this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2024
394 points (97.6% liked)

World News

32362 readers
287 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Rumblestiltskin@lemmy.ml
AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml
jackmarxist@lemmy.ml
zephyreks@lemmy.ml
OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
394
Barbados To Recognize Palestine as State (www.telesurenglish.net)
submitted 7 months ago by Alsephina@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
28 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Barbados indicated on Friday its intention to recognise Palestine as an independent State says Minister of Foreign Affairs Kerrie Symmonds in talks that according to the official started in September last year. ⠀

The FM said there is an incongruity and inconsistency because "how can we say we want a two-state solution if we do not recognise Palestine as a state?” ⠀

The Palestine State recognition it is expected to be very welcomed by the local pro-Palestinian campaign group, the Caribbean Against Apartheid in Palestine (CAAP), which has been pushing for Prime Minister Mia Mottley, who has previously condemned the genocide in Gaza, to do more to stop the Israeli siege.

Declared a state by the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) in November 1988, and accepted as a UN non-member observer state in 2012, the State of Palestine has so far been recognised by 140 of the UN’s 193 member states.

Archive link

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bartolomeo@suppo.fi 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

That still doesn't answer the question. The second sentence in the Wikipedia article about the partition plan for Palestine is

On 29 November 1947, the UN General Assembly adopted the Plan as Resolution 181 (II).

so I'm not really sure how you got the idea that this was "just a proposal".

The article you linked says

The United States says an independent Palestinian state should be established through direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority and not through UN action.

which makes it even more unclear. Was Israel created through UN action or did they just steal the land and expel the Palestinians? Did they negotiate directly with the Palestinians in 1948 and arrive on the agreement to share the land according to the borders that existed before 1967?

If you (or anyone) actually have an answer, I'd be happy to hear it.

[–] n2burns@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Just because there's a UN Resolution passed, doesn't mean everything that's proposed magically happens. Governments of all levels accept long-term plans, but then they need to do further actions to follow through on those plans (or in many cases, they don't do anything and those plans just stay as dreams and what-ifs).

Israel is a state because they've declared it and the UN has accepted Israel as a member, it's really that simple. If you want to know why Israel's statehood was accepted, that's very, very complicated and involves millennia of history. I certainly can't condense it here, maybe others could, but I doubt it. I honestly think Wikipedia's a pretty good source for the history of Israel, and I'd suggest starting the British Mandate and looking back if you need more context.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Israel was not established through direct negotiations between Israel and Palestine. Why the double standard?

[–] n2burns@lemmy.ca 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I don't understand your question. Can you please explain it?

Maybe the answer is colonialism?

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Israel gets to be recognized as a state despite not negotiating with Palestine.

Palestine isn't allowed to be a state without negotiating with Israel.

It's a double standard.

[–] n2burns@lemmy.ca 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It's immensely unfair, but I'm not sure I'd call that a "double standard."

I'm no expert, Israel was accepted as a UN when they pledged to implement the partition plan. They've never followed through, so you could argue they lied to get in, but once they're in, it's difficult to expel/suspend a member.

It looks like it wasn't until decades later that Palestine sought UN membership. So it kind of makes sense to say the applicant needs to appease the existing members. You could also argue the partition plan was/is unfair, and many wars have been fought over it. I'm just not sure the situations are similar enough to be a "double standard."

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

This isn't about appeasing existing members, it's just the US blocking everything. Also, asking the colonized to negotiate with their own colonizers is absurd - just wolves and deer negotiating on what's for dinner.

[–] n2burns@lemmy.ca 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

...still not a "double standard"

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 months ago

The double standard is "Israel gets to be a state without negotiating with the people it's stealing the land from, Palestine doesn't get to be a state without negotiating with the people who stole their land." It's a double standard enforced by the US, but it's definitely a double standard and the rest of the world can see it.

All the US is doing is destroying its own credibility and the legitimacy of the UN. This shit is going the way of the League of Nations.

[–] bartolomeo@suppo.fi 2 points 7 months ago

Alright, thanks. I took your advice and I think I found my answer in the 1948 Palestine war:

During the war, the British withdrew from Palestine, Zionist forces conquered territory and established the State of Israel, and over 700,000 Palestinians fled or were expelled. It was the first war of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and the broader Arab–Israeli conflict.

[–] Hextubewontallowme@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Did they negotiate directly with the Palestinians in 1948 and arrive on the agreement to share the land according to the borders that existed before 1967? [ Does solving the issue by war count?

[–] bartolomeo@suppo.fi 3 points 7 months ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acre,_Israel

Before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War broke out, the Carmeli Brigade's 21 Battalion commander had repeatedly damaged the Al-Kabri aqueduct that furnished Acre with water, and when Arab repairs managed to restore water supply, then resorted to pouring flasks of typhoid and dysentery bacteria into the aqueduct, as part of a biological warfare programme. At some time in late April or early May 1948, - Jewish forces had cut the town's electricity supply responsible for pumping water - a typhoid epidemic broke out. Israeli officials later credited the facility with which they conquered the town in part to the effects of the demoralization induced by the epidemic.[50]

Israel's Carmeli forces attacked on May 16 and, after an ultimatum was delivered that, unless the inhabitants surrendered, 'we will destroy you to the last man and utterly,'[51] the town notables signed an instrument of surrender on the night between 17–18 May 1948.

No, war doesn't count. Someone please tell Putin while we're at it.