The recurring attempts by western European states to recognize and define the borders of a nonexistent Palestinian state, and the maneuvers by Mahmoud Abbas to obtain a seat for this putative state at various UN forums and to have the Security Council determine the deadline for and outcome of negotiations between him and Israel to create such a state, are unprecedented in the annals of nation-states and in the UN’s history.
- PA's UN statehood bid 'disastrous,' says Hamas leader
- As Hamas and Fatah quarrel, Gaza is orphaned
- Why Egypt won't let Turkey be Gaza's hero
- Palestinians to submit revised statehood resolution to UN
- Why (some) Israelis are allergic to the word 'Palestine'
In some ways they are reminiscent of Charles De Gaulle’s vain call, “Vive le Quebec libre,” during his visit to Montreal in July 1967, which did not change Quebec’s status at all. That’s not how nation-states are created.
All this is surely clear to the sundry statesmen and parliamentarians engaged in these maneuvers. Why are they doing this?
Presumably it is because they sincerely believe in the right of self-determination and would like to ram a Palestinian state down Israel’s throat.
They have fallen under the spell of the catchy slogan “two states for two peoples.” How can you object to that? Not only Europeans and Americans have fallen for it, but many Israelis as well.
There is only one catch here, which they insist on ignoring: The Palestinians already have a state of their own. That’s Jordan, where 70% of the population is Palestinian. If Jordan is not an expression of the right of self-determination of the Palestinian people, then what is?
In Black September 1970, Yasser Arafat, head of the Palestine Liberation Organization, tried to take it over, considering the country proper Palestinian territory.
Why, then, is Jordan not prepared to represent the Palestinians and to call for it to annex Judea and Samaria and the Gaza Strip?
The well-wishers of the Palestinian cause, those who call for “two states for two peoples,” know the answer all too well: Jordan does not want any more Palestinians within its borders.
So what is really at issue here is the establishment of a second Palestinian state. They want Israel to give up control of Judea and Samaria and put an end to what they refer to as occupation of these areas.
That is the real goal of all the latest diplomatic shenanigans. By hook or by crook, they want to create a second Palestinian state.
To that the Israeli left says, why not? Let’s free ourselves of the burden of occupation and who cares about the consequences.
Once the IDF leaves the area, it may be taken over by Hamas or Islamic State, things may get worse for the Palestinian population residing there, Israel’s population centers may be rocketed, Jordan may be destabilized, but who cares?
In their eyes those outcomes are presumably better than the status quo.
What’s more, there is at present no way of going from A to B, from the present situation to an agreement to establish a second Palestinian state.
Mahmoud Abbas does not represent all the Palestinians; his position in Judea and Samaria is shaky at best and depends on the IDF’s presence in the area.
He does not want to sign an agreement with Israel, nor is he capable of implementing it if he were to sign one, and he knows it. He prefers to be a phantom at the UN.
Those sounding the hollow call of “two states for two people” are completely divorced from reality. They may not see it, but more likely they do not want to see it.
Many are hostile to the State of Israel, regardless of its borders. They do not like an Israel that has grown to be strong economically and militarily, capable of defending itself against aggression and acts of terror.
As regards the Middle East they have lost their moral compass.