Tuesday, April 9, 2024
Year : 2, Issue : 15
The most recent conflict in the Gaza Strip has shed new light on the necessity for Israel and the Palestinians to come up with some sort of long-term peace, though such an outcome has never looked more remote. At the heart of any discussion is the issue of Palestinian statehood, promised in the 1947 UN General Assembly Peace Plan, but has never materialized.
In fact, while Israel self-proclaimed its independence on May 14, 1948, and was then recognized as such by a large community of states (Israel joined the United Nations in May 1949), the Palestinian entity never made it to a recognized statehood. In 1988, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) proclaimed the State of Palestine and claimed sovereignty over the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem (along the 1967 borders). As of 2024, 140 countries have recognized the Palestinian state. This includes China, Russia, Türkiye, all Arab states, and all BRICS+, but not the US nor any of the G-7 countries. Nine EU countries have recognized Palestine as an independent state, but only Sweden has done so while being an EU member. The other eight – Malta, the Greek Cypriot administration, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, and Poland – have recognized Palestine before joining the EU. For those countries that have not recognized the state of Palestine, recognition is not rejected per se, but it is to be considered in the broader framework of a peace process with Israel. Such was the spirit of the 1993 Oslo Peace Accords: if the Accords did not explicitly endorse the idea of a Palestinian state, they were ultimately about an anticipation of a two-state solution.
Similarly, Palestine was never able to join the UN as a full member. In 1975, the PLO obtained observer status at the UN General Assembly, then transferred to Palestine in 1988 when Palestine self-proclaimed its independence. In 2012, Palestine was then upgraded to a “non-member observer state” at the UN General Assembly, which equated to a quasi-recognition by the UN of Palestinian statehood.
Palestinian bid to the UN
In this context, the conflict in Gaza has only vindicated the Palestinians in their quest for UN membership, while making it even more impossible for Israel. On April 2, in a letter sent to the UN secretary-general, Palestine officially renewed its bid (the last bid was in 2011) to join the UN as a full member. The Palestinian side hopes that the issue will be examined by the UN Security Council in April. Never in the past any text had been put to a vote at the Security Council; only the General Assembly has considered the issue. The Arab League, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and the Non-Aligned Movement have all supported the new Palestinian bid.
To join the UN, any candidate needs to get a two-thirds majority at the UN General Assembly following a recommendation by the Security Council, where the veto of the five permanent members (United States, China, Russia, France, United Kingdom) can be resorted to.
US veto
This is where the Palestinian bid will be problematic. Some European countries, including France, have stated that recognition of Palestine should no longer be a taboo. Yet the US would unlikely recommend UN membership of Palestine and would therefore use their veto at the Security Council in case a text in favor of Palestine would reach it. The US has recently taken its distance with Israel’s conduct of its operation in Gaza, and even abstained on a UN Security Council resolution calling for a cease-fire. Yet the US-Israeli divergences have not reached the level that would justify a US vote against its “protégé” on a text pertaining to the UN Palestinian membership.
The current conflict in Gaza has not brought Israel closer to a two-state solution, actually, it has made such a prospect even more remote, as anything being granted to the Palestinians would now be considered a reward for the Oct. 7 attacks. In February 2024, the Israeli parliament also voted against a unilateral recognition of Palestinian statehood.
Here lies the main issue: For the Palestinians, there is no solution to the current confrontation without Palestinian statehood. By contrast, for the Israelis such an option – if they were ever to seriously consider it – could only come at the end of a diplomatic process that for the time being is nowhere. And at this stage, the US protector is still playing its role. As if Palestinian statehood or UN membership were just another collateral damage of the current war.
