Palestinian demands may be thwarted by "mutual recognition"

As the Palestinians’ UN Security Council bid and the EU vote on statehood loom closer, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has raised the tone of his defiant rhetoric by rejecting what he calls “coercion” by the EU and Palestinian Authority. Prior to meeting US Secretary of State John Kerry, Netanyahu addressed a press conference in Nazareth, in which he accused Hamas of seeking to assert its control over the occupied West Bank.

The Palestinian proposal, which seeks to end Israel’s occupation without even mentioning the fundamental reality of its simultaneous colonisation, has been denounced by Netanyahu as “incompatible with genuine peace”. Israel, he insisted, will reject “attempts to dictate to us unilateral moves on a limited timetable.”

The proposed resolution to be presented at the UN Security Council, the drafting of which included contributions by Britain, France and Germany, reiterates the importance of negotiations aimed at achieving the two-state compromise; this makes the text an affirmation of previous negotiations which have reduced Palestine to fragments. Unnamed EU diplomats have also referred to mutual recognition as a condition within the draft; that is, the recognition of Israel as a “Jewish state”, something which the Palestinians have rejected consistently.

The US has yet to indicate whether it will use its veto in the event of a vote at the Security Council, although an anonymous state department official quoted in the Times of Israel has expressed opposition to the two-year time frame as stipulated in the resolution. “That’s not the way I think that we would look at handling a very complicated security negotiation,” the official insisted, “by mandating a deadline of two years.”

Within the EU, support for Palestinian statehood from several European countries has resulted in a propaganda campaign that fails to take into account the repercussions for Palestine; namely a repetition of conditions that enabled Israel to claim further territory while ensuring the disintegration of Palestinian rights. Symbolic endorsement at a higher level from the European parliament is unlikely to result in tangible political benefits for Palestine. Rather, the vote would continue to promote the concept of dependence on Israel and mutual recognition.

The endeavours at the UN and EU give priority to Israel’s demands over Palestine’s legitimate rights, albeit the Palestinians remain less assertive partly due to decades of capitulating to Israeli and imperialist demands. PA President Mahmoud Abbas’s overtures during the previous negotiations were isolated from the wider context of acquiescing to Israel’s colonial project, in the same manner that further settlement construction was discussed as a separate issue instead of being dealt with as additional colonial expansion. Palestinian efforts to utilise international organisations may be constructed as a diplomatic effort in concordance with political expectations. However, the reality also reflects the fragmentation of resistance, as exhibited by the willingness to prioritise reconciliation away from the historical affirmations of commitment to armed struggle for liberation.

However, as expected, only Netanyahu spoke of “coercion” in his attempt to portray the forthcoming moves as joint efforts by Palestinians and European countries. This is despite EU members seeking constantly to improve ties with Israel and ensure that financial offers to Palestinians in return for further acquiescence are met with yet more economic opportunities for Israel, as befitting the EU’s vision of “equality”.

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