CAIRO – In his September 23, 2010, speech before the UN General Assembly, President Obama expressed the hope that, "when we come back here next year, we can have an agreement that will lead to a new member of the United Nations – an independent, sovereign state of Palestine, living in peace with Israel." Now that same Obama is exercising tremendous pressure on the Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas not to apply to the UN requesting full membership of the State of Palestine in the international organisation. He has urged Abbas to seek this goal via negotiation with Israel, which Obama, more than any one else, should realise would never yield any fruit as long as Israel continues to be governed by Benjamin Netanyahu with the far-rightist parties behind him. Despite the many disappointments Netanyahu has caused Obama, whenever the latter made an initiative to accelerate the peace process, the American president has affirmed the US''s "unshakeable" commitment to the Jewish state's security, and said that any lasting peace must recognise Israel's "very real security concerns". He has spoken at length about Israeli suffering, but, to the consternation of the Palestinians, has made no mention of the difficulties of life under occupation or the impact of the expanding Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The question is: why has the American president bothered to meet the Palestinian President in order to pressurise him not to pursue a request for full membership of the UN, while the US has the right of veto that it continues to use against any Palestinian and Arab demand that it perceives could harm Israel? The answer is very simple, Obama is fully aware that the time is different now and with the Arab Spring, which he claimed to embracing, taking such clear position of enmity to the Palestinian right would mean losing what remains of US credibility in the Arab region. While reaffirming America's support for a Palestinian state, Obama stressed his belief that a Palestinian state could only be reached by negotiation and compromise, "not by statements and resolutions at the UN". Obama and leaders of all other countries taking the same stand have forgotten that the State of Israel was created according to a UN resolution, after Jews had committed violent crimes against the original inhabitants of Palestine. The Palestinians, in their turn, have tried restoring their occupied lands via use of weapons once and through long years of a peace drive. When they became confident that Israel would never willingly give up an inch of their land that it had occupied, they found no other alternative but to head to the UN to obtain their right, like any other nation, to live in an independent state with recognised secure borders. However, the US and other world powers have decided to continue to protect Israel and prevent the Palestinians from having a chance of the international community recognising their independent state. At the time that the US expressed clear opposition to Abbas' request, France attempted to avoid expressing clear opposition to the Palestinian right by announcing an initiative to resume peace talks. President Nicolas Sarkozy criticised the American mediation in the peace process, which, in his opinion, had proved a failure. He has called for taking “a fresh negotiation approach, with wider involvement of European and Arab nations, based on a timetable that would see the borders of a Palestinian state agreed within six months and a final deal within a year”. Sarkozy also said the Palestinians were mistaken in seeking full recognition as a member state at the Security Council. He warned there could be violence if the bid went ahead but was vetoed by the US. The French president said the Palestinians should instead ask to be admitted as a state with observer status to the UN General Assembly, which would give them hope. Sarkozy omitted the fact that France was part of the ‘Quartet' initiative that failed in forcing Israel to be committed to the peace drive. Accordingly, that is why Sarkozy's initiative, that has gained praise from Germany, is nothing but a new trick from the world powers to distract the Palestinians from their goal. It is driving them to a new vicious circle of fruitless bargaining that would cost them more concessions and the loss of more land with the non-stop building of Jewish settlements. In his speech at the UN, Netanyahu again called on the Palestinians to return to the bargaining table, but gave no public sign of any concession on settlements or on anything else. So why should the Palestinians submit to the American-Israeli request to withhold their demand of having full membership at the UN and resume direct peace talks? Why should Mahmoud Abbas risk his credibility over the Palestinian state and abandon the Palestinians' dream of having their state recognised by the international community. Abbas has well done by keeping a strong hold on this historic chance despite Obama's pressure to make him pull back. This is the only way to make the international community in general and the West in particular to assume their responsibilities and clarify their stands on the Palestinians state, removed from the diplomatic promises that have never turned into reality. The expected financial losses the Palestinians might suffer because of the threatened suspension of American aid to them are nothing if compared to the great gains they would obtain by this stand. In addition, Abbas should not care about Obama's image in the Arab world to the extent that he would sabotage his own image in the whole world in general and in the Palestinian street in particular.
