|
In the current political environment, the Middle East has become a hotspot once again and it seems the Israel-Palestine conflict is still a burning issue that deserves the international community’s urgent attention.
According to a 2007 poll, the majority of Israelis and Palestinians opted for an independent State of Palestine (SOP) alongside the Israeli state as an ultimate solution to the conflict. But a number of significant obstacles cast dark shadows over what now is the popular demand.
The Israel-Palestine conflict is not as simple as it appears. It is not just between the two warring parties and the involvement of regional and global power further contributes to the complexity of the issue. It is also not just Israel and Palestine clinging to rhetoric, but also the world powers’ lust to exploit the issue for leveraging their meddling in the Middle Eastern affairs.
Declaring the SOP, as it is expected in the United Nation’s General Assembly meeting in September, would have different ramifications than 1948 when the state of Israel was carved out in the heart of the Middle East. The proposed state would envelope the territory of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza. Since then consistent efforts were launched by the Arab world that also took other countries in its fold. However, it appears that most of the frustrated Arab attempts further complicated the issue and dampened the hopes for an amicable resolution.
The trouble began when Arabs declared a war on Israel in 1973 which provoked Israel putting the status of Palestine as an independent state in jeopardy. If Arabs are fed up with Israel, so does the Jewish state as well as the main external actors involved in the Palestinian saga, particularly the Quartet comprising the United Nations which is expected to table and pass the resolution in favor of a sovereign Palestinian state this month; the European Union with its cautious rather empty approach towards the issue; a competing Russia, and the United States with its lethally decisive veto power in the UN Security Council.
Israel seems to have been caught in a diplomatic bind over the issue of the State of Palestine, as it narrows the choices and jeopardize its control over the occupied territory it had been enjoying for over 40 years and which it never wants to give up. To rescue itself from this situation, Israel may throw a bargain and agree to give up some of the occupied territories outside its mushrooming settlements of tens of thousands of Jews to SOP under a regional mediatory body. In fact, Israel did exhibit flexibility in considering withdrawal from some settlements on the West Bank but would want to hold on to the larger portions, particularly on the East, which is unacceptable to the Palestinians.
Another obstacle to the establishment of the SOP is the internal dimension, which deals with the division between the West Bank where the Palestinian Authority prevails and Gaza that is under the influence of Hamas, whereas the Palestinians are trying for a Hamas-Al Fatah deal!
However, the recommendations in this regard would be to sweep aside the Palestinian heavy weights as they have put their foot down demanding an end to Israeli settlements while flagging the ultimate goal of the UN membership. This inflexibility has been used by the Palestinians as a pressure tactic to stop the expanding Jewish settlements on their claimed territory.
The possibility of tabling of the SOP resolution in the forthcoming UNGA has sparked a diplomatic tsunami. Addressing a news conference in Tel Aviv earlier in March, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak feared that sticking to rhetoric would lead to further isolation of Israel. Israel’s Godfather, the U.S. has its hands full in the mess it has created around the world and is still bemused amid an influential Jewish lobby in Washington that has so far been masterminding the lone superpower’s behavior on the Palestinian issue.
The hopes of the Palestinian Authority’s Prime Minister Salam Fayyad are pinned on the September 2009 statement of U.S. President Barak Obama that talks about an independent SOP in two years. Fayyad’s confidence in this regard is generated by Obama promising that the framework for an independent Palestinian state would be declared in a year.
But the shattered Israeli-Palestinian talks earlier this year invited external pressure. The suggestion put forward by the UK, France and Germany and the members of the Quartet, is in contrast to the aspirations of Israel, which rejects their idea of keeping the negotiations on the 1967 lines. It calls for an equal and amicable distribution of land, which of course would never happen. Earlier, the U.S. administration had also cited the 1967 lines as the main agenda to initiate talks.
As one of the major bottlenecks to the resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict, Israel does not want the talks to be based on the 1967 lines, which had been a source of disagreement around the world and not just for the Palestinians alone. On the other hand, Palestinians see Israeli settlements as a statement of Israel’s negation of the SOP. Israel has countered with the plea that the Palestinians had refused to accept Israel as an independent Jewish state. Hence it puts the entire process of negotiations in the doldrums.
On the brighter side, a diplomatic memorandum speculated in April that the UNGA might approve a resolution favoring the SOP for the September meeting and even without an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement.
It is expected that over 100 sovereign members of the UN would say ‘Yes’ to an independent Palestinian state. If that happens, both the Palestinians and the Israelis have to reconsider their commitments, attitudes and actions or reactions towards each other – certainly a hard nut to crack.
On the darker side, the situation reflects pessimism, particularly under the prevailing socio-political turmoil in the Middle East. Israel perceives an independent Palestinian state as a continuing challenge and threat to its existence. Israel is likely to obtain further security guarantees that would oppose the sovereignty of the SOP.
Israel which has intensified lobbying in Europe, mainly anchors its hopes on an all-time and all out support of the U.S. veto weapon. Interestingly, the U.S. has no veto power in the UNGA for blocking such resolutions. But, to pass such resolutions would first require a recommendation from the UN Security Council where the U.S. enjoys veto power - the main obstacle in resolving the Palestinian issue.
In the backdrop of feeble moves by the Quartet before a decisive veto power of one of its members, the U.S. and half-hearted approach of the Arab world, hopes can only be revived for declaring a SOP, if some new initiatives are taken. The struggle for meddling in the affairs of oil rich Middle Eastern countries, confining the selfish interest of individual Arab states, having both Israel and Palestine sticking to rhetoric, the likelihood of the U.S. employing its veto muscle seems to have stalemated the situation once again. 
Syed Moazzam Hashmi is a political and security analyst, senior journalist and former political affairs advisor to the U.S. Consulate General in Karachi.
|
Show/hide comments
Show/hide comment form
