John Spencer has just written an article on the legal requirements for any political entity to legitimately be considered for statehood, and how the Palestinians fail to meet every one of those requirements. His analysis can be found here: “Why Palestine Cannot and Should Not Be Recognized as a State,” by John Spencer, X, May 11, 2025:
With renewed reports that the United States may consider recognizing a Palestinian state as part of a potential normalization agreement with Saudi Arabia, the question of Palestinian statehood has returned to the diplomatic forefront. While such recognition remains unlikely in the near term, the fact that it is even under discussion reveals how detached the conversation has become from legal reality. The question of Palestinian statehood is not just political or moral—it is legal. Under international law, recognition of a state is contingent on specific criteria. As articulated in the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, a state must meet four basic qualifications: a permanent population, a defined territory, a functioning government, and the capacity to enter into relations with other states. At present, the various Palestinian political entities fail to meet several of these criteria….
To summarize:
1) There are no defined borders of a future state of Palestine. Those borders some Arabs propose — those who pretend to accept the existence of a Jewish state — are the 1949 armistice lines. Were Israel to be squeezed back within those lines (not borders, but armistice lines), it would have a nine-mile-wide waist from Qalqilya to the sea. It would lose control of the Judean Valley that is essential to its defense, and would be wide open to an invasion force from the east. As UN Security Resolution 242 recognized, Israel has a right to hold onto any territory it won in the Six-Day War that it needs for its defense, as the author of Resolution 242, Lord Caradon, repeatedly noted.
2) There is no single governing authority for the Palestinians. Hamas runs Gaza, while the Palestinian Authority rules the Palestinians who live in Judea and Samaria. They have been at daggers drawn, literally, since 2007, when Hamas, killed hundreds of members of Fatah, the military faction of the Palestinian authority, drove others out of the Strip, and assumed total control. In the Palestinian-populated areas of Judea and Samaria, the Palestinian Authority has, similarly, suppressed its political rival Hamas, by killing its operatives. The two rivals are not any closer to establishing a single governing authority today; Hamas wants to keep control of Gaza, and the PA is hoping it can convince the world to let it replace Hamas in the Strip.
3) Neither side rejects terrorism or the use of violence. Hamas has always been, unapologetically, a terror group, and has been designated as such not just by the Western powers but by Arab states, including Saudi Arabia and Egypt, as well. Hamas is merely the Gazan outpost of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is a threat to all the Arab rulers in the region.
As for the Palestinian Authority, it presents itself as the acceptable “moderate” face of Palestinian revanchism. The PA does not itself use terrorism directly against Israel, but its “Pay-For-Slay” program provides generous monthly stipends to imprisoned terrorists and their families, and thus it both rewards past, and incentivizes future, terrorism. Until the PA ends “Pay-For-Slay,” and stops glorifying Palestinian terrorists in its media and in its schoolbooks, but instead denounces them, loudly and steadily, it cannot be considered a candidate for statehood.
4) Statehood is not a right but must come only after certain criteria have been met. As John Spencer writes, the Palestinians — both in Hamas and the PA — have refused to renounce terrorism, dismantle terrorists, or “engage in sustained negotiations without preconditions….Recognition without reform would reward intransigence and undermine the integrity of international legal standards.”
None of those requirements have been met. But even if they were, there is still no reason to pressure Israel to give up one dunam of its claim to Judea and Samaria, a claim based on 3500 years of history and the Mandate for Palestine. The Arabs have 22 states; they do not need a 23rd Arab state, that would exist only to serve as a launching-pad for the next pan-Arab, or possibly pan-Muslim, attempt to destroy Israel and its people.
Samer says
Yes, the Palestinians are not qualified to establish an independent Palestinian state. But the question is: What is the realistic and practical solution to this intractable problem? The only realistic solution – in my opinion – is to restore the status of the West Bank to its pre-1967 war status, when it was part of Jordan. A union between Jordan and the West Bank would best take the form of a federation called the “United Kingdom of Jordan and Palestine.” I
After all, Jordanians and Palestinians
are Arabs and Muslims, So why don’t they live in one state as they did for nearly 20 year between 1948 and 1967. I hope that this site or one of its visitors will convey this proposal, if possible, to President Trump or to his advisors.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Like Hugh mentioned, Israel can’t have a 9 mile corridor b/w Tel Aviv and Haifa. It’s too insecure and indefensible. Also, after October 7th, Palestinians have forfeited the right to live not just in Gaza, but Judea/Samaria as well. They can move to Jordan, Syria or even better, some remote country, like Somalia or Libya
Just nowhere near Israel, where they are a security threat
The Istanbulian says
Move the Palestinians to the east bank
Hugh Fitzgerald says
If Israel were to give up Judea and Samaria (a/k/a since 1950 as the West Bank) it would lose control of the Judean Valley, indispensable for its defense, and would be squeezed back within the 1949 armistice lines — nota bene, not “borders” but “armistice lines.” Israel would also be giving up the place where Jewish history was made — not in Tel Aviv and Haifa. but in Judea and Samaria. And the half-million Israelis living in Judea and Samaria will not be uprooted. The Israelis have not only a 3500-year history in Judea and Samaria, but the
Netanyahu has said he wants the Palestinian Arabs to have as much control over their own lives as is consonant with Israel’s security. That does not seem unreasonable to me.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Since last year, Trump had the right ideas in terms of seemingly recognizing that the “Two state solution” was dead, and seemed to reinforce that w/ his proposal on Gaza. This talk of recognizing “Palestine” would be like in 2001, recognizing an al Qaeda state in Afghanistan
Also, as the essay above notes, a state must have well defined borders, as well as a governing authority and a rejection of terrorism. Here is one such entity that satisfies all of these conditions, and more. It has its own constitution, currency, flag, coat-of-arms, vehicle licensing authority, a police force and its own postal system
That state? Transnistria, or Pridnestrovia. Its western border is the River Dniester, and its eastern border is the agreed Moldova-Ukraine border: it has no claims on Ukrainian territory. Its secession demands became stronger when Moldova and Romania, which had forgotten about their desire to merge in the 90s, recently started moving in that direction. The people of Pridnestrovia are ethnic Russians who don’t wanna be a part of such an arrangement, so they seceded peacefully, in a way that, where they to be recognized by the “international community”, they’d be a viable state in their own right
However, despite Pridnestrovia having more legitimate attributes of a sovereign state, no country, not even Russia, recognizes its independence. Yet 147 countries, and now reportedly the US, recognizes this fictitious state called “Palestine”. It’s like China rebranding the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh and calling it a part of its own
Captain Quirk says
@ Mr. Fitzgerald: Excellent, very informative article. At least now I know what a dunam is ;-): https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunam . But seriously: excellent article.
Slightly off-topic, but definitely inspired by this article, I would suggest taking the following into consideration:
There is a whole lot of buzz going around concerning the ‘deal tour’ Trump’s Middle East trip has turned into. He even made (or better yet: facilitated) mega deals with Qatar, I understand: https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/05/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-secures-historic-1-2-trillion-economic-commitment-in-qatar/. This would seem to benefit not only the US but also Qatar.
There’s one hitch, however: Qatar actively supports and finances mohamedan terrorism and protects its leaders, all obviously in line with mohamedan orthodoxy.
In light of the fact that Qatar stands to gain a lot from these deals, it would only seem smart to demand them to stop these activities in return.
It’s just a thought.
I’m quite sure Trump will say ‘Hey I’m not making the deal, company X is.’
tgusa says
‘demand them to stop these activities in return”
Yes and they will tell us they will. They will get right on it. Honest, cross my heart, you can believe me, etc etc. Those that embrace islam embrace a complete life orthodoxy…forever and unto death. And that makes it very very problematic.
Captain Quirk says
I know they can’t be trusted at all, but you can build in safeguards.
Captain Quirk says
Of course the same would seem to hold for the other countries he’s touring and who support and finance terrrorism.
Captain Quirk says
And come to think of it, this would also be a great ‘opp’ to demand a stop to the financing of mosques ‘abroad’ (that is: ‘here’) and all that *** (let’s say: ‘poppycock’) about a ‘religion’ founded by a man who never existed.
Captain Quirk says
As a matter of fact, THAT would really be ‘the art of the deal’. And so Trump claims he has guts. Show us how far you can go, boy! Okay, make that ‘man’.
skeptiker says
Um als “Abschreckendes Beispiel” für alle friedliebenden und zivilisierten Völker dieser Welt zu dienen, brauchen diese Mörder und Vergewaltiger, bekannt unter dem Namen “Palästinenser”, weder einen Staat noch ein Recht auf lebenslange Alimentierung durch die Weltgemeinschaft.
Mir ist nicht bekannt, welchen positiven Beitrag, außer das man sie als Abschreckendes Beispiel in den Geschichtsbüchern verewigt , diese Terror-Volksgruppe für die Menschheit geleistet hat. Nun, als große Denker & Erfinder sind sie wohl eher nicht in Erscheinung getreten.
Es würde ja schon reichen einfach mal die Füße still zu halten, anderen nicht permanent mit ihrem kranken Hass auf den Sack zu gehen, sich eine Arbeit zu suchen, um seine Familie zu ernähren und mal neben A.Hitler “Mein Kampf” und den Koran auch mal was anderes lesen.