Israel and Palestine: Face-Off at the UN

Zero Phoenix

The Second Coming of Hazama
#1
Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has said that this week's bid by the Palestinians for UN membership has no chance of success and that they would ultimately seek renewed talks.

"Their attempt to be accepted as a member of the United Nations will fail," he said at the start of the weekly cabinet meeting on Sunday. "That attempt will fail, since it has to pass through the Security Council."

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has promised Palestinians he will seek UN membership from the Security Council on Friday.

The move comes despite stiff opposition from Israel and the US, who say that only direct negotiations can resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Abbas left neighbouring Jordan on Sunday bound for New York, where he is to meet heads of state attending the UN General Assembly, his spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeina said.

The US, Israel's main ally, has already announced it is prepared to use its veto to block the Palestinian bid in the Security Council.
"As a result of the actions of the United States, which is working closely with us, and of other governments with which we and the Americans are working, I predict that this attempt will fail," Netanyahu said.

"In the end, after the smoke clears and after everything that happens at the UN, the Palestinians will come to their senses, I hope, drop these moves to bypass negotiations and return to the table in order to bring peace to us and our neighbours."

'Legitimate aspirations'

The US and Europe have stepped up a diplomatic scramble Sunday to avoid a UN showdown on the Palestinian plan to seek full UN membership.

US, European Union, Russian and UN officials were all involved in the bid to seek a face-saving way out of the looming confrontation.
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with EU foreign affairs representative Catherine Ashton in New York, where the Middle East diplomatic Quartet's envoy, Tony Blair, was to meet UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

Blair said on Sunday that he hoped for a last-minute compromise which would allow the Palestinians to express their desire for self-determination while opening the door to renewed talks.
"
What we will be looking for over the next few days is a way of putting together something that allows their claims and legitimate aspirations for statehood to be recognised, whilst actually renewing the only thing that's going to produce a state - which is a negotiation directly between the two sides," Blair told ABC television.

"Let's see if we can craft something that allows the Palestinians to come to the United Nations, to advance their aspirations for statehood that also at the same time allows us to develop a framework for negotiations so that they get back to talking."

Twelve months ago, US President Barack Obama said he wanted to see a Palestinian state at the UN within a year.
Britain, France and Germany will have decisive votes on the council. All of their UN envoys say that no decision on how to vote has been taken because they have not seen a Palestinian resolution.

The Palestinians' willingness to return to direct talks will play a central role in their decision, envoys added.

'Any resolution'

Netanyahu compared the Security Council to the UN's government, while the General Assembly, he said, was more like a parliament.

"There you can pass almost any resolution," he said. "They could decide that the sun rises in the west and sinks in the east, but it doesn't have the same weight and the same importance as the Security Council."

Netanyahu has said he too will go to the UN to explain Israel's opposition to the Palestinian move.

Like Abbas, he is to speak on September 23, a government official said.

The White House says Netanyahu is also likely to meet US President Barack Obama in New York.

Peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians foundered nearly a year ago in a dispute over Israel's continued construction of settlements on occupied Palestinian land.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/09/201191816583436163.html

On my end I have to wonder why we should even waste time with this matter. Palestine is obviously the aggressor in this fight as it has been historically. The U.S. should grow some balls, team up with Israel, and turn that sandbox into a crater. It's times like this I miss Reagan.
 

-lexus-

Visions of Hell
#2
Its a waste of time since the US will veto it anyways. At the other hand, it would have been a perfect move to give Fatah some credibility, get rid of Hamas and get those peace talks on the move again. Abbas was absolutely right when he said that these peace talks so continue between the two countries at equal footing. Otherwise you cant have a deal.

Otherwise, I do kinda agree with Zero. Invade it, put a EU/America/Russia/Whatever controlled government there and force both of them to integrate. Israel is a state based on racism and Palestinians and territorially divided to form an effective state. But yeah, that should be done to the entire area.
 

Chimer

★('°Ch†mR°') ★
#4
On my end I have to wonder why we should even waste time with this matter. Palestine is obviously the aggressor in this fight as it has been historically. The U.S. should grow some balls, team up with Israel, and turn that sandbox into a crater. It's times like this I miss Reagan.
Ouch... well maybe it's time to remember why israelians are WHERE they ARE now... that is historical... sure thing palestinians can be seen as agressors... in the same way as a A country shall agress a B country in order to get back his lands...

This conflict isn't as simple as Palestinians are the Baddies and Israelians the goodies... i think it's an absurdity to see things that way. ( well it's only my opinion on a point of view, nothing personal. )

And honestly why do you think no one has invaded/attacked palestinians... cause of US ??... what a joke... then why the US doesn't raid the palestinians once and for all ?? weapon business maybe ?? yeah Israel is sure well equiped... and it's just an example.

Invade it, put a EU/America/Russia/Whatever controlled government there and force both of them to integrate
yeah sure just force them to do something... two different religion, two different wayz of life, etc... truly it's gonna so fun... i hope you'll be sent on to see how efficient this will be...
 

Rascal

.........................
#5
On my end I have to wonder why we should even waste time with this matter. Palestine is obviously the aggressor in this fight as it has been historically. The U.S. should grow some balls, team up with Israel, and turn that sandbox into a crater. It's times like this I miss Reagan.
how so? This conflict is beyond ancient... and imo, the new generations need to put the fighting behind them. But before WWI, Arabs held the land... it was taken and given to Jewish settlers... who's sole claim to the land was that God had deemed it theirs.

yeah sure just force them to do something... two different religion, two different wayz of life, etc... truly it's gonna so fun... i hope you'll be sent on to see how efficient this will be...
@Chimer so what? sure it'll be rough... but that is the ideal end ja?
 

Chimer

★('°Ch†mR°') ★
#6
@Chimer so what? sure it'll be rough... but that is the ideal end ja?
honestly do you really think those two can leave "together" in the same space ?? do i really need to go further ?? you want to put muslims with jewish in the same space by force ?? you want to try to force two people, wich are fighting over decades, to live together by force... honestly you truly need a two pages developpement to see how it's impossible ?
 

Rascal

.........................
#7
honestly do you really think those two can leave "together" in the same space ?? do i really need to go further ?? you want to put muslims with jewish in the same space by force ?? you want to try to force two people, wich are fighting over decades, to live together by force... honestly you truly need a two pages developpement to see how it's impossible ?
not by force, and im not saying its a good idea, i wouldnt do it either, I just meant itd be ideal for us all to get along~ and it is not impossible... D: anything is possible!!! .... but yeah... its pretty much impossible. Whats ur solution tho? At this point, giving the land back to the Arabs would simply re-kindle the first spark and set the thing ablaze worse. Giving...or rather letting the Jews keep the land they have now, seems to be the best idea. and just dividing it where it is. No occupying palestine land. let palestine be a state, let israel stay a state.
 

Chimer

★('°Ch†mR°') ★
#8
At this point, giving the land back to the Arabs would simply re-kindle the first spark and set the thing ablaze worse
yeah i'm agree with that.

It's an hard matter, i think the original decision to put Isrealian people in an "enclave" ( it's a french word, so i'm not sure it has the same meaning in english... i'm sorry i don't the englissh word .. ) was absolutely @_@,specialy in this part of the world... but in the same time i don't really know what should have been done, the situaton was quite complex due to the world state/politic circumstances at this particular time.

But the fact is that this action created a real mess.
not by force, and im not saying its a good idea, i wouldnt do it either, I just meant itd be ideal for us all to get along~
Yeah it should be the adsolute goal to reach, we are all agree ( sorry i've missunderstood the last part of your post @Faux Angel . ) but, from what i've constated, it seems those people are relatively "extreme" in their own way. I think this is our fault ( i mean the occidentals ) cause some of our previous decisions. But not only, i think some Muslims ( NOT ALL !!! TO BE CLEAR I WANT TO AVOID A GENERALISATION.) are "extrems" : In their way to see/interpret/live things, not only in religion. In the other hand,the same can be said about some Israelians.

Plus, if we are waiting for next generations, it will take, i think, much time. Even if i keep hope in the fact that ( for me it's maybe the best option.) the youth, tired of the situation, and with an another mentality based on a more "open" vision, shall bring some "freshier" solutions for their state/countries.
 

-lexus-

Visions of Hell
#9
yeah sure just force them to do something... two different religion, two different wayz of life, etc... truly it's gonna so fun... i hope you'll be sent on to see how efficient this will be...
Having two states is obviously not gonna work either. One state, thats the best solution. But yeah, you gotta ensure that racism gets suppressed, so you cant leave it to either the Israelis or the Palestinians to be part of the administration for now.
 

Chimer

★('°Ch†mR°') ★
#10
One state, thats the best solution
so you cant leave it to either the Israelis or the Palestinians to be part of the administration for now
paradox... "you" want to make a unik state for those two, but this won't be under Palestinian or Isralians ( maybe the both at the same time... )
Then, who will be in charge of this state ? who will take the responsabilities ? An international "governement" ? not sure it could work... there are already lot of difficulties with internationals organisations... honestly... why not, but i don't think it can be possible. Plus i presume that it could be taken as an act of "ingérence"...
 

-lexus-

Visions of Hell
#11
No, put a peace force at the head of it. Much how the Allies controlled Germany and Japan in the first years after the war. Mandatory reeducation for everyone, and some third, neutral party rules the country until they are both taught how to live together.
 
#13
I'm honestly wondering what will happen in the Council.

I honestly wish for Palestine to become it's own state. I think with some 3rd party intervention (in terms of their respective governments), there might be some peace between Israeli's and Palestinians

This guy should represent Palestine, trololo
[YOUTUBE]cNQSV3BBtZ4[/YOUTUBE]
 

Kaze Araki

Libertarian Communist
#14
On my end I have to wonder why we should even waste time with this matter. Palestine is obviously the aggressor in this fight as it has been historically. The U.S. should grow some balls, team up with Israel, and turn that sandbox into a crater. It's times like this I miss Reagan.


While I do not claim myself as an expert in Israel-Palestine affair, I however do posses in-depth knowledge regarding the matter, due to my voracious research surrounding the issue and from reading many well established scholarly sources. In this instance, I would like to make a very short outline for the origin of Israel and Palestine.

- In ancient time, Palestine is inhabited by Canaanite civilization.
- At around 2,000BC a new branch stemmed out from this civilization; they are known as the Hebrew (Israelite) - later known as Jews.
- Starting from 70AD, there are massive emigration of Jews from Palestine due to their loosing war against the Roman.
- The Islamic Empire conquest of Jerusalem (637AD) started the process of Arabization of the native Palestinians.
- The term of native Palestinians is a very loose term since Palestine is virtually under constant attack from many empires through out history. Thus, the term should be understood as mixed ancestry between the indigenous population (Canaanites, Jewish) with outside invaders (Mongol, Arabs, Turkic, Caucasian Europeans etc.). These people are known today as simply Palestinians (the term Arabs is really misleading since they are not Arabs, but Arabized native population), and they had indeed lived on the land since ancient times.
- After WWII, with the Holocaust momentum, Ashkenazi Jews from Europe (see the diaspora I mentioned above) saw the opportunity to create the State of Israel in Palestine, which obviously rejected by the native population. At this time, the immigrant Jews comprised of a very small population in Palestine, compared to the rest of the indigenous population.
- In 1947 UN Mandate declared the partition of Palestine into two separate states for the Jews and the Arabs in Palestine, this is obviously once again rejected by the overwhelming native population.
- In 1948, after the creation of Israel, the war broke out between the Arabs (including the native Palestinians) and the Israelis, in which the Palestinians looses and starting from this point, they are systematically and ethnically cleansed from Palestine, resulting in more than 4.5 million of Palestinians refugees scattered around the Arab world.

I hope this clarify the origin for the current situation.
 

-lexus-

Visions of Hell
#15
hum... i'm truly not fan of this solution. And, well germany and japan wasn't ennemy... plus they won't accept this,
Japan and Germany at that time, were the enemy of the US and its Allies. But yeah, they lost the war and that means they dont have much of a choice. And in hindsight, its the best thing that happened to them. Japan is an economic superpower and a stable democracy, and Germany is an economic powerhouse (relatively at least) and also a stable democracy. Both countries have only benefited from the allied occupation.

But yeah, they probably wont accept it. Then again, right now they are like two children fighting over a toy. Are you going to let them or do you step in and tell them to share.

@Kaze, you conveniently left out the times the palestinians murdered jewish atletes, hijacked planes and blew up busses and restaurants for their cause. Surely, someone who is so well read about this subject must have heard of those things as well? If so, why do you leave them out, and thus paint a one sided picture where the Palestinians look like powerless victims and the Israeli's like a bunch of Nazis.
 

Kaze Araki

Libertarian Communist
#16
The outline (itself excluded many other events) stopped at 1948 for the purpose of explaining to the readers in regard to the "aggressor" claim. All the event that you stated are continuation of the outline. But it must be noted here that, despite the atrocities on both sides, the civilian casualties is overwhelmingly Palestinians. The recent Gaza Massacre is a good example, where the ratio is roughly 1:100.
 

-lexus-

Visions of Hell
#17
The outline (itself excluded many other events) stopped at 1948 for the purpose of explaining to the readers in regard to the "aggressor" claim. All the event that you stated are continuation of the outline. But it must be noted here that, despite the atrocities on both sides, the civilian casualties is overwhelmingly Palestinians. The recent Gaza Massacre is a good example, where the ratio is roughly 1:100.
The vicious circle of violence has been going on for so long that both parties have provoked the other so often that both parties are equally at fault. Its just that one party has a superior army capable of far more destruction then the other party, so its an uneven fight. T

hen again, I personally think youre asking to be mauled if you provoke a grizzly bear to fight you, and thats no difference then provoking a superior military to come to your place to trash the place.
 

Chimer

★('°Ch†mR°') ★
#18
hen again, I personally think youre asking to be mauled if you provoke a grizzly bear to fight you, and thats no difference then provoking a superior military to come to your place to trash the place
hummm, i'm not so sure... for exemple, Afghanistan... when russians came out there with huge military forces, the stayed, fought and return to their country with no particular results...

@Kaze Araki => many thanks for the historical precision. :thumb:
 

-lexus-

Visions of Hell
#19
hummm, i'm not so sure... for exemple, Afghanistan... when russians came out there with huge military forces, the stayed, fought and return to their country with no particulary results...
I never said anything about winning. Israel, with all its military might, still hasnt managed to stop the Palestinians from rebelling against them. But, if you provoke them into a fight its gonna get bloody for your side.