Linking the Gaza Strip with the West Bank: - Jerusalem Center For ...

page 48or is responsible for their international obligations. 268Practically speaking, an entity must actually engage inforeign relations, rather than merely assert a capacityto do so. The mere assertion of such capacity, withoutmore, would be insufficient to meet international legalrequirements. 269d. IndependenceIndependence has been identified by some scholars asan implied fifth criterion, 270 while others simply view it asequivalent to, and the foundation of, the ‘capacity to enterinto relations with other states.’ 271 In demonstratingone’s independence, the question arises as to whatform it should take. There are two recognized formsof independence. The first is formal independence,which exists where governing power over a territoryis vested in the separate authorities of the territory. 272The second is actual independence, which refers to theeffective independence of the putative state -- the realgovernmental power at the disposal of its authorities. 273While seemingly simple, the term operates differently indifferent contexts. Thus, one must distinguish betweenindependence as an initial qualification for statehood andindependence as a criterion for the continued existenceof a state. A new state that is created by secession ora grant of power from a previous sovereign will have todemonstrate substantial independence before it will beregarded as existent -- it must demonstrate both formaland actual independence. An existing state is subject toa far less stringent requirement. 274 Thus, the Palestinianentity, to be recognized as a state, must be able todemonstrate both formal and actual independence. It isconceivable that the Palestinian entity could demonstratethe existence of both forms of independence.e. Modern Developments in International LawIn recent years additional criteria for statehood havebeen formulated in response to modern developments instate practice. This suggests that further considerationshave been developed and have gained acceptance in thisarea of international practice. 275International LawConcerning FriendlyRelations and CooperationAmong States, in accordancewith the Charter of theUnited Nations, sets forthsome basic precepts, one ofwhich says that states shallrefrain from the threat or useof force against the territorialintegrity or politicalindependence of a state. 277The rule of legality states that in satisfying the traditionalcriteria for statehood, an entity must satisfy thetraditional standards of statehood in accordance withinternational law. If an entity emerges through acts thatare considered to be illegal in terms of international lawor norm, then no matter how effective the entity may be,its claim to statehood cannot be maintained. 276D. Examples of Viable, Non-Contiguous StatesExamples of both past and present non-contiguous statessuggest that contiguity is not a prerequisite for a state’sviability, and that a state will be capable of existing evenif it is non-contiguous. It is to these examples that wenow turn.There are many examples, past and present, of noncontiguousstates -- states consisting of two or more partsbetween which lies foreign sovereign territory -- which havenevertheless proven themselves to be viable. There are,however, some examples of non-contiguous states thatdo raise concerns. For example, East Pakistan (referredto as East Bengal prior to 1955) and West Pakistan, andthe Danzig Corridor proved to be problematic.Pakistan was created when the United Kingdom leftIndia, and the subcontinent was divided according to