Palestinians to seek full UN membership Sept. 23

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

RAMALLAH, West Bank—The Palestinians will ask the Security Council next week to accept them as a full member of the United Nations, the Palestinian foreign minister said Thursday, a move that would defy Washington's threat to veto the statehood bid.

The remarks by Riad Malki came just ahead of the arrival in the West Bank of a senior U.S. diplomatic team that was in the region in a last-ditch effort to persuade the Palestinians to drop the U.N. bid. Although Malki did not close the door on compromise, his comments signaled the chances of breakthrough were slim.

With a diplomatic showdown looming, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced Thursday that he would travel to the U.N. next week to lead the opposition to the Palestinian initiative.

The emerging scenario would constitute a blow to U.S. diplomacy by forcing Washington to veto a proposal whose outcome—a Palestinian state—in principle is supported by most of the world, including the White House and many in Israel as well.

However, both the U.S. and Israel say a Palestinian state can be established only through negotiations.

It could also drag out the maneuver at the United Nations for months.

The process would have to play out in the Security Council before the Palestinians turn to the General Assembly, where they are likely to find the needed majority for a lesser form of recognition as a "nonmember observer state."

Malki said the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, will personally submit the Palestinian request for membership to U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon after addressing the General Assembly on the afternoon of Sept. 23. In the meantime, he said the Palestinians would listen to suggested alternatives.

"We will see if anyone carries with him or her any credible offer that will allow us to look into it seriously and to be discussed in the Palestinian leadership. Otherwise, on the 23rd at 12:30, the president will submit the application," Malki told foreign journalists in Ramallah.

The Palestinians say they are turning to the U.N. in frustration after years of failed peace talks. While a U.N. vote will not change the situation on the ground, the Palestinians believe it will improve their position if peace talks resume.

"We are going to the United Nations because we want really to strengthen the chances for the resumption of negotiations," Malki said.

The U.S. envoys, David Hale and Dennis Ross, are the latest in a string of senior diplomats who are trying to get the Palestinians to cancel their U.N. bid and instead resume negotiations with Israel. The European Union's foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, and international Mideast envoy Tony Blair have also held talks with the Palestinians in recent days.

A meeting with Blair late Wednesday, Malki said, "did not produce anything new."

The last round of Israel-Palestinian talks broke down a year ago, just weeks after their launch, in a dispute over Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank and east Jerusalem. The Palestinians claim both areas, captured by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war for their future state.

The Palestinians say they will not return to the table unless Israel freezes settlement construction and accepts its 1967 boundaries as the basis for a final agreement. Israel captured the West Bank and east Jerusalem, territories claimed by the Palestinians, in the 1967 Mideast war.

Malki would not give specifics on what it would take to get the Palestinians to abandon their U.N. bid, saying only it would require a "firm base with clear terms of reference, a clear timetable and with a clear end game."

U.S. officials in Washington say the proposed formula would endorse parameters laid out in a speech by President Barack Obama last May, when he said the 1967 lines should be the basis of an agreement. The Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot said other details would include a three-month settlement moratorium and six-month timetable for talks.

The U.S. has already said it will use its veto in the Security Council, the powerful 15-member body that must approve U.N. membership.

There had been some expectation that the Palestinians would go straight to the General Assembly. Approval of a Palestinian resolution is guaranteed in the 193-nation body, which is dominated by developing countries sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.

But Malki said Thursday the Palestinians remain focused on the Security Council, setting the stage for a direct confrontation with the Americans.

Netanyahu, meanwhile, announced he would lead his government's delegation to the annual gathering in New York. Acknowledging the General Assembly is not "particularly sympathetic to Israel," he said it was important to go and "lay things out the way they are."

Netanyahu said he would stress his country's security needs, particularly in light of the dramatic changes sweeping through the Arab world.

"I will tell the truth, the simple truth, and the truth is Israel wants peace," Netanyahu said. "We know that this peace is conditioned on recognition and security, and I think these needs are only sharpened against the background of the events we see around us."

http://www.mercurynews.com/nation-world/ci_18899606

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Netanyahu, meanwhile, announced he would lead his government's delegation to the annual gathering in New York. Acknowledging the General Assembly is not "particularly sympathetic to Israel," he said it was important to go and "lay things out the way they are."

Netanyahu said he would stress his country's security needs, particularly in light of the dramatic changes sweeping through the Arab world.

"I will tell the truth, the simple truth, and the truth is Israel wants peace," Netanyahu said. "We know that this peace is conditioned on recognition and security, and I think these needs are only sharpened against the background of the events we see around us."

This is the newest development... at first Israel said it would send Shimon Peres to attend the U.N. vote.

So Netanyahu will make a speech. He must convince the U.N. of these 4 things:

#1. Israel sincerely wants peace, recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, and has worked diligently for 40+ years to achieve peace

#2. Israel's 44-year military occupation, decades of land confiscation and expulsion of Palestinians from their property, and the continuing transfer of illegal Israeli settlers onto those confiscated lands are not obstacles to peace, and are actually components of Israel's sincere and ongoing participation in the peace process

#3. It's the Palestinians who don't want peace and this is evident because they keep resisting the occupation, the violent oppression of their people and the forcible appropriation of their land

#4. Israel does not only have the right to keep the illegal settlements it already built on Palestinian land, but continue expanding them and building new settlements as it pleases, until a time when Israel decides that Palestinians are ready for peace

Edited September 15, 2011 by wife_of_mahmoud

[mawilson 2,133]

Palestinians already have a de-facto state (two, in fact - Gaza and the West Bank) and the UN as their sock puppet.

What will change once they become a full UN member?

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I can only give this post a +1, but it's worth far more.

This is the newest development... at first Israel said it would send Shimon Peres to attend the U.N. vote.

So Netanyahu will make a speech. He must convince the U.N. of these 4 things:

#1. Israel sincerely wants peace, recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, and has worked diligently for 40+ years to achieve peace

#2. Israel's 44-year military occupation, decades of land confiscation and expulsion of Palestinians from their property, and the continuing transfer of illegal Israeli settlers onto those confiscated lands are not obstacles to peace, and are actually components of Israel's sincere and ongoing participation in the peace process

#3. It's the Palestinians who don't want peace and this is evident because they keep resisting the occupation, the violent oppression of their people and the forcible appropriation of their land

#4. Israel does not only have the right to keep the illegal settlements it already built on Palestinian land, but continue expanding them and building new settlements as it pleases, until a time when Israel decides that Palestinians are ready for peace

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Palestinians already have a de-facto state (two, in fact - Gaza and the West Bank) and the UN as their sock puppet.

What will change once they become a full UN member?

If nothing will change, then what is the Israeli government so afraid of ?

[mawilson 2,133]

If nothing will change, then what is the Israeli government so afraid of ?

No idea. You tell me.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

No idea. You tell me.

It seems Netanyahu's main fear is the International Criminal Court.

[Pooky 3,693]

Looks like the Palestinians will get as far as Non-Member State, which is as much as the full UN General Assembly can give. Only the Security Council can grant full member status and that, apparently, isn't going to happen.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Looks like the Palestinians will get as far as Non-Member State, which is as much as the full UN General Assembly can give. Only the Security Council can grant full member status and that, apparently, isn't going to happen.

There's a wild card - UNGA Resolution 377 A.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

So many countries have appeared and disappeared in the last 60 years that I never say never about what can happen.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I think statehood will be great for the West Bank. I imagine regarding illegal settlements, Palestinians will get a proper voice in the UN though no sanctions etc.

Gaza is messy though. So after the resolution, Gaza would have its own territorial waters where ships come and go. It won't take long before there is an attack on Israel with a rocket what have you. Israel can now officially declares a fully legal war on the Palestinian State...then what? (Right now, its vague regarding Gaza, are they at "war" or aren't they...I suppose the Israelis are using that term to legitimize the blockade)

See why peace before statehood is important? If anything I question whether statehood will make the current gray situation black and white...and not in favor of the Palestinians (unless they want to get rid of Hamas as the cancer it is)

Edited September 16, 2011 by Sousuke

[Kathryn41 3,205]

A number of baiting comments posted to instigate additional controversy have been removed along with 2 quoting same. Please confine your discussion to the topic in the article and stop trying to derail the thread with antagonistic comments.

Edited September 16, 2011 by Kathryn41

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

I think statehood will be great for the West Bank. I imagine regarding illegal settlements, Palestinians will get a proper voice in the UN though no sanctions etc.

Gaza is messy though. So after the resolution, Gaza would have its own territorial waters where ships come and go. It won't take long before there is an attack on Israel with a rocket what have you. Israel can now officially declares a fully legal war on the Palestinian State...then what? (Right now, its vague regarding Gaza, are they at "war" or aren't they...I suppose the Israelis are using that term to legitimize the blockade)

See why peace before statehood is important? If anything I question whether statehood will make the current gray situation black and white...and not in favor of the Palestinians (unless they want to get rid of Hamas as the cancer it is)

+1

I bet it's going to go down exactly like that. Palestine will get their state, yet they will want the old borders back, Israel will tell them to go take a hike, Palestine and one or two Muslim countries will attack Israel and that will give Israel the green light to clean house.

The West Bank and Gaza are going to look like a newly paved parking lot by the time the Jews get finished and that will be that.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

http://news.yahoo.com/q-implications-palestinian-u-n-drive-180016139.html

Q+A: The implications of the Palestinian U.N. drive

By Crispian Balmer and Lou Charbonneau | Reuters – 2 hrs 43 mins ago

Reuters) - Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said on Friday he would request recognition of a fully-fledged Palestinian state at the United Nations when he goes to the world body next week, defying fierce opposition from Israel and the United States.

Here are some of the reasons behind the push as well as some of the possible consequences.

WHY DO THE PALESTINIANS WANT TO GO TO THE UNITED NATIONS?

Abbas says 20 years of U.S.-led peace talks have got nowhere and wants a vote in the United Nations to bestow the Palestinians with the cherished mantle of statehood. However, he recognizes that negotiations with Israel will still be needed to establish a properly functioning state.

Justifying the move, the Palestinians point to the success of a Western-backed, two-year plan to build institutions ready for statehood which they say is now finished.

THE PALESTINIANS WANT RECOGNITION ON 1967 LINES. WHY?

The Palestinian Authority (PA) says placing their state firmly in the context of territory seized by Israel in the 1967 war will provide clear terms of reference and mean Israel will no longer be able to call the land "disputed." Instead, it will make clear it is occupied. Israel fears this will enable Palestinians to start legal proceedings in the International Criminal Court (ICC) against some 500,000 Israelis who live in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

HOW DOES THE U.N. ADMIT NEW MEMBER STATES?

Countries seeking to join the United Nations usually present an application to the U.N. secretary-general, who passes it to the Security Council to assess and vote on. If the 15-nation council approves the membership request, it is passed to the General Assembly for approval. A membership request needs a two-thirds majority, or 129 votes, for approval.

A country cannot join the United Nations unless both the Security Council and General Assembly approve its application.

COULD THE PALESTINIANS JOIN THE U.N.?

In theory, yes. But Washington has made clear it would veto such a request, meaning it has no chance of success. Even if the Palestinians secured a two-thirds majority of votes in the General Assembly, there is no getting around the need for prior approval of the Security Council.

IS "NON-MEMBER STATE" STATUS AN OPTION?

In addition to applying to become a full U.N. member state, the Palestinians could also seek upgraded observer status as a non-member state. That is what the Vatican has. Such status, U.N. envoys say, could be interpreted as implicit U.N. recognition of Palestinian statehood because the assembly would be acknowledging that the Palestinians control an actual state.

The advantage of this option is that it would require only a simple majority of the 193-nation General Assembly, not a two-thirds majority. Abbas said on Friday that more than 126 states already recognize the state of Palestine, meaning he could probably win such a vote with ease.

WHAT WOULD BE THE ADVANTAGE OF THAT?

Besides granting them the all-important title "state," diplomats say it might enable the Palestinians to join the ICC, from which it could pursue legal cases against Israel over the partial blockade of Gaza or the settlements.

ARE THERE ANY DISADVANTAGES FOR THE PALESTINIANS?

There are potential pitfalls. For example, Israel could counter sue the Palestinians in the ICC over missiles fired at it out of Gaza, which is run by the Hamas Islamist group.

Some critics have warned of legal consequences for the Palestinians themselves, arguing the move could jeopardize the rights of refugees in the Palestinian diaspora and the status of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). Others have dismissed those arguments.

Also, the U.N. vote will not change things on the ground in the Palestinian territories -- a reality which could further undermine the standing of the Palestinian leadership when the dust settles. Some Israelis have warned disappointment could fuel anti-Israeli violence and even spark a new Intifada. PA officials have dismissed that prospect.

COULD ISRAEL OR WASHINGTON EXACT PUNISHMENT ON THE PA?

Israeli officials have suggested a range of possible measures, including limiting travel privileges for Palestinian leaders seeking to exit the West Bank, halting the transfer of crucial tax revenues to the Palestinians and even annexing West Bank settlement blocs to try to sidestep ICC legal action. Some U.S. officials have warned that they might cut their annual aid to the Palestinian Authority, which runs to some $450 million.

It is far from clear if they will enact these threats. Depriving the PA of funds, for example, would rapidly push it to financial collapse, which would provoke instability. In the case of bankruptcy, some leading Palestinians argue that the PA should hand over the keys of the big West Bank cities to Israel and tell it to pay for the on-going occupation.

[Boiler 44,928]

When you think of the other nasty regimes that are members of the UN, what difference would one more make?