Abbas’ U.N. bid a dangerous farce

• Reprints

Updated: November 10, 2011 12:52PM

As we’ve come to expect, Israel has offered up new concessions to the Palestinians, and as we’ve come to expect, the Palestinians have rejected them. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas was hell-bent Monday on a United Nations confrontation no matter the grave damage it would inflict on the prospects for a lasting settlement and on the volatile politics of the Middle East.

Abbas went so far as to declare that even Israeli agreement on his demands over borders and settlements would not deter him from his irresponsible U.N. gambit or persuade him to return to direct talks.

While not completely accepting Abbas’ demands, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did ease his stance on borders and settlements. He went further to express flexibility on another fundamental issue, recognition of Israel as the Jewish homeland. According to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, Netanyahu “agreed to wording that refers to two states for two peoples and two nation-states, without specific reference to a Jewish state.”

Haaretz quoted an associate of Tony Blair, the former British prime minister and a key figure in in Mideast mediation efforts, as saying the Palestinian leader had rejected every peace suggestion.

Abbas often is portrayed as a moderate but his diplomatic jihad to ask the U.N. Security Council to unilaterally declare a state of Palestine is anything but moderate. His true nature is further exposed in his statement that Palestinians have lived under “occupation” for 63 years. This is a radical departure in the use of the term occupation, which has always referred to the West Bank and Gaza Strip territories captured by Israel during the Arab world’s failed 1967 war to annihilate the Jewish state. Sixty-three years goes back to the creation of Israel under U.N. auspices in 1948. Abbas is engaging in nothing less than the rejectionist rhetoric normally associated with the terrorist organization Hamas and the Iranian fanatic Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Despite the deadly serious implications of Abbas’ U.N. campaign, it has elements of farce. Abbas can’t claim to represent all of Palestine. Hamas, not the Palestinian Authority, rules in the Gaza Strip, and it has no interest in any settlement that recognizes the Jewish state. What’s more, Abbas’ election mandate ran out two years ago, and no new elections have been possible because of the Gaza-West Bank schism.

A Palestinian statehood bid will surely fail in the Security Council if for no other reason that the United States will veto it. Apparently there are bureaucratic hurdles that could delay a vote for weeks or months. In either event, Abbas may ask the U.N. General Assembly, where America has no veto, to elevate Palestine to a non-member observer state, a status held by the Vatican.

The conventional wisdom is U.S. standing would be damaged in the Muslim world if it exercises its veto. A U.N. General Assembly vote in favor of Abbas would further isolate America as well as Israel.

Such irresponsible behavior by Abbas must not go unanswered. As I argued previously, America should cut off the $500 million in annual aid to the Palestinian Authority and, if the General Assembly takes a pro-Palestinian vote, reduce U.S. funding to the world body. Failure to react to Abbas’ transgression and an irresponsible U.N. vote would leave the Obama administration looking weak in a part of the world that respects only strength.

Israel also has options to Abbas wrecking the peace process. Among them is cutting off financial support to the Palestinians. That would emphasize a central reality for “Palestine” — its economic success depends on Israel. The weak economies of neighboring Syria, Jordan and Egypt won’t bring prosperity to Palestinians; only trade, employment and commerce with Israel will. In his U.N. gambit, Abbas is taking aim at Israel, but as was the case with past Palestinian leaders, he will end up harming Palestinians.