PLO’s Initiative at the UN – Good Idea or Bad?

In September 2011, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) – supported by 122 countries, including all Arab and Muslim countries – intends to seek full membership in the United Nations (UN) for a Palestinian state based on the 1949 armistice lines (more commonly referred to as June 4, 1967 borders).  Alternatively – if, as it is expected, the United States of America invokes its veto power at the UN Security Council, thereby stopping the critically required UN Security Council’s recommendation to the UN General Assembly for such membership – the PLO will have the option to seek recognition of the Palestinian state by the UN General Assembly and obtain an observer status for that state, which would not require a UN Security Council recommendation.

The PLO is on record that if the Israelis declare total freeze on settlement activities in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and agree to a time schedule for the negotiations to be completed on a two-state solution based on the 1949 armistice lines, it (i.e. the PLO) would return to negotiations with the Israeli government and delay seeking membership at the UN for the Palestinian state pending the outcome of such negotiations.

In recent weeks, there has been a noticeable surge in the number of Palestinian and Arab voices that reject the PLO’s initiative; mainly on the grounds that such a move would be injurious to the long-term objective of the Palestinian struggle; i.e. to liberatePalestine– all of Palestine– from the Zionist project.

It is true that I, among many, do not see the possibility of a final resolution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict except in the peaceful creation of a one state for all – and that includes all Israeli Jews and all Palestinian refugees – where people are treated as equal human beings, regardless of their religious or ethnic affiliations.  This belief in the value of the one-state concept does not make me anti any other proposal that might, directly or indirectly, help bring the one-state idea closer to reality.  Also, the belief in the ultimate goal of one state for all must not freeze our thinking into rejecting anything and everything unless it explicitly states that the one-state is the ultimate objective.  The late Edward Said used to describe the emergence of the bi-national state that he advocated coming to fruition after two states are established; thereby having the one bi-national state emerging out of interest-based negotiations between two equals; not between an occupier and an occupied.

With that in mind, I believe it would be helpful for my Palestinian and Arab friends who stand in opposition to the PLO’s initiative at the UN next month to consider positions taken by the core advocates of continuing and expanding the Zionist experiment in Palestine.  One of those very powerful and influential people is Mr. Lee Rosenberg, president of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).  It has been reported that Mr. Rosenberg wrote in a letter in which he solicited help from AIPAC’s supporters to stop the PLO’s initiative.  The letter stated, among other things, that if the PLO’s initiative were to succeed, “Israelis could be dragged into foreign courts and charged with human rights violations…nations could implement sweeping economic sanctions…the Jewish [more accurately Israeli] presence in east Jerusalem could come under severe international challenge.”  For the full text of the letter, visit the following link:
http://mondoweiss.net/2011/08/campaign-to-end-us-aid-to-israel-expands-to-san-francisco-cable-cars.html
and scrawl down to a comment by POA.

For all those Palestinians and Arabs who are not sure about the PLO’s initiative, I would encourage them to consider the argument that if the PLO’s initiative is not something the likes of Lee Rosenberg – let alone Benjamin Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman – would endorse, but consider it to be a threatening danger to his vision of an exclusive state of Israel over the whole of the geographic area of historic Palestine, then such initiative would probably be the right move to take by the PLO.

Abu Mazen… go ahead… on this one, you are on the right track!

Monzer Zimmo
Ottawa,Ontario
2011/08/26

Hope is the stuff from which life is made!

Advertisements

About Alcanaanite

Monzer Zimmo, a Palestinian-Canadian living and working in Ottawa, Canada. Monzer is an advocate of resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict through the peaceful creation of a bi-national-democratic state on all the territory of historic Palestine, where Christians, Jews, Muslims, and others live together as equal citizens; be and feel safe, secure, and at home.
This entry was posted in Arab Peace Initiative, Bi-national-Democratic State, Exclusive State, Palestine Liberation Organization, Palestinian State, Palestinian-Israeli negotiations, Two-state solution. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to PLO’s Initiative at the UN – Good Idea or Bad?

  1. Christopher Assad says:

    Good thinking Monzer. Many believe that the anticipated US veto on the issue is enough to deem the effort fruitless. Indeed, this is not the case, as the majority in the General Assembly supports and will rasie the recommendation to the UNSC. Such a move will carry much moral value and would be a first step towards defeating the shamefull technicality of a US veto.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s