There was jubilation in the West Bank as Mahmoud Abbas, in defiance of the wishes of the two powers that touted him as the guy they could do business with in contrast to the Hamas leadership operating in Gaza, succeeded in getting a non-member (as opposed to the earlier 'entity') observer status in the United Nations.
Full membership would almost certainly not be extended to Palestine given that according to the United Nations rules, the Security Council is required to approve the application and the United States has made it abundantly and unambiguously clear to the Palestinians that it would veto any such move.
The resolution granting an upgrade in status to Palestine was passed in the 193-member UN General Assembly with 138 nations, including Pakistan, voting in favour, nine opposed it and 41 abstained. The countries which opposed the move and labelled it symbolic and counter-productive were the global superpower United States, the regional superpower Israel and seven others including Canada, Czech Republic, Panama, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru and Palau. The EU countries largely abstained. The obvious question is why the US and Israel opposed a resolution that, in their own words, was symbolic and counter-productive? The answer, according to several reports, is that the upgrade in status would enable the Palestinians to seek redress for war crimes against Israel in the International Criminal Court (ICC). The question is would membership of ICC be within the ambit of a non-member observer Palestine?
The ICC can only accept disputes between fully recognised member-states of the UN which, in turn, would require filing papers of "accession" under the Rome Treaty that set up the ICC, membership of which is open to "all states." An application seeking to become a state would have to be submitted to the office of the Secretary General of the UN which is the repository for signatures. The Secretary General would then seek a legal opinion from the UN's internal legal department on whether Palestine constitutes a state. The recent passage of the resolution would of course strengthen the case for Palestinians, however lack of control over the West Bank and Gaza being run by Hamas would hinder it.
It maybe recalled that Palestinians did attempt to take the matter of Israeli war crimes in 2008-09 to the ICC, however, prosecutors refused to open an investigation arguing it was unclear if the Palestinians qualified as a state given that only states recognise the court's jurisdiction. Thus there is many a slip between the cup and the lip and the considerable leverage that Israel's long-term supporter and sole superpower US continues to exert in favour of Israel and against the Palestinians makes any attempt to be declared a "state" not such a cut and dried outcome.
Be that as it may, Israel fears that membership of the ICC may be the next step. And as per the Geneva Convention, occupying powers are forbidden from "moving parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies," a condition that would legally halt Israel's settlement policy which it claims is legal citing historical and biblical ties to the West Bank and Gaza. There is a growing concern in Israel that it is only a matter of time when world opinion would compel Israel to act within the norms of international law and not rely on the US to block moves to hold it accountable. Many in Israel would agree including Alon Liel, former director-general of the Israeli Foreign Ministry, "This UN vote is a very strong signal to the Israelis that they can't shove this matter under the carpet for any longer. This is a red light for Israel."
The US threatened cessation of financial assistance to the West Bank if the Palestinians went ahead with the upgrade and the Israeli government has announced its settlement plans which would, when implemented, effectively push any hopes of peace into oblivion. The fact that the Palestinians went ahead with the resolution in spite of threats by both the US and Israel shows their clear priorities: a step nearer to statehood and freedom even at the cost of reduction in their assistance, with the European Union indicating it would not slash its financial support to the West Bank, and the possibility of more settlements. The loss of life, the constant humiliation at the hands of the Israeli security forces and disproportionate use of force by Israel led to Mahmoud Abbas to prefer an upgrade in status, in spite of the fact that the US would effectively block its full membership status; and if the Palestinian jubilation is anything to go by then Abbas clearly acted in conformity with Palestinian public opinion. Abbas' critics maintain that his motive in seeking a status upgrade may have been political as the recent spat between Gaza and Israel had shifted the focus to Hamas successfully raising the issue internationally but whatever the reason there is clearly Palestinian support for the upgrade.
Another event that hit the headlines last week was the electoral victory of separatist regional parties in Catalonia, a region with the highest Gross Domestic Product in all of Spain as well as the highest per capita income. The country's Supreme Court had declared a 2008 push for a national referendum on Basque's political status unconstitutional. "For Basques it is very important what the Catalans are doing - in Catalonia a majority are wanting to take steps towards independence," Pello Urizar, a Basque parliament member from EH Bildu, reportedly stated. However while the conglomeration of left-leaning Basque separatist parties won the second-highest number of seats in the regional parliament Urizar acknowledged that "We don't yet have as clear of a consensus" on the matter of independence.
These two international events should give pause to Pakistani policymakers. While one cannot draw comparisons as the two external events cited above do not specifically relate to what is happening in Pakistan yet two valuable lessons can be drawn. First and foremost, political engagement must be preferred over military engagement for the latter fuels hatred that has the capacity to be passed from one generation to the next compromising efforts for peace for future generations as well. And secondly, resource-rich regions are unlikely to accept an economically subordinate role - the rich Catalans do not want austerity measures imposed on them. Pakistan's resource-rich but the poorest province Balochistan is seeking a greater share of its resource wealth through the democratic process though a separatist wing has begun receiving some international attention. The time to act is therefore at hand and any further delay may have serious and far-reaching consequences.