Palestinians to Submit Resolution for UN Statehood Bid


Palestinians plan to submit a final draft of a statehood resolution to the United Nations on Dec. 29 calling for a peace deal with Israel within a year and an end to occupation of Palestinian territories by the end of 2017, officials said.

Palestinian officials said the proposal calls for negotiations to be based on the territorial lines that existed before Israel captured the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip in the 1967 Middle East war.


Looks to me like the Palestinian Authority wants this to be vetoed by the U.S., which the U.S. should certainly do.


I might support this if the Palestinians ever demonstrate a capacity for leadership in which the desire for the good of their people ranks higher than the desire to kill Jews and humiliate Israel. As long as the latter two are obviously the first priority for that leadership, they are not ready for UN intervention establishing an independent nation. Hamas moreso than the PA, I guess. The PA tends more towards extreme corruption than homicidal mania…


Likely the only thing keeping the P.A. leaders alive in the West Bank is Israeli protection. It is highly possible that Fatah keeps throwing impossible conditions into the mix, knowing Israel will not accept them, but keeps up the appearance of being for Palestinian statehood. It is entirely likely that statehood including the West Bank would result in a Hamas takeover there as well as in Gaza, and the establishment of a Hamas state not unlike ISIS; an eventuality that Israel, Jordan and possibly even the Assad regime could not tolerate.


Nothing is getting through while Israel has two votes (Us, UK) in the security council.


One suspects the P.A. has those same two votes.


I think this article is pertinent because it reveals what will almost certainly happen should Israel lose it’s complete and total control over the “peace process” dialog, the goal of which seems to be assuring that any sort of peace with Palestinians never actually manifests:

There will be a “violent backlash” by Congress against the UN, including suspended funding, if it tries to “take over the peace process,” visiting US Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) said Saturday night alongside Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem.

Graham, a staunchly pro- Israel senator whose name has been bandied about as a possible 2016 presidential contender, said there would be a violent pushback in the new Republican-controlled Congress “if there’s any effort by the UN Security Council to set theterms of peace negotiations, avoiding direct talks. President [Barack] Obama in 2011 said the United Nations was not the right venue when it came to discussing the peace process in reaching a two-state solution. I agree with what President Obama said in 2011.”

Graham is expected to take over as chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, which deals with funding issues.

Graham, who is also expected to continue as a member of the powerful Armed Services Committee, said, “Any effort by the French, the Jordanians or anyone to avoid direct negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians over the peace process, anyone who tries to take this to the UN Security Council, there will be a violent backlash by Congress that could include suspending funding to the United Nations.” Congress, he said, “will not sit back and allow the United Nations to take over the peace process.”
His words came a day after lead PLO negotiator Saeb Erekat said in an al-Arabiya interview that the Palestinians would bring their proposal for a full IDF withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines by 2017, to a vote in the Security Council by Monday.

In that interview, Erekat also likened Israel to Islamic State, and Netanyahu to the Islamic State leader. Erekat said the war against Islamic State was a just war, then he added that just as Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi “considers himself the leader of the ‘Islamic State,’ Benjamin Netanyahu heads the ‘Jewish State.’” “There is no difference between the crime of laying an American or Western journalist on the ground and beheading him, and between a criminal who lays Muhammad Abu Khdeir on the ground and burns him alive,” he said in reference to the murder of the east Jerusalem youth this summer, which was condemned wall-to-wall by Israeli political leaders, with Netanyahu calling the teen’s father to offer his condolences.
Netanyahu, at the outset of his meeting with Graham, said Israel was faced with two “great challenges.”

The first, he said, “comes from the Palestinians. The chief Palestinian negotiator, Saeb Erekat, has compared Israel to ISIS [Islamic State].

This is the same Palestinian Authority that joins hands with Hamas, incites constantly against Israel, the kind of incitement that has led to an attack that we witnessed just two days ago of a Molotov cocktail thrown at a little girl, and I commend our security forces for apprehending the terrorists. But the same Palestinian Authority is going to try to bring to the UN Security Council a resolution that seeks to impose on us conditions that will undermine our security. And I want to assure you that we will stand firmly and reject such a dictate. We always have; we always will.”

Graham assured Netanyahu that while the international community “seems to be a bit confused,” Congress “clearly sees the difference between the tactics of Hamas and the democracy called Israel.”

The other great challenge facing Israel, Netanyahu said, comes from Iran, which he noted on Saturday carried out a military drill on Saturday with a “suicide drone” near the Strait of Hormuz.

Netanyahu told Graham, who has hammered Obama over the last number of years over foreign policy issues ranging from the attack on the US embassy in Benghazi to Washington’s policy on Iran; “I don’t have to convince you, Senator, that the most important task before us is to prevent this dangerous regime from having nuclear weapons. And I believe that what is required are more sanctions, and stronger sanctions. And I welcome your leadership in this effort. I think this is something that is important for the peace of the world. You know, there are moments in history when nations have to stand firm. Israel stands firm on both sides, and on both issues.”

The article continues online, along with a brief video segment.


I doubt you would be a bit different if ISIS set up a state in the county next to yours. Unfortunately, while the P.A. owes its very existence to Israel, it still has to “talk the talk” like everybody else in the Middle East who trades with Israel and enjoys Israeli protection.


P.A. owes land grabbing settlers, missiles, and occupation to Israel. But I don’t know how I would feel about western powers creating a news state that suppresses my people and acts like a bully while getting the support of the most powerful militaries. I probably wouldn’t like it.


Only problem is that its an all or nothing vote and Israel has at least two thanks to wonderful groups like AIPAC. Not to mention Israel aren’t the ones applying.


Israel will never give up the West Bank and certainly will not share Jerusalem as the capital for both the Palestinians and Israel.



The U.N. Security Council on Friday rejected a resolution that would have called for Israelis and Palestinians to strike a peace deal within a year and for Israel to withdraw to its 1967 borders within three years — a blow to Palestinians seeking to increase pressure on the government of Benjamin Netanyahu.

The resolution fell one vote short of the nine necessary for passage, sparing the Obama administration, which opposed the measure, the need to wield its veto power on the council.

After the vote, Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said the administration’s opposition to the resolution stemmed from its belief that peace will come through a negotiated agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, not through a “staged confrontation.”

The failed resolution called for a peace deal with Israel within 12 months, and an end to Israeli occupation by late 2017. It said a final deal should be based on borders that existed before the 1967 war when Israel won control of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip. It declared East Jerusalem would be the capital of a Palestinian state, a more hardline stance than an earlier version that described Jerusalem as a shared capital. It also demanded an end to Israeli settlement building.


If the West Bank became part of a “Palestinian state”, the Fatah leaders would be killed by Hamas just as they were in Gaza. Jews have always lived in the West Bank and are 1/3 of the population. Where do you want to put them when you hand the place over to Hamas? Might as well just eliminate the middle step and hand it directly to ISIS.


If I were the Israeli Knesset, I would almost certainly allow Palestinians to maintain a capital in Jerusalem. But I would never allow it to be militarized, nor would I ever allow Hamas/ISIS to rule there.


Thanks for the update.


If only the West had not begotten ISIS


ISIS is a child of Islam.



Isn’t it interesting how it is the fault of “the West” every time some barbarism is committed by non-westerners?

I certainly laud the ability to have introspection and to identify where mistakes were made, but it’s highly strange to me that most people seem either to see ALL of the problems in the world as cause by western power or that NONE of them are due to Western power blunders.

Maybe, just maybe, sometimes native cultures and religions contain evil. Heresy, I know… :rolleyes: But nothing about ISIS is terribly new in Islamic culture. They’ve been doing that stuff (not everywhere and not always, mind you) for 1,200 years.


ISIL is a symptom

Even more problematic than the shifting demographics taking place between Kurds and Arabs is ISIL (the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant). A quick investigation into how the group came to be shows that ISIL is not a problem in Iraq but a symptom.

ISIL grew out of Al Qaeda in Iraq, itself formed in response to the U.S. invasion in 2003. Today the Islamic State is the target of bombing ordered by President Barack Obama, who campaigned in part on ending the U.S. military presence in Iraq.

Bombing ISIL is like drinking vodka to cure a hangover. They exist in large part because of U.S. bombs. The disproportionate number of Sunnis who cycled through U.S. prisons during the more than decade-long occupation has further ensured that there is a ready pool of support for ISIL. Iraq is locked in overlapping cycles of violence that the U.S. has done nothing to relieve, only exacerbate.




DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit