Powered by WebAds

Sunday, July 17, 2011

'Palestinians' to give up on bid for full UN membership to avoid US veto?

'Palestinian' sources and European diplomats say that the 'Palestinians' are considering giving up on becoming full members of the United Nations, and instead seeking non-member state status 'within the 1967 borders' from the General Assembly. This would avoid a US veto in the Security Council and would only require a majority vote in the General Assembly.
Following the failed meeting of the Quartet foreign ministers in Washington last week, the Palestinians recognized that the United States will veto any resolution that will be brought before the UN Security Council for unilateral Palestinian statehood. Moreover, the Palestinians have also concluded that turning to the Security Council with a request for full membership in the UN is a more complicated proposition, largely because of time constraints.

Palestinian sources and European diplomats said that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his aides are increasingly leaning toward a direct appeal to the General Assembly of the international organization. Even though the assembly lacks the authority to offer the Palestinians full UN membership, at the General Assembly the United States is unable to use its veto power against resolutions brought before the plenum for a vote.

Also, the Palestinians would like the vote to take place during the General Assembly in the last week of September, and for this there is no need for a great deal of preparation. The vote at the General Assembly could be called with as little as 24 hours notice.

A vote at the General Assembly is expected to end with a Palestinian victory and a large majority, as some 140 member states are expected to support recognition of a Palestinian state. Even though a General Assembly resolution is "weaker" than one by the Security Council, the Palestinians are comparing such a decision to Resolution 181 of November 29, 1947, in which the General Assembly approved the plan to partition Palestine.

Senior Palestinian officials say that without the decision on dividing Palestine in 1947, Israel would not have had the international legitimacy to declare independence in May 1948.
Except that Israel could have done whatever it wanted in 1948 because the Arabs (there were no 'Palestinians' in 1948) rejected the partition plan and determined to drive the Jews into the sea. Moreover, Israel was admitted by the Security Council in 1949.

By the way, the rest of the quartet is blaming the United States for the 'Palestinians' pique.
Senior European diplomats said that the failure of the Quartet meeting pushed the Palestinians even more toward turning to the UN. They say that responsibility for the failure of the meeting lies with the United States, which proposed to the other Quartet members - the EU, the UN and Russia - a one-sided wording for an announcement that favored Israel and which had no chance of being accepted by the Palestinians.

The U.S. version did include mention of negotiations being based on the 1967 borders with an exchange of territory, however, it also included portions of the letter of President George Bush to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon which noted that the border changes would reflect the demographic changes on the ground since 1967. This implies the annexation of the settlement blocs to Israel.

"The Israelis pressured the U.S. very heavily and the American wording was too blatant and unbalanced," senior European sources said. "In the way things had been written there was no chance that the Palestinians would accept this."

European Union Foreign Policy head Catherine Ashton refused to accept the U.S. version and was joined by the Russians. She put forth a more moderate version, calling for negotiations on the principle of "two states for two peoples," with mention to Resolution 181 on the division of Palestine in 1947. "Unfortunately the Americans failed to convince the Israelis to accept this version," senior European diplomats said.
Did they really expect Israel to accept the 1947 partition lines more than 60 years after the Arabs rejected them? Even Livni couldn't accept that.

Labels: , , , , ,


At 1:30 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does the UNGA have the authority to overturn a UNSC resolution (242)? Because that is what this vote would do.

At 2:11 PM, Blogger NormanF said...

The Arabs want not a compromise peace but an Israeli surrender. They shouldn't hold their breath waiting for that to happen in our lifetime.

At 3:43 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The PA have stated over and over that even with negotiations they will demand, one time, two times, three times, however many times it takes, full UN membership. It is good to see that the US is coming around, at least at this junction, even though the Europeans are doubling down in full out anti-Jewish appeasement posture. That Ashton is willingly being pimped out by the Russians is no surprise to anybody--"more moderate version"--ha ha. Next up, the EU reprises the "moderate Madagascar Plan".


Post a Comment

<< Home