Log in

View Full Version : UN upgrades Palestinian status to observer state



Ostrinski
29th November 2012, 22:17
The United Nations General Assembly has voted in favour of upgrading the Palestinians status to that of a non-member observer state.

The vote was taken at a meeting of the body in New York, with 138 countries voting in favour of the upgrade. Nine countries voted against it, and 41 others abstained.

Thousands of Palestinians gathered across the West Bank and Gaza to demonstrate their support for the fresh attempt by President Mahmoud Abbas to secure the status.

Palestinians were previously listed as a UN observer "entity" with no voting rights.

The new status is an indirect recognition of the Palestinians' claims on statehood in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip. It allows them to join a number of UN agencies, as well as the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Abbas addressed the General Assembly ahead of the vote.

Abbas referenced the recent Israeli assault on Gaza, saying that Palestine had come to the UN at time when they were "still tending to [their] wounds and still burying [their] beloved martyrs of children, women and men who have fallen victim to the latest Israeli aggression".

"What permits the Israeli government to blatantly continue with its aggressive policies and the perpetration of war crimes stems from its conviction that it is above the law and that it has immunity from accountability and consequences [...] The moment has arrived for the world to say clearly: Enough of aggression, settlements and occupation."

He said that the Palestinians were not seeking to "delegitimise" Israel, but to affirm the legitimacy of Palestine as a state. This recognition of an upgraded UN status was the beginning of "a final serious attempt to achieve peace", he said, stressing that the Palestinian Liberation Organisation was seeking to "breathe new life" into negotiations.

"The General Assembly is called upon today to issue a birth certificate of the reality of the State of Palestine."

"The moment has arrived for the world to say clearly: Enough of aggression, settlements and occupation."

- Mahmoud Abbas,
Chairman, Palestinian Liberation Organisation

Ron Prosor, the Israeli ambassador to the UN, also addressed the assembly before the vote, stressing that Israel was "prepared to live in peace with a Palestinian state", but that Israeli concerns about its security must be a part of any negotiated dialogue.

He said that none of Israel's national security interests appeared in the resolution, and that this was why his country could not support it.

"For as long as President Abbas prefers symbolism over reality, as long as he prefers to travel to New York for UN resolutions rather than travel to Jerusalem for dialogue, any hope of peace will be out of reach."

He called the resolution "one-sided" and passing it would show that "the international community is willing to turn a blind eye to peace agreements".

Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, meanwhile, condemned Abbas' statements as being "hostile and poisonous". In a statement released after the speech, Netanyahu said that "these are not the words of a man who wants peace".

The latest bid comes a year after the Palestinian leader first approached the UN to seek full state membership but the request stalled at the Security Council due to opposition from the veto-wielding US.

In a statement issued ahead of the vote, Abbas said that the Palestinians "remain committed to the two-state solution and our hand remains extended in peace".

Rival factions celebrate

Ahead of Thursday's vote, thousands of Palestinians from rival factions celebrated in the streets of the West Bank. In a departure from previous opposition, Hamas, which rules the Gaza Strip, said it would not interfere with the bid, and its supporters joined some of the celebrations.

"For as long as President Abbas prefers symbolism over reality, as long as he prefers to travel to New York for UN resolutions rather than travel to Jerusalem for dialogue, any hope of peace will be out of reach."

- Ron Prosor,
Israeli ambassador to the UN

The Palestinians say Israeli settlement-building on occupied West Bank land has hampered prospects for a bilateral statehood deal. Disagreement over the issue led to negotiations stalling in 2010.

Hanan Ashrawi, a Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) executive committee member, described the bid as a "last-ditch effort".

"We believe the two-state solution is in jeopardy because of [Israeli] actions. We want to ensure that the world is still committed to the establishment of a sovereign viable democratic free Palestinian state to interact as an equal," she said on Wednesday.

A simple majority vote in the 193-member General Assembly would be enough to bestow non-member observer status, bypassing the Security Council - where the US, Israel's ally, has a veto.

A similar campaign by the Palestinians last year proved short-lived amid opposition from Israel and the US, which said a Palestinian state should be founded in agreement with Israel.

European support divided

France and Italy have both said that they would vote in favour of Palestinian non-member status, an important boost in Palestinian efforts to secure greater international recognition.

The Palestinians have lobbied for support from European countries for their bid. While Israel has lobbied against them, the Palestinians are set for a sure victory in the 193-member world body made up mostly of developing countries long sympathetic to their cause.

"This Thursday or Friday, when the question is asked, France will vote yes," French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius announced in the French National Assembly, the lower house of parliament, on Tuesday.


Thousands rally in Ramallah to support bid

"It is only with negotiations between the two sides that we demand immediately without any preconditions that a Palestinian state can become a reality," he said.

On Thursday, Mario Monti, the Italian prime minister, phoned Abbas to inform him of his country's decision to the bid at the UN, according to a statement. Monti also spoke with Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, assuring him that the decision did not signal a weakening of the traditionally strong Israel-Italy relationship.

Palestinian officials, keen on solidifying as much European favour as they can in the hours before the vote, have indicated they will not immediately seek to accede to the ICC, addressing a last international concern.

Israeli, British and US diplomats, apparently realising that they can no longer sway the Palestinians' in their whole bid, are now seeking guarantees that Palestinians would forego filing complaints against Israel in the court.

Palestinian officials have refused. But, appearing to balance their tone, they said the timing and strategy of their eventual ICC accession is a matter for later internal discussion.

"It is our right, and we will not abandon it. We will decide on the proper timing, given our priorities and best interests," Ashrawi said.

"It's not for any country to get the Palestinians to relinquish their rights. And if Israel is innocent, it has nothing to fear from the court," she told the Reuters news agency.

Britain, which in recent weeks had pushed European countries to abstain on the statehood vote, has requested that Palestinians renounce applying to the ICC in return for changing the British vote to a "yes".

The ICC is not an official organ of the United Nations, but generally accepts applications from its members.

Israel has at times cancelled visits by officials to Britain out of fear of war crimes litigation there. It is concerned that future Palestinian claims at the court could focus on its leaders and undermine its standing abroad.

On Thursday, Catherine Ashton, the EU's foreign policy, reiterated the bloc's support for the recognition of Palestine as a full member of the UN "when appropriate", but said that "only a political solution" would bring peace to both Israel and Palestine.

'Two-state solution'

Israel and the US condemn the UN bid, saying the only genuine route to statehood for the Palestinians is via a peace agreement made in direct talks with Israel.

Peace talks, however, have been stalled for two years over the issue of Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, which have expanded despite being deemed illegal by most of the world. On Thursday, Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general, said the peace process was "on life support", and that direct negotiations must resume.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu downplayed the Palestinian's attempt to achieve their long-promised state.

"The decision at the UN today won't change anything on the ground," Netanyahu said. "It won't promote the establishment of a Palestinian state, it will distance it."

"Israel's hand is always extended in peace, but a Palestinian state will not be established without [a Palestinian] recognition of the State of Israel as the Jewish people's state. A Palestinian state will not be established without a declaration of the end of the conflict... without real security arrangements that protect the State of Israel and its citizens," the prime minister said.

Israel and the US have discussed withholding aid and tax revenue that the Palestinian government in the West Bank needs to survive. Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has also viewed options that include bringing down Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

Abbas said he was ready for an unconditional resumption of peace talks with Israel after a successful bid.

On Tuesday, a senior Israeli official told reporters that Israel would act cautiously, just as Palestinian negotiators said the number of countries indicating their decisions to vote "yes" was on the rise.

France has indicated its support, while Palestinian envoys say Ireland, Malta, Portugal and Luxembourg have conveyed their intention to vote "Yes", leaving Germany and the Czech Republic among the few possible "No" votes.

European countries were split in voting for a successful Palestinian bid to join the UN cultural agency UNESCO in October 2011. They appear to be leaning more closely towards supporting the Palestinian statehood bid in recent days.

"We support Palestinians' right to self-determination, without prejudicing good relations between Israel and the Palestinians and talks to ultimately solve the conflict," a European diplomat whose country supports the bid told Reuters.

"European countries have made an investment, politically and economically, in a two-state solution with Israel and Palestine living in security with each other. We have an interest in moving that vision forward," the diplomat said.

European countries are eager to empower moderates, analysts say, after a bloody eight-day conflict this month between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

"If you add up the political calculations, nobody's willing to cut off their money and undermine Abu Mazen [Abbas] or his government," said Ramallah-based political commentator and former government spokesperson Diana Buttu.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/11/20121128142545792986.html

Thoughts?

Ostrinski
29th November 2012, 22:20
I think this might constitute a psychological defeat for zionism, as even if it doesn't mean much in the long run it shows that the Zionist state's sense of entitlement isn't observed universally.

Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist
29th November 2012, 22:21
Personally I favor a one state solution, but this is still a good step forward

Let's Get Free
29th November 2012, 22:52
Well, it's progress. Now Israel has to do extra paperwork before it can invade.

Ostrinski
30th November 2012, 02:11
https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/s480x480/73218_10151186592328884_133646103_n.jpg

Jack
30th November 2012, 05:35
I don't know if this is necessarily a good thing. On one hand it enables violations of Palestinian sovereignty by Israel to be brought up as an international issue with some legal basis. On the other hand it dictates that Palestine falls within only the 1967 borders, leaving out the rest of Palestine that the Zionist entity sits on.

There's also nothing addressing the right of return for Palestinian refugees and I think Palestine's recognition as a sovereign state will only cause more legal complications that allow Israel to continue possessing stolen Arab lands.

Zealot
30th November 2012, 05:40
The Den of Thieves finally recognises Palestine as an "observer state", how lovely.

blake 3:17
30th November 2012, 08:51
This is a victory. Partial, sure, but anything that stops the genocide is more than welcome.

hetz
30th November 2012, 09:01
This is a victory. Partial, sure, but anything that stops the genocide is more than welcome.
Is there a genocide in Palestine? Source?
I mean, genocide is a very specific term. People are still disputing many historical events in regards to whether they were actualy "genocides" or not.

Jack
30th November 2012, 18:02
Is there a genocide in Palestine? Source?
I mean, genocide is a very specific term. People are still disputing many historical events in regards to whether they were actualy "genocides" or not.

In terms of forcefully removing people from their lands and moving in Jewish settlers to force demographic changes. Like Israel did in 1948, and has done in Golan, parts of the West Bank, and parts of what would be Gaza.

Genocide does not necessarily have to include massive killings if the job can be done without it. The Circassians were just expelled from their lands too, but nobody would deny it was genocide.

hetz
30th November 2012, 18:14
You're right about that.
But notice how Blake was talking in the present tense, implying that the genocide is still ongoing.

Ocean Seal
30th November 2012, 18:27
You're right about that.
But notice how Blake was talking in the present tense, implying that the genocide is still ongoing.

A genocide is
systematically killing
a people die in Palestine

Jack
30th November 2012, 18:27
You're right about that.
But notice how Blake was talking in the present tense, implying that the genocide is still ongoing.

It is, though, settlements have continued to be built in the West Bank. East Jerusalem is the best example of this, Palestinian homes are being demolished and Israeli-only housing is built in their place, basically their goal is to force East Jerusalem to have a Jewish majority by removing the Arab population, therefore challenging claims to Jerusalem as anything but the capital of Israel.

hetz
30th November 2012, 18:32
A genocide is
systematically killing
No it's not, look into the definition of genocide please.



It is, though, settlements have continued to be built in the West Bank.
I thought they stopped doing that. I guess I'm not that well informed.
The Israelis are then preparing for further ethnic cleansing.

But I'd like to see a source on the ongoing genocide.
I don't know if you've heard of what happened ( or what's going on ) in for example Kosovo. There are ongoing disputes about whether that was/is a genocide.

Jack
30th November 2012, 18:34
No it's not, look into the definition of genocide please.



I thought they stopped doing that. I guess I'm not that well informed.
The Israelis are then preparing for further ethnic cleansing.

But I'd like to see a source on the ongoing genocide.
I don't know if you've heard of what happened ( or what's going on ) in for example Kosovo. There are ongoing disputes about whether that was/is a genocide.

They "stop" every few years, then resume or it is picked up by private settler interests (financing and building settlements without the government).

Are you referring to the expulsion of the Serb population?

hetz
30th November 2012, 18:38
Are you referring to the expulsion of the Serb population?
I'm referring to everything that happened there, the expulsions, murders and terror against both Serbs and Albanians.

brigadista
30th November 2012, 18:46
new settlements....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/30/israel-build-jewish-settlement-un-palestine

The Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, has ordered the construction of thousands of new homes in Jewish settlements in the occupied territories in what will be widely interpreted as retaliation for the United Nations vote to recognise a Palestinian state on Thursday.

Israeli officials said the new construction would centre on expanding existing West Bank settlements and more home for Jews in occupied East Jerusalem where the government is imposing demographic changes in order to diminish the proportion of Arab residents. Netanyahu also ordered the advancing of plans for construction to link up Jerusalem with a Jewish settlement, Ma'aleh Adumim, which would have a profound effect on any future Palestinian state based on 1967 borders by cutting deep into the centre of it. The US and Europe have long pressured the Israeli government not to build there.

The announcement is a reflection of Israel's anger at the vote, and the Palestinian leadership at pushing for it.

Israel condemned the UN's recognition of a Palestinian state as damaging to peace while also, more privately, expressing concern at how many European countries backed the move.

Palestinian officials were mixed in their reactions with warnings that if the UN recognition is not used to renew the dormant peace process, then it will lead to more violence, while Hamas described the vote in New York as also a victory for armed resistance.

The Israeli government worked hard to portray the UN decision to effectively recognise a Palestinian state as undermining peace. The prime minister's spokesman, Mark Regev, described the move as "negative political theatre because it takes us out of a negotiating process".

"It's going to hurt peace," he said.

Dore Gold, a former Israeli ambassador to the UN, told the BBC that the Palestinian move was a "massive violation" of the Oslo peace accords.

"The main issue is what does this do to the peace process," he said.

Gold said that if the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, attempted to use the new status to declare an independent state then Israel would have to act and could go so far as "annexing territory".

But other Israeli officials sought to downplay the vote, saying it was symbolic and did not require action unless the Palestinians followed through with measures such as acceding to the International criminal court (ICC).

The Palestinian leadership rejected pressure from the US and Britain to renounce its new right to go to the ICC, but has said it is not likely to accede immediately. Instead, Abbas sees the issue as a card that can be played in negotiations, particularly over the issue of Jewish settlements – which some international lawyers believe are a clear cut breach of the Geneva Convention preventing "belligerent nations" from moving their nationals to live on occupied territories.

Salam Fayyad, prime minister of the Palestinian Authority, warned in Washington that if the UN vote is not used to put renewed impetus into the dormant peace process, it will strengthen armed groups such as Hamas.

"What we can all do is to see how we can take advantage of what happened, to enhance the political process. I hope more will begin to see things this way. Let's get together and have a serious discussion on whether things in the past few years proceeded the way they should have proceeded. We demonstrated, we Palestinians can govern ourselves in an effective way," he said.

The Hamas leader, Khaled Meshaal, said that the UN vote was in parallel with what many Palestinians see as a victory over Israel in the fighting in Gaza earlier this month. He told Reuters that armed struggle was necessary in conjunction with diplomacy.

"Negotiating without powerful cards on the ground has no meaning," said Meshaal. "It will turn into begging. This enemy doesn't give anything unless under pressure."

But the facts that Israel won the support of just nine countries, including the US, in the UN has caused a degree of alarm inside the Jewish state.

Israeli officials were shocked at the scale of European support for the Palestinian resolution, with France switching sides and Germany abandoning a pledge to vote against. Among EU nations, only the Czech Republic supported Israel.

For months, Israeli diplomats worked to persuade governments in the EU to, at the least, abstain in the vote in the hope that the Jewish state would then be able to deride a Palestinian victory as delivered by dictatorships and other less than democratic regimes.

Israel's position was supported by the EU's foreign affairs representative, Catherine Ashton, and Tony Blair, envoy for the Quartet of the US, EU, Russia and the UN attempting to kick start peace talks.

But the fighting in Gaza, fears about strengthening Hamas by not supporting a high profile diplomatic move, and the extreme position taken by Israel, particularly its foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, who threatened to overthrow Abbas, helped push many countries toward the Palestinian position.

Israel regards France has having led the charge after President François Hollande abandoned his earlier opposition to the Palestinian UN bid.

Britain abstained and was isolated enough to feel it had to justify its position by saying it would have supported the resolution if the Palestinians had renounced the right to accede to the ICC and had agreed to immediately renew peace negotiations.

The Israelis were particularly stung by the German decision to shift from opposition to abstention. Haaretz reported that Germany moved because of Israeli intransigence of Jewish settlement construction and because Israel had not met previous commitments to the German government. The paper said senior Israeli foreign ministry officials were "shocked" by Berlin's decision.

An opinion poll released on Friday showed that a slim majority of Israelis, 51%, do not believe there will be a lasting peace deal with the Palestinians. About 40% say there will eventually be an agreement but that it will take at least five years to reach. More than one third of Israelis expect the conflict with the Palestinians to intensify in the coming years.

Sinister Cultural Marxist
30th November 2012, 20:11
There is a legitimate analytical difference between the term "Genocide" and "Ethnic Cleansing". Resistance to both makes sense, but they are different things. Using the wrong terminology just makes someone look hyperbolic.

l'Enfermé
30th November 2012, 21:31
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007043

United Nations approved the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide:

[G]enocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

The Zionist entity has embarked on a road in 1948 that can only culminate in the complete destruction of the Palestinian people. This is undeniable. The genocide of the Palestinian people has not yet been completed as it still ongoing, but it is definitely a genocide.

l'Enfermé
30th November 2012, 21:35
In terms of forcefully removing people from their lands and moving in Jewish settlers to force demographic changes. Like Israel did in 1948, and has done in Golan, parts of the West Bank, and parts of what would be Gaza.

Genocide does not necessarily have to include massive killings if the job can be done without it. The Circassians were just expelled from their lands too, but nobody would deny it was genocide.
Almost half a million Circassians were killed though. They weren't just expelled.

Jack
30th November 2012, 22:46
Oh boy:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20552391

blake 3:17
5th December 2012, 05:47
Is there a genocide in Palestine? Source?
I mean, genocide is a very specific term. People are still disputing many historical events in regards to whether they were actualy "genocides" or not.

Source: reality