Introduction (Paiman Riazat)
The question of Palestinian statehood is and has been a for decades controversial matter. The main conclusion is that Palestine seems to satisfy all the four traditional criteria mentioned in the issues of recognition such as people, land, government, and capacity (Montevideo Convention, 1933). However, Palestine has these requirements; its legal status remains in vogue for the sake of political and historical conditions.
As January 2025 begins the situation in Palestine is still unknown. The war between Israel and Palestinian groups in Gaza has resulted in significant casualties and destruction. The United Nations has reported that over 46,000 Palestinians have lost their lives and many more have been injured or displaced (United Nations, 2024). Gaza is home to approximately 2.3 million people and continues to endure a strict blockade imposed by Israel since 2007 (Amnesty International, 2024).
In 2012, the United Nations General Assembly granted Palestine non-member observer state status (United Nations General Assembly, 2012). This recognition has allowed Palestine to join international organizations and participate in international legal proceedings, such as the International Criminal Court (ICC) (International Criminal Court, 2021).
This paper aims to effectively analyze the recognition of Palestine’s statehood in international law, discovering the legal arguments for and against its recognition. By bringing up the Montevideo criteria and the current situation on the ground, this research seeks to provide an extensive understanding of Palestine’s legal status in international law.
Background (Cherry Wong)
International law is a set of rules and principles that governs the relations between states and other international actors (Legal Information Institute, n.d.). It comprises treaties, customary practices, legal precedents etc. that establish obligations and rights for states to adhere to (Butchard, 2020). The aim of international law is to maintain global peace and security, addressing issues such as human rights, trade, and environmental protection (United Nations, n.d.). It is enforced through various mechanisms, emphasizing both state responsibility and the roles of international institutions (Iwasawa, 2023).
Palestine’s historical context is characterized by a long struggle for self-determination amidst colonial and geopolitical challenges. The Palestinian national movement began in the early 20th century, with significant events such as the 1920 Palestinian National Council demanding independence from British rule, which was largely ignored due to the British commitment to the Balfour Declaration favoring Jewish immigration and settlement (Boulos & Abu Eid, 2024). The 1947 UN Partition Plan proposed separate Jewish and Arab states, leading to the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and the Nakba, which resulted in the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians (Utrecht University, 2024).
The quest for statehood continued with the establishment of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in 1964, which became the representative body for Palestinians (Powell & Strug, 2016). The PLO declared the State of Palestine in 1988, gaining recognition from numerous countries and the UN General Assembly, which granted it non-member observer state status in 2012 (Powell & Strug, 2016). Despite this, the ongoing Israeli occupation and settlement policies complicate the realization of Palestinian statehood (Boulos & Abu Eid, 2024).
International law defines statehood criteria primarily through the Montevideo Convention, which stipulates that a state must possess a permanent population, a defined territory, a government, and the capacity to engage in relations with other states (Fang, 2023). Recognition by other states is essential, as international relations are built upon the acknowledgment of a state’s sovereignty. While Palestine has been recognized by approximately 146 countries, its quest for full statehood remains hindered by geopolitical dynamics, particularly the influence of the United States and the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict (The Hindu, 2024).
The significance of recognition in international law (Tasnuba Tasnim Anita)
Recognition refers to the formal acknowledgment by one state of the existence and sovereignty of another state within the global community. In international law, statehood is traditionally determined by the Montevideo Convention of 1933, which outlines four criteria: a permanent population, a defined territory, a government, and the capacity to enter into relations with other states (Montevideo Convention, 1933). However, recognition by other states often solidifies and legitimizes a state’s legal standing in the international arena. But recognition is not a prerequisite for statehood, it facilitates the newly established state’s ability to participate in international organizations, treaties, and diplomatic engagements (Roth, 2010). Diplomacy often revolves around recognizing states to foster alliances, resolve disputes, and promote stability. Conversely, withholding recognition can serve as a form of protest or leverage in international negotiations. The process of recognition is rarely free of political influence. States may base their recognition decisions on strategic interests, ideological alignments, or economic incentives. This selective approach can lead to inconsistencies (Christopher J Borgen, 2009).
Recognition of states in international law can take two primary forms: de jure and de facto recognition (Cochran, C. L.1968). De jure recognition is often permanent and implies that the recognized state satisfies all the criteria of statehood, including effective control and governance. It refers to the formal and unequivocal acknowledgment of a state’s sovereignty and legal personality under international law.
De facto recognition often occurs in situations where a state has effective control over a territory but faces unresolved issues regarding its legitimacy or sovereignty (Briggs, H. W. 1939). It implies that while the recognizing state acknowledges the factual existence of the entity as a governing authority, it does not grant full legal legitimacy or permanence (Houghton, N.D, 1932).
The case of Palestine illustrates the nuanced application of de jure and de facto recognition in international law. Over 130 UN member states have granted Palestine de jure recognition, acknowledging its sovereignty and right to statehood under international law (Ghaedi, M. 2024). Conversely, many states, including major powers like the United States, have limited their acknowledgment to de facto recognition, if at all (Al Jazeera, 2024). The recognition of Palestine is often viewed through the lens of the broader Arab-Israeli dispute, making it a symbol of regional and global political divisions (Palestine Unbound, 2016). The case of Palestine highlights the significance of recognition in shaping the legal and political realities of statehood under international law.
The role of key international resolutions, declarations, and organizations (Paiman Riazat)
The adoption of UN General Assembly Resolution 67/19 on November 29, 2012, was a crucial time for Palestine in its struggle for statehood, which granted Palestine non-member observer state status. This resolution allowed Palestine to participate in General Assembly debates and attend different international treaties (UN General Assembly, 2012). The upgrade in status was an important step toward approaching international recognition and has been mentioned as fundamental for Palestine’s claims to statehood (Khalidi, 2021). The resolution also emphasizes the significance of a peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian war based on mutual recognition and respect for rights. In 2023, the UN General Assembly reaffirmed its support for Palestinian self-determination through a resolution highlighting the need for a two-state solution based on pre-1967 borders (UN General Assembly, 2023). This resolution gathered significant aid, demonstrating ongoing international backing for Palestinian rights despite consistent Israeli opposition. The persistent endorsement of Palestinian rights by the UN displays a growing consensus among member states regarding the need for a just resolution to the never ending war.
The Oslo Accords, signed in the 1990s, settled the Palestinian Authority (PA), granting it limited self-governance in West Bank and Gaza Strip. However, these accords did not resolve critical issues such as borders, refugees, or the status of Jerusalem (Smith, 2020). The PA has faced challenges in asserting its authority due to ongoing Israeli military presence and settlement expansion, which complicates its governance and diminishes its legitimacy among Palestinians (Hass, 2022). The political issue between Fatah and Hamas further complicates the PA’s ability to represent Palestinian interests effectively. This has led to differing approaches to negotiations with Israel and varying positions of support from the Palestinian populace.
A non-member observer state empowers Palestine to be invited to different international organizations. In 2015, Palestine acceded to the International Criminal Court (ICC), allowing it to follow cases against Israel regarding war crimes committed during conflicts (Johnson, 2021). This membership has provided a tool for Palestine to search for accountability on the international stage. Moreover, Palestine has sought advisory views from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) regarding its legal standing under international law. The ICJ’s advisory opinion on the legality of Israel’s wall in the occupied Palestinian territories stated that the construction broke international law and called for its dismantlement (ICJ, 2004). This opinion has been instrumental in framing arguments about occupation and human rights violations. To add this, Palestine has participated in various UN agencies such as UNESCO, and has been in touch with initiatives intended at boosting cultural heritage and education within Palestinian territories. These efforts highlight Palestine’s commitment to engaging with global institutions despite its complex legal status.
Legal challenges and controversies (Erem Henry)
Legal issues and obstacles continue to surround Palestine’s recognition as a state under international law. Disputes over boundaries, sovereignty, and the right to self-determination remain central to this discussion and continue to attract major legal and political attention.
One of the main legal arguments is over Palestine’s borders. The absence of agreement on boundaries, particularly in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem, hampers efforts for recognition. The 1967 borders are frequently cited in peace talks, however continuous Israeli settlement growth violates international law, notably the Fourth Geneva Convention (UN General Assembly, 2021). These unilateral measures have sparked debate regarding the legitimacy of territorial claims.
Palestinian sovereignty remains another contentious issue. Despite proclaiming independence in 1988, Palestine’s fragmented governance—split between the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza—challenges its statehood claim (Quigley, 2010). Sovereignty under international law requires defined territory, a permanent population, and an effective government, criteria that remain difficult to meet given the constraints of occupation and political division (Crawford, 2007). The principle of self-determination is integral to the Palestinian cause, as codified in the UN Charter and General Assembly Resolution 1514. However, its implementation faces resistance. The Israeli occupation, coupled with the absence of a comprehensive peace settlement, undermines Palestinian self-determination (ICJ, 2004). Legal controversies persist regarding whether Palestinians can exercise this right without state recognition or full control over their territory.
These problems are illustrated by case studies from international legal forums. Palestine’s candidacy for full UN membership in 2011 was denied due to resistance from some Security Council members, leaving it with non-member observer state status (UN General Assembly, 2012). Similarly, Palestine’s referral of alleged crimes to the International Criminal Court (ICC) has prompted concerns about jurisdiction and state recognition, as evidenced by ICC Pre-Trial Chamber decisions (ICC, 2021). The regional and global responses to Palestinian statehood remain polarised. While more than 130 UN member states recognise Palestine, important parties such as the US and certain European countries maintain that recognition should come after a negotiated peace accord (Blum, 2016). These opposing viewpoints reflect the ongoing geopolitical and legal difficulties of the problem.
Reflection (Cherry Wong)
The pathway to recognizing Palestine as a state is laden with challenges but also offers significant opportunities for progress.
Achieving full statehood recognition hinges on multiple factors, including but not limited to the legal criteria established by the Montevideo Convention. The evolving landscape of international relations and the shifting attitudes of global players also play crucial roles (Akande, 2013). The recent recognition by 146 countries demonstrates a growing acknowledgment of Palestinian claims, signaling a shift away from the traditional stance that statehood can only be realized through negotiations with Israel (Pitta, 2018). This paradigm shift is crucial; it not only empowers Palestinian aspirations but also invites a broader discourse on self-determination and justice (Adel and Imran, 2022).
Diplomatic efforts, especially engagement with international organizations such as the United Nations would be a good way to garner attention and support, particularly following the recent escalations in conflict between Palestine and Israel. Advocacy also remains essential in this landscape, as grassroots movements and civil society organizations are means of raising awareness and galvanizing support for Palestinian statehood. The interplay between public opinion and state policy can lead to transformative changes in how nations engage with the Palestinian issue.
In conclusion, while the path to full statehood recognition for Palestine is fraught with obstacles, the combination of evolving international sentiment, strategic diplomacy, and robust advocacy offers a hopeful outlook. As the global community reevaluates its stance on Palestinian rights, the potential for achieving full statehood recognition becomes increasingly viable, paving the way for a just and equitable resolution to the longstanding conflict.
Conclusion (Tasnuba Tasnim Anita)
In conclusion, the question of Palestinian statehood remains a deeply complex and multifaceted issue. The legal framework provided by the Montevideo Convention affirms that Palestine fulfills the traditional criteria for statehood—people, land, government, and capacity to engage in international relations. Despite this, geopolitical realities, including Israeli occupation, ongoing conflict, and global political divisions, have left its legal status in a state of ambiguity. Key developments, such as the UN General Assembly Resolution granting Palestine non-member observer state status, signify incremental progress but fall short of full recognition.
The role of international organizations and legal bodies, including the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice, has been pivotal in highlighting issues of sovereignty, human rights violations, and self-determination. However, unresolved challenges, such as territorial disputes, internal political fragmentation, and the broader Arab-Israeli conflict, continue to impede the realization of Palestinian statehood. The influence of major powers, notably the United States, further complicates efforts toward a resolution, underscoring the interplay between law and politics in this ongoing debate.
Future research should focus on exploring pathways for reconciling legal principles with political realities, particularly the role of international diplomacy in facilitating a two-state solution. Additionally, the impact of grassroots advocacy and civil society movements on global public opinion warrants further examination. Addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and fostering Palestinian unity are critical areas for action.
Ultimately, achieving full recognition for Palestine requires a concerted effort by the international community to prioritize justice, self-determination, and peace. By addressing the legal, political, and humanitarian dimensions of this issue, meaningful progress toward a sustainable resolution is possible, offering hope for a more equitable future in the region.
References
Adel, I., Imran, H. (2022). An international paradigm shift recognizing the root causes of Palestine’s struggle? Reflection on the UN Special Rapporteur’s report and recent developments in the discourse on Palestine/Israel. Law for Palestine. https://law4palestine.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Reflection-on-the-UN-SRs-Report-and-Recent-Developments-in-the-Discourse-on-Palestine-Israel-Ihsan-Adel-Hassan-Imran.pdf
Akande, D. (2013, August 7). The importance of legal criteria for statehood: A response to Jure Vidmar. EJIL: Talk! European Journal of International Law. https://www.ejiltalk.org/the-importance-of-legal-criteria-for-statehood-a-response-to-jure-vidmar/
Al Jazeera. (2024, May 22). Mapping: Which countries recognise Palestine in 2024. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/5/22/mapping-which-countries-recognise-palestine-in-2024
Blum, Y. Z. (2016). The missing reversioner: Reflections on the status of Judea and Samaria. Israel Law Review, 3(2), 279-301. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021223700001436
Borgen, Christopher J. (2009) “The Language of Law and the Practice of Politics: Great Powers and the Rhetoric of Self-Determination in the Cases of Kosovo and South Ossetia” Chicago Journal of International Law, 10(1), Article 3. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1298&context=cjil
Boulos, S., Abu Eid, X. (2024, April 25). Recognizing Palestinian Statehood: Some Critical Comments. Security Context. https://www.securityincontext.com/posts/recognizing-palestinian-statehood-some-critical-comments
Briggs, H. W. (1939). De Facto and De Jure Recognition: The Arantzazu Mendi. American Journal of International Law, 33(4), 689–699. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2192880
Butchard, P. (2020, September 21). Principles of International Law: a brief guide. House of Commons Library. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9010/.
Cochran, C. L. (1968). De facto and de jure Recognition: Is There a Difference?. American Journal of International Law, 62(2), 457-460. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2196887
Crawford, J. (2007). The Creation of States in International Law. European Journal of International Law, 18(4), 776-778. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chm041
Houghton, N. D. (1929). [Review of The Legal Effects of Recognition in International Law, by J. G. Hervey]. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 142, 461–461. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1016680
ICC. (2021). Pre-Trial Chamber Decision on the Situation in Palestine.
ICJ. (2004). Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-178825/
Iwasawa, Y. (2023). Various means of enforcement in international law. Harvard International Law Journal, 65(1), 1-24. https://journals.law.harvard.edu/ilj/wp-content/uploads/sites/84/HILJ-651-Iwasawa_compressed.pdf
Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). International law. Cornell Law School. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/international_law.
Monir Ghaedi,2023, February 17). Which countries recognize Palestinian statehood?https://www.dw.com/en/which-countries-recognize-palestinian-statehood/a-69168152
Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, Dec. 26, 1933, 165 L.N.T.S. 19. https://www.ilsa.org/Jessup/Jessup15/Montevideo%20Convention.pdf
Palestine Unbound. (2016). Journal of Palestine Studies, 45(3 (179)), 72–78. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26378611
Pitta, M. (2018). Statehood and recognition: The case of Palestine (Master’s thesis, CEI International Affairs). University of Barcelona. https://diposit.ub.edu/dspace/bitstream/2445/123175/1/TFM_Michele_Pitta.pdf
Quigley, J. (2010). The Statehood of Palestine: International Law in the Middle East Conflict.
Roth, B. R. (2010). Secessions, Coups, and the International Rule of Law: Assessing the Decline of the Effective Control Doctrine. Melbourne Law School. https://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1241&context=lawfrp
The Hindu. (2025, January 4). 146 countries now recognise a Palestinian state. https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/facts-145-countries-now-recognise-a-palestinian-state/article68225129.ece
UN General Assembly. (2021). Resolution on Israeli Settlements.
United Nations. (n.d.). International law and justice. https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/international-law-and-justice
Utrecht University. (2024, July 17). The Israeli-Palestinian conflict explained: This preceded the Gaza war. https://www.uu.nl/en/background/the-israeli-palestinian-conflict-explained-this-preceded-the-gaza-war.
