1. How can a place with no elected officials be considered a state?
Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority, last won an election in 2005. His term ended in 2009. The Palestinian Legislative Council was last elected in 2006. Much of the Palestinian Authority is run by Prime Minister Salam Fayyad who has never been elected to anything.
The Palestinian Authority has refused to call elections, but found the time to put forward statehood bids. Shouldn’t there be an election before a statehood bid?
2. How can Palestine be a state if it’s actually two mutually hostile states run by two different governments?
The West Bank is governed by the Palestinian Authority. Gaza is run by Hamas. Each have their appointed politicians, militias and officials. Each is a mini-state. Despite several unity attempts, both remain divided between two mutually hostile armed camps, which are unable to agree on elections.
Shouldn’t there at least be a single Palestinian government that runs both the West Bank and Gaza as a prerequisite for statehood?
3. How can a place that is almost entirely subsidized by foreign aid qualify for statehood?
The Palestinian Authority lives off American, European and Middle Eastern aid, including aid directed through the UN and a variety of international organizations. It hardly has anything resembling an economy and its domestic businesses are monopolies controlled by Palestinian Authority leaders.
Shouldn’t the Palestinian Authority become self-sustaining before it becomes recognized as a state?
4. How can a place that has made no progress in 20 years qualify for statehood?
The Palestinian Authority has been around for nearly two decades. And two decades later it is not only struggling with the same problems of violence and corruption, but it has actually gone backward in many ways. The Palestinian Authority no longer even has elections or a united territory?
Should a place that has actually gotten worse during its period of autonomy really become a state?