Wikia

Religion Wiki

State of Palestine

Talk0
33,790pages on
this wiki
Palestine
فلسطين
Filastin
AnthemBiladi adopted 1996 - Mawtiny was adopted from 1936 till 1995
CapitalJerusalem (proclaimed)1
Gaza, Ramallah (administrative)
Largest city Gaza City2
Government Semi-presidential;
Parliamentary democracy
 -  President Mahmoud Abbas
Establishment
 -  Declared November 15, 1988 
Population
 -  2009 (July)2 estimate 4,136,540 (125th)
GDP (PPP) 20082 estimate
 -  Total $11.95 billion2 (-)
 -  Per capita $2,9002 (-)
HDI (2007) 0.731 (medium) (106th)
Currency Jordanian dinara
Egyptian Poundb
Israeli shekelc
(JOD, EGP, ILS)
Time zone   (UTC+2)
 -  Summer (DST)   (UTC+3)
Internet TLD .ps
Calling code +9703
1 Jerusalem was designated the capital of Palestine in the declaration of independence, but Palestine exercises no control over that territory.
2 Population and economy statistics and rankings are based on the Palestinian territories
3 +972 is also used as well.

The State of Palestine (Arabic: دولة فلسطين‎, dawlat filastin), officially simply Palestine (Arabic: فلسطين‎, filastin),[1][2] is a state with limited recognition. It was proclaimed on November 15, 1988, in Algiers by the Palestine Liberation Organization's (PLO) Palestinian National Council (PNC) as an affirmation of the Palestinian people's right to self determination in form of an independent, sovereign state. This step, however, did not have any practical effect regarding the control of territory or population. The declaration designated Jerusalem the capital of Palestine,[i][1][2] despite the Israeli control over the city and its designation as the Israeli capital in the Israeli law.

More than 100 countries have extended diplomatic recognition to the proclaimed state; other countries announced they welcomed this step without explicitly declaring recognition. The United Nations decided to change the name of the PLO General Assembly permanent observer to "Palestine" following the 1988 declaration.[3] In the list of "non-member states and entities" Palestine is categorized under "Other entities having received a standing invitation to participate as observers in the sessions and the work of the General Assembly and are maintaining permanent offices at Headquarters"[4].

The Palestinian National Authority (PNA or PA), established as a result of the Oslo Accords which were signed between the PLO and Israel, is an interim administrative body that exercises some governmental functions in parts of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The current President of Palestine is Mahmoud Abbas, serving in his capacity as Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization.

BackgroundEdit

As a geographic area, the definition of Palestine has varied throughout history, but currently covers what is the State of Israel, the West Bank (between Israel and Jordan) and the Gaza Strip (between Israel and Egypt, on the Mediterranean shore).[5] Ruled by the Ottoman Empire (1518-1917), this area became part of Mandate Palestine after the end of World War I.[5] The boundaries of two new states were laid down within the territory of the Mandate, Palestine and Transjordan.[6][7] The partition of Palestine into an Arab state, Jewish state, and a Corpus Separatum was proposed as part of the 1947 United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine; only the Jewish state materialized, adopting the name Israel, on approximately three quarters of Mandate Palestine's territory[8]. The territory known today as the West Bank was annexed to Jordan, and the territory known as the Gaza Strip was put under Egyptian military administration.

Accordingly, Palestine is a country that does not appear on contemporary political maps, but which is very much alive for its people.[5] Many of its people are refugees, and comprise today a significant segment of the Palestinian diaspora, accounting for why some Palestinians describe Palestine as, "a country in exile."[5] The Palestinian people's struggle for recognition of their political rights, including statehood, has made the "Palestinian Question"[9], "a continuing flashpoint for tensions in the Middle East since the late 1920s."[5]

West Bank and Gaza Strip, 1948-1967Edit

Ernest A. Gross, a senior U.S. State Department legal adviser, authored a memorandum for the United States government titled Recognition of New States and Governments in Palestine, dated 11 May 1948. He expressed the view that "The Arab and Jewish communities will be legally entitled on May 15, 1948 (the date of expiry of the British Mandate) to proclaim states and organize governments in the areas of Palestine occupied by the respective communities." Gross also said "the law of nations recognizes an inherent right of people lacking the agencies and institutions of social and political control to organize a state and operate a government."[10]

On April 12, 1948, the Arab League announced:

The Arab armies shall enter Palestine to rescue it. His Majesty (King Farouk, representing the League) would like to make it clearly understood that such measures should be looked upon as temporary and devoid of any character of the occupation or partition of Palestine, and that after completion of its liberation, that country would be handed over to its owners to rule in the way they like.[11]

West BankEdit

During the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, Jordan occupied the area of Cisjordan now called the West Bank, which it continued to control in accordance with the 1949 Armistice Agreements and a political union formed in December 1948. Military Proclamation Number 2 of 1948 provided for the application in the West Bank of laws that were applicable in Palestine on the eve of the termination of the Mandate. On 2 November 1948, the military rule was replaced by a civilian administration by virtue of the Law Amending Public Administration Law in Palestine. Military Proclamation Number 17 of 1949, Section 2, vested the King of Jordan with all the powers that were enjoyed by the King of England, his ministers and the High Commissioner of Palestine by the Palestine Order-in-Council, 1922. Section 5 of this law confirmed that all laws, regulations and orders that were applicable in Palestine until the termination of the Mandate would remain in force until repealed or amended.[12]

The Second Arab-Palestinian Congress (1948)[13] was held in Jericho on December 1, 1948. The delegates proclaimed Abdullah King of Palestine and called for a union of Arab Palestine with the Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan.[14] Avi Plascov says that Abdullah contacted the Nashashibi opposition, local mayors, mukhars, those opposed to the Husaynis, and opposition members of the AHC. Plascov said that the Palestinian Congresses were conducted in accordance with prevailing Arab custom. He also said that contrary to the widely held belief outside Jordan the representatives did reflect the feelings of a large segment of the population.[15]

Sandra Berliant Kadosh analyzed United States policy toward the West Bank in 1948, based largely on the Foreign Relations Documents of the United States. She noted that the US government believed that the most satisfactory solution regarding the disposition of the greater part of Arab Palestine would be incorporation in Transjordan and that the State Department approved the Principle underlying the Jericho resolutions.[16] Kadosh said that the delegates claimed to represent 90 percent of the population, and that they ridiculed the Gaza government. They asserted that it represented only its eighty-odd members.[17].

The Transjordanian Government agreed to the unification on December 7, 1948, and on December 13 the Transjordanian parliament approved the creation of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. The change of status was reflected by the adoption of a new official name. The "Encyclopedia of the United Nations and international agreements" says that the name of Transjordan was officially changed on 21 January 1949 to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.[18] The step of unification was ratified by a joint Jordanian National Assembly on April 24, 1950. The Assembly was comprised of 20 representatives each from the East and West Bank. The Act of Union contained a protective clause which presevered Arab rights in Palestine without prejudice to any final settlement.[12][19]

The Department of State Bulletin for the first quarter of 1950 contained an article about the Clapp Mission to Middle East countries of Lebanon, Jordan, Arab Palestine, and Syria. The UN Economic Survey Mission for the Middle East, headed by Gordon R. Clapp, chairman of the Board of Directors of the Tennessee Valley Authority recommended four development projects, involving the Wadi Zerqa basin in Jordan, the Wadi Qilt watershed and stream bed in Arab Palestine, the Litani River in Lebanon, and the Ghab Swamps in Syria.[20] President Truman subsequently announced that the Foreign Economic Assistance Act of 1950 contained an apropriation of $27 million dollars for the development projects recommended by the Clapp Mission and to assist Palestinian refugees.[21]

Many legal scholars say the declaration of the Arab League and the Act of Union implied that Jordan's claim of sovereignty was provisional, because it had always been subject to the emergence of the Palestinian state.[22][23] A political union was legally established by the series of proclamations, decrees, and parliamentary acts in December 1948. Abdullah thereupon took the title King of Jordan, and he officially changed the country's name to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in April 1949. The 1950 Act of Union confirmed and ratified King Abdullah's actions. Following the annexation of the West Bank, only two countries formally recognized the union: Britain and Pakistan.[24][25] Thomas Kuttner notes that de facto recognition was granted to the regime, most clearly evidenced by the maintaining of consulates in East Jerusalem by several countries, including the United States.[26] Joseph Weiler agreed, and said that other states had engaged in activities, statements, and resolutions that would be inconsistent with non-recognition.[27] Joseph Massad said that the members of the Arab League granted de facto recognition and that the United States had formally recognized the annexation, except for Jerusalem.[28][29]

The United States extended de jure recognition to the Government of Transjordan and the Government of Israel on the same day, January 31, 1949.[30] President Truman told King Abdullah that the policy of the United States Government as regards a final territorial settlement in Palestine had been stated in the General Assembly on Nov 30, 1948 by the American representative. The US supported Israeli claims to the boundaries set forth in the UN General Assembly resolution of November 29, 1947, but believed that if Israel sought to retain additional territory in Palestine allotted to the Arabs, it should give the Arabs territorial compensation.[31]

Clea Bunch said that "President Truman crafted a balanced policy between Israel and its moderate Hashemite neighbours when he simultaneously extended formal recognition to the newly created state of Israel and the Kingdom of Transjordan. These two nations were inevitably linked in the President's mind as twin emergent states: one serving the needs of the refugee Jew, the other absorbing recently displaced Palestinian Arabs. In addition, Truman was aware of the private agreements that existed between Jewish Agency leaders and King Abdullah I of Jordan. Thus, it made perfect sense to Truman to favour both states with de jure recognition."[32]

In 1978 the U.S. State Department published a memorandum of conversation held on June 5, 1950 between Mr. Stuart W. Rockwell of the Office of African and Near Eastern Affairs and Abdel Monem Rifai, a Counselor of the Jordan Legation: Mr. Rifai asked when the United States was going to recognize the union of Arab Palestine and Jordan. Mr. Rockwell explained the Department's position, stating that it was not the custom of the United States to issue formal statements of recognition every time a foreign country changed its territorial area. The union of Arab Palestine and Jordan had been brought about as a result of the will of the people and the US accepted the fact that Jordanian sovereignty had been extended to the new area. Mr. Rifai said he had not realized this and that he was very pleased to learn that the US did in fact recognize the union.[21]

At the Rabat summit conference in 1974, Jordan and the other members of the Arab League declared that the PLO was the "sole legitimate representative of the [Arab] Palestinian people", thereby relinquishing to that organization its role as representative of the West Bank.

The Amman Agreement of February 11, 1985, declared that the PLO and Jordan would pursue a proposed confederation between the state of Jordan and a Palestinian state.[33] In 1988, King Hussein dissolved the Jordanian parliament and renounced Jordanian claims to the West Bank. The PLO assumed responsibility as the Provisional Government of Palestine and an independent state was declared.[34]

Gaza StripEdit

Egypt supervised an independent government of Palestine in Gaza as a trustee on behalf of the Arab League.[35] An Egyptian Ministerial order dated June 1, 1948 declared that all laws in force during the Mandate would continue to be in force in the Gaza Strip. Another order issued on August 8, 1948 vested an Egyptian Administrator-General with the powers of the High Commissioner. The All-Palestine Government issued a Declaration of the Independent State of Palestine on October 1, 1948.[36] In 1957, the Basic Law of Gaza established a Legislative Council that could pass laws which were given to the High Administrator-General for approval. In March 1962, a Constitution for the Gaza Strip was issued confirming the role of the Legislative Council.[12]

1967 occupationEdit

The West Bank and Gaza Strip were conquered by Israel during the 1967 war. They are considered by the international community to be Occupied Palestinian Territory, notwithstanding the 1988 declaration of Palestinian independence, the limited self-government accorded to the Palestinian Authority as a result of the 1993 Oslo Accords, and Israel's withdrawal from Gaza as part of the Israel's unilateral disengagement plan of 2005, which saw the dismantlement of four Israeli settlements in the West Bank and all settlements in the Gaza Strip. See also Consequences of the occupation in the Legal status section below.

1988 DeclarationEdit

The Palestinian Declaration of Independence was approved by the Palestinian National Council (PNC) in Algiers on November 15, 1988, by a vote of 253 in favour 46 against and 10 abstentions. It was read by Yasser Arafat at the closing session of the 19th PNC to a standing ovation.[37] Upon completing the reading of the declaration, Arafat, as Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization assumed the title of "President of Palestine."[38]

Referring to "the historical injustice inflicted on the Palestinian Arab people resulting in their dispersion and depriving them of their right to self-determination," the declaration recalled the Treaty of Lausanne (1923) and UN General Assembly Resolution 181 as supporting the rights of Palestinians and Palestine. The declaration then proclaims a "State of Palestine on our Palestinian territory with its capital Jerusalem".[39][40] The borders of the declared State of Palestine were not specified. The population of the state was referred to by the statement: "The State of Palestine is the state of Palestinians wherever they may be". The state was defined as an Arab country by the statement: "The State of Palestine is an Arab state, an integral and indivisible part of the Arab nation". The declaration was accompanied by a PNC call for multilateral negotiations on the basis of UN Security Council Resolution 242. This call was later termed "the Historic Compromise"[41], as it implied acceptance of the "two-state solution", namely that it no longer questioned the legitimacy of the State of Israel.[40] The PNC's political communiqué accompanying the declaration called only for withdrawal from "Arab Jerusalem" and the other "Arab territories occupied."[42] Yasser Arafat's statements in Geneva a month later[43][44] were accepted by the United States as sufficient to remove the ambiguities it saw in the declaration and to fulfill the longheld conditions for open dialogue with the United States.[45][46]

As a result of the declaration, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) convened, inviting Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the PLO to give an address. An UNGA resolution was adopted "acknowledging the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988," and it was further decided that "the designation 'Palestine' should be used in place of the designation 'Palestine Liberation Organization' in the United Nations system." One hundred and four states voted for this resolution, forty-four abstained, and two - the United States and Israel - voted against.[47] By mid-December, 75 states had recognized Palestine, rising to 89 states by February 1989.[48]

Government structureEdit

Palestine election map

Governorates of Palestine

The Constitution of the League of Arab States says the existence and independence of Palestine cannot be questioned de jure even though the outward signs of this independence have remained veiled as a result of force majeure.[49] The League supervised the Egyptian trusteeship of the Palestinian government in Gaza after the termination of the British Mandate and secured assurances from Jordan that the 1950 Act of Union was "without prejudice to the final settlement".[50][19]

By the 1988 declaration, the PNC empowered its central council to form a government-in-exile when appropriate, and called upon its executive committee to perform the duties of the government-in-exile until its establishment.[37]

Under the terms of the Oslo Accords signed between Israel and the PLO, the latter assumed control over the Jericho area of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip on 17 May 1994. On September 28, 1995, following the signing of the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Israeli military forces withdrew from the West Bank towns of Nablus, Ramallah, ,Jericho, Jenin, Tulkarem, Qalqilya and Bethlehem. In December 1995, the PLO also assumed responsibility for civil administration in 17 areas in Hebron.[51] While the PLO assumed these responsibilities as a result of Oslo, a new temporary interim administrative body was set up as a result of the Accords to carry out these functions on the ground: the Palestinian National Authority (PNA).

An analysis outlining the relationship between the PLO, the PNA (or PA), Palestine and Israel in light of the interim arrangements set out in the Oslo Accords begins by stating that, "Palestine may best be described as a transitional association between the PA and the PLO." It goes on to explain that this transitional association accords the PA responsibility for local government and the PLO responsibility for representation of the Palestinian people in the international arena, while prohibiting it from concluding international agreements that affect the status of the occupied territories. This situation is said to be accepted by the Palestinian population insofar as it is viewed as a temporary arrangement.[52]

In March of 2008 it was reported that the PA was working to increase the number of countries that recognize Palestine and that a PA representative had signed a bilateral agreement between the State of Palestine and Costa Rica.[53] A recent Al-Haq position paper said the reality is that the PA has entered into various agreements with international organizations and states. These instances of foreign relations undertaken by the PA signify that the Interim Agreement is part of a larger on-going peace process, and that the restrictions on the foreign policy operations of the PA conflict with the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, now a norm with a nature of jus cogens, which includes a right to engage in international relations with other peoples.[54]

Legal statusEdit

There are a wide variety of views regarding the status of the State of Palestine, both among the states of the international community and among legal scholars. The existence of a state of Palestine, although controversial, is nonetheless a reality in the opinions of the many states that have established bilateral diplomatic relations.[55][56][57]Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag. Tag has more than one name associated with reference. A number of publicists and legal experts have noted that the majority of other states have legally recognized the State of Palestine.

Consequences of the occupationEdit

After 1967, a number of formalistic legal arguments were advanced which dismissed the right of Palestinians to self-determination and statehood. They generally proposed that Palestine was a land void of a legitimate sovereign and supported Israeli claims to the remaining territory of the Palestine Mandate.[58][59] Historian and journalist, Gershom Gorenberg, says that outside of the pro-settlement community in Israel, these positions are considered quirky. He says that, while the Israeli government has used them for PR purposes abroad, it takes entirely different positions when arguing real legal cases before the Israeli Supreme Court. In 2005 Israel decided to dismantle all Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip and four in the northern West Bank. Gorenberg notes, the government's decision was challenged in the Supreme Court by settlers, and the government won the case by noting the settlements were in territory whose legal status was that of 'belligerent territory'. The government argued that the settlers should have known the settlements were only temporary.[60]

Most UN member states questioned the claim that Israel held better title to the land than the inhabitants, and stressed that statehood was an inalienable right of the Palestinian people.[61] Legal experts, like David John Ball, concluded that "the Palestinians, based on the principles of self-determination and the power of the U.N., appear to hold better title to the territory."[62] The International Court of Justice subsequently reaffirmed the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and the prohibition under customary and conventional international law against acquisition of territory by war.

The Israeli Supreme Court, sitting as the High Court of Justice, cited a case involving Gaza and said that "The Judea and Samaria areas are held by the State of Israel in belligerent occupation. The legal representative of the state in the area is the military commander. He is not the sovereign in the territory held in belligerent occupation. His power is granted him by public international law regarding belligerent occupation. The legal meaning of this view is twofold: first, Israeli law does not apply in these areas. They have not been "annexed" to Israel. Second, the legal regime which applies in these areas is determined by public international law regarding belligerent occupation."[63]

The court said most Israelis do not have ownership of the land on which they built their houses and businesses in the territory "They acquired their rights from the military commander, or from persons acting on his behalf. Neither the military commander nor those acting on his behalf are owners of the property, and they cannot transfer rights better than those they have. To the extent that the Israelis built their homes and assets on land which is not private ('state land'), that land is not owned by the military commander. His authority is defined in regulation 55 of The Hague Regulations. . . . The State of Israel acts . . . as the administrator of the state property and as usufructuary of it."[63]

The Declaration and the Act of State DoctrineEdit

Many states have recognized the State of Palestine since 1988. Under the principles of customary international law, when a government is recognized by another government, recognition is retroactive in effect, and validates all the actions and conduct of the government so recognized from the commencement of its existence.[64]

Stephen Talmon notes that many countries have a formal policy of recognizing states, not their governments. In practice, they usually make no formal declarations regarding recognition. He cites several examples including a memorandum on US recognition policy and practice, dated 25 September 1981 which said that recognition would be implied by the US Government's dealings with the new government.[65] Many countries have expressed their intention to enter into relations with the State of Palestine. The United States formally recognized the West Bank and Gaza Strip as a country in 1997 at the request of the Palestinian Authority. At that time it asked the public to take notice of that fact through announcements it placed in the Federal Register.[66] The USAID West Bank/Gaza,[67] has been tasked with "state-building" projects in the areas of democracy, governance, resources, and infrastructure. Part of the USAID mission is to "provide flexible and discrete support for implementation of the Quartet Road Map",[68] an internationally backed plan which calls for the progressive development of a viable Palestinian State in the West Bank and Gaza. The EU has announced similar external relations programs with the Palestinian Authority.[69]

The view of the European states, which did not extend full recognition was expressed by French President Francois Mitterrand who stated: "Many European countries are not ready to recognize a Palestine state. Others think that between recognition and non-recognition there are significant degrees; I am among these."[47] But, after the PLO recognized the state of Israel, Mitterrand welcomed the PLO leader, Yasir Arafat, in Paris, in May 1989.[70]

Decisions of international and national tribunalsEdit

The U.S. State Department Digest of International Law says that the terms of the Treaty of Lausanne provided for the application of the principles of state succession to the "A" Mandates. The Treaty of Versailles (1920) provisionally recognized the former Ottoman communities as independent nations. It also required Germany to recognize the disposition of the former Ottoman territories and to recognize the new states laid down within their boundaries. The Treaty of Lausanne required the newly created states that acquired the territory to pay annuities on the Ottoman public debt, and to assume responsibility for the administration of concessions that had been granted by the Ottomans. A dispute regarding the status of the territories was settled by an Arbitrator appointed by the Council of the League of Nations. It was decided that Palestine and Transjordan were newly created states according to the terms of the applicable post-war treaties. In its Judgment No. 5, The Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions, the Permanent Court of International Justice also decided that Palestine was responsible as the successor state for concessions granted by Ottoman authorities. The Courts of Palestine and Great Britain decided that title to the properties shown on the Ottoman Civil list had been ceded to the government of Palestine as an allied successor state.[7]

State successionEdit

A legal analysis by the International Court of Justice noted that the Covenant of the League of Nations had provisionally recognized the communities of Palestine as independent nations. The mandate simply marked a transitory period, with the aim and object of leading the mandated territory to become an independent self-governing State.[71] Judge Higgins explained that the Palestinian people are entitled to their territory, to exercise self-determination, and to have their own State."[72] The Court said that specific guarantees regarding freedom of movement and access to the Holy Sites contained in the Treaty of Berlin (1878) had been preserved under the terms of the Palestine Mandate and a chapter of the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine.[73]

Article 62 (LXII) of the Treaty of Berlin, 13 July 1878[74] dealt with religious freedom and civil and political rights in all parts of the Ottoman Empire.[75] The guarantees have frequently been referred to as "religious rights" or "minority rights". However, the guarantees included a prohibition against discrimination in civil and political matters. Difference of religion could not be alleged against any person as a ground for exclusion or incapacity in matters relating to the enjoyment of civil or political rights, admission to public employments, functions, and honors, or the exercise of the various professions and industries, "in any locality whatsoever."

The resolution of the San Remo Conference contained a safeguarding clause for all of those rights. The conference accepted the terms of the Mandate with reference to Palestine, on the understanding that there was inserted in the process-verbal a legal undertaking by the Mandatory Power that it would not involve the surrender of the rights hitherto enjoyed by the non-Jewish communities in Palestine.[76] The draft mandates for Mesopotamia and Palestine, and all of the post-war peace treaties contained clauses for the protection of minorities. The mandates invoked the compulsory jurisdiction of the Permanent Court of International Justice in the event of any disputes.[77]

Article 28 of the Mandate required that those rights be safeguarded in perpetuity, under international guarantee.[71] The General Assembly's Plan for the Future Government of Palestine placed those rights under UN protection as part of a minority protection plan.[78] It required that they be acknowledged in a Declaration, embodied in the fundamental laws of the states, and in their Constitutions. The partition plan also contained provisions that bound the new states to international agreements and conventions to which Palestine had become a party and held them responsible for its financial obligations.[79] The Declarations of the Independent State of Israel and the Independent State of Palestine acknowledged the protected rights and were accepted as being in line with UN resolution 181(II).[80]

Opinions of officials and legal scholarsEdit

Jacob Robinson was a legal advisor to the United Nations delegation of the Jewish Agency for Palestine during the special session of the General Assembly in 1947.[81] He advised the Zionist Executive that the provisional states had come into existence as a result of the resolution of November 29, 1947.[82]

L.C. Green explained that "recognition of statehood is a matter of discretion, it is open to any existing state to accept as a state any entity it wishes, regardless of the existence of territory or an established government."[83]

Alex Takkenberg writes that while "[...] there is no doubt that the entity 'Palestine' should be considered a state in statu nascendi and although it is increasingly likely that the ongoing peace process will eventually culminate in the establishment of a Palestinian state, it is premature to conclude that statehood, as defined by international law, is at present (spring 1997) firmly established."[84] Referring to the four criteria of statehood, as outlined in the 1933 Montevideo Convention - that is, a permanent population, a defined territory, government and the capacity to enter into relations with other states - Takkenberg states that the entity known as Palestine does not fully satisfy this criteria.[84]

Conversely John V. Whitbeck, who served as an advisor to the Palestinian negotiation team during negotiations with Israel, writes that "[...] the State of Palestine already exists," and that when, "Judged by these customary criteria [those of the Montevideo Convention], the State of Palestine is on at least as firm a legal footing as the State of Israel." He continues: "The weak link in Palestine's claim to already exist as a state was, until recently, the fourth criterion, "effective control. [...] Yet a Palestinian executive and legislature, democratically elected with the enthusiastic approval of the international community, now exercises 'effective control' over a portion of Palestinian territory in which the great majority of the state's population lives. It can no longer be seriously argued that Palestine's claim to exist falls at the fourth and final hurdle."[85]

For John Quigley Palestine's existence as a state predates the 1988 declaration. Tracing Palestine's status as an international entity back to the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after World War I, he recalls that the Palestine Mandate (1918–1948), an arrangement made under Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, held as its "ultimate objective", the "self-determination and independence of the people concerned." He says that in explicitly referring to the Covenant, the 1988 declaration was reaffirming an existing Palestinian statehood.[86] Noting that Palestine under the Mandate entered into bilateral treaties, including one with Great Britain, the Mandatory power, he cites this as an example of its "sovereignty" at that time. He also notes the corollary of the Stimson Doctrine and the customary prohibition on the use of force contained in the Restatement of Foreign Relations Law of the United States, "[a]n entity does not necessarily cease to be a state even if all of its territory has been occupied by a foreign power".[47]

Robert Weston Ash says that Quigley’s analysis of the declaration that the Palestinian Authority provided to the International Criminal Court failed to explain a number of key issues. He says the “Palestinian people” to whom sovereignty reverted upon the departure of the British would have included both Jews and Arabs. He suggests that establishes a colorable Jewish —as well as Arab— claim to all of Palestine which tends to refute Professor Quigley’s contention that there are no other claimants to that territory. Ash says there are segments of Israeli society that continue to view “Judea and Samaria” as areas promised to the Jews by the Balfour Declaration and says that the Geneva Convention is not applicable to Israel's presence in those territories. He cites Yehuda Blum's "Missing Reversioner" and Eugene Rostow's related claim that “The right of the Jewish people to settle in Palestine has never been terminated for the West Bank.”[87] Quigley has said that the International Court of Justice findings in the "Wall" case regarding the applicability of the Geneva Convention discredited once and for all, as a legal matter, the ‘missing reversioner’ argument.[88] The International Criminal Court has published a summary of arguments which says that some submissions consider that it is clear that the Palestinian National Authority cannot be regarded as a ‘State’, and that some submit that Palestine is recognized as a State by many States and many institutions. The Court says that a conclusive determination on Palestine's declaration will have to be made by the judges at an appropriate moment.[89][90]

Disputes have arisen as a result of the Conflict of laws between the Palestinian Authority and Israel. Judgments originating in Israeli Courts are not directly enforceable in the Courts of the Palestinian Authority.[91] The District Court of Israel ruled that the Palestinian Authority satisfied the criteria to be legally treated as a sovereign state[92] The ruling was appealed to the Supreme Court of Israel which ruled that the Palestinian Authority cannot be defined as a foreign state, since recognizing states is an exclusive authority of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Supreme Court held that the Palestinian Authority can be granted state immunity on an ad hoc basis when it is warranted by the circumstances[93]. The Knesset responded to the willingness of the judges to engage in examination of the notion of ‘statehood for the purpose of state immunity’ by adopting a measure that makes it possible to grant sovereign immunity to a ‘political entity that is not a state’ as part of the 2008 Foreign States Immunity Law, Art. 20.[94]

Stefan Talmon notes that "In international law it is true that one generally recognizes the Government which exercises effective control over a territory. But this is not an absolute rule without exceptions."[95] James Crawford notes that despite its prevalence, and inclusion in the statehood criteria found in the Montevideo Convention, effectiveness is not the sole or even the critical criterion for statehood. He cites several examples of annexations and governments that have been recognized despite their lack of a territorial foothold.[96] Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu recently expressed a willingness to recognize the State of Palestine if it will agree to forgo taking effective control of its airspace, military defense, and not enter into alliances with Israel's enemies.[97]

In November 2009, Palestinian officials were reported to be preparing the ground for asking for recognition of a Palestinian State from the Security Council. The state was envisioned to be based on the 1967 Green Line as an international border with Israel and East Jerusalem as its capital. The plan was reported to have support from Arab states, Russia and the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon.[98] The Secretary General said "Today, the State of Israel exists, but the State of Palestine does not." "It is vital that a sovereign State of Palestine is achieved". "This should be on the basis of the 1967 lines with agreed land swaps and a just and agreed solution to the refugee issue."[99]

Paul De Waart says that the Quartet, particularly the United States, as well as western states, do not consider Palestine to be a state as yet. In their view the statehood of Palestine will be the result of bilateral negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian people. He says they have overlooked that under international law it is not anymore a question of creating but of recognizing the State of Palestine.[100]

Israeli legal expert Ruth Lapidoth said the Palestinians have already unilaterally declared statehood, and they did not need to do it again. "Recognition of statehood is a political act, and every state has the right to decide for itself whether to recognize another state."[101]

President Abbas said that the State of Palestine was already in existence and that the current battle is to have the state's border recognized.[102] Jerome Segal wrote about Salam Fayyad's plan for Palestinian statehood. He said lest anyone believe that the 1988 declaration is ancient history, they should read the new Fayyad plan with more care. It cites the 1988 declaration four times, identifying it as having articulated "the foundations of the Palestinian state."[103]

Statehood for the purposes of the UN CharterEdit

The UN Charter protects the territorial integrity or political independence of any state from the threat or use of force. Philip Jessup served as a representative of the United States to the United Nations and as a Judge on the International Court of Justice. During the Security Council hearings regarding Israel's application for membership in the UN, he said:

[W]e already have, among the members of the United Nations, some political entities which do not possess full sovereign power to form their own international policy, which traditionally has been considered characteristic of a State. We know however, that neither at San Francisco nor subsequently has the United Nations considered that complete freedom to frame and manage one's own foreign policy was an essential requisite of United Nations membership.... ...The reason for which I mention the qualification of this aspect of the traditional definition of a State is to underline the point that the term "State", as used and applied in Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations, may not be wholly identical with the term "State" as it is used and defined in classic textbooks on international law."[104]

After Operation Cast Lead, Palestinian Foreign Minister Riad al-Malki said that he and Palestinian Justice Minister Ali Kashan had provided proof to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court that Palestine had been extended legal recognition as a State by 67 other countries, and had bilateral agreements with States in Latin America, Asia, Africa and Europe .[105] The General Assembly endorsed the report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict which also called for war crimes investigations.[42]

John Dugard has served as Judge ad hoc on the International Court of Justice and as a Special Rapporteur for both the former United Nations Commission on Human Rights and the International Law Commission. He recently wrote that the majority of states recognize the State of Palestine, and that it was only necessary that it be considered a State for the purposes of the Rome Statute for the case to be accepted by the International Criminal Court.Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag. Tag has more than one name associated with reference.

Thomas Grant says that the General Assembly "Definition of Aggression", contained in UN General Assembly Resolution 3314 (XXIX) (1974) provides that any entity (even an illegal one like the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus) which is the target of aggression may be legally termed a State - without regard to recognition or UN membership - and benefit from the protections contained in article 2(4) of the UN Charter regarding the use of force or the threat of force by other states.[106] The UN Treaty Organization says that portions of the General Assembly's definition have been judged to be declarative of customary international law by the International Court of Justice.[107]

International recognition Edit

Palestine-recognition-map

Map showing nations which have recognised or have special diplomatic arrangements with the State of Palestine or other Palestinian delegation.

The United Nations has recognized the permanent sovereignty of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem as a matter of international law. General Assembly resolution 64/185, 21 December 2009 was adopted by a vote of 165 in favor to 8 against, with 7 abstentions. The right of permanent sovereignty over natural resources is a "valid norm of international law."[108] Franz Perrez wrote that "The principle of permanent sovereignty over natural resources is a fundamental principle of contemporary international law. It emerged in the 1950s during the process of decolonization as a basic constituent of the right to self-determination and an essential and inherent element of state sovereignty."[109]

The International Court of Justice noted that a number of agreements have been signed since 1993 between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization and that those agreements required Israel to transfer to Palestinian authorities certain powers and responsibilities exercised in the Occupied Palestinian Territory by its military authorities and civil administration. The Court said that Israel is under an obligation not to raise any obstacle to the exercise of such rights in those fields where competence has been transferred to Palestinian authorities.[110] Israel’s representative at the United Nations subsequently said that under agreements reached between the two sides, the Palestinian Authority already exercised jurisdiction over many natural resources, while interim cooperation and arrangements were in place for others.[111]

States recognising the State of PalestineEdit

Many countries have a standing policy against making formal declarations that recognize new governments instead indicating their recognition of a state by doing business with its government.[65] Francis Boyle, legal advisor to the PLO, assisted the organization in drafting the 1988 Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Palestine. At that time, the United States was using its Foreign Assistance Act and other measures to discourage other countries and international organizations from extending recognition.[112] By 1988, more than 100 countries had recognized the "state" of Palestine.[113] Boyle reported in 1990 that the number had risen to 114 states.[56] In 2005, Anat Kurz reported that 117 United Nations member states had formally recognised the state of Palestine as a sovereign state.[114]

After the election victory of Hamas, some governments took steps to oppose countries that supported the new Palestinian authorities, and once again imposed economic and other sanctions.[115][116] The Palestinian National Authority publicly acknowledged the recognition of 94 other states.[117] Since then, other states have publicly extended recognition[53] and Boyle has reported in 2009 that about 130 countries recognize the State of Palestine.[118] Most states that recognized the State of Palestine subsequently upgraded to embassy status any PLO offices in their countries.[119] A number of other states and the Holy See grant some form of diplomatic status to a Palestinian delegation. Some fall short of full diplomatic recognition. The following are listed in alphabetical order by region.

AfricaEdit

North and Central AmericaEdit

South AmericaEdit

AsiaEdit

EuropeEdit

Western AsiaEdit

OceaniaEdit

States maintaining special diplomatic arrangements Edit

States that do not recognize the State of Palestine but allow the PLO to maintain a regional office in their countries are:

The delegations and embassies listed below on the left, are recognized as the representatives of the Palestinian people by the nations listed to their right:

Representation in international organizationsEdit

United Nations representation Edit

Palestine is an entity with special status at the UN.[154] The Palestine National Council (PNC) sent formal notification to the U.N. Secretary-General regarding the establishment of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in May 1964. The following year in October, some Arab states requested that a PLO delegation be allowed to attend meetings of the Special Political Committee, and it was decided that they could present a statement, without implying recognition. PLO participation in the discussions of the Committee took place under the agenda item of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) from 1963 to 1973.[155]

The PLO gained observer status at the United Nations General Assembly in 1974 (General Assembly resolution 3237). Acknowledging the proclamation of the State of Palestine, the UN redesignated this observer status to 'Palestine' on 15 December 1988 in General Assembly resolution 43/177 and affirmed "the need to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967."[156] In July 1998, the General Assembly adopted a new resolution (52/250) conferring upon Palestine additional rights and privileges, including the right to participate in the general debate held at the start of each session of the General Assembly, the right of reply, the right to co-sponsor resolutions and the right to raise points of order on Palestinian and Middle East issues.[154] By this resolution, "seating for Palestine shall be arranged immediately after non-member States and before the other observers."[154] This resolution was adopted by a vote of 124 in favor, 4 against (Israel, USA, Marshall Islands, Micronesia) and 10 abstentions.[157]

Organisation of the Islamic ConferenceEdit

Palestine is a member state of the international Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and the Islamic Development Bank, an international financial institution set up for member states.[158][159]

Application to the WHOEdit

The PLO, who holds observer status at the World Health Organization (WHO), applied for full membership status for the State of Palestine in 1989. The United States, which provided one-quarter of the WHO's funding at the time, informed the WHO that its funding would be withheld if Palestine was admitted as a member state. Yasser Arafat described the US statement as "blackmail". The PLO was asked to withdraw its application by the WHO director general. The WHO subsequently voted to postpone consideration of the application and no action or decision on the application was ever taken.[47] John Quigley writes that Palestine's efforts to gain membership in several international organizations connected to the United Nations was frustrated by US threats to withhold funding from any organization that admitted Palestine.[160]

Arab LeagueEdit

Palestine is a member of the Arab League. Represented there since 1964 by the Palestine Liberation Organization, after the 1988 declaration of statehood, its status was upgraded to full membership under the name 'Palestine' with the Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization serving as 'president of Palestine'.[161]

Other membershipsEdit

Palestine is a member state in a number of international organizations. In others, it enjoys affiliation in a lesser capacity or under another designation (such as PLO or Occupied Palestinian Territory). In the list below, if the membership is not full or not for the state of Palestine, the type and name of affiliation is denoted in parentheses.

Palestinian passportEdit

File:PNA passport.jpg

Between 1924 and 1948, a Palestinian passport was available to residents of British Mandate Palestine. Issued by the High Commissioner for Palestine, they were titled, "British passport, Palestine," and the holders of these documents were considered, "citizens of Palestine." When the State of Palestine failed to be created with the termination of the Mandate in May 1948, the status and privileges attached to the passport were no longer valid.[163]

Since April 1995, a passport issued by the Palestinian Authority has been available to Palestinian residents of the Gaza Strip and West Bank. By September 1995, recognition of the passport was granted by 29 states: Algeria, Bahrain, Bulgaria, People's Republic of China, Cyprus, Egypt, France, Germany, Greece, India, Iran, Jordan, Malta, Morocco, the Netherlands, Pakistan, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, and the USA.[127]

As of 1997, Palestinian authorities had not yet issued a passport in the name of the State of Palestine.[164] While the U.S. Government recognizes Palestinian Authority passports as travel documents, it does not view them as conferring citizenship, since they are not issued by a government. Consular officials representing the Governments of Egypt, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates, when asked by the Resource Information Center of UNHCR in May 2002, would not comment on whether their governments viewed PA passports as conferring any proof of citizenship or residency, but did say that the passports, along with valid visas or other necessary papers, would allow their holders to travel to their countries.[165]

The Palestinian Authority has said that anyone born in Palestine carrying a birth certificate attesting to that can apply for a PA passport. Whether Palestinians born outside Palestine could apply was not clear to the PA Representative questioned by UNHCR representatives in May 2002. The PA representative also said even if those applying met the PA's eligibility criteria, the Israeli government placed additional restrictions on the actual issuance of passports.[165]

In October of 2007, a Japanese Justice Ministry official said, "Given that the Palestinian Authority has improved itself to almost a full-fledged state and issues its own passports, we have decided to accept the Palestinian nationality". The decision followed a recommendation by a ruling party panel on nationality that Palestinians should no longer be treated as stateless.[166]

See also Edit

Footnotes Edit

i.   ^ The Palestine Basic Law, approved by the PLC in May 2002, states unambiguously "Jerusalem is the Capital of Palestine" (source: [43]). Ramallah is the administrative capital where government institutions and foreign representative offices of Australia, Brazil, Canada Colombia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Malta, the Netherlands, South Africa, and Switzerland are located. Jerusalem's final status awaits future negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (see "Negotiating Jerusalem", University of Maryland). The United Nations and most countries do not accept Israel's claim over the whole of Jerusalem (see Kellerman 1993, p. 140) and maintain their embassies to Israel in other cities (see the CIA Factbook).

References Edit

  1. 1.0 1.1 Bissio, 1995, p. 433.
  2. 2.0 2.1 Page, 2004, p. 161.
  3. United Nations General Assembly (15 December 1988). "Palestine question/Proclamation of State/Designation "Palestine" - GA resolution". http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/9a798adbf322aff38525617b006d88d7/146e6838d505833f852560d600471e25?OpenDocumentc. Retrieved 6 February 2010. 
  4. United Nations (29 February 2009). "Permanent observers - non-member states and entities". http://www.un.org/en/members/nonmembers.shtml. Retrieved 7 February 2009. 
  5. 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Rubin, 1999, p. 186.
  6. Boundaries Delimitation: Palestine and Trans-Jordan, Yitzhak Gil-Har, Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 36, No. 1 (Jan., 2000), pp. 68-81: "Palestine and Transjordan emerged as states; This was in consequence of British War commitments to its allies during the First World War.
  7. 7.0 7.1 See Marjorie M. Whiteman, Digest of International Law, vol. 1, US State Department (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963) pp 650-652
  8. Wolffe, John (2005). Religion in History: Conflict, Conversion and Coexistence (Paperback). Manchester University Press. p. 265. ISBN 978-0719071072. 
  9. As it referred to by the UN
  10. The memo is contained in the Foreign Relations of the United States 1948, volume 5, part 2, page 964 and is cited by Stefan Talmon, in "Recognition of Governments in International Law" (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), page 36
  11. Israel, the West Bank and international law, by Allan Gerson, Routledge, 1978, ISBN 0714630918, page 78
  12. 12.0 12.1 12.2 "From Occupation to Interim Accords, Raja Shehadeh, Kluwer Law International, 1997, pages 77-78; and Historical Overview, A. F. & R. Shehadeh Law Firm [1]
  13. See Jericho Congress (1948)
  14. See:
    • Jericho Declaration, Palestine Post, December 14, 1948, Front page[2]
    • Telegram Mr. Wells Stabler to the Acting Secretary of State, December 4, 1948, Foreign relations of the United States, 1948, The Near East, South Asia, and Africa Volume V, Part 2, pages 1645-46[3]
    • British House of Commons, Jordan and Israel (Government Decision), HC Deb 27 April 1950 vol 474 cc1137-41[4]
  15. See "The Palestinian Refugees In Jordan 1948-1957, Routledge, 1981, ISBN 0714631205, pages 11-16
  16. Foreign relations of the United States, 1948. The Near East, South Asia, and Africa Volume V, Part 2, pages 1706-1707
  17. See United States Policy toward the West Bank in 1948, Jewish Social Studies, Vol. 46, No. 3/4 (Summer - Autumn, 1984), pp. 231-252
  18. Encyclopedia of the United Nations and International Agreements, Vol. 4, Edmund Jan Osmanczyk, and Anthony Mango, Routledge, 3rd edition, 2004, ISBN 0415939240, page 2354 [5]
  19. 19.0 19.1 *Marjorie M. Whiteman, Digest of International Law, vol. 2, US State Department (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963) pages 1163-68
  20. See the Department of State Bulletin, Vol. 22 Jan- Mar 1950, pages 105-106 [6]
  21. 21.0 21.1 Foreign relations of the United States, 1950. The Near East, South Asia, and Africa, Volume V (1950), Page 921
  22. Palestine and International Law, ed. Sanford R. Siverburg, McFarland, 2002, ISBN 0786411910, page 47
  23. Israel, the West Bank and international law, By Allan Gerson, Routledge, 1978, ISBN 0714630918, page 77
  24. http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1948to1967_jordan_annex.php
  25. http://www.sixdaywar.org/content/jordanianocuupationjerusalem.asp
  26. See Israel and the West Bank, By Thomas S. Kuttner, Israel Yearbook on Human Rights 1977, Volume 7; Volume 1977, edited by Yoram Dinstein, Kluwer Law International, 1989, ISBN 0792303571, [7]
  27. See Israel and the creation of a Palestinian state: a European perspective, By Joseph Weiler, Croom Helm, Ltd. 1985, ISBN 0709936052, page 48 [8]
  28. ; See Joseph A. Massad, Colonial Effects: The Making of National Identity in Jordan (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001),ISBN 023112323X, page 229
  29. The policy of the U.S. Department, was stated in a paper on the subject prepared for the Foreign Ministers meetings in London in May was in favor of the incorporation of Central Palestine into Jordan, but desired that it be done gradually and not by sudden proclamation. Once the annexation took place, the Department approved of the action "in the sense that it represents a logical development of the situation which took place as a result of a free expression of the will of the people.... The United States continued to wish to avoid a public expression of approval of the union." See Foreign relations of the United States, 1950. The Near East, South Asia, and Africa Volume V (1950), page 1096 [9]
  30. Foreign relations of the United States, 1949. The Near East, South Asia, and Africa Volume VI, Page 713
  31. Foreign relations of the United States, 1949. The Near East, South Asia, and Africa, Volume VI, pages 878 and 879
  32. Clea Lutz Bunch, "Balancing Acts: Jordan and the United States during the Johnson Administration," Canadian Journal of History 41.3 (2006)
  33. See "An Interview with Yasser Arafat", NY Review of Books, Volume 34, Number 10, June 11, 1987 [10]
  34. See Renouncing claims to the West Bank, Jordan under King Hussein » Renouncing claims to the West Bank
  35. See "Palestine and International Law", ed. Sanford R. Siverburg, McFarland and Company, 2002, ISBN 0786411910, page 11
  36. See Palestine Yearbook of International Law, Vol 4, By Anis F. Kassim, Kluwer Law International (June 1, 1988), ISBN 9041103414, page 294
  37. 37.0 37.1 Sayigh, 1999, p. 624.
  38. Silverburg, 2002, p. 198.
  39. Silverburg, 2002, p. 42.
  40. 40.0 40.1 Quigley, 2005, p. 212.
  41. PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (13 November 2008). "The Historic Compromise: The Palestinian Declaration of Independence and the Twenty-Year Struggle for a Two-State Solution". http://www.nad-plo.org/news-updates/Historic%20Compromise%20FAQs%20FINAL.pdf. Retrieved 6 February 2010. 
  42. Political communique Palestine National Council. Algiers, November 15, 1988. Official translation.
  43. Yasser Arafat, Speech at UN General Assembly Geneva, General Assembly 13 December 1988 - Le Monde Diplomatique
  44. Arafat Clarifies Statement to Satisfy U.S. Conditions for Dialogue, 14 December 1988 - Jewish Virtual Library
  45. Rabie, Mohamed (Summer,1992). "The U.S.-PLO Dialogue: The Swedish Connection". Journal of Palestine Studies 21 (4): 54–66. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0377-919X(199222)21%3A4%3C54%3ATUDTSC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Q. Retrieved 2007-07-01. 
  46. Quandt, William B. (1993). Peace Process: American Diplomacy and the Arab-Israeli conflict since 1967. Washington: Brookings Institution. pp. 367–375, 494. ISBN 0-520-08390-3. 
  47. 47.0 47.1 47.2 47.3 "THE PALESTINE DECLARATION TO THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT: THE STATEHOOD ISSUE". Rutgers Law Record. May 6, 2009. http://www.lawrecord.com/files/35-rutgers-l-rec-1.pdf. Retrieved 2009-07-19. 
  48. Kassim, 1997, p. 49.
  49. Henry G. Schermers and Niels M. Blokker, International Institutional Law, Hotei, 1995-2004, ISBN-10: 9004138285, page 51
  50. See paragraph 2.20 of the Written Statement submitted by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan [11]
  51. Eur, 2004, p. 905.
  52. Dajani in Brownlie et al., 1999, p. 121.
  53. 53.0 53.1 See Perelman, Marc, Forward, March 07, 2008, Costa Rica Opens Official Ties With ‘State of Palestine’ [12]
  54. Al-Haq Position Paper on Issues Arising from the Palestinian Authority’s Submission of a Declaration to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court Under Article 12(3) of the Rome Statute (December 14, 2009)
  55. Segal, Jerome M., Chapter 9, "The State of Palestine, The Question of Existence", in Philosophical perspectives on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Tomis Kapitan editor, M.E. Sharpe, 1997, ISBN: 1563248786
  56. 56.0 56.1 Boyle, Francis A. Creation of the State of Palestine; 1 Eur. J. Int'l L. 301 (1990)
  57. Kearney, Michael and Denayer, Stijn, Al-Haq Position Paper on Issues Arising from the Palestinian Authority’s Submission of a Declaration to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court Under Article 12(3) of the Rome Statute (December 14, 2009), para 43.a.
  58. Yehuda Z. Blum, The Missing Reversioner: Reflections on the Status of Judea and Samaria, 3 ISR. L. REV. 279, 289–90 (1968)
  59. Eugene V. Rostow, “Palestinian Self-Determination”: Possible Futures for the Unallocated Territories of the Palestine Mandate, 5 YALE J. WORLD PUB. ORD. 147 (1980)
  60. See Gershom Gorenberg, The Accidental Empire: Israel and the Birth of the Settlements, 1967-1977, Macmillan, 2007, ISBN-10: 0805082417, page 363 and South Jerusalem On Settlement Legality, 24 November 2008 [13]
  61. Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People [14]
  62. Ball, David John, 79 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 990 (2004), Toss the Travaux - Application of the Fourth Geneva Convention to the Middle East Conflict - A Modern (Re)Assessment
  63. 63.0 63.1 HCJ 7957/04 Mara’abe v. The Prime Minister of Israel [15]
  64. See for example "The Restatement (Third) Foreign Relations Law of the United States, § 443 "The Act of State Doctrine", Commentary a., RN 3; or Oetjen v. Cent.Leather Co., 246 U.S. 297, 303 (1918)[16]
  65. 65.0 65.1 See Stefan Talmon, Recognition of Governments in International Law: With Particular Reference to Governments in Exile (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998) pages 3-4
  66. See the explanatory note in T.D. 97–16
  67. USAID West Bank/Gaza
  68. See the USAID policy and budget statement
  69. See the EU statement on external relations with the Palestinian Authority [17]
  70. Jean-Pierre Filiu, "Mitterrand and the Palestinians", Journal of Palestine Studies, 150, winter 2009, p.34.
  71. 71.0 71.1 See the Statement of the Principal Accredited Representative, Hon. W. Ormsby-Gore, C.330.M.222, Mandate for Palestine - Minutes of the Permanent Mandates Commission/League of Nations 32nd session, 18 August 1937, [18]
  72. See the Judgment in "Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory" [19]
  73. See paragraphs 49, 70, and 129 of the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion, Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory [20] and PAUL J. I. M. DE WAART (2005). International Court of Justice Firmly Walled in the Law of Power in the Israeli–Palestinian Peace Process. Leiden Journal of International Law, 18 , pp 467-487, doi:10.1017/S0922156505002839
  74. See Article 62 (LXII) of the Treaty of Berlin
  75. See Defending the Rights of Others, by Carol Fink, Cambridge University, 2006, ISBN 0521029945, page 28
  76. See Papers relating to the foreign relations of the United States, The Paris Peace Conference, 1919, Page 94 [21]
  77. See Summary of the work of the League of Nations, January 1920-March 1922, League of Nations Union, 1922, page 4 [22]
  78. It was cataloged during a review of Minority Rights Treaties conducted in 1950: see UN Document E/CN.4/367, 7 April 1950. UN GAR 181(II) is also listed in the Table of Treaties, starting at Page xxxviii, of Self-determination and National Minorities, Oxford Monographs in International Law, Thomas D. Musgrave, Oxford University Press, 1997, ISBN 0198298986
  79. See UN GA Resolution 181(II), November 29, 1947, Section C., Chapters 1-4[23]
  80. Mr Eban acknowledged the undertakings contained in resolution 181(II) and 194(III) with regard to religious and minority rights and the internationalization of Jerusalem during the Ad Hoc Committee hearings on Israel's application for membership in the United Nations. His declarations and explanations were noted in text of General Assembly resolution 273 (III), 11 May 1949, and UN documents A/AC.24/SR.45, 48, 50 and 51; The fact that Declaration of the State of Palestine, supplied by the Palestine National Council, was accepted as being in line with General Assembly resolution 181(II) was noted in General Assembly resolution 43/177, 15 December 1988
  81. See The Life, Times and Work of Jokubas Robinzonas – Jacob Robinson [24]; and Palestine and the United Nations: prelude to solution, By Jacob Robinson, Greenwood Press Reprint; New ed of 1947 ed edition (September 28, 1971), ISBN 0837159865
  82. See the Minutes of the People's Council, Palestine Yearbook of International Law, Vol 4, By Anis F. Kassim, Kluwer Law International (June 1, 1988), ISBN 9041103414, page 279
  83. See Israel Yearbook on Human Rights, 1989, Yoram Dinstein, Mala Tabory eds., Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1990, ISBN 0792304500, page 135-136 [25]
  84. 84.0 84.1 Takkenberg, 1998, p. 181.
  85. "The Palestinian State Exists". Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics, Economic and Culture 3 (2). 1996. http://www.pij.org/details.php?id=544. Retrieved 2009-08-05. 
  86. See Silverburg, Sanford R. (2002), "Palestine and International Law: Essays on Politics and Economics", Jefferson, N.C: McFarland & Co, ISBN 0-7864-1191-0, pages 37-54
  87. Robert Weston Ash, [http://www.lawrecord.com/files/36-Rutgers-L-Rec-186.pdf Is Palestine a “state”? A response to Professor John Quigley's article], The Internet Journal of Rutgers School of Law.
  88. See The International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion on the Legality of Israel’s Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Legal Analysis and Potential Consequences, By Susan Akram, John Quigley, Elizabeth Badger, and Rasmus Goksor, page 11 [26]
  89. See the ICC Letter to the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, dated 12 January 2010 [27]
  90. See the ICC Questions and Answers [28]
  91. See Michael M. Karayanni, The Quest For Creative Jurisdiction: The Evolution Of Personal Jurisdiction Doctrine Of Israeli Courts Towards The Palestinian Territories [29]
  92. See Elon Moreh College Association v. The State of Israel, April 3, 2006; Mis. Civ. P. (Jer) 1008/06, Elon Moreh College Association v. The State of Israel [April 3, 2006]; and Yuval Yoaz, "J'lem court: Palestinian Authority meets criteria to be classed as a sovereign state, Ha'aretz, 24/04/2006, [30]
  93. The Israeli Supreme Court ruling in Hebrew
  94. See Ronen, Yael "ICC Jurisdiction Over Acts Committed in the Gaza Strip: Article 12(3) of the ICC Statute and Non-State Entities", Journal of International Criminal Justice, Vol. 7, No. 1, 2010, page 24 [31]
  95. See Stefan Talmon, Recognition of Governments in International Law: With Particular Reference to Governments in Exile (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998) page 1
  96. See Thomas D. Grant, The Recognition of States: Law and Practice in Debate and Evolution (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1999) page 9
  97. See Transcript: Netanyahu Speech on Israel-Palestine (14 June 2009)
  98. PA negotiator: We may seek UN recognition of Palestinian state (Haaretz, Nov. 14, 2009)
  99. See "A Sovereign State of Palestine, Vital: UN Chief", 2009-12-01, Xinhua, [32]
  100. International symposium ICJ and Israel’s Wall, The Hague 9 July 2009, Address P.J.I.M. de Waart [33]
  101. See Lieberman warns against '67 borders, Jerusalem Post, November 14, 2009 [34]
  102. See Abbas: Palestinian state an existing fact, Ynet, November 11, 2009
  103. See The 1988 Declaration of Independence [35] and Ending the Occupation, Establishing the State - Program of the Thirteenth Government [36]
  104. See page 12 of S/PV.383, 2 December 1948
  105. See ICC prosecutor considers ‘Gaza war crimes’ probe
  106. See The recognition of states, By Thomas D. Grant, page 21
  107. See Definition of Aggression, General Assembly resolution 3314 (XXIX), 14 December 1974 [37]
  108. See Gerhard Brehme, Souveranitat der jungen National-staaten uber Naturreichtumer [Sovereignty of the Young Nation-States over Natural Resources] 71, 266 (1967)
  109. The other authorities cited in Franz Xaver Perrez, "The Relationship between "Permanent Sovereignty" and the Obligation Not to Cause Transboundary Environmental Damage," Environmental Law 26.4 (1996) are Kamal Hossain, Introduction to Permanent Sovereignty over Natural Resources in International Law at ix (Kamal Hossain & Subrata Roy Chowdhury eds., 1984); International Law Association, Report of the Sixtieth Conference, Montreal, pages 196-197 (1982); and Milan Bulajic, Principles of International Development Law pages 283-284 (2d ed. 1992);
  110. See para. 77 and 112 of the ICJ Advisory Opinion in the "Wall" case
  111. See General Assembly Doc. GA/EF/3219, 20 October 2008
  112. See Patterns of global terrorism 1985-2005: U.S. Department of State reports with supplementary documents and statistics, Volume 1, Anna Sabasteanski, Berkshire, 2005, ISBN 0974309133, page 47
  113. Fowler and Bunck, 1995, p. 59.
  114. Kurz, Anat N. (2005) Fatah and the Politics of Violence: the institutionalization of a popular Struggle. Brighton: Sussex Academic Press ISBN 1845190327, ISBN 9781845190323 p. 123
  115. See for example, Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006, Pub. L. 109–446, Dec. 21, 2006, 120 Stat. 3318 [38]
  116. US plotted to overthrow Hamas after election victory, by Suzanne Goldenberg, The Guardian, Tuesday 4 March 2008
  117. Official website of the Palestinian National Authority
  118. Palestine, Palestinians and International Law, Francis A. Boyle, Clarity Press, September 1, 2009, ISBN-10: 093286337X, Back Cover
  119. Talmon, 1998, p. 158, footnote #236.
  120. 120.00 120.01 120.02 120.03 120.04 120.05 120.06 120.07 120.08 120.09 120.10 120.11 120.12 120.13 120.14 120.15 120.16 120.17 120.18 120.19 120.20 120.21 120.22 120.23 120.24 120.25 120.26 120.27 120.28 120.29 120.30 120.31 120.32 120.33 120.34 120.35 120.36 120.37 120.38 120.39 120.40 120.41 120.42 120.43 120.44 120.45 120.46 120.47 120.48 120.49 "Request for the admission of the State of Palestine to Unesco as a Member State". UNESCO. 12 May 1989. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0008/000827/082711eo.pdf. Retrieved 2009-08-22. 
  121. 121.00 121.01 121.02 121.03 121.04 121.05 121.06 121.07 121.08 121.09 121.10 121.11 121.12 121.13 121.14 121.15 121.16 121.17 121.18 121.19 121.20 121.21 121.22 121.23 121.24 121.25 121.26 121.27 121.28 121.29 121.30 121.31 121.32 121.33 121.34 121.35 121.36 121.37 121.38 121.39 121.40 121.41 121.42 121.43 121.44 121.45 121.46 121.47 121.48 121.49 121.50 121.51 121.52 OIC members and Palestine The Statistical, Economic and Social Research and Training Centre for Islamic Countries
    OIC members urge recognition of Hamas People's Daily
  122. 122.00 122.01 122.02 122.03 122.04 122.05 122.06 122.07 122.08 122.09 122.10 122.11 122.12 122.13 122.14 122.15 122.16 122.17 122.18 122.19 122.20 122.21 122.22 122.23 122.24 122.25 122.26 122.27 122.28 122.29 122.30 122.31 122.32 122.33 122.34 122.35 122.36 122.37 122.38 122.39 122.40 122.41 122.42 122.43 122.44 122.45 122.46 122.47 122.48 122.49 122.50 122.51 122.52 122.53 122.54 122.55 122.56 122.57 122.58 122.59 122.60 122.61 122.62 122.63 122.64 122.65 122.66 122.67 122.68 122.69 122.70 122.71 122.72 122.73 122.74 122.75 122.76 122.77 122.78 122.79 122.80 122.81 122.82 122.83 122.84 122.85 122.86 122.87 122.88 122.89 "Palestine, recognition of the State of". European Institute for Research on Mediterranean and Euro-Arab Cooperation. December 2001. http://www.medea.be/index.html?page=2&lang=en&doc=289. Retrieved 2009-01-03. 
  123. 123.0 123.1 123.2 123.3 123.4 Member state of the OIC. All 56 OIC members recognize Palestine as a state and it is a member state of that body. Palestine's Right to Statehood and What it Means
  124. The DRC recognized Palestine under its former name of "Zaire".
  125. Peters, 1992, p. 141.
  126. South African Representative Office to the Palestinian National Authority
  127. 127.00 127.01 127.02 127.03 127.04 127.05 127.06 127.07 127.08 127.09 127.10 127.11 127.12 127.13 127.14 127.15 127.16 127.17 127.18 127.19 Eur, 2004, p. 933.
  128. The Associated Press (26 February 2008). "Israeli diplomat postpones meeting after Costa Rica recognizes Palestinian state". Haaretz. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/958208.html. 
  129. "English Translation of Letter from Venezuelan Foreign Ministry". Diplomacy Monitor. April 27, 2009. http://diplomacymonitor.com/stu/dma1.nsf/tr/tt72F6FB6B8DA924A1852575A6000F95D4. 
  130. The Palestinian embassy in Tashkent, Uzbekistan also represents the PNA to Azerbaijan.
  131. 131.0 131.1 Embassy of the State of Palestine to the Republic of Uzbekistan, Central Asia and Azerbaijan
  132. 132.0 132.1 132.2 132.3 132.4 Tessler, 1994, p. 722. "Within two weeks of the PNC meeting, at least fifty-five nations, including states as diverse as the Soviet Union, China, India, Greece, Yugoslavia, Sri Lanka, Malta, and Zambia, had recognized the Palestinian state."
  133. 133.0 133.1 133.2 Embassies of Palestine
  134. Diplomatic and Consular Missions > Consulate General of the State of Palestine. Government of the Philippines. Retrieved March 20, 2007.
  135. Vietnamese Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Government of Vietnam. Retrieved March 20, 2007.
  136. 136.0 136.1 Kassim, 1997, p. 291.
  137. "Embassy of the State of Palestine". Kompass. http://www.kompass.com/it/BY150045. Retrieved 2009-07-18. 
  138. Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to the United Nations: Palestine Embassies, Missions, Delegations Abroad
  139. About Bosnia: Institutions and Organiations - Foreign Embassies in Sarajevo
  140. "Palestine: Embassy of the State of Palestine". Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic. http://www.mzv.cz/jnp/en/diplomatic_missions/foreign_missions_to_the_czech_republic/palestine_embassy_of_the_state_of.html. 
  141. "Dates of Recognition and Establishment of Diplomatic Relations". Montenegro: Ministry of Foreign Affairs. http://www.mip.gov.me/en/index.php/Bilateral/dates-of-recognition-and-establishment-of-diplomatic-relations.html. Retrieved 2010-01-03. The State of Palestine recognized the state of Montenegro on July 24, 2006, and diplomatic relations were established between the two states on August 1, 2006.
  142. "Embassy of the State of Palestine". http://www.palestine.sk/about.html. Retrieved 2009-07-18. 
  143. Ukranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Retrieved March 20, 2007.
  144. Cypriot Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Government of Cyprus. Retrieved March 20, 2007.
  145. http://www.palestina.int.ar/ Retrieved March 20, 2007.
  146. http://www.info.dfat.gov.au/Info/WebProtocol/WebProtocol.nsf/WebConsularList?OpenForm&Palestinian%20TerritoriesO
  147. General Delegation of Palestine in Canada
  148. General Delegation of Palestine in Finland
  149. http://www.mfa.gov.ge/index.php?sec_id=346&lang_id=ENG
  150. The General Delegation of Palestine in Brussels, Belgium is accredited to Luxembourg.
  151. The ICJ noted that Palestine gave a unilateral undertaking, by declaration of 7 June 1982, in the name of the 'State of Palestine' to apply the Fourth Geneva Convention - and that Switzerland, as depositary State, considered that unilateral undertaking valid. See paragraph 91 of the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion, Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Source
  152. http://www.gdp.ie/
  153. http://www.palestina.com.mx/
  154. 154.0 154.1 154.2 Osmańczyk and Mango, 2003, p. 1741.
  155. "Status of Palestine at the United Nations". Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to the United Nations - New York. http://www.un.int/palestine/status.shtml. Retrieved 2009-07-28. 
  156. Hillier, 1998, p. 214.
  157. Silverburg, 2002, p. 292.
  158. "OIC Member States". Permanent Mission of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference to the United Nations Offices in Geneva and Vienna. http://www.oic-un.org/about_oic.asp#Members. Retrieved 2009-12-30. 
  159. Taylor & Francis group and Lucy Dean, 2003, p. 1328.
  160. Quigley, 1990, p. 231.
  161. Takkenberg, 1998, pp. 136-138.
  162. English country names and code elements
  163. Artz, 1997 p. 77.
  164. Segal in Kapitan, 1997, p. 231.
  165. 165.0 165.1 INS Resource Information Center (May 20, 2002). "Palestinian Territory, Occupied" (PDF). UNHCR. http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/pdfid/402d150c4.pdf. Retrieved 2009-01-24. 
  166. See Japan to recognize Palestinian nationality, KUNA, 10/5/2007 [39]; Japan to recognise Palestinian nationality, The India Report, 6 October 2007 [40]; Yomiuri, Government to recognize Palestinian ‘nationality’, Saturday, October 6, 2007; and Japan News Review, Government to recognize Palestinian ‘nationality’, October 6, 2007, [41]

BibliographyEdit

External links Edit




Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki