By Musa Keilani
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said in UN that he will reject a peace blueprint if it doesn't demand that Israel stop building settlments.
The
Palestinians should have done that much earlier since it was clear that Israel
had no intention to negotiate a fair and just peace agreement with them based
on their legitimate rights upheld by UN resolutions, starting with Resolution
181 of 1947.
The
Palestinians were encouraged to start the Oslo process, as political thinker
and analyst Adnan Abu Odeh says, by Sadat who regained the occupied Sinai
through American sponsorship of direct negotiations with Israel. Certainly one
important factor was the fall of the Soviet Union, the real patron, political
supporter and military provider of the Palestine Liberation Organisation.
The
Palestinians assumed they could follow Egypt’s example and win back their
territories without realising the dramatic changes in the power
politicsfollowing the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989. They should have made
Arafat realise that the desert terrain of Sinai is not geopolitically or
religiously sacrosanct to the Jews as Jerusalem.
The
Palestinian move now, and after 20 years of direct talks, has been prompted by
despair and frustration over Israel’s stonewalling and adamant stand that any
peace accord should be based on its terms and conditions. Furthermore, the
world political powers seemed to go along with the Israeli position.
The
Palestinian decision to demand that the UN reaffirm its own decision, taken in
1947, is mainly aimed at breaking the status quo.
According
to US Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice, the UN Security Council is
likely to start debating the Palestinian bid for membership this week. US
President Barack Obama already told Abbas that if he insisted on submitting
this bid to the UN Security Council, the US would use its veto power to kill
it.
The
Palestinian problem will continue to remain on the front burner of
international conflict demanding a solution as the situation in the occupied
territories deteriorates and might presage a third Intifada, which will add
more fire and bloodshed to what is witnessed in Damascus, Yemen, Libya and
Iraq.
Under
a previous proposal, the Palestinians were supposed to simply submit their
request to the UN and do nothing towards seeking a vote for one year, during
which they would resume negotiations with Israel. Then, French President
Nicolas Sarkozy came up with another proposal for the UN to give the
Palestinians an observer status position, similar to the Vatican’s.
The
French proposal stipulated one condition: that the internationally backed
roadmap for peace be implemented within one year. Israel turned down the French
proposal, saying it was not viable and not coordinated with the US or the
European Union.
The
Israeli rejection of the proposal is a reaffirmation of the reality that Israel
does not want peace and does not expect any agreement to be reached with the
Palestinians in one year, or many years beyond that, during which the
demography and geography of the occupied territories will have been transformed
so much that there will be little left to negotiate.
Israeli
settlers in the West Bank and Jerusalem total now more than the Jewish
population in Palestine in 1947, when Israel was founded.
An
Israeli offer to resume direct negotiations was yet another ploy to stall the
Palestinian move at the UN. Abbas said on Thursday that he had no knowledge of
the Israeli proposal.
Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has accused the Palestinians of“defiant and
obstinate behaviour”, whereas he, himself, imposed conditions on the outcome of
negotiations: no return of Arab East Jerusalem, no to the rights of the
Palestinian refugees from the 1948 war to return and no to giving up any Jewish
settlements in the occupied territories. Furthermore, he wants to impose
Israel’s own security arrangements with the Palestinians, including control of
the Jordan Valley and of all access to the Palestinian territories. These
positions and demands are the main reasons for the deadlock in peace
negotiations.
The
Palestinians went ahead with their move at the UN in order to force the
international community to recognise that they can no longer take the
Palestinians for granted and let Israel continue to behave as if they were
following a different set of rules.
The
expected US veto of the Palestinian bid at the UN will embarrass the United
States in front of an overwhelming majority in the international community. Not
that Washington would mind it much, but Israel will face further isolation and
that is not acceptable to the US.
It
is difficult to see how things will get ahead from here, but the Palestinian
leadership has added a dramatically new element to the equation.
Israel
can be expected to come up with more ideas and proposals, but the Palestinians
should not allow themselves to be lured into any of them without ironclad
guarantees that fairness and justice will be at the basis of any peace
agreement and that they will enjoy their legitimate rights, including the right
to set up an independent state with Arab East Jerusalem as its capital.
-This commentary was published in The Jordan Times on 25/09/2011
No comments:
Post a Comment