EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- Cornel West: Obama 'Is a War Criminal'
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
Popular content
Today's Top News
UN Recognition of Palestinians Still Far Off
UNITED NATIONS - Despite massive support from the international community, the Palestinian quest for recognition as an independent and sovereign nation is unlikely to materialise soon, say political observers and diplomats here.
The Israeli barrier will eventually be more than 700km in length. Recent diplomatic efforts by the Palestinians won the support of as many as 140 countries out of 192 General Assembly members. But, that is not enough to establish statehood because U.N. rules require the backing of the powerful 15-member Security Council as well. (Photograph: Reuters) "That is not going to happen," an African diplomat who has spent more than a decade at the U.N. as an ambassador told IPS. "Yes, the Palestinians have huge support in the General Assembly, but for the recognition as a new member state they need approval from the Security Council."
Recent diplomatic efforts by the Palestinians won the support of as many as 140 countries out of 192 General Assembly members. But, that is not enough to establish statehood because U.N. rules require the backing of the powerful 15-member Security Council as well.
"More than 90 percent of the member states are in support of the proposal to adopt a resolution in September that would call for Palestinian statehood," a senior U.N. official who has worked for the world body for more than two decades, told IPS.
Membership to the organisation can only be granted by the General Assembly, on the recommendation of the Security Council. "Recognition of a new state or government is an act only states and governments may grant or withhold," according to a spokesperson for the Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. "It generally implies readiness to assume diplomatic relations."
Recent statements from Washington on the Israeli-Palestine conflict suggest it is highly unlikely that the U.S., a staunch ally of Israel, would endorse a resolution on the establishment of the Palestinian state. The U.S. is one of the five veto-wielding members on the Security Council.
During her speech at the Security Council meeting Thursday, Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the U.N., made it clear that U.S. support for Israel would remain unconditional, and implicitly suggested that there would be no support for any U.N.-based initiative to recognise a Palestinian state.
"We are deeply concerned by the escalation of rocket and mortar fire from Gaza into southern Israel," Rice said. "We are particularly disturbed by reports indicating the increased use of advanced weaponry, including rockets, in attacks against Israeli civilians."
After reading a few words in support of a two-state solution and expressing concerns about the humanitarian situation in Gaza, Rice spent much of her speech defending Israel's position - with harsh criticism of an alleged Iranian supply of weapons to the Palestinians.
Rice also criticised non-governmental organisations' initiatives to supply humanitarian goods to Palestinians in Gaza, and said that there was "no justification" for them to do so - an argument that has been raised by the Israeli establishment and its allies in the U.S.
While addressing the Security Council meeting, Meron Reuben, the Israeli envoy to the U.N., reiterated Israel's concern about rocket attacks by Palestinian militants and suggested that the recognition of Palestine as an independent state would not happen without the consent of Israel.
"It cannot be imposed from the outside," Reuben told the Security Council, hinting at diplomatic efforts to pass a General Assembly resolution endorsing the state of Palestine as new member of the U.N.
He suggested that in order to resolve the conflict, Israel would like to have "direct talks" with the Palestinians. "We need solution, not resolution," he told the Council, implying that any resolution in support of the recognition of an independent Palestinian state would not be acceptable.
As of March this year, more than 100 states had recognised the state of Palestine. According to a U.N. Security Council report issued Apr. 19, several European countries, including most recently Britain, have upgraded Palestinian diplomatic status.
While briefing the Council Thursday on the situation in the Middle East, Lynn Pascoe, the U.N. chief for political affairs, said he recognised the Palestinians' achievements of institution-building and stressed that bold and decisive steps were needed to resolve the decades-old conflict.
Pascoe has been severely criticised by the Israel lobby in the U.S. for his independent judgments and remarks about the Israeli- Palestinian conflict. In his briefing, he noted that both the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) had reported "strong progress in institution-building" in Palestine.
In his view, the Palestinian Authority (PA) is "above the threshold for a functioning state", but, at the same time, he says that the international community must be aware that "admirable achievements" by the PA are limited to certain parts of the occupied Palestine territory, and do not apply to all areas.
Pascoe said the international community "is rightly concerned" at the protracted peace process, and said that the resumption of Israeli- Palestinian peace negotiations was "urgent".
U.N. spokesperson Farhan Haq told IPS that the secretary-general was fully aware of what was happening in the region and that the Quartet meeting on the peace process was likely to take place soon. The Quartet includes the U.S., U.N., European Union and Russia.
In his speech, Palestinian envoy Riyad Mansour urged the Security Council members to rein in Israel for its aggressive actions against the Palestinians, and said that the body must "apply to Israel the same legal and moral yardstick applied to all other issues on the global agenda".
Over the past several decades, both the U.N. Security Council and General Assembly have passed numerous resolutions that Israel continues to defy - mainly due to strong backing from the U.S.
"The council cannot surrender in the face of continued Israeli defiance," said Mansour. "It must be unwavering in calls for respect of law and its own resolutions, and act with conviction to compel Israel, the occupying power, to cease its obstruction of peace and stability in our region."
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

8 Comments so far
Show AllYet another reason to expel the United States from the United Nations.
Whose payroll is the unnamed African diplomat on? Since when did the Security Council have a say in who is accepted as a nation by the General Assembly? The US had to twist a number of arms to get the General Assembly to recognize Israel's statehood, which had absolutely nothing to do with the Security Council. It would require that the General Assembly cede its rights to the Security Council which has not happened.
Article XIV rule 136:
"If the Security Council recommends the applicant State for membership, the General Assembly shall consider whether the applicant is a peace-loving State and is able and willing to carry out the obligations contained in the Charter and shall decide, by a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting, upon its application for membership."
Rule 137:
"If the Security Council does not recommend the applicant State for membership or postpones the consideration of the application, the General Assembly may, after full consideration of the special report of the Security Council, send the application back to the Council, together with a full record of the discussion in the Assembly, for further consideration and recommendation or report."
Looks like the US can block a Palestinian application to join as a state.
Thanks for the reply.
The process needs to carried through completely. If the US does indeed block
the application for membership by Palestine by use of its veto , it seems that
such resolution does not die (as is usually the case, eg veto of US on
February 18, all other Council members voting to condemn the State of
Israel with the US vetoing).
Instead, the Council should "send the application
back to the General Assembly, back to the General Assembly for further
consideration and report..." (Article XIV, Rule 137 as cited above.)
The full discussion would have to be made and shared with the General
Assembly.
The US can try to block a Palestinian application to join as a state but, instead
of killing the proposal by veto as on other occasions, such an action would
have to be reported completely back in the General Assembly.
email: peterloeb@yahoo.com
Evidently the U.S. decides everything at the UN. It cancels meetings of the
"Quartet" if it (or Israel) so choose. It sets conditions. The U.S. refers to
"peace negotiations" which the US (and Israel) completely control to the extent
that they might perchance exist. The plain truth is: There is, at this time, no
"peace process" at all. Israel (and the U.S) do not want any State of Palestine
which does not obey the U.S. Note that many other states have joined the
UN without there being a so-called "peace process" controlled by the enemies.
Are there laws ---on paper--- and/or precedents (resolutions) for the position
that the UN Security Council totally controls membership? If so what are they,
where are they?
email:peterloeb@yahoo.com
I have commented in greater detail as a "comment/blog" response to
"Israel's 'Lobbification of Congress' ", by Professor Lawrence Davidson which
appears on CONSORTIUMNEWS.COM, 4/17/2011.
My comment/blog is titled:
SHEDULING DIFFICULTIES. posted April 18 in consortiumnews.com.
email:peterloeb@yahoo.com