UN 194 – Not!


Pages: 1 2

On Saturday, August 13, The Palestinian Authority’s foreign minister, Riyad al-Malki, informed the UN that Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas will personally attend the UN’s 66th General Assembly on September 20, and request UN approval of statehood for “Palestine.”  He seeks to make “Palestine” the 194th member of the United Nations by means of a UN fiat.

This idea was formally presented to the world by President Abbas in the New York Times on May 16.  However, both President Obama and Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel spoke out against this move at a press conference on June 8.  Obama said he would veto a favorable Security Council vote.  Congress threatens to cut all ties to the Palestinian Authority if it goes forward with its statehood bid, ending hundreds of millions in US aid.  So PA leadership has second thoughts.

Perhaps in response to this sustained US pressure, and out of the fear that major EU countries will vote against the Palestinian proposal, the Palestinian Authority has a “revised formula” requesting merely an upgrade in PLO status at the UN from “observer” to “non-member state”.

Given that the PA seems committed to creating their state, or some facsimile thereof, by “steamroller” tactics at the UN, it will be useful to understand why our Congress and President and some EU states are opposed to this PA maneuver.

The first problem is that the PA cannot yet demonstrate all of the four characteristics required for statehood by international law.  A sovereign state is a political entity with a defined territory, a permanent population, a functioning government with the ability to exercise sovereignty over that territory (i.e., to command habitual obedience from that population by means of that state’s monopoly on the use of force), and the capacity to enter into relations with other sovereign states. [ [i]]

The PA fails on two counts.  It currently cannot command habitual obedience of its population because it is in a state of civil war with Hamas [ [ii]] and because there are at least a dozen different armed terrorist organizations operating independently within the Palestinian Authority. Without a monopoly on the use of force, no government can exercise control over its population. Without one unchallenged head of state and a unified state government, the PA cannot guarantee its enforcement of treaties with other states.  Hamas maintains control of the Gaza Strip, fields its own terrorist army, some 13,000 strong, is independent of the PA, and has refused to cooperate with Abbas on issues related to Israel.  The much vaunted “accord” of May 20, 2011, to end the civil war, has faltered and none of the actions agreed upon for a “national unity government” has been carried out.[ [iii]]

The second problem is that a unilateral UN recognition of a Palestinian state contradicts three UN resolutions and the Oslo Accords.

UN General Assembly resolution 181 (29 November 1947) required that both the Jewish and Arab states settle all international disputes by negotiations (section 10:b),  refrain from threat or use of force against another state (section 10:c), and guarantee all persons equal and non-discriminatory rights in civil, political, economic and religious matters (section 10:d).

UN Security Council resolution 242 (22 November 1967) demanded that all sides in the conflict agree to a “termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for, and acknowledgement of, the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area, and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries freed from threats or acts of force.”

UN Security Council resolution 338 (22 October 1973) required all parties to abide by UN Resolution #242 and enter into negotiations to establish a just and durable peace.

Article V, par. 2 & 4, of the Oslo Accords (13 September 1993) call for negotiated agreements as the path to the solution to problems relating to refugees, settlements, security, borders, and holy sites.

President Abbas, Arafat, and related terror groups, all have unceasingly declared their intention to destroy Israel no matter how long it takes.  It is illogical to assume that this passionate Arab commitment to Israel’s destruction will suddenly evaporate with the UN’s recognition of “Palestine.”

Moreover, over the past two years Abbas has categorically refused to resume negotiations.  Over the past 75 years various Arab leaders have rejected at least 31 opportunities for a two-state solution via a negotiated peace.  Most recently Sa’eb Erekat has admitted that the PA has rejected Israeli offers, including a proposal by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to restart peace negotiations on the basis of Palestinian border demands.

Finally, the state that Hamas envisions, as its leaders have unabashedly promised, is based upon Shari’a law.  Shari’a law requires that non-Muslims under Muslim sovereignty be dhimmi: non-citizens without equal rights.  Such a status is in violation of resolution 181:10c.

The key concepts in all of the above are recognition, negotiations, peace, and basic human rights.  All of these are an anathema to Hamas and the other terror organizations that constitute the PA. Thus a unilateral UN recognition of the PA as a state would be a violation not only of the resolutions listed above, but also of the very cornerstones of the UN’s noble purpose.

And that brings us to the third problem which lies within the core concepts of the UN itself.  The UN was founded with the goal to settle international disputes via peaceful means.  However, as noted above, the leadership of the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, and kindred terrorist organizations, have been vociferous about their intentions to maintain a terror war against Israel until such time as they, and allied Arab or other Muslim states, have the power to launch a full-scale war of annihilation .[[iv] ]

It is important to recall that the charters of both Hamas and the PLO demand unequivocally the destruction of the Jewish state, and the Hamas charter foresees the genocide of all Jews world-wide.  Genocide, attempted genocide and incitement to genocide are all violations of international law and crimes against humanity, per the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 9 December 1948.  The deeds of these and a dozen other Arab terror groups over the past 60 years have validated their genocidal rhetoric and diatribe of annihilation.  The August 18th attacks near Eilat are the most recent manifestation of this psychotic hatred.

Even if, as the newest member of the UN family of nations, “Palestine” wanted peace, it is not likely that it could make peace, given the pressures it would face from Hamas, Hezbollah, even more extreme terror groups,[ [v]]   and Arab confrontation states.  It is far more likely that with the status of statehood, the PA and other pro-Palestinian groups could ratchet their political and PR campaigns and “lawfare” to new levels of intensity in the courts of various nations and even at the International Court of Justice.  To enable these terrorist powers to gain the political status that will enhance their ability to achieve their genocidal goals is an astonishing abrogation of the UN’s basic purpose.  Granting the PA the status of statehood and UN membership is likely to result in the UN’s complicity in genocide, or at least attempted genocide.[[vi]]

The fourth problem is quite practical. Without direct negotiations, highly contested issues like Jerusalem, borders and water rights will remain in legal limbo with no resolution, as will the status of refugees and the so-called Arab “right of return.”  Resolution 242 requires a “just” solution to the “refugee problem.”  A solution can be “just” only if it is accepted by the competing parties, not imposed on them.

The fifth problem is the economy.  A flourishing economy is not a requirement for statehood; but the PA economy is an important indicator of preparedness.  As a result of some recent economic improvements in the PA, the IMF decided that “…the PA is now able to conduct the sound economic policies expected of a future well-functioning Palestinian state;” and the UN concluded that the PA’s financial  management is “…now sufficient for a functioning government of state.”

But reality is not quite so rosy.  This growth is largely the result of donor funds. Somewhere between one-third and one-half of the PA budget comes from external aid (more than $1 billion) from the US, the EU and Arab states. In recent years Arab states have become less generous, giving $462 million in 2009, $287 million in 2010, and so far in 2011 $78 million.  In recent months some of the Arab pledges have failed to materialize.  This drop in foreign aid has created a huge deficit in PA finances.

Moreover, unemployment is rising. An UNRWA report of June 2011showed that unemployment among Palestinians in the West Bank and east Jerusalem rose from 21.7% to 25% during the last year. Unemployment in the Gaza Strip is 37.4%, the highest in the world.  Paradoxically, Israeli settlements are major employers of Palestinian labor.  About 80,000 Palestinians, 25% of the entire Palestinian payroll, work in the Israeli economy.  The PA also depends on Israel to collect and remit tax revenues of about $1.5billion per year. If Israel were to economic cooperation, the PA could not pay its bills.

Pages: 1 2

  • StephenD

    They (the PA) have no intention of becoming an independent state. For to do so would undermine their lucrative post of being "refugees" and holding their hand out to the world even though they are refugees to themselves. Look at Jordan; "Palestinians" fill refugee camps and thus maintain the status. Does the world call for Jordan to carve out a piece of land for them? Same issue with Egypt. No, they don't really want or expect a separate state unless and until Israel is no more. In the mean time they can keep the funds flowing in by maintaining the status quo.

  • Freedom John

    Herein lies another problem. Since there are now so many "Arab states" in the UN along with a multitude of PA sympathizers and league of anti-Israel voters , these very problems and requirements will swept under the rug. The UN has virtually lost any influence it might have possibly at one time had.

  • zsqpwxxeh

    "A sovereign state is a political entity with a defined territory…" There's the failure here. "Palestine" doesn't have a defined territory. If they declare, unilaterally or not, that their territory is the West Bank + Gaza + East Jerusalem, they are signing their own death warrants since the radicals running these areas demand all of Israel. Same thing if they declare just a rump of the WB without Jerusalem. If they declare all of Israel + WB + Gaza is their state the UN, in recognizing them, would be voting to dissolve Israel. It's a diplomatic dead end.

    So they'll just keep up the attacks and the terror, waiting until a "Suitcase from Allah" detonates in Tel Aviv. They can be patient. The Crusaders occupied Jerusalem for what, 90 years? They're betting that they can beat that record with the Jews.

  • UCSPanther

    I think the Palestinian cause will cease to exist in time. They have lost a lot of credibility and more or less have been in a downhill slide since Arafat bit the dust.

  • James Hovland

    Kvetching for position is nothing more than attempt to gain support for your side and doesn’t indicate any real desire to resolve the conflict. You can spin this how ever you want in the Western media, but the Palestinians still know the truth, and they’re the ones Israel has to make peace with.

    By taking the issue to the UN, Palestine has turned this conflict into (the Zionist’s worse nightmare) a global discussion. The world is watching.

    The reason Israel and America reject recognition before negotiations is that recognition is all they have to offer, and Israel wants more than is rightfully theirs.

    As for the ‘right of return’? That’s actually a right, whereas Israel’s identity as a “Jewish State” is not.

    • UCSPanther

      It's been a global discussion for a while now, and whether you like it or not, us "Zionists" will be vindicated.

      Taking it to the UN means absolutely nothing.

    • MixMChess

      "By taking the issue to the UN, Palestine has turned this conflict into (the Zionist's worse nightmare) a global discussion. The world is watching."

      The Israeli-Palestinian issue is already a global discussion. The Israelis rightfully fear that this is just another attempt by the Palestinians to delegitimize Israel. The UDI rewards Palestinians for their intransigence in refusing to make any concessions and negotiate for peace. The puts pressure only on Israel, instead of equally on both parties, which is another Palestinian/Arab attempt to isolate and demonize Israel to the world.

      For example, UDI allows the Palestinians to request statehood without ammending their official "state charter." This goes against UN policy and precedent that expressly forbids member nations to call for the ethnic cleansing of another people. Both the "Fatah (PA) and the Hamas charters openly call for the elimination of Israel" and Palestinian President Abbas even outwardly says that he "will not allow a single Jew to remain in the future Palestinian state. "

    • MixMChess

      "The reason Israel and America reject recognition before negotiations is that recognition is all they have to offer, and Israel wants more than is rightfully theirs."

      WRONG, all Israel wants from the Palestinians is peace, security and the right to exist. Palestinian Unilateral Declaration for Independence seeks to delegitimize Israel by allowing the Palestinians to create a state without mutually negotiated borders and without having to recognize Israel as the Jewish state. That's a fact.

      On numerous occasions Israel has been more than willing to negotiate and give away its fair share of land. As recently as 2000 Israel gave the Palestinians over 98% of the W. Bank and all of Gaza and the Palestinians WALKED AWAY without even a counter offer or negotiations.

    • MixMChess

      "As for the 'right of return'? That's actually a right, whereas Israel's identity as a "Jewish State" is not."

      WRONG, the so-called "Right of Return" has ZERO basis in international law or in any UN Resolutions. All the UN Resolutions advocate repatriation or resettlement in other countries. None of them mention a "right of return."

      For example, UN Resolution 194, adopted December 11, 1948, does not mention a Right of Return. It even places a qualification on the recommendation that refugees be repatriated.

      UN Security Council Resolution 242 is the current basis for all peace negotiations. It does not mention a "Right of Return" nor does it refer specifically to Palestinians. In speaking of refugees, it also implicitly referred to the 850,000 Jewish refugees who had fled Arab lands.

      Further, no UN General Assembly Resolutions refer to the principle of the so-called "Right of Return." All of them repeat the same formula for resolving the refugee problem: "Reintegration of refugees either by repatriation or resettlement."

      Israel's identity as a Jewish state is a legal right based on international precedent and codified formally under the League of Nations and the UN (under the 1947 Partition).

  • Ron Carnine

    Recognition of Palestine should be firmly tied to an agreement that proclaims Israel's right to exist and their right to exist in peace. No more attacks by a group of armed thugs who were given 95% of what they demanded in earlier peace talks and still they rejected this treaty. Palestinians need to demonstrate that they are willing to live in peace with Israel. Otherwise, no Palestinian state!

  • Jordanian

    "sovereign state is a political entity with a defined territory, a permanent population, a functioning government with the ability to exercise sovereignty over that territory (i.e., to command habitual obedience from that population by means of that state’s monopoly on the use of force), and the capacity to enter into relations with other sovereign states."

    Oh, the irony! By this very standard then, neither does Israel qualify for statehood: 1) It does not have a defined eastern border, nor a recognised northern border. 2) It does not command the habitual obedience of the more radical settlers who assault Palestinians and their property in the West Bank. There is also the issue of the so-called hilltop youth, who set up "communities" in areas that they have not been given permission by any recognised authority.

    If you're going to condemn the Palestinians, you could at least apply the same standard to Israel.

    • UCSPanther

      Unfortunately for you, most other countries in the Middle East don't recognize Palestine. It is merely a "club" to attack Israel with.

    • MixMChess

      "1) It does not have a defined eastern border, nor a recognised northern border."

      Israel's northern border is the Golan and it is a legal recognized border as Israel formally annexed the territory in 1981. The division with the W. Bank is not defined, but that does not prevent statehood under international law because that territory is "disputed" and negotiated.

      " 2) It does not command the habitual obedience of the more radical settlers who assault Palestinians and their property in the West Bank. There is also the issue of the so-called hilltop youth, who set up "communities" in areas that they have not been given permission by any recognised authority."

      Huh? The Israeli government has actually increased law enforcement of settlements and cutting off aid to illegal outposts. Recall, in 2005 Israel dismantled all settlements in Gaza and dismantled 3 in the W. Bank. Israel has gone on the record to state that it will dismantle more settlements in peace negotiations.

      As for claim of assault by settlers on the Palestinians, this is a LIE. From 2000-2010, 242 Israeli civilians were killed by Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, while only 47 Palestinians were killed by Israeli civilians. MOST of the Palestinians were killed while attempting to INFILTRATE settlements for TERRORIST attacks or while ATTACKING Israelis.

  • JohnWV

    Israel's is the cause of most of the reasons herein cited to deny Palestine UN recognition. The Jewish State has made itself into a militant supremacis­t theocracy/ethnocracy with ICBM nukes; a very real and rapidly increasing threat to itself and to the whole world. A pariah among nations. Somehow, the Jewish State has to be redirected. United States must stand aside. UN and EU can then impose resolution just as involuntary, disruptive and humiliating to Israel as Israel has wreaked upon occupied Palestine for generations. The beginning must include Israel's recognition of Palestine with UN enforced autonomy, eviction of all settlers, true contiguity encompassing Gaza, the West Bank and Jerusalem plus punitive reparations.

    • MixMChess

      JohnWV is a well-known neo-Nazi and LIAR. This is standard copy and paste by him so I'll respond in kind…

      "Israel has made itself into a militant supremacis­t theocracy/ethnocracy with ICBM nukes; an very real and rapidly increasing threat to itself and to the whole world."

      Israel is a SECULAR democracy that guarantees the equal rights of all of its citizens. Israel has never used or threatened the use of nuclear weapons and has never engaged in aggressive war with its neighbors.

      Of course you ignore the fact that the xenophobic Palestinians regularly persecute Christians and call for the genocide of all non-believers. Palestinians define Terrorism and are a threat to freedom-loving peoples everywhere.

      "United States must stand aside. UN and EU can then impose resolution just as involuntary, disruptive and humiliating to Israel as Israel has wreaked upon occupied Palestine for generations."

      Nonsense, Israel has always sought peace with its Palestinian neighbors – it has never wreaked any humiliation on the Palestinians, in fact the Palestinians are quite good at humiliating themselves. Perhaps its time the Palestinians stopped murdering civilians and decapitating children? Perhaps its time the Palestinians apologized for their grave offenses against Israelis, Americans, Christians, and really the whole world….

      "The beginning must include Israel's recognition of Palestine with UN enforced autonomy, eviction of all settlers, true contiguity encompassing Gaza, the West Bank and Jerusalem plus punitive reparations."

      Nonsense, you're asking the UN impose what Israel has been trying to accomplish through negotiated settlements. Israel has tried numerous times to create a Palestinian state through NEGOTIATED settlement. Each time the Palestinians have REFUSED. Israel has already given up all of Gaza and the Palestinians govern over 98% of the W. Bank. Jerusalem has ALWAYS been historically Jewish with a Jewish majority. Palestinian claims to Jerusalem or the need to connect Gaza and the W. Bank are just more excuses for refusing negotiation and preconditions for destroying all of Israel.

  • David Springers

    you made me laugh.. who wrote this article is obviously from the Israeli 'IDF'. You're such a crazy person.

  • Carl

    I Love You Palestinians.