Palestine pushes for UN general assembly recognition

Well this is why it's baffling to me that Netanyahu's government has spent the last 2 years playing with fire. They have a strategic security advantage with the present pacifist trends in the region, and a strong emotional backing from a substantial contingent in the US, despite its financial crisis and other internal issues. And they don't think their recalcitrance will come back to haunt them, or that it will somehow improve if the relationship stagnates even longer? They think the Arabs will just pack up and leave quietly if poked hard enough?

I think Obama would provoke a great deal of important thought and discussion by explicitly stating that even a mighty superpower such as America can only help those who want to be helped. I'm sure in the world of diplomatic softspeak, words to such effect would have a very strong impact on the decisions Israel makes.

Naturally the world doesn't revolve around America, and there are other timelines and agendas to be concerned with. Indefinite delays are also unacceptable, so a deadline of some sort had to be set, and Netanyahu hasn't done anything to suggest that a longer timeline would lead to a more favourable reception from Israel. I still think it would have been worthwhile to time this push until after the US elections, because no one else on Earth is in a better position to twist Netanyahu's arm.

Yes, Israelis haven't yet figured out that their actions today will have severe repercussions tomorrow, and if they're going to learn the hard way, it's easier for both the US and Israel to conclude their respective business sooner rather than later. US Republicans seem completely disconnected from the nature of this current Israeli government and other events in the middle east, and how their unconditional support is not going to help Israel's sovereignty or security in the long term.

Seeing Israel used as a political tool by either side of the political spectrum is pretty disheartening for me- it's too small and stubborn of a country to devote so much energy to attacking or defending, and the US has very big problems of its own which need to come first on its list of priorities.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Norman Finkelstein posted this on his blog:

I noted they didn't ask the Israelis what the vote should be.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

http://www.globescan.com/news_archives/bbc2011_palestine/

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

are they percentages and if so what are the missing ones?

For instance US 45, 2, 36 = 83

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The thing that really baffles me is how Netanyahu is in charge again. It's like the late 90's all over again, this time as farce. It's like if W were to become President again in 2015. WTF people.

/says quick prayer of gratitude to Roosevelt and Founding Fathers for Presidential system with 2-term limit

Shit, at this point the entirety of post-Oslo Israeli strategy has amounted to delay and hope for a better deal. At some point, obstructionism is obstructionism, no?

I think the basic fact of the matter is that neither Obama nor Netanyahu is in a position to deliver anything to Abbas that would make up for the cost to him of being seen to back down. So, politics dictates that the confrontation will proceed.

The Great Recession
or: Peace in the Middle East??

 

The white space is the abstentions ie DK/NA

 

Really makes you think, how come the Palestinians didn't think of this before?

 

They have. Several times. Why do you think this is the first time they have approached the UN or its agencies? The problem has always been the lack of cooperation from the UN and its members, as well as from the international courts who disclaimed jurisdiction

Or BS like this:

Also Israeli hasbara was the mainstream narrative and they did not have sufficient support from other nations, who were either in the holocaust guilt pit or struggling towards their own recognition. This is the first time it is Israel, US and Micronesia [and possibly Canada] vs the rest of the world

 

I can't say I am an expert on the Palestine/Israel issue tbh. Last few years my main source has been the BBC.

Dumb question, so why is there going to be a vote at the UN this time? what is different now?

 

Obama, at U.N., Explains Rationale for Opposing Palestinian Statehood Bid

“Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the U.N.,” Mr. Obama said, in an address before world leaders at the General Assembly. “If it were that easy, it would have been accomplished by now.”

Instead, Mr. Obama said, the international community should continue to push Israelis and Palestinians toward talks on the four intractable “final status” issues that have vexed peace negotiations since 1979: the borders of a Palestinian state, security for Israel, the status of Palestinian refugees who left or were forced to leave their homes in Israel, and the fate of Jerusalem, which both sides claim for their capital. ​

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

​

 

Nothing is different now, just like nothing was different at Tahrir Square this spring that was not there the last 27 years. Its just a combination of circumstances working together to create this decision. Maybe because Abbas is 76 and "negotiating" since 20 years, maybe because Palestinians feel they have support from other people around the world, maybe because they feel that their time has come. Not everyone is sure that this is going to help, or if they want a two state solution or even if they will get the seat.

But they want to try and thats something

 

Right, right i get ya.

Sounds like its going to be big, esp. when you take into account what else is going on in the region.

 

The legal status of the occupation has never been under question:

From the ICJ Advisory on the legal implications of the settlement wall

http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=4&code=mwp&case=131&k=5a

 

Or it could be for the same reasons you didn't want UN peacekeepers on the Gaza border prior to Cast Lead- they didn't feel the UN would give them 100% of the pie.

What's so BS about it? That agreement increased Palestinian autonomy and laid the foundations for them to make a claim at the UN like what they're doing right now.

I agree with your assessment here- the Palestinian narrative has been suppressed in Western circles for many decades and is picking up more strength in the age of information. All the same, Islamic extremism in the region has long contributed to the West's disinterest in their cause, and it's the relative peace of the last few years which enables us to consider the Arab side of the story without fearing the empowerment of fundamentalist nutjobs. Hint: complaining that the American hunted down Bin Laden won't win you many friends there.

As a Canadian, I have already expressed my hope that our prime minister Stephen Harper will either vote in favour or else abstain, because I don't want him sacrificing political points to a leftist opposition which caters to those who scream the loudest and still thinks government revenues grow on trees- it's certainly not worth sacrificing Canada's future prosperity for the sake of some racist settlers who believe an ancient book of questionable origin gives them the legal authority to expel others from the lands in which they were born and raised.

 

hello bork

the palestinians have always wanted pece keepers in the west bank etc but israel keeps blocking it...

or so i thought and read!!

 

Where did you read that? I honestly haven't seen any concrete proposals about peacekeepers from either side. If the Palestinians did ask for peacekeepers, it would back Israel into a very tight corner, because anyone standing in the way of such a request would have a very difficult time convincing the world that they truly want peace.

 

Well, Palestine declared a state back in 1988, and there are already various UN resolutions recognizing this in various ways. Really, what's on the table here is less of a leap than it gets made out to be - it's more about certain procedural issues at the UN, such as giving Palestine a vote in the General Assembly, access to various UN-related international organizations, etc.

The thing to keep in mind is that resolutions and bilateral recognitions are just that - this stuff all ultimately comes down to politics and diplomacy, and even the most glowing UN endorsement won't add up to anything unless a great many countries (and all of the most influential ones) follow through on such with meaningful diplomacy and politics in support of such.

 

And to acknowledge that twenty years is a long time for "most influential ones" to achieve nothing - hence this desperate measure.

 

Isn't this a fine kettle of fish? Brought to you by the sons of men who threw the Native Americans on reservations. But then, the Zionist Old Testament is all in favor of slavery, isn't?
H. Res. 394: Supporting Israel's right to annex Judea and Samaria in the event that the Palestinian Authority...

lol. And here I was wondering. .

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

What on Earth were 81 representatives doing in this tiny country in the middle east? Apparently getting briefed on a very dicey up and coming situation of grave and dire political importance to an important "ally" who is also a large campaign contributor.

Report: 81 congressmen going to Israel on break

 

Joe Walsh (R-Il) is a giant douche. The Cons like to suck up to Israel, but it's a relatively recent infatuation caused by evangelical Christianity, which really wants all the them dead so that the end times can come.

 

I could get involved in this debate that has gone one for years...

But wait, is that ice cream I see? Why yes it is.

Goodbye