A negotiated settlement between the parties shall lead to the creation of an independent, democratic and viable Palestinian state, living side by side with Israel and with its other neighbors in peace and security.
Will this agreement, drawn from the “roadmap for peace” endorsed by the UN, the EU, the United States and the Russian Federation on the 30^th of April 2003, be forgotten in a few months? Though not entirely new, the issue of a unilateral declaration for an independent and sovereign Palestinian state, recognized by the international community, has been making the headlines recently.
Let us not waste time and energy in guesswork and prognoses as to the consequences of such a unilateral declaration of independence. It is nonetheless possible to ponder the opportunities and risks this initiative presents.
Faced with the deadlock in peace talks, Palestinian officials have skillfully deployed a bypass strategy based on a possible unilateral declaration of independence. If this strategy turns out to be questionable from a strictly legal perspective – the validity of a unilateral declaration of independence for Palestine being at best uncertain – it is nevertheless effective from a political perspective.
Indeed, it is a powerful symbol and this strategy shows the international community the Palestinians’ determination to get what they want. It also creates for Palestinians an alternative – real or theoretical – to peace negotiations; finally, it makes it more difficult for Israelis to steal time and delay the resumption of peace talks.
Faced with a quasi-split between Gaza and the West Bank, Palestinian officials mean to press Israel and all the other peace-talk participants into returning to the negotiation table, in contrast with the Israeli government’s reluctance.
By putting forward the idea of a unilateral /fait accompli/ strategy, Palestinian negotiators have made it possible to size up the existing diplomatic “forces”. Recent recognitions of the Palestinian state within the 1967 borders by a whole series of South-American states, led by Brazil and Argentina, have given much publicity to this initiative.
The intense bargaining between European countries before their final refusal to go toward recognition of a unilateral declaration of independence, show they are getting impatient and annoyed that negotiations might resume only to get bogged down again.
The idea is after all quite simple: for Palestinians, it is a question of reversing the current balance of power with their Israeli counterpart, by showing that the creation of a Palestinian state is a project nearing completion and unavoidable, with or without negotiations, rather than the result of a negotiated compromise with Israel.
But this strategy is risky. First, from the Palestinian perspective: by announcing that a state will be born in the year 2011, political decision-makers’ credibility is put on the line. It runs the risk of adding disappointment to despair among the peace advocates living in the West Bank or Gaza.
Furthermore, accepting the idea of a unilateral creation of an independent Palestinian state within the 1967 borders amounts to giving up /de facto/ any right of return of the Palestinian refugees, regardless of its practical implementation.
Last but not least, giving rise to the idea that a unilateral action can replace a negotiated settlement may well weaken the “peace camp” for a long time, by marginalizing it.
The Israeli army pullbacks from southern Lebanon and from the Gaza strip, and the dreadful political, diplomatic, military and humanitarian consequences which followed, should be enough to convince us that only a negotiated solution to the conflict will allow to ensure peace and security for Israelis, Palestinians as well as for all countries in the region.
Brandishing the threat of a unilateral declaration of independence as sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy is a double-edged sword, which will either hasten a resumption of the peace talks, or, on the contrary, finish off the negotiations and further consolidate distrust in both sides.
Ivan Terel, January 30th