independence, Palestine has not yet met the requirements of statehood; therefore, under international law it is not considered a
state.
Work Cited
Dickovick, J. T., & Eastwood, J. 2013. Comparative politics: integrating theories, methods, and cases. New York: Oxford University Press, 613-614.
Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States. (2008, Apr). Retrieved Sep, 2013.
Scobbie, I., Margalit, A., & Hibbin, S. 2011. “Recognizing Palestinian Statehood Yale Journal of International Affairs.” September 18. http://yalejournal.org/2011/08/25/recognizing-palestinian-statehood (August 25, 2011).
“This paper prepared in accord with the JMU Honor Code”