Two states?

Following a meeting between US President Barack Obama and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas last September, Obama said only a year was needed to enable the foundation of a Palestinian state.

"There's a lot of work that remains to be done so that we can create a two-state solution in the Middle East in which we have an Israel that is secure and fully accepted by its neighbors and a Palestinian people that have their own state, self-determination and the ability to chart their own destiny," he said.

Obama's prognosis turned out to be false. Abbas now wants to take things into his own hands; he announced last week that he would apply for full UN membership in a bid to reinforce his position in future international negotiations.

Abbas' plan has led in the meanwhile to controversy that could possibly result in new unrest in the region. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's nationalist government has categorically rejected the move, and Israel currently has the support of the United States, one of the five veto-wielding members on the UN Security Council.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has also voiced opposition to Abbas' move: "We want the two-state solution … and support efforts at achieving this solution. But we do not believe that unilateral steps will help this process."

'Legitimate right'

Abbas counters that his course of action represents the "legitimate right" of the Palestinian people, rejecting claims that it is a "unilateral" action that will hinder the outcome of future negotiations.

"Our plans are not unilateral, as many have now said, and they are in no way contradictory to the basic law of negotiations. On the contrary, they are based on international law," he said.

Saeb Erakart, former Palestinian chief of the PLO Steering and Monitoring Committee, argues that the principle consequence of UN full membership would be the amendment of Palestine's legal status.

"It will be a state that is under the occupation of another UN member state. If you look at the UN charter, it is clear that negotiations between a UN member state and an autonomous territory are much different than those between two UN states," said Erakart.

It's another question when such negotiations could begin. But, according to the rhetoric used in Jerusalem, Washington or Berlin, this is the only way to create the two-state solution. But at the moment, neither the US nor the Europeans - nor even the Middle East Quartet - have offered practicable suggestions for the resumption and success of peace talks.

Several obstacles

But one is faced with the question: Is the United Nations route really a viable alternative for Abbas? The world body, on its own, can't found any state; it normally only decides on the recognition of existing states.

There has never been a state of Palestine. In 1947, the UN decided to divide the territory into a Jewish and Arab state. A year later Israel was granted statehood, but there was no recognition of an Arab state.

In 1988, former PLO chief Yasser Arafat announced the "founding of the state of Palestine;" however, the borders were not clearly defined and the PLO found itself in exile. When the group returned as a result of the Oslo Accords, instead of declaring statehood, it called itself a "Palestinian National Authority."

A second major obstacle concerns the fact that the Palestinian state is not only geographically divided, but also politically and ideologically. The PLO rules in the West Bank; the Gaza Strip, however, is under Hamas' Islamist control.

Hamas is strictly against any recognition of Israel and in defiance of all peace arrangements. While the foreign minister of the Hamas leadership, Mahmoud a-Zahar, has conceded the intention to erect a Palestinian state on "all parts of Palestine," he also adds that this is only a first step."

"We want all of Palestine. Here there must be no misunderstanding. If our generation doesn't achieve this, then our children will. We will raise them with this goal in mind. Palestine is called Palestine. There is no place for Israel in the middle of our state."

Talks frozen

Abbas has made it clear that his concept of the two-state solution is based on the borders of 1967 - prior to the start of the Six-Day War. Netanyahu's government, meanwhile, has ignored Abbas' formulations, deciding instead to concentrate on preparing for possible unrest in the West Bank.

This is further proof that Israel is not prepared to re-enter peace talks with the Palestinians - including Abbas.

Any further escalation of violence will diminish the clout of the Palestinian president, only to reinforce the irreconcilable elements - such as Hamas, giving rise to an increasing air of pessimism at the United Nations, according to special envoy for the Middle East, Robert Serry.

"Come September, if we still have no formulas and two parties who are unable to seriously discuss and negotiate the core issues for a two-state solution, then I'm worried. I'm worried about the frustration that I feel in Ramallah, in Hebron and in other cities."

Author: Peter Philipp / glb
Editor: Andreas Illmer