The Palestinian’s unilateral declaration of statehood at the United Nation’s in September is right around the corner, but what was initially considered by some as a shrewd maneuver to force their terms as part of the peace process is now facing a much larger uphill battle.
Given that the peace process — propelled by the Oslo Accords — has not yet resulted in a sovereign Palestinian state, the Palestinian Authority decided to petition the United Nations to simply deem the Palestinians as having a state, whose borders would likely be drawn — give-or-take — along 1967 lines. Even though the Obama administration has urged for 1967 lines to be the starting point for negotiations, Israel has been reluctant to embrace that idea even though no other potential borders are feasible.
By obtaining a unilateral declaration of statehood, the Palestinians would be hijacking the conversation and ensuring that their positions are effectively implemented even though Israel, which technically controls much of the land, has not been engaged in substantive dialogue with the Palestinians for years.
This Palestinian strategy was at first considered a major threat to Israel’s bargaining position, as many countries — such as those in Latin America — initially supported the prospect. It appeared that the Palestinians had substantial allies at the United Nations — albeit not the full U.N. Security Council — and could garner enough support to at least leave a major impression on the world and steer the dialogue in favor of the Palestinian bargaining position.
However, all that has been changing over the last few months, as country after country — even some states that have spouted heated rhetoric against Israel — are not only opposing the Palestinian move, but actually urging the Palestinian Authority to rethink its entire strategy lest it backfire.
Take, for example, Jordan — one of very few Muslim countries that has a peace accord with Israel and a state that shares borders with both the West Bank and Israel proper. Jordan has been lobbying the Palestinian Authority to drop its plan because broader goals would not be realized.
Notably, Jordan argues that the establishment of a Palestinian state would make the Palestinians lose their argument for the right of return. Even though the Jordanians oppose the Palestinian plan because it is not extreme enough, the unilateral declaration of statehood still lacks that and other key allies, which endanger its prospects of passage.
Further, both U.S. political parties are extremely opposed to the move, thereby making the resolution’s actualization highly unlikely. The Obama administration’s diplomats — including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice — have repeated years-long U.S. policy that a peaceful solution must be forged through a bilateral discussion and not unilateral actions. The rhetoric was further ratcheted up this week as the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee — Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) — unveiled legislation that would impose requirements on U.S. funding for the United Nations, thereby threatening the group’s activities if unfavorable decisions are made by the body, a quarter of whose budge is funded by the United States.
Even though the Palestinians appear to be facing a major uphill battle to actualizing their goal and might not make as large of an impression as had previously been feared, the measure is most certainly going to garner substantial interest and lobbying ahead of U.N. consideration. The eventual vote — if it actually does occur — will be viewed as the world’s temperature on whether the Palestinians should have a state immediately and whether Israel — and not the Palestinians — is impeding that process.
While a poor showing on the part of the Palestinians could set their agenda back, a modest vote supportive of the resolution could still send shock waves through public opinion and lead Israel to be further vilified as the antagonist to peace. All the Palestinians must do to win the spin is to obtain a decent level of support, as their resolution will most certainly not lead them to actually have an independent state. Israel, on the other hand, faces a much steeper fight to keep support for the measure to minuscule numbers to peg the Palestinians as intransigent and unwilling to negotiate.
While Israel must overwhelmingly win this vote and the Palestinians must only provide a modest showing to prove their point, developments over the last few months have pushed the scales slightly more toward Israel. But, there’s a long way to go for Israel to forcibly send the resolution back to the drawing boards and have its narrative prevail. And for that reason, the public lobbying and spin machines on both sides have been making their case and will continue to do so.
