Britain risks Israeli anger by extending diplomatic recognition to Palestinians
106 replies, posted
[url]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/britain-risks-israeli-anger-by-extending-diplomatic-recognition-to-palestinians-2170413.html[/url]
[quote=The Independent]
Britain is expected to risk Israeli protests by upgrading the status of the Palestinians' diplomatic representation in London in response to the progress made in state-building preparations by its leadership in the West Bank.
Although the move would be symbolic rather than practical, it is being contemplated at a sensitive time because of deepening Israeli unease over Palestinian efforts to achieve international recognition ahead of negotiations or peace agreement.
Those efforts have gathered momentum in the wake of the United States' decision earlier this month to abandon efforts to persuade Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to renew a moratorium on settlement-building in return for resuming direct negotiations between the two sides. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas insisted that he would not take part in such talks without a settlement freeze.
Ecuador last week became the latest of a series of Latin American countries – including Brazil and Argentina – to confer recognition of a Palestinian state within the borders that existed before the 1967 Six Day War. Israel regards such moves – which themselves have little practical significance – as helping to delude the Palestinian leadership into thinking it may be able to achieve a state without direct negotiations.
The British Government has no intention of following the Latin American example. Its upgrade to the Palestinian diplomatic presence comes after similar moves by France, Spain and Portugal since the summer. In July, the US upgraded the status of the Palestinian representation in Washington – though only up to "general delegation" level, which has long prevailed in most European countries, including Britain.
Although Israel did not formally protest any of these moves, it reacted sharply to the more recent decision of Norway to upgrade the Palestinian representative in Oslo earlier this month. The Norwegian chargé d'affairs was summoned for a "conversation" at the Foreign Ministry, despite making it clear that the move did not constitute recognition of a Palestinian state.
The move would have no practical impact on the day-to-day working of the Palestinian representative in London – currently Professor Manuel Hassassian. But it would probably allow the delegation to call itself a "mission", and would confer an automatic right of future representatives to call on the Foreign Secretary after their first arrival in the country.
But while the French upgrade provides for the Palestinian representative – officially of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation – to present his credentials to the President, the British move would not confer an equivalent right, enjoyed by ambassadors of actual states, to present credentials to the Queen.
Like the French decision, the British move would flow largely from a recognition that the Palestinian Cabinet, under the premiership of Salam Fayyad, has made considerable strides in public service and security reform as part of his two-year plan to prepare for a Palestinian state, and not from the recent impasse in negotiations.
When the French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner announced the upgrade in July, he went out of his way to point out that the Palestinians had "reorganised their administrations, made their public finances transparent, and have achieved unquestionable results with respect to security and respect for the rule of law".
Saying that France supported the creation of the "institutions of a future state", Mr Kouchner said it was "timely" to upgrade the Palestinian general delegation. The timing of any British move has been complicated by the heightened diplomatic atmosphere after the stalling of talks. Haaretz newspaper reported last week that the director general of the Foreign Ministry, Rafael Barak, sent a cable to its embassies, alerting them to a diplomatic effort by the Palestinians, driven by the lack of progress in the peace process: seeking a UN resolution condemning settlements; winning international recognition of a Palestinian state based on 1967 borders; and seeking upgrades in diplomatic representation in Europe and elsewhere.
* A prominent left-wing Israeli activist Jonathan Pollak was sentenced to jail for three months and fined 1,500 shekels (£273) yesterday for taking part in a 2008 bicycle protest against the blockade of Gaza. The Association of Civil Rights in Israel said the sentence was an "extreme punishment" and raised suspicion that Pollak was "targeted to silence him and prevent him from partaking in acts of protest".[/quote]Nothing of value would be lost
That's our Hague!
[editline]28th December 2010[/editline]
[img]http://timesonline.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/04/01/william_hague_hat_7.jpg[/img]
So basically, Israel is being a bunch of xenophobic shitheads as usual?
Anti-semites
Sigh.
If I were Britain, I'd side with them, too.
The Israeli people's history of blowing up public transport when angry isn't quite as long reaching as that of the opposition...
Well this is unexpected.
The Israeli government bitches about anti-semitism but practices it's own version of apartheid.
gg
[QUOTE=Swilly;27039997]Well this is unexpected.[/QUOTE]
Yes.
But not really.
So, did anyone actually read the story or is it just attack Israel time?
Couple things to note. It probably won't upset Israel that much because it's just a recognition of what has previously been done. They want actual negotiations between the two involved in making them a state which isn't really unreasonable.
With the borders, it doesn't seem likely to get the pre-1967 borders due to how much Israel has done on the land and the obvious unwillingness to give it to them for free. 1967 borders would give a fair bit of land to them and ease off the fences and shit so that's more reasonable. Likely though, new borders will be redrawn as every other plan was as arbitrary as the next.
The Israeli government bitches about anti-semitism but practices it's own version of apartheid.
The Israeli government bitches about anti-semitism but practices it's own version of
The Israeli government bitches about anti-semitism but practices it's own version
The Israeli government bitches about anti-semitism but practices it's own
The Israeli government bitches about anti-semitism but practices it's
The Israeli government bitches about anti-semitism but practices
The Israeli government bitches about anti-semitism but
The Israeli government bitches about anti-semitism
The Israeli government bitches about
[B]The Israeli government bitches.[/B]
its not like its particularly difficult to make israel mad. all you have to do is say that israel isn't the 100% perfect eternal glorious homeland of the jews and you'll piss off somebody in the israeli government.
It's hypocritical because you can be banned for anti-semitism but not for anti-christianism, or islamaphobia.
[QUOTE=Dr. G;27046653][img_thumb]http://www.modkraft.dk/IMG/jpg/Get_rid_of_Anti_Semitism_490_354.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE]
Good job posting a retarded political cartoon. It's also strange how nothing in the article mentions anti-semitism or even Israel getting pissed off about it. You just can't come up with anything intelligent to say so you post rubbish that is retarded as fuck and think yourself witty for it.
Come on, got anything to say other than Israel bad? Got any reasoned ideas for what to about the borders? Any insights to the conflict other than the caveman idea of Israel just killing everyone? You want to even tell me why Israel would give a fuck about this even though they barely cared about everyone else doing it?
[editline]29th December 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=RayDark;27046777]It's hypocritical because you can be banned for anti-semitism but not for anti-christianism, or islamaphobia.[/QUOTE]
You don't frequent these threads much, do you? People get banned for it all the time and even anti-semitism bans are a joke that don't happen here.
I see nothing wrong with upgrading recognition to the Palestinians. Who gives a fuck if Israel will get mad, their problem.
[QUOTE=Starpluck;27046933]I see nothing wrong with upgrading recognition to the Palestinians. Who gives a fuck if Israel will get mad, their problem.[/QUOTE]
Wanna know something funny? The French pointed out one of the main reasons for the upgrade that they did was that they had made considerable strides in security and public safety. Something which would of never been achieved without Israel providing huge military support, training their forces for them and in the meantime, doing most of it themselves. They gonna get real mad, aren't they?
The Israeli govnerment can be a bit of an ass, and as a result some citizens turn Xenophobic, but Facepunch is bandwagoning up on the hate.
-snip hit post to soon-
Good
[QUOTE=Devodiere;27047019]Wanna know something funny? The French pointed out one of the main reasons for the upgrade that they did was that they had made considerable strides in security and public safety. Something which would of never been achieved without Israel providing huge military support, training their forces for them and in the meantime, doing most of it themselves. They gonna get real mad, aren't they?[/QUOTE]Um no. That's giving Israel a false sense of credit for something the Palestinian leadership did alone.
Israel never trained Palestinan forces and saying they did would be undoubtedly ludicrous.
There are also other reasons the French announced the upgrades such as "Palestine reorganised their administrations, made their public finances transparent, and have achieved unquestionable results with respect to security and respect for the rule of law." which has nothing do to with "Israel doing all the work"
Palestine makes is public finances transparent "Oh well that's thanks to Israel ya know? They trained and taught them how to do so!" is what you're saying.
To be fair this can only be a good thing, you can't acheive anything worthwile without treading on a few toes.
[QUOTE=RayDark;27046777]It's hypocritical because you can be banned for anti-semitism but not for anti-christianism, or islamaphobia.[/QUOTE]
I think it's due mainly to the fact the other two are religions you can leave and being an atheist Jew is an ethnicity you're born with. And you can't change ethnicities like religion.
[QUOTE=Starpluck;27047441]Um no. That's giving Israel a false sense of credit for something the Palestinian leadership did alone.
Israel never trained Palestinan forces and saying they did would be undoubtedly ludicrous.
There are also other reasons the French announced the upgrades such as "Palestine reorganised their administrations, made their public finances transparent, and have achieved unquestionable results with respect to security and respect for the rule of law." which has nothing do to with "Israel doing all the work"
Palestine makes is public finances transparent "Oh well that's thanks to Israel ya know? They trained and taught them how to do so!" is what you're saying.[/QUOTE]
Never said they were taking credit for them becoming more like an actual government. I dunno what fallacy you would call it but it sure seems like putting words in my mouth.
The military and police however is a very different matter. I recall an article where it stated they worked together but I cannot find it. Instead, [url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101220/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_palestinians]good old Wikileaks comes up with Abbas sharing every bit of intel with Israel[/url] in order for them to tackle these threats. Along with Israel giving a fair state of peace with their "occupation" allowing the Palestinian police to actually get some training and not deal with the shitstorm immediately, they have done a great deal more for peace in the area than the Palestinian police have done. They are becoming competent and will take over the job soon, but they haven't done it on their own.
And I don't get it, who heads the mission?
Fatah or Hamas?
[QUOTE=Starpluck;27047854]I think it's due mainly to the fact the other two are religions you can leave and being an atheist Jew is an ethnicity you're born with. And you can't change ethnicities like religion.[/QUOTE]
I go into the Event log and see someone banned for Islamophobia and racism towards Muslims. I see multiple bans for racism against Muslims in most of the ban history of people who argue for Israel but none for anti-semitism in any of the against. It is a figment of his imagination and the only actual anti-semitism ban I can think of was done by Mr. Gestapo in the LMAO pics thread.
[QUOTE=Devodiere;27047958]I go into the Event log and see someone banned for Islamophobia and racism towards Muslims. I see multiple bans for racism against Muslims in most of the ban history of people who argue for Israel but none for anti-semitism in any of the against. It is a figment of his imagination and the only actual anti-semitism ban I can think of was done by Mr. Gestapo in the LMAO pics thread.[/QUOTE]
That's because no one ITN is actually an anti-semite, they're anti-Israel. And people who bash Christianity often have a clear and logic argument.
[QUOTE=Billiam;27048053]That's because no one ITN is actually an anti-semite, they're anti-Israel. And people who bash Christianity often have a clear and logic argument.[/QUOTE]
Some yes, I certainly wouldn't say most are.
Israel is getting mad?
Worried, I am not.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
