It seems Mahmoud Abbas is trying to rally the world behind his unilateral declaration of statehood idea by visiting and discussing the issue with world leaders. He has succeeded in persuading a good amount of countries, including EU countries, to the case for his unilateral decision but the most important state actor the United States has issued many reservations about the move. Personally I must say first and foremost I am against the two state solution, but for argument’s sake I will act today as a supporter of it. Mahmoud Abbas warned of grave consequences if the petition is rejecting in the UN, but what can Abbas seriously do? Although he has all the important support from influential Palestinians he is not a charismatic, symbolic, and powerful leader. Simply, he is not Arafat. Arafat had the trust and loyalty of the masses in addition to a good amount of the influential Palestinian support. If he were alive today trying this move and threatened grave consequences it might fall on Palestinian and international ears better.
What I can not understand is why Abbas thinks and argues the points the way he does. The Occupied Palestine Blog said
“Abbas said that it is illogical for the US to obstruct the declaration, adding that the White House supports a certain formula to end Middle East conflict, by establishing a state that live in peace with Israel”
I do not disagree one bit with that, but I am also not delusional to the US’ track record regarding the two state settlement based off of UN resolutions regarding the yearly vote on the Palestine Question. The US has consistently for 30 years been blocking (with Israel. some Pacific Island powerhouses such as Paulu, and sometimes Australia or Canada) the two state settlement based off of UN resolutions 242, 338, and 194. Every year the vote comes up to have Israel withdraw to June 5th, 1967 borders, settle the refugee problem, withdraw settlements, etc and every year is voted in favor by the world and voted against by the above mentioned parties. Why would the US vote for a unilateral Palestinian state that is within the first pretext’s words? The US is not in the business of idealism or international law, it follows a rather strict code of realist international relations theory in regards to the Palestine Question.
The Palestinians at best will end up in a situation like Kosovo and at worst in a situation of possible annexation and re-occupation of Area A territories. If you do not believe me about the annexation argument just look at this article quoting the Minister of National Infrastructure about what Israel should do as a rebuttal against unilateral Palestinian statehood.