Despite Trump’s Gaza plan and growing recognition, Palestinian statehood remains elusive

US President Donald Trump’s proposal to end the war in the Gaza Strip includes a pathway for Palestinian statehood, and French President Emmanuel Macron has led a wave of international recognition of the Palestinian state. Yet, any real statehood remains elusive — and to many, it appears farther away than ever.

As tens of thousands of Palestinians have been killed in Gaza, more and more countries have recognised that ending the war is not enough. They have stated that the Israeli–Palestinian conflict must be addressed as well. Most of these countries have backed the two-state solution as the way forward.

Under the proposed two-state solution, the Jewish State of Israel and the Arab State of Palestine are envisioned as neighbouring countries established in a way that neither threatens the other’s existence. The idea behind the proposal is to address the self-determination aspirations of two peoples rooted in the same land.

While Palestinian statehood seemed within reach in the 1990s, when the Oslo Accords paved the way for the creation of the Palestinian Authority (PA) —the de facto Palestinian government in the West Bank— Israeli–Palestinian talks have been stalled for at least 15 years. In recent years, the rise of far-right forces in Israel and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s transition into a staunch opponent of Palestinian statehood have led many observers to believe that meaningful progress is not on the horizon.

But does that mean Trump’s plan and the wave of international recognition are meaningless? Not exactly, says Muddassir Quamar, a scholar of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict at the Centre for West Asian Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), Delhi.

Quamar tells Firstpost, “The current wave of recognition of the Palestinian state shows that more and more countries realise the question of Palestine cannot be put on the backburner forever. It is also a message to Israel that they do not condone the death and destruction in Gaza. Even though the rising recognition has not changed Israel’s actions, it ensures the question of Palestine is not forgotten — even if no breakthrough is expected anytime soon.”

Does Palestine meet the criteria for statehood today?

What it means to be a state is enshrined in the Montevideo Convention of 1933.

The Convention states that a state must have four features: (i) a permanent population; (ii) a defined territory; (iii) a government; and (iv) the capacity to enter into relations with other states.

As things stand today, Palestine fulfils two conditions: it has a permanent population and the capacity to enter into relations with other states — the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), the international representative of the Palestinian people, holds Observer State status at the United Nations (UN) and has embassies in most of the UN member-states.

However, Palestine does not have a defined territory. Although it claims the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem under pre-1967 borders as part of the Palestinian state, it only governs a sliver of the West Bank. The Palestinian government —the PA, which operates under the framework of the Oslo Accords signed between Israel and the PLO— only partially governs the West Bank as around 60 per cent of the territory remains under direct Israeli control.

Therefore, irrespective of the wave of recognition, Palestine does not meet the criteria for statehood under international law.

But isn’t there a push for a two-state solution?

Paradoxically, the push for a two-state solution is increasing by the day and, at the same time, the space for a Palestinian state is shrinking.

Trump’s proposal for Gaza states that the strip will eventually be handed over to the PA, and once the PA has carried out the required reforms, “the conditions may finally be in place for a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood, which we recognise as the aspiration of the Palestinian people”.

But in reality, the room for Palestinian statehood is narrowing. For one, Israel has vowed to expand Jewish settlements in the West Bank, which reduces the land available for any future Palestinian state. One estimate suggests that around 40 per cent of the West Bank is occupied by Israeli settlements and outposts —deemed illegal under international law— where around half a million Jews live.

Even though Trump has told Arab countries he will not allow Israel to annex the West Bank, and his proposal states that Israel will not annex Gaza, there is no assurance regarding the illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank. And this is just one of the outstanding issues, says Alvite Ningthoujam, a scholar of West Asian affairs and Deputy Director of the Symbiosis School of International Studies (SSIS), Symbiosis International University, Pune.

“The question of Jerusalem, the security concerns of either side, and the disjointed nature of the West Bank —where Israeli settlements are situated in a way that restricts free movement of Palestinians— are some of the outstanding issues that do not appear to have any solution in sight. President Trump’s proposal does not address any of this. And that means that even though the statehood movement has gained traction, the hope for a near-term solution is not high,” says Ningthoujam.

Moreover, the controlling entity —Israel— appears firmly opposed to any Palestinian statehood. Even as the declaration violated Trump’s proposal, Netanyahu said just hours after it was unveiled that he will never agree to a Palestinian state.

Even Palestinians are not ready for statehood

While Netanyahu’s opposition to Palestinian statehood is well known, Palestinians themselves are not ready for statehood.

The PA has not held elections since 2006, and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, 88, has ruled well beyond his mandated term.

Beyond the obvious issue of age, Abbas is seen as highly unpopular — even among Palestinians. And there is no Palestinian leader on the horizon who could take up the baton from him as Abbas and the late Yasser Arafat failed to groom and elevate the next generation of Palestinian leaders.

The Palestinian leader often cited as Abbas’s potential successor, Marwan Barghouti, has been in an Israeli jail since 2002 after being convicted of five murders. His photos and videos have rarely appeared in public over the past 23 years.

The Palestinian polity is fractured, and there is neither a leader who can be the face of the people nor any unified approach among factions, says Quamar, the scholar of West Asia and Associate Professor at the Centre for West Asian Studies, JNU.

“Firstly, the West Bank and Gaza have been completely separated for 19 years, so there is little sense of political or administrative jointness. And among many Palestinian factions, there is no united approach. There is still no consensus on whether armed struggle should be abandoned. Even though Fatah has given up arms, there are elements that dream of an armed struggle and have not laid down their weapons. That does not help the Palestinian cause,” says Quamar.

Within the PLO, Fatah led by Abbas is the dominant party. But some parties within the PLO, such as the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), have not renounced violence and remain in conflict with Israel. Moreover, the Fatah-dominated PLO has not expelled the PFLP from the bloc. Then there are problematic aspects like the PA’s ‘pay-for-slay’ scheme under which families of terrorists receive stipends.

The fact that the international community continues to view the PA as the sole Palestinian government, and that even Trump has recognised the PA’s legitimacy, are positive signs. However, the PA’s persistent failure to reform — from the issue of elections to the leadership vacuum — means it is not making a strong case for Palestinian statehood, says Ningthoujam, Deputy Director of SSIS, Pune.

Go to Source