AJC ACCESS

Thursday, 29 November 2012 22:15

The Vote in the UN is Over: Now What Should Israel Do? Featured

Written by  Michael Brenner
Rate this item
(0 votes)

abbas 2It is understandable that our community is deeply unhappy with Mahmoud Abbas's decision to put the case of Palestine before the General Assembly.  We have long made a distinction between the bilateral negotiations envisioned by Resolution 242 and the "internationalization of the conflict" that would essentially use the international community as a cudgel to pressure Israel into concessions. 

There is also a good legal case that by recognizing Palestine as a state, the Palestinians would also take on the obligations that come with statehood, and thus, Israel would not be subject to the occupied/occupier analysis and the two-state solution, rather than a one-state solution, would be further ensconced in international law.  I think, however, that since the vote is largely symbolic, the international community will continue to criticize whatever Israel does over the Green Line, since the criticism was always politically motivated to begin with.  I also think prosecutions of Israeli soldiers at the International Criminal Court are unlikely both because of the political considerations and because Israel has a viable judicial system and can investigate its own soldiers. 



The problem with the Palestinian UDI campaign, and the reason it differs from our 1947 campaign which led to the Partition Plan, is that the Palestinians have not done the diplomatic legwork to ensure that their statehood declaration is worth something more than a piece of paper.  The Americans do not support it, and the Europeans recognize that it is an end-run around bilateral negotiations, which most diplomats realize are necessary to ending the conflict.  The Palestinians have never quite learned the lesson the Yishuv learned long ago, which is that the goal is real sovereignty and the ability to self-govern, not international declarations.  The first is necessary for the second to mean anything. 

I generally agree with the Reut Institute that Israel should find a way to support the effort, because there is little to be gained by opposing it, other than further international isolation.  Israeli leaders also do not help by publicly threatening to destroy the PA, which would help no one.  Ultimately, a much bigger question, and one our community tends to avoid, is what our long-term goal is.  UDI will not change the status quo a great deal.  While it may ensconce the two-state solution in international law and give Israel recognized borders, it will not make that solution any more or less likely if large parts of our community are not in favor of it and most Palestinians are not in favor of it.  That is ultimately why the solution must come from bilateral negotiations; peace cannot be made unless both sides agree to make it. 

Read 2017 times Last modified on Wednesday, 23 January 2013 23:34
Published in Global Voices Posts
Tagged under

Related items

More in this category: « Recognition of Palestine as a Non-Member Observer State of the UN Israeli Election Reflections »

82 comments

Leave a comment

Make sure you enter the (*) required information where indicated. HTML code is not allowed.

back to top

© Copyright AJC, 2013. All Rights Reserved. | Privacy Policy