Supporters of Palestinian state could circumvent U.S. veto at U.N.

By: Pamela Falk
Topics: Foreign Policy

Palestinian women are seen through the Palestinian flag as they take part in a rally celebrating the signing of a reconciliation agreement between Fatah and Hamas, in the West Bank city of Ramallah, Wednesday, May 4, 2011.

(Credit: AP Photo/Tara Todras-Whitehill)

In terms of formal U.N. membership, he is correct. Chapter II, Article 4 of the U.N. Charter says, "The admission of any such state to membership in the United Nations will be effected by a decision of the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council."

That suggests that the U.S., a member of the Security Council, would veto any Palestinian membership if negotiations with Israel do not succeed.

But a U.S. veto may ultimately not matter. An effort is underway at the U.N. to garner support for a General Assembly vote in favor of Palestinian membership. Supporters would have to find a two-thirds' majority of the 193 votes in the General Assembly to prevail.

The plan is to then invoke General Assembly Resolution 377 A (V), which was given the title "Uniting for Peace." Passed in 1950, according to the U.N. treaty documents, it "states that where the Security Council, because of lack of unanimity of the permanent members, fails to exercise its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, the General Assembly shall seize itself of the matter." That basically means that the U.N. General Assembly would bypass the U.N. Security Council.

Now, the wording is such that it does not have the force of international law. But there is a reason why Israel's Defense Minister Ehud Barak, referring to the U.N. movement to vote for recognition of a Palestinian state with the 1967 borders, said in March, "We stand to face a diplomatic tsunami." Needless to say, Israel is trying to fend off the vote, and the White House and the U.S. Mission to the U.N. have been supportive. But the plan for the vote is still moving forward.

Pamela Falk
Pamela Falk is CBS News Foreign Affairs Analyst and an international lawyer, based at the United Nations.

11 Comments +

Add a Comment See all 11 Comments


by KampungHighlander July 27, 2011 11:49 AM EDT: I wonder if the Israeli's, once they realize the US veto can no longer protect them from International Law, will stop using AIPAC to pervert the American Political System.

Seems like a good deal. The Palestinian's get their own country, and the American's get their country back.; Reply to this comment


by BorderOne July 23, 2011 10:39 AM EDT: All who wish to reproduce my comment on mailing lists, repost on other blogs, or send to congress, senators and state representatives, or use for lobbying are welcome to do so. Let justice be served:

The only solution for a lasting peace is absolute democratic process (that we Americans cherish so passionately) for the entire territory in question, otherwise, the peace will not last. All people who lived there without regard to religion, race, etc. should vote on how they would like their one country to be run. I favor one state solution because two states would only attempt to "legalize" Zionist occupation that will be remembered in history until it is corrected by future large scale conflicts, so no lasting peace will result. The only issue with the fair democratic process is what to do with all manipulated Jewish people who the Zionist regime imported for decades to increase the Jewish population from around 100,000 to over 5 Million since the start of the occupation. This is obviously an attempt to unjustly manipulate any future democratic process by forcefully increasing the occupier's population at the expense of others. Any compromise other than the absolute fair democratic process with no manipulated population will be temporary with terrible conflicts looming to correct it in the future.

The truth is that the Zionist regime will not accept any democratic process even if the manipulated Jewish population is included because it cannot exist as a democratic country as Zionists will be outvoted by all others who live there (Zionists were in an infinite minority before the occupation). The Zionist regime can only temporarily exist through the force of its arms as a one people country where only select ones can vote and where different laws apply to different people.
The world must stand up against the Zionist regime by cutting all diplomatic and economic relations with it. Many countries have already stopped all relations with the Zionist regime and others are in the process of doing the same. We Americans need to completely distance ourselves from this oppressive regime through urging our state representatives and senators to do what the rest of the world is doing; Reply to this comment


by Bulls42 July 23, 2011 9:55 AM EDT: Imagine in the current time if France would want to create its own state in Michigan and separate it from the U.S. French are a minority in Michigan so democratic vote on the separation would not work because they would be outvoted by the rest of the Americans living in Michigan. So imagine if they had a historic opportunity when the U.S. is at its weakest and militarily occupy a part of Michigan and impose a regime where only French can vote and all the others who lived there cannot. Furthermore, the occupiers rename the occupied part of Michigan as the "French State" where not only that Americans are not welcome, but they are systematically expelled over time creating huge refugee camps in nearby states of Indiana and Ohio. Imagine then that at that point in history the artificial organization called the United Nations is full of French supporters and somehow that makes the occupation "legal" and Americans who fight for their homes in the occupied part of Michigan are labeled as terrorists. The occupation is a part of a careful log-term plan (i.e. Zionism) of acquiring land by French, so literally days after the occupation is implemented (what a coordinated plan!) the occupiers import millions of other French from all over the world to increase their population in Michigan from around 100,000 to over 5 Million in a short period. Then Americans resist and fight to regain the occupied part of Michigan, but Russia steps in, sends weapons, cash, and everything else the occupiers need to sustain the occupation.

What do you think all of us Americans would feel? We would hate French first, and then all of their supporters (Russia in this analogy) that make the occupation of our land possible. Still questioning yourself why people in the Middle East and other parts of the world do not like us? Because Zionist controlled our government, not the people, supported the very exact scenario as described above against our will and with our tax money making us accomplices in this unspeakable crime. The scenario that would outrage all of us Americans and make us fight against it if it happened in Michigan or anywhere else in the U.S.

This comment is not intended to make derogatory remarks about France and Russia. It is merely used as an example of how Americans would be outraged and fight back in the same situation as the forced establishment of the Zionist regime and its occupation of Palestine.
Urge your state representatives and senators to immediately stop any remaining support for the Zionist regime. Much of the support already stopped because of the increasing pressure on this issue, but we Americans need to completely distance ourselves from this oppressive regime and start actively opposing it; Reply to this comment


by Cave_West July 23, 2011 8:16 AM EDT: If it is ever reached, the current and any other artificial "peace agreement" will be illegitimate before it is ever signed because (1) all people living in Palestine regardless of religion, race, origin, etc. (hereinafter "All People of Palestine") were never given a choice on how they want their land to be governed, and (2) all contracts signed under duress are null and void.
The biggest problem in Palestine is that the Zionist regime never offered a choice to All People of Palestine on how they want to govern their land because the Zionist regime cannot exist as a democratic entity. If there was ever any democratic process in Palestine, Zionists would have been outvoted and the Zionist regime would have never existed. That is why the Zionist regime is the occupier because it does not offer choice (i.e. democracy), but instead imposes its regime (i.e. occupies). Imagine if Russians would simply occupy a town in the U.S. where they are in significant numbers and attempt to create a Russian state there without giving the rest of the Americans living there a choice. Imagine then if they would try to institute a "peace agreement" that would attempt to legitimize their occupation. The "peace agreement" would logically and legally be illegitimate because the Americans were not given a choice.

Under all countries' laws, any contract is null and void if it is signed under duress. The current Palestine "peace agreement" process reminds me of The Godfather movie where the mafia boss (i.e. the Zionist regime) made a guy "an offer he could not refuse" by placing a gun (i.e. Zionist conventional and nuclear arsenal) to his head and making him sign the contract. Like the mafia boss' offer, any "peace agreement" other than the choice for All People of Palestine is a crime, and the contract is legally null and void.

The bottom line is that All People of Palestine never wanted to divide their land into artificial two states the way the occupation and this "peace agreement" attempt to divide it. From the beginning of the Zionist regime to its unavoidable end, All People of Palestine and the region never wanted the Zionist regime and they do not want it even more after all the atrocities the Zionist regime committed. I just cannot believe how the Zionist regime can be so ignorant to think that this or any other "peace agreement" that does not allow people to choose how they want to be governed will last and ensure its people's survival. The Zionist regime fails to realize that no matter if it succeeds in muscling this "peace agreement" by unspeakable historic coercion tens of millions of moral people around the world will oppose it until it is corrected, and until justice and free choice prevail. Also, ever increasing number of Jewish people are realizing that Zionism is becoming a destructive force for them and are leading the global resistance to it.

Feel free to copy this comment, email it to other bloggers, and repost it on other blogs, newspaper websites, Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking websites, and include it in any correspondence/lobbying with senators, state representatives and any other public officials so the public learns the truth; Reply to this comment

by RobAla May 22, 2011 8:14 AM EDT

President Obama said Thursday that Palestinian "efforts to delegitimize Israel will end in failure," adding that "symbolic actions to isolate Israel at the United Nations in September won't create an independent state."

OK - if he understands that Palestinians do not recognize Israel's right to exist, why in the world does he side with Palestinians and why does he attempt to force the 1967 borders (leaving Israel without a buffer zone against incoming rockets from Hamas)? President Obama makes no sense at all on this issue.

Reply to this comment


by justme2012 May 22, 2011 10:11 PM EDT: Is it true that Obama wants to give Texas back to Mexico along with his heartfelt apology?


by HAZELET May 20, 2011 4:45 PM EDT: I'm sure obama realized this would play out this way. He made his speech,
supposedly support Israel. With friends like him who need enemies.; Reply to this comment


by WeHappyFew May 20, 2011 3:36 PM EDT: Told you Obama was playing hardball over the UN vote. the US and Russia are all Israel has right now. Israel does NOT want to rely on Russia and Obama wants his 'pound of flesh'.; Reply to this comment


by us_1776 May 20, 2011 3:28 PM EDT: What do expect would happen after 60 years of an impasse?

The world is searching for a solution.

Somehow this situation must reach a conclusion so that peace and stability can be achieved for all the peoples of the region.

.; Reply to this comment

by justme2012 May 20, 2011 2:46 PM EDT

I say we keep our one billion + dollars we give to the UN and use that money to help pay the interest on our debt.

A win win.

Reply to this comment


by justme2012 May 20, 2011 8:32 PM EDT: Sounds good to me. We should not be borrowing money to give to any country. Including Africa, Brazil, Mexico.

Stop spending money we don't have.