Friday

18th Jun 2021

Opinion

The EU should not be complicit in Abbas' mistake

  • Israel got a state in 1947, but Palestine did not because Palestinians and Arabs rejected the UN resolution at the time (Photo: the half-blood prince)

The Palestinians are about to compound their 1947 UN blunder with yet another misstep at the world body. No EU country should be complicit in this mistake.

The war between Hamas and Israel has barely ended, but the Palestinians are already off to their next battle - this time on the diplomatic front.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

Having been marginalised by the Gaza conflict, Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas remains determined to ask the United Nations General Assembly for non-member observer state status on Thursday.

He apparently hopes that this move will make him and the PA “relevant,” as the Jerusalem Post put it on Friday, citing diplomatic sources.

Now here is a crazy thought: if Abbas wants to become more relevant again, how about focusing his energy on state-building, fighting corruption at home and getting back to the negotiating table?

Having failed to embrace the offer by former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert for a comprehensive peace in 2008, he has largely refused to even speak to Olmert's successor, Benjamin Netanyahu.

Abbas then has the chutzpah to cite the absence of peace talks, which he is himself boycotting, as justification for going to the UN.

Given the traditional voting patterns in the General Assembly, the resolution is sure to pass. With the 120-strong non-aligned movement, of which 56 are members of the Organization of Islamic Co-operation, the Palestinians could easily win a resolution saying black is white.

But the real fight is for Western legitimacy. Unfortunately, a number of European Union member states are likely to back the UN move.

This would be a mistake. If the long-standing Arab-Israeli conflict should have taught us one thing, it is that Palestinian interests are not necessarily identical with its leadership's policies.

The UN vote may give the PA a state on paper but it will not change the reality on the ground.

The creation of a state can only come through direct negotiations and any UN endorsement based on Palestinian terms will only make it harder to find a mutually acceptable compromise in the future. The UN bid thus threatens to divorce the creation of a Palestinian state from the ultimate goal of achieving peace.

The only valid legal framework between Israel and the Palestinians – the 1995 “Oslo Accords” – specifically forbids the sort of unilateral manoeuvre that Abbas plans.

"Neither side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip pending the outcome of the Permanent Status negotiations,” the agreement says.

By supporting the unilateral UN bid, EU member states would not only assist the Palestinians in violating their contractual obligations, they would also undermine the EU’s own standing, which after all signed the Oslo Accords as a witness.

And how will violating past agreements encourage Israelis to trust Palestinians to abide by future agreements?

The just-ended Hamas conflict underlined Israel's dilemma, which in any future peace deal will have to give up territory and thus security.

But building trust is not on Abbas' agenda. In a New York Times op-ed last year, the he outlined his UN move as part of a plan to intensify the conflict, for instance by bringing charges at the International Criminal Court. Such a step and the inevitable Israeli counter charges would make reconciliation so much harder.

Speaking of counter charges: does his UN gambit mean that Abbas is now taking responsibility for the war crimes and terrorism committed by Hamas?

If not, how does he reconcile his statehood bid with the stubborn fact that he lacks control over Gaza, a significant part of that new “observer state." Control over defined territory remains one of the basic legal criteria for statehood.

So why is Abbas going to New York instead of Jerusalem to negotiate peace?

Word here in Brussels is that he does not trust Netanyahu. But what does the head of a state that does not yet exist have to lose from talking to the only man who can bring it about?

Netanyahu has accepted the two-state solution, has said he is ready for the necessary “painful compromises,” and has repeatedly invited Abbas for direct talks. So why not take him at his word and either negotiate an end to the conflict or, if Netanyahu is really just bluffing, 'expose' him?

To add an air of substance for his refusal to negotiate, President Abbas blamed the settlements, demanding a construction halt as a precondition to talks.

But when Netanyahu agreed in 2009 to a 10-month building moratorium, Abbas still stayed away for nine out of these 10 months, showing up only when no more time was left for meaningful talks. So who is bluffing?

The UN vote is set for 29 November, the day of the 1947 UN resolution that called for the creation of a Palestinian and a Jewish state. Abbas probably thinks the date's symbolism will help his cause. It should not.

The reason Palestine does not exist yet is that unlike the Jewish leadership at the time, the Palestinians and their Arab brethren rejected the partition plan before attacking the newly born Israel.

The Palestinians are about to compound their 1947 UN blunder with yet another misstep at the world body. No EU country should be complicit in this mistake.

Daniel Schwammenthal is director of the American Jewish Committee Transatlantic Institute in Brussels

This op-ed was first published in the Commentator on 28 November

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

Next week is time for EU to finally lead on rule of law

The EU Commission still has to prove they are ready to stand up for the rights of every citizen in the EU. Throwing the towel in would send a terrible signal to European leaders tempted to emulate Hungary and Poland.

Why the EU renewables target needs to be (a lot) higher

The revamped Renewable Energy Directive next month should set an EU binding renewable energy target of at least 50% by 2030, paving the way towards transition to a 100 percent renewable-energy based system by 2040.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersNineteen demands by Nordic young people to save biodiversity
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersSustainable public procurement is an effective way to achieve global goals
  3. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic Council enters into formal relations with European Parliament
  4. Nordic Council of MinistersWomen more active in violent extremist circles than first assumed
  5. Nordic Council of MinistersDigitalisation can help us pick up the green pace
  6. Nordic Council of MinistersCOVID19 is a wake-up call in the fight against antibiotic resistance

Latest News

  1. AstraZeneca must deliver 50m doses by September or face fines
  2. Next week is time for EU to finally lead on rule of law
  3. Austria blocking EU sanctions on Belarus banks
  4. Number of people forcibly displaced reaches historic high
  5. Three-quarters of EU citizens support vaccines, survey finds
  6. NGOs: Leaked EU biomass reform 'denial of science'
  7. US and Russia restart talks on cyber and nuclear war
  8. Europe needs to help sea rescues, say NGOs

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us