Palestinian President Abbas tells U.S. envoy UN bid does not contradict peace talks

[News_Editor]

Palestinian President Abbas tells U.S. envoy UN bid does not contradict peace talks

2011-09-08 03:11:16 GMT+7 (ICT)

RAMALLAH (BNO NEWS) -- Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on Wednesday told U.S. officials that the Palestinian bid to seek a full United Nations membership does not contradict the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, the Palestine News and Information Agency reported.

U.S. Middle East peace envoy David Hale, along with national security adviser for the Middle East Dennis Ross and U.S. Consul-General in Jerusalem Daniel Rubinstein, asked the Palestinian Authority to abandon its bid to have the United Nations recognize Palestinian statehood. Abbas, however, told the U.S. envoy in his headquarters in Ramallah that the bid does not contradict with the peace process, but will end the deadlock that resulted from "Israeli intransigence."

Abbas also said that Palestine is willing to return to negotiations if Israel accepts terms of reference to the peace process, the two-state solution on the 1967 borders and stopped settlements in the Palestinian Territory, according to the news agency.

Last year, Israel and the Palestinian Authority stalled the peace negotiations, which were supported by the United States and the United Nations, after the Jewish nation refused to extend a moratorium on settlement building in the occupied Palestinian territory in September.

In response, President Abbas broke off direct talks as recommended by Hamas, which has been designated as a terrorist organization by the European Union and countries such as the United States and Israel. Israel has since resumed settlement construction even though they were labeled as a violation of international law by the international community.

Palestine demanded a stop to settlement construction in the disputed East Jerusalem and West Bank area as a key element for continuing peace talks, aimed at reaching a two-state solution based on the 1967 Green Line. However, Israeli authorities have rejected the Palestinian solution based on the 1967 borders as that measure would leave a large population of Israelis in Judea and Samaria outside Israel's borders.

About 120 out of 193 countries have currently recognized the State of Palestine and those are seen as likely supporters if the UN votes on the issue. There are reports, however, that the United States would veto any UN bill to recognize Palestine.

If the UN Security Council resolution is approved, Palestine would become the 194th member of the United Nations.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2011-09-08

[Jingthing]

If the UN Security Council resolution is approved, Palestine would become the 194th member of the United Nations.

But it is 100 percent certain this resolution for UN membership will NOT be approved as it will be vetoed in the security council.

They will win a status upgrade; that's it for now.

[Scott]

Baiting, inflammatory post deleted as well as responses to it.

[coma]

If the UN Security Council resolution is approved, Palestine would become the 194th member of the United Nations.

But it is 100 percent certain this resolution for UN membership will NOT be approved as it will be vetoed in the security council.

They will win a status upgrade; that's it for now.

If/ when the US vetos the resolution then that would be like a 'red rag to a bull'.

Arabs all over the wolrd would surely not be happy about it and I fear their reaction/s.

[Ulysses G.]

Arabs all over the wolrd would surely not be happy about it

There is nothing new about that.

[Wallaby]

If the UN Security Council resolution is approved, Palestine would become the 194th member of the United Nations.

But it is 100 percent certain this resolution for UN membership will NOT be approved as it will be vetoed in the security council.

They will win a status upgrade; that's it for now.

If/ when the US vetos the resolution then that would be like a 'red rag to a bull'.

Arabs all over the wolrd would surely not be happy about it and I fear their reaction/s.

Not only arab nations. The list is ever growing and the more it gets the more Israel and the US will be isolated. They are obviously already feeling the pressure and that's why they don't want it to go to a vote.

[Ulysses G.]

The US would always prefer to not have to vote on something that they will veto. Politics.

[carmine]

Isn't it about time the Palestians were given ALL their land back that was STOLEN from them?

It could only be politics that would allow such an injustice.

[Jingthing]

Isn't it about time the Palestians were given ALL their land back that was STOLEN from them?

It could only be politics that would allow such an injustice.

When did you stop beating your wife? Ask a better question; you might get a better answer.

[Ulysses G.]

Isn't it about time the Palestians were given ALL their land back that was STOLEN from them?

It is well documented that there has never been a country called Palestine or a people called Palestinian, so that claim has little basis in fact. The mass of Arabs from surrounding countries who immigrated illegally have no more right to the land than the Jews who did the same thing and at the same time.

Edited September 8, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[Wallaby]

Isn't it about time the Palestians were given ALL their land back that was STOLEN from them?

It is well documented that there has never been a country called Palestine or a people called Palestinian, so that claim has little basis in fact. The mass of Arabs from surrounding countries who immigrated illegally have no more right to the land than the Jews who did the same thing and at the same time.

Better get a hotline to the US who doesn't agree with you as they keep telling Israel to stop stealing the land.

[Jingthing]

Talking about different issues here. Israel became a sovereign state in 1948. In 1947 the UN partitioned the British colony of Palestine into two parts. Also, many new borders since then from wars and yes settlement expansion. So people who say ALL of the land of Jewish Israel is "stolen" are not telling the truth. It's abrasive language, but yes you can make an argument that west bank settlements are stolen if you like.

[up-country_sinclair]

They will win a status upgrade; that's it for now.

And that upgrade would mean that they are more likely to be able to bring charges of Israeli atrocities to the International Criminal Court.

"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice."

[Jingthing]

The more important question is whether the upgrade in status which they will get brings Jewish Israel and Arab Palestine any closer to the day when they can live in peace as neighbors. Shouldn't that be the prize people of good will are working for?

[Pakboong]

Of course the US will veto.

There is no issue of stolen land either.

Israel has a right to exist in any manner it can physically back-up.

My fear, and a serious fear, is that this is all about the clash of the Titans. I would not want to fight the Turks nor would I want to fight the Iranians, and that seems to be what we are working toward. Throw in a few more countries like North Korea, another billion or so Muslims, and we are in serious trouble. I for one have a nephew sitting on a US Navel vessel somewhere in the area. I would like to see him alive again. I am sure he doesn't have any idea why he is there nor that there is a UN vote pending.

This could be about a final straw that the Muslims have been building toward for many years now.

[Scott]

I take umbrage at the use of the word stolen. The land hasn't been stolen, it's right where it always was. It's occupied, maybe illegally, but it's not stolen.

[Jingthing]

I get your point Scott but people all over the world use that kind of rhetoric and stopping them from doing so would be like stopping human nature. You can find many Mexicans today who will tell you the gringos "stole" California, and they have a point.

[Ulysses G.]

Better get a hotline to the US who doesn't agree with you as they keep telling Israel to stop stealing the land.

Far be it from me to suggest that you constantly distort history and facts on this forum and make

unfounded claims, but I would really like to see a link to a credible source that reports on the U.S. Government "telling Israel to stop 'stealing' land".

Edited September 8, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[Jingthing]

Of course they wouldn't use that language. They would say we urge you to stop building new housing on settlements or starting new settlements, etc.

[Ulysses G.]

That is very different from "telling Israel to stop 'stealing' land".

They are looking for a peaceful solution to the problem

where both sides have to make sacrifices and that does mean that telling Israel to trade land for peace is just.

No one seems to be suggesting that Jordan stole the land that the UN meant for the Palestinian Arabs and that is beyond dispute and there are no plans to give any of it back.

Edited September 8, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[Wallaby]

Better get a hotline to the US who doesn't agree with you as they keep telling Israel to stop stealing the land.

Far be it from me to suggest that you constantly distort history on this forum and make

unfounded claims, but I would really like to see a link to a credible source that reports on the U.S. Government "telling Israel to stop 'stealing' land".

It is well known that your interpretation of history is biased. Below are just a few but of course you will say it isn't stealing. Those with blinkers always find and excuse in an attempt to justify their inability to acknowledge the truth.

Hillary Clinton has said Israel must stop 'settlement activity' and steer clear of comments that will provoke Palestinians. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/7598527/Hillary-Clinton-tells-Israel-to-stop-settlement-activity-and-provoking-Palestine.html

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Sunday he had been "surprised" by a recent U.S. demand that Israel halt a construction project in a Palestinian neighborhood in East Jerusalem. http://www.haaretz.com/news/u-s-demand-for-east-jerusalem-building-freeze-surprised-netanyahu-1.280247

Hillary Clinton has said Israel must stop 'settlement activity' and steer clear of comments that will provoke Palestinians. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/7598527/Hillary-Clinton-tells-Israel-to-stop-settlement-activity-and-provoking-Palestine.html

Israel will not accept the American demand to stop building in east Jerusalem's Jewish neighborhoods and in the settlement blocs, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told US President George W. Bush on Wednesday. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3492546,00.html

President Obama yesterday embarked on his most daunting diplomatic challenge yet by telling Israel to take “difficult steps” towards peace, allow a Palestinian state and halt settlement expansion on occupied land. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6315072.ece

[Wallaby]

That is very different from "telling Israel to stop 'stealing' land".

They are looking for a peaceful solution to the problem

where both sides have to make sacrifices and that does mean that telling Israel to trade land for peace is just.

No one seems to be suggesting that Jordan stole the land that the UN meant for the Palestinian Arabs and that is beyond dispute and there are no plans to give any of it back.

No, it is the same. Only you would think it different because it doesn't sit well with you.

Tell me where you live, I'll just move in as you can't own it.

Edited September 8, 2011 by Wallaby

[Ulysses G.]

No mention of "stealing Palestinian land" at all - just suggestions for ways to to make diplomacy easier.

Why am I not surprised and why don't some posters try sticking to the facts instead of the hateful anti-Israeli rhetoric?

Edited September 8, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[Wallaby]

As predicted.

[Scott]

I strongly suggest you stick to the topic of the OP rather than personal remarks directed at other posters.

[Ulysses G.]

That is very different from "telling Israel to stop 'stealing' land".

They are looking for a peaceful solution to the problem

where both sides have to make sacrifices and that does mean that telling Israel to trade land for peace is just.

No one seems to be suggesting that Jordan stole the land that the UN meant for the Palestinian Arabs and that is beyond dispute and there are no plans to give any of it back.

No, it is the same. Only you would think it different because it doesn't sit well with you.

I think that it is different because it is.

Two historically accurate videos on the subject:

Edited September 8, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[Jingthing]

Good stuff, UG. No doubt the material is biased to the mainstream Israeli view, but the truth is the vast majority of non-Israelis haven't even been exposed to that point of view in their local media, even in pro-Israel countries supposedly dominated by the Israeli lobby. Currently, the pro Arab side is winning the international PR war, so some BALANCE is a good thing.

Edited September 8, 2011 by Jingthing

[Wallaby]

If the land does not belong to Israel then they have no right to build on it, end of story. Israel's actions has caused it to now be in the minority. Most countries are calling for Palestine to be recognised, the US and Israel is afraid that the more votes for Palestine at the UN the more US and Israel will be marginalised.

As I said before, give me your address, I'll move in and of course you'll just accept it and move on.

[Jingthing]

If the land does not belong to Israel then they have no right to build on it, end of story. Israel's actions has caused it to now be in the minority. Most countries are calling for Palestine to be recognised, the US and Israel is afraid that the more votes for Palestine at the UN the more US and Israel will be marginalised.

Not exactly. The US believes this current UN move won't help bring peace and a two state solution to fruition in REALITY. The UN is the UN.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defe...-at-un-1.383314

Leftist pro-Israel group says it aligns with U.S. position that Palestinian UN bid will not advance peace.

"J Street does not support the Palestinian effort to become a member of the United Nations at this time because we do not believe that, in the current context, it will advance peace, enhance security and improve conditions on the ground", the organization officials wrote in the position paper.

"J Street therefore supports the U.S. intention to veto such an effort in the Security Council. We urge an assertive American and international diplomatic initiative that could lead the Palestinians to defer their approach to the UN by jumpstarting efforts to reach a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."

J Street stressed that its goal is the realization of the two-state solution, and the creation of a Palestinian state will not necessarily resolve the conflict. Despite the UN’s role in Israel’s creation and its important work globally on many issues including humanitarian relief and peacekeeping, the United Nations arouses distrust when it comes to matters related to Israel in the Jewish community.

Edited September 8, 2011 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

If the land does not belong to Israel then they have no right to build on it

The Arabs rejected the UN deal and went to war numerous times to destroy Israel, so the land does not belong to them until they accept Israel's right to exist, recognize it as a Jewish state and stop the hate, violence, terrorism and sign a peace treaty. Until then, the US will veto every one of the absurd Hamas demands for a State.

Edited September 8, 2011 by Ulysses G.