Thread: Palestinians apply to UN for statehood in July

If Bibi can't come up with some sort of program that will convince members of the General Assembly that the Washington-Jerusalem axis is at last serious about settling the Palestinian problem, there will be a bit of a flap at the UN this fall. The motion to accept the PA as a sovereign member state will surely pass unless the US vetoes it in the Security Council. This would be awkward for the US and Obama clearly doesn't want to have to do it. Will Bibi call his bluff?

It sucks when you initiate, and lose, multiple wars doesn't it? It also sucks when you get treated poorly for being a terrorist run nation.

Originally Posted by Voland

After israeli PM Netanyahu essentially saying "no" to negotiations during his visit to the US ( No to sharing Jerusalem, NO to removal of settlements, NO to the 1967 borders and a couple of other "no"s ) the Palestinian Authority (PA) will formally apply to be recognized as a state by the UN in July, according to Haaretz. While the UN General Assembly IS authorized to formally recognize new member states, it can only do so after recieving a recommendation from the Security Council, where also the Palestinians expect a US veto against palestinian statehood. The majority in the General Assembly will easily be met though, since NO other country in the world supports Israels position on the West Bank, the settlements etc. What Mahmoud Abbas and PM Salam Fayyad seem to plan is to expose the total isolation of the US and Israel on the issue, a wave of new countries ( including the EU) recognizing Palestine and Israel and the US simply having to accept the factual existence of their state by time :

Palestinians plan to approach UN Security Council about statehood in July - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

I'm hoping that the UN does recognize Palestinian statehood. President Obama will have a tough choice to make, I hope he is strong enough to make it, but obviously, he would have a huge price to pay, no matter what he does!

Originally Posted by Sadanie

I'm hoping that the UN does recognize Palestinian statehood. President Obama will have a tough choice to make, I hope he is strong enough to make it, but obviously, he would have a huge price to pay, no matter what he does!

There's a downside, though.

Right now, when a random Hamas member gets bored and lobs a rocket into Israel, it's just another day in the Middle East.

Post statehood, does that become an act of war? Will the UN act against the new Palestinian state if that happens?

Matt

Originally Posted by MattInFla

There's a downside, though.

Right now, when a random Hamas member gets bored and lobs a rocket into Israel, it's just another day in the Middle East.

Post statehood, does that become an act of war? Will the UN act against the new Palestinian state if that happens?

Matt

That would be fair enough!
But, by giving Palestinians statehood, it would take away a big motivation to launch rockets on Israel.

Now, how about considering the reverse: If palestinians are granted statehood, would new settlements and attacks on Gaza be considered an act of war by Israel, and would the UN (and the US) denounce it?

It does go both way!

Originally Posted by MattInFla

There's a downside, though.

Right now, when a random Hamas member gets bored and lobs a rocket into Israel, it's just another day in the Middle East.

Post statehood, does that become an act of war? Will the UN act against the new Palestinian state if that happens?

Matt

I'm thinking Israeli invasion of Palestine in reaction to unprovoked attack and then UN peace keepers being murdered by Islamic terrorists within 24 months of recognition of Palestinian statehood.

Originally Posted by Sadanie

That would be fair enough!
But, by giving Palestinians statehood, it would take away a big motivation to launch rockets on Israel.

Pre-statehood:
Palestine is a shithole. They hate Israel. They have rockets. Boom.

Post-statehood:
Palestine is a shithole. That hate Israel. That have more rockets. ???

I suspect the result won't change. I could be wrong, and that would be great, but the violence is so ingrained over there that I don't see it going away just because the UN holds a vote.

Originally Posted by Sadanie

Now, how about considering the reverse: If palestinians are granted statehood, would new settlements and attacks on Gaza be considered an act of war by Israel, and would the UN (and the US) denounce it?

It does go both way!

It absolutely does. I suspect the Israelis have better discipline and are likely to hold out for a Palestinian rocket attack (which is pretty much a daily occurrence) and then over-react based on that "justification".

Matt

Originally Posted by Sadanie

That would be fair enough!
But, by giving Palestinians statehood, it would take away a big motivation to launch rockets on Israel.

Except of course for the desire to destroy the state of Israel.

If palestinians are granted statehood, would new settlements and attacks on Gaza be considered an act of war by Israel, and would the UN (and the US) denounce it?

It would certainly be foolish and seemingly illegal. It may be an act of war if sponsored by the state of Israel. So would the UN forces be there to eject or protect settlers?

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

Except of course for the desire to destroy the state of Israel.




It would certainly be foolish and seemingly illegal. It may be an act of war if sponsored by the state of Israel. So would the UN forces be there to eject or protect settlers?

I would hope (and, I know, you think "hope" is a silly concept!) that the "desire to destroy the state of Israel" would fade away, to be replaced by a (uneasy maybe) co-habitation across internationally recognized borders.


And, I would think that if Israel insisted in putting down new settlements in the State of Palestine, the UN would take the side of Palestine and look at these settlements as an invasion of the Palestinians sovereign State.

To reach that point, I guess the Israeli settlers that are currently in the Palestinians territory should be given a choice to become citizens of Palestine and remain in their homes in Palestine, or to be repatriate to Israel soil.

Originally Posted by Sadanie

That would be fair enough!
But, by giving Palestinians statehood, it would take away a big motivation to launch rockets on Israel.

The motivation to launch rockets into Israel is to destroy Israel.

That will not change with a recognized Palestinian state.

What will change is Arabs will then feel compelled to engage in direct military alliances with the Palestinians, up to and including the stationing of armies on the territories, essentially achieving through useful idiots in the Western diplomatic corps what the Arabs could not achieve on the battlefield.

That is the sole purpose of Jordan and Egypt abandoning it's citizens, and declaring them to be Palestinians.

Originally Posted by MattInFla

Pre-statehood:
Palestine is a shithole. They hate Israel. They have rockets. Boom.

Post-statehood:
Palestine is a shithole. That hate Israel. That have more rockets. ???

I suspect the result won't change. I could be wrong, and that would be great, but the violence is so ingrained over there that I don't see it going away just because the UN holds a vote.



It absolutely does. I suspect the Israelis have better discipline and are likely to hold out for a Palestinian rocket attack (which is pretty much a daily occurrence) and then over-react based on that "justification".

Matt

Why us "'s when saying the word justification? You don't think daily rocket attacks is a justification? How about a democratically elected terrorist government as a neighbor that carries out these attacks? If nothing Israel has been subjected to gives them justification Pearl Harbor or 9/11 doesn't count either.

Originally Posted by Sadanie

I would hope (and, I know, you think "hope" is a silly concept!) that the "desire to destroy the state of Israel" would fade away, to be replaced by a (uneasy maybe) co-habitation across internationally recognized borders.


And, I would think that if Israel insisted in putting down new settlements in the State of Palestine, the UN would take the side of Palestine and look at these settlements as an invasion of the Palestinians sovereign State.

To reach that point, I guess the Israeli settlers that are currently in the Palestinians territory should be given a choice to become citizens of Palestine and remain in their homes in Palestine, or to be repatriate to Israel soil.

Palestine is not a state and therefore has no territory.

It seems the more fair and democratic way would be to ask the residents of disputed border areas which nation they would like to belong to. Makes more sense that forced displacement (which is, IIRC, prohibited by the UN charter).

Matt

Originally Posted by MattInFla

Palestine is not a state and therefore has no territory.

It seems the more fair and democratic way would be to ask the residents of disputed border areas which nation they would like to belong to. Makes more sense that forced displacement (which is, IIRC, prohibited by the UN charter).

Matt

Once again, i didn't say that Palestine is a state at this time. . .isn't that what this thread is about?

whether you want to call "territory" or "land," the fact is that Israel has been encrouching for years on Gaza and the left bank, far beyond the "territory" that was alloted to them after WWII.

And if you read my post for comprehension, rather than for criticism, you would have noticed that I didn't say that the settlers should be DISPLACED by FORCE, but should be offer the choice to remain there, and take the new citizenship in Palestine (once it is a State), or to repatriate to Israel territory.