Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Discussion & Updates on Palestinian statehood bid

Discussion in 'International Politics' started by Hembo, Sep 19, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. lucifer

    lucifer Lieutenant SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    785
    Likes Received:
    155
    re: Discussion & Updates on Palestinian statehood bid

    ^^^^ First a moral victory, they would gather more support from across the world.
    Another they would be able to get aid from world bank/IMF for development, they would be able to raise an army/air force/navy etc.

    Anyways, I'm all for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestine conflict and that should be the way to go, but for palestine to say no negotiations, its gonna be our way, and walk away from peace talks, thats not really showing much keen interest in having a peaceful mid-east now is it?
    Truth is, Palestinians have always walked away from negotiations/peace talks with Israel ever since its inception, and these guys want to stop at nothing into acquiring all of Israel, this for them would just be a beginning. Just because they have a holy place of theirs in Jerusalem & have lived their for a 1000 or so years doesnt alter the truth. The holiest of places for Jews & Christians is in Jerusalem, Jews have lived their for over 3000 years and this land is rightfully theirs.
     
  2. legalize logic

    legalize logic FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2011
    Messages:
    63
    Likes Received:
    8
    re: Discussion & Updates on Palestinian statehood bid

    Even if one supposes that America abstains from vetoing the Palestinian bid for independence,it doesn't mean that embargoes or restrictions will be lifted on account of it.Moral victory yes,everything else will still need the nod from Israel/United States.That is why Palestine resolving it's issues with Israel before making it's bid for statehood would be the best approach in my book.
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2011
  3. Ahmad

    Ahmad 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    48
    re: Discussion & Updates on Palestinian statehood bid

    I do agree with you, but the problem is that israel dont and wont support a palestinian state.
     
  4. lucifer

    lucifer Lieutenant SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    785
    Likes Received:
    155
    re: Discussion & Updates on Palestinian statehood bid

    ^^^ You are speaking half information here...
    Yes, Israel won't support a palestinian state, true... but it wont support a palestinian state where the govt./military/people want to anhilate Israel, they have made this their life's purpose. They wont support Palestinian state where they have to cede to the unjust demands of the said state. Palestine rightfully lost the land in the wars it initiated. and now it wants the land back, which originally belonged to the people of Israel itself!? Israel has always offered to normalize relations with Palestine but what does palestine do? Instead of going to negotiations with Israel, internationalizes the issue, and launch rockets in Israel. No sane country would support such a state.
     
  5. december

    december FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 7, 2011
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    8
    re: Discussion & Updates on Palestinian statehood bid

    You have to condider the thousands of people displaced to Lebnon,Syria & egypt.I dont think they can ever make it to home even
    after generation.I met a palestini setlled in lebnon.His grandfather moved to lebnon at the time of arab-israel conflict.Now if i ask him do you know where your grand father houde ,he can show only a rough location.

    Remeber inorder to provide shelter for jews from europe during the wold war .....muslims where removed from thier land and now thy are refugees in other counties.........

    By stating that the palestine doenot want peace is not correct.you have to also take the right or terror wing in ISRAEL who also doenot want peace process to move on.

    Imagine a generation of people who doesnot have freedom at thier own very land.......

    The only solution to it is two counrty solution based on th 1967 borders and israel returning full control of west bank,gaza & jerusulam to palestine and golan heights to syria and the other territories captured from niegbours to respecive counteries during arab-israel war.

    United nation & US has come forward and find solution.UN has to take serious role than bieng a stamp.

    Arab counties after partition must recognies Israel as a state & israel & UN should recognise palestine as a state.
     
  6. lucifer

    lucifer Lieutenant SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    785
    Likes Received:
    155
    re: Discussion & Updates on Palestinian statehood bid

    they were living in foreign land captured by their ancestors, it wasnt even their home, and they wishfully moved out. Even still around 20% of Israeli population is arab who have made the choice and enjoy freedom in Israeli soil, perhaps more than they could've even dreamed of in lebanon/syria/egypt.
    Muslims were removed from Israel after WW2, to make way for the return of the people to whom the land rightfully belongs.

    So you are comparing a tiny fraction of Israeli population to the majority of Palestinians?


    Imagine several generations of people who have been under constant threat for existence ever since their country was re-born.
    I agree the only solution is a 2 state solution, but the borders you are asking for Israel to accept are unreasonable & unjustified. Jerusalem has been the capital of Israel for over 3000years, never has it been a capital for any arab entity.
    Jerusalem was founded by King David. Mohammad never came to Jerusalem.

    Israel became a country in 1312 BC, even before Islam was born.
    The people who claim "palestinian" title started doing so after 1967, nearly 2 decades after Israel was re-born.
    Under Jordanian rule, Jewish holy sites were desecrated and the Jews were
    denied access to places of worship. Under Israeli rule, all Muslim and Christian
    sites have been preserved and made accessible to people of all faiths.
    The UN was silent while 58 Jerusalem Synagogues were destroyed by the
    Jordanians.
    The UN was silent while the Jordanians systematically desecrated the ancient
    Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives.
    The UN was silent while the Jordanians enforced an apartheid-like a policy
    of preventing Jews from visiting the Temple Mount and the Western Wall.
     
  7. lucifer

    lucifer Lieutenant SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    785
    Likes Received:
    155
    Zakaria: I oppose the Palestinian U.N. bid for practical reasons




    I am opposed to the Palestinian effort at the United Nations because I think that it is going to get them nowhere. This is not the time for romantic gestures. This is the time for them to do something that will actually help them get a Palestinian state - a goal that I support.
    What is the likely outcome at the U.N.? The likely outcome is that the push is going to go nowhere in the Security Council. It may get to the General Assembly, and there may be a symbolic vote. But the result of that symbolic vote may well be that they lose funds - financial support from Israel, the U.S. and potentially some European countries - and it will make the Israelis feel that the Palestinians have gone in a unilateral direction when the only viable strategy is a bilateral one.
    At the end of the day, there is only one way you’re going to get a Palestinian state. And that’s if the Israelis agree to it. They have the land; they have the guns; they have the money. Palestinians may regard it as deeply unfair, and I understand that. But it is the world that we live in. The only way they’re going to get a Palestinian state is to engage directly with the Israelis.
    The Israelis have not been willing to be a productive partner in recent years, though it is worth remembering that the Israeli government under Ehud Barak did make a very serious effort and the Israeli government under Ehud Olmert made a very serious offer to the Palestinians. So, let’s not confuse Benjamin Netanyahu’s intransigence with all Israeli governments in recent years. The current government in Israel is clearly motivated by Israeli domestic politics. It fears the fragile governing coalition will fall apart. Perhaps, it is also motivated by ideological reasons. It is not in any way being a constructive partner.
    I think the U.N. vote is an understandable act of frustration on the part of the Palestinians, but they’re not going to get a Palestinian state through frustration. They’re going to get it by being smart and figuring out what they need to do to get the Israelis to engage in serious negotiations. I think Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad’s strategy of building a state from the ground up has been an incredibly successful one, and you can see it in the fact that Israelis have increasing respect for the institutions on the ground in the West Bank.
    I think the next big push the Palestinians need to figure out is how to get control of Gaza. If you have half of the Palestinian leadership that engages in terrorism and does not accept Israel’s right to exist, the Israelis are simply not going to create a Palestinian state under those conditions.
    Again, I’m leaving morality aside for now and just asking, “What is the practical path to a Palestinian state?†And the practical path has to be to sideline Hamas in some way or another. The more good governance the Palestinian authority is able to demonstrate, the more likely it is that Hamas will be sidelined.
    I’m convinced of the cause; I would like to see a Palestinian state, and I would like to see it broadly speaking on the boundaries that President Clinton’s plan talked about.
    Someone who has frequently been in these negotiations has told me:
    “It’s not that there’s no light at the end of the tunnel. Everybody sees the light at the end of the tunnel. The light at the end of the tunnel is blindingly clear and obvious. The problem is there’s no tunnel. There is no actual concrete path to getting to that light.â€
    And it isn’t going to happen with grand gestures at the United Nations. It’s going to happen through a series of very smart, thoughtful and practical steps along the way.
     
  8. lucifer

    lucifer Lieutenant SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    785
    Likes Received:
    155
    re: Discussion & Updates on Palestinian statehood bid



    The Palestinian Authority, which has already made a pact with the Hamas terrorist organization, now seeks recognition for a unilaterally declared state at the United Nations. President Barack Obama, though deeply committed to Palestinian statehood, declares his intention to block that scheme, even by exercising an American veto in the Security Council. Congress, for its part, threatens to cut off aid to the Palestinian Authority if it breaches its commitment to direct talks with Israel and pursues unilateralism.

    American mediators, meanwhile, lobby other members of the Middle East Quartet—the U.S., the European Union, the U.N., and Russia—in an attempt to forge a new framework for renewing Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. And Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu waits for the Palestinians to rejoin him at the negotiating table.


    Sound confusing? Indeed it was for many observers of this past week's dizzying diplomacy in New York. They asked themselves what exactly had transpired at the U.N., and why? What had spurred the Palestinians to turn their backs on a sympathetic U.S. president and a strong Israeli statesman capable of leading his skeptical people to peace? How could the Palestinians risk all they had achieved in recent years—a thriving economy, restored law and order, and significant U.S. aid—in a reckless bid to snatch the statehood that they could easily have earned?

    Confusing, perhaps, but the answer is simple. The Palestinians came to the U.N. to get a state, but without giving Israel peace in return.

    Understanding the Palestinians' decision requires a review not only of this past week's events but of one that occurred nearly 64 years ago at the same U.N. On Nov. 29, 1947, the General Assembly voted to partition British-controlled Palestine into two states, one Arab and one Jewish, that would live side-by-side in peace. The Jews accepted the agreement, but the Palestinians rejected it and joined with five Arab armies in an ultimately thwarted attempt to destroy the Jewish State of Israel.

    Forty six years later, in 1993, the Palestinians received another chance to accept the two-state solution. In the Oslo Accords, which the U.S. co-signed, Palestinians and Israelis pledged to resolve all outstanding issues through face-to-face negotiation and to achieve an historic peace. In fact, these discussions produced two Israeli peace proposals, in 2000 and 2008, that met virtually all of the Palestinians' demands for a sovereign state in the areas won by Israel in the 1967 war—in the West Bank, Gaza and even East Jerusalem.

    But Palestinian President Yasser Arafat rejected the first offer and Mahmoud Abbas ignored the second, for the very same reason their predecessors spurned the 1947 Partition Plan. Each time, accepting a Palestinian State meant accepting the Jewish State, a concession the Palestinians were unwilling to make.

    In between Israeli peace offers, the Palestinians waged a terror war that killed and maimed thousands of Israelis. When Israel uprooted all of its settlements from Gaza in 2005, the Palestinians failed to create a peaceful enclave and instead created a Hamas terrorist stronghold that fired thousands of rockets at Israeli civilians. Yet, in spite of their rejection and trauma, Israelis continued to uphold the vision of two peaceful adjacent states.

    That goal was embraced by Mr. Netanyahu, leader of the Likud Party, in a speech at Bar Ilan University in June 2009. Turning to "our Palestinian neighbors," he declared, "let's begin negotiations immediately without preconditions." But Mr. Abbas refused to negotiate. Nevertheless, Mr. Netanyahu ordered the removal of hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, facilitating remarkable economic growth and dramatically increased transport in and out of Gaza. When President Obama asked him to freeze construction in West Bank settlements, Mr. Netanyahu announced an unprecedented 10-month moratorium. But over the course of two and a half years, Mr. Abbas negotiated for a total of six hours, and then refused to discuss Israel's security needs.

    Those needs have grown immensely in the wake of the upheaval in the Arab world, the rise of Iranian proxies, and the deployment of tens of thousands of terrorist rockets on our borders. Though doubtful of the Palestinians' readiness for genuine peace, Israelis retain the hope of a two-state solution. Mr. Netanyahu championed that hope and even brought it to the U.N. this week. "I am extending my hand, the hand of Israel, in peace," he told Mr. Abbas—and the world—on Friday. "I hope you will grasp that hand."

    Unfortunately, Mr. Abbas did not come to New York to shake Mr. Netanyahu's hand but to grab a state which, he wrote earlier this year, "will pave the way for the internationalization of the conflict" and "pursue claims against Israel at the United Nations."

    The U.S. and other principled nations are standing strong, though, and Mr. Netanyahu is ready to negotiate today—if only Mr. Abbas is willing. While the circumstances have changed since 1947 and even 2008, the formula for peace remains unaltered. By accepting the Jewish State, the Palestinians can have their own.
     
  9. december

    december FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 7, 2011
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    8
    re: Discussion & Updates on Palestinian statehood bid

    I forgot the plaestisne is a promised land to Jews at the time of moses and they have birth right to it............
    plaestine was conquered by christians and muslims at various times .You are ignoring that the fact that muslims settled there for 1000s of yers and considered it as there home........

    You only reason to ignore is that becuse of that promised land concept.....

    .Jews immigaration started anly at the start of 19 th century......another dubious plan by briton to make sure that never a peace arise in middle east................Same as that they done with india & pakistan........

    waht do you expect from palestian people when they are forcibily removed from thier place and is only offered what the isreal or other western nation consider convinient.

    What was palestine canot be restored,,,,,,,,,,,,,,by I only expect some justice to be done to them..........

    and I have already stated how it can be done in my last post.............

    And please dont creat ideas that the palestine people never want peace by reading the western medias .............Who on the earth doesnot want to live at peace and return to thier to home but at what cost is that matter...........
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2011
  10. lucifer

    lucifer Lieutenant SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    785
    Likes Received:
    155
    re: Discussion & Updates on Palestinian statehood bid

    you conveniently overlook all the information I provided and re-post your same propagandic theory.
    Yes, Israel is the promised land of Jews not philistine.
    palestine has been conquered by muslims & christians, yes, and Arabs & Jews have fought alongside against the crusaders.
    Muslims settled their for 1000s of years, when Islam itself was born in 7th century AD! wonderful.
    My only reason is Jews settled their before muslims were even a concept. Jews have lived their for over 3000years as I stated before.
    palestinians have been asked to leave from Jewish land to make way for the rightful & Original owners. They were offered to live in Israel, and many of them chose again something you overlooked conveniently.
    Justice should be done to them, and they deserve their own country, but unilaterally proclaiming one, and that too which poses a credible security threat to Israel is in no way justified.

    Perhaps you can easily overlook the crimes committed by Hamas & Hezbollah, the PLO, and how they have completely changed the mindset of majority of the palestinians to be vengeful, but no sane person can overlook these heinous crimes.

    and who on earth doesn't want to live at peace...... ummm at the top of my head, Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, terrorists. Dont be so naive to overlook the ground reality and also take into consideration the past events.
     
  11. Indian Tiger

    Indian Tiger Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 18, 2011
    Messages:
    423
    Likes Received:
    92
    re: Discussion & Updates on Palestinian statehood bid

    Prime Minister expresses India's steadfast support for a Palestinian state




    United Nations: As Palestinians make a vigorous push for statehood, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Saturday expressed India's "steadfast" support for their struggle for a sovereign, independent and united state of Palestine.

    Singh said India looked forward to welcoming Palestine as an "equal" member of the United Nations where the US has threatened to veto any resolution seeking full UN membership for it. He also spoke about the crisis in the world economy and what India could do to help. (Read: Growing India can help the world economy, says Prime Minister)

    Hours before Singh made the remarks on the Palestine issue in his address at the UN General Assembly, Foreign Secretary Ranjan Mathai said there was no change in India's "well-established" position on Palestinian statehood, which it recognised way back in 1988.

    In his address at the UN General Assembly Singh said, "India is steadfast in its support for the Palestinian people's struggle for a sovereign, independent, viable and united state of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital, living within secure and recognizable borders side by side and at peace with Israel. We look forward to welcoming Palestine as an equal member of the United Nations."

    The Prime Minister also said the unresolved Palestinian question was a source of great instability and violence.

    UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has forwarded the Palestinian application for recognition of statehood to the President of the Security Council.

    The US has vowed to veto the unilateral Palestinian bid at the Security Council, saying talks between Israel and the Palestinians are the only real path to peace and statehood.

    For the Palestinians, full membership depends on nine approved votes in the 15-member Security Council as well as concurrence of the five permanent members. India is among the non-permanent members.

    Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas met UN Secretary General just before he addressed the UN General Assembly on Friday and submitted his application for Palestine to be admitted as a full member of the world body on the basis of the June 4, 1967 borders with Jerusalem as its capital.


    Prime Minister expresses India's steadfast support for a Palestinian state
     
  12. lucifer

    lucifer Lieutenant SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    785
    Likes Received:
    155
    re: Discussion & Updates on Palestinian statehood bid

    Yes, India supports Palestine instead of Israel. India's support has forever been for the cause of muslim population within our country and also to appease the arab nations to support India's stance on Kashmir. how have fared on both accounts so far? muslims within our nation also many, support Israel, for they put the security concerns of their country before religion. They understand Israel has long been an ally of India against extremist forces. And the arabs.... they continue to support pakistan, UAE & KSA have even offered to send their AWACS accompanied by fighter jets in a war like scenario with India. So what have we achieved by supporting an illegal entity?
    Agreeing with the west or other powers doesnt necessarily mean bending down to them, its just as well we see each other on the same page, just to show that India is an individual power doesnt mean we have to object to everything that comes up from the other major powers.
    From the beginning of the thread, the very first post, one can say that many more Indians support Israel and only a few are in favor of palestine, while our govt. chooses not to listen to its own people like everytime, and play vote bank politics
     
  13. lucifer

    lucifer Lieutenant SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    785
    Likes Received:
    155
    Settling for statehood

    Settling for statehood

    Nationalist movements have always compromised in order to achieve their goals.

    The 66th session of the United Nations General Assembly has just begun. Unless a diplomatic miracle happens, that body will soon be asked to approve what amounts to a unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood. Palestinian spokesmen say they had no choice but to make their end run around serious negotiations with Israel – because what Israel is offering in such negotiations is just a fraction of the territory to which the Palestinians are entitled.

    To appreciate the hubris in this justification, it helps to recall a historical fact: Virtually no nation founded in modern times has been born in possession of all the territory to which it could lay plausible claim. Settling for half a loaf – that is, statehood in a territory significantly smaller than the historic or desired homeland – is the price that most national liberation movements have paid for self-determination and international recognition.

    Giuseppe Garibaldi, the pre-eminent military leader of 19th-century Italian unification, was born to an Italian family in Nice, where most inhabitants spoke the language of northern Italy. One of Garibaldi’s goals was to unify the Italian peninsula into a single state, including Nice. When a peace treaty was imposed giving the city to France in exchange for statehood, Count Cavour, the political leader of the nationalist movement, at one point tendered his resignation as prime minister.

    When the treaty was ratified, there were riots in the streets of Nice, and thousands moved across the new border to Italy rather than be ruled by France. French possession of Nice was the price Italy paid for independence, recognition and peace. Politics is the art of the possible.

    Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey, was born in Salonika. It had been an Ottoman city for four centuries. During most of that time, Jews were the largest ethnic group in the population; for many years they were a majority. But the city also had a large and powerful community of Ottoman Muslims – including not only Ataturk, who was born there in 1881, but most of the leadership of the modernizing Young Turks. In 1912 the Greeks conquered the city and renamed it Thessalonica. After World War I, Greece suffered a military defeat by the Turks. But in the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne, Thessalonica was ceded to Greece in return for recognition of the Republic of Turkey, with internationally settled borders.

    This has been the pattern. Greece, for its part, achieved national independence in 1823. At that time it was a tiny statelet, with territory ending just north of Athens. Mount Olympus, the plain of Thessaly, Constantinople, Homer’s birthplace, and most of the world’s Greeks were beyond its borders. In 1919, the Treaty of Versailles created a series of independent states for previously stateless peoples, including Poles, Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, Czechs and Slovaks.

    None of these states had the borders that their people’s leaders wanted. In 1947, Lord Mountbatten drew a line across the map of India. With his stroke, the Indus Valley, the cradle of Indian civilization and then home to millions of Hindus, was excluded from the new nation of India. A long and bloody ethnic cleansing by Pakistani Muslims has left the Indus Valley almost without Hindus. They moved across the line to India, which flourishes inside the arbitrary line that Mountbatten drew.

    Just this summer, the primarily Christian and animist South Sudan assumed statehood with gratitude and hope, despite a border that excludes the heavily Christian province of Abyei. Meanwhile large, historic peoples including Kurds, Tibetans, Baluch, Pashtun, Sri Lankan Tamils, and Uyghurs, can only dream of an opportunity for national selfdetermination.

    Most would accept sovereignty even over a piece of their historic homeland no larger than a postage stamp, as long as it was a place in which they could determine their own fate and cultivate their unique history and culture.

    In 1937, Zionist leader Ze’ev Jabotinsky asked “merely for a small fraction†of the “vast piece of land†that included modern-day Israel. And in 1948, that is precisely what the United Nations offered the Jews, reserving the larger part of the land west of the Jordan for Arabs. Jews accepted the UN’s offer even though the heart of the biblical kingdoms, Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem, lay outside its borders. Arab leaders rejected the offer, launching a war to destroy the Jewish state instead of seizing the opportunity to build an Arab Palestine.

    Garibaldi and Ataturk achieved statehood at the cost of ceding the cities of their birth to rival nations. When the goal of a national movement is to build a state in which a treasured language, literature and culture can flourish and be passed on to new generations, the leaders of the movement will pay such a price.

    In contrast, if leaders of a national movement declare that they will not even negotiate until they have been promised every square inch of the land that they regard as their historic homeland, they are effectively announcing to the world that they are not prepared to assume a responsible place in the community of nations. If Palestinian leaders are serious about taking their place in this community, they will need to make the kind of concession that Ataturk and Garibaldi, Greece, Poland, India and Israel made.

    They would do well to recognize that the borders sought by some members of the movement are only aspirational, that the nation on the other side of the border also has a right to statehood, and that it will be necessary, finally, to settle down to the business of building a government, an economy and a peaceful future.
     
    1 person likes this.
  14. lucifer

    lucifer Lieutenant SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    785
    Likes Received:
    155
    re: Discussion & Updates on Palestinian statehood bid

    P.S. mods, this topic is probably going to be long with a lot of developments in the future, might I recommend making it a sticky and perhaps even a mid-east section?
     
  15. december

    december FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 7, 2011
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    8
    re: Discussion & Updates on Palestinian statehood bid

    Lucifer I agree to you that some adjustment has to be made...........
    But i think GAZA,West bank & jerusulem should be returned to palestine............Palestine should be established atleast on 1967 border.......and israel have to stop the settlement at the earliest to start the peace process.........settlement & peace process canoot go hand in hand.................

    Israel should also return the lands they siezed during the arab israel war so that it will help to establish peace and encorage arab counties to recognise israel................


    Pls forgive my spelling errors
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page