By: Annette Brinckerhoff
The Pope has recognized the “State of Palestine” in a treaty addressing the Catholic Churches’ role in the occupied territories. Acknowledging Palestinian statehood reinforces its autonomy and puts pressure on Israel to end the occupation. Recognition of the state of Palestine follows the Pope’s controversial visit to the West Bank. Israel’s Netanyahu is outraged, calling the acknowledgement counterproductive to future peace between Israel and Palestine. He argues that this bilateral move deteriorates the possibility for a two state solution brokered between Israeli’s and Palestinians. This blatant validation is another in a series of progressive policy to recognize Palestinian statehood and an increase in rhetoric condemning Israel’s use of force in Gaza and the West Bank.
Netanyahu’s words seem confusing to characterize a political move that reaffirms the position of a marginalized, repressed, and humiliated people. If anything, the treaty will empower Palestinians to seek resolution with Israel through diplomatic instead of militant means. Netanyahu’s words are then a reflection of a nontraditional threat to Israel’s legitimacy, a changing global narrative that will no longer stay quiet as violations to international humanitarian norm continues. This statement is a reflection of panic brought on by an increasing amount of key political individuals and states to recognize Palestinian independence.
In the last year, a growing number of european countries have vocalized support for Palestine’s statehood. Culminating in December 2014, with the European Parliament recognizing Palestinian statehood, much to Israel’s distress. Although this doesn’t mean that every country in the EU endorses an autonomous Palestine, it does present judicial precedent for the recognition of Palestine within the borders established in the 1967 for a two-states solution.
European allies are not the only ones taking a harder stance on Israel’s actions. The U.S., traditionally the strongest Israeli ally, has also begun to chastise Netanyahu’s administrations policy concerning the occupied territories. In an interview with Arab media last week, Obama vocalized the importance of the end to the occupation. He highlighted the stress and disruption to daily life caused by the occupation, which is detrimental to stability in the region. This statement legitimizes the Palestinian struggle and humanizes the consequences of Israeli military action. The statement illustrates increasing frustration at Netanyahu’s progress negotiating with the PLO, as he announced that as long as he is prime minister there will be no two state solution. As the United States looses faith that Israel is serious about seeking peace with its neighbor it can no longer sustain the two faced position of supporting democracy and peace in the region while blindly allowing Israel to operate as it has without repercussion.
Western democracies are reexamining their policies concerning support for Palestine as Israeli actions are increasingly questioned and Palestine continues in its quest for legitimacy. Palestinians have been on the quest for a diplomatic solution to their occupation since the mid 20th century. After their failure to seek statehood through the UN, in a resolution which failed by one vote, they applied and gained membership at the International Criminal Court, allowing them to bring up charges of human rights abuses and war crimes allegedly committed by Israel in Operation Protective Edge. Seeking reconciliation through the ICC is key because of its position as a time tested, internationally recognized institution. It is another tool in the Palestinian strategy which rejects the use of terrorism for political goals. It also reflects an institutional change in the approach to Palestine’s standing since a requirement for ICC membership is being an autonomous state, further recognizing the Palestinian right to self determination and to live free from occupation.
This change in attitude has largely been a result of the destruction seen in July and August of 2014. The confrontation was provoked by Hamas launching rockets from the Gaza Strip into Israel, leading to the death of over 2,100 Palestinians and 70 Israelis. During this time, thousands were displaced and an already failing social fabric was decimated. Israel’s disproportional response, which involved firing on UN-chartered schools, received vast social media attention as graphic images surfaced and many NGOs released reports condemning the violence. Disrupting the acceptance of the status-quo has begun. Now, Israel must decide whether they want to evolve with a changing global policy and adapt a more democratic approach to their national security. Or whether they choose to continue the strategy of violence and occupation that has led to their decreased legitimacy.