Friday, November 30th 2012 - 02:30 UTC

UN approves ‘non member observer’ status for the Palestine authority

The United Nations General Assembly on Thursday endorsed an upgraded UN status for the Palestinian Authority, despite intense opposition from the United States and Israel.

“Symbolic but a last chance to save the two-state solution” said Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas

The resolution elevates their status from “non-member observer entity” to “non-member observer state,” the same category as the Vatican, which Palestinians hope will provide new leverage in their dealings with Israel.

Its leaders had been working with dozens of supporting nations to develop a formal draft, enlisting the backing of European countries such as France and Spain. The vote was 138 delegates in favor of the measure, nine against and 41 abstentions, including Germany.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said the move, which many call symbolic, represents a “last chance to save the two-state solution.”

It comes on the heels of an eight-day conflict that raged between Israel and Hamas fighters, where a series of air strikes and rocket launches drew international attention and threatened regional stability.

“We did not come here seeking to delegitimize a state established years ago, and that is Israel; rather we came to affirm the legitimacy of the state that must now achieve its independence, and that is Palestine,” he said.

But Israel's U.N. ambassador Ron Prosor said the move largely ignores the specifics of longstanding issues, such as settlements in disputed lands, and cannot substitute for direct negotiations between Jerusalem and Ramallah.

This resolution “doesn't pursue peace,” Prosor said, criticizing Abbas for being unable to represent the Gaza Strip, where a Hamas-controlled government presides. “It pushes it backwards,” he said.

The effort stalled last year when it became apparent that the bid could not get the necessary support in the Security Council. Observer state status does not require Security Council approval, unlike full membership recognition. The observer status resolution needs only a majority of the UN's 193 members to approve.

The United States and Israel have remained steadfast in their opposition, saying the move will not advance the cause of Middle East peace.

US Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice said US leaders could not support a measure that circumvents direct talks and cautioned that Thursday's decision did “not establish Palestine as a state.” Rice urged both sides to the resume direct negotiations without preconditions.

“Israel is prepared to live in peace with the Palestinian state,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Thursday. “But for peace to endure, Israel's security must be protected, the Palestinians must recognize the Jewish state and they must be prepared to end the conflict with Israel once and for all.”

Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev called the resolution “political theater.”

But Palestinian leaders have said they had the right to go to the U.N. because Israel failed to comply with agreements signed more than two decades ago.

“It's about a contract. Our contract is that in five years, we should have concluded the treaty of peace and all core issues. This did not happen, and we're talking about 20 years later. And going to the UN is not a unilateral step,” Palestinian Authority chief negotiator Saeb Erakat said in September.

The last round of negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority was in 2010.
 

26 comments Feed

Note: Comments do not reflect MercoPress’ opinions. They are the personal view of our users. We wish to keep this as open and unregulated as possible. However, rude or foul language, discriminative comments (based on ethnicity, religion, gender, nationality, sexual orientation or the sort), spamming or any other offensive or inappropriate behaviour will not be tolerated. Please report any inadequate posts to the editor. Comments must be in English. Comments should refer to article. Thank you.

1 Ayayay (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 05:19 am Report abuse
*Despite intense opposition from SOUTHERN evangelical bumpkin U.S. states.

Almost handicapped by their outsized intellect, they believe Israel & Jerusalem -has- to be set up their way to fulfill an entertaining, bumpkiny interpretation of the Bible.

Congrats Palestinian ppls!
2 Think (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 05:20 am Report abuse
TWIMC

And the U.K. abstained from the vote……..

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_resolution_67/19#Voting

”Self-Determination of the Peoples” Is a ”Paramount Human Right” for the British....
Suuure….
When it fits them…
Brainwash anybody….?
3 Fido Dido (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 06:15 am Report abuse
Well Think, you can't blame those “kool-aid drinkers” from the UK, (trolls), for being brainwashed. They believe their “beloved leaders” without questioning them and believe everthing what they see and hear on their tv (news channels: Skynews, BBC, CNN International, Cartoon network and the video games they play).

“US Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice said US leaders could not support a measure that circumvents direct talks and cautioned that Thursday's decision did “not establish Palestine as a state.” Rice urged both sides to the resume direct negotiations without preconditions.”

She can't, plain and simple for the following reasons: She is a puppet, who doesn't realize that is an idiot. If she she does her career is over...period!

“ ”Self-Determination of the Peoples” Is a ”Paramount Human Right” ”
Those imbeciles from silly island that type here don't even know the meaning of those words.

Facts of “Palestine”....oh by the way, how many british soldiers died in Palestina because of “terrorist” atacks (both Arabs and Jews)?
Anyway, educate yourself some history and check the map before you type comments out of your ass!
www.peterloud.co.uk/palestine/
4 Teaboy2 (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 08:14 am Report abuse
So what if we abstained, all it means is we are neatural on the palestine issue. We are not saying they do not have the right to self determination, they already excercised that by having their own government. So its nothing to do with self determination, but to do with recognising palestine as a state and its territorial claims to land which is highly disputed.

The only solution to this is for isreal to remove its occupational forces, and its illegal settlements, and recognise the the west bank and gaza together are part of the palestine state. The problem though then is the fact that gaza and the west bank are sepereated by swathes of land that are part of isreal territories, so an agreement needs to be in place allowing unrestricted travel between both areas over the territory held by isreal. The problem lies on the isrealie side, as they want talks but they refuse to give way or anything. Its like trying to have talks with argentina, which can not happen because argentina won't bodge on their demand for full sovereignty of falkland islands whilst ignoring the islanders wishes.

So you two #2 and#3 have shown your hypocrites, by trying to using your support for palestine to dispute the islanders rights to self determination. You can't support one, then not support the others rights!

By the way #3 its you that should check your history as the kingdom of isreal, was there long before palestine. Hell the land was even given to them by God. are you going to go against the rule of god - You are catholic aren't you! - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Israel_%28united_monarchy%29

Palestine has no histrical claim to the west bank as originally in ancient times palestine only existed in what is not Gaza.
5 Idlehands (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 10:01 am Report abuse
All the claptrap about events from 2000 years ago needs to be forgotten about - as does most of the historical claims there..

They need to simply look at the situation as it is now. Israel needs to withdraw from the West Bank as it did from Gaza and the Palestinians need to get their act together, unite under democratic and moderate leadership, recognise Israels right to exist and stop firing rockets at them.

However it's not going to happen. The Palestinians are too divided and too caught up in their victim status and the Israelis are past caring about public opinion or attacking Palestinians with unbridled force when they come under rocket attacks.

There's also the question of what to do about Jerusalem.
6 Boovis (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 10:41 am Report abuse
@3: you clearly know absolutely nothing about the UK, we're one of the most cynical peoples on the planet, we certainly don't believe everything our government, politicians or papers tell us. I find that rich coming from Argies who believe all the propaganda fed to them since the baby bottle and spit out CFK's words verbatim each time something happens then claim they aren't brainwashed, no no no. We believe in Self Determination but surely the Israelis deserve it too? I'm not saying I agree with the way the UK voted (funnily enough, we all have our own opinions...) but I can see why there are good and bad reasons for giving the Palestinians a voice at the UN. It's a complicated subject.
7 Conqueror (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 10:59 am Report abuse
@5 Remind me about where you live so that I can come round and occupy your house while you're out! The past, or history, cannot simply be “ignored” because it is currently inconvenient. You might want to think of 322 years of British occupation of the Falkands and the need to send British troops, combat aircraft and warships 8,000 miles to protect them as being “inconvenient”.

The FACT is that 3,000 years ago the Kingdoms of Judah and Israel existed, much where the State of Israel is today. For at least 1,000 years the Jewish people were invaded and occupied but never truly conquered. Then came 70AD, the Roman emperor Vespasian and his son, Titus. Jerusalem, the capital of Israel, together with the Temple, were destroyed. The Roman intentions were such that many Jewish people fled for their lives. Wherever you are, if you were faced with annihilation, wouldn't you do the same? Six hundred years later came the Islamic Arabs who, once again, invaded and occupied. Somewhat later there were the Crusades as Christians sought to regain access to the holy places. They went on for over 250 years. Should we mention the various pogroms against Jews, culminating in the Holocaust? Eventually, the British had the chance to do the “right” thing. Return Israel to the Jews/Hebrews/Israelites/Israelis and see the Arabs in their own land, Jordan. How would it hurt the Arabs to move from Gaza and the West Bank to Jordan? They could have the whole of the East Bank. But, no, they want to wipe Israel off the map. Presumably, they want to wipe Jews off the planet as well. They constantly attack Israel just for being. And have done for 64 years. How are they any better than Hitler? In fact, I'd say they are worse. Perspective is everything. And you don't get perspective without taking a broad view.
8 Idlehands (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 11:17 am Report abuse
7 Conqueror

“How would it hurt the Arabs to move from Gaza and the West Bank to Jordan”

There you have it - you wouldn't be happy to substitute Arab for Israeli in that sentence.

If you need to name Roman emperors to settle 21st century territorial disputes then you probably don't have much of an argument.

I would regard myself as pro-Israeli and you as your usual demented self.
9 Boovis (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 11:26 am Report abuse
@8 He only mentions the Roman era to set a context and that's only for a small amount of his argument. I'm not picking sides here, but at least be logical with your nitpicking.
10 Idlehands (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 11:34 am Report abuse
...the Roman era, then the dark ages, then the medieval era - where does it stop?

He's always keen to point out that the Argentine civilians weren't expelled from the Falklands in 1833 but is calling for the ethnic cleansing of millions from the West Bank and Gaza.

Why should the nation of Jordan be compelled to accept millions of refugees with no roots no money and no desire to be there?
11 Boovis (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 11:52 am Report abuse
I can't speak for anyone else's point of view on this, but I think that Israel and Palestine are both as bad as each other. The civilians aside (because you can rarely blame the actions of governments or armed groups on the general public) everytime the Palestinians call for peace, the Israelis seem to just build more houses on politically sensitive land, and everytime the Israelis call for peace, a few more rockets go flying over the border. It's time the UN stepped in, made a standing and lasting peace with all parties involved and make it clear that, if they choose not to take part in the negotiations, they'll go ahead without them and fill the area with UN troops. If two kids can't play with a toy nicely, take it away from them.
12 LightThink (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 12:04 pm Report abuse
None of you all know the Middle East ....

Your reasonings are compiled from media,internet..etc...

The Middle Eastern never know black/white colours.....
They only think /act in every kinds of gray colours.
13 Boovis (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 12:12 pm Report abuse
What's twisted Spanish for “well duuurrrh!!!°” ?
14 Idlehands (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 12:13 pm Report abuse
12 LightThink

Are you claiming to be from the middle east?
15 Raul (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 03:10 pm Report abuse
Pathetic and deplorable attitude of the UK to abstain.

United Kingdom joined once again demonstrated that self-determination is not interested or territorial integrity unless used for piracy and plunder of natural resources at gunpoint as they do in the South Atlantic.
16 Teaboy2 (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 03:38 pm Report abuse
@15 this is not a self determination issue Raul. They already have their government which is recognised as well as their lands the west bank and gaza. What the issue is, is they are claiming land that isreal claims also. Are you saying we should put the palistines rights above that of the Isrealies!!
17 Idlehands (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 03:43 pm Report abuse
15 Raul

Nice rant. Only 14 posts before some muppet diverts the Arab Israeli conflict into one about the Falklands.

Haven't you heard that YPF is now applying for licences from the Falkland Government to explore for gas in Falkland territorial waters? Were they dragged there at gunpoint?
18 Think (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 04:05 pm Report abuse
TWIMC

The MercoPress comment section is literally paved with Brutish Turnips constantly lecturing us, Argentineans, about their willingness to spill the last drop of other people’s blood in defence of the Sacrosanct Principle of Self Determination of less than 3,000 British Squatting Subjects in the South Atlantic……

At the same time, the 4,000,000 Palestinian living in the Holy Land and the ~15,000,000 strong Palestinian Diaspora don’t even seem to deserve a positive British vote at the UN…..

Brainwash anybody…………..?
19 Idlehands (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 04:14 pm Report abuse
18 Think

You need to learn the difference between the words “literally” and “metaphorically” before you use either.

Otherwise you just sound stupid.
20 Conqueror (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 04:19 pm Report abuse
@8 That's because you're a fool. And obviously uneducated. But you didn't respond to the first point. If history is irrelevant, why should the fact that the Falkland Islands have been occupied by Brits be of any relevance? So let's move the timeframe. Only the last 20 years count. NOW justify ownership of the Islands by the Islanders and Britain.

But let's quote you more precisely:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“How would it hurt the Arabs to move from Gaza and the West Bank to Jordan”

There you have it - you wouldn't be happy to substitute Arab for Israeli in that sentence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course not, the word “Israeli” doesn't appear in my sentence.

@10 Because, back in 1948, that was where they were supposed to go! They would be amongst their own. It's not as though Jordan is exactly over-populated! And I'm not sure I'd go along with you on the “ethnic cleansing” accusation either. As I understand it, plenty of Arabs live quite happily in the State of Israel. All I'm thinking of is the troublemakers.

As far as whose “side” I am on, I'm not sure that I'm on anyone's side. I like the idea of peace. But I'm not prepared to go as far as “anything for peace”. That's appeasement. It doesn't work. So I have no problem with a military response at any level if attacked. Be it Britain, a BOT or Israel.
@15 Yes, I quite understand. Perhaps you should be talking to Idlehands. He doesn't think past events should have any effect on the present. No doubt he'll be pleased to agree that 300 years of history is immaterial and you can have the Falklands. I, on the other hand, will be doing my best to be at the shoreline with a gun should you decide to make another try.
@18 Why don't you sail over there and give them a hand. Oh, sorry, forgot. You can't.
21 Idlehands (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 04:31 pm Report abuse
You're right - I don't regard events in 1833 to have much bearing on the status of the Falklands either.

The age of empire ended after the second world war with the creation of the united nations. Since then the principle has been that of self determination.

As those that live on the Falklands clearly don't want to become part of Argentina that's about all the argument you need.

As for this quote of yours:

“Of course not, the word “Israeli” doesn't appear in my sentence”

- I can only assume you didn't even understand the point. You are perfectly happy to herd millions of Palestinians into a neighbouring state against their wishes but I doubt very much you would be happy to herd Israelis anywhere. You shouldn't be happy to do either.
22 LightThink (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 06:13 pm Report abuse
[ 14

no !

but i saw few Mid East countries Iran,Israel,Syria,Lebanon,Kuwait,Abu Dabi.

You should use the popular arabic words like - inshallah....mashallah--
in daily life to connect the people easily.

Their meals are like Mexican ones..tasty.

Probably i saw many British agents in hotels but i don't remember them.
23 cornishair (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 07:19 pm Report abuse
21 idlehands. i have to agree with you here. ilsrael is atleast on a par with Serbia for crimes against humanity (tho they're been doing it since 1948 & serbia's were in the 90's-00's). Alway find it weird that a people almost wiped out in europe in a “holocaust” would go on (within 3 yrs of the war ending) to try and ethic cleanse i whole nation out of history. weird a............
24 slattzzz (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 08:24 pm Report abuse
@22 you saw fook all you never left your sorry home town, the middle east is a dream for you you've been watching to many films, anyone can get arabic words off films, however now tell us what they mean without googling it you heathen. if you had said inshallah in Isreal mate you wouldn't be on here you'd be slotted.
25 emerald (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 08:51 pm Report abuse
intifada

intifada
26 British_Kirchnerist (#) Nov 30th, 2012 - 09:25 pm Report abuse
Viva Palestina! Though Abbas will try to use this to prop up his utterly discredited leadership, its good to see Palestine can now bring charges against Israeli war criminals...

#2 Indeed

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!

Advertisement

Get Email News Reports!

Get our news right on your inbox.
Subscribe Now!