How Arab Media View a Declaration of Palestinian Statehood

1. Vol. 11, No. 5 27 June 2011
How Arab Media View a Declaration of Palestinian Statehood
Linda Menuhin Abdul Aziz
 The momentum for the emergence of Palestinian statehood began two years ago with a
serious plan set forth by Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad. In addition, President
Barack Obama in his speech to the UN General Assembly in 2010 stated that Palestine
should become a full member of the United Nations by the fall of 2011.
 Unlike the vibrant debate in Israel over the Palestinian plan to seek support for
statehood in September in the UN General Assembly, the Arab media is occupied with
the wave of changes sweeping Arab countries, leaving little room for discussion of the
projected Palestinian plan.
 Some commentators believe Abbas’ plan is a dream and that, in order to save face, it is
better not to push the plan all the way to the end since this step will not create a
Palestinian state on the ground, due to the opposition of Israel and the U.S. Others
believe that Mahmoud Abbas is seeking to use the declaration as a tactic to reshuffle
the cards and achieve better terms.
 The Arab media predicts that a declaration of statehood by the Palestinians would not
result in any immediate changes on the ground. Any Palestinian state would lack
sovereignty and authority, with borders dictated by certain facts on the ground – the
security fence, the settlements, and Israeli control of Jerusalem, as well as continued
economic dependence on Israel.

2.  The Oslo II Agreement of 1995 established that neither side shall initiate or take any
step that will change the status of the West Bank and Gaza. In order to avoid Israel's
accusation of breaching the Oslo agreements, Palestinians are advised to shake off their
commitment to the Oslo agreements, under the pretext that Israel did not live up to all
its commitments.
Arab Media Focused on “Arab Spring,” Not Palestinian State
Unlike the vibrant debate in Israel over the Palestinian plan to seek support for statehood in
September at the UN General Assembly, the Arab media is busy with the wave of changes
sweeping Arab countries, leaving little room for discussion of the projected Palestinian plan,
especially in the leading London-based Arabic websites.
The momentum for the emergence of statehood came from two sources. It began two years
ago with a serious plan set forth by Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad. In addition,
President Barack Obama in his speech to the UN General Assembly in 2010 stated that Palestine
should become a full member of the United Nations by the fall of 2011.
PA President Mahmoud Abbas stated in April 2011 that he is opposed to a unilateral
declaration of Palestinian statehood, which he said would constitute “a leap in the air and a
miscalculated step.” Abbas added that one of the options before the Palestinians was to appeal
to the UN General Assembly to demand Palestinian independence in accordance with
Resolution 377 (V), “Uniting for Peace.”1
Yet most of the Arab media believe that the underlying message Abbas is trying to convey is
that the Palestinian Authority has other options beside negotiations – which he put on hold.
Seeking declarative support for statehood is seen as putting pressure on Israel and the U.S. to
return to the negotiating table with better terms for the Palestinians.2 Yet it is not clear if all
Arab states will endorse the plan, given the fact that most are preoccupied with internal
matters and the future of their own regimes.
Yasser Abed Rabbo, Secretary General of the Palestine Liberation Organization, has explained
that the UN declaration is a means rather than an end. “The Palestinian Authority will defer its
attempts to unilaterally declare a Palestinian state at the United Nations if ‘real and serious’
negotiations with Israel begin. The basis of any negotiated agreement must be according to the
1967 borders, very limited exchanges of land and no exchanges of population.” According to
Abed Rabbo, the Middle East Quartet should tackle these negotiations in accordance with the
timetable previously agreed to, ending in September 2011.3
Some Arab commentators believe the Abbas plan is a dream and that in order to save face it
would not be advisable to push the plan all the way to the end, since this step will not create a
Palestinian state on the ground, due to the opposition of Israel and the U.S., with some
2

3. reservations from EU countries as well. Others believe that Abbas is seeking to use the
declaration as a tactic to reshuffle the cards and achieve better terms.4
The Arab media maintains that even if the declaration gains a majority of the votes in the UN
General Assembly, the resolution cannot give birth to a Palestinian state, as it lacks many
essential requirements such as recognized borders and an independent economy.
The recently forged reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah is viewed as a positive and
essential step toward the declaration act, as it combines two entities into one as a minimum
requirement of building a state.5 Hamas, however, has not changed its position towards this
option, portraying it as unrealistic, futile, and an escape from its national commitments.
According to Hamas spokesman Abu Zahri: “What is important is to secure real international
support to end the Israeli occupation, rather than build a state in the air.” 6
Support of Arab Countries
The Arab media considers Arab countries' support essential to gain momentum. PA President
Abbas informed Arab leaders of the possibility of seeking U.S. support for the unilateral
declaration of a state during the November 2010 Arab summit in Serta, Libya, before the onset
of the Arab Spring.
Meanwhile, Egyptian Foreign Minister Nabil al-Araby, who will soon assume the position of
Secretary General of the Arab League, has urged the United States to support the declaration of
an independent Palestinian state after the reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah brokered
by Egypt.7 The statement marks yet another shift in Egypt's foreign policy. The new call
indicates a move away from Egypt's past stance, which has strongly opposed the Palestinian
Authority's campaign to win backing for a unilateral declaration of statehood.
Amr Moussa, the outgoing Secretary General of the Arab League, has stated that it is essential
to declare a unilateral Palestinian statehood as planned in September and there was no need to
delay it, due to the continuation of Israeli settlements on Palestinian land.8
The Arab Peace Initiative Committee, affiliated with the Arab League, announced on May 28
that it has decided to submit a request to the UN to accept the Palestinian state as a full
member, based on the 1967 boundaries and with east Jerusalem its capital. The announcement
further stated that all necessary legal procedures will be pursued in order to translate this
decision into action.
3

4. The Declaration of a Palestinian State Is Redundant
The Arab media is aware of the fact that the Palestinian National Council had declared a
Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital back in 1988 in Algiers. That resolution was
backed by the UN General Assembly and supported by 104 countries.
In 1997 Yasser Arafat threatened to unilaterally declare a state in 1999 at the end of the Oslo II
transition period. Confronting this bid, the Israeli government warned that such a move would
constitute “a substantive and fundamental violation of the interim agreement between Israel
and the Palestinians.” In such a scenario, Israel would be entitled to take all necessary measures
including the application of Israeli law to settlement blocs and security zones in the West Bank.
In September 2000, Arafat had a resolution passed in the PLO Central Committee postponing
the declaration of a state to an indefinite date.
The idea was floated again by some Palestinian leaders after the start of negotiations between
former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Mahmoud Abbas, but the idea came under
criticism from the U.S., which refused to compare the situation in Kosovo to that of the
Palestinian territory.
In 2009, PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad announced a program known as the “Palestine
document” that called for the establishment of Palestinian state institutions in two years, to be
followed by the declaration of a Palestinian state in 2011.
On several occasions, Israel has announced that it rejects the unilateral declaration of a
Palestinian state and considers it a breach of the Oslo agreements. Prime Minister Netanyahu's
response carried a warning of the unilateral annexation of Israeli settlements to the State of
Israel if the Palestinians moved for a unilateral statehood declaration.
The U.S. and the European Community
The international community, including the United States, seems to favor the idea of a
Palestinian state. Yet there is clearly a lack of political will and muscle for forcing Israel to
accept the unilateral emergence of Palestine. The U.S. has announced on several occasions its
refusal to acknowledge a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state and that this would be
considered a violation of the Oslo agreement, stressing that negotiations are the best path to
resolve problems between Palestinians and Israelis. U.S. congressmen expect America to use its
veto against any such resolution submitted to the Security Council.9
On March 17, 1999, the U.S. Congress endorsed HR 380, requesting the U.S. president to refuse
any unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state. In the eyes of the Arab media, all these
elements reflect the amount of opposition that the projected declaration would face. On the
other hand, according to foreign and Israeli sources cited by Al Jazeera, the Obama
4

5. administration, with its eye on the 2012 elections, is looking for a Middle East breakthrough
that might well take the form of recognition of a Palestinian state. 10
The EU supports the U.S. stand of refusing unilateral steps, even if some of the EU foreign
ministers view the Palestinian plan as a tool to press the parties to move forward with
negotiations, a legitimate act that serves the negotiation process.11
Expected Gains from the Declaration
The Arab media predicts that a declaration of statehood by the Palestinians would not result in
any immediate changes on the ground. It would, however, drastically alter international
attitudes toward two-state negotiations, with the Palestinians seen as having a much stronger
position in such negotiations.
The Arab media notes that any Palestinian state would lack sovereignty and authority, with
borders dictated by certain facts on the ground – the security fence, the settlements, and Israeli
control of Jerusalem, as well as continued economic dependence on Israel. At best, this will
leave the Palestinians with a copy of what the Oslo agreements offered under the name of a
state, with a permanent instead of a transitional status.12
Securing a majority of votes at the UN General Assembly, the Palestinians would register a
significant victory in the media battle, regardless of the fact that this would not provide even a
partial solution to the Palestinian problem.
Even if the Palestinian state would arise only in Area A, according to the Oslo agreement, it
would comprise only a small percentage of the West Bank and would not include east
Jerusalem or the Jordan Valley. Such a state would be an island surrounded by Israel and
without bordering any Arab country.
Al-Jazeera further notes that a unilateral declaration of a state, while Israeli settlements
separate Palestinian towns and villages in the West Bank and the West Bank remains separated
from Gaza, would create cantons lacking geographical unity.13
“If the Palestinian Authority is not properly prepared for the battle ahead, then it's advisable to
regress because it cannot count on Obama and it is already clear that the administration will
not let such a resolution pass, neither at the Security Council nor at the General Assembly,” the
UAE newspaper Al Khaleej warned.14
The Palestinian Public
A survey reported by Near East Consulting (NEC) on May 4 indicates that 70 percent of
Palestinians believe the Palestinian Authority will be able to ask the UN Security Council to
5

6. support a declaration of a Palestinian state in September 2011.15 Another survey by Al-Najah
University in Nablus reported on April 12 a similar level of support by Palestinians in Gaza and
the West Bank.16
This is seen as a sign of recognition and appreciation for the work of Palestinian Prime Minister
Salam Fayyad, after the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund praised the
performance of the PA, saying in separate reports that the PA is well-positioned to run an
independent nation. “I believe that our governing institutions have now reached a high state of
readiness to assume all the responsibilities that will come with full sovereignty on the entire
Palestinian occupied territory,” Fayyad stated.17
According to a survey conducted by The Israel Project, it is clear that Palestinian expectations
have been on the rise over recent months, since Palestinians once considered the option of a
unilateral state as a joke.18
Recommendations to the Palestinians by the Arab Media19
According to Al-Jazeera, Palestinians are advised to shake off their commitment to the Oslo
agreements, under the pretext that Israel did not live up to all its commitments. The 1995
Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement, also known as Oslo II, clearly established that neither
side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the West Bank and Gaza.
The act of unilateral declaration is to be supported by daily public protests in the West Bank,
while seeking international support and halting security coordination with Israel. Similar to the
international campaign to end the Gaza blockade, the PA should build an international front
supporting the declaration of a Palestinian state, coupled with international demonstrations
and campaigns, in order to secure broad support all over the world for the vote on a Palestinian
state.
The Legal Front
Accompanying the declaration of Palestinian statehood, Al-Jazeera envisions challenges to the
legitimacy of recognizing Israel. UN General Assembly Resolution 273(3) of May 1949, that
accepted Israel as a member of the UN, maintains explicitly that Israel should commit to
Resolution 194 that pertains to the Palestinian right of return and Resolution 181, known as the
partition resolution, allegedly ignored by Israel. Both resolutions pave the way to challenge
Israel's legitimacy in the General Assembly.
It is further recommended to seek to apply UN Security Council Resolution 1515 of November
2003, which calls for a two-state solution and the establishment of a Palestinian state. In
addition, it is proposed that Israel be sued at the International Court of Justice in Holland to
enforce the ruling issued on July 2004 which claimed that Israel’s security fence is illegal.
6

7. Summary
Prospects for a Palestinian state through the UN appear to be 50:50 in the eyes of the Arab
media, also because there is no coherent domestic front in the Palestinian territories that
speaks with one voice, even after the reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah. Add to that the
looming questions about what Israel will do and whether the U.S. will veto the proposal or put
forward new ideas. No less important is the pattern that Arabs and Palestinians choose to apply
as they view the successful outcome of popular uprisings in the region. It would be no surprise
if Israel witnesses a repeat of attempts by Palestinians to break its borders from Syria, Lebanon,
Gaza, the West Bank, or from the sea.
* * *
Notes
1. Al-Ayyam (PA), April 10, 2011.
2. Firas Abu Hilal, Aljazeera.net, December 12, 2010.
3. Al-Hayat (UK), April 25, 2011.
4. Al-Khaleej (UAE), April 23, 2011.
5. Doha Institution and Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies
6. http://www.islammemo.cc/akhbar/arab/2011/04/23/122194.html
7. http://www.nileinternational.net/full_story.php?ID=14387
8. http://www.fatehforums.com/showthread.php?p=3801410, May 1, 2011.
9. CNN.net (Arabic), December 17, 2009.
10. Firas Abu Hilal, Aljazeera.net, http://www.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/96D9B5A2-9A6A-413E-A7F7-
F12E5BFDA06B.htm
11. Al-Doustour (Jordan), December 12, 2009.
12. Firas Abu Hilal, AlJazeera.net. See also Issa Khalaf, Palestine Chronicle,
http://www.palestinechronicle.com/view_article_details.php?id=16834
13. Firas Abu Hilal, AlJazeera.net.
14. Al-Khaleej (UAE), http://www.alnashernews.com/news/news.php?action=view&id=5451
15. WAFA (PA), May 4, 2011, http://english.wafa.ps/index.php?action=detail&id=16042
16. http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/Arabic/Politics/?id=3.1.242373314
17. Almasry Alyoum (Egypt), April 11, 2011.
18. David Horowitz, Jerusalem Post, April 8, 2011.
19. Firas Abu Hilal, Aljazeera.net, http://www.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/96D9B5A2-9A6A-413E-A7F7-
F12E5BFDA06B.htm
* * *
Linda Menuhin Abdul Aziz is a senior journalist and commentator in Middle East affairs.
Previously, she served as head of the research unit in the information section of the Israel
Police, and as head of the Middle East desk of Arabic TV at the Israel Broadcasting Authority.
7

8. This Jerusalem Issue Brief is available online at:
http://www.jcpa.org
Dore Gold, Publisher; Alan Baker, ICA Director; Mark Ami-El, Managing Editor. Jerusalem Center for Public
Affairs (Registered Amuta), 13 Tel-Hai St., Jerusalem, Israel; Tel. 972-2-561-9281, Fax. 972-2-561-9112,
Email: jcpa@netvision.net.il. In U.S.A.: Center for Jewish Community Studies, 7 Church Lane, Suite 9,
Baltimore, MD 21208; Tel. 410-653-7779; Fax 410-653-8889. Website: www.jcpa.org. © Copyright. The
opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the Board of Fellows of the Jerusalem Center
for Public Affairs.
The Institute for Contemporary Affairs (ICA) is dedicated
to providing a forum for Israeli policy discussion and debate.
To subscribe to the Jerusalem Issue Brief list, please go to link:
http://www.list-jcpa.org/brief-sub.html
To unsubscribe from the Jerusalem Issue Brief list, go to link:
http://www.list-jcpa.org/mail-brief/forms/optoutform.asp
8