Opinions
2024.05.12 17:53 GMT+8

What UNGA's backing of Palestinian bid for membership means

Updated 2024.05.12 17:53 GMT+8
Wang Jin

Voting results are displayed during the 10th Emergency Special Session of the General Assembly at the UN headquarters in New York, May 10, 2024. /Xinhua

Editor’s note: Wang Jin, a research fellow of the Charhar Institute. The article reflects the author’s opinion and not necessarily the views of CGTN or the Charhar Institute.

The UN General Assembly has voted overwhelmingly in favor of a resolution finding that the State of Palestine has met the qualifications for a full membership of the UN. Although Palestine's application for UN membership will continue to be challenged by the U.S. and its allies, the UNGA's resolution symbolizes the general consensus of the international community and is of great political and practical significance.

Achieving independence is a long-cherished aspiration of the Palestinians. Adopted by the UNGA in November 1974, Resolution 3237 approved the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as an observer. The Oslo Accords, signed in 1993 with the establishment of the Palestinian National Authority, led to a more optimistic attitude toward the resolution of the Palestine question through peaceful dialogue with Israel. As a result, the Palestinian National Authority, which is internationally recognized as the "representative of the Palestinian people," put the process of joining the UN on hold during this period.

But the situation changed considerably afterwards. First, after 2000, the Palestinian-Israeli peace negotiations, which should have been concluded in 1999, stalled and failed to achieve any political breakthrough. Over the past two decades, Israel has accelerated the construction of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, encroaching on Palestinian land. Jewish settlements are often built near important water sources, strategic locations and cultural heritage sites, and together with Israeli military and police checkpoints deployed in the West Bank, they sever the daily connection between Palestinian neighborhoods.

Besides, Palestinian factionalism, especially the rapid rise of Hamas, has left Fatah with few choices but to gain political support through diplomatic means. The Oslo peace process was opposed by the local Palestinian political and military groups represented by Hamas. Since the outbreak of the Palestinian uprising in 2000, the political influence of Hamas has grown rapidly. In 2006, the election of a Hamas-led Palestinian government led to an armed confrontation between Hamas and Fatah militias, further dividing the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

Moreover, the president of the Palestinian Authority (PA) Mahmoud Abbas has vast experience in diplomacy and hopes to achieve a breakthrough in the Palestinian-Israeli issue through political and diplomatic means. In 1993, he visited Saudi Arabia and was the first senior official of the PLO to visit the Gulf Arab states after the Gulf War, which helped greatly mend the relations between the Gulf Arab states and the Palestinians. From the early 1990s, Abbas participated in the negotiations on the Oslo Accords with Israel, and for many years thereafter, he has been representing the PA to engage in dialogue and communication with Israel.

After years of trials and tribulations, upgrading from an "observer State" to a full membership could help Palestine garner more support at the international level and exert greater external pressure on Israel.

Although the UNGA voted overwhelmingly to approve a resolution stating that the State of Palestine meets the qualifications for membership under the UN Charter and should be admitted as a full member of the UN, Palestine's road to the UN still faces challenges.

Riyad Mansour, the permanent observer of Palestine to the United Nations, addresses the 10th Emergency Special Session of the General Assembly at the UN headquarters in New York, May 10, 2024. /Xinhua

On the one hand, the U.S., as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, could veto Palestine's application as it has always believed that the Palestinian-Israeli peace process should be achieved through U.S.-led peace negotiations. This shows U.S. hegemonic thinking.

On the other hand, the U.S. and Israel will put more pressure on Palestine, such as threatening to impose more sanctions, which will have a greater impact on the PA as the U.S. is an important sponsor of the PA and Israel has been controlling Palestinian customs and is able to exert pressure on the PA through suspension of the transfer of customs revenues.

Although the Palestinians' road to the UN will encounter many challenges in the future, the call for international justice for the Palestine question has become the mainstream of the international community.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on X, formerly Twitter, to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)

Copyright © 

RELATED STORIES