Beginning in 1917, the British Government ruled the land known as Palestine and ruled its inhabitants, both Arabs and Jews, for more than 30 years. That British in-depth knowledge and experience has been reported to the League of Nations (today's United Nations) on the Administration of Palestine, and the 1936-1937 report by the [British] Palestine Royal Commission:
This is what the British reported to the League of Nations, some 80 years ago:
Nor is the [Arab-Jewish] conflict in its essence an interracial conflict, arising from any old instinctive antipathy of Arabs towards Jews. There was little or no friction, as we have seen, between Arab and Jew in the rest of the Arab world until the strife in Palestine engendered it. The only difference is that in Palestine Arab nationalism is inextricably interwoven with antagonism to the Jews. ... That is why it is difficult to be an Arab patriot and not to hate the Jews.
The 1937 report concludes:
We find ourselves reluctantly convinced that no prospect of a lasting settlement can be founded on moderate Arab nationalism. At every successive crisis in the past that hope has been entertained. In each case it has proved illusory.
From the Oslo Accords (September 13, 1993) through the Quartet's Roadmap (May 1, 2003), and the Aqaba Summit (June 4, 2003), 14 agreements and memorandums have been signed by the Palestinian Arabs.
At each juncture, when attempts to reach a 'live-and-let-live' solution have been advanced, Arab responses have boiled down to a two-pronged offensive that dovetails diplomacy with violence. In short, the Arabs, and particularly the Palestinians, have refused to recognize Israel as a legitimate Jewish entity or to negotiate genuine compromise. Instead, they have tried to drive the Jews out through violence and terror.
The promises continue, the incitement continues, and rejectionism and violence remain the most salient features of Palestinian discourse. Palestinians believe that terror pays and expect the world's support for the creation of a Palestinian state. A Palestinian state that is likely to become a rogue state - the kind of polity the United States is currently grappling with in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Iran, North Korea, and elsewhere.
A rogue state requires special treatment and high levels of international pressure in order to prevent it from wrecking public order, setting off wars, and subverting whole areas of the world. This type of regime would be subject to an international equivalent of incarceration, until there is sufficient recovery to permit reentry into the international system.
Unfortunately, the world community has been ignoring the prospect that a full-blown independent Palestinian state will become just the kind of rogue states and renegade organizations the world is grappling with today.
In light of the Palestinians' history of violence, and its poor performance coping with limited freedom or autonomy - the equivalent of a 'half-way house' to test their readiness to join the family of nations should be devised. Because of the support that Palestinians enjoy in the international arena, Palestinian independence could very well turn into a genuine nightmare.