Fatah: Oslo Accords will cease to exist after UN bid

Four years ago when Abbas stopped negotiating, he effectively abandonned Oslo. Now it appears he may make that official. He has concluded that nothing is to be gained by negotiating, He is placing his bet on the UN to deliver a state to him. If Oslo is officially abrogated then so is the Roadmap which includes the settlement freeze. Everyone will focus on whether the Fourth Geneva Convention applies and if yes whether the settlements are illegal. But Israel shouldn’t simply participate in the debate. It should act like it believes the settlements are legal. AND BUILD MORE.

So why is Obama dead set against the UN bid? He wants the role of moderator in negotiation so that he has a world platform and can pressure Israel winning him brownie points with the Muslims. No peace process no moderator.

Secondly he wants Gaza to be quiet so he pressures Eqypt quietly to negotiate a truce. He also sends the Emir of Qatar to Gaza to get Hamas to stop shooting. Why you ask? Obama is embracing the MB as secular, moderate and democratic. Since Hamas is the progeny of the MB he wants it to wear the same mantel. If the MN or Hamas turned violent it would destroy his who game plan and make it difficult to sustain his embrace. Nevertheless, Morsi still won’t meet with Israelis. Ted Belman

Abbas Zaki says once Palestine becomes a recognized state, they will force int’l community to take legal action against Israel

11/08/2012 18:16

The Oslo Accords between the PLO and Israel will cease to exist the day after the UN votes in favor of upgrading the status of a Palestinian state to non-member, Abbas Zaki, member of the Fatah Central Committee, was quoted Thursday as saying.

Zaki’s remarks came as Palestinian Authority officials said that the PA President Mahmoud Abbas was considering asking for a UN vote on November 15 or 29.

November 15 marks the anniversary of the declaration of a Palestinian state in Algeria in 1988. November 29 marks “International Day for Solidarity with the Palestinians.” Zaki’s threats came as several Palestinian officials warned Israel against imposing sanctions on the PA in response to the statehood bid.

Zaki said that once the status of a Palestinian state is upgraded, the Palestinians would be able to pursue Israel for “war crimes” in the International Criminal Court.

“Once we become a recognized state, we will go to all UN agencies to force the international community to take legal action against Israel,” Zaki told the London-based Al-Quds Al-Arabi newspaper.

He said that after the UN votes in favor of the PA request, “the case of the Oslo Accords and the Palestinian Authority will be closed. We will have a state parliament and not a Palestinian Legislative Council.” Zaki denied that some Arab countries have been exerting pressure on the PA leadership to refrain from the statehood bid.

“Until this moment, no one has dared to ask us not to go to the UN,” he stressed. “We have no other choice. Some European countries, like Britain, have only asked us to delay the statehood bid for three months. But we are determined to go to the UN General Assembly this month.”

Saleh Ra’fat, member of the PLO Executive Committee, warned that the PA leadership would abrogate economic and security agreements with Israel if the Israeli government imposed sanctions on the Palestinians in response to the statehood bid.

“The Palestinian leadership will respond if the Israeli government carries out its threats against the Palestinian Authority,” Ra’fat told the Jerusalem-based Al-Quds daily.

He said that the PA would consider itself free of all its commitments under the agreements signed with Israel, including economic and security obligations.

Ra’fat said that if Israel decides to withhold tax revenues belonging to the PA, the Palestinians will in response call for boycotting all Israeli goods.

He also threatened to “escalate popular resistance against Israel.”

The PLO official said that the PA was planning to call for international conference for peace in Moscow after the UN vote.

Jamal Muhassen, member of the Fatah Central Committee, declared that the PA leadership was determined to go to the UN this month despite Israeli and American “threats.”

He said that the “situation on the ground would change” after the UN vote because “the Palestinian state will be under occupation.”

Another PLO official, Tayseer Khaled, said that the Palestinian would cancel the Paris Economic Protocol if the Israeli government imposed financial sanctions on the PA after the UN vote. “We will stop importing everything that is Israeli,” Khaled cautioned. “We will not remain idle if Israel robs Palestinian money.”

November 12, 2012 | 6 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

6 Comments / 6 Comments

  1. @ Michael Chenkin:

    The 4th Geneva Convention really isn’t applicable to Israel and the Palestinians. the Palestinians aren’t signatories to the 4th Geneva Convention and can’t be because Part I, Article 2, of the Convention makes it applicable to High Contracting Parties, i.e., legitimate states, and there is no state called Palestine. Besides, the 4th Geneva Convention was intended to prevent crimes of the sort perpetrated by the Nazis in (1) forcibly transferring populations to concentration or extermination camps and/or (2) transferring their own population to unlawfully occupied Poland to colonize it, a situation in which Germany had been the aggressor nation and colonizers “were often given Polish homes where the families had been evicted so quickly that half-eaten meals were on tables and small children had clearly been taken from unmade beds” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi-Soviet_population_transfers). Israel has not committed either of these crimes in allowing its citizens to establish settlements in Judea and Samaria.

  2. I agree with your analysis. Israel committed a monumental blunder in not invoking San Remo years ago on the supposition, as you stated, that “peace” would eventually prvail. The Israelis completely misread the tea leaves and now find themselves in the midst of a morass. Action can no longer be postponed. Push has come to shove.@ Michael Chenkin:

  3. UN Vote will most probably take place on November 29. (Kaf Tet Be November) Is this for a reason? If you are not sure of what I am talking about Google “29 November 1947” Lake success N.Y
    Was it just a coincidence that the Bengahzi Massacare took place on (9/11?0)Or Yom Kipur war started on the holliest Jewish day? Or is it the terrorist’s way of thinking.

  4. Israel’s strongest legal case for retaining control of all lands west of the Jordan River is the San Remo Resolution and the legally binding commitments flowing from it. A determination based on Article 49 of the 4th Geneva Convention will simply be a popularity contest that Israel will lose. Furthermore, there are no legal protections for Israel in an Article 49 debate. In contrast the obligations to the Jewish people first recognized in international law in the San Remo Resolution was concreted continued in Article 80 of the United Nations Charter. If the General Assembly creates a “Palestinian” State it would be violating Article 80 of its Charter as well as articles concerning the allocation of powers between the Security Council and the General Assembly.

    Since 1947 Israel has been reticent in asserting its full territorial claims, perhaps in the optimistic belief that Jewish compromise would lead to Arab compromise and peace. This delusional idea is on the threshold of being concretely buried. Furthermore, Jews in Israel and Diaspora must finally accept that an Arab state carved out Israel’s heartland does not advance peace but rather represents a major security threat to Israel. Such a state will not be demilitarized and will control the highlands overlooking the narrow coastal plain holding the vast majority of Israel’s population, commerce and industry. With the loss of Turkey and Egypt as forces of stability, the situation in Syria in dangerous flux and the regime in Jordan under threat, Israel is rapidly approaching a situation where she is surrounded by actively hostile regimes (as well as the Iranian threat looming in the background.)

  5. Anyone have any idea what potential reactions the GOI contemplates in return? I always thought that a good start would be to deport all PA,PLO members and militias back to Tunisia or defacto state of gaza. Basing this on the premise that they were allowed into Israel under Oslo accords and that with Oslo dead they can no longer legally remain. after that there are various shades of annexation but is anything seriously being considered. I see very little published on it as if everyone expects that BB will decide all, or perhaps Obama.