FACT SHEET: PALESTINIAN UNILATERAL DECLARATION OF
INDEPENDENCE (UDI)
International Positions on UDI
U.S.
officials and Congress have denounced UDI. In a unanimously approved
resolution, the U.S. House of Representatives underscored that “true and
lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians can only be achieved through
direct negotiations between the parties” and urged other nations to reject the
Palestinians’ appeal.1
U.S.
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said on January 19, 2011, “We're
working to keep the focus where we think it needs to be [direct negotiations]
and that is not in New York.”2
Key
European countries, such as Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, the Czech
Republic, the Baltic states, and other eastern European nations also oppose
UDI.3
Even
several Arab and Palestinian leaders have advised President Abbas against UDI.
Nabil Elaraby, secretary-general of the Arab League, suggested President Abbas
reconsider because the PA is not in control of Gaza.4
Jordan
and some Palestinian officials, including PLO official Nabil Amr and former Palestinian
UN Observer Nasser Al-Qidwa, also object, fearing passage of UDI would harm
rather than help the Palestinian cause.5 Despite this opposition,
UDI would probably pass in the UN General Assembly, where the PA commands an
automatic voting majority with the block of Islamic and non-aligned nations.
However, the UN Security Council, which alone has the authority to accept new
UN member states, will either reject or veto the measure. If the “moral
majority” nations— liberal democracies like the EU, Canada, Australia, and others—oppose
UDI, it will lose all moral force and legitimacy despite General Assembly
approval. All responsible nations should firmly reject UDI and employ all
diplomatic means to prevent its passage. This latest unilateral effort by
Palestinian leaders is a crushing blow to hopes for peaceful coexistence.
UN endorsement of the Palestinian unilateral demand for
recognition of statehood would: Crush hopes for peace, which can only come from
direct negotiations.
Israel’s
peace treaties with its neighbors, Egypt (1979) and Jordan (1994), were
hammered out through direct negotiations. Israel made significant territorial
concessions for peace, but only after security safeguards had been addressed.
Israel has repeatedly shown its willingness to make concessions to the
Palestinians, but Israel also has rights that Palestinians must acknowledge and
address through negotiated agreements.
Establish dangerous precedents for international diplomacy.
A
UDI will undermine the principles of international diplomacy and conflict
resolution. Diplomatic processes lose their value when one party can simply
walk out on them and achieve its own ends without considering the basic needs of
the other—and gain international recognition anyway. The South American
countries set a dangerous precedent despite their hollow claims that their recognition
does not contradict their commitment to negotiations.
Violate the prevailing legal standard of statehood.
Since
1933, a state has been defined by the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and
Duties of States as possessing the following qualifications:
“a)
a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government; and d) capacity
to enter into relations with the other states.”6
The
Fatah-governed West Bank and the Hamas-controlled Palestinian entity in Gaza do
not meet these: there are two rival governments, two rival prime ministers
whose terms have expired, and no functioning legislature. The UN Charter does
not grant the United Nations the authority to establish a state. The UN only
has the power to admit established states as members.7
The
Palestinians are circumventing the rules and responsibilities for statehood and
attempting to use the authority of the UN to symbolically elevate their
international status while avoiding steps for establishing a state
legitimately.
Undermine international stability by setting a precedent
for separatist movements in Europe and elsewhere to also begin seeking UN
endorsement.
If
one separatist group can go to the UN for recognition, then others could as
well. In Europe alone, multiple groups could follow this path, such as the
Basques and Catalonians in Spain, the Flemish in Belgium, the Roma in Romania,
the Corsicans in France, and the Albanians in Macedonia.
Directly violate past PLO-Israel agreements.
After
painstaking diplomatic efforts, Israel and the PLO signed the Oslo Accords in
1993 and in 1995, both times under U.S. supervision. The Oslo Accords
specifically called for a negotiated resolution to the permanent status of the
West Bank, including the issues of borders, Jerusalem, and Palestinian
statehood. They explicitly forbid either side from taking unilateral steps that
would prejudge the final status of the disputed territory. Yet, Mahmoud Abbas,
president of the Palestinian Authority (PA) and chairman of the Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO), is now trying to take unilateral steps. Neither Israel nor
the PA has ever renounced its commitment to these agreements. If the PA now
violates them, the whole edifice of peacemaking will be undermined, including
the legitimacy of the PA that was established through the Oslo Accords.
Directly violate UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and
338.
Both
resolutions call for negotiated land-for peace agreements that will lead to
“secure and recognized boundaries.” The pre-1967 line separating Israel and the
West Bank was an armistice line delineated at the conclusion of the Arab
states’ war to destroy Israel in 1948. It was never recognized as an
international border, and the UN resolutions did not regard it as a secure
border for Israel. The PA and nations that comply with the PA unilateral declaration
of statehood on the pre-1967 lines are in defiance of the UN resolutions.
Not address the major obstacle to peace: terrorism.
Hamas,
which remains in an active state of war against Israel and dedicated to
Israel’s “obliteration,” seized control of Gaza after Israel’s withdrawal in
2005. It has thousands of rockets, which it continues to launch at Israeli
towns and farms; is smuggling in higher-grade weapons through Egypt; and is
preaching for Israel’s destruction in its mosques and media. A unilateral
declaration ignores the grave threat that Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist
groups would pose to Israelis from the West Bank, which is only a few
kilometers away from Israel’s major population centers and infrastructure.
Give official international sanction to the terrorist group
Hamas.
The
PA signed a unity pact with Hamas, which governs Gaza. This pact may collapse,
but the UN would still be sanctioning a Palestinian government that might
include Hamas, which is designated a terrorist organization by the U.S., the
EU, Canada, the UK, Japan, and Jordan. The PA did not demand that Hamas change
its political platform, which calls for the “obliteration” of Israel, the
murder of Jews, and violence.
Support the Palestinian ploy to bypass negotiations and
avoid making the concessions that are prerequisites to peace.
Palestinians
must renounce terrorism, accept the Jewish state’s right to exist within secure
boundaries, honor past PLO-Israel agreements, renounce claims to Israel,
negotiate mutually agreed-upon solutions for other outstanding issues, and
agree to an end to the conflict.
Be exploited as a stepping stone for the destruction of
Israel.
President
Abbas vowed that even if the UN passes UDI, the PA will not recognize Israel as
a Jewish state8 and will not renounce claims to Israel. The PA will
still fight for the “right of return” for millions of Palestinians to the Jewish,
not the Palestinian, state, which would destroy Israel demographically.9
The
PA continues to issue maps depicting all of Israel as “Palestine.”10
Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad endorses
this Palestinian strategy. According to him, “Recognizing the Palestinian state
is not the last goal. It is only one step forward towards liberating the whole
of Palestine.”11
Increase the potential for violence and war.
None
of the outstanding issues, such as refugees and Jerusalem, would be resolved.
Instead, the Palestinians would feel empowered to continue making maximum
demands, even by force of arms and terrorism, as Hamas is still doing. This
will not lead to the peaceful coexistence sought by Israel and moderates in the
region. A UN Security Council resolution declaring Palestinian statehood should
be vetoed, and any attempt to recognize Palestinian statehood by the UN General
Assembly should be rejected. All efforts should be directed toward getting Palestinians
back to the negotiating table, not supporting their campaign to bypass the
peace process.
Sources:
(1)
U.S. Congress, House Resolution 1765, 111th Congress, “Supporting a Negotiated
Settlement to the Israeli- Palestinian Conflict and Opposing Unilateral…,”
December, 2010 at http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=hr111-1765
(2)
Matthew Lee and Edith Lederer, “Palestinians defy US with Security Council
request,” AP Report, Jan. 21, 2011 at http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j8a
MPQcwg_Rn1QOpIW4qoxWWvGHA?docId=97e4aa8c0157 4126b4108e8cbbb26382
(3)
Ronen Medzini, “Who will endorse Palestine?” YNet News, Aug. 27, 2011 at
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-
4114432,00.html
(4)
Daniel Siryoti and Israel Hayom Staff, “Arab League: Palestinian Statehood Bid
Could Be Dangerous,” Israel Hayom, Aug. 22, 2011 at http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id
=807
(5)
L. Barkan, “Palestinian Senior Officials, Writers: It Is Doubtful Whether a Bid
to the U.N. Will Benefit the Palestinian Cause,” MEMRI Inquiry and Analysis
Series Report 716, July 26, 2011 at http://www.memri.org/report/en/print5506.htm
(6)
Montevideo Convention, at http://www.cfr.org/sovereignty/montevideo-conventionrights-
duties-states/p15897
[7]
United Nations, “About UN Member States,” at http://www.un.org/en/members/about.shtml
and
UN Charter, Article 4 at http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter4.shtml
[8]
Elior Levy, “Abbas: We Won’t Recognize Israel as Jewish State,” YNet News, Aug.
28, 2011 at http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4114446,00.html
[9]
Khaled Abu Toameh, “ ‘UN Recognition Won’t Stop PA Demand for Right of Return,’
” Jerusalem Post, Aug. 28, 2011 at http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?i
d=235789
[10]
Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik, “Official Palestinian Authority Daily
Cartoon: All of Israel Is ‘Palestine’ and There Can Be No Compromise,” Hudson-NY,
Aug. 26, 2011 at http://www.hudsonny. org/2385/palestinians-no-compromise
[11]
Reuters, “Iran Says Palestinian Statehood Only ‘First Step,’ ” Reuters, August
26, 2011 at http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/08/26/idINIndia-
58992720110826
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий