In a move that brought quick denunciations from Israeli officials and from the head of the Zionist Organization of America, Pope Francis last Wednesday announced a Vatican decision to officially recognize the “State of Palestine” in a formal treaty.

The AP reports that the treaty, which concerns the activities of the Roman Catholic Church in Palestinian territory, is “deeply symbolic and makes it explicit that the Holy See has switched its diplomatic recognition from the Palestine Liberation Organization to the State of Palestine.”

As could be expected, the pope’s decision drew a sharp rebuke from the Israeli Foreign Ministry, which said it was  “disappointed” in the decision because “this move does not promote the peace process and distances the Palestinian leadership from returning to direct and bilateral negotiations,” according to a text message from the ministry.

It would be easy and convenient to accept the Israeli statement as patently true. But is it? Let’s delve deeper.

The resumption of serious bilateral negotiations between the Palestinian Authority and the narrow 61-seat coalition built by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seems highly unlikely to take place any time soon.  Indeed, on the eve of the recent Israeli elections, Netanyahu made an explicit statement that an independent Palestinian state would not happen on his watch as prime minister. He partially walked that back later, stating the “time was not right” for a two-state solution because of Palestinian failures to live up to its past obligations to renounce violence and the glorification of terrorists.

In the meantime, PA leader Mahmoud Abbas has been on a roll, moving toward increasing international recognition for Palestinian statehood.  Pope Francis and the Vatican, by formally embracing Palestinian statehood, lend considerable symbolic value to Abbas’  goal.  

Of note is the fact that both the Vatican and the PA have exactly the same status at the United Nations — “nonmember observer state” — that the latter obtained in the General Assembly to get around a sure United States veto in the Security Council.

In an editorial, The New York Times notes that “some 135 nations have recognized a state of Palestine since 1988” and that, in October, Sweden became the first West European democracy to formally recognize Palestine as a state. In recent months, parliaments in Britain, Spain, France and Ireland have passed formal resolutions urging their governments to recognize Palestine as a state.

U.S. State Department and White House security officials have broadly hinted that if a new application for statehood recognition at the U.N. is submitted by the Palestinians, the United States might not block the move via Security Council veto.

Despite Israel’s objections, might there be some ultimate advantage to Israel and the peace process if Palestine gains official recognition as an independent state and full membership in the U.N.? We can’t say it’s a slam dunk one way or the other, and only a cursory inspection is possible in the space available here.

There is no evidence that the PA will change its obstructionist tactics or permanently foreswear the kind of violence inflicted by Hamas and other Palestinian terrorists against Israel. That on its face suggests there’s little upside for Israel in a statehood pronouncement.

But that’s not where the analysis ends. For one thing, with a Palestinian sovereign, some of the disingenuous anti-colonialist, freedom-fighting rhetoric that has worked for Palestinian supporters in the court of world opinion against Israel might lose sway, particularly regarding the Hamas tactics of ongoing rocket fire and building terror tunnels that open onto Israeli soil. Being able to make the same claims of defense as any other country would have against an invading neighbor is not an inherently bad position.

Moreover, there’s really nothing the PA or any Palestinian state can effectively wrangle on borders, settlements or a lasting peace without Israel’s cooperation. A declaration of statehood might give Palestinian supporters some feel-good moments, but without assurances to Israel of safety, security and border enforcement, any long-term goals of independence and prosperity will continue to fall short.

So there are arguments that cut both ways, and the path to peace obviously remains murky whether or not the international community recognizes a Palestinian state. The Vatican decision, however, is further evidence that the movement toward statehood has real momentum on its side, whether you like it or not.  

It would be wise, therefore, for Israel and its supporters across the globe to analyze the best tactics to engage on behalf of the Jewish State whether or not the State of Palestine become an accepted reality.