EU Support for Palestinian Statehood?

UN Body Slams Israeli Apartheid
February 25, 2020
Overt Trump Regime Support for Al-Qaeda Offshoot
February 25, 2020

EU Support for Palestinian Statehood?

by Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.orgHome – Stephen Lendman)

Anglo-Zionist Europe and allied countries have been hostile to Palestinians since Britain’s Arthur Balfour’s opposition to their sovereign rights over a century ago, things worsening for them over time.

Balfour’s call for establishing a nation for Jews (on stolen Palestinian land) was all about wanting Western control over Arab states and their hydrocarbon resources, their people considered inferior to white Europeans.

He and other Ango-Zionist supporters began endless conflict, occupation, dispossession, and repression, along with social and cultural fragmentation of the Palestinian people.

He falsely promised Palestinians respect for their rights, saying they’d be protected, free from foreign rule.

Colonization, occupation, and apartheid exploitation followed, along with endless violence and dispossession, Palestinians displaced from their sovereign land to make way for exclusive Jewish development and use, along with Western control over part of the world not its own.

Balfour and the British mandate period from 1920 – 1948 made Israel’s creation and elimination of historic Palestine possible.

A century of history proved the US and Europe are dismissive of Palestinian rights, a people to be exploited, not served, their rights under international law to be ignored, not recognized — notably after Israel’s creation on 78% of their historic land in 1948, the remainder stolen in 1967.

Should Luxembourg Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn’s initiative to recognize Palestinian statehood be taken seriously?

In December, he wrote EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell and other bloc foreign ministers, saying the way to pursue a two-state solution is by creating a “more equitable situation” between Israel and Palestinians, adding:

“In no way would (his initiative) be directed against Israel. Indeed, if we want to contribute to solving the conflict between Israel and Palestine, we must never lose sight of Israel’s security conditions, as well as of justice and dignity for the Palestinian people.”

Asselborn reportedly discussed his ideas with counterparts in France, Belgium, Ireland, Spain, Portugal, Finland, Sweden, Malta and Slovenia — the Trump/Netanyahu annexation scheme triggering his initiative.

At least nine European countries recognize Palestinian statehood. So does the European Parliament, but not Brussels.

Recognition is more symbolic than a change in policy since Israel’s creation.

Over two-thirds of world community nations recognize Palestinian statehood the same way — short of full diplomatic relations with its ruling authorities the same way as with de jure UN member states.

Palestine is partially recognized as a PLO-represented UN observer state even though full de jure status could have been attained long ago.

Its ruling authorities never sought full sovereign rights as a UN member state for the Palestinian people, remaining subservient to Israeli interests for special benefits afforded them.

The PLO’s executive committee can apply to the UN General Assembly for full world body recognition as a member state.

With support from over two-thirds of UN members, it’s attainable, their rights as a member state gotten and preserved, their people equitably served by their ruling authorities for the first time since Israel’s creation. 

The EU’s longstanding position has been that Palestinian statehood and related issues should be resolved through negotiations with Israel — assuring no resolution at all because Jewish state officials don’t negotiate. They demand.

The US and Israel reject regional peace and Palestinian self-determination the way it should be, pretending otherwise, fooling no one in the international community, saying nothing to avoid antagonizing Washington.

In response to Asselborn, the Netanyahu regime, supported by Trump, said “this is not the time for unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state,” adding:

It would prevent “a possibility of direct negotiations between the sides for a permanent agreement” — never achieved over the past half century because the US, Europe, and Israel reject regional peace, equity and justice.

The Trump/Netanyahu annexation scheme was designed to be rejected, not supported, a one-sided plan no responsible leader would accept.

Is Asselborn’s initiative stillborn like virtually everything proposed before by Europe, pretending concern for Palestinian rights, but never following through with positive steps?

If past for over 100 years is prologue for what’s likely ahead, his alleged concern about the Trump/Netanyahu no-peace/annexation plan will go nowhere in deference to US and Israeli interests.

Palestinians are treated like nonpersons, their fundamental rights and the rule of law ignored — why their only viable option is resistance.

VISIT MY WEBSITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

 

My newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Stephen Lendman
Stephen Lendman
Stephen Lendman was born in 1934 in Boston, MA. In 1956, he received a BA from Harvard University. Two years of US Army service followed, then an MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania in 1960. After working seven years as a marketing research analyst, he joined the Lendman Group family business in 1967. He remained there until retiring at year end 1999. Writing on major world and national issues began in summer 2005. In early 2007, radio hosting followed. Lendman now hosts the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network three times weekly. Distinguished guests are featured. Listen live or archived. Major world and national issues are discussed. Lendman is a 2008 Project Censored winner and 2011 Mexican Journalists Club international journalism award recipient.