Draft resolution to recognise Palestine fails to challenge Zionist colonisation

“We don’t intend to confront the US, so if we can agree on a formula that accepts the 1967 lines as the basis for any agreement, I think the Palestinian team will be able to compromise on the time table.” This statement, quoted in Haaretz and attributed to an unnamed senior Palestinian official, clearly conveys the inherent compromise within the draft resolution to be submitted by the PLO to the UN Security Council.

Calling for the establishment of a Palestinian state and an end to Israel’s “47-year occupation”, the resolution affirms the Palestinian leadership’s forfeiting of resistance in favour of diplomacy, in particular through its recurring use of terminology that distorts Palestinian history through the elimination of imperialist-supported Zionist colonisation.

As both the Palestinian and Israeli media attempt to portray the significance of the purportedly forthcoming initiative, albeit through diverging viewpoints, the destruction wrought by colonisation is conveniently eliminated from both narratives. With “occupation” having established itself as an existing alternative that provides easier discussion than the issue of colonisation, Palestinian leaders have – once again – portrayed themselves as willing accomplices of colonial and imperialist oppression. Seeking the continuation of Zionist colonisation remains at the helm of the initiative that is being portrayed as the ultimate step before resorting to the International Criminal Court.

The resolution will focus upon the perilous two-state conspiracy, at a time when countries have been voting for symbolic recognition of a Palestinian state that has been erroneously represented as a positive step. The implication behind the recognition includes the fact that the exhibited symbolic support for a Palestinian state within the two-state framework constitutes an affirmation of imperialist domination through Zionist ideology.

Ma’an has reported the draft resolution within the context of the “fruitless US-brokered meetings” with reference to the negotiations that were characterised by PA President Mahmoud Abbas’ concessions to Israel – a discontinued prisoner release in return for relinquishing international recourse and granting the settler-colonial state further expansion. “Fruitless” within such a context is inaccurate – decades of concessions have been detrimental for Palestinians, as leaders continue to seek legitimacy from Israel and the international community while disregarding their historical narrative.

Israel’s military occupation has been detached from the historical process of colonisation that enabled the current manifestation – a trend that suits Israel’s quest for achieving “Greater Israel”. Hence, the intentional separation has elicited a scenario whereby addressing the more visible mainstream alleged “concern” – one that, despite its brutality, is still normalised through the adaptation of hegemonic narratives, takes precedence over the ideology and expansion that constitute Zionist settler-colonialism. However, the foundations for such violence are derived from colonialism – a reality that is intentionally abandoned by Palestinian leaders and the international community in order to assist Israel’s expansion and thus ensure imperialist regional domination.

Diplomatic recognition will continue to be incompatible with the Palestinian reality and need for legitimate armed resistance to reclaim land, not least due to the dilution of historical narratives that have been obliterated in order to produce a convenient and unchallenging discourse that is suitable for UN and international purposes. Beneath the illusion created by the manoeuvres, Palestinians remain shackled by the inability of their leaders to determine and include the historical narrative as the foundation for necessary decolonisation and reclamation of land.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.