Recently the UN voted to make the Palestinian territories as a “non-member observer state,” rather than a “non-member observer entity.” The vote was 73% to 5% with 22% abstaining.
My own take on this vote is scrambled, so bear with me as I lay it out here.
The Israelis have objected to this vote because they argue that the Palestinians are trying to forego direct negotiations with the Israelis. This is a fair objection.
However, the Israelis often argue that their state was legitimized when the UN voted in favor of a 1947 partition plan (the vote was 72% to 13% with 15% abstaining). That is to say, there were no direct negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians when the partition of Palestine was being drafted by the UN.
Much of the property owned by Jews in Israel today was acquired legally.
I think that the UN move by the Palestinians is a good one for two reasons:
- It gave the Israelis a taste of their own medicine by applying their own legal logic against them.
- It follows an ingenious tactic that the Israelis recently unveiled with the inclusion of expelled Jews from Arab states during the wars in the middle of last century.
To conclude, I favor a one state solution. I don’t like the idea of defining states in terms of religious or ethnic denominations, but I think the two-state solution is a good one to pursue for the time being. Both sides are guilty of practicing diplomacy in bad faith, but I have to hand it to the Palestinians on this one. It’s a stroke of genius.