News Analysis from page 38
option was first used to circumvent
a Soviet veto in the Security Council
against action during the Korean War,
and it was employed during the 1980s
to protect countries that sanctioned
apartheid South Africa from being
sued under international trade laws.
• Why are the Palestinians seek-
ing statehood recognition from the
United Nations rather than negoti-
ating directly with Israel?
The Palestinian leadership has
eschewed renewed peace talks with
Israel, either because Abbas believes
that talks with Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu won't produce
desired results or because Abbas
believes he has more to gain by going
to the international arena — or both.
Abbas essentially is gambling that
the U.N. move will give him more
leverage vis-a-vis Israel, making it
more difficult for the Israelis to stick
to their current negotiating positions
and establishing the pre-1967 lines as
the basis for negotiations.
• What tools does Israel have to
respond to the Palestinian bid?
Israel's strategy now is trying to
persuade as many nations as possible
— as well as the Palestinians — that
a U.N. vote favoring Palestinian state-
hood would set back the peace track.
The argument is that it would make
it less likely that Israeli-Palestinian
negotiations would succeed, forcing
Israel to dig in its heels.
Beyond that, Israeli experts have
warned, Israel may consider the
unilateral Palestinian bid for U.N.
recognition an abrogation of the
Oslo Accords, which stipulated that
the framework for resolution of the
conflict be negotiations between the
two parties. If the Oslo Accords, which
provides the basis for the limited
autonomy the Palestinians currently
have in the West Bank, are nullified,
Israel may re-occupy portions of the
West Bank from which its forces have
withdrawn, end security cooperation
with the Palestinian Authority and
withhold hundreds of millions of dol-
lars in tax money it collects on behalf
of the Palestinian Authority.
• What are some of the other
possible negative consequences for
the Palestinians of U.N. statehood
recognition?
The U.S. Congress has threatened
to ban assistance to the Palestinian
Authority if it pursues recognition of
statehood at the United Nations. That
could cost the Palestinians as much
as $500 million annually, potentially
crippling the Palestinian government.
• What's the plan for the day after
the U.N. vote?
Commentary
It's not clear. The Palestinian leader-
ship doesn't seem to have a plan. The
Palestinian public is expected to stage
mass demonstrations. Israel is prepar-
ing for a host of worst-case scenarios,
including violence.
If the United Nations does endorse
Palestinian statehood in some form,
it will be seen as a public relations
New York
victory for the Palestinians. But in the
absence of progress on the ground
oon, Mahmoud Abbas'
in the Middle East, a U.N. vote could
Palestinian Authority (P.A.) is
set off popular Palestinian protests
expected to seek a unilateral
against Israel that could escalate into
declaration of Palestinian state-
another Palestinian intifada (upris-
hood at the United Nations.
ing).
The bid may fail, not least
No one knows what another
because the U.S. could veto
Palestinian intifada will look like. It's
a Security Council resolution
possible that soon after a U.N. vote,
to that effect. But whether
Palestinians will march on Israeli set-
successful or unsuccessful,
tlements and military positions much
the Palestinian U.N. state-
like Palestinians in Syria and Lebanon
hood bid is bad news, which
marched on Israel's borders in mid-
will have bad consequences.
May to commemorate Nakba Day —
First, it is illegal. The
the day marking the anniversary of
Israeli-Palestinian diplomatic
the "catastrophe" of Israel's founding.
process – the Oslo accords
Or a U.N. vote could unleash a new
– is explicitly predicated on
wave of violence, with attacks and
achieving peace and resolv-
counterattacks that destroy the relative
ing all outstanding issues only by
calm that has held between Israel and
negotiations. The Oslo II agreement
West Bank Palestinians since the sec-
(1995), Article 31, Paragraph 7, is
ond intifada waned in 2004.
clear: "Neither side shall initiate or
The outbreak of violence, however,
take any step that will change the
could undermine Palestinian interests.
status of the West Bank and the Gaza
In the relative absence of Palestinian
Strip pending the outcome of the
terrorism in
recent years,
the Palestinians
have managed
to get increased
economic assis-
tance, established
THE ELECTION N
upgraded diplo-
2002 OF AN
matic ties with
ISLAMIST GOVT
nations through-
IN TURKEY .
out the world, ral-
lied more global
support for their
cause and seen
a considerable
rise in their gross
domestic product
and quality of life
in the West Bank.
They don't want
DV NOT LEAD TO
to throw that all
AN IMMEDIATE
away.
That may leave
BREAKING OF TIES
the Palestinians
WITH THE JEWISN
and Israel back
STATE,
where they started
before talk of
U.N. recognition
began: at a stand-
still. Li
A Unilaterally Declared
Palestinian State: Illegal,
Wrong And Dangerous
Dry Bones
permanent status negotiations."
Second, it is wrong. The
Palestinians are not going to the
U.N. because they can't achieve
something though negotiations; they
are going to the U.N. because they
refuse to negotiate. And
they refuse to negoti-
ate because that would
mean concessions to
Israel, recognizing Israel
as the Jewish homeland
and declaring an end of
claims and conflict. This
they are not prepared to
do because they reject
Israel's existence as a
Jewish state. As P.A.
President Mahmoud Abbas
has said more than once,
"I do not accept the Jewish state;
call it what you will."
That is why the Palestinians walked
away from offers of statehood in
1937, 1948, 2000 and 2008. To
accept any of these plans would have
meant declaring that Palestinians
would live in permanent peace with
Israel. They cannot even bring them-
selves to lie about doing so, let alone
actually do it.
Alienating Peace
Indeed, under Abbas, the P.A. does
not prepare Palestinian society for
peace; it prepares it for war and
replacing Israel. The ruling Fatah
party's Constitution calls for "demol-
ishing the Zionist state" (Article
22) and for the "armed struggle"
(Article 19) against Israel. Such goals
are inculcated through the P.A.-
controlled news media, mosques,
schools and youth camps. Little won-
der that a recent poll found that 73
percent of Palestinians agree with
Hamas' Charter (Article 7) calling for
the murder of Jews. The same poll
found that 66 percent of Palestinians
believe that setting up a Palestinian
state should be only the first step
in a policy aimed at creating a
single Palestinian-controlled state.
American Jewry understands this
to be the case: last year, 76 percent
of American Jews agreed with the
statement, "The goal of the Arabs is
not the return of occupied territories,
Uriel Heilman is a
staff writer for JTA.
Commentary on page 40
September 15 • 2011
39