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

page 52wander until it is time to return.” Thus, it appears thateven in the hostile Middle East, non-contiguous states,such as Israel for the first two decades of its existence,can be viable.Some states remain discontiguous to thepresent. Examples of current non-contiguousstates that are nonetheless viable include:• Angola is separated from its oil-rich, 158 mile-longCabinda Province by the Democratic Republic of theCongo. 293• Russia maintains the Oblast of Kaliningrad, which isa non-contiguous enclave surrounded by Lithuania,Poland, and the Baltic Sea. 294• Azerbaijan includes the exclave of the NaxcivanAutonomous Republic, which is separated fromAzerbaijan-proper by Armenia (an unresolved disputeexists between Azerbaijan and Armenia over theNagorno-Karabakh region). 295• Brunei consists of two territories, physically separatedby Malesia. 296• East Timor is separated from its Oecussi (Ambeno)region on the northwest portion of the island of Timorby Indonesia. 297• Oman controls the strategic port of MusandamPeninsula, although it is separated by territorybelonging to the United Arab Emirates. 298• Argentina is separated from its southern region ofUshuaia by Chilean territory. 299• The United States is separated from its state of Alaskaby approximately 500 miles of Canadian territory. 300• The southern region of Croatia is separated from therest of Croatia by a 16-mile stretch of Bosnian coast.The fact that there were and are non-contiguous states,which are viable, appears to militate against the callfor a territorially contiguous Palestinian State as aprerequisite for its viability. The state, it appears, couldfunction and maintain a separate existence without suchcontiguity.ConclusionConventional wisdom insists that a territorial link betweenGaza and the West Bank -- whether sovereign or not -- isessential for the existence of a viable Palestinian State.Thus, safe passage is called for to link Gaza and the WestBank. Indeed, the need for a territorial link of some sortis often imbedded in the call for a viable PalestinianState, the premise being that a non-contiguous statecannot be viable. This monograph’s analysis revealsthat the lack of a link between separated territories doesnot affect whether a new political community should berecognized as a state under international law. In addition,based on past and present international practice, a statedoes not possess an inherent right to a link between itsgeographically distinct areas. In particular this may beapplied to the sovereign link called for by the Palestiniansbetween Gaza and the West Bank.Notwithstanding conventional wisdom, the need for sucha link is questionable. One generally thinks that at thevery least the Palestinians need to be able to transportgoods between the Gaza Strip and West Bank for theirstate to be viable. However, this is not the case. First,there were convoys, discussed above, which affect themovement of goods from Gaza to the West Bank, andfrom there to Jordan. Interestingly, this was in usefor ten years, despite the absence of any safe passageregime. Second, being a member of the Arab League ofStates and a signatory to the Arab Transit Agreement of1977, ‘Palestine’ has the right of free transit across theterritories of all Arab countries that are parties to theAgreement. Both Egypt and Jordan are signatories tothe Agreement. They are therefore under an obligation toexempt Palestinian goods in transit from customs duties,taxes and other such charges. 301 This would surelybe preferable to a safe passage with its many securitychecks, customs and duties. This has not been fullycapitalized upon, and while “the right of the Palestinianswith regard to transit transport is practiced” it is done ona “very exceptional basis.” 302 There is no reason for thisnot to be capitalized upon in as much as the Arab statesprofess their commitment to an economically successfulPalestinian State. Thus, the need for safe passage isquestionable.