Most Popular
-
1
Medical profs at top hospitals suspend surgeries, clinics
-
2
Samsung chip business back on track, logs W1.9tr operating profit in Q1
-
3
Exports to US reach all-time high, widen gap with China
-
4
Shinsegae faces showdown with investors over SSG.com's delayed IPO
-
5
Hopes rise for possible Gaza truce deal
-
6
Trump rekindles criticism: US forces defending 'wealthy' S. Korea 'free of charge'
-
7
Ex-pro baseball player who killed debtor appeals sentence
-
8
S. Korea discussed possible participation in AUKUS Pillar 2 with Australia: defense minister
-
9
S. Korea to issue travel ban on Haiti amid intensifying gang violence
-
10
Leaders of S. Korea, Angola agree to boost economic, trade cooperation
When I was 1 year old, my parents and their neighbors had occasion to be glued to their radio sets to listen to a very special broadcast. It was Nov. 29, 1947, when the General Assembly of the United Nations voted on the Partition Plan of then British-ruled Palestine between Arabs and Jews.
One by one the chairman, Oswaldo Aranya from Brazil, read the names of the countries, and everybody in the Middle East held their breath until the answer was heard: yes, no or abstained. When the final count was heard ― 33 for, 13 against and 10 abstaining ― was announced, my parents and their neighbors burst into the street, dancing and weeping in joy.
The Arabs, on the other hand, who had rejected the partition, started shooting. The 1948 War erupted. When it ended, the Jews had a state bigger than had been designed for them in the Partition Plan. The Arabs of Palestine, on the other hand, lost everything. Many of them became refugees, and for the last six decades they have been struggling to regain some of their loss.
This week, folks in the Middle East had a sense of deja-vu when again in the United Nations a momentous decision on Palestine is on the table, and the countries of the world are required to give their vote on the proposal to recognize a Palestinian state. Except that this time the inhabitants of the land in question switched sides: The Arabs are supporting, and the Israelis are opposing.
In the 64 years that have passed since the first vote in 1947, the United Nations more than tripled in membership. If and when the vote on a Palestinian state happens, it is expected that more than two-thirds of the world’s countries will support it, while Israel, its staunch American ally, and a few other countries will oppose.
Since the road to statehood goes through the Security Council, it is expected that the proposal will be vetoed by the United States, unless the Palestinians pull back at the last moment. One way or another, it doesn’t change the overall picture: The world says yes to a Palestinian state, while Israel, the United States and few others, say no.
It is easy to criticize the Israeli government for opposing the U.N. vote on a Palestinian state. Even Israelis feel uncomfortable rejecting a U.N. motion for Palestinian sovereignty, when the same action in the U.N. gave them their own state.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu explains that it is the Palestinians who are actually on the rejecting side, trying to make a shortcut to statehood through the U.N. by avoiding talks with Israel.
There is sense in the official Israeli approach. Declaring a state and asking the U.N. to recognize it, without agreeing with the Israelis on the key issues, is only a recipe for trouble. The feeling among many Israelis is that the Palestinians ― even if they come to the negotiating table ― are never willing, or able, to compromise and strike a deal.
Prof. Itamar Rabinowitz, a former Israeli ambassador to the United States, this week recalled an episode from the last days of President Clinton in power. In 2000, Clinton came the closest to reaching an agreement between Palestinians and Israelis, and then Yasser Arafat backed off at the last moment. As Clinton was ready to leave the White House, Arafat called and praised him as a “great man.”
“You could have made me a great man,” Clinton answered dryly, “if you just said yes.”
President Obama is much weaker than Clinton was in 2000, so the chances that he would be able to knock heads together and jump-start the failed peace process are slim. I’m not sure he is even interested. We are doomed, then, to a show in the United Nations, with a lot of speeches, haggling and drama.
When the dust settles, however, Palestinians and Israelis will be left in the same place, having to share the same piece of land. We may encounter some instability first, but then the time will come for another round of face-to-face negotiations. It worked with the Egyptians, it worked with the Jordanians and it should also work with the Palestinians.
At least, we have to try again.
By Uri Dromi
Uri Dromi writes about Israeli affairs for the Miami Herald. Readers may send him email at dromi@mishkenot.org.il. ― Ed.
(The Miami Herald)
(MCT Information Services)
One by one the chairman, Oswaldo Aranya from Brazil, read the names of the countries, and everybody in the Middle East held their breath until the answer was heard: yes, no or abstained. When the final count was heard ― 33 for, 13 against and 10 abstaining ― was announced, my parents and their neighbors burst into the street, dancing and weeping in joy.
The Arabs, on the other hand, who had rejected the partition, started shooting. The 1948 War erupted. When it ended, the Jews had a state bigger than had been designed for them in the Partition Plan. The Arabs of Palestine, on the other hand, lost everything. Many of them became refugees, and for the last six decades they have been struggling to regain some of their loss.
This week, folks in the Middle East had a sense of deja-vu when again in the United Nations a momentous decision on Palestine is on the table, and the countries of the world are required to give their vote on the proposal to recognize a Palestinian state. Except that this time the inhabitants of the land in question switched sides: The Arabs are supporting, and the Israelis are opposing.
In the 64 years that have passed since the first vote in 1947, the United Nations more than tripled in membership. If and when the vote on a Palestinian state happens, it is expected that more than two-thirds of the world’s countries will support it, while Israel, its staunch American ally, and a few other countries will oppose.
Since the road to statehood goes through the Security Council, it is expected that the proposal will be vetoed by the United States, unless the Palestinians pull back at the last moment. One way or another, it doesn’t change the overall picture: The world says yes to a Palestinian state, while Israel, the United States and few others, say no.
It is easy to criticize the Israeli government for opposing the U.N. vote on a Palestinian state. Even Israelis feel uncomfortable rejecting a U.N. motion for Palestinian sovereignty, when the same action in the U.N. gave them their own state.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu explains that it is the Palestinians who are actually on the rejecting side, trying to make a shortcut to statehood through the U.N. by avoiding talks with Israel.
There is sense in the official Israeli approach. Declaring a state and asking the U.N. to recognize it, without agreeing with the Israelis on the key issues, is only a recipe for trouble. The feeling among many Israelis is that the Palestinians ― even if they come to the negotiating table ― are never willing, or able, to compromise and strike a deal.
Prof. Itamar Rabinowitz, a former Israeli ambassador to the United States, this week recalled an episode from the last days of President Clinton in power. In 2000, Clinton came the closest to reaching an agreement between Palestinians and Israelis, and then Yasser Arafat backed off at the last moment. As Clinton was ready to leave the White House, Arafat called and praised him as a “great man.”
“You could have made me a great man,” Clinton answered dryly, “if you just said yes.”
President Obama is much weaker than Clinton was in 2000, so the chances that he would be able to knock heads together and jump-start the failed peace process are slim. I’m not sure he is even interested. We are doomed, then, to a show in the United Nations, with a lot of speeches, haggling and drama.
When the dust settles, however, Palestinians and Israelis will be left in the same place, having to share the same piece of land. We may encounter some instability first, but then the time will come for another round of face-to-face negotiations. It worked with the Egyptians, it worked with the Jordanians and it should also work with the Palestinians.
At least, we have to try again.
By Uri Dromi
Uri Dromi writes about Israeli affairs for the Miami Herald. Readers may send him email at dromi@mishkenot.org.il. ― Ed.
(The Miami Herald)
(MCT Information Services)
