•  
  •  
 

University of Baltimore Journal of International Law

Abstract

This article replies to Professor John Quigley's recent article on the rather dramatic controversy concerning Palestinian statehood. The present article provides a critical assessment of two pivotal Palestinian Unilateral Declarations of Independence (UDI) initiatives as of 1988 and 2011. It does so both generally and with regard to the territorial and border disputes underplayed by Professor Quigley's supportive Palestinian statehood argument altogether.

In the wake of the codenamed 'Arab Spring' tentative spread of democracy throughout the Middle East, regional law and order commands legal certainty. Thus, while being sympathetic to the secessionist selfdetermination of Palestine under public international law, this article offers critical assessment of the latter's unilateral bypass of both relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions as well as the Israeli-Palestinian bilateral Oslo Interim Peace Agreements. The article concludes that neither argument to the contrary in support of unilateral Palestinian statehood as put by Professor Quigley is legally assured.

Share

COinS