David Doyle
Culture Editor
On Friday September 23rd, The Palestinian Authority (PA)’s President, Mahmoud Abbas, addressed the General Assembly of the United Nations. He presented to it a plan for full membership of the United Nations for Palestine. The audacious move would mean the declaration of a Palestinian state. The decision to try to get a Palestinian State through the United Nations – as opposed to through direct negations with Israel has drawn criticism from many – while also garnering huge support. It is the divide within Palestinian civil society that is causing confusion for Palestine solidarity organisations.
The Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign (IPSC) is one such organisation that reflects the lack of unity on the issue. John Reynolds’ address to the IPSC on September 15th clearly demonstrated the complexity and confusion surrounding the membership bid but also the immense interest Irish people have in the debate on Palestinian membership to the UN. To a capacity crowd in the Teacher’s Club, Reynolds sought to navigate the complexities without getting bogged down in international law or the quagmire that is the politics of the Middle East, but ultimately such a debate doesn’t exist in a vacuum.
"The statehood bid is desperate, a last resort"
The Arab Spring – which has shaken the Arab world and beyond – is hugely significant in discussions about Palestinian recognition at the United Nations. The growing democratisation in the region has fundamentally altered the prognosis for Palestinian governance and for Israel. Israel has long sold itself as the only viable democracy in the region. However, the change in leadership in several countries in the region may soon alter that. Similarly, the spotlight is being increasingly shone on the PA and how they govern. The region now operates within a framework whereby ordinary people are no longer willing to tolerate poor governance and this may account, in part, for the decision to follow the UN route to a Palestinian state.
There has for quite some time been disquiet among certain sections of Palestinian civil society about the stalling of the peace process. It seems that it is this sentiment that the PA has seized upon. No longer wanting to be seen as playing a part in a languishing peace process, they have, in the eyes of many commentators, significantly distanced themselves from the possibility of a return to the negotiating table.
However, what may have stemmed from a desire to win over the population of the West Bank and Gaza has, it seems, not been entirely successful. No consensus on the plan has emerged. Despite huge rallies supporting the bid in the West Bank, there have been bitter arguments as to the best route forward. This has left certain Palestinian organisations finding themselves in the uncomfortable position of taking the same policy line as one of the most-right wing governments in Israeli history. However, John Reynolds and many at the IPSC meeting seemed to be of a clear opinion: that the PA have been largely backed into a corner and the statehood bid is, in the words of Reynolds, a “desperate bid” and a “last resort”.
There is some credence to this suggestion by Reynolds; the peace process has stalled. There seems to be no sense that a return to the negotiating table is imminent. Surrounded by a climate in which self-determination has become the buzz word, the Palestinian Authority has found itself in a difficult position. The bid for full membership seems destined to fail. It is a foregone conclusion that the Security Council will block such a move – because America will veto it. But the real results of the vote won’t be whether it passes or not. Instead they will be the reaction to the vote – especially among the Palestinian and Israeli populations.
"Despite huge rallies supporting the bid no consensus has emerged"
Already there has been an increase in the Israeli presence in the West Bank and, with the vote imminent, there is the potential for the violent clashes that often follow significant political events in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The world has once again focused on the issues surrounding the conflict as a result of the vote and there is a chance that this increased focus will yield a new solution now that direct negotiation has stalled.
It seems that the Arab Spring, which started in Tunisia and spread across the region, has brought the idea of self-determination to the forefront of Middle Eastern politics. It is this idea that seems to be colouring the debate about the UN vote. Indeed the very fact that the IPSC have decided not to take a stance on the issue, deciding instead to let the Palestinians decide their own course is testament to the centrality of self-determination in the region’s current discourse. Perhaps it is this rallying call across the region that will finally make the breakthrough in the Arab-Israeli conflict.
David Doyle can be found on Twitter at @DavidMJTDoyle
