JERUSALEM – I requested a right of reply to JTAโs essay “The Zionist Case for Palestinian Statehood.” JTA did not respond to my request. The essay makes a case for a two state outcome. It does not address whether a future Palestinian polity will recognize and live alongside the State of Israel.
As a journalist who has covered the Palestinian entity since 1987, and who has produced books, documentary films, and investigations on the ground, I find that important questions about the legal and institutional commitments of a planned Palestinian state remain unanswered. I raise those questions here so readers can assess claims that a new Palestinian status will produce lasting peace.
First, what is the legal status of the Palestinian National Charter, known as the PLO covenant? The Palestine National Council met in Gaza in April 1996 and passed a resolution regarding the charter.
International records show the PNC approved language to abrogate articles inconsistent with the 1993 letters of mutual recognition. But analysts and legal observers note the 1996 action was ambiguous and contested, and questions remain about whether the charter has been formally and fully revised to remove clauses that call for Israelโs elimination.
Second, will laws that provide material rewards for attacks on Israelis be repealed? The Palestinian Authority long operated formal programs that make payments to prisoners and to families of Palestinians killed while attacking Israelis. These programs are anchored in legislation and government decrees that describe such payments as social benefits to those the leadership calls participants in the national struggle.
Recent statements and decrees in 2025 indicate the Palestinian leadership has at times moved to suspend or revoke elements of those payment systems, but independent observers caution that suspension is not the same as full legislative repeal and implementation remains unclear. Readers should not assume the end of the practice without transparent legal steps and verifiable implementation.
Third, will school curricula be reformed to remove material that praises violence or martyrdom? Multiple curriculum reviews by independent monitors have documented instances in Palestinian textbooks that glorify violent struggle and present martyrdom in a positive light.
Those findings have been cited by international researchers as evidence that current education materials leave students ill prepared for peaceful coexistence. Any credible plan for statehood must specify curricular reforms, independent review, and timelines.
Fourth, what will appear on official maps and in public symbols? Slogans and maps that advocate sovereignty across the territory “from the river to the sea” remain prominent in some political and civil society settings.
Such imagery raises fundamental questions about whether a new Palestinian entity would acknowledge Israel as a neighboring state on equal footing. International debate about maps and symbols is ongoing, and it will matter whether a new Palestinian polity uses territorial iconography that recognizes Israelโs existence.
Fifth, what does the constitutional framework foresee for religion and law? The Palestinian Basic Law, adopted in amended form in the early 2000s, declares Islam the official religion and states that the principles of Islamic Sharia shall be a principal source of legislation.
This formulation is common in a number of constitutions in the region and can be interpreted in many ways. But the text means that questions about minority rights, equal citizenship, and the place of religious law in the penal and civil codes must be settled openly if a Palestinian polity is to be a partner for Jewish and democratic neighbors.
My reporting is not an argument against Palestinian statehood in principle. It is an appeal for clarity. Proposals that reshape borders and sovereignty cannot be judged solely on good intentions or high level rhetoric. They must be evaluated against concrete legal steps, clear repeal of statutes that incentivize violence, curricular reform verified by independent experts, and public symbols that recognize a neighboring state.
Those are the issues I asked JTA to let me address directly in a right of reply. The organization declined to grant that forum. I am publishing these questions now so readers and policymakers can judge the assumptions underlying arguments for immediate recognition and state creation.
This article seeks to inform readers in the Jewish and Zionist community who support durable peace and who expect that any new state will meet minimum standards of renunciation of violence, protection of minorities, and adherence to clear, implementable laws.
This article is based on verified information from the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, United Nations records and analyses of the 1996 PNC resolution, independent studies of Palestinian legislation on prisoner and martyr payments, monitoring reports on Palestinian school curricula, and texts of the Palestinian Basic Law.