The Palestinians were on a roll in the U.N. General Assembly when President Mahmoud Abbas waived a copy of the PLO's application for full-fledged membership in the world body. Delegates responded with a standing ovation.
Abbas' popularity has soared in the West Bank where crowds gathered in Ramallah to hear his speech live. But the membership application is expected to go nowhere while major powers advocate a new timetable for negotiations and an agreement.
Despite the excitement, there was a poignant sadness in the proceedings. The speeches from Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu illustrated the gulf between Israelis and Palestinians -- a fear their existence is at stake and widely disparate accounts of a painful shared history. (read Netanyahu here, Abbas here and his application text.)
Netanyahu, delivering an eloquent speech in fluent English, was cheered by supporters sitting in the visitor's gallery. Only one Palestinian delegate remained while Israeli and American delegates, including U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice were in the hall for both speeches.
The Israeli leader offered immediate talks in the United Nations without pre-conditions, which the Palestinians have rejected, saying the expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank had to stop. In turn, Israel wants the Palestinian Liberation Organization to recognize it as a Jewish state.
We've both just flown thousands of miles to New York. Now we're in the same city. We're in the same building. So let's meet here today in the United Nations. Who's there to stop us? What is there to stop us? If we genuinely want peace, what is there to stop us from meeting today and beginning peace negotiations?
That did not happen.
Abbas held up a copy of the letter requesting membership that he gave to U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, saying "The time has come."
He received another round of applause when he invoked the late Yasser Arafat's 1974 speech to the General Assembly: "Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand".
But Israel's isolation was palpable all week long, with country after country calling for a two state solution, protests against Israel in Egypt and Jordan and a rift with Turkey over the killing by Israeli commandos of Turkish civilians in a flotilla that tried to land in Gaza. (Netanyahu was reported to have rejected a legal deal that would have papered over differences.)
What's next?
The U.N. Security Council, which has to approve the application for full membership, is meeting on Monday to set up a committee. It can delay a vote for a month or more and leave time for negotiations.
While the United States has vowed to veto the application, it probably will not have to vote at all. Nine votes in favor are needed in the 15-nation Council. If fewer than nine states raise their hands, a resolution collapses. At the moment only Russia, China, India, Brazil, South Africa and Lebanon are committed to a "yes" vote.
The Palestinians have said that after a "reasonable " time period they would go to the General Assembly for an upgrade in status -- a non-voting member state which allows them to participate in a variety of international forums, such as treaty bodies. There is no veto in the Assembly so they are assured of passage.
Quartet wants immediate talks
In an effort to avoid a confrontation, the Middle East mediators -- the United States, the European Union, Russia and the United Nations -- proposed a return to the negotiating table without preconditions within a month. Both sides are to submit plans on the contentious issues of borders and security within three months. They are to make "substantial progress" within six months and complete a final agreement before the end of 2012.
But one thing is clear. Without outside pressure and facilitators during the negotiations, the Israelis and Palestinians are too far apart to have substantial talks after 20 years of missed deadlines. Abbas is not considered a skilled negotiator and Netanyahu has a reputation of inflexibility.
"The Quartet proposal represents the firm conviction of the international community that a just and lasting peace can only come through negotiations," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, urging both sides to seize the chance to talk.
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, the Quartet's special envoy, believed both sides could accept the proposals and begin work. Asked by this reporter if they would, he said "I have no idea."
Reactions in the West Bank were captured by Reuters in two telling quotes:
"We have come to take part with our people in asking for our rights," said Mohammed Hamidat, 40. "With the current closed horizons, it's the only thing we can do, even if the result is failure. It's been years since we have seen anything new: this is a first step."
Said Israeli settler Meir Bartler, 25: "We don't care what they're up to at the U.N. We have the bible, which says the land of Israel belongs to the Jewish people."
The barebones history
The United Nations partitioned Palestine in 1947, but Arab states rejected that and declared war on the new state of Israel, which then captured more territory than it had been allotted under the U.N. plan Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled or were driven out and became refugees. For decades Jordan occupied the West Bank and Egypt took Gaza.
Then in 1967, Israel feared Arab states would attack and launched a pre-emptive war, seizing the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and defeating Arab armies. It began to put down Jewish settlements in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Those in the West Bank were expanded and those in the Gaza Strip (now controlled by Hamas which does not recognize Israel and objects to Abbas' U.N. initiative) were dismantled.
According to Ari Shavit, a senior correspondent of the Israeli Haaretz newspaper and a member of its editorial board, the Obama administration, the Israelis and the Palestinians squandered months of opportunities for talks:
The Palestinians made a grave error in the past month. Success went to their heads and they overplayed their hand. Going head-to-head against (President) Obama turned Abbas into a rival and played into Netanyahu's hands. But Netanyahu could make that very same mistake now. After succeeding to break in a wayward American president, he believes everything is OK. But everything is not OK. The occupation is not OK, Israel is not OK, the Middle East is not OK. There's a real world outside the Capital Beltway.
Follow Evelyn Leopold on Twitter: www.twitter.com/evjournalist
Alon Ben-Meir: Egypt and Israel: Within the Realm of Possibilities
The Palestinians are mostly accused of SAYING threatening things, and regradless of whether violence stops altogether or not, the settlements (which in no way add to Israels security) continue to grow.
It is Israel who is the aggressor, and the party responsible for the this conflict dragging on and the recognition of the Palestinian state is a reason for most of the world to celebrate, and to back the international court as they begin suing the settlements out of existence.
Once THAT occurs, Israel might actually start real negotiations for the first time in history.
"The Middle East's New Geopolitical Map" by Patrick Seale
EXCERPTS:
"Turkey, Iran and Egypt, heirs to ancient civilizations, are thus asserting themselves against what they see as an Israeli upstart. Saudi Arabia, the region’s oil and financial giant, guardian of Islam’s holiest sites, is breaking free from the constraints of the American alliance.
"Israel stands accused. Will it heed the message or shoot the messenger? If true to its past form, it might well try to fight its way out of the box in which it now finds itself, further destabilising the region and attracting to itself further opprobrium.
"As for the United States, bound hand and foot by Israeli interests, it seems to have abdicated the leading role in the Arab-Israeli peace process it has played for so long — but to so little effect. Disillusion with President Barack Obama is now total."
But, Israel's false sense of themselves will ultimately be teir downfall. History, demographics and world opinion is all against them. That corner they have painted themselves into keeps getting smaller. The Arab Spring could very well become Israel's winter of its discontent.
In all fairness I can't take credit for that quote. It's a (slightly adapted) Adolf Hitler.
1. In the early 20th century the British ruled land now known as Israel was mostly inhabited by Muslim Arabs.
2. Over the following decades increasing numbers of Jews emigrated there, many being refugees from Nazi persecutioÂn.
3. Friction arose between the 2 groups and occasional fighting broke out.
4. The UN offered a partition plan which involved giving the Jews more of the land despite their lower populationÂ.
5. The Arabs understandÂably refused this settlementÂ.
6. Fighting broke out again and the Jews took Israel by force.
7. NeighbouriÂng nations attacked this new state and lost.
8. The UN acknowledgÂed the state of Israel as an independenÂt sovereign nation.
9. Thousands of Muslim PalestiniaÂns were forced out of Israel* and now live as refugees in poverty in one of the most overcrowdeÂd regions on earth (12th most overcrowdeÂd to be precise).
*There is limited evidence of a deliberate policy of 'ethnic cleansing' but numerous spontaneouÂs attacks by Jewish Israelis terrified the PalestiniaÂn Muslims into leaving.
**********ÂÂ*********Â*Â********Â**Â****
IMPORTANT - Note that although the UN acknowledgÂed the state of Israel soon after its inception, this was on condition of PalestiniaÂns being offered their own state or being allowed a right of return (resolutioÂn 194). This has not happened.
Already almost useless, bureaucratic , corrupt and biased organization.
As if the Pals asking for statehood after exhausting all other methods IS the major setback and not the illegal settlements. Did I mention that Wolf was an AIPAC lobbyist before landing this gig with CNN? Talk about honest journalism.
When last time since 2000 Palestinian leadership was engaged in serious negotiations with Israel?
Everybody blaming it on Netanyahu, but he's 4th Israeli PM that served as PM in last 10 years - so Palestinians could not negotiate with any of them?
The PLO accepted Israel's right to exist as a sovereign state in 1988 and agreed to UNSC Res. 242 in 1993. The PLO also accepted the UNANIMOUSLY ENDORSED 2002 Arab League’s 2002 Beirut Peace Initiative which calls for recognition of Israel as a sovereign state, exchange of ambassadors, trade, tourism, etc. if Israel complies with international law and its previous commitments.
Nahum Goldman, former president of the World Jewish Congress: "Israel has never presented the Arabs with a single peace plan. She has rejected every settlement plan devised by her friends and by her enemies. She has seemingly no other object than to preserve the status quo while adding territory piece by piece."
Professor Avi Shlaim, renowned Israeli historian, as summarized by Ha'aretz (11 August 2005) in its review of his highly acclaimed book The Iron Wall (2000): “...based on facts, he surveys the history of Israel's contacts with the Arab world from 1948 and states decisively ('The job of the historian is to judge,' he says) that the Israeli story that Israel has always stretched out its hand to peace, but there was nobody to talk to - is groundless. The Arabs have repeatedly outstretched a hand to peace - says Shlaim – and Israel has always rejected it. Each time with a different excuse."
Indeed, contrary to the late Abba Eban's observation, it is Israel's leaders, not those of the Palestinians who "have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity" to achieve peace.
Pertinent observation. Not just between political positions; the cultural chasm.
Netanyahu referred to Palestinian statehood as a RIGHT. He stated his people's desire for peace in no uncertain terms:
"But most especially, I extend my hand to the Palestinian people, with whom we seek a just & lasting peace. [...] President Abbas, stop walking around this issue. Recognize the Jewish state & make peace with us. […] We believe that the Palestinians should be neither the citizens of Israel nor its subjects. They should live in a free state of their own."
Abbas's speech was different. It contained no appeal to Israelis for peace, but a long list of recriminations, going back 63 years; it presented Israel’s existence not as a RIGHT, but as a “Palestinian concession":
"in the absence of absolute justice, we decided to adopt the path of relative justice – justice that is possible & could correct part of the grave historical injustice committed against our people. Thus, we agreed to establish the State of Palestine on only 22% of the territory of historical Palestine..."
The party attacked but victorious pleaded for peace. The party which started the aggression but lost claimed to be "generously giving" something they never possessed!
And yet, the Israeli delegation remained seated during Abbas's speech. It must’ve been unpleasant, but they listened. The Palestinian delegation left (all except one). They would NOT listen.
Grave power differentials make it extremely problematic to presume reciprocal recognition of statehood would actually have tangible value. Still there are plenty of judges out there who will insist on mandatory mediation that forces an abused wife to sit at a table with her abusive husband in the 'best interests' of the children.
This particular "abused wife" did did a lot of "husband beating" -- for a very incomplete list see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabena_Flight_571_hijacking
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_Nahariya_attack
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_suicide_attacks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel,_2008
Specifically, given the wide disparity between the two bodies on this matter, do you think that if the statehood resolution fails due to a veto, there would be enough of an appetite for changing the situation to see an effort at a 'Uniting For Peace' resolution in the GA to either grant member state status, or maybe pass an arms embargo on Israel?
The whole world is watching!
Ever heard of settlements, Bibi ? The same settlements that you, your governmenet and your people are building WHILE YOU SPEAK OF PEACE !
Every been to Israel?
Go there. Walk around. When you see one side of a street in total disarray and the other green and well-kept, you will understand just a bit better. When you see a rocket fly, you will understand a little more.
LET THEM LEAVE, LET THEM GO BACK TO WHERE THEY CAME FROM !
What really drives two young men to slaughter a sleeping jewish family is the same as it's been for a couple thousand year: VIRULENT ANTI-SEMITISM.
You're not the only one with a caps-lock BUTTON!
What's a good time frame for Peace based on Justice ?
Six decades, four decades, two decades, two years, six months, a couple of months ?
It has been Six decdes since a Jewish entity declared itself a state recognised by the US, UN and followed by othre nations.
It has been over four decdades since the occupation of the West bank and Gaza began.
It has been at least a couple of decdes since the "peace process" began.
It has been a couple of years since the current US administration began to initiate the stalled peace process. Thanks to Bibi, it has stalled again.
It has been a couple of days now since the Full UN Membership Application was submitted despite objections and considerable discouragement from friends and purported friends.
Palestine has been declared a state for atleast a cople of decades now and recognised as such by over 120 countries with the notable exception of Israel, US, etc and the UN NO LESS !
The Jewish entity that declared itself a state has the nerve to advise the Palestinians to not persue the UN path to statehood !