Given the soon to be fall of Moammar Qaddafi and the the brutal suppression of the populace by Syrian Dictator Bashar Al-Assad, there has been less of a focus internationally on the possible upcoming vote on recognition of a Palestinian State yet all the same it seems that this vote will go ahead as planned.
Unfortunately, the Palestinian polity still remains as fractured as ever with the Unity talks obviously in tatters, and the Israeli government moving full speed ahead on settling and creating their own version of future state(s). When this occurs will the Palestinian and Israeli leadership be ready for what is ahead? I think that is the question that many right now should be asking.
Here are just some of the issues this vote faces:
At Maan News there is a headline that reads: UN Bid 'Endangers Palestinian Rights'. The Gist of the article is that recognition of the Palestinian State would basically undo the 1975 recognition of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the sole representative of the Palestinian People as it creates a legal State of Palestine to take on that role. All fine and good, except for the fact that over half the Palestinian People live in the diaspora.
The legal brief of Guy Goodwin-Gill a professor of International Law at Oxford University cites issues involved with with as wide-ranging.
The first and most alarming to the Palestinian Polity is the loss of representation for Palestinian Refugees at the U.N., a loss that would significantly affect the Palestinian claim for "Right of Return"
As Karma Nabulsi former PLO Representative and Professor at Oxford University states:
Without question, no Palestinian will accept losing such core rights for such a limited diplomatic initiative in September," she says. "First, we will not have liberated territory upon which to establish a State. But in losing the PLO as the sole legitimate representative at the UN, our people immediately lose our claims as refugees to be part of our official representation, recognized by the world.
Nabulsi goes on to comment that now that this "red-line" has been identified, what are issues that need to be fixed. The Palestinian Authority (P.A) which is spearheading this plan, cannot assume all of the rights of the PLO as it was created as a short-term administrative body. Real issues of Representation still lies with the PLO. According to Prof. Nabulsi,
"Neither the Palestinian Authority nor the PLO can alter the role and structure of the PLO without the agreement of the entire Palestinian people. In any case, the PLO and the Palestinian people were not aware that by losing the PLO as representative at the UN, it would create such legal dangers. Now they are."
She concluded: "Obviously, we need clarity from the PLO on this critical issue, and it is important that the Palestinian public everywhere, especially the refugees in the [Diaspora], are given concrete reassurances that representation of their core rights -- on both representation and right of return -- will remain untouched in September."
But given the fractured state of affairs in the Palestinian polity, how can an agreement like this take place? Who would be administrating polling over something like this? The Palestinian Polity cannot agree on unity and now it is even more fractured by sectarian concerns. In fact, elections scheduled for 10/22/11 are being pushed back on request from Hamas (a move being slammed by some of the smaller factions of the Polity as "undemocratic"). However, currently the P.A. and Hamas between them represent a large majority of the Palestinian Polity in the West Bank and Gaza. Of course, this is problematic in it's own right as neither of these groups are "progressive" by any standards.
Now, no one thinks that just because of a United Nations General Assembly vote a state will pop into being. Not only is the Palestinian polity incapable of handling this or prepared for it (though they overwhelmingly support it), but, the Israelis have absolutely no inclination to give up any territory at the current time. And certainly they will not be giving up East Jerusalem short of a complete and total Peace agreement, (and even then they would not give up all of it). But the symbolism of having a recognized State is important.
One other unintended thing that this accomplishes is to cement the The Two State Solution. By setting borders and creating boundries the U.N. de facto creates this solution. It allows Israel to point to a Palestinian State as a place to take in refugees just as Israel did with Displaced Persons (D.P.'s) following the Holocaust or due to the ethnic cleansing of Jews in Arab countries after the Israeli victory in the War of Independence.
In any case since it recognizes the State of Israel and the State of Palestine it officially wipes out the One State Solution that some here advocate. Moreover, it affects the refugee clause in UN Res. 194 which states that refugees be allowed to Return to their homes (from the 1948 war) at the earliest "practicable time". Well, for the State of Israel there is no "practicable time" for this, it would mean totally changing Israeli society and fundamentally altering the nature of the State (not to mention it's infrastructure). YET, with a Palestinian Homeland, it would be much more "practiciable" for the refugees to be settled there. However that is a moot point since neither side respects or will respect most of UN Res. 194 in any case.
The overriding issue is that as September approaches there are still far more questions than answers and far more confusion than clarity. Creating a State is a hard process and State building is often not very pretty. Still fundamental questions like; what shape will the Government take? Who will negotiate on behalf of the State on the World Arena? Will the State be viable economicall? And many other questions remain.
As I mentioned before, they would also have to deal with the Israelis and their military. The Israelis have been quite clear about what they will and won't do. Given that, and given that they sit on that territory with the their military, What are people going to do to enforce this. Mass protests?... Great but over 70% of the Israeli Populace wont care about these and in fact will stand against a small minority who insist on turning over everything gained in the Six Day War.
Where do I as the author of this article stand... I am agnostic. I think a Palestinian State is absolutely necessary to Peace in the Middle East. Moreover, I think it is important from a human standpoint. People deserve a legitimate homeland and right to self-determination be they Jewish or Palestinian. At the same time I think that the confusion in the Palestinian Polity would create an unstable situation at best. It would be an understatement to say that this action makes me very wary regarding the plausability of this movement.
Does it matter to you, the reader? Please lets discuss.