Palestine's declaration of independence in 1988 was a turning point in the struggle for statehood
My Interview
The Palestinian Declaration of Independence, declared by former Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) leader Yasir Arafat in Algeria 36 years ago, is seen as a turning point in the Palestinians gaining state status.
Source:AA
It is stated that the Declaration of Independence, declared by Arafat in Algeria 36 years ago, is the most important step in Palestine's recognition as a state by 146 countries today.
International law experts point out that the biggest obstacle to the recognition of the state of Palestine, which is currently recognized by 146 countries, especially by Western countries, is the diplomatic pressure from the United States.
Experts stressed that the state status of Palestine is extremely important in terms of holding Israel accountable for the ongoing genocide in Gaza, and that it provides legal grounds for both South Africa's intervention in the genocide case filed against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and for the International Criminal Court (ICC) to conduct an investigation into Israeli officials.
US Human Rights Professor Francis Boyle, who was the legal advisor for the Palestinian Declaration of Independence, and Ohio State University International Law Professor John Quigley evaluated the preparation process of the declaration, the legal basis of Palestine's state status, and the obstacles to international recognition.
The two purposes of the declaration
Boyle stated that the PLO invited him to give a speech at the United Nations (UN) Headquarters in 1987 on the 20th anniversary of the Six-Day War, and said, "In that speech, I said that it was time for the Palestinians to unilaterally declare their own independent state and apply for UN membership."
Boyle, who stated that he prepared a memorandum upon the request of the Palestinians, said, "After King Hussein of Jordan severed all ties with the West Bank in August 1988, the PLO realized that they had to establish their own state. Meanwhile, the leadership of the Intifada that started in Gaza in December 1987 asked the PLO to establish a state for them in March 1988."
Explaining that there were two important purposes for him to prepare the declaration of independence, Boyle said, "First, the Palestinians' right to self-determination and their right to have their own state. Second, the Palestinians needed a state to protect them from being destroyed by the Zionists. We see this today in Gaza and the West Bank."
"State status keeps Palestinians alive"
Boyle noted that 146 out of 193 UN members recognize the state of Palestine, adding, "In 2012, it obtained observer state status, which is similar to full membership status in the UN. Finally (May 2024), the UN General Assembly raised Palestine's status almost 'de facto' to the level of a member state, with all the rights of a member state except voting and being elected to office."
Explaining the importance of "State Status" for Palestine, Boyle said, "State status keeps them alive today. It is the only source of authority and power they have. This also enabled Palestine to participate in international agreements and international organizations. For example, Palestine's participation in South Africa's genocide case against Israel at the ICJ was only possible after it had state status since November 15, 1988."
"No UN member state was destroyed"
Referring to his experiences in the genocide case at the ICJ as the lawyer of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Boyle said, "No member state in the history of the UN has been destroyed. Some have disintegrated, like Yugoslavia or the Soviet Union, but none have been destroyed."
Boyle said, "In my work for the Bosnians, the UN, the European Union (EU) and the Clinton administration tried to destroy them by destroying their statehood and their UN membership. Today, that UN membership keeps Bosnia alive, protects Bosnia's statehood. Otherwise, they would have been lost to history."
Boyle said the US government still opposes the state status of Palestine and is pressuring states that accept it. "It is putting enormous pressure on different European countries not to recognize the state of Palestine. Although the EU said years ago that it would recognize Palestine, it still has not done so due to US pressure, intimidation and bullying. The recognition of Palestine by NATO member Norway last spring was an important step," he said.
"Palestine gained state status with the Treaty of Lausanne"
John Quigley, Professor of International and Comparative Law at Ohio State University, drew attention to a different dimension of the 1988 declaration.
"The 1988 declaration was important because it made it clear that the PLO was the government of Palestine. I don't see it as a declaration of statehood. The 1988 declaration was more of a declaration of government of a state that had existed since 1923, since the Treaty of Lausanne," Quigley said.
Referring to Article 16 of the Treaty of Lausanne, Quigley said, "With Turkey's renunciation of sovereignty over basically all lands outside of Anatolia, the states of Palestine, Iraq and Syria came into being."
Quigley emphasized that Palestine should have been accepted as a state since 1923, and said, "In 1924, in the Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions case of the Permanent Court of International Justice, it was stated that as a result of the Treaty of Lausanne, sovereignty in Palestine belongs to Palestine, not to England or anyone else."
"US pressure is hindering the recognition process"
While both experts emphasized that the biggest obstacle to recognizing Palestine was US pressure, Quigley pointed out that the US was preventing countries that had not yet officially recognized Palestine as a state from doing so.
"In order to recognize Palestine as a state, they have to take a stance that is contrary to the US position and they are reluctant to oppose the US. If the US were to announce tomorrow that it recognizes Palestine, other states would immediately recognize it," Quigley said.
Pointing out the importance of recognition, Quigley said, "The UN General Assembly's decision in May to accept Palestine almost as a full member state was accepted despite the opposition of the US. This has an important symbolic value in terms of Palestine's full participation in UN activities."
Recognition of states in international law
In international law, recognition refers to unilateral transactions in which "international legal entities", primarily states and international organizations, accept a situation, a fact or a relationship as lawful and declare that they will conduct their relations on the basis of this acceptance.
In international law, the elements of the state are listed in four articles as a piece of land with certain borders, a fixed human community living on that land, the political authority governing this community, and the ability to conduct relations with other states.
While these elements derive their validity from customary rules that have been in effect for many years in international law, Israel and the US in particular argue that these four conditions have not yet been met for Palestine, thus obstructing Palestine's efforts to establish diplomatic relations as independent states.
The West's dominance over "recognition"
"Recognition of states" has a long history and gained great importance in Latin America, Europe and Africa, especially after the dissolution of the Spanish Colonial Empire in the 19th century and the Napoleonic Wars of 1803-1815.
The issue of recognition of states, which had become increasingly important with the French Revolution, became one of the most controversial issues of international law with the decolonization movements after the Second World War.
While European states used "recognition" as an additional condition for becoming a state for many years, they considered themselves to have the privilege of deciding who would become a state and who would not.
Constitutive and declarative theories
Those who oppose seeing "recognition" as a condition for becoming a state argue that recognition does not have a "founding" role if the state has its elements, but rather means "declaring" the current state of being an independent state.
While the founding theory means that a state only exists when it is recognized, it is criticized because it means adding a new element to the four elements that make up the state.
On the other hand, it is not legally fair for a state's existence to depend on the recognition of another state that is equal to it and not superior.
While the declarative theory argues that a state exists whether it is recognized or not, according to this approach, recognition only means accepting the existence of the state.
Although the founding view was once widely defended by Western states, today the declarative view is more widely adopted.
What does it mean for Palestine to be recognized as a "state"?
The increase in the number of countries recognizing the Palestinian people shows that their efforts are paying off, and this increases their bargaining power in negotiations with Israel and at the international level.
For Palestine, recognition as a state means establishing diplomatic relations on an equal footing with other states.
In this way, Palestine will be able to reciprocally appoint ambassadors to countries that recognize it as a state, and it will also reduce the legitimacy of the US veto on its path to full UN membership.
In addition, Palestinian passports become valid in countries that recognize them, just like citizens of other states, and these countries can make regulations regarding Palestine's statehood in their domestic laws.
It also shows that these occupied territories are accepted by the states that recognize them as belonging to the state of Palestine and that Israel's annexation efforts in these territories are rejected.
Although recognition does not directly change the current occupation and attacks on Gaza for Palestinians, it does provide benefits in ending the conflict, reaching a permanent solution, and holding people accountable for the crimes committed.
Government recognition is based on different criteria
In international law, government recognition, unlike state recognition, only applies in extraordinary circumstances such as a coup, uprising or occupation. In this case, the basic criterion is "effective control".
The authority that has effective control in a certain region of a country can be recognized as the "de facto local government" in that region. However, this recognition does not exclude the central authority and is not accepted as the legitimate representative of the entire country.
There are two important approaches to government recognition in international law. The doctrine, developed by former Mexican Foreign Minister Jose Maria Estrada in the 1930s, argues that looking at political criteria such as democracy and free elections in recognizing a government would amount to interference in its internal affairs. According to this doctrine, a government, whether it came to power through ordinary or extraordinary means, should be recognized if it maintains effective control over the country.
In contrast, the doctrine developed by former Ecuadorian Foreign Minister Carlos Tobar emphasizes democratic legitimacy. According to the Tobar doctrine, governments that are not elected and are formed outside the constitutional framework should not be recognized. However, the Estrada doctrine is more widely accepted in terms of maintaining international peace and security.
https://karadenizgazete.com.tr/dunya/filistinin-1988deki-bagimsizlik-ilani-devlet-olma-mucadelesinin-donum-noktasi-oldu/549516
No comments:
Post a Comment