Palestinian Question: Between Ceremonial Sovereignty And The Aftermath

IT has consumed many generations, even as the present ones remain unsure. But the age-long conflict may be giving way to a more definite step towards joining the league of sovereign states as the United Nations, during its just concluded 70th General Assembly, reached a decision to hoist the Palestinian flag.

Beyond the attendant immediate implications of its flag status, would this gesture signal the end of Middle East crisis, particularly Arab-Israeli conflict? Of what use is the de jure recognition to the Palestinians question and the controversial two-state solution?

Compared to the characteristic uproars that often follow international decisions on the Palestinian question, the latest UN action witnessed sparse negative reaction. Yet, the action may have come a little too late and too little for comfort to the beneficiaries. Largely, the Israeli-Palestinian question has also proved a mere convenient ruse for the Middle East crisis, as recent uprisings in the zone have thrown up the inherent contradictions in the Arab League-member countries.

In the euphoria of the moment, the President of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas reiterated that it was unconscionable that the question of Palestinian statehood remained unresolved.

He also warned that the Palestinian people no longer felt bound by agreements with Israel he claimed were continually violated. He said Israel must assume all of its responsibilities as an occupying power.

According to Abbas, “As long as Israel refuses to cease settlement activities and to release the fourth group of Palestinian prisoners in accordance with our agreements, they leave us no choice but to insist that we will not remain the only ones committed to the implementation of these agreements.”

Expectedly, the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said Abbas’ speech was “deceitful and encourages incitement and lawlessness in the Middle East.”

But the 80 year-old leader of the Palestinian Authority and chair of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) has his own trouble. He has sort of become feeble over the years and battle must be getting into him. In the past, Abbas threatened to dissolve the Palestinian Authority and hand sole responsibility for the West Bank to Israel if there is no chance of a peace deal.

The Palestinian Authority was set up as an interim administration for the major Palestinian cities in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip after the 1993 Oslo Accord. It was envisaged that a comprehensive treaty would be concluded within five years.

However, more than two decades of talks with Israel have failed to achieve a final peace settlement and the much sought-after independent Palestinian state. The last round of negotiations collapsed in April 2014.

The General Assembly may have recognised Palestine as a ‘state’ under his leadership, but that recognition may not mean much for the average Palestinian in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, or a refugee camp in a neighbouring Arab country. Israeli settlements have expanded under Abass’ watch, the militant group, Hamas, still controls Gaza, and a two-state solution in which an Israeli state and a Palestinian state divide the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea looks more remote than ever. The toll on Abbas is evident.

Earlier, the General Assembly passed a motion to raise the Palestinian and Vatican flags. Israel voted against the motion, along with the United States and six other countries. Forty-five countries also abstained.
Israel’s permanent representative to the UN, Ron Prosor, said at the time that the move was a “blatant attempt to hijack the UN.” He insisted that the only way Palestinians could achieve statehood was through direct negotiations.

In 2012, the General Assembly voted to upgrade the status of the Palestinians to that of a “non-member observer state” –– the same position that the Vatican holds.

This followed a failed bid by the Palestinians to join the international body as a full member state in 2011 because of lack of support in the UN Security Council.

But speaking to The Guardian President and CEO, of the African Graduate School of Management and Leadership, Prof David Abdullahi suggested that time may be fast running out for both Israeli and Palestinian authorities.

“It is not only Abass that is increasingly growing battle wary, but frustration is growing, particularly among the youths, in the face of repeated failure to achieve sovereignty after all other efforts, including armed struggle, negotiations, and international pressure, have been exhausted,” he said.

Fuelled by Abass threat of handing over control of all Palestinian lands to Israel, many are now looking at the option of abandoning the two-state option in favour of one-state option.

Abass youngest son, the businessman Tareq Abbas, said that the Palestinians should give up on the two-state solution and demand instead civil rights from Israel. This veiled reference to voting rights would give Palestinians access to the Israeli Knesset, where decisions regarding their lives are really made. A combination of the father’s threats and the son’s alternative strategy would put Israel on a dangerous path –– the country would have to deal with approximately 4.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza asking not for land of their own but for a voice and a role inside Israel itself.

Analysts believe that this reality may have jolted the Israeli authority as the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hurriedly admitted a commitment to a two-state solution.

“I remain committed to a vision of two states for two peoples in which a demilitarized Palestinian state recognises the Jewish state,” Netanyahu said on the fourth day of the 70th UN General Assembly.