the challenge to israel’s legitimacy

16
No Path To Peace: The Potential Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly A Strategic Briefing for Policymakers Paper No. 5 September 5th, 2011

Upload: friends-of-israel-initiative

Post on 16-Jan-2015

189 views

Category:

Education


1 download

DESCRIPTION

 

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: The Challenge to Israel’s Legitimacy

No Path To Peace:The Potential Consequences of

Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly

A Strategic Briefing for Policymakers

Paper No. 5September 5th, 2011

Page 2: The Challenge to Israel’s Legitimacy
Page 3: The Challenge to Israel’s Legitimacy

The Henry Jackson Society / Friends of Israel Initiative

No Path To Peace: The Potential Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly

Executive Summary and Recommendations

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has declared his intention to •pursue the recognition of statehood for Palestine as a full member of the UN at the UN General Assembly in September as part of an attempt to ‘internationalise’theconflictbetweenIsraelandthePalestinians.

Such a unilateral course of action runs counter to the explicit Palestinian •commitmentaspertheOsloAgreementstoseektoresolvetheconflictbetweenIsraelandthePalestiniansthroughdirectbilateralnegotiationsleadingtoafinalstatusagreementandtheendofallclaims.

The Palestinian unilateral gambit entails not only significant risks to•Palestinian economic progress but also carries grave potential for the escalationofviolenceontheground.

Firm US opposition to such a unilateral Palestinian initiative at the UN •is premised on an understanding that only bilateral negotiations in a US andQuartet-ledframeworkhavethepotentialforrealprogressleadingtoafinalstatusagreementbetweenIsraelandthePalestinians.

Though the modalities of a relevant Palestinian resolution at the UN •General Assembly are not yet clear, it can be assumed that EU member stateswillbeinapositiontocastthepivotalvotesthatwilldeterminetheoutcomeofthePalestinianinitiative.

AssignatoriestothecommitmentstoresolvetheconflictbetweenIsrael•and the Palestinians through bilateral negotiations, and on account of

Page 4: The Challenge to Israel’s Legitimacy

The Henry Jackson Society / Friends of Israel Initiative

No Path To Peace: The Potential Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly

thesignificantpotentialforadeteriorationinthesituationtheunilateralinitiativeposits,EUmemberstatesshouldworktoavertsuchacourseof action by the Palestinians and if necessary vote against recognition, whilstmakingclearthattheysupportthecreationofaPalestinianstatelivingside-by-sideinpeaceandsecuritywithIsraelasperafinalstatusagreementnegotiateddirectlybetweenthepartiestotheconflict.

1. Background

Writing in the New York Times in May, Palestinian National Authority President Mahmoud Abbas declared that “this September, at the United NationsGeneralAssembly,wewillrequestinternationalrecognitionoftheState of Palestine on the 1967 border and that our state be admitted as a fullmemberoftheUnitedNations.”1 Such unilateral Palestinian action is stronglyopposedbothbyIsraelandtheUnitedStatesaswellasanumberofEuropean states, including Germany and Italy, ultimately on the basis that itwillproveasignificanthindrancetoprogressinthePeaceProcess.Ithasserious potential consequences leading to a deterioration in the dynamics of theIsraeli-Palestinianconflictinboththeimmediateandthelongterm,aswellasimpactingontheroleoftheinternationalcommunityandmultilat-eralinstitutionsinthisandsimilarscenarios.

Despite the continued categorical public statements indicating that the Pal-estinian leadership aims to pursue this path to its full extent, President Ab-bas’ diplomatic corps has simultaneously partaken in a frantic diplomatic search to avert the potentially grave fallout from such an enterprise, giving credencetoclaimsthattheirinitiativehasbeenpursuedwithoutacoherentstrategybehindit.Atthetimeofwriting,thediplomacyremainsunsuccess-ful and it appears that the dynamic of expectation unleashed by the Pales-tinianleadershipmayhavepassedapointofnoreturn.Withthepossibilityof a major last minute diplomatic intervention receding, policymakers are likelytobeconfrontedwiththeconsequencesofPalestinianunilateralismsometimearoundSeptember20th.

1. The Long Overdue Palestinian State, Mahmoud Abbas, New York Times, May 16, 2011

Page 5: The Challenge to Israel’s Legitimacy

The Henry Jackson Society / Friends of Israel Initiative

No Path To Peace: The Potential Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly

ThoughitisfarfromclearwhatexactformPresidentAbbas’courseofac-tion at the UNGeneral Assembly will take, the contours of an expectedPalestinian unilateral initiative have come into focus as the diplomacy has unfolded. TheUNcannot confer statehoodper se– states are generallydeclared by the political leadership in a relevant territory, subject to vari-ous stipulations, including control of said territory, provisional institutions forthestate-to-beandotherobviousprerequisites.TheUNcanthenadmitstatestothebody–anactthatentailsthepassageofarecommendationtodosobytheSecurityCouncilandatwo-thirdsmajorityvotebytheGeneralAssembly.

Since theU.S. hasmade its opposition toPalestinianunilateralism clearandisfirmlyexpectedtovetoanysuchinitiativeintheSecurityCouncil,thefocus has shifted to potential Palestinian action in the General Assembly, wherethePalestiniandelegationenjoysanautomaticmajorityofsupportdrawnfromtheArabLeague,IslamicCooperationandNon-Alignedblocs.Though complex, in principle the modalities of available courses of action for the Palestinians here are tied into their long-standing use of the ‘Uniting forPeace’mechanism–aprocedureoriginallydesignedtosidestepsuper-powergridlockintheSecurityCouncilduringtheColdWar–whichresultsin non-legally binding resolutions that generally have little consequence in realterms. However,giventhegravewiderimplicationsforthestatusofdiplomacyintheIsraeli-PalestinianconflictthatthePalestinianunilateralgambit carries, even such a more limited General Assembly resolution could havefarreachingconsequencesinthiscase.WithUNmemberstates’posi-tions of support or opposition to the Palestinian unilateral initiative clear, ostensiblythemajordeterminingfactorofsuccessforthegambitwillcomefrom the votes cast by those European Union and associated countries that can confer or deny a sense of diplomatic legitimacy to the outcome of a rel-evantUNGeneralAssemblyvote.

With this in mind, the latest round of diplomacy appears to be edging towards anoutcome thatwill see thePalestinian leadership retreat fromseeking to become a full member state and instead aim to garner European support for a resolution elevating Palestine from having Observer Status at the UN to becoming a Non-Member State (similar in status to the Holy See). Thoughit isnotclearwhatthespecifictextofanyresolutiontobetabledwillbe,thepossibilityofsucharesolutionmakingreferencetothe1967 line around which bilateral negotiations between the parties havefocusedadds further fuel to theunilateralfire inattempting topre-judgetheissueofborderswhichundertheOsloAgreementsisclearlyreservedas

Page 6: The Challenge to Israel’s Legitimacy

The Henry Jackson Society / Friends of Israel Initiative

No Path To Peace: The Potential Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly

anessentialpartofbilateralnegotiations. Indeed,anyunilateralattemptby the Palestinians to seek a form of UN recognition of statehood under the modalities described stands in express contradiction to the obligation of resolvingtheconflictbybilateralnegotiationthatpastagreementsbetweenIsrael and the Palestinians expressly carry, a position endorsed by the US, EUandQuartet.

TheconsequencesoftheexpectedPalestinianunilateralactionarehowev-ernotonlylegalinnature.Thediplomaticprocess,realitiesonthegroundandnotleasttheUNsystemandinternationallawmaysufferseriousnega-tive consequences if European states accede to such an attempt to remove the search for a two-state solution from the established bilateral frame-work. Progresstowardstwostateslivingsidebysideinpeaceandsecu-ritywillonlybeachievedthroughdirectnegotiationsbetweentheparties,howeverdifficult.SincetheEUmemberstatesonwhomtheoutcomenowappears to hinge are expressly determined to reach such an outcome, it is vital that they send a clear message that the Palestinian unilateral initiative isadead-end–atbestacostlydistraction,atworstarecipeforsignificantdeterioration.

2. Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions for the Diplomatic Process

DespitethesignificantuncertaintiesabouttheexactformtheunilateralPal-estinianinitiativewilltake,theextremevolatilityinherentinpopularimpe-tuses and diplomacy in the Middle East gives cause for grave concern on a numberoflevelsifthePalestiniansgoaheadwiththeirinitiative.

For thediplomaticprocess theconsequencesof suchan initiativewillbesignificantlydetrimentalinamannerthatshouldbeofseriousconcerntothoseinterestedinpromotingconstructivestepsbetweenIsraelandthePal-estinians. Twoproblemsareparamount–thefailuretoabidebytheex-presscommitmenttotheprincipleoftheresolutionoftheconflictthroughnegotiationsbetweentheparties;andtherelatedbroaderattempttomovethe conflict into amultilateral diplomatic settingwhichwill significantly

Page 7: The Challenge to Israel’s Legitimacy

The Henry Jackson Society / Friends of Israel Initiative

No Path To Peace: The Potential Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly

diminishedchancesofsuccess.Therearealsobroaderconcernsaboutin-ternational diplomacy and the UN system per se inherent in the proposed Palestinianaction.

2.1. Negating the Commitment to Bilateral Negotiations and Statehood as ‘End of Claims’

TheprincipleofresolvingtheIsraeli-Palestinianconflictthroughbilateralnegotiations isa long-standingpartof thediplomatic frameworkseekingtoaddresstheconflict,andisafundamentalprincipleagreedbetweenthepartiesaspartoftheOsloAgreements.Startingwiththeexchangeoflet-tersonmutualrecognitionin1993, inwhichthePLOcommitteditself toadeclarationthat“alloutstandingissuesrelatingtopermanentstatuswillberesolvedthroughnegotiations”,andfollowedinthe1995InterimAgree-ment(OsloII)byacommitmentnottotakeanystepthatwouldchangethestatus of the Palestinian territories pending the outcome of the permanent statusnegotiations(anagreementtowhichtheEUisasignatory),thisprin-ciplehasnotonlybindingvalidityontheparties,buthasbeenreaffirmedtimeandagainastheonlyacceptablebasisforaresolutionoftheconflict.BoththefoundingpositionoftheQuartetaswellastheso-calledRoadmaptoPeacehavemaintainedthisclearcorecomponentofthePeaceProcess.Noristhisalegalisticpointalone–thiscoreunderstandingexistssinceitisclearlyunderstoodthatnosuccessfuloutcomewillbeachievedunlessthepartiesabidebythisprinciple.Assuch,amoveawayfromtheprincipleofbilateral negotiations, as a Palestinian unilateral attempt at declaring state-hoodwouldentail,isnotonlyaproblemintermsofpastagreements,itisalso counter to the accepted modalities statesmen have posited for decades astheonlypossiblewayforwardbetweentheparties.Thegravityofaban-doningtheprincipleofanegotiatedsolutionastheonlyacceptablewayfor-wardintheMiddleEastPeaceProcesscannotbeoverstated.

For the potential implications that such a grave reversal of long standing paradigmsinvolves,oneneedonlylookattheIsraelireaction. Giventhecentrality of the bilateral requirement to the Oslo paradigm, top Israeli poli-cymakers have mooted a potential cancelation of the Oslo Accords in re-sponse to the Palestinian initiative as part of a package of options being pre-paredtocounterwhatisperceivedtobeamajordiplomaticaffront.Thoughthese are measures deemed to be the preferred option of only a minority of Israeli cabinet ministers, the implications are that if one party violates

Page 8: The Challenge to Israel’s Legitimacy

The Henry Jackson Society / Friends of Israel Initiative

No Path To Peace: The Potential Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly

suchafundamentalprincipleofthediplomaticagreements,theotherwillfeelwarrantedtopursueequallystrongmeasures,leadingtoaninevitableerosionofthehard-foughtforprinciplesoftheentireprocess.Thishastobeunderstoodquiteapartfromanyfrustrationonbehalfofthepartieswiththeir opposite and the rough-and-tumble of high stakes diplomacy, but rath-erasafundamentalparadigmshiftawayfromeventhelimitedconstructiveframeworkthepartiesarecommittedto.Inevitably,suchadynamicwouldbe majorly detrimental to the Peace Process and external actors have a duty toacttoavoidsuchascenario.

Nor is this the only paradigm shift the Palestinian unilateral statehood gambit entails. ForsuchamoveasconceivedbyPresidentAbbaswouldservetoundermineanotherofthefundamentalaspectsofthePeaceProcess–thatthe recognitionofPalestinianstatehood throughfinal statusnegotiationsshould be coupled to a reciprocal agreement establishing an ‘End of Claims’ onthepartofthePalestinians.Infact,theunilateralscenarioaspursuedby President Abbas, envisages statehood, even in a more limited form, as a stepping-stone to the perpetuation of the conflict throughmultilateralbodies.

2.2. The Counterproductive ‘Internationalisation’ of the Peace Process

In his New York Times op-ed, Mahmoud Abbas posited explicitly that a ma-jor aim of the Palestinians’ attempt to unilaterally assert statehood through theUNwasthatthis“wouldpavethewayfortheinternationalizationoftheconflictasalegalmatter,notonlyapoliticalone.Itwouldalsopavethewayfor us to pursue claims against Israel at the United Nations, human rights treatybodiesandtheInternationalCourtofJustice.”,makingclearthathefullyintendedtheinitiativetoservetoopenupanewdiplomaticandlegalfrontintheconflictwithIsrael.Suchanaimhasfoundasympatheticre-sponseinvariousquarters,belyingtheseriouslydetrimentaleffecttowardsrealprogressinpursuitofafinalsettlementitwouldentail.

PeacebetweenIsraelandthePalestiniansrestsnotonlyonaviablePalestin-ianstateemergingfromafinalstatusagreement,butisalsodependentonIsrael’s legitimate diplomatic and security concerns being addressed as part

2. The Long Overdue Palestinian State, Mahmoud Abbas, New York Times, May 16, 2011

Page 9: The Challenge to Israel’s Legitimacy

The Henry Jackson Society / Friends of Israel Initiative

No Path To Peace: The Potential Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly

ofadealbetweentheparties.TheonlycredibleguarantorofthisaxiomaticcomponentofapeacedealistheUnitedStates.WhilstthereisarolefortheEU, the Quartet and other parties, including the UN, the bilateral diplomat-icframeworkasledbytheUSistheonlyonethathasaninherentchanceof success on account of its ability to deliver the legitimate assurances such adealwillentail. Noseriousobserverinterestedinasuccessfuloutcomeacceptabletobothpartiestotheconflictcandiscountthisreality.Muchofthe US’ resistance to a unilateral move that entails a principal shift in the diplomaticvenueforconflictresolutionbetweenIsraelandthePalestinianstomultilateralbodiesispremisedontherecognitionofthisdynamic.Itisfor this very reason that the opposition to the Palestinian unilateral gambit has been so vocal even from a US administration highly sympathetic to Pal-estinianaspirations.

Assuch,whilstsuchan‘internationalisation’oftheconflictmayonthesur-face appear attractive to the Palestinian leadership and its supporters, the neteffectsareinrealitylikelytoconstitutesignificantadditionalobstaclesto peace. No credible peace-building initiative for Israel and thePales-tinians has ever emerged from theUNGeneral Assembly. Despite theobsessive focus on condemnation of Israel in parts of the UN structure, associated legal rulings and sustained efforts to constrain Israeli room for diplomatic manoeuvre, formal progress has only ever been made through directnegotiationbetweenthepartiesinaUS-ledframework.Indeed,theinternationalisationoftheconflict,withpotentialattemptsbythePalestin-iansandtheirsupporterstomountsignificantdiplomaticandlegalchal-lenges to Israel through international bodies deemed receptive to Palestin-iangrievances,willlikelyresultinsignificantentrenchmentonthepartofIsrael.WhilstsuchascenariomayentailperceivedvictoriesforthePales-tinians,itwouldintruthonlyservetoperpetuatetheconflict,withnohopeofmakingprogresstowardsafinalsettlementandconstantpotential forescalation.

No multilateral institution can supplant the role of bilateral negotiation and USengagement. Noristhepotentialimpactofsuchaninternalisationoftheconflictpossibletocontrol.Assuch,whilstthelikelihoodofasuccess-fulfinalsettlementasaresultoftheinternationalisationoftheconflictap-pears non-existent, potential obstacles are multiplied exponentially by such acourse,whichifsuccessfulwouldsoonturnouttobeaPyrrhicvictoryforthePalestinianleadership.

Page 10: The Challenge to Israel’s Legitimacy

The Henry Jackson Society / Friends of Israel Initiative

No Path To Peace: The Potential Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly

2.3. Implications for International Diplomacy and the Problem of Precedent

Asnotedabove, thePeaceProcessbetweenIsraeland thePalestinians isbuiltona frameworkofagreements thatexplicitlybindtheparties tore-solvetheirdifferencesandreachafinalstatusagreementthroughbilateralnegotiations. In the caseof the 1995Oslo II InterimAgreement, andasreaffirmedbythepolicycommitmentsmadeaspartoftheQuartet,boththeUSandtheEUmemberstatesaresignatoriestothesecommitments. Assuch, European member states that support a unilateral Palestinian resolu-tionwouldsignificantlyimpedetheirabilitytoserveasanhonestbrokerinfuturenegotiationsbetweentheparties,sinceIsraelwouldcrediblyblamethem for reneging on vital agreements and understandings about the Peace ProcessinsupportofunilateralPalestinianactions.

TherearealsowiderconcernsaboutaPalestinianunilateraldeclarationofstatehood.MostobserversagreethatacoursethatresultsinaGeneralAs-sembly resolution in favour of Palestinian statehood under the ‘Uniting for Peace’mechanismwouldsetsuchaproblematicprecedentastobeopposedevenbyamajorityofcountriessympathetictothePalestiniancause. Yeteven a more limited unilateral success at achieving UN endorsement of po-sitions that the Palestinians have failed to achieve in bilateral negotiations withtheprincipalotherpartytotheirconflictwouldhavethepotentialtocreateahighlyproblematicprecedentintheUNsystem.ThePalestinianshaveenjoyedasignificantnumberofunusualdiplomaticbenefitsasobserv-ersattheUN,includingastandingmechanismthatallowsthemtoforgosome of the procedural hurdles usually entailed in seeking recourse to the GeneralAssembly.Yet,theworldisnotshortofstatelesspeopleandmove-mentswithsignificantgrievancesandlonghistoriesofconflict,anditisnothard to imagine the impact on global governance and the UN system should Palestinian success in achieving their aims through unilateral means sanc-tionedbytheUNinspireotherstoseekasimilarpath.Thiswouldhaveasignificant impactontheUNsystem,whichhithertoadmittednewstatesonlyoncetheirprimaryconflictshadbeenresolvedbilaterally,suchasforexampleinthecaseofEastTimorandIndonesia.

Page 11: The Challenge to Israel’s Legitimacy

The Henry Jackson Society / Friends of Israel Initiative

No Path To Peace: The Potential Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly

The implications for international diplomacy and the UN system of a uni-lateralPalestiniandeclarationofstatehoodarenottobediscounted.Thecommitment to bilateralism that the EU has entered into is beyond dispute andwillinevitablybecomeapointofcontentionshouldindividualmemberstatesabandonit. Yet,successfulprecedent-settingunilateralPalestinianactionwouldbeapotentialproblemfortheUNsystemasawhole,indicat-ing to other movements and peoples seeking statehood that the apparently unassailable dynamics of proper sequencing and obligatory prerequisites maybecutshortbyrecoursetotheUNGeneralAssembly.

3. Practical Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions

Whilst the potential negative impact of the unilateral Palestinian gambit on thePeaceProcessandprogresstowardsafinalsettlementhasbeennotedabove in thecontextof theattempted internationalisationof theconflict,theimmediatepracticalconsiderationsgiveevenmorecauseforconcern.ThePalestinianunilateralgambitnotonlyjeopardiseshardwonpracticalPalestiniangainsbutalsocreatesthepotentialforviolenceintheregion–and ultimately has the potential to jeopardise the position of the Palestinian NationalAuthority(PA)itself.

3.1. Exacerbating the Palestinian Financial Crisis

WhenunderstoodinthecontextofthepopularuprisingsthathaveswepttheArabWorldinthecourseofthisyear,itispossibletoseehowthepres-sure on the Palestinian leadership to produce practical gains for its popula-tionhas led to thehaltingattemptsat reconciliationbetweenHamas–aterroristorganisationwhichgovernstheGazastrip-andPresidentAbbas’FatahpartyintheWestBank.ThefactasidethatsuchaunitygovernmentincorporatinganunreformedHamaswouldbeunacceptable–anddisin-terested–asapartnertopeace,itappearsinanycasethatattemptsatrec-onciliationbetweenthetwowarringPalestinianfactionsarefaltering.TherationalebehindthereconciliationattemptwasarguablyareactiontotheArabSpring-withaviewtotheformationofatransitionalunitygovern-mentinadvanceofelectionsnextyear.Thefalteringofthelatestattemptat Palestinian unity is perhaps best evidenced by the struggle over Salam

Page 12: The Challenge to Israel’s Legitimacy

The Henry Jackson Society / Friends of Israel Initiative

No Path To Peace: The Potential Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly

Fayyad’spositionasPrimeMinister.Defactoremaininginplacefornow,FayyadisattemptingtotackletheseriousfinancialcrisisthePAisfacing,whichthreatenstoderailhardwongainsineconomicandinstitutionalim-provementwithwhichhe is credited. At fault,not least, is the failureofArabdonorcountriestodeliverover$300millioninpledgedassistance.

Giventheseseriouspoliticalandfinancialdifficulties,itisdifficulttodetectacoherentstrategybehindPresidentAbbas’unilateralgambit.NotonlyisHamas opposed to seeking recourse at the UN, complicating efforts at con-solidatingnationalunity,butthePAisalsolayingitselfopentoasignificant–potentiallyexistential–deepeningofthefinancialcrisis.OveramillionPalestinians–bothintheWestBank,butalsopublicemployeesinGaza–aredependentonthePAfortheirsalaries,yetthecurrentfinancialcrisishasleftthePAstrugglingacutelytofulfilitscommitments.WiththeUSbeingthe biggest and most reliable single state donor to the Palestinian Author-ity,donatingover$500millionannually,seekingaunilateraldeclarationofstatehoodindefianceofUSdemandstoabidebybilateralcommitmentsisaseriousrisk.LestthePalestiniansdoubtedifthepossibilitywerereal,theUSCongresspassedaresolutionlastmonthbyanoverwhelmingmajorityurging President Obama to suspend aid to the Palestinians should they pro-ceedwiththeunilateralgambit.

IftheUSwastosuspendaidtoaPalestinianAuthorityalreadyindirefinan-cialstraits,theconsequenceswouldbeseverenotonlyintermsofjeopar-disinghardwoneconomicgainsbutinalllikelihoodplungingthePAintoanunprecedentedpolitical crisiswith thepotential forwidespread socialunrest.

3.2. The Potential for Violence

One of the gravest concerns about the Palestinian unilateral attempt to gain recognition as a state at the UN is the serious potential for violence such an initiativeentails.PresidentAbbasandahostofotherPalestinianleadersin-cludingMarwanBarghoutihavecalledformassproteststoaccompanytheinitiativeinSeptember.WhilstthePalestinianleadershiphasbeenempha-sising that such demonstrations should be peaceful, the volatile nature of thedynamiconthegroundposesasignificantdangerofescalation.Israelipolicymakers have made clear they are gravely concerned at the potential for violence such demonstrations entail and the Israeli Army has purchased millionsofdollarsworthofnon-lethalweaponrysuchasteargasandspecial

Page 13: The Challenge to Israel’s Legitimacy

The Henry Jackson Society / Friends of Israel Initiative

No Path To Peace: The Potential Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly

watercannonsinpreparationforthemassprotests,aswellasinstigatinganextensivetrainingprogrammetoensurearmyunitsareequippedwiththeskillstodefendIsraeliterritorywhilstminimisingharmtoprotesters.Such initiatives give clear indication that Israeli military planners consider thePalestinianUNinitiativetoentailasignificantriskofsparkingaviolentconfrontation. The fallout fromanysuchconfrontation isunpredictable,butitwillinevitablydoimmensedamagetoeffortstoreachapeaceagree-mentbetweenmoderatesonbothsides.

Nor are the immediate protests accompanying the Palestinian initiative the onlypotentialsparkforviolence.PresidentAbbas’unilateralinitiativehasunleashed a dynamic of expectations thatwill be a challenge to contain.Even in the unlikely scenario that the September gambit results in the rec-ognition of Palestinian statehood, the mismanagement of expectations on the ground also entails the potential for violence once it becomes clear that the strategy of seeking unilateral diplomatic gains through the UN fails to translate intotangiblegainsontheground. Moreover,suchmismanage-ment of expectations has left President Abbas’s more moderate faction of the Palestinian leadership open to attack from hardliners, not least Hamas, potentiallyjeopardisingtheentirenegotiationparadigm.Inthewakeofapotential UN gambit’s failure to alter conditions on the ground for ordinary Palestinians,Hamasandotherhardlinerswillbeabletoclaimthatthedip-lomatic track has failed to deliver results and as a result attempt to legiti-mateviolenceasanalternativetoAbbas’gesturediplomacy.

4. Policy ConsiderationsThe Palestinians’ unilateral initiative to seek recognition of their statehood attheUNGeneralAssemblyinSeptember,whateverformaresolutionulti-matelytakes,isasignificantchallengetothePeaceProcessbetweenIsraeland the Palestinians that uproots the explicitly agreed principle of a resolu-tiontotheconflictonthebasisofbilateralfinalstatusnegotiationstosettleallclaimsbetweentheparties.Itcarriesgravepoliticalrisks,notleastthepotentialforanescalationinviolenceontheground,aswellasposingaveryrealthreattoPalestinianeconomicdevelopment.SinceEUmemberstatesare committed explicitly to the bilateral principle entailed in the Oslo Ac-cordsandsincetheirvoteswilllikelyplaythepivotalpartinlegitimisinganyresolution in the UN General Assembly, it is incumbent upon EU leaders to join the US in seeking to avert such a move and persuade the Palestinian

Page 14: The Challenge to Israel’s Legitimacy

The Henry Jackson Society / Friends of Israel Initiative

No Path To Peace: The Potential Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly

leadershiptoreturntobilateralnegotiations,theonlypathwithachanceofsuccess.EUleadersshouldvoteagainstanyunilateraldeclarationofPal-estinianstatehoodwhilstmakingclearthattheysupportthecreationofaPalestinian state throughdirectbilateralnegotiationsbetween Israel andthePalestinians.EUleadersshouldalsocallonthePalestinianleadershiptode-escalatethestepsitistakinginbuildingpublicexpectations–astepwhichmayrequireasetofincentivesthataredeliverableontheground–soastoavertwhatisfastbecomingadangeroussituationintheregion.

Page 15: The Challenge to Israel’s Legitimacy
Page 16: The Challenge to Israel’s Legitimacy

The Henry Jackson Society / Friends of Israel Initiative

No Path To Peace: The Potential Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly

FRIENDS OF ISRAEL INITIATIVE

Join the Initiativewww.friendsofisraelinitiative.org

On social networksFacebook: Friends of Israel InitiativeTwitter: http://twitter.com/Friendsisrael

THE HENRY JACKSON SOCIETYProject for Democratic Geopolitics

Join and Support the Societyhttp://www.henryjacksonsociety.org

On social networksFacebook: The Henry Jackson SocietyTwitter: http://twitter.com/henryjacksonsoc