UN Membership for Palestine — Now

April 6, 2003 1:07 AM

UN Membership for Palestine — Now! John V. Whitbeck thinks the time is now for Palestine to apply for full United Nations membership. His argument is persuasive, and tasty fodder for a steaming mefi buffet.
posted by giantkicks (15 comments total)

Well, the United Nations is an organization for actual nations... Then again, most UN members are dictatorships already, so "Palestine" is sure to be invited at some point or other. You'd think they'd be more interested in other things than joining that useless, dying bureacracy, however...
posted by dagny at 1:38 AM on April 6, 2003

This should be good.
posted by password at 1:52 AM on April 6, 2003

I suspect you're using the word "good" in an experimental, previously unseen way. Not "good" in the boring old definition that people like me have come to expect. "Good" meaning "like having one's genitals power-sanded" perhaps, or "good" meaning "oh God, I think I've lost the will to live".

The OED are waiting by the phone as we speak, agog for your new definition of the word "good".

(Can you answer sarcasm with sarcasm? Does it provoke a sort of black hole of sarcasm?)
posted by Grangousier at 1:56 AM on April 6, 2003

By "good," I mean a highly enlightened, thoughtful, and respectful conversation on the merits of including Palestine in the UN as well as the validity of the UN itself. I wouldn't expect anything else from our comrades here at Metafilter.

Or "good" like watching a Vin Diesel movie.
posted by password at 3:23 AM on April 6, 2003

Sure. Why not? Make sure they get a seat at the Security Council too. In passing: where are the boundaries to that state? Capital?
posted by Postroad at 5:08 AM on April 6, 2003

In passing: where are the boundaries to that state? Capital?

I can't seem to find it on a map. Could it be the hypothetical state that has been flatly rejected now how many times by the palestinian terrorist thugocracy?
posted by hama7 at 5:28 AM on April 6, 2003

So these Likudniks, they vibrate?

Don't be assholes. Neither one of you is stupid enough to not know that the boundaries encompass the 22% of the Palestinian mandate originally managed by the British that the Zionists did not control prior to the 1967 war. Just because it doesn't fit into your Zionist-blindered world view doesn't mean it's not common knowledge.
posted by JollyWanker at 7:35 AM on April 6, 2003

Ssorry that Mr. Wanger has to be a name caller in his remarks. The boundaries remain up for grabs since the Arabs rejected the State and choose instead to fight some three different times for the entire area. Call me old fashioned, but even this Likudnik (?)_ knows that the UN said the land is "contested"--not occupied land, and that there should be a two-state soluytion when Israel has safe and secure borders.
Now, having lost some land, the Arabs want a return to what they might have had had they accepted the UN decision. But if you know any history you know that nations do not land taken in war unless there is an accord in advance. Why lose your men in war and them, withlout any peace accord, turn back the land you fought on in order to survive.
Waving a magic want, as the writer does, does not return things to 1948....If things worked this way, the American Indians would get lots of now developed land back; Mexico would get large parts of Southern US back; India would get Pakistan back etc etc.
Even kids in the school yard know that you stop the fighting when the other side cries "Uncle." Then you can reconcile.
posted by Postroad at 7:53 AM on April 6, 2003

it's fodder for a big steaming mefi something, that's for sure...
posted by tss at 9:25 AM on April 6, 2003

I'm sure this idea was in the roadmap to middle east peace that Bush & Co were going to roll out just before... oh yes, the way started. Interesting how that fell by the wayside.
posted by holycola at 10:07 AM on April 6, 2003

it's fodder for a big steaming mefi something, that's for sure...

well, since we're discussing I/P, enjoy:

High Court: Women's group can't read Torah at Wall

The Jerusalem Paradox

Israel wants changes to peace 'road map'
Threat to reject pact if concerns aren't met

Sharon delays final decision on position of separation fence

Belgium guts 'genocide law' to end war crimes cases against Sharon, Bush Sr., others

Have fun
posted by matteo at 10:14 AM on April 6, 2003

I'm wondering about the Palestinians *after* the Iraq war. For example, what if Israel *does* deport them, probably to Jordan, as almost 50% of Israelis are favoring? Syria and Lebanon truly become isolated, too, and can't look to anyone bailing them out if they get into a knock-down-drag-out with Israel or the US.
Is the only possibility left for the Palestinians the Egyptians?
posted by kablam at 10:29 AM on April 6, 2003

In general, a good fix on reality is a minimum requirement for credible analysis. Self-delusion should not be part of international policy, though there are many cases where it has been (the U.S. refusal to acknowledge that Taiwan didn't rule China until the early seventies is the best example I can think of).

Frankly, even if Israel and the Palestinians were to make peace and Israel gave up most of the west bank to the Palestinians, I do not believe that a Palestinian state is viable. There would be a civil war within weeks, and inevitably Israel would be dragged back in. And that's just because of the divisions within the Palestinan leadership. The Palestinian people may have an enmity for Isreal but they have taken a liking to the way the Israeli government works, and they would like to have a similar participatory government. Unfortunately, few of their leaders feel the same way.

The best solution I can think of, frankly, is for the United States to pay Jordan a ton of money to see if they can come in and nurture something that could grow into a legitimate government with some democracy. Jordan, of course, is not a democracy, but it has some experience with the area - it did rule the whole thing for 20 years - and it does have some democratic structures.

As for the Gaza strip, I'm afraid there is no solution.
posted by gspira at 2:29 PM on April 6, 2003

How about this for a solution:
Israel agrees to recognize the west bank as the Palestinian state and withdraws all settlements and the U.S. goes in and destroys Syria's army?
posted by stevefromsparks at 4:23 PM on April 6, 2003

I agree with the first comment. There is no nation called "Palestine," therefore they can't join the UN.

Have you ever noticed the linguistic similarities between Palestine, Palestinians and Philistines?
posted by jasontromm at 1:42 PM on May 1, 2003