faithfulguy
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 13,651
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
UN vote recognizes state of Palestine as non-member state
- Thread starter Hyde
- Start date
rubyjackass
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2008
- Messages
- 3,610
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Israelis did bring technological breakthroughs. But that is not justification for any occupation.
Even the US or Israel do not use this as the reason to not support Palestinian statehood. Just BS. Don't invent random reasons for occupation. Besides what is your problem if Gaza is planning to live on aid for the entire period of its existence. Vatican lives on donations.
So believe in Karma and give Palestinians their state. Good or bad- they will suffer. Also they will have no reason to ****** about Israel in the future.
The Hamas charter is just a boogeyman. If Hamas is such an unreasonable power, why do they accept for ceasefires at all? Hamas' leader has many times made it clear that the charter is just a vestige of its origin and that today Hamas would accept 1967 lines. Just two days ago, he reiterated this to support the UNGA observership bid.
I agree with no sympathies to terrorists.
But how about this. Recognize them and then bomb them when they send rockets. Because then it would be a war and countries are allowed to declare war against each other.
More BS. The HDI of Palestinian territories is on par with the other Arabic countries around. Nothing miraculous there. If you somehow remove your glasses that show Palestinians as inherently inferior, you will see the facts.
Well let them free to do some work.
Also please enlighten us as to how a country has to be run. But first read up on how many countries are worse organized than the Palestinian territories. Even some parts of India are among them.
I am unemotionally talking about what is just. You are making up flimsy arguments against Palestinian statehood for God-knows-why(probably because they are muslim? Arab? FYI there are Arab Christians too among them).
You are the idiot who does not understand the rationale behind India's support to Palestine. Israel has a vested interest to picture India's position as vote-bank politics. For them, India's position is based on expediency whereas US's position is based on morality. But at least Indians should not buy into their BS.
All the countries except the 9 did not back Palestine for nothing, at least not for expediency or for fear of Islam. Such rare unanimity is only symbolic of the validity of Palestine's claims.
Hyde
SENIOR MODERATOR
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2008
- Messages
- 20,543
- Reaction score
- 20
- Country
- Location
Coalition of the opposing: Why these 9 countries voted against Palestine at the U.N.
The red countries voted against admitting the Palestinian Authority as a non-member observer state at the United Nations on Nov. 29, 2012. Click to enlarge. (Max Fisher The Washington Post)
Nauru, a remote and impoverished Pacific island nation, is the worlds smallest sovereign country by population. It has tried and failed to build an economy based on, among other things, offshore-banking schemes and providing Australia with refugee-detention services. On Thursday, Naura joined the United States, the worlds richest and most powerful country, as part of a small and somewhat oddball coalition of nine United Nations member-states that voted against recognizing the Palestinian Authority as a non-member observer state.
That nine-country block played a mostly symbolic role in the U.N. vote; an overwhelming majority of the United Nations, 138 nations, voted for the recognition, with 41 abstaining. But its worth examining those nine, who they are, why they may have opposed, and what it says about the Israel-Palestine peace process. Here, from America to Nauru, is the list of no votes (the states are also highlighted in red in the map above):
United States: Says it subverts peace process
The United States opposes any Palestinian efforts toward statehood that go outside of, and thus subvert, the U.S.-led Israel-Palestine peace process. Washington would prefer to see Israel and Palestine putting all of their efforts through the diplomatic peace process. The thinking is that a durable peace can only be achieved by direct agreement between Israelis and Palestinians. The United States, in backing Israel, also ensures that it will retain leverage and credibility with the Israeli government, which it needs to retain its ability to bring the Israelis to the negotiating table.
Israel: Reduces Israeli role in peace process, could grant Palestinians ICC access
Israels position is largely that of the United States in viewing Palestinian efforts outside of the formal peace process as counterproductive. The Palestinian Authority, by going through the United Nations rather than the peace process, is also choosing a path that has far less Israeli involvement. It also moves the Palestinian Authority closer to the ability to register claims with the International Criminal Court, potentially including Israeli military operations in Gaza and the West Bank, which could be problematic for Israel.
Canada: Supports Washingtons Israel-Palestine strategy
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, a member of the conservative party, has been particularly supportive of U.S. policy in the Middle East. Ottawa closed its embassy in Iran earlier this year, calling the country a state sponsor of terrorism. In response to Thursdays U.N. bid, the Canadian government has recalled its ambassador to the United Nations, Israel, and the Palestinian authority, and says it is reviewing its relationship to the third of those three.
Czech Republic: Very pro-Israel, closer to the U.S. than the EU
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said earlier this year that Israel has no better friend in Europe than the Czech Republic, which Thursday was the only European country to vote no. Heres a snippet from a good Reuters explainer on the two big factors here: the Czech Republics support of Israel, and more broadly its tendency to conduct foreign policy more in line with the United States than with the rest of the European Union.
Pragues support for the Jewish state also reflects an ongoing push by Czech centre-right politicians to build stronger ties with Washington and the euro-sceptic tendency of the two main ruling parties, Necass Civic Democrats and Top 09.
The opposition Social Democrats take a more mainstream European approach, while, partly staffed by dissidents who opposed the Communists in the Cold War era, the centre-right lobbied hard last decade for the establishment of a U.S. radar base and staunchly supported the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In 1948, then-Czechoslovakia broke a U.N. embargo, sending arms and supplies to Israel that may have helped turn that years Arab-Israeli war.
Panama: Close with the United States, strong Jewish community
The Panama Canal is essential to the economies of both Panama and the United States, fueling close cooperation between the countries. And Panama has strong ties directly with Israel, as the Jerusalem Post explained in this 2010 article on Panamanian President Ricardo Martinellis visit with Israeli President Shimon Peres:
Panama will always stand with Israel, in appreciation of its guardianship of the capital of the world Jerusalem, Martinelli told Peres at Beit Hanassi on Tuesday.
Panama is a small country (population 3,400,000), but it has a big heart for Israel, said Martinelli, who is on a working trip to Qatar and Israel.
About 8,000 Panamanian citizens are Jews, and three of the ministers in Martinellis cabinet are Jewish, as are many senior government officials.
The Jewish community is fully integrated and has made a tremendous contribution to Panamas cultural and economic life, Martinelli said.
The Pacific island nations: Nauru, Palau, Micronesia, and Marshall Islands
Excepting Israel, fully half of the no votes came from these tiny island states in the West Pacific. Their story is a little more complicated. Other than Naura, they are all associated states with the United States, which means that they are sovereign but closely aligned with America, which administered them as a trust territory from World War II until 1986.
Separately, Israel has cultivated close ties with these West Pacific nations. A 2010 Washington Post foreign service story explained that the relationship has given Israel a couple of dependable votes in the United Nations and brings a source of technical aid on agriculture, health and other issues to the small Pacific islands.
Israel is a minority in the Middle East and struggling to survive, said Micronesian President Emanuel Mori. We are also out there. We have no enemies, only natural ones. Typhoons come, and we survive. Being surrounded by not-friendly neighbors, we kind of pity them.
Sitting at a seafood restaurant as stormy waves crashed onto the coastline, a familiar scene for the group, Mori said that Israels early decision to support Micronesias membership in the U.N. two decades ago helped cement the relationship.
So what does all of this mean? From the Israeli and American view, that the international coalition is so small does not augur well for Israel-Palestine peace process. But perhaps it also reflects the degree to which global opinion seems to be aligning in favor of the Palestinians Europes much-watched votes are moving slowly but decisively in that direction and away from the U.S.-led peace process.
Source: Coalition of the opposing: Why these 9 countries voted against Palestine at the U.N.
The red countries voted against admitting the Palestinian Authority as a non-member observer state at the United Nations on Nov. 29, 2012. Click to enlarge. (Max Fisher The Washington Post)
Nauru, a remote and impoverished Pacific island nation, is the worlds smallest sovereign country by population. It has tried and failed to build an economy based on, among other things, offshore-banking schemes and providing Australia with refugee-detention services. On Thursday, Naura joined the United States, the worlds richest and most powerful country, as part of a small and somewhat oddball coalition of nine United Nations member-states that voted against recognizing the Palestinian Authority as a non-member observer state.
That nine-country block played a mostly symbolic role in the U.N. vote; an overwhelming majority of the United Nations, 138 nations, voted for the recognition, with 41 abstaining. But its worth examining those nine, who they are, why they may have opposed, and what it says about the Israel-Palestine peace process. Here, from America to Nauru, is the list of no votes (the states are also highlighted in red in the map above):
United States: Says it subverts peace process
The United States opposes any Palestinian efforts toward statehood that go outside of, and thus subvert, the U.S.-led Israel-Palestine peace process. Washington would prefer to see Israel and Palestine putting all of their efforts through the diplomatic peace process. The thinking is that a durable peace can only be achieved by direct agreement between Israelis and Palestinians. The United States, in backing Israel, also ensures that it will retain leverage and credibility with the Israeli government, which it needs to retain its ability to bring the Israelis to the negotiating table.
Israel: Reduces Israeli role in peace process, could grant Palestinians ICC access
Israels position is largely that of the United States in viewing Palestinian efforts outside of the formal peace process as counterproductive. The Palestinian Authority, by going through the United Nations rather than the peace process, is also choosing a path that has far less Israeli involvement. It also moves the Palestinian Authority closer to the ability to register claims with the International Criminal Court, potentially including Israeli military operations in Gaza and the West Bank, which could be problematic for Israel.
Canada: Supports Washingtons Israel-Palestine strategy
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, a member of the conservative party, has been particularly supportive of U.S. policy in the Middle East. Ottawa closed its embassy in Iran earlier this year, calling the country a state sponsor of terrorism. In response to Thursdays U.N. bid, the Canadian government has recalled its ambassador to the United Nations, Israel, and the Palestinian authority, and says it is reviewing its relationship to the third of those three.
Czech Republic: Very pro-Israel, closer to the U.S. than the EU
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said earlier this year that Israel has no better friend in Europe than the Czech Republic, which Thursday was the only European country to vote no. Heres a snippet from a good Reuters explainer on the two big factors here: the Czech Republics support of Israel, and more broadly its tendency to conduct foreign policy more in line with the United States than with the rest of the European Union.
Pragues support for the Jewish state also reflects an ongoing push by Czech centre-right politicians to build stronger ties with Washington and the euro-sceptic tendency of the two main ruling parties, Necass Civic Democrats and Top 09.
The opposition Social Democrats take a more mainstream European approach, while, partly staffed by dissidents who opposed the Communists in the Cold War era, the centre-right lobbied hard last decade for the establishment of a U.S. radar base and staunchly supported the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In 1948, then-Czechoslovakia broke a U.N. embargo, sending arms and supplies to Israel that may have helped turn that years Arab-Israeli war.
Panama: Close with the United States, strong Jewish community
The Panama Canal is essential to the economies of both Panama and the United States, fueling close cooperation between the countries. And Panama has strong ties directly with Israel, as the Jerusalem Post explained in this 2010 article on Panamanian President Ricardo Martinellis visit with Israeli President Shimon Peres:
Panama will always stand with Israel, in appreciation of its guardianship of the capital of the world Jerusalem, Martinelli told Peres at Beit Hanassi on Tuesday.
Panama is a small country (population 3,400,000), but it has a big heart for Israel, said Martinelli, who is on a working trip to Qatar and Israel.
About 8,000 Panamanian citizens are Jews, and three of the ministers in Martinellis cabinet are Jewish, as are many senior government officials.
The Jewish community is fully integrated and has made a tremendous contribution to Panamas cultural and economic life, Martinelli said.
The Pacific island nations: Nauru, Palau, Micronesia, and Marshall Islands
Excepting Israel, fully half of the no votes came from these tiny island states in the West Pacific. Their story is a little more complicated. Other than Naura, they are all associated states with the United States, which means that they are sovereign but closely aligned with America, which administered them as a trust territory from World War II until 1986.
Separately, Israel has cultivated close ties with these West Pacific nations. A 2010 Washington Post foreign service story explained that the relationship has given Israel a couple of dependable votes in the United Nations and brings a source of technical aid on agriculture, health and other issues to the small Pacific islands.
Israel is a minority in the Middle East and struggling to survive, said Micronesian President Emanuel Mori. We are also out there. We have no enemies, only natural ones. Typhoons come, and we survive. Being surrounded by not-friendly neighbors, we kind of pity them.
Sitting at a seafood restaurant as stormy waves crashed onto the coastline, a familiar scene for the group, Mori said that Israels early decision to support Micronesias membership in the U.N. two decades ago helped cement the relationship.
So what does all of this mean? From the Israeli and American view, that the international coalition is so small does not augur well for Israel-Palestine peace process. But perhaps it also reflects the degree to which global opinion seems to be aligning in favor of the Palestinians Europes much-watched votes are moving slowly but decisively in that direction and away from the U.S.-led peace process.
Source: Coalition of the opposing: Why these 9 countries voted against Palestine at the U.N.
Hyde
SENIOR MODERATOR
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2008
- Messages
- 20,543
- Reaction score
- 20
- Country
- Location
Map: How Europe voted on Palestine at the U.N., in 2011 and now
The United Nations General Assembly voted today to upgrade the Palestinian Authority to a “non-member observer state,” a symbolic victory in the Palestinian quest for statehood.
The vote was overwhelming, with 138 in favor, nine against, and 41 abstentions. Most of the votes, including the United States’ “no,” were unsurprising. One important story here is in Europe: The European Union’s 27 votes were never going to decide the outcome, but they are an important indicator of potentially changing global diplomacy with regards to Israeli-Palestinian relations.
“The EU has become the most undecided and therefore scrutinized bloc at the U.N.,” Daniel Levy wrote at the Daily Beast. “For Europeans (or at least some of them), Israel-Palestine tends to be an issue that crosscuts domestic politics, the role of national history in contemporary foreign policy, transatlantic relations and mercantilist interests.”
So how did Europe vote? It about split between voting for the Palestinian bid and abstaining, with only one “no,” from the Czech Republic. The U.K. suggested that it might vote “yes” if the Palestinian Authority offered assurances that it wouldn’t pursue charges in the International Criminal Court, but apparently came away unsatisfied.
This actually represents a potentially significant shift in Europe’s position on Palestinian membership at the United Nations. Last year, the Palestinian Authority sought membership in a U.N. body called the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), seen as a test case for today’s bid. Here’s how Europe voted then, and below that are some important takeaways on the changes:
Last year’s U.N. vote on Palestinian membership in UNESCO. Click to enlarge. (Max Fisher/The Washington Post)
Here are the big changes between the 2011 vote and today’s:
Five countries switched from “abstain” to “yes”: Italy, Denmark, Switzerland, Portugal, Georgia.
Three countries switched from “no” to “abstain”: Germany, Netherlands, Lithuania.
One country switched from “no” to “yes”: Sweden.
One country was absent: Ukraine, which had abstained in 2011. It happens.
Excluding Ukraine’s absence, that means that nine European countries moved their votes in a way that suggests greater support for Palestinian U.N. statehood efforts. That might just be about these two particular U.N. votes and nothing more, or it might represent shifting European diplomatic energy away from the Israeli-Palestinian peace process (the U.S. and Israel have warned that approving the Palestinians’ bid would undermine the process) and toward supporting more such unilateral Palestinian efforts.
It is difficult to see good news here for Israel or for the U.S.-led peace process.
Source: Map: How Europe voted on Palestine at the U.N., in 2011 and now
The United Nations General Assembly voted today to upgrade the Palestinian Authority to a “non-member observer state,” a symbolic victory in the Palestinian quest for statehood.
The vote was overwhelming, with 138 in favor, nine against, and 41 abstentions. Most of the votes, including the United States’ “no,” were unsurprising. One important story here is in Europe: The European Union’s 27 votes were never going to decide the outcome, but they are an important indicator of potentially changing global diplomacy with regards to Israeli-Palestinian relations.
“The EU has become the most undecided and therefore scrutinized bloc at the U.N.,” Daniel Levy wrote at the Daily Beast. “For Europeans (or at least some of them), Israel-Palestine tends to be an issue that crosscuts domestic politics, the role of national history in contemporary foreign policy, transatlantic relations and mercantilist interests.”
So how did Europe vote? It about split between voting for the Palestinian bid and abstaining, with only one “no,” from the Czech Republic. The U.K. suggested that it might vote “yes” if the Palestinian Authority offered assurances that it wouldn’t pursue charges in the International Criminal Court, but apparently came away unsatisfied.
This actually represents a potentially significant shift in Europe’s position on Palestinian membership at the United Nations. Last year, the Palestinian Authority sought membership in a U.N. body called the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), seen as a test case for today’s bid. Here’s how Europe voted then, and below that are some important takeaways on the changes:
Last year’s U.N. vote on Palestinian membership in UNESCO. Click to enlarge. (Max Fisher/The Washington Post)
Here are the big changes between the 2011 vote and today’s:
Five countries switched from “abstain” to “yes”: Italy, Denmark, Switzerland, Portugal, Georgia.
Three countries switched from “no” to “abstain”: Germany, Netherlands, Lithuania.
One country switched from “no” to “yes”: Sweden.
One country was absent: Ukraine, which had abstained in 2011. It happens.
Excluding Ukraine’s absence, that means that nine European countries moved their votes in a way that suggests greater support for Palestinian U.N. statehood efforts. That might just be about these two particular U.N. votes and nothing more, or it might represent shifting European diplomatic energy away from the Israeli-Palestinian peace process (the U.S. and Israel have warned that approving the Palestinians’ bid would undermine the process) and toward supporting more such unilateral Palestinian efforts.
It is difficult to see good news here for Israel or for the U.S.-led peace process.
Source: Map: How Europe voted on Palestine at the U.N., in 2011 and now
shuttler, if you believe a Palestinian state would end the violence in the ME or even reduce it, then you are sadly mistaken. You believe that these people are rational and reasonable people who desire peace, which again is a mistake on your part.
Appeasing evil does not make evil go away.
shuttler
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2012
- Messages
- 9,253
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
yes the violence is affecting both sides and that is what I think! and probably that is what China and some of the european countries which voted for and abstained the motion thnk too!
national_crisis
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2012
- Messages
- 84
- Reaction score
- 0
Obama:`We Are Fully Supportive of Israels Right to Defend Itself
BANGKOK, Thailand President Obama today fully backed Israels right to defend itself and warned that the escalating violence in the Middle East threatens the prospect for a lasting peace process.
Speaking at a joint press conference with Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, Obama called for an end to the firing of missiles into Israel by militants inside Gaza, saying there is no country on earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders.
The president cautioned that any ground offensive could lead to greater Israeli casualties.
Israel has every right to expect that it does not have missiles fired into its territory, he said. If that can be accomplished without a ramping up of military activity in Gaza, thats preferable. Thats not just preferable for the people in Gaza, its also preferable for the Israelis because if Israeli troops are in Gaza they are much more at risk of incurring fatalities or being wounded.
Obama reiterated Americas unwavering support for Israel. We are fully supportive of Israels right to defend itself from missiles landing on peoples homes and workplaces and potentially killing civilians. And we will continue to support Israels right to defend itself, he said.
The president, who has been in contact with leaders in the region to try and de-escalate the violence, said if were serious about wanting to resolve this situation and create a genuine peace process, it starts with no more missiles being fired into Israels territory and that then gives us the space to try and deal with these long-standing conflicts that exist.
Were going to have to see what kind of progress we can make in the next 24, 36, 48 hours, but what Ive said to [Egyptian] President Morsi and [Turkish] Prime Minister Erdogan is that those who champion the cause of the Palestinians should recognize that if we see a further escalation of the situation in Gaza than the likelihood of us getting back on any kind of peace track that leads to a two state solution is going to be pushed off way into the future, he said
Obama:`We Are Fully Supportive of Israels Right to Defend Itself - ABC News
BANGKOK, Thailand President Obama today fully backed Israels right to defend itself and warned that the escalating violence in the Middle East threatens the prospect for a lasting peace process.
Speaking at a joint press conference with Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, Obama called for an end to the firing of missiles into Israel by militants inside Gaza, saying there is no country on earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders.
The president cautioned that any ground offensive could lead to greater Israeli casualties.
Israel has every right to expect that it does not have missiles fired into its territory, he said. If that can be accomplished without a ramping up of military activity in Gaza, thats preferable. Thats not just preferable for the people in Gaza, its also preferable for the Israelis because if Israeli troops are in Gaza they are much more at risk of incurring fatalities or being wounded.
Obama reiterated Americas unwavering support for Israel. We are fully supportive of Israels right to defend itself from missiles landing on peoples homes and workplaces and potentially killing civilians. And we will continue to support Israels right to defend itself, he said.
The president, who has been in contact with leaders in the region to try and de-escalate the violence, said if were serious about wanting to resolve this situation and create a genuine peace process, it starts with no more missiles being fired into Israels territory and that then gives us the space to try and deal with these long-standing conflicts that exist.
Were going to have to see what kind of progress we can make in the next 24, 36, 48 hours, but what Ive said to [Egyptian] President Morsi and [Turkish] Prime Minister Erdogan is that those who champion the cause of the Palestinians should recognize that if we see a further escalation of the situation in Gaza than the likelihood of us getting back on any kind of peace track that leads to a two state solution is going to be pushed off way into the future, he said
Obama:`We Are Fully Supportive of Israels Right to Defend Itself - ABC News
Hasbara Buster
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2010
- Messages
- 4,612
- Reaction score
- -7
Don't expect anything, the ICC is a western political tool to control other nations.
...
Hasbara Buster
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2010
- Messages
- 4,612
- Reaction score
- -7
Yes and like i said, you are wrong. The violence will not end until the Arabs achieve what they've desired for 60 years, which is the destruction of Israel and the expulsion of the Jews. So the peace you, China(Which i don't believe cares one bit for the Palestinians, it's all diplomatic on their part) and the anti-Semitic Europeans desire will never come to pass because they know nothing of the Arab's nature.
Hellraiser007
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2012
- Messages
- 1,971
- Reaction score
- -3
Kashmir and Palestine are two different things altogether.
karan.1970
BANNED
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2010
- Messages
- 14,781
- Reaction score
- -20
- Country
- Location
And Balochistan ????
arp2041
BANNED
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2012
- Messages
- 10,406
- Reaction score
- -9
- Country
- Location
Be my Guest, U have not seen the MIGHT of MIGHTY India
, even the OIC couldn't declare Kashmir as an independent country, how will 193 member UN will, when majority of countries are in favor of India???Similar threads
