America's Hazardous Game at the U.N.
Published in Al Quds
(Palestine) on 5 October 2011
by John Witbak (link to original)
(Palestine) on 5 October 2011
by John Witbak (link to original)
Translated from
by Mouhsine Abdellaoui.
Edited by Derek Ha
.
The number of countries that diplomatically recognize the State of Palestine has now reached 128, whereas only 65 countries remain standing on the wrong side of history and humanity.
If one ignores the Caribbean and small Pacific states, most of the countries not recognizing Palestine are Western — including the colonial countries which were founded on the ethnic cleansing of indigenous peoples — and the eight European countries with colonial histories.
It seems that the U.S. strategy to thwart Palestine’s application for membership in the U.N. is merely an attempt to deprive Palestine of the nine approving votes at the Security Council, and that is achieved through persuading all five of the European countries — Bosnia (which recognized Palestine), France, Germany, Portugal and Britain — and Colombia (the sole country in South American that has not recognized Palestine) to refrain from voting. This will result in only eight consenting votes. Hence, the U.S. will not need to use its veto.
Even if we all know that the Security Council would unanimously agree on Palestine's membership, if the U.S. announced its approval, the evident goal behind the American strategy is (in the absence of using the veto) to prevent the appearance of their hand in this result; and therefore no one, especially in the Arab and Muslim worlds, will be angry at the U.S. for thwarting Palestine’s application for membership. Mahmoud Abbas and his compatriots will then creep back into the cage from which they recently, unexpectedly and dramatically emerged, and return politely and submissively to dancing to the Israeli-U.S. rhythm, without thinking.
This is not simply a naive strategy, but a risky one — not in the least because the Palestinian Authority leadership, which knows the meaning of enlightenment, has regained self-esteem and human dignity.
The U.S. veto will be neither a big deal nor a bad thing. It will confirm, without a doubt, the sad and degrading truth known to people around the world: The U.S. is pro-Israel and obeys its orders with respect. In doing so, the U.S. veto will end the country's eligibility for an important role in any real peace process in the Middle East, and return to the false role they played in order to benefit Israel during the past 20 years. Thus, an opportunity for peace will be provided.
In effect, having the status of an observer state would provide Palestine the same benefits granted to member states, the most important being access to the International Criminal Court, where it is possible to prosecute Israelis for war crimes, building settlements and crimes against humanity. Besides, the U.S. veto in the Security Council and the raising of Palestine to the level of observer state by the General Assembly might perhaps be the most constructive step for Palestine — even more so than full membership in the U.N., which will only happen with U.S. compliance and dominance in any peace process.
One might perhaps realistically hope that the new international forces being generated in the U.N. consisting of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — all of which are presently members in the UN Security Council and have recognized Palestine — will vote in favor of Palestinian membership. These forces, along with the European Union, can join together to get the international community behind real and active efforts to achieve peace with a measure of justice.
On the other hand, if the U.S. strategy to deter the Europeans’ unanimous vote proves successful, it will have disastrous consequences. While Arabs and Muslims have learned to expect the worst from the U.S., they have retained, at least so far, some hope that Europe is not their enemy. If the application for Palestine’s membership is aborted by a Western bloc voting no, the world will face a fundamentalist clash under the motto of "the West against the rest." It will bring memories of the worst eras of imperialism and confirm the belief — currently an effectively widespread one in the Arab and Muslim worlds — that the Judeo-Christian world is in a state of war with the Muslim world.
Of course, one person is capable of preventing the materialization of this scenario. So, what is more important for the president of the multi-ethnic U.S.? The possibility of a few more supporters for himself and the funds to run against his Republican rivals more effectively, or preventing a long-term clash of civilizations, cultures, races and religions and promoting progress toward a more peaceful and harmonious world?
This is what the world will know in the coming weeks.
If one ignores the Caribbean and small Pacific states, most of the countries not recognizing Palestine are Western — including the colonial countries which were founded on the ethnic cleansing of indigenous peoples — and the eight European countries with colonial histories.
It seems that the U.S. strategy to thwart Palestine’s application for membership in the U.N. is merely an attempt to deprive Palestine of the nine approving votes at the Security Council, and that is achieved through persuading all five of the European countries — Bosnia (which recognized Palestine), France, Germany, Portugal and Britain — and Colombia (the sole country in South American that has not recognized Palestine) to refrain from voting. This will result in only eight consenting votes. Hence, the U.S. will not need to use its veto.
Even if we all know that the Security Council would unanimously agree on Palestine's membership, if the U.S. announced its approval, the evident goal behind the American strategy is (in the absence of using the veto) to prevent the appearance of their hand in this result; and therefore no one, especially in the Arab and Muslim worlds, will be angry at the U.S. for thwarting Palestine’s application for membership. Mahmoud Abbas and his compatriots will then creep back into the cage from which they recently, unexpectedly and dramatically emerged, and return politely and submissively to dancing to the Israeli-U.S. rhythm, without thinking.
This is not simply a naive strategy, but a risky one — not in the least because the Palestinian Authority leadership, which knows the meaning of enlightenment, has regained self-esteem and human dignity.
The U.S. veto will be neither a big deal nor a bad thing. It will confirm, without a doubt, the sad and degrading truth known to people around the world: The U.S. is pro-Israel and obeys its orders with respect. In doing so, the U.S. veto will end the country's eligibility for an important role in any real peace process in the Middle East, and return to the false role they played in order to benefit Israel during the past 20 years. Thus, an opportunity for peace will be provided.
In effect, having the status of an observer state would provide Palestine the same benefits granted to member states, the most important being access to the International Criminal Court, where it is possible to prosecute Israelis for war crimes, building settlements and crimes against humanity. Besides, the U.S. veto in the Security Council and the raising of Palestine to the level of observer state by the General Assembly might perhaps be the most constructive step for Palestine — even more so than full membership in the U.N., which will only happen with U.S. compliance and dominance in any peace process.
One might perhaps realistically hope that the new international forces being generated in the U.N. consisting of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — all of which are presently members in the UN Security Council and have recognized Palestine — will vote in favor of Palestinian membership. These forces, along with the European Union, can join together to get the international community behind real and active efforts to achieve peace with a measure of justice.
On the other hand, if the U.S. strategy to deter the Europeans’ unanimous vote proves successful, it will have disastrous consequences. While Arabs and Muslims have learned to expect the worst from the U.S., they have retained, at least so far, some hope that Europe is not their enemy. If the application for Palestine’s membership is aborted by a Western bloc voting no, the world will face a fundamentalist clash under the motto of "the West against the rest." It will bring memories of the worst eras of imperialism and confirm the belief — currently an effectively widespread one in the Arab and Muslim worlds — that the Judeo-Christian world is in a state of war with the Muslim world.
Of course, one person is capable of preventing the materialization of this scenario. So, what is more important for the president of the multi-ethnic U.S.? The possibility of a few more supporters for himself and the funds to run against his Republican rivals more effectively, or preventing a long-term clash of civilizations, cultures, races and religions and promoting progress toward a more peaceful and harmonious world?
This is what the world will know in the coming weeks.