UN folly of Palestinians ignores progress post Oslo

THE Palestinian leadership has announced its intention to unilaterally declare statehood and seek recognition from the UN.

The move might score the Palestinian Authority a symbolic win in the General Assembly, where it enjoys the support of an automatic majority of Muslim countries.

However, their triumph may be short-lived and even counter-productive.

Following the vote, the lives of ordinary Palestinians will remain essentially unchanged, which is likely to lead to their mounting frustration, as the UN promise is exposed as an empty shell.

Furthermore, a unilateral move seeking to decide permanent status issues, including statehood, will violate existing bilateral agreements between Israel and the Palestinians and thus unravel the delicate thread of legal and administrative co-operation that has been woven between Israel and the Palestinian Authority over the past 20 years under the framework of the Oslo peace accords.

While it has become fashionable for some to disparage the Oslo process, reality demonstrates that it has brought the Palestinians much closer to real independence and statehood than they were before the process began in 1993.

Ongoing co-operation between Israel and the Palestinians in 40 spheres of daily life, including security, water and taxation matters, has led to relative calm in the West Bank and seen significant growth in the Palestinian economy, especially in the past few years.

Before 1993, the Palestinians were not in control of a single square inch of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Today, the Palestinian Authority controls all of the major Palestinian population centres in the West Bank and Hamas controls the Gaza Strip.

The aftermath of a bitter and highly politicised vote in the UN would undoubtedly threaten this co-operation and advancements made, to the detriment of all peoples in the area.

Neither a unilateral Palestinian declaration of statehood nor a politicised move in the UN will actually resolve any of the core issues of the conflict.

A General Assembly resolution alone cannot legally decide the issue of Palestinian statehood or borders, security arrangements, the status of Jerusalem, issues concerning Palestinian and Jewish refugees and the allocation of vital water resources.

Trying to impose a solution acceptable to only one party will raise, and then dash, expectations and deepen rather than help to resolve the conflict.

In their unilateral design for statehood, the Palestinian leadership confirm their rejection of direct negotiation, preferring to force a "solution" on Israel through international pressure.

The Palestinian Authority admits these manoeuvrings are a deliberate confrontation designed to isolate Israel and undermine its legitimacy. In the words of the President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, "Palestine's admission to the UN would pave the way for the internationalisation of the conflict as a legal matter. It would also pave the way for us to pursue claims against Israel at the UN."

It is therefore obvious that peace is not the Palestinians' goal. Their unilateral declaration would be exploited to launch a new frontier of war against Israel.

Palestinian "lawfare" against Israel can only fan the fires of conflict.

We must also question the role Hamas plays in a future Palestinian state. This has become particularly relevant after the recent alleged reconciliation agreement between Fatah and Hamas.

Hamas is a terrorist organisation. Its Qassam brigades are outlawed in many countries, including Australia. It refuses to recognise Israel, renounce violence and adhere to previous agreements, as required by the Middle East Quartet (the UN, the US, the EU and Russia).

Its charter is incontestably and grotesquely anti-Semitic and unabashedly strives for the destruction of the Jewish state.

How will recognition of a Palestinian state, with Hamas playing an integral role, encourage the vision of two states living peacefully side by side?

Hamas will find no greater international legitimacy for its aggression than victory at the UN. A successful bid will affirm the triumph of terrorist tactics to aggrieved peoples worldwide.

With respect to Israel, the majority of parties, both Left and Right, have acknowledged the emergence of a Palestinian state as an outcome of a negotiated peace. The vision is two states for two peoples living side by side in peace and security.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has reiterated this principle in numerous public speeches. Therefore, the debate is not about the solution to the conflict, but about the best way to get there.

Israel calls upon the Palestinians to reciprocate, and return to the negotiating table. Real and lasting peace in the region will not be achieved by unilateral political posturing in the UN, but by both sides coming together and negotiating and resolving outstanding issues, without preconditions.

We must complete the peace process that began with a handshake almost 20 years ago. Only by working together in good faith can the two states vision become a lasting reality.

As a respected middle power, Australia can be a voice of reason and principle amid the murky politics of the UN. Australia's main parties have all backed a two-state peace agreement, achieved through direct negotiations. By reaffirming that position at the UN in September and repudiating the unilateralist alternative, the Australian government still has a chance to persuade our Palestinian partners to step back from this latest folly.

Ultimately, this unilateral act reveals a fundamental reason why peace with the Palestinians has eluded us for the past 6 1/2 decades. It's because the Palestinian leadership has been unwilling to accept a Palestinian state, if it meant accepting a Jewish state alongside it. Our conflict has never been about the establishment of a Palestinian state. It has always been about the existence of a Jewish state.

Yuval Rotem is Ambassador of Israel to Australia