Recognition by the UN would be a setback for Palestinians.

Next Tuesday, Palestinian delegates will in all probability submit a request to the

General Assembly of the United Nations to be recognized as a full member of the

UN. Since 1988 the UN recognizes Palestine as a nation, as a people, and the

international community acknowledges that the areas that were conquered by

Israel in 1967 don’t belong to them but rather to the Palestinians, in the case of

the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, or to the Syrians in case of the Golan

Heights. Still, a request for full recognition would be unwise, not because

America will once again show its worst nature in this conflict, but because the

problems for Palestinians will only increase.

Mahmoud Abbas

The motivation for the request for full recognition was clearly explained last May by Palestinian President

Mahmoud Abbas in an article in The New York Times:

The UN and various international agreements provide many legal provisions concerning the legality, or lack

thereof, of occupying land that belongs to another state. Recognition as a full Palestinian 'nation state', which

122 countries have already done, would mean that the Palestinians could rely on those legal provisions and the

pressure on Israel to cooperate with a two-state solution would increase. Because of that pressure on its most

important ally, America is trying to prevent the UN in all possible ways from recognizing the Palestinian state.

Popular support

The problem of full recognition is twofold and relates to the chosen route towards a two-state solution. First of

all, that route is not one that is widely supported by the Palestinian people. It is important to remind that

Abbas's legitimacy as a representative of the Palestinian people isn’t so much based on those people, but

rather on his recognition by Israel and the West. In 2006 Abbas' Fatah party lost the election from Hamas, but

because the western world and Israel are not willing to negotiate with that party that they have – rightly or

wrongly – classified as a terrorist organization, Abbas negotiates not as much with an electoral mandate from

his people but rather thanks to the support of other countries. Fatah's willingness to commit to a two-state

solution is partially what gave Hamas an advantage during the elections in the first place.

If the two-state solution is not widely supported by the Palestinian people, the chosen route will not succeed. A

peaceful solution to the conflict needs enough popular support, needs to be able to count on sufficient

willingness of the people to cooperate on both sides to work. If Abbas takes steps towards a two-state solution

without the support of his population, attacks by Palestinians groups will remain ongoing. Internally, the

conflict between Fatah and Hamas will continue and a large part of the Palestinian people will continue to feel

oppressed by Israel. A solution that is forced upon its stakeholders is never a solution.

Institutionalization

The second problem is closely related to the first. The Palestinians have good reasons for rejecting a two-state

solution because full recognition would legitimize and institutionalize the oppression and ethnic cleansing of

Palestinians by Israel. If the Palestinians finally have their own state, it would mean that Israel can justifiably

say that there is no place for Palestinians in Israel because they already have their own state where they can

live. This means that the - still ongoing - expulsion of Palestinians from their homes and settlements, ethnic

cleansing in other words because Israel is effectively being "cleansed" of Palestinians, can continue and that

already displaced Palestinian refugees living in places like the Gaza Strip and Lebanon can never return to their

old homes, that they have no right to return.

"Palestine's admission to the United Nations would pave the way for the Internationalization

of the conflict as a legal matter, not only a political one."

When, during the 1897 First Zionist Congress in Basel, the establishment of a Jewish state was discussed

publicly for the first time, it was suggested that the state could be founded in a barely populated but fertile

part of Argentina. For most Jews, however, that was unacceptable because what they wanted was not just any

state, but their own state in a place they regarded as their own home. For many Palestinians this is the same,

they don’t necessarily want any state but rather their home state. Like the Jews in 1947, they just want to

return to what they regard as their homes. A two-state solution and full recognition of a Palestinian state

would permanently close any window of opportunity for that happening. It would be as much unwise with

regards to finding a solution to the conflict, as it would be unjust.

Progress

The Western world - especially the "Quartet" consisting of key partners, the United States, the European

Union, Russia and the United Nations – actively supports the two-state solution as the only sustainable solution

to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The motivation behind this seems to have little to do with feasibility or

justice, but rather with the fact that it sends the signal that some progress is being made, where in reality that

doesn’t seem to be the case. Recognition of a Palestinian state by the UN would mean no progress and the

conflict would deteriorate even further. It would therefore be in the best interest of the Palestinian people that

they don’t get their own state now.