Tweet
Here is as link to the United Nations live feed for the General Assembly.
At 3:00 EST, the body will vote on recognition of Palestine:
The UN General Assembly is set to approve an implicit recognition of Palestinian statehood today despite threats by the United States and Israel to punish the Palestinian Authority by withholding funds for the West Bank government.
A resolution that would lift the Palestinian Authority’s UN observer status from “entity” to “non-member state,” like the Vatican, is expected to pass easily in the 193-nation General Assembly. At least 15 European states plan to vote for it.
Israel, the United States and a handful of other members are set to vote against what they see as a largely symbolic and counterproductive move by the Palestinians, which takes place on the 65th anniversary of the assembly’s adoption of resolution 181 on the partition of Palestine into Jewish and Arab states.
at last?
Photo by Rusty Stewart used under Creative Commons License.
31 Comments
Thank you ET!
Thanks, fdl, for posting this up front. history being made. meanwhile, I’m off to teach music theory.
US voting against it = never pass up a chance to whore for Israel lobby millionaires.
Wow. History. Thank you for posting.
and they vote Yes
I’m so proud our country is on the side of Justice - oh wait
Iyad El-Baghdadi @iyad_elbaghdadi
That is a very interesting vote. The US did what domestic politics demanded being done, but didn’t seem to have twisted many arms to vote No. The 41 abstentions are what will be interesting as a number of US allies–notably Turkey and France– voted Yes. And regardless of the vote, all of the nations explaining their votes insist on accelerating direct negotiations between Israel and Palestine.
The question is who’s in on putting pressure on Israel to negotiate again. A opportune time as Netanyahu goes to an election. Also, are Hamas and Fatah on the same page on negotiations?
I noticed that Ban Kyi Moon included the word “contiguous” in his statement about a future Palestinian state. How exactly is that going to come about–by making the south of Israel non-contiguous or some other agreement? I’m curious as to how those borders could be drawn.
I heard a report on npr that the o admin felt that this was not helpful to move toward “negotiations” for a settlement. This might make israel feel that the Palestinians don’t want a settlement. What a joke. The israeli govt has been rejectionist from before 1948. No matter what the Palestinians do, it will be seen as counterproductive for a settlement of the i/P conflict.
I heard an interview on i/P and the whole ME today on Hugh Hamilton’s program on WBAI. The professor suggested that israel provoked the whole problem to test the iron dome system. They claim to be satisfied with it.
ET,you make me proud,that i know real Renaissance guy…kudos
What a beautiful photo to go with the diary!
It so humanizes the Palestinian desire for care and dignity.
That was the formal explanation of the US “No” vote presented by Ambassador Susan Rice. It carefully parroted the Israeli position as presented in the debate by the Israeli Ambassador the UN. And then insisted that negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians start without preconditions (which was definitely not the Israeli position). Other nations in their explanations echoed the “begin negotiations now without preconditions” line regardless of whether they voted Yes, No, or Abstained. Israel, US, Canada, Panama, and five Pacific Island nations (two of which are former US possessions) voted No. Israel has 41 trading partners that abstained.
Is Bibi going to go into a pout now?
When did he stop?
About time for Randall Kohn to drive by and issue a pithy platitude, eh?
Sure you spelled “pithy” correctly?
And Hillary’s. Dynamic Duo. Lookin’ for p-i-s-s-y, perhaps?
And all such fine and upstanding supporters of truth and justice. Each and everyone.
{{{Now I will go and wash my mouth out with Clorox}}}
This may very well have been Bibi’s and Avi’s Last Hurrah at the UN.
Now that statehood recognition’s a done deal, what does that mean for Gaza’s ability to control its own borders and coastline?
193-member assembly voted as follows:
• 138 in favour
• 9 against (Canada, Czech Republic, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Panama, USA).
• 41 abstentions
That’s a rather hefty repudiation for the US and Israel. I’ll admit to being very pleasantly surprised.
Clinton (who seems determined to equal Madeleine Albright in infamy) apart from throwing a minor hissy fit about how the vote was “unfortunate and counterproductive” took the chance to flog the dead horse of the two state solution again:
Source: Clinton: UN Vote For Palestine Hurts Peace Hopes : NPR
Not much. Palestine has gone from being classified as a “non-member observer entity” to a “non-member observer state” that means it can sign treaties and join such bodies as the ICC. Ultimately it will be able to launch prosecutions in the ICC both against the Jewish state and against named officials. I would think that when and if they do that they’ll probably prosecute Apartheid. Which as you know is defined as a the war crime by the UN. As well as launching prosecutions for Apartheid they could also try prosecuting Israel for its illegal Jewish settlements on the West Bank and for its barbaric and punitive military attacks on the civilian populations of West Bank and Gaza. (Israeli, American, and British fears in this regard were highlighted by the British Foreign Secretary’s offer that Britain would vote for the resolution if the Palestinians specifically undertook a binding commitment never to prosecute Israel in the ICC. – The Palestinians quite rightly refused).
I don’t see it having much impact on the ground for the foreseeable future it’s more important in legitimising Palestinian aspirations and in delegitimising the Israeli goal of a pure Jewish state run exclusively on apartheid lines.
mfi
Randall is indisposed. Unfortunately there’s been a horrific outbreak of crestfall in the troll pens and Randall is one of the victims. How kind you are to notice his absence and enquire after his health.
Please rest assured that he’s being treated humanely and will be along as soon as his handlers judge him sufficiently recovered from his crestfallen state to resume his tireless hasbarising.
mfi
Fuck yeah!
Well said, my friend. Isaiah Berlin would be envious of your eloquence.
Go sleep it off.
Ah the well-nigh miraculous powers of modern modern medicine. Bless your shiney scales Randall, as you can see Philip was getting worried about you. Tell your handlers we’re delighted to see you back in action. Here, have a biscuit.
mfi
Why does the word “Bantustan” keep coming to mind?
I’m old enough to remember when the US media made a point of discussing the blatant phoniness of the alleged sovereignty of the Transkei and the other Bantustans set up and controlled by the Apartheid government in South Africa.
Sounds like the UN is trying to turn the Gaza Bantustan into a real live country, as opposed to a puppet province of Israel.
Re: the UK and Germany abstaining, I’d thought that their thinking was down to the fact that voting nay would give more power to Hamas, as has been claimed for France, Italy, Spain, Norway, Denmark and Switzerland.
But now the Guardian has it that UK Germany abstained because Abbas wouldn’t promise to engage in negotiations, as though, had he, they would have voted Aye.
Opinions? And does the overwhelming vote ‘confer’ or ‘imply’ Palestinian statehood?
“Bless your shiney scales Randall,…”
Gee, gosh golly Batman I perceive we have a spelling malfunction.
Since the word ‘shiney’ does not exist, at least in the Oxford English Dictionary, we must look elsewhere for assistance in interpreting your Byzantine (1651) labyrinth of Mr. Kohn’s morphology.
So the question renders down to whether the intended word was shinny, shiny, or sheeny.
Shinny: (1672) a variation of hockey played by children
Shiny:(1558) having a smooth, glossy surface
Sheeny: (19th century)-untrustworthy Jew
I prefer to think that the second choice is the correct one.
But then again, all things considered and under the circumstances, I, for one, would not rule out the third option.
Actually it’s a typo. Now go and whore your filth at somebody else doremus.
mfi
“Now go and whore your filth at somebody else doremus.”
Why goodness gracious.
You use your tongue better than a two dollar whore.
And the resemblance is striking.
No doremus neither goodness nor graciousness apply to bigoted trash like you or to your persistent attempts to drag everyone down to your level. Run along dear you have nothing to sell that I would touch even wearing rubber gloves.
mfi
I remember Edward Teller. You ain’t no Edward Teller.
“mfi”
Hey, I thought it was a foreign language or something.
But no, it’s the initials of your name:
More fucking insanity.
Do you get the impression that the opposition is sending out children to do a man’s job?
Seems like the same modus operandi they use to fight the Israelis.
Makes one wonder if all together they could scrape together one good pair.