The determination shown by the Obama administration and Congress to ‘persuade’ the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) from attempting to gain UN recognition of statehood is deplorable; their methods even more so.
US President Barack Obama, the man who pledged to bring about a Palestinian state, strongly objects to the Palestinian bid under the pretext that it is counterproductive to the peace process, which in reality has been defunct since former US President Bill Clinton left office in 2000.
As a man sympathetic to Palestinian aspirations prior to taking office, I wonder whether Obama likes what he sees in the mirror nowadays. Not only has he reneged on his promise to deliver a Palestinian state by September this year, he is vigorously opposing the creation of a state in name only. He is also using every tactic to bring US allies on his side while he twists the arm of the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas not to proceed. Obama’s latest inducement aimed at luring the Palestinians to give up their right to a UN hearing was delivered by US envoys David Hale and Dennis Ross—dubbed ‘Israel’s lawyer’ by one of his former deputies.
The pair arrived bearing a written proposal for the resumption of face-to-face talks that instead of referring to Jewish colonies as ‘illegal’ attributed their existence to ‘demographic trends since 1967.’ It’s no wonder that Abbas considered this offer as ‘the last straw’ when its acceptance would have been tantamount to legalising Israeli expansionism.
Obama has said the US will use its veto if the Palestinians take their case for full UN membership to the Security Council, which they plan to do on Friday. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says the road to peace doesn’t go through New York; it goes through occupied Jerusalem and Ramallah. Her mention of occupied Jerusalem rather than Israel’s recognised capital Tel Aviv is indicative of her pro-Israel bias. In the meantime, Congress is out to punish the Palestinians for daring to put their case before the international community. Discussions held by the House Committee on Foreign Affairs included the closure of the Palestinian mission in Washington, the termination of US aid to the PNA and the reevaluation of US aid to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) that tends to the needs of Palestinian refugees.
Targeting the UN
Republican Chairwoman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs Ileana Ros-Lehtinen would like to target the UN itself. She and others have introduced legislation to induce the UN to shape up in Israel’s favour else face the US withholding its share of the body’s operating budget, which translates to 22 per cent. “The current UN continues to be plagued by scandal, mismanagement and inaction and its agenda is frequently hijacked by rogue regimes which protect each other while targeting free democracies like the US and Israel,” she said. It should be mentioned that Ros-Lehtinen’s campaign has been supported by a major funder of Jewish colonies in occupied east Jerusalem and the West Bank, Irving Moskowitz, an individual said by the pro-Israel lobby group J-Street to be someone who “actively works to derail the chances for a two-state solution.”
Ros-Lehtinen and her pro-Israel committee cohorts should realise that their threats towards the PNA, UNRWA and the UN are not only undemocratic but spiteful. It’s this type of bias that nurtures anti-Americanism.
The Palestinians are doing nothing wrong. They are merely taking the only channel legitimately left open to them. They’ve abandoned armed struggle; they’ve spent decades talking to Israeli leaderships and have made generous concessions to no avail, they’ve tried peaceful protest only to be shot at or jailed. What’s left to them other than an appeal to the international community? And why should such appeal elicit fear in both the Israeli and American corridors of power?
The problem is if the US turns out to be the lone UNSC member state to flourish its veto to protect Israeli interests as it was earlier this year, Israel’s diplomatic isolation will be highlighted along with Washington’s slavish posture and its unsuitability to be any kind of Middle East broker let alone an honest one. But there’s a lot more at stake besides red faces. Israel’s neighbourhood is likely to become even more hostile if the Palestinian bid fails and potentially America’s relationship with the Arab world will be sorely tested. A former Saudi ambassador to Washington Prince Turki Al Faisal, who recently penned an op-ed published in The New York Times titled “Veto a state, lose an ally,” believes just that.
Prince Turki urges the US to support the Palestinian bid else risk a decline in its regional influence, the undermining of Israeli security and the empowerment of Iran. He also warned that the special relations between Saudi Arabia and the US would be in jeopardy as America “would increasingly be seen as toxic by the vast majority of Arabs and Muslims . . .”
The Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan recently referred to Israel as the West’s spoilt child. I only hope that the Palestinians and their supporters succeed in giving the brat a well-deserved slap. The bid itself will fail but the Palestinians will gain the moral high ground and Abbas will garner his people’s respect now that he’s finally given up dancing to Washington’s tune.
Linda S. Heard is a British specialist writer on Middle East affairs. She welcomes feedback and can be contacted by email at heardonthegrapevines@yahoo.co.uk.
RSS
US desperate to thwart Palestinian statehood bid
Exercise of its veto at UN will highlight Israel’s diplomatic isolation along with Washington’s slavish posture
Posted on September 21, 2011 by Linda S. Heard
The determination shown by the Obama administration and Congress to ‘persuade’ the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) from attempting to gain UN recognition of statehood is deplorable; their methods even more so.
US President Barack Obama, the man who pledged to bring about a Palestinian state, strongly objects to the Palestinian bid under the pretext that it is counterproductive to the peace process, which in reality has been defunct since former US President Bill Clinton left office in 2000.
As a man sympathetic to Palestinian aspirations prior to taking office, I wonder whether Obama likes what he sees in the mirror nowadays. Not only has he reneged on his promise to deliver a Palestinian state by September this year, he is vigorously opposing the creation of a state in name only. He is also using every tactic to bring US allies on his side while he twists the arm of the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas not to proceed. Obama’s latest inducement aimed at luring the Palestinians to give up their right to a UN hearing was delivered by US envoys David Hale and Dennis Ross—dubbed ‘Israel’s lawyer’ by one of his former deputies.
The pair arrived bearing a written proposal for the resumption of face-to-face talks that instead of referring to Jewish colonies as ‘illegal’ attributed their existence to ‘demographic trends since 1967.’ It’s no wonder that Abbas considered this offer as ‘the last straw’ when its acceptance would have been tantamount to legalising Israeli expansionism.
Obama has said the US will use its veto if the Palestinians take their case for full UN membership to the Security Council, which they plan to do on Friday. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says the road to peace doesn’t go through New York; it goes through occupied Jerusalem and Ramallah. Her mention of occupied Jerusalem rather than Israel’s recognised capital Tel Aviv is indicative of her pro-Israel bias. In the meantime, Congress is out to punish the Palestinians for daring to put their case before the international community. Discussions held by the House Committee on Foreign Affairs included the closure of the Palestinian mission in Washington, the termination of US aid to the PNA and the reevaluation of US aid to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) that tends to the needs of Palestinian refugees.
Targeting the UN
Republican Chairwoman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs Ileana Ros-Lehtinen would like to target the UN itself. She and others have introduced legislation to induce the UN to shape up in Israel’s favour else face the US withholding its share of the body’s operating budget, which translates to 22 per cent. “The current UN continues to be plagued by scandal, mismanagement and inaction and its agenda is frequently hijacked by rogue regimes which protect each other while targeting free democracies like the US and Israel,” she said. It should be mentioned that Ros-Lehtinen’s campaign has been supported by a major funder of Jewish colonies in occupied east Jerusalem and the West Bank, Irving Moskowitz, an individual said by the pro-Israel lobby group J-Street to be someone who “actively works to derail the chances for a two-state solution.”
Ros-Lehtinen and her pro-Israel committee cohorts should realise that their threats towards the PNA, UNRWA and the UN are not only undemocratic but spiteful. It’s this type of bias that nurtures anti-Americanism.
The Palestinians are doing nothing wrong. They are merely taking the only channel legitimately left open to them. They’ve abandoned armed struggle; they’ve spent decades talking to Israeli leaderships and have made generous concessions to no avail, they’ve tried peaceful protest only to be shot at or jailed. What’s left to them other than an appeal to the international community? And why should such appeal elicit fear in both the Israeli and American corridors of power?
The problem is if the US turns out to be the lone UNSC member state to flourish its veto to protect Israeli interests as it was earlier this year, Israel’s diplomatic isolation will be highlighted along with Washington’s slavish posture and its unsuitability to be any kind of Middle East broker let alone an honest one. But there’s a lot more at stake besides red faces. Israel’s neighbourhood is likely to become even more hostile if the Palestinian bid fails and potentially America’s relationship with the Arab world will be sorely tested. A former Saudi ambassador to Washington Prince Turki Al Faisal, who recently penned an op-ed published in The New York Times titled “Veto a state, lose an ally,” believes just that.
Prince Turki urges the US to support the Palestinian bid else risk a decline in its regional influence, the undermining of Israeli security and the empowerment of Iran. He also warned that the special relations between Saudi Arabia and the US would be in jeopardy as America “would increasingly be seen as toxic by the vast majority of Arabs and Muslims . . .”
The Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan recently referred to Israel as the West’s spoilt child. I only hope that the Palestinians and their supporters succeed in giving the brat a well-deserved slap. The bid itself will fail but the Palestinians will gain the moral high ground and Abbas will garner his people’s respect now that he’s finally given up dancing to Washington’s tune.
Linda S. Heard is a British specialist writer on Middle East affairs. She welcomes feedback and can be contacted by email at heardonthegrapevines@yahoo.co.uk.