Palestinian State: more symbolic than realistic
text_fields
Image for representation only
Finally, more world nations have come forward in demand of an independent Palestinian state and pushing a two state solution to end the decade long conflict. Though the aspirations expressed by the French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer are more symbolic, they carry political significance. But there are miles to go before the establishment of a statehood as the very idea of an independent state is still in cold storage. For the people of Gaza and West Bank, the need of the hour, or the immediate concern, is the cessation of genocide and the humanitarian help, and not a state.
Nevertheless, the growing demand for a Palestinian state has its political relevance, particularly when it stems from western leaders, who have been the supporters of Israel. In fact, this rhetoric is to pacify the thickening sentiments against Israel’s war crimes and genocide, and eyewash to stand aloof from the tacit support it gives to Israel. Everybody knows that an Arab sovereign state adjacent to Israel is an improbable reality, as long as the US, the ideological and material mentor of the Zionist state, wields veto power in the UN Security Council.
True, the statements of Macron and Starmer have triggered a hot discussion. Israel rejected the demand outright and the US President has distanced himself from endorsing what his European friends said. Even then it’s a positive move in many respects. At least it helped in alienating Israel from the ambit of a civilized and responsible nation to a rogue nation.
What does a Palestinian state consist of?
The demand for a sovereign Palestinian state that includes West bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza has a long history. It was in the Oslo accord in 1990s that an agreement between Israel and the then Palestine Liberation Organization brought out the idea of a two state solution, a promise that still rests in paper. More than two thirds of the world’s nations, i.e. about 150 nations back full statehood to Palestine barring a handful of them including the Unites States. It’s true that US supports a two state solution, but not a sovereign Palestinian state. They back the Palestinian authority in West bank, a system of administration and of course not an independent state; and little more than an autonomous city. Hence, the present upbeat mood about a state for a stateless people is highly likely to be dashed in the UN General Assembly in next September. The recent decisions by France and Britain did help to boost the demand for a full state, but in all probability get nowhere, and remain an imaginary goal in every aspect – not only because of a defiant US, but since the hurdles are many and varied.
There are many an unanswered question. First and foremost is the borders of the proposed statehood. Will the UN be ready to reclaim the Israeli occupied Arab lands? Will the world body be able to redraw the border of Israel excluding West Bank , Gaza, East Jerusalem and Golan Heights? If yes, will Israel be ready to relocate 700,000 illegal Jewish settlers from the West Bank and East Jerusalem? Even recently, Israel parliament has ratified the annexation of parts of West Bank. And finally, what will be the future of six million Palestinian refugees who live in and outside Gaza? Israel occupied these lands in the 1967 war, or the six-day war.
Interestingly, the leaders who now dramatically raised the cause of a Palestinian state know that it is not going to be a reality easily. UK Prime Minister Starmer held a telephonic conversation with Israeli PM Netanyahu before declaring his backing for a Palestinian state. The drama is clear. Just an attempt to distract the attention from the outcry against the starvation and genocide in Gaza. It is also to assuage the domestic and international pressure for tougher sanctions against Israel and arms embargo. No more, nor less. In other words, or words of Shakespeare, full of sound and fury signifying nothing.
The flip side of this episode is that some countries, including a few Arab countries, have even demanded Hamas, the armed force that defend their land in Gaza to lay down the arms and to disarm themselves. This seemingly innocuous statement is also an attempt to win applause from US and its supporters, not a way out to stop the war. Many countries apparently do not want to get the status quo disturbed.
