Statehood Criteria: Religious Freedom and Equality

What is required to recognize a State: worship, equality, and army

Is having territory, an army, and a tax agency enough for the rest of the world to call you a State? The question, which sounds like a civil service exam, has become the axis of a discussion that starts with two minimum rules: real freedom of worship and identical rights for all citizens. Those who do not meet them, the initial argument holds, should not receive any official recognition. The problem appears when applying this yardstick to specific cases.

The first response to the proposal is quick: before discussing freedoms, the State must exist. An armed organization claiming control over a territory is not a State, and there lies the sustancia ilegal. Because the same criterion, turned around, serves to question anyone else: some recall that in Israel 20% of the population is Muslim and that religious courts exist where Sharia is applied, with judges appointed by parliament. If Sharia disqualifies, it disqualifies there too.

What minimum requirements define a State

The classic definition repeats with variations: territory with borders, army, and fiscal capacity. Some simplify it further: an army stronger than neighbors', and the rest is literature. It is the cynical version of international law, explaining why diplomatic recognition resembles a balance of forces more than an exam of constitutions.

On that basis, the debate gets tangled in double standards. It is argued that Saudi Arabia lacks freedom of worship yet remains a friendly State to Western powers. In contrast, the response is that consistency does not require treating everyone equally, but rather not rewarding those who fail to meet minimums. Two ways of understanding the same principle, and neither yields.

Gaza, the West Bank, and the problem of who represents whom

The focus shifts to demographic data. Gaza adds up to 1,989,970 inhabitants in 365 square kilometers, with a density of 5,479 people per square kilometer and an annual growth of 2%. The figure is launched to describe the territory as the largest concentration camp in the world. The reply comes fast: in the West Bank, much larger, Hamas does not govern, but the Palestinian National Authority, and since 2013 that entity calls itself the State of Palestine, recognized by more than a hundred nations.

The counterargument does not dispute demographics, it disputes capability. A territory with missiles, thousands of tunnels, and the ability to organize an attack with 1,200 deaths does not fit the image of a concentration camp. The answer to that is that the cause of the cause is the primary cause: if there are weapons, it is because whoever controls the perimeter allows them. The circle does not close.

Marriage, Sharia, and the yardstick that is not applied

One of the most concrete exchanges in the debate concerns family law. In Israel only religious authorities can solemnize marriages, and the Chief Rabbinate authorizes unions, with fifteen religious courts regulating weddings and divorces. Civil or mixed marriages performed abroad took time to be recognized. That is: the same country that presents itself as a beacon of liberties in the region has a confessional marriage regime.

The conclusion drawn is uncomfortable for everyone. If freedom of worship and equal rights are the filter, almost no State in the region passes it. And if the filter is only existence and force, then the discussion on principles is superfluous. The full calculation, with population percentages and involved courts, gives a picture much grayer than that of the two sides.

Why the recognition of Palestine is decided in May

The thread lands on real politics: some argue that several European countries will recognize Palestine and that this will force a break in relations with Israel. The economic warning also appears: less trade, less employment. And the response is that the cost of sustaining the official narrative is already paid in another currency.

Meanwhile, the discussion on requirements remains unresolved, which is exactly where it usually stays. Defining what a State is is easy in a manual and very difficult when the one asking has interests. We leave it there.