Justifying the Recognition of Palestine as an Independent State - Dissertation Example

?To the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Cyprus: Justifying the Recognition of Palestine as an Independent By Table of Contents Introduction 2 Section 1: Historical Background 4 Section 2: The Montevideo Convention Criteria for Statehood 6 Section 3: Recognition by Other States 12 Section 4: UN General Assembly Resolution A/67/L.28 on the Status of Palestine 15 Section 5: The relevance of Human Rights in the determination of statehood and the inalienable right of Palestinian people to self-determination 17 Conclusion 20 Bibliography 22 Introduction This report is addressed to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Cyprus. The purpose of this report is to provide a factual and legal justification for Cyprus’s formal and complete recognition of Palestine as an independent and sovereign state. A good starting point is the declaration of independence by Palestine. On 15 November 1988, the Palestine National Council declared Palestine an independent state. However, this announcement might be seen as a mere formality since the League of Nations provisionally recognised Palestine as an independent state as well as the 1922 Mandate for Palestine that awarded Palestine to Great Britain.1 Again in 1947, the United Nations General Assembly passed Resolution 181(11) Future Government of Palestine mandated the division of Palestine into two states: a Jewish and an Arab state. In 1948, the Jewish state was proclaimed as the State of Israel.2 Attempts and progress with respect to the recognition of an Arab Palestinian state however has been turbulent. The 1988 declaration did nothing to change the status quo.3 Palestine has had a difficult time achieving what many feel is its legal right: independent state status. This difficulty surrounds the lack of recognition within the international community, a necessary prerequisite for the effective acquisition of state status.4 A main part of the problem is the Arab League’s opposition to the recognition of Israel as an independent state. This has created significant tensions between Israel and Arabs in the region and Palestinians are paying the price. None of this diminishes the legal elements entitling Palestine to state recognition.5 The debate over the appropriate state status of Palestine is for the most part partisan.6 This report takes a wholly non-partisan approach to the issue of the appropriate state status of Palestine and examines the issue from the perspective of the people of Palestine and its territory. In this regard, separate and apart from political consideration, this reports examines the legal elements of statehood under international law as well as the right of self-determination on the part of the people of Palestine under international customary and human rights law. Cyprus knows all too well the struggles that accompany territorial claims and the denial of the right to self-determination having suffered its own division and struggles for an independent state in opposition to both Greece and Turkey.7 This report however, does not advocate for recognising the state status of Palestine out of sympathy, but simply because it is the right thing to do under international law and strengthens Palestine’s recognition by one of only a few member states to the EU. In making the case for Cyprus’ recognition of Palestine as an independent state this report will be presented in 5 parts. The first section provides background and historical context relative to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the state status of Palestine. Section 2 examines the Montevideo Convention criteria for statehood in relation to Palestine. Section 3 identifies and analyses the recognition of Palestine as a state within the international community. Section 4 analyses the UN General Assembly Resolution A/67/L.28 which upgrades Palestine’s state status. Section 5 of this report will analyse the right to self-determination under international human rights law and its implications for Palestine’s state status. Section 1: Historical Background The historical background is very important as it presents the factual background for evaluating the legal elements necessary for state status. The history not only reveals how and why Palestine has for all intents and purposes acquired the right to be recognized as a sovereign and independent state, but also that recognition is essential for peace in the region. The unsettled nature of Palestine’s state status has historically been the cause of conflict and tensions in the region and Cyprus’s complete and formal recognition of Palestine is therefore important for security policy reasons. With the collapse of the Ottoman Empire following the First World War, Palestine came under the control of the British government.8 In 1917, with an influx of Jewish immigrants to the area, conflicts between immigrant Jews and indigenous Arabs gave rise to Britain’s desire to establish a Jewish state within Palestine. The founding of a Jewish state within Palestine is known as the Balfour Declaration and was really a letter to the British government by Britain’s Foreign Secretary. The letter indicated that the British government supported a Jewish state in Palestine, while respecting the “civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine”.9 According to Tomes however, the Balfour Declaration led to the establishment of the Israeli state and at the same time paved the way for “continuing instability in the Middle East” as it “provoked a sharply divided response”.10 Thus the region became increasingly hostile as Jews and Arabs were at odds with respect to who should occupy what in Palestine. As a result of continued turbulence, Britain turned the Palestine issue over to the UN and in 1947, the UN, “under pressure from the US,” passed Resolution 181 dividing Palestine into an Arab and Jewish state.11 The Arab state members of the UN which included Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Syria were sharply opposed to the partition of Palestine but were outnumbered by the US and its allies and thus a Resolution was passed.12 It is therefore hardly surprising that with the support of the great powers, Israel was established and recognized by those powers as a sovereign state. The Arab states opposing the division of Palestine would refuse to recognize Israel as an independent sovereign state. Increasingly, an independent and recognized Israel has occupied significantly more territory within Palestine, reducing the Arab territory to 22% of its original occupation. According to the PLO, for the sake of peace, the Arab faction would rather accept its reduced territory in exchange for a peaceful acquisition of statehood. Although the 1988 Declaration of Independent state status made no additional claims to Palestinian territory and offered a peaceful settlement of the Palestine issue, Palestine continues to lack state recognition within the international community.13 This is obviously less than Palestine is entitled to having regard to the fact that it had its own territory and identity since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Territory ceded to Israel, often through conflict and under pressure, helped to provide Israel with territorial element necessary for achieving state status and at the same time does not appear to assist Palestine in its quest for state recognition. Section 2: The Montevideo Convention Criteria for Statehood In determining whether an entity meets the criteria for state status under international law, reference is typically given to the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States 1993, which was signed in Montevideo, Uruguay in 1933 (hereinafter the Montevideo Convention).14 By virtue of Article 1 of the Montevideo Convention, a state contains four essential elements: “a permanent population”, a “defined territory”, a “government” and the “capacity to enter into relations with the other states”.15 This four part test is known as the declarative theory of statehood and the constitutive theory of statehood adds yet a fifth criterion. The fifth criterion added by the constitutive theory holds that although a state may satisfy the four essential elements of declarative statehood under the Montevideo Convention, the entity is not a state unless and until it is recognized as such within the international community. Under the constitutive view, it is generally believed that once a state with sufficient international power recognizes the entity as a state, it is indeed a state.16 However, Article 3 of the Montevideo Convention provides that recognition is nothing more than a political gesture and states have a right to defend its territory and “integrity” independent of state recognition.17 The Federal Supreme Court of Germany validated the constitutive theory of statehood by ruling in a trademark case that a trademark registered in a state lacking recognition could not be enforced because non-recognition was inconsistent with the definition of statehood.18 More recently, the Arbitration Commission of the Peace Conference on the Former Yugoslavia in Opinion No. 8 of 7/4/1992 observed that recognition is not a legal requirement for the acquisition of statehood. However, it was up to a state whether or not it wanted to recognize a state. Recognition would only provide evidence that the state met the declaratory standards of statehood.19 Based on both the political and legal significance of recognition under the constitutive theory, in considering whether or not Palestine is a de facto state, it is necessary to consider both the Montevideo criteria and the fifth criteria of recognition. In this regard, the first question for consideration is whether or not Palestine has a permanent population. The element of a permanent population is perhaps the most uncontroversial issue for Palestine. Under international customary law, population size and the fact that it is not static does not appear to be a barrier to the acquisition of statehood. For example, the Vatican which is strictly a male population with incoming and outgoing populations is a state under international law.20 The population of Palestine is far more static than the population of the Vatican having been residing in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. The belligerent co-existence with Israel is a further testament to the permanency of the Palestine population’s permanence as it indicates that the population has no other place to call home.21 Thus, there is no doubt that Palestine has a permanent population for the purposes of satisfying the first essential element necessary for the acquisition of statehood under international law. The next question is the extent to which Palestine has a defined territory. Defined territory has been expanded on under customary international law and now includes a requirement that the territory in question is not “seriously contested by any other state”.22 This is added to the further requirement that the government in question has “effective control over the state’s territory and population”.23 In 1988, Jordan relinquished any sovereign claim to the West Bank and despite the fact that Egypt was involved in the Gaza Strip for nearly two decades, it never made a claim to sovereignty over it. Moreover, while Israel claimed East Jerusalem, this was not recognized by any other state as a legitimate acquisition.24 In addition for the last 44 or so years, Israel has not asserted sovereign claims over the remaining portions of the West Back nor the Gaza Strip. Since Palestine’s 1988 declaration, it has been the only state making a serious sovereign claims to these portions of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.25 Moreover, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Israel’s construction of a wall in Palestine was constructed on Palestinian territory and impeded the freedom of movement of Palestinians. As such the construction of the wall was in violation of international law.26 The ICJ’s findings thus establishes not only that Palestine has a defined territory, but also a permanent population. Therefore, in all the circumstances, Palestine has a defined territory under the declaratory theory of statehood under international law. Does Palestine have a government? In this regard, there must be an entity with effective control over the territory and population in order to meet the requirement for statehood under international law.27 What is important is that there is an identifiable and respect body capable of exercising authority over the population and the territory both nationally and internationally.28 It must be plain for all to see that a decision made on behalf of the people of a specific territory is binding on those people and is made on their behalf.29 Although previously, the PLO’s ability to effectively govern Palestine was questionable on account of its agreements with Israel, the position has changed significantly since 2009. 30 In 2009 the Palestinian Authority issues a “two-year national state-building programme” which had the support and supervision of the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee for Assistance to the Palestinians (AHLC).31Additionally, a 2011-2013 National Plan was implemented for on-going “development and state-building”.32 At a meeting of the AHLC in 2011, the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process submitted a report on Palestine’s state building process and reviewed governance, the rule of law, human rights, and economic development. The report noted that although Israel’s belligerence was undermining the state building process in all areas of Palestine, the “governmental functions are now sufficient for a functioning government of a state”.33 With the endorsement of the US on the issue of whether or not Palestine has an effective government, this element of statehood is satisfied. The final declarative ground is the capacity to enter into relations with other states. The main question is whether or not Palestine can engage in relations with other states free of the control of another state.34 As Weiner and Morrison note that the ability to engage in relations with other states is partly dependent on governance within the territory and the extent to which it makes it possible for the territory to comply with its international commitments. In addition, the capacity to engage in relations with other states depends on the extent to which the territory is able to conduct these relations free of input or supervision from another state.35 Palestine clearly has the capacity to enter into relations with other states free of control by any other state. This is not only demonstrated by its agreements with Cyprus as will be discussed in Section 3, but is also demonstrated by a legal framework empowering its relations with other states. The legal framework consist of the Palestine Authority and the Basic Law which is the “legislative body of the PLO” relative to the areas of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip which it maintains full control over.36 In negotiating and concluding bilateral agreements with Cyprus, Palestine acting on its own and is alone responsible for those agreements. Therefore, Palestine has proven that it has the capacity to enter into relations with other countries without the control or input from another country. With respect to the constitutive theory of statehood, the issue of state recognition should be proven. This will be discussed in greater detail in the next section of this paper. At this point it is necessary to add that in addition to the traditional criteria of statehood under the Montevideo Convention, there is a modern criteria. Under the modern criteria the putative state must demonstrate that it was not formed illegally and that it is capable of and will comply with international law and its international obligations.37The United Nations General Assembly passed Resolution 181(11) which mandated the division of Palestine and the formation of two states, one of which was already formed dispenses with the issue of legality. Palestine is therefore legally formed. In addition, as an observer member of the UN and as a state recognized by over 100 states that are members of the UN, Palestine is capable of observing and complying with international law and its international obligations.38 Moreover, considering the patience and the willingness to negotiate a peaceful settlement of the Palestine issue, Palestine has demonstrated its ability and willingness to abide by international law and its international obligations. Thus in all the circumstances, Palestine has met the traditional and modern criteria for statehood. Section 3: Recognition by Other States In 2009, amidst ongoing bilateral relations with Palestine, Cyprus opened the Cyprus Representation Office in Ramallah. In 2013, Cyprus upgraded its diplomatic relations with Palestine from that of a diplomatic mission to Embassy.39 The Cyprus Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dr. Erato Kozakou-Marcoullis noted that the upgrade to Embassy is indicative of Cyprus’s 1988 recognition of Palestine which is consistent with 7 other member states of the EU. These states are Bulgaria, Slovakia, Hungary, Malta, the Czech Republic, Poland and Romania.40 The upgrade is also consistent with Cyprus’s “long-standing principled position on the Palestine issue”.41 Cyprus’s support of Palestine’s effort to obtain internationally recognized state status is evidenced by its vote in the UN for upgrading Palestine’s state status. It also reflects, “the solidarity of the people of Cyprus with the Palestinian people and the Palestinian cause.”42 As the Cyprus Minister of Foreign Affairs noted: Cyprus remains ready to contribute, both bilaterally and internationally, to the further development and welfare of the Palestinian society.43 It is important to note that Cyprus’s support of Palestine’s ambitious attempt to achieve state status is not accomplished unilaterally. The Cyprus Minister of Foreign Affairs indicated that while it supported Palestine’s attempt to achieve full state status, it also supported Israel’s security concerns and would therefore prefer to see a two-state solution to the Palestine issue.44 Regardless, Cyprus has been particularly active with respect to engaging Palestine. For example a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between Palestine and Cyprus in 2011. The Memorandum of Understanding was aimed at improving agricultural relations between Cyprus and Palestine. In 2013, the Ministers of Agriculture for Cyprus and Palestine signed an Action Plan which further enhanced agricultural cooperation between the two parties.45 All indications are therefore, that from the perspective of Cyprus, Palestine is accorded de jure recognition. De jure recognition is predicated on the belief that the state in question should be treated as a sovereign state, but has not been able to officially achieve that status.46 Under customary international law there are two types of state and/or government recognition, although in practice, the distinction does not affect the recognized state’s status under international law. In this regard, de facto recognition refers to the actual status of the government or the state. In such a case, a state or government is recognized quite simply because on the facts of the case, the government or the state has acquired recognition under the declarative criteria for state recognition.47 De jure recognition occurs when a state or a government ought to be recognized but are in fact not in fact states or recognized governments. The distinction was made by Banker LJ in Luthor v Sagor. According to Banker LJ, a de jure state/government is one which should have sovereign powers, although it such powers have been denied. The de facto state or government on the other hand, has sovereign power which may or may not have been obtained lawfully.48 Under some national laws, regardless of whether a state expresses de jure or de facto recognition, the recognition is binding on the recognised state and the recognising state. For example in Luther, the court ruled that regardless of whether a state offers de jure or de facto recognition, the recognised state is entitled to be treated as an independent state.49 The significance however, is that a de jure recognition is more “complete” and de facto recognition can be withdraw more readily.50 In international law, most states are both de facto and de jure states in that they are accorded state hood because they are states both in fact and in reality.51 It is submitted that based on Palestine’s ability to satisfy the declarative theory of statehood under the Montevideo Convention and its ability to satisfy the modern criteria of statehood as discussed in the previous chapter and as evidenced by the constitutive requirement of state recognition, that Palestine is a state in fact and in reality: de facto and de jure. With respect to state recognition, as Whitbeck notes, out of the world’s nine “most populous states, eight (all except the United State) recognize the state of Palestine”.52 Moreover, of the “world’s 20 most populous states, 15 (all except the United States, Japan, Mexico, Germany and Thailand) recognize the state of Palestine”.53What this means is that approximately 90% of the world’s population recognizes that Palestine is de jure state.54 At this point, Palestine is recognized by 112 states worldwide, 8 of which are EU states.55 In the meantime, the EU Parliament has established a Palestinian Legislative Council which is an ad hoc committee of delegates that travel to Palestine to convene with and discuss matters relevant to EU-Palestinian relations. The Palestinian Legislative Council was established since 1993.56 The Arab League which consist of 22 states includes Palestine “which it considers an independent state”.57 Again in November of 2012, the UN General Assembly voted by an overwhelming majority that Palestine be regarded as a non-member observer state which is an upgrade over its previous status as a non-member observer entity.58Thus, in addition to recognition as an independent state by individual countries, international organizations such as the EU are dealing with Palestine as a de jure state and the Arab League and the UN have accepted the de facto and de jure status of Palestine as a state. Therefore, Palestine has met the criteria for statehood under the recognition criteria of the constitutive theory. Section 4: UN General Assembly Resolution A/67/L.28 on the Status of Palestine Although UN Resolutions are not binding on member states, it has significant persuasive value. As Chinkin explains, customary international law is formed by consensus and not by virtue of unanimity. Courts will generally look for “principles” that are more common among national laws and practices and thus norms, rules and laws become crystallised.59 Therefore the passing of Resolution A/67/L. 28, in favour of state status indicates that a common principle among member states indicative of the fact that Palestine is in fact, an independent and sovereign state. Until 2012, Palestine was no more than a mere entity from the perspective of the UN. In this regard, Palestine, or rather the PLO was an “entity having received a standing invitation to participate as observe in the work of the General Assembly.”60 However, the implementation of the UN General Assembly Resolution A/67/L.28 on the Status of Palestine in the United Nations, 2012 on the Status of Palestine changed this position. The resolution refers to a number of previous UN General Assembly Resolutions including a resolution previously recognising the right of the people of Palestine to Self-determination and as such the right to an independent Palestine.61 The 2012 Resolution also recalled the Resolution passed in 1988 that called for referring to the Palestine as opposed to the PLO without prejudice to the latter’s observer status in the UN.62 The 2102 Resolution represents a milestone in the struggles of Palestine to become both a de facto and de jure state. Article 1 of the Resolution “reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967”.63Thus Article 1 establishes that there is a permanent population with a defined territory pursuant to the declarative requirements for statehood under the Montevideo Convention. Article 2 of the 2012 Resolution goes on to state that the UN General Assembly: …Decides to accord to Palestine non-member observer state status in the United Nations, without prejudice to the acquired rights, privileges and role of the Palestine Liberation Organization in the United Nations as the representative of the Palestinian people, in accordance with the relevant resolutions and practice.64 This too is a significant milestone for Palestine as it establishes that the requirement of government is satisfied in respect of Palestine’s quest for statehood under the declarative criteria of the Montevideo Convention. Article 3 goes on to state that the UN General Assembly hopes that when the application put forth by Palestine for membership to the UN is considered, that the Security Council will accept the application.65The application for full membership is pending and includes a letter from Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. The letter focuses on the right of Palestinians to self-determination and the declaration of independence of 1988.66 Thus, at this juncture, it is clear that Palestine is both a de facto and a de jure state under international law and it is only matter of mere formality that it obtains official state status. The UN and the current Palestinian President’s emphasis on the right of the people of Palestine to self-determination and its connection to independent state status appears to be the turning point in the status of Palestine. Therefore the right to self-determination will now be examined in greater detail. Section 5: The relevance of Human Rights in the determination of statehood and the inalienable right of Palestinian people to self-determination The right of self-determination and its relevance to statehood is found in the observation of former US President Woodrow Wilson who states that “national aspirations must be respected; people may now be dominated and governed only by their consent”.67 This concept is contained in the declarative criteria for statehood under the Montevideo Convention. It will be recalled that statehood is only acquired where there is a permanent population over which the government has effective control. Using Wilson’s test, control within the realm of the right to self-determination is only possible where the population consents to the government. Obtaining the right to self-determination and thus an independent sovereign state was previously measured by reference to a shared culture, language, history, territory and ethnicity. However, after the colonial period and the end of the Second World War, the displacement of populations altered the entitlement criteria for self-determination.68 The criteria for obtaining state status on the grounds of the right to self-determination is now measured in terms of a broader connection to a territory.69 According to the International Criminal Court, the right to self-determination is among one of the “most essential principles of international law.”70However, it remains an ambiguous concept in which it is difficult to determine when a specific population is entitled to its own national identity under the right of self-determination under international law.71 Regardless, the right to self-determination in the case of the people of Palestine is uncontroversial for two reasons. First it is codified by the United Nations Charter 1945 which states that its purpose is for the development of “friendly relations” between states on the basis of “respect for the principles of equal rights and self-determination”.72 This principle of self-determination was added to the UN Charter by UN General Assembly Resolution A/Res/25/2625 Declaration on Principle of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, 1970.73 The right to self-determination is also codified by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights1966 and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 1966 both of which establish the basic human right to self-determination.74 Secondly, the United Nations has already determined that the people of Palestine have a right to self-determination and in order to realise this right, the people of Palestine are entitled to their own state. Specifically on 22 November 1974 the UN General Assembly passed Resolution A/Res/3236 (XXIX) on the Question of Palestine 1974 reaffirming “the “inalienable rights of the Palestinian people” to the right to self-determination “without external interference” and the “right to national independence and sovereignty”.75In 2011, the UN General Assembly Resolution A/Res/66/146 The Right of the Palestinian People to Self-Determination 2011 went further. In addition to reaffirming the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination, the Resolution went on to state that the UN General Assembly requests that all member states together with its various organs and bodies, persist in their “support” and assistance of the people of Palestine in their plight to exercise and realise their inalienable “right to self-determination”.76 Therefore, pursuant to Article 2 of the UN General Assembly Resolution of 2011, although Cyprus is not bound by the UN Resolutions, it has a moral obligation, given the persuasive value of UN Resolutions. Moreover, Cyprus is certainly bound by the 1976 Conventions with respect to the right of self-determination. The UN Resolution of 2011 merely strengthens and reinforces Cyprus’s international obligation to do whatever it can to help the people of Palestine realise their right to self-determination. As demonstrated through the various UN General Assembly Resolutions cited above, that right to self-determination includes the right to an independent and sovereign state. Since de jure recognition is one way in which Palestine can and will receive independent and sovereign state status, Cyprus can satisfy its international obligation by recognising Palestine as an independent state. As previously discussed, de jure recognition is more complete and as more states conferring de jure recognition on Palestine, its state status within the international community will strengthen. With the strengthening of Palestine’s state status within the international community, the right of the people to self-determination will be realised more affirmatively via the acquisition of a sovereign and independent state. Conclusion This report demonstrates that Palestine’s state status is only a matter of formality. The facts and circumstances of this case reveal that Palestine for all intents and purposes is both a de facto and de jure state under international law. Palestine has satisfied the criteria for state status and state recognition under both the declarative theory and constitutive theory of statehood under international law. Not only has Palestine met the four essential declarative requirements contained in the Montevideo Convention, it has also met the modern criteria relative to the legality of its acquisition of statehood, and the constitutive theory via recognition by other states. In this regard, Palestine has all the markings and characteristics of a sovereign and independent state. It has its own permanent population, a defined territory to which no other state has a serious or legitimate claim, it has an effective government and has proven time and again that it is entirely capable of conducting relations with other states free of control or supervision by another state. In addition to satisfying these factors, Palestine has made significant progress in forging relations within the international community. In addition to being recognized as a state by more than 100 states, Palestine is also a member of the Arab league and has formal relations with the EU. Moreover, Palestine’s status has been upgraded by the UN who changed its non-member, observer status from that of an entity to that of a state. It is significant that the UN itself recognizes that Palestine is a state and that the UN is at the same time recognising that the people of Palestine are entitled to their own sovereign and independent state. In doing so, the UN has imposed upon other states within the international community a duty to assist the people of Palestine with realising their right to self-determination. The best way that Cyprus can discharge this duty is by recognising Palestine as a state and treating it accordingly. According to the UN Resolution of 2012 in which Palestine is formally recognized as a state within the UN system, it is only a matter of time before Palestine becomes a member to the UN. Cyprus can contribute to hastening this next big step in the Palestine issue and in turn the realisation of the right to self-determination by the people of Palestine by officially and completely recognising Palestine. Recognition is an important step in the resolution of the Palestine issue and in aiding the people of Palestine in realisation of their right to self-determination. Recognition alone may establish de jure statehood and renders the scrutiny of other factors futile. Recognition acts as evidence that the state in question satisfies the criteria for statehood. Cyprus will therefore be joining a large contingent of states by recognising Palestine as a state and in doing so will not only be discharging its international obligations, but will be doing that which is right for Palestine and peace in the region and by extension, international peace. Bibliography Journal Articles Boyle, Francis, A. ‘Forum: The Algiers Declaration on Palestine: The Creation of the State of Palestine.’ (1990)1 European Journal of International Law, 301-313. Briggs, H.W. ‘De Facto and De Jure Recognition: The Arantzau Mendi.’ (October 1939) 33(4) The American Journal of International Law, 689-699. Crawford, James. ‘The Creation of the State of Palestine: Too Much Too Soon?’ (1990) 1 European Journal of International Law, 307-314. Falk, Richard, A. and Weston, Burns, H. ‘The Relevance of International Law to Palestinian Rights in the West Bank and Gaza: In Legal Defense of the Intifada.’ (Winter 1991)32(1) Harvard International Law Journal, 129-157. Nawaz, M.K. ‘The Meaning and Range of the Principle of Self-Determination.’ (1965) Duke Law Journal, 82-101. Samson, Elizabeth. ‘Palestinian Statehood and International Law.’ (Fall 2011) V(3) inFocus Quarterly, 1-3. Saul, M. ‘The Normative Status of Self-Determination in International Law: A Formula for Uncertainty in the Scope and Content of the Right?’ (2011) 11(4) Human Rights Law Review,609-144. Strain, Barrie. ‘Palestinian Statehood: A Political Pipedream but a Legal Reality.’ (2002) Coventry Law Journal, 1-11. Suzuki, E. ‘Self-Determination in International Law.’ (May 1980) 89(6) The Yale Law Journal, 1247-1259. Whitbeck, John, V. ‘The State of Palestine Exists.’ (Summer 2011)18(2) Middle East Policy, 62-66. Textbooks and Book Chapters Bajwa, K.S. Jamu and Kashmir War, 1947-1948: Political and Military Perspective. (New Delhi: Har-Anand Publications, 2004). Calleya, Stephen. Security Challenges in the Euro-Med Area in the 21st Euro-Med Area in the 21st Century. (London: Routledge, 2012). Chinkin, C. ‘Normative Development in the International Legal System’, In D. Shelton (Ed.) Commitment and Compliance: The Role of Non-Binding Norms in the International Legal System. (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2003) Ch. 1. Dixon, Martin; McCorquodale, Robert and Williams, Sarah. Cases and Materials on International Law. (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2011). Dixon, Martin. Textbook on International Law. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013). Fawcett, Louise. International Relations of the Middle East. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013). Focarelli, C. International Law as Social Construct: The Struggle for Global Justice. (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2012). French, Duncan. Statehood and Self-Determination. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011). Joyner, C.C. International law in the 2st Century: Rules for Global Governance. (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefeild, 2005). Malone, L.A. International Law. (New York, NY: Aspen Publishers, 2008). Quigley, John. The Statehood of Palestine. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010). Raic, D. Statehood and the Law of Self-Determination. (The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2002). Ronen, Y. ‘ICC Jurisdiction over Acts Committed in the Gaza Strip: Article 12(3) of the ICC Statute and Non-State Entities’. In C. Meloni and G. Tognoni, (Eds.) Is There a Court for Gaza? A Test Bench for International Justice. (The Netherlands: TMC Asser Press, 2012) Ch. 13. Silverburg, Sanford, R. ‘Diplomatic Recognition of States in Statu Nascendi: The Case of Palestine.’ In Silverburg, Sanford, R. (Ed.) Palestine and International Law: Essays on Politics and Economics. (Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company, 2008), Chapter 1. Silverburg, Sanford, R.‘Palestine and the World of Law: A Structural Analysis.’ In Sanford R. Silverburg (Ed.) Palestine and International Law: Essays on Politics and Economics, (Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company, Inc. Publishers, 2009) Ch.4. Singer, Joel. ‘Aspects of Foreign Relations under the Israeli-Palestinian Agreements on Interim Self-Government Arrangements for the West Bank and Gaza.’ In Sandford R. Silverburg (Ed.) Palestine and International Law: Essays on Politics and Economics, (Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company, Inc. Publishers, 2009) Ch. 5. Tomes, J. Balfour and Foreign Policy. (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2002). Verma, S. K. An Introduction to Public International Law. (PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd., 1998). Weiner, Justus, Reid and Morrison, Diane. Linking the Gaza Strip with the West Bank: Implications of a Palestinian Corridor Across Israel. (Jerusalem, Israel: The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 2007). International Conventions/Treaties/Resolutions: United Nations Series Convention on the Rights and Duties of States 1993. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights1976. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 1976. UN General Assembly Resolution A/67/L.28, on the Status of Palestine in the United Nations 2012. UN General Assembly Resolution A/Res/3236 (XXIX) on the Question of Palestine, 1974. UN General Assembly Resolution A/Res/25/2625 Declaration on Principle of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations 1970. UN General Assembly Resolution 181(II) Future Government of Palestine, 1947. UN General Assembly Resolution A/Res/66/146 The Right of the Palestinian People to Self-Determination 2011. United Nations Charter 1945. Cases International Cases Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo (Request for Advisory Opinion) Advisory Opinion of 22 July 2010, ICJ Reports (2010). Arbitration Commission of the Peace Conference on the Former Yugoslavia, Opinion No. 8 of 7/4/1992 [1993] 92 ILR 199. Case Concerning East Timor (Portugal v Australia) Merits, Judgments, ICJ Reports 1995, 4. International Registration of Trademark (Germany) Case [1959] 28 ILR 82 (Federal Supreme Court of the Federal Republic of Germany). Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Request for Advisory Opinion) ICJ Advisory Opinion 9 July 2004, 1-21. National Cases Luthor v Sagor [1921] 3 KB 543 (UK). Internet Sources BBC News. ‘Profile: Arab League.’ (5 November 2013). http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15747941 (Accessed 22 January 2014). European Parliament/Delegations. ‘Palestinian Council.’ (2014) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/delegations/en/dplc/home.html (Accessed 22 January 2014). Gulfnews. ‘Cyprus Gives Full Diplomatic Status.’ (10 February 2013), Gulfnews.com. http://gulfnews.com/news/region/palestinian-territories/cyprus-gives-palestine-full-diplomatic-status-1.1144298 (Accessed 20 January, 2014). MacAskill, E. and McGreal, C.‘UN General Assembly Makes Resounding Vote in Favour of Palestinian Statehood.’ (29 November 2012) The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/nov/29/united-nations-vote-palestine-state (Accessed 22 January 2014). Minister of Agriculture of Cyprus. ‘The Minister of Agriculture had a Meeting with the Palestinian Minister of Agriculture.’ (31 October 2013). http://www.moa.gov.cy/moa/agriculture.nsf/All/D3DEDE3FCA7D930CC2257C15007E48EB/$file/Press%20conference%20on%20signing%20the%20Action%20Plan%20with%20the%20Palestinian%20Ministry%20of%20Agriculture.pdf (Accessed 20 January 2014). PLO Negotiations Office. ‘Recognizing the Palestine State on the 1967 Border & Admission of Palestine as a Full Member of the United Nations.’ http://www.nad-plo.org/userfiles/file/fact%20sheet/who%20and%20why%20recognize%20Palestine%20Factsheet%20-%20english%20July%202011_pdf.pdf (Accessed 20 January 2014). Republic of Cyprus. ‘Press and Information Office: The Minister of Foreign Affairs Met with the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the State of Palestine.’ (2013). http://www.cyprus.gov.cy/moi/pio/pio.nsf/6b9f0caebe3bff4ec2257076004d01ca/3092a6403e92ab04c2257b0d0024a51d?OpenDocument (Accessed 20 January, 2014). Miscellaneous Reports Office of the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process. ‘Palestine State-Building: A Decisive Period.’ (13 April 2011) United Nations, 1-38. United Nations General Assembly Security Council, ‘Application of Palestine for Admission to Membership in the United Nations,’ (23 September 2011) A/66/371 S/2011/592. Whitbeck, John, V. ‘Palestinian Statehood – Quality as Well as Quantity.’ (29 and 30 March 2011) United Nations Latin American and Caribbean Meeting in Support of Israeli-Palestinian Peace: The Urgency of Realizing a two-state Solution, Montevideo, 8-10. Read More