U.N. vote makes Palestine an observer state

[karter]

New York (CNN) -- The United Nations General Assembly on Thursday endorsed an upgraded U.N. status for the Palestinian Authority, despite intense opposition from the United States and Israel.
The resolution elevates their status from "non-member observer entity" to "non-member observer state," the same category as the Vatican, which Palestinians hope will provide new leverage in their dealings with Israel.
Its leaders had been working with dozens of supporting nations to develop a formal draft, enlisting the backing of European countries such as France and Spain.
The vote was 138 delegates in favor of the measure, nine against and 41 abstentions, including Germany.

The United States and Israel have remained steadfast in their opposition, saying the move will not advance the cause of Middle East peace.
U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice said American leaders could not support a measure that circumvents direct talks and cautioned that Thursday's decision did "not establish Palestine as a state."
Rice urged both sides to the resume direct negotiations without preconditions.
"Israel is prepared to live in peace with a Palestinian state," Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Thursday. "But for peace to endure, Israel's security must be protected, the Palestinians must recognize the Jewish state and they must be prepared to end the conflict with Israel once and for all."
Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev called the resolution "political theater."

But Palestinian leaders have said they had the right to go to the U.N. because Israel failed to comply with agreements signed more than two decades ago.
"It's about a contract. Our contract is that in five years, we should have concluded the treaty of peace and all core issues. This did not happen, and we're talking about 20 years later. And going to the U.N. is not a unilateral step," Palestinian Authority chief negotiator Saeb Erakat said in September.
The last round of negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority was in 2010.
Erakat said the new status would eliminate Israeli justifications for building settlements in the disputed areas of East Jerusalem and the West Bank.
But Israeli officials disagreed.
"No decision by the U.N. can break the 4,000-year-old bond between the people of Israel and the land of Israel," Netanyahu said.
Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, however, threw his full support behind the new status for the Palestinian Authority.
"What the Palestinians moved to do today in the U.N., I think is in basic line with the strategy of a two-state solution," Olmert told CNN's Christiane Amanpour on Thursday.
The peace process is completely stalled at the moment, but Olmert said Israel must move rapidly toward a two-state solution. "Time is running out for Israel more than for the Palestinians," he said.
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who supports a two-state solution, said Thursday's vote "underscores the urgency of a resumption of meaningful negotiations."
"I urge the parties to renew their commitment to a negotiated peace," Ban said.
Meanwhile in Washington, Israel's Defense Minister Ehud Barak addressed his country's relations with Iran and expressed doubt about sanctions against that country. The United Nations' nuclear watchdog has said Iran is cooperating enough in a review of its nuclear programs.
"I don't believe that these kinds of sanctions will bring them to a moment of truth where they sit around a table and look at each others eyes and decide that the game is over, they can't stand it anymore, they are going to give up their nuclear intention," Barak said.
Barak was visiting U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who noted how the Israeli defense chief announced his retirement from political life. Panetta praised Barak's "brilliant strategic mind" and "warrior heart."









The vote was 138 delegates in favor, nine against and 41 abstentionsThe resolution elevates their non-member status from "observer entity" to "observer state"
The United States and Israel remain opposed


Source: http://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/29/world/meast/palestinian-united-nations/index.html

[wixard]

can't help but think that people of the middle east or anywhere else for that matter should be able to determine their own future. the vote at the UN doesn't empower palestinians but robs them of their self determination

[karter]

-_- Some countries are saying that by supporting this, they are trying to bring peace between Israel and Palestine but I don't see how this will happen. Hamas is a terrorist organization, accepting their government in the United Nations means acknowledging them as an acceptable government and showing willingness to negotiate with them. The real shocker is hardly any of USA' allies voted against this.

[FlyingJesus]

A decision that's come far too late - most of the Palestinian lands have already been stolen or flattened by Israeli attacks, but at least this might hinder them a little now.


-_- Some countries are saying that by supporting this, they are trying to bring peace between Israel and Palestine but I don't see how this will happen. Hamas is a terrorist organization, accepting their government in the United Nations means acknowledging them as an acceptable government and showing willingness to negotiate with them. The real shocker is hardly any of USA' allies voted against this.

The Israeli government is also a terrorist organisation (and one which has systematically over the years stolen Palestinian lands with illegal settlements and attacks) so actually the real shocker is that the US have the audacity to preach about defense and how "there's no country on Earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders" while they support Israel doing just that and continuing their own outsider attacks on Pakistan and the surrounding countries

[-:Undertaker:-]

I don't pay attention to anything the United Nations comes out with - a quick look at it's surface and you'll see what a farce this organisation is.

As for the British position - i've always thought that the British government ought to recognise independent entities even if they aren't in our 'interests' - I mean, it's common sense really that the Republic of China (Taiwain) is a sovereign state in all but name along with the likes of Azawad and Palestine. When the British government says 'we dont recognise X, Y or Z' - well it's silly really isn't it?