Any entity seeking statehood, whose aim is primarily the destruction of member states is obviously beyond the boundaries of civilized statehood and cannot help the world find peace. Such an entity, should they become a state, would become more roguish than the states that currently sponsor them that have at least historic moments of normative philosophies in their international relations.
All member states must desire peaceful coexistence or they cannot be considered member states. While philosophical extremists can say whatever they like, terrorist ideology is beyond the pale of normative international relations. Comparable to a shopping mall; just as you need everyone to be dedicated to avoiding violence before they enter. Similarly there is a normative expectation for an applicant state. It is a social contract expected from everyone who shops at a mall. There are reasonable expectations from applicant nations as well. Hamas is inherently disqualified from joining civilized nations and also Israel never intended to give them Gaza. Therefore to encourage Hamas control of Gaza is illegitimate as a goal towards the path of achieving worldwide peace among nations states.
During Hamas' drive to continue ties with arms supplier Iran, we need to put more pressure up against their false claims to Gaza. Under international law, there is no protection for non nation entity based terrorists who are trying to form a rogue state. There is no international law that grants diplomatic immunity to Hamas to form a terrorist state before it has even achieved statehood. Pro Israel advocates should emphasize this fact more often.
* * * * *Today I met Prof. Eugene Kontorovich for the first time. Though we have spoken previously, via electronic means. I reiterated my position as taken in our previous discussion, on my view that Gaza does not belong to Hamas even under International Law. (as written about in this blog at this URL: Gaza and a One State Solution) It was that meeting today that inspired this essay.