Why Israel will never concede to a Palestinian state

The Palestinian statehood bid has opened up a Pandora’s Box of possibilities and dangers which has led to differing opinions, even from eminent lawyers, about whether such a bid will benefit the Palestinians in their struggle for freedom and independence.

The primary obstacle to peace is not the vote at the U.N. on September 20, but rather Israel's inability to come to terms with the establishment of the state of Palestine. Here are a few reasons why.

First, ever since Israel belligerently occupied the remnants of historic Palestine in 1967 - the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem - its sole goal has been to colonise every possible skerrick of land with what now amounts to more than half a million Jews from all over the world. This has been a deliberate continuation of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine that had already begun in the early 1900s.

Second, the state of Israel, supported by Diaspora Jewry sympathetic to the Zionist enterprise, have in a sustained and relentless campaign, continued to deny the crimes that lead to the creation of Israel - namely the Nakba (Arabic for catastrophe) in which the majority population - over 750,000 Palestinians - were driven from their indigenous lands.

Third, while purporting that it is committed to peace, Israel's historical and present actions certainly paint a different picture. The supposed offers by Barak in 2001 and Olmert in 2008 have been disproven as mere attempts to once again paint the Palestinians as the rejectionists, when in fact those intimately involved from the Israeli side have themselves stated, on the record, that if they had been presented with what the Palestinians were offered, they too would have walked away from the shoddy deals.  

Fourth, the current government of Israel, which is lead by Likud, the party of Benjamin Netanyahu, is committed to destroying any prospects of peace, despite its recent machinations claiming to support a two-state solution.  A cursory analysis of Likud’s political charter offer the following interesting facts:

On Self-Rule: 'The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an Independent and sovereign state.'

On Jerusalem: 'Jerusalem is the eternal, united capital of the State of Israel and only Israel.'

On Settlements: 'The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting.'

The charter ends by saying that the 'declaration of a state' is a 'unilateral' act. How this can possibly be any more an act of unilateralism than the settlements, home demolitions, the illegal blockage of Gaza, land expropriation (under the guise of security), the continued construction of the apartheid wall, defiance of countless aspects of international and humanitarian law and the ongoing detention of over 300 Palestinian children (almost all without charge) is incomprehensible.

Fifth, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel has documented some 30 basic laws that deliberately discriminate between Jewish and Palestinian citizens of Israel. These laws cover employment, housing and education. Three of the most fundamental aspects of a civilised and democratic society, amongst many others, that clearly expose the institutionalised apartheid that exists in Israel today.    

In principle, a sovereign Palestine is the ideal conclusion to the Palestine/Israel impasse, however, Israel’s ongoing denial of the Palestinians’ most basic human rights remains at the core of the conflict. There are no guarantees that those rights will be addressed by simply declaring a state.  Yet, it seems that the number of countries required for a successful ‘yes’ vote at the U.N. has been all but reached.

In light of Israel’s flagrant and ongoing violations, what will the international community’s response be to a successful bid?

It was not that long ago that the international community punished the Palestinians for electing Hamas in democratic elections that had been scrupulously supervised. Instead of respecting the will of the people, Israel imposed a diabolical siege on Gaza that has completely isolated the population from the rest of world – a world that shamefully has acquiesced in this collective punishment in violation of international law.

Is it likely then that we will see demands being made of Israel to respect the borders of the Palestinian state, to dismantle the illegal Israeli settlements, to stop its Judaisation of all Jerusalem, to allow Palestinians their water rights, and to stop blocking the refugees’ right to return home?   These are after all the issues that have been the sticking points in twenty years of fruitless negotiations, and regardless of what happens in the U.N., will be no closer to being resolved, unless pressure is brought to bear on Israel.

Currently, every single Palestinian living under occupation relies on Israel for survival. Israel or an arm of the government or military ultimately controls the water, electricity, fuel, taxes, and every other function of society.

International aid is still the single biggest factor supporting the Palestinian economy with Australia having donated about $150 million since Labor took power in 2007. However, a U.N. investigation found that 45 per cent of every aid dollar to Palestine directly benefits the economy of Israel, which means in effect that Israel’s occupation is funded by the international community, including Australia.

Having historically supported the two-state model as the only acceptable solution, Australia has an important role to play if it genuinely wants to see both peoples thrive. Otherwise, it will be party to Israel’s apartheid policies and practices.

These are the issues that must be addressed if there is to be a sovereign Palestine. Failure to do so will only condemn both peoples to more violence and no peace in Palestine/Israel.