More haste, less speed Mr Abbas

If there is anything that the Palestinian Authority is good at, it’s proving to Israel how “flexible” and “generous” it is. This week, the Ramallah Authority did just that when it submitted, well ahead of the 26 January 2012 deadline, its proposals on borders and security issues which it feels should be the basis for renewed negotiations with Israel. Although the PA has agreed to Israel’s demands for a land exchange and a demilitarised Palestinian state, Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing government rejected the offer outright; Israel, apparently, prefers direct and confidential negotiations. Needless to say, Israel has given no indication that it will respect the Middle East Quartet’s timeline for submitting its own proposal.

What prompted the PA to submit its proposals now? Clearly, finance is a factor. Just one week after Mahmoud Abbas made his foray at the UN seeking membership of the world body, the US Congress decided to block a transfer of $200 million to the Ramallah Authority. Israel complemented this collective punishment by Washington when it, in turn, froze the transfer of tax revenues valued at well over $100 million, leaving the PA in a serious economic mess.

Politically-speaking, the timing of the PA move is extraordinary, and that’s an understatement; it coincided with the conclusion of the UN General Assembly’s annual debate on the Question of Palestine, during which the world gathering expressed overwhelming support for the Palestinian leadership’s application for full UN membership. The General Assembly stressed the detrimental impact on the peace process of Israel’s settlement policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. In six recorded votes, the Assembly adopted resolutions covering Palestine and the wider Middle East; the texts referred to the illegal Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem as well as the Golan Heights. One speaker after another praised the prisoner exchange deal but regretted that it was undermined by Israel’s ongoing settlement construction and its withholding of tax revenues from the Palestinian Authority. The Malaysian representative described Israel’s actions as not only immoral, but also counterproductive to the goal of genuine and lasting peace.

When the vote was taken, the Assembly adopted, by 167 in favour to 7 against (Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, United States of America) with 4 abstentions (Australia, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Tonga), a broad-based resolution on the peaceful settlement of the Palestine question.

Not in the least bit embarrassed, the US representative said his delegation was troubled by the repetitive, disproportionate and one-sided annual General Assembly resolutions condemning Israel. He added that his country was disappointed that the Assembly singled out Israel repeatedly without fully acknowledging the responsibility of both sides; thus ended the Americans’ patently absurd attempt to lecture the United Nations delegates about impartiality and balance.

On Palestine, the US is in a lonely league of its own. The “historic” Palestinian leadership is yet to take full advantage of this reality and the broad support that it enjoys internationally. The truth is, Palestine doesn’t need UN membership to engage with the world community. The PA could, if only it could muster the courage, build on this support in spite of US opposition. It took the People’s Republic of China more than 30 years before it was granted membership of the world body. Throughout that period Washington chose to recognise the Taiwan government as the “real” China, but that did not stop the Beijing from interacting and consolidating its position in the family of nations.

Mahmoud Abbas’s decision to rush through his proposal is all the more staggering because everyone knows that American presidents don’t “do” Palestine in an election year. In Barack Obama’s case it is already obvious that the chances of him doing anything are basically non-existent. Though he is still ahead of his Republican rivals in the popularity ratings, he will have to pay a price for jeopardising America’s influence in the Middle East sooner or later. After all, it was under his watch that America and Israel lost their most loyal Arab supporters in Egypt’s Mubarak and Tunisia’s Ben Ali. Moreover, it is just a matter of time before Obama is held to account for allowing the rise of political Islam in the region, a reality that now causes Israeli officials sleepless nights.

Looking at Israel, we have to ask the same sort of question of Mahmoud Abbas; why is he making haste when Netanyahu’s term is coming to an end and Israelis have a tradition of playing musical chairs with their prime ministers?

Furthermore, in Europe Abbas can hardly expect a change of approach to the conflict. The big three – Britain, France and Germany – will not change their stance. They have been subsumed too much by their role in creating the tragedy in Palestine; Britain wrote the dubious Balfour Declaration, France gave Israel nuclear military capability and Germany has paid billions in reparations for the Nazi Holocaust. When all is said and done, none of these countries could care less about a Palestinian state and the return of refugees to their homes and property.

Still, all is not lost. Change can, and will come, but only when it becomes palpable to America and Europe that Israel too much of a burden. There are already signs of this but there is still some way to go. With the removal of the western-backed Arab dictators who plundered their people’s wealth, diverted the energies of their youth and denied them an opportunity to realise their real potential, change is not far off. But Abbas is in a hurry and yet, if he does not benefit now from this current regional and international climate and goodwill he probably never will. Indeed, the PA will probably never do so as long as it continues to place all its eggs in the in the negotiations basket.

The sad truth is, membership of the UN will not hasten or delay the change of realities on the ground. The exercise of political will can change the balance of forces which currently favour the Israelis and their occupation. And political will is what the PA lacks. The first step towards success would be for the PA to end its reliance on its adversaries for finance and security and seek to exploit its support in the world community. More haste, less speed Mr Abbas; sometimes the tortoise does beat the hare.