Daily Alert Archives

The International Context of the U.S. Veto at the UN Security Council - Interview with Dore Gold by Michael Tuchfeld

(Makor Rishon-Hebrew, 25Feb11) Israel needs to prepare for the possibility that the UN Security Council will be asked to decide on the establishment of a Palestinian state along the 1967 lines. These preparations have to include a specific clarification on Israel's part that if the Palestinians do this in a one-sided manner, Israel will act to impose Israeli law on areas of the West Bank that are essential to it. It's necessary to say this in advance. Perhaps the world will become alarmed by the Israeli threat and pressure the Palestinian side to avoid such one-sided moves. This needs to be as clear as day. Therefore, it is necessary to prepare the ground right now in Washington, London, and other European capitals in order to clarify what are Israel's essential interests. Right now there are forces in the international community which are determined to impose a West Bank withdrawal on Israel that does not take into account its most vital security needs. Every American government, except for the Carter administration, determined that the settlements are legal but are an obstacle to peace. That is the traditional American position. There are famous American spokesmen, even the person who was number two in the U.S. State Department at the time of Lyndon Johnson, Professor Eugene Rostow, a former dean of Yale Law School, who determined that Israel has the right to build in the settlements. Though there are those who dissent from this, this view existed as a legitimate part of the American legal tradition. During the negotiations on the Oslo Accords, Arafat requested a building freeze in the settlements and Peres and Rabin absolutely refused. Arafat gave up and nevertheless instructed Abbas to sign the Oslo Accords back in 1993. This means that Israel has no legal obligation from the Oslo Accords to stop construction. The traditional American position has determined that the UN is not the place to deal with sensitive political issues. The Americans employed the veto because it was in America's interest to do so. If they didn't do so, they would pave the way for further unilateral Palestinian initiatives with regard to declaring a state. If they see that the U.S. is prepared to use the veto on an issue such as the settlements, where its position is very close to that of the Palestinians, they will understand that the Americans will certainly veto any attempts to get the international community to recognize a Palestinian state in the Security Council and predetermine its borders without negotiations. Dr. Dore Gold, a former Israeli UN Ambassador, is president of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.
2011-03-01 00:00:00
Full Article