Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

US Veto Could Derail Palestine as New U.N. Member State

The United States, in the face of global opposition, looks likely to veto a possible UN resolution recognizing Palestine as an independent country.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Inter Press Service

If the General Assembly is called upon to recognise Palestine as a new sovereign nation state, the resolution is expected to garner the required two-thirds majority among the 192 members in the world body, come September.

But a single veto in the 15-member Security Council – most likely by the United States – will derail Palestine's membership in the United Nations, even if the Palestinians are able to muster the required nine votes in the Council.

The administration of President Barack Obama has not only hinted about a possible veto but is also lobbying European countries, urging them not to vote for the resolution when it comes up before the General Assembly in September.

Medea Benjamin, a political activist and co-founder of the women's anti-war group Code Pink, told IPS, "Given that the position of the Obama administration is that there should be a sovereign Palestinian state, it makes no sense to try to block a resolution on statehood, if it comes up at the United Nations this fall."

She said it will show the absurd reality that U.S. policy not only runs counter to the sentiment of the majority of the world, but also runs counter to its own policy.

"We saw this same phenomena when the U.S. vetoed the U.N. resolution condemning Israel for the continued building of settlements – a veto that ran counter to the stated U.S. policy calling on Israel to stop building settlements," she pointed out.

The Obama administration should not lobby the Europeans to vote against this resolution, she said. On the contrary, the U.S. should support it, said Benjamin, a leader of an international peace movement and co-founder of the San Francisco-based Global Exchange which advocates fair trade.

In an op-ed piece in the New York Times last month, Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian National Authority, said: "We will request international recognition of the State of Palestine on the 1967 border and that our state be admitted as a full member of the United Nations."

As of now, France and Britain, two veto-wielding permanent members of the Security Council, have hinted they will vote for the resolution.

China and Russia, the other two permanent members, are also expected to exercise a positive vote.

Mouin Rabbani, contributing editor to the Washington-based Middle East Report, told IPS while there is as yet no clear indication that European states have thrown their support behind the Palestinian initiative to seek U.N. recognition for Palestinian statehood in September, a serious discussion about this has started, and there have been growing signs that key EU states, such as France, might endorse it.

"This would constitute a body blow to continued U.S. hegemony of conflict management, and Washington appears determined to thwart, if not the Palestinian initiative, then at least the support for it of influential allies, particularly Europe," he said.

Obama's recent comments on the Middle East were therefore addressed not so much to the parties themselves as to Europe, noted Rabbani.

Obama's statement that the United States now endorses the 1967 boundaries as a basis for a negotiated resolution of the conflict – albeit with a slew of qualifications that make this an essentially meaningless statement – is intended to persuade Europe that Washington retains the qualifications to remain the sole proprietor of this dossier, he said.

"Will it work? Obama did no more than issue a statement that he thereafter almost instantaneously emptied of substance," he said.

More importantly, argued Rabbani, "Obama did not provide any details about either how – or even if – Washington intends to realise this objective, nor on how the U.S. intends to address reality on the ground in the absence of concrete American movement towards this objective.

"So the Europeans – hardly morons and self-interested actors to their very marrow – are unlikely to be impressed," he added.

Samir Sanbar, a former U.N. assistant secretary-general who headed the Department of Public Information, told IPS that most likely a resolution will get a majority in the General Assembly regardless of U.S. or European vote.

The real question will be the extent of that majority, he added.

For example, a two-thirds majority would make the difference, and if handled strategically by the Palestinian representatives, could outweigh a possible veto by the United States, Britain or France.

"Of course, a crucial key is the position of the Security Council that recommends new members to the General Assembly. Timing the submission and approach in presentation are crucial," said Sanbar, who has served under five different U.N. secretaries-general during his longstanding career at the world body.

Rabbani told IPS that Obama's failure – or rather refusal – to compel Israel to comply with a measure as benign as a partial and temporary suspension of further settlement expansion in order to ensure the continuation of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, and thus the breakdown of diplomacy, appears to have had a big impact on Europe, not least Washington's closest allies like London and Berlin.

"Europeans increasingly feel they are spending billions of Euros not to solve this festering sore on their doorstep, but rather to sustain the conflict by financing an occupation that Washington doesn't have the will to terminate," he said.

The failure of the Fayyad Plan, proposed by Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad for the creation of a de facto Palestinian state within two years, particularly in the context of the Arab Spring, was for many the last straw.

That Abbas, the Palestinian leader for whom negotiations has been an article of faith, now appears to be exploring alternatives such as Palestinian reconciliation and U.N. recognition on account of Obama's steadfast refusal to help him sell yet more negotiations as a credible path was seen in Europe as a further wake-up call, said Rabbani.

European states are not going to launch a Middle East initiative independent of Washington. At the end of the day, resolving the Arab- Israeli conflict is for them not worth the conflict with Washington this would entail, given more important interests they would not want to jeopardise, he declared.

Sanbar said that some who are nervous may even be "seeking links with Israel" as a way of gaining clearer U.S. support. "And how credible is the Palestinian Authority with its own people?"

A crucial element is their unified presentation through an updated inclusive free national framework, said Sanbar.

Rabbani said that slowly but surely, the region is transcending the priorities and constraints imposed upon it by U.S. policy, and this is no less true of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Mere talk of seeking U.N. recognition – whatever one may think of it – demonstrates quite clearly that even dependent clients like the PLO are moving on, and no longer basing their every little move on whether or not it pleases the occupant of the White House, he said.

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Jon Lerner is a conservative political strategist and top adviser to US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley. He was a key figure in the “Never Trump” Campaign, which appears to have led to his being ousted as Vice President Mike Pence’s national security adviser.


Pamela Geller is a controversial anti-Islam activist who has founded several “hate groups” and likes to repeat debunked myths, including about the alleged existence of “no-go” Muslim zones in Europe.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Although overlooked by President Trump for cabinet post, Gingrich has tried to shape affairs in the administration, including by conspiring with government officials to “purge the State Department of staffers they viewed as insufficiently loyal” to the president.


Former Sen Mark Kirk (R-IL) is an advisor for United Against Nuclear Iran. He is an outspoken advocate for aggressive action against Iran and a fierce defender of right-wing Israeli policies.


A military historian, Kimberly Kagan heads the Institute for the Study of War, where she has promoted the continuation of U.S. war in Afghanistan.


A “non-partisan” policy institute that purports to defend democracies from “militant Islamism,” the neoconservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) is an influential base of hawkish advocacy on Middle East policy.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Other than the cynical political interests in Moscow and Tehran, there is no conceivable rationale for wanting Bashar al-Assad to stay in power. But the simple fact is, he has won the war. And while Donald Trump has reveled in positive press coverage of the recent attacks on the country, it is clear that they were little more than a symbolic act.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The reality is that the Assad regime is winning the Syrian civil war, and this matters far less to U.S. interests than it does to that regime or its allies in Russia and Iran, who see Syria as their strongest and most consistent entrée into the Arab world. Those incontrovertible facts undermine any notion of using U.S. military force as leverage to gain a better deal for the Syrian people.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

An effective rhetorical tool to normalize military build-ups is to characterize spending increases “modernization.”


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The Pentagon has officially announced that that “long war” against terrorism is drawing to a close — even as many counterinsurgency conflicts  rage across the Greater Middle East — and a new long war has begun, a permanent campaign to contain China and Russia in Eurasia.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Revelations that data-consulting firm Cambridge Analytica used ill-gotten personal information from Facebook for the Trump campaign masks the more scandalous reality that the company is firmly ensconced in the U.S. military-industrial complex. It should come as no surprise then that the scandal has been linked to Erik Prince, co-founder of Blackwater.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

As the United States enters the second spring of the Trump era, it’s creeping ever closer to more war. McMaster and Mattis may have written the National Defense Strategy that over-hyped the threats on this planet, but Bolton and Pompeo will have the opportunity to address these inflated threats in the worst way possible: by force of arms.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

We meet Donald Trump in the media every hour of every day, which blots out much of the rest of the world and much of what’s meaningful in it.  Such largely unexamined, never-ending coverage of his doings represents a triumph of the first order both for him and for an American cult of personality.


RightWeb
share