Poll for today: Recognising Palestine
A rocket is fired between combatants in the Israel-Palestine conflict during July. If the UK government recognises Palestine, could this change the way the international community views the situation there?
Much though this blog maligns the BBC News website, it does come out with the occasional scrap of news, such as the fact that MPs are to vote on a backbench motion to officially recognise Palestine as a state.
“Labour backbencher Grahame Morris will present the motion on Monday as MPs return to the Commons,” the report states.
“The motion has the full backing of the Labour shadow cabinet, the BBC has been told.
“The vote is symbolic and would not change government policy but could have international implications.”
It goes on to say that backbenchers are likely to add an amendment, simply to say that this would be a contribution towards securing a two-state solution for the conflicts between the Israeli government and the Palestinian people.
In the light of the violence that flared up in July, this all seemed fairly straightforward – but it seems it isn’t. The Independent has reported that the amendment is part of an “internal revolt” from “pro-Israeli” members of the shadow cabinet over a decision to “force” them to support the proposal.
To be frank, it all seems very childish, especially when considering the number of deaths – mainly of Palestinians but also of some Israelis – and the destruction of homes and property.
But what do you think? Originally this was going to be a question about Labour but considering the pettiness of the squabble, let’s rise above it: Should the United Kingdom recognise Palestine as a state? Please vote.
[polldaddy poll=8367789]Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
bringing you the best of the blogs!
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
On checking the Business of the Day for Monday 13th in HOC,
I found the motion is as follows:
“That this House believes that the Government should recognise the state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel.”
There is an amendment to add at end which states:
“, on the conclusion of successful peace negotiations between the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority.’.
So, if the original motion is carried. all well and good.
But if the amendment is then carried, then the original motion will be devalued as the amendment appears to be a proviso.
The Balfour Declaration (dated 2 Nov 1917)
“His Majesty’s government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”
It never mentioned anything about Israel being a state.
I was disturbed and confused to find that George Galloway has announced he will not support this motion. Normally as with most issues I find myself in full agreement with his words Particularly on this subject. I did find it hard to get my head round his reasons which seem to be that the motion recognises Israel as a state. casalealex above has made this now much more clear for me and I accept that as a good reason to object. Unlike George however i am not happy with the “one state solution” It seems to me that Israel should withdraw from all land that it has seized in contravention of international law. She should only then be recognised as a state. I am very aware that the chances of that happening are next to zero. So since the motion is being presented to me with a less than honest “headline” I think i must vote against recognition of the present illegally occupied territories being recognised as part of a a “State of Israel” as that seems to me to be the hidden intention of the motion.
Pete, I had not seen Galloway’s objection. but I think I understand where he is coming from.
Hopefully, some sense may be evident in the following:
In its Basic Laws, Israel defines itself as a Jewish and Democratic State.
In the Report of the Committee dated 3 September 1947 to the UN General Assembly, the majority of the Committee in Chapter VI proposed a plan to replace the British Mandate with “an independent Arab State, an independent Jewish State, and the City of Jerusalem .
On 14 May 1948, the day before the expiration of the British Mandate, David Ben-Gurion, the head of the Jewish Agency, declared “the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz-Israel, to be known as the State of Israel”. The only reference in the text of the Declaration to the borders of the new state is the use of the term, Eretz-Israel.
The international recognition of Israel refers to the diplomatic recognition of the State of Israel, which was established by the Israeli Declaration of Independence on 14 May 1948.
Israel was admitted as a member of the United Nations by majority vote on 11 May 1949.
160 of the 192 other UN member states (83%) currently recognize Israel.
At present, a total of 32 United Nations member states do not recognise the State of Israel
Some countries that do not recognise Israel have also questioned the legitimacy of Israel.
The international recognition of the State of Palestine has been the objective of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) since the Palestinian Declaration of Independence proclaimed the establishment of the State of Palestine on 15 November 1988 in Algiers at an extraordinary session in exile of the Palestine National Council.
As of 27 September 2013, 134 (69.4%) of the 193 member states of the United Nations have recognised the State of Palestine.
Israel does not recognise Palestine as a state and maintains de facto military control in the territories even in areas officially under the government of the Palestine National Council.
Israel do not recognise Palestine,t aking the position that the establishment of this state can only be determined through direct negotiations between Israel and the PNA. The main issues currently obstructing an agreement are: borders, security, water rights, the status of Jerusalem and freedom of access to religious sites, ongoing Israeli settlement expansion, and legalities concerning Palestinian refugees including the right of return.
Before anyone launches into me let me make it very plain that I do support Palestine being recognised as a state. That alone.
I not only believe that Palestine should be recognised as a state but that every one of those living in the territories illegally occupied by Israel should be asked to move out, along with any Israeli military presence there. Sometimes I get so angry that I feel, if they don’t leave, they should be subjected to a similar bombardment as that suffered by Gaza with full US backing. OK, I don’t really believe that, but how can Israel be made to understand?
PARLIAMENT HAS VOTED FOR THE MOTION: ‘That this House calls on the government to recognise the state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel’ AYES 274 NOES 12