What Will the “State of Palestine” Look Like?

As the French, the British, the Canadians, and the Australians rush to recognize the “State of Palestine,” the question that must be asked is: what will this entity look like?

Before discussing a number of relevant factors to answer the question, it must first be stressed that the decisions of these countries and any others who might decide to join them to recognize the “State of Palestine” are predominantly declarative.

The decisions that are populist in nature and designed, for the most part, to placate the voices of growingly radicalized domestic audiences cannot serve as an alternative to the Palestinian entity actually meeting the requirements of international law for statehood.

The Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs (JCFA) addressed those criteria, and the failure of the Palestinians to meet them, in a previous report¹ – France’s Malicious Recognition of “Palestine”: The Ultimate Reward for the October 7 Massacre – and since then nothing has changed.

What then would be the nature of the “State of Palestine”?

Democracy or Dictatorship?

Based on the experience to date and empty rhetoric aside, the “State of Palestine” would most likely be another dictatorship.

In the Oslo Accords, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) committed to establishing a liberal democracy. Elections for the position of the Palestinian Authority (PA) chairman and parliament were meant to take place every four years. In practice, in thirty years, the PA has only ever held two elections for the position of chairman (1996 and 2005) and two elections for the parliament (1996 and 2006).

Current PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, who refers to himself as the president of the “State of Palestine,” was last elected in 2005 and is currently in his 21^st year of his first four-year term.

Elections for the PA parliament last took place in 2006 and ended with a landslide victory for Hamas, the genocidal terrorist organization that planned and executed the October 7, 2023, massacre. Hamas won despite a $50 million donation from the U.S. administration, given to ensure the victory of Abbas and his Fatah party.²

In 2007, Abbas deposed the elected Hamas government and replaced it with a succession of governments run by members of his Fatah party. Since then, Abbas has adopted several decisions and measures to incorporate the PA institutions into the PLO institutions, thus guaranteeing that his Fatah party, which dominated the PLO, will forever remain in control. Over the years, predominantly when under pressure from donor countries, Abbas has feigned calls for general elections³ for both the PA chairmanship and the PA parliament. However, once Abbas realized that his Fatah party would lose the elections, he cancelled them.

Most recently, and as part of the basis for French recognition of the “State of Palestine,” Abbas wrote⁴ to President Emmanuel Macron to confirm his ostensible commitment to democracy and new elections “in order to rejuvenate Palestinian governance.” While this would seemingly be a positive development, ominously, Abbas added that the “elections will be inclusive and open, based on new party legislation, solely to political forces and candidates that clearly accept the PLO political platform…”

Hamas, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), and other internationally designated terrorist organizations should never have been allowed to participate in any Palestinian election. Abbas’s demand back in 2005 to allow them to participate was a clear breach of the Oslo Accords.⁵

Since Hamas rejects the “PLO political platform,” it would initially seem that Abbas is going to tailor the “new party legislation,” in a manner that would exclude Hamas from participating. However, Abbas knows that the Palestinian people would reject a measure of this nature. Thus, in the run-up to the election, he is hoping that Hamas will show sufficient, albeit false, flexibility and will be willing to issue any mealy-mouthed acceptance of the PLO’s platform.

Behind closed doors and as an integral part of the move to hoodwink the French, the Brits, the Canadians, and the Australians, Abbas will explain to Hamas that there is no reason to object to issuing the statement since the PLO has never abandoned its commitment to destroy Israel.

Needless to say, the very idea of issuing “new party legislation” in the run-up to elections, that would ostensibly ban the largest party which enjoys the most significant popular support of the Palestinian people, is far from being democratic.

In this manner, Abbas hopes to “rejuvenate Palestinian governance” by holding elections with the participation of a limited group of parties, his being the biggest.

Abbas’s commitment also camouflages another fundamental flaw.

The elections, according to Abbas, would only be open to those parties that “clearly accept the PLO political platform.” Abbas can make this stipulation since he also heads the PLO and his Fatah party dominates the PLO.

However, other members of the PLO, such as the PFLP, are internationally designated terrorist organizations. To this day, the PFLP rejects any peace with Israel and openly advocates for the destruction of Israel. To achieve its goals, PFLP members actively engage in terror, such as the 2001 assassination of Israeli Minister of Tourism, Rehavam Ze’evi, and the planting of the roadside bomb that murdered 17-year-old Israeli Rina Shnerb.

Human Rights

Over the last 30 years, the international community has donated hundreds of millions of dollars to promote human rights in the PA, yet it is unclear what exactly has been achieved. As the JCFA has already noted,⁶ between 2007 and 2023, the European Union alone donated over 1.81 billion euros to promote “gender equality.” Despite the substantial contribution, women living in the PA still face institutionalized discrimination. Perpetrators of “honor killings,” in which a male kills his female relative based on a suspicion of sexual impropriety, are still prevalent and still enjoy the opportunity to receive a lenient sentence.

While women are still discriminated against, their situation is still far superior to that of members of the LGBTQ community.

Since the “State of Palestine” is unlikely to differ substantially from the PA, it is reasonable to assume that the new state will similarly view homosexual activity as “a violation of the highest ideals and values of the Palestinian society.”⁷ Members of the LGBTQ community will continue to be persecuted and subject to punishment of up to ten years in prison.⁸

The Most Anti-Jewish State in the World

As the French, British, Canadians, and Australians know well, for decades, the PLO and the PA have run the most extensive program to promote, incentivize, and reward terror. As part of this program, the PLO and PA have paid billions of dollars over the years to reward imprisoned terrorists, including murderers, and to the families of dead terrorists, including the families of terrorists who carried out suicide bombings to murder Jews. Entrenched in PA law – The Law of Prisoners and Released Prisoners – and PLO regulations, this policy practically places a price tag on the head of every Jew. By way of comparison, despite having carried out the Holocaust, even the Nazis did not have an institutionalized policy comparable to that of the PLO/PA to reward every person who murders a Jew.

Since the French, British, Canadians, and Australians did not condition the recognition of the “State of Palestine” on the total abolition of this policy, often referred to as the PLO-PA “Pay-for-Slay” policy, it can only be assumed that the new state will continue to promote, incentivize, and reward the murderers of Jews, seeing the new recognition as condoning the practice.

The “Pay-for-Slay” policy is, of course, in addition to the open anti-Jewish sentiments and constant dehumanization of Jews and Israelis that is commonplace in PLO-PA messaging to the Palestinians.⁹

Having systematically demonized Jews and fermented Jew hatred, it is not surprising that the Palestinians reject any concept of a Jewish presence in the “State of Palestine.”

Clearly articulating this principle, in 2013, Abbas presented his vision for the “State of Palestine,” saying without hesitation that “In a final solution, we would not see the presence of a single Israeli – civilian or soldier – on our lands.”¹⁰

In other words, in the eyes of the Palestinian leadership, the “State of Palestine” now being recognized by the French, British, Canadians, and Australians would be the embodiment of the Nazi principle of creating a state that is “Judenfrei,” in which people who murder Jews are systematically paid financial rewards.

Economy

In addition to being a dictatorship, the “State of Palestine” will also inevitably become an economic train wreck.

Instead of developing industry, promoting innovation, and establishing a functioning economy, for the last 30 years, the PA has existed on handouts from the international community and income Israel agreed to waive, as part of the Oslo process, to buy peace.¹¹

According to financial reports published by the PA, domestic tax revenue accounted for only 22% of the PA’s total revenue, while the taxes waived by Israel accounted for an additional 68%.

According to other statistics published by the PA, the Palestinian economy is almost entirely dependent on trade with Israel.¹² Those statistics show that on average, 85-90% of PA exports are sold to Israel, and 55% of its imports come from Israel.

In addition to its dependency on Israel as a market for exports and source of imports, since the PA never developed its domestic economy, the Palestinian workforce was also heavily dependent on Palestinians working in Israel.

According to a 2023 Q1 Labour Force Survey issued by the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, 25% of the workforce was unemployed. 37% of those employed in the Palestinian private sector earned less than the minimum wage (NIS 1,880 or $537). The average monthly wage of those employed in the Palestinian public sector was NIS 2,882 ($823). Alongside them, 130,000 people, or 13% of those employed, worked in Israel, earning an average monthly salary of NIS 6,270 ($1,791).

Needless to say, the unilateral recognition of the “State of Palestine,” which would come in addition to the other fundamental Palestinian breaches of the accords, would negate the Oslo Accords and release Israel from all of its financial commitments to the PA.

Israel would no longer be required to waive any taxes on behalf of the “State of Palestine.” It could, in theory, impose import taxes on goods originating from the unilaterally declared state. The citizens of the “State of Palestine” would no longer be entitled to enjoy a relaxed policy for entry into Israel for employment or other reasons.

An End to the “Palestine Refugees”

For almost 78 years, the Arabs who fled the nascent State of Israel have been held in limbo. Their numbers have allegedly swelled from the original 711,000 to nearly six million people.

Over the decades, the Arab countries and the Palestinian leadership have refused to resettle them in their host countries, falsely promising them that one day they would demographically flood and democratically destroy Israel.

The so-called “right of return” of the refugees has become so sacrosanct that Abbas even rejected an offer to allow the “Palestine refugees” to flee the Syrian civil war and find haven in the PA-controlled areas if it meant them relinquishing their “refugee” status.

While Israel had allegedly agreed in 2008, as part of a negotiated settlement, to absorb 150,000 “Palestine refugees” over ten years, unilaterally creating the “State of Palestine” would put an end to the delusion of their return to Israel. The “refugee” resident in the “State of Palestine” would certainly lose their “refugee” status, as one cannot be a “refugee” if one is a resident in one’s state. Those living abroad would naturally be expected to relocate, to the extent to which they so desire, to live in their state.

As a positive note for Israel, unilaterally creating a “State of Palestine” would necessarily mean disbanding the terror infested United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). For the “State of Palestine” on the other hand, this would mean losing the billions of dollars that the agency spends providing for the “Palestine refugees.”

Conclusion

While the unilateral recognition of the non-existent “State of Palestine” may placate some elements of the French, British, Canadian, and Australian electorates, the reality would be a disaster.

Declarations aside, the illusive “State of Palestine” will still not meet the requirements set by international law for real statehood.

Just as the delusional “Arab Spring” failed to bring about the touted change, given its non-existent foundations, the false promise of a “State of Palestine” will quickly turn into a bleak Palestinian Winter.

“Palestine” will be a dictatorial, racist state that flouts basic human rights. From its creation, it will have a failed economy, having lost 65% of its funding that the PA received from Israel and the international aid it used to receive via UNRWA.

Recognition will also not promote peace. Rather, it is rightly being perceived as a reward for terror and murder that will embolden the Palestinian leadership to continue their struggle to destroy Israel.

* * *

Notes