APPLICATION FOR THE FUTURE

The Palestinian question has become a focus of international politics. Mahmoud Abbas, the leader of the Palestinian National Authority (PNA), has asked the UN to recognize Palestine's statehood within its 1967 borders. Real diplomatic battles involving many countries have revolved around this initiative.

Mahmoud Abbas' demarche and the "hand" of Benjamin Netanyahu

The Palestinian state has been officially recognized by many countries and is part of the Arab League but it does not have the status of a full-fledged member of the UN because it has not been recognized by the three Western countries who are permanent members of the UN Security Council (the US, France and Great Britain). Meanwhile, Mahmoud Abbas' application claims that Palestine is a peace-loving state that respects the UN Charter and wants the United Nations to play a more important and effective role in resolving the Near East conflict. However, the PNA's objective -

full-fledged membership of the UN for Palestine - has led, as expected, to resistance from the leading Western powers, especially the US, which has traditionally supported Israel, and, of course, Israel itself, which insists that Palestine cannot be given international recognition without achieving a peace agreement with Tel-Aviv.

Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, seems to have come up with a compromise proposal. It boils down to granting the PNA delegation in the UN General Assembly the status of a "permanent observer" and to hold in the course of the coming year intensive talks between Israel and Palestine with the purpose of reaching a "definitive agreement". At the same time, the French leader stressed, "the ultimate objective of the peace talks must be mutual recognition of two states for two peoples based on the 1967 borders with the equivalent exchange of territories".

But the real problem is the fact that the conflicting sides not only view the question of a return to the 1967 borders from radically opposing positions (not to mention the fact that Israel has no intention whatever of offering East Jerusalem to the Palestinians as the capital of their state as international law documents adopted by the UN demand) but also approach the prospect of a resumption of the talks process in different ways.

Israel is calling for a resumption of direct talks with the Palestinians without any conditions. The PNA, meanwhile, says it is ready to enter into talks with Israel only when there is a complete halt to the construction of Jewish settlements on the West Bank of the Jordan. According to Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinians will only agree to talks based on international law, i.e. UN Security Council resolutions which demand Israel's withdrawal from all territories occupied during the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.

However, speaking at a session of the UN General Assembly, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that the question of the settlements can be resolved during talks because it does not lie at the basis of the conflict which was caused by "the Palestinians' refusal to recognize a Jewish state within its borders".

"President Abbas, stop evading this question. Recognize the Jewish state and conclude peace with it! Israel will be prepared to make painful compromises within the framework of a genuine peace agreement," Netanyahu urged his Palestinian opponent. The Israeli prime minister also stressed that he is extending to the Palestinian leader "the hand of Israel, the hand of peace. I hope you will accept it. We are both descendants of Abraham whom your people call 'Ibrahim'. We have a common patriarch. We live in the same land. Our destinies are mutually linked. Let us implement Isaiah's prophecy: 'Peoples who have walked in darkness will see a great light.' Let this be the light of peace!"

But, unfortunately, when he returned to Israel Netanyahu approved a measure which could distance the Near East region even more from the long-awaited peace. The adoption by the Israeli government of a plan to build 1,100 new homes on Palestinian territories in East Jerusalem cannot be assessed in any other way. Even the US and the European Union, which oppose the recognition of Palestine as part of the UN and insist on the need to start talks without any conditions, expressed their profound disappointment at the Netanyahu cabinet's decision.

Meanwhile, the discussion at the UN of the recognition of Palestine exposed an intrigue over the timeframe for the consideration of Mahmoud Abbas' application. It was originally suggested that it could take several weeks to reach a decision. However, the Security Council decided not to shelve it. The reason for this, by all accounts, was the fact that the United States, which had originally warned that it was prepared to block Palestinian entry into the UN (in President Barack Obama's opinion the conflicting sides must first reach agreement on borders, refugees and the status of Jerusalem), had decided to speed up consideration of the application without waiting for any changes in the positions of the Israelis or the Palestinians.

Nine out of the 15 Security Council members must say "yes" for a corresponding decision to be adopted. But the US originally promised to use its right of veto if necessary to prevent recognition of Palestine in the UNSC. This move by Washington will undoubtedly be a blow to the Americans' already disreputable position in the Muslim world and threatens to ultimately destroy Barack Obama's efforts to improve the US' image in the international arena, especially among the countries of the Near East.

The PNA is clearly prepared for such a turn of events. And, most probably, one can expect very soon an appeal by Mahmoud Abbas to the UN General Assembly which could realistically grant Palestine observer status. This will to a certain degree strengthen the diplomatic position of Palestine which will be able to file anti-Israeli actions to international judicial organizations in connection with the occupation of Palestinian territories and bring charges of war crimes against the Israeli leadership.

Erdogan in New York and a Turkish swing to the East  

Meanwhile, the Palestinian question continues to be a bone of contention between Israel and Turkey. The latter did not let up on its Israeli criticism even after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asked Turkey "not to close the door on Israel" (meaning to stop the steady movement of both countries towards a complete breakdown in bilateral relations). Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan lived up to his reputation in a speech to the UN General Assembly in which he again accused Israel of conducting an aggressive policy, which was the main reason for the Near East conflict.

Erdogan began by calling for a change in the rules of the game in the international community in favour of new political-economic centres. "I don't believe that the United Nations is today being run by someone who is capable of accepting the challenges of today," the Turkish prime minister said. "Therefore the UN should be reformed in such a way that this organization is able to protect mankind's humanitarian rights as a whole and each individual country in particular." As an example of the international community's ineffectiveness in its present form he cited the UN's failure in the fight against the famine in Somalia.

Erdogan then attacked Israel, accusing it of failing to observe numerous UN General Assembly and Security Council resolutions. He also criticized the United Nations itself: "It is alarming that the UN does not respond and looks on helplessly at the suffering of the Palestinians. So I ask: when will the UN stop remaining silent as it is doing in the case of Israel? Is its light-hearted approach to the fact that Israel possesses nuclear weapons justified? Everything that is allowed to Israel is forbidden to any other country. The world community must show Israel that it is not above the law."

Speaking directly about the proclamation of a Palestinian state, Erdogan noted that the UN should "meet the Palestinians' demand half way". "In point of fact," Erdogan said, "the UN recognized the Palestinian state back in 1947, but, unfortunately, this decision was not implemented. Turkey supports Palestine unconditionally and will continue to act vigorously towards achieving peace and to fight against the illegal blockade of the Gaza Strip," the Turkish prime minister stressed. Nor did he ignore last year's crisis over the "freedom flotilla" which led to nine Turks being killed by Israeli troops. According to Erdogan, Israel has seriously offended Turkey and its people by its behaviour. Therefore the Israeli authorities should apologize for their actions in this incident and pay compensation to the families of the dead Turkish citizens.

However, Erdogan's "attack" from the rostrum of the UN has again given cause to speak not only about Ankara's readiness in principle for a split in relations with Israel, but also about Turkey's firm intention to become a leader in the Islamic world, its swing to the east and its desire to restore its own influence on the region of the former Ottoman Empire. Thus, Turkey is making the West realize that it is a self-sufficient power and has no intention of continuing to ask it to accept Ankara into the bosom of its civilization (if the European Union does not believe Turkey can be seen as a full-fledged partner and participant in the European community). Turkish President Abdullah Gul's recent visit to Germany confirmed the seriousness of Ankara's intentions regarding a curtailing of its pro-Western policy. Because Gul, in essence, made it clear to the EU, as if to say, you don't want us to enter your house and we don't have to.

It is not by chance that the resolute actions of the Erdogan government, which up to now had mainly concerned Israel and the Near East, have reached the edge of Europe. Thus, the situation has again become exacerbated around Greek Cyprus which, without agreement with Turkey, but in alliance with Israel and the US, has begun prospecting for hydrocarbons on its Mediterranean shelf. Ankara, meanwhile, believes that Nicosia's unilateral actions are damaging the interests of Turkish Cypriots and will harm the whole process of a Cyprus settlement. This led to Ankara signing an agreement with the authorities in Northern Cyprus about the start of exploratory drilling in the Mediterranean.

Turkey's determination to uphold its interests in the oil-bearing shelf of Cyprus, which is preparing to head the European Union next year, is another sign that Ankara intends to deal with Europe in a new format, more in the status of a country that is fundamentally free from any obligations to the Old World.