3
   

Palestinian search for U.N. membership puts U.S. in bind

 
 
Reply Wed 14 Sep, 2011 09:32 am
I guess Obama feels he must support Israel's position because he needs the Jewish vote for him in next year's election. It's sad that he is not supporting Palestinian's desire to be a state, which is the only way to reduce the conflict between them and Israel. ---BBB

September 13, 2011
Palestinian search for U.N. membership puts U.S. in bind
By Sheera Frenkel and Jonathan S. Landay | McClatchy Newspapers

JERUSALEM — Palestinian leaders will ask the U.N. Security Council for full United Nations membership, Palestinian officials said Tuesday, despite a U.S. vow to veto the move and fears that it could deal a fatal blow to the moribund peace process.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas scheduled a formal announcement for Friday night even as two senior U.S. envoys prepared to return to the region to mount a last-ditch effort to revive Palestinian-Israeli peace talks, which have been stalled for nearly a year.

European Union officials, meanwhile, pursued their own effort to prevent a new crisis in the restive region, struggling to draft a compromise U.N. resolution that could meet Palestinian and Israeli positions.

But a U.S.-based European diplomat, who requested anonymity in order to speak freely, admitted that EU members were deeply divided. He said that reaching a deal before the new U.N. General Assembly opens next week was "a long shot."

"There will be a U.S. veto and then we enter unchartered waters," he said.

Ending months of speculation, Maen Rashid Areikat, the Palestinian Liberation Organization representative to the United States, said that Abbas would ask the Security Council next week to pass a resolution upgrading the PLO to "non-member observer state" status.

"We want to seek full membership ... and seek a resolution in the Security Council," he told reporters in Washington, adding that Lebanon, the current council president, has agreed to sponsor the resolution "on our behalf."

Non-member observer status is the lowest level of full U.N. membership. It would confer on the PLO, which runs the Palestinian Authority, the same standing as the Vatican, giving it a seat in the 193-member U.N. General Assembly and access to international institutions like the International Criminal Court. The PLO is currently a U.N. observer without voting rights.

Mohammad Shtayyeh, a senior official of Fatah, the largest faction in the PLO, was quoted by the Al Jazeera satellite network as also announcing, "We are going to the Security Council."

"We are going to seek full membership based on the 1967 borders," he told a news conference in the West Bank administrative center of Ramallah, referring to the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, lands captured by Israel in the 1967 Arab-Israeli War.

The move is fiercely opposed by Israel, which denounces it as an attack on its legitimacy and a "unilateral step" tantamount to seeking recognition of Palestinian statehood in violation of the 1993 Oslo Accords, which call for a negotiated settlement.

"Peace will be achieved only through direct negotiations and not through unilateral moves," said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Israeli officials have threatened unspecified retaliation for any Palestinian attempt to seek full U.N. membership. The measures could include the withholding from the Palestinian Authority of tax revenues that Israel collects for the Palestinians and accelerated construction of Jewish settlements on land claimed by the Palestinians, experts said.

President Barack Obama and his top aides for weeks have asserted that the United States, one of five veto-wielding permanent Security Council members, would block such a resolution. They contend that approval of the resolution would undermine U.S.-led efforts to revive direct talks on establishing a Palestinian state based on the 1967 boundaries with agreed swaps of land.

"The only way of getting a lasting solution is through direct negotiations between the parties and the route to that lies in Jerusalem and Ramallah, not in New York," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in Washington on Tuesday. "Our hope is that we get the parties back into a frame of mind and a process where they will actually begin negotiating again."

U.S. officials announced that David Hale, the special U.S. Middle East envoy, and Dennis Ross, a senior White House adviser, would leave for the region on Tuesday evening to try to head off the Palestinian move only a week after returning to Washington empty-handed from a similar mission.

"We want to leave no stone unturned in our effort to get these parties back to the table. So we think another trip is warranted," said State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland.

Hale and Ross would be meeting Netanyahu and Abbas, she said.

Some members of the House of Representatives are threatening to withhold U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority if it seeks U.N. membership.

Palestinian officials, however, said that they have become frustrated by what they contended has been the Netanyahu government's refusal to end the expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem and by the U.S. administration's unwillingness to confront Israel on the issue.

"They just give in," Areikat told reporters during a breakfast meeting in Washington. "Israel has no reason to move forward because they are in a very comfortable position."

Areikat said the Palestinians would be unmoved by threats of a withdrawal of international aid. "We are not going to allow a financial sword to be held over our necks," he said.

By going to the U.N. Security Council, he said, the Palestinians hope to intensify pressure on Israel to halt Jewish settlement expansion and to set a timetable for a peace talks — and to persuade the United States to also pressure Israel.

"What we are hoping is to see a different approach from the United States," he said.

Palestinian legislator Hanan Ashrawy, a leading advocate for the move, said U.N. recognition is needed to shake up a peace process that in 18 years since the signing of the Oslo Accords has gone nowhere.

"We are addressing the fact that the prolonged peace process has done nothing but undermine the chances for peace," she said.

U.S.-mediated direct negotiations collapsed in September 2010 after Israel refused to extend a 10-month partial moratorium on Jewish settlement construction on land claimed by the Palestinians.

Areikat said Israel bore the responsibility for forcing the Palestinians to turn to the U.N.

"What is left of Oslo?" he asked. "I mean Oslo spoke about no party will take any unilateral action to change the situation on the ground. Oslo spoke about keeping Palestinian institutions open in East Jerusalem. Oslo spoke about turning over more areas to the Palestinian Authority. We only control 18 percent of the West Bank."

"Oslo spoke about so many things and Israel didn't implement any of them," he said.

(Special correspondent Frenkel reported from Jerusalem and Landay, from Washington.)

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/09/13/124031/palestinian-search-for-un-membership.html#ixzz1XwPt1HIO
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 3 • Views: 1,444 • Replies: 11
No top replies

 
Foofie
 
  0  
Reply Wed 14 Sep, 2011 01:18 pm
I thought the reality is that the UN could vote for Palestinean statehood, but it has no more value than writing Santa what one wants for Christmas. Who is going to enforce it? Not the west, I believe.

Let the Palestineans print money; will it be worth anything? Let them trade with other nations. What will they be trading?

That's when the driving force of anti-Semitism might be unmasked. That being the resentment towards the Jew as industrious. Presently, the Palestineans can blame Israel for their impoverished existence. What happens if they have statehood and must live off of world welfare? Talk of resentment then.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2011 06:15 am
@BumbleBeeBoogie,
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
I guess Obama feels he must support Israel's position because he needs the Jewish vote for him in next year's election.


Actually, the most likely reason Obama supports Israel is because they're the good guys.



BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
It's sad that he is not supporting Palestinian's desire to be a state, which is the only way to reduce the conflict between them and Israel. ---BBB


Obama doesn't oppose their desire to become a state. He only wants the Palestinians to do it via negotiations.

And no, the only way to reduce the conflict would be for the Palestinians to stop being savages and come to the negotiating table.



Quote:
September 13, 2011
Palestinian search for U.N. membership puts U.S. in bind
By Sheera Frenkel and Jonathan S. Landay | McClatchy Newspapers

JERUSALEM — Palestinian leaders will ask the U.N. Security Council for full United Nations membership, Palestinian officials said Tuesday, despite a U.S. vow to veto the move and fears that it could deal a fatal blow to the moribund peace process.


Hardly puts us in a bind. Unless the article refers to all the whining that will commence once we veto the tripe. Earplugs are a great solution to excessive whining.



Quote:
Non-member observer status is the lowest level of full U.N. membership. It would confer on the PLO, which runs the Palestinian Authority, the same standing as the Vatican, giving it a seat in the 193-member U.N. General Assembly and access to international institutions like the International Criminal Court.


It's going to be funny when the Palestinians join the ICC, and then find that Israel starts delivering them to the ICC for prosecution.



Quote:
Israeli officials have threatened unspecified retaliation for any Palestinian attempt to seek full U.N. membership. The measures could include the withholding from the Palestinian Authority of tax revenues that Israel collects for the Palestinians and accelerated construction of Jewish settlements on land claimed by the Palestinians, experts said.


The option I like best is the annexation of East Jerusalem, Ariel, and everything west of the separation fence.



Quote:
Palestinian officials, however, said that they have become frustrated by what they contended has been the Netanyahu government's refusal to end the expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem and by the U.S. administration's unwillingness to confront Israel on the issue.


Maybe the Palestinians should try achieving it at the negotiating table instead of trying to force Israel to give it up for nothing.



Quote:
By going to the U.N. Security Council, he said, the Palestinians hope to intensify pressure on Israel to halt Jewish settlement expansion and to set a timetable for a peace talks — and to persuade the United States to also pressure Israel.

"What we are hoping is to see a different approach from the United States," he said.


Their hopes shall be in vain. But let's hope Israel annexes East Jerusalem and most of the settlers.



Quote:
Areikat said Israel bore the responsibility for forcing the Palestinians to turn to the U.N.

"What is left of Oslo?" he asked. "I mean Oslo spoke about no party will take any unilateral action to change the situation on the ground. Oslo spoke about keeping Palestinian institutions open in East Jerusalem. Oslo spoke about turning over more areas to the Palestinian Authority. We only control 18 percent of the West Bank."

"Oslo spoke about so many things and Israel didn't implement any of them," he said.


Note that it is the Palestinians who undermined Oslo, when instead of negotiating, they sent wave after wave of suicide bombers to massacre Israeli children.
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  2  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2011 09:28 am
@oralloy,
September 15, 2011
Palestinians rebuff Obama, edge closer to statehood bid
By Sheera Frenkel, Jonathan S. Landay and Lesley Clark | McClatchy Newspapers

RAMALLAH, West Bank — Palestinian leaders on Thursday rebuffed the latest U.S. attempt to dissuade them from seeking U.N. recognition of a Palestinian state, all but guaranteeing a veto by the Obama administration that would please domestic supporters of Israel but further inflame anti-U.S. anger across the changing Middle East.

Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki left the door ajar to "any credible offer" that could avert a showdown at next week's U.N. General Assembly opening session. But, he told reporters, the United States hadn't presented a plan that would allow the Palestinians "to climb down from the tree."

Barring such a plan, he said, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas would formally submit the Palestinian Authority's application for full U.N. membership at 12:30 p.m. next Friday.

President Barack Obama, facing an uphill battle for re-election next year and fierce bipartisan opposition to the Palestinian bid in Congress, sent two senior aides on a second long-shot mission in 10 days to persuade the Palestinians not to seek U.N. recognition by reviving direct peace talks with Israel. Even though the Palestinians almost certainly have the nine requisite votes for a U.N. resolution, the administration has warned repeatedly that it would use the veto the U.S. wields as a permanent Security Council member, arguing that the resolution would jeopardize the chances of restarting the talks that have been stalled for nearly a year.

Maliki, however, said Thursday that U.S. envoy David Hale and Dennis Ross, a senior Obama adviser, had "not presented anything new," and that the Palestinian leadership would seek non-voting observer status at the U.N., which would grant implicit recognition to a Palestinian state for the first time. It would be able to join certain international institutions, including the International Criminal Court, which some Israelis fear they would use to bring war crimes charges.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has denounced what he calls a unilateral move by the Palestinians to short-circuit the peace process, announced Thursday that he would lead Israel's opposition by addressing the General Assembly on the same day as Abbas.

"The General Assembly is not a place where Israel usually receives a fair hearing," Netanyahu told a press conference in Jerusalem. "But I still decided to tell the truth before anyone who would like to hear it. I have decided to convey the twin messages of direct negotiations for peace and the quest for peace."

U.S. and Israeli officials argue that a Palestinian state can only be established in a peace accord reached in direct negotiations with Israel.

"The Palestinians will not and cannot achieve statehood through a declaration at the United Nations," White House spokesman Jay Carney said. "It is a distraction, and in fact, it's counterproductive. That remains our position."

Israel has threatened unspecified retaliation if the Palestinians proceed, which could include a withholding of tax revenues collected and an acceleration in settlement construction on lands claimed by the Palestinians.

The Palestinians and their supporters blame Netanyahu's conservative government for forcing them to seek U.N. recognition. They contend that they cannot resume direct talks while Israel refuses to halt Jewish settlement construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which they claim along with the Gaza Strip for their independent state.

"The United States and Israel want to see us go back to the negotiating table, where they are comfortable for us to sit in a low chair, speak quietly and continue wasting time while Israel builds settlements," said a Palestinian official who was involved in the peace talks but was not authorized to speak to reporters.

"We are actually trying to rescue the chances for peace by taking a different approach," said Palestinian legislator Hanan Ashrawy, asserting that the U.N. bid could breathe new life into the peace process by signaling that it is "no longer business as usual."

A U.S. veto in the Security Council would assuage Israel's supporters among American Jewish and conservative voters, some of whom accuse Obama of being too soft on the Palestinians. Some staunch Israel allies in the House of Representatives are pushing legislation that would cut off U.S. aid to the Palestinians — some $390 million next year — and any country that supported U.N. statehood recognition.

Republicans suggest they have an opening to poach Jewish voters from Obama, who they say is viewed warily by some Jewish voters for taking a tough early stance against Israel's building of settlements in the West Bank.

Democrats lost former Rep. Anthony Weiner's New York congressional seat this week in a rout that critics say showed Obama's support among Jewish voters is wavering. The Emergency Committee for Israel, a conservative group founded by the Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol, has put up billboards across New York accusing Obama of being weak on Israel.

Carney said that Obama's "absolute commitment to Israel's security is demonstrated and unshakable," but he declined to say if Obama supported a cutoff of aid to the Palestinians.

A U.S. veto, however, risks triggering violent protests in a region that's being remade by the Arab Spring uprisings, which have upended longstanding U.S. relationships and, in Egypt and Tunisia, ousted dictators who for decades forcibly suppressed anti-Israeli and anti-American sentiments and Islamic militant movements.

In Cairo, seething anti-Israeli sentiment flared into an assault on the Israeli Embassy last week that forced the Israeli ambassador to flee the country. Some experts are concerned that Egypt, which has fought three wars with Israel, could walk away from the 1979 peace accord that established formal diplomatic relations with the Jewish state and made it one of the United States' closest Arab allies.

A U.S. veto also could embolden Iran's hard-line Islamic regime, worsen relations with Turkey — a key NATO power whose moderate Islamist government has led international condemnation of Israel — and alienate European allies who support the Palestinians.

"This would be a real setback to American diplomacy and calls into question whether the U.S. can do what it wants to do, which is to bring a peace to Israel and Palestine," said Philip Wilcox of the Middle East Institute, who formerly served as the top U.S. diplomat in Jerusalem.

"A vast part of the world is increasingly hostile to the United States because of the image they see of the U.S. tilted almost entirely toward the Israeli side of the equation," he said.

The European Union's foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, and international Mideast envoy Tony Blair have also been holding talks with the Palestinians to resolve the growing crisis.

The key sticking point remains Israel's contentious West Bank settlements. Netanyahu has expressed a willingness to slow down construction in the West Bank, but not in East Jerusalem. His largely right-wing coalition opposes any construction freeze.

The Obama administration continues to pursue a compromise that would placate Netanyahu's coalition while giving the Palestinians a graceful exit from their U.N. bid. That could include a temporary freeze on building in specified areas and an announcement of a resumption of direct talks.

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/09/15/124269/palestinians-rebuff-obama-edge.html#ixzz1Y86Gq4qS
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2011 12:53 pm
It's gotten to the point where the US isn't merely irrelevant to the peace process. The US is largely a hinderance to the peace process what with its biased support of the Zionist position in this conflict.

In light of the fact that the US is biased against the Palestinians, the latter should consider the Zionists and the US as a single, two headed entity with whom they have to deal in their struggle for their rights. Given these circumstances the UN is just about the Palestinians' only recourse.
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Sep, 2011 09:48 am
@BumbleBeeBoogie,
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
In Cairo, seething anti-Israeli sentiment flared into an assault on the Israeli Embassy last week that forced the Israeli ambassador to flee the country. Some experts are concerned that Egypt, which has fought three wars with Israel, could walk away from the 1979 peace accord that established formal diplomatic relations with the Jewish state and made it one of the United States' closest Arab allies.

A U.S. veto also could embolden Iran's hard-line Islamic regime, worsen relations with Turkey — a key NATO power whose moderate Islamist government has led international condemnation of Israel — and alienate European allies who support the Palestinians.


It shouldn't be too much longer before Israel destroys Turkey and Egypt.

The bombing of Iran is of course long overdue.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Sep, 2011 09:52 am
@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote:
It's gotten to the point where the US isn't merely irrelevant to the peace process. The US is largely a hinderance to the peace process what with its biased support of the Zionist position in this conflict.


The only thing the US hinders are these moves by the Palestinians to try to impose an unfair settlement on Israel.



InfraBlue wrote:
In light of the fact that the US is biased against the Palestinians, the latter should consider the Zionists and the US as a single, two headed entity with whom they have to deal in their struggle for their rights. Given these circumstances the UN is just about the Palestinians' only recourse.


Hardly biased to insist that the Palestinians play fair.

I think the Palestinians will find that their move at the UN has set them back. A likely Israeli response will be the annexation of East Jerusalem and of the land that most of the settlers reside on.
0 Replies
 
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Sep, 2011 02:02 pm
Oralloy seems to have branched out from trolling the Amanda Knox thread. Folks, be warned - this guy is a big time prick and attention whore. Don't feed the troll.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sat 17 Sep, 2011 03:07 pm
@contrex,
contrex wrote:
Oralloy seems to have branched out from trolling the Amanda Knox thread. Folks, be warned - this guy is a big time prick and attention whore. Don't feed the troll.


a) I've been on A2K for longer than you have, and have posted on many topics over the years. The others in this thread are likely more familiar with me than they are with you.

b) The fact that vermin who support sending innocent people to prison are also strong supporters of the Palestinians is a sound measure of just how vile and evil the Palestinians really are.

c) Me pointing out facts and telling the truth is not trolling, on any thread.

d) Attention whore??? That's stupid even for you.

e) Big time prick? Perhaps. But all I ever do is state the truth and defend the innocent. If you find yourself opposing me on a matter of moral significance, it is probably a sign that you're an evil person.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Sep, 2011 05:15 pm
@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote:

It's gotten to the point where the US isn't merely irrelevant to the peace process. The US is largely a hinderance to the peace process what with its biased support of the Zionist position in this conflict.

In light of the fact that the US is biased against the Palestinians, the latter should consider the Zionists and the US as a single, two headed entity with whom they have to deal in their struggle for their rights. Given these circumstances the UN is just about the Palestinians' only recourse.


How can a party be both a hindrance and irrelevant?

Do the Palestinians actually view the US as an impartial broker?

If the, somehow irrelevant, US that has for decades been expected to resolve the conflict is, in effect, one and the same as The Big Bad Zionists and is a hindrance to the "peace process," what recourse do the Palestinians have other than the UN? The Russians? The Chinese? Europe? Their Arab brethren? Superman?


InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2011 01:28 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
I'll clarify. The US has gone from being irrelevant to being a hinderance to the peace process.
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Mar, 2012 05:24 am
@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote:
I'll clarify. The US has gone from being irrelevant to being a hinderance to the peace process.


That's silly. The only hindrance to the peace process is the Palestinians' refusal to make peace.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Eye On Israel/Palestine - Discussion by IronLionZion
"Progressives(TM)" and Israel - Discussion by gungasnake
Israel's Reality - Discussion by Miller
Israel's Shame - Discussion by BigEgo
Abbas Embraces the Islamists - Discussion by Advocate
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Palestinian search for U.N. membership puts U.S. in bind
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 11/15/2018 at 07:07:47