With September, and the possibility of a U.N. vote on the creation of a Palestinian state nearing, the issue of a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state is becoming increasingly prominent. Many American Jewish groups are urging world leaders to block such a declaration. A unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state certainly should not occur before key issues are sorted out in a peace agreement with Israel — such a declaration would launch the Middle East into conflict, something that must be avoided given the fragile state of the region. However, I believe that for Israel’s sake, the declaration of a Palestinian state must happen soon, which means that Israel, along with the international community, must do everything in its power to quickly establish a peace accord that is agreeable to both sides (not an easy task, I know).
Living outside the United States for the past nine months has given me a new perspective on the Israel-Palestine issue — that is, it seems to me that even though Israel still has strong support in the diplomatic community, the same cannot be said to be true elsewhere. Yes, it is true in the United States that support toward Israel seems to be waning, but here the sentiment is outright anger with Israel and support of the Palestinians, which I do not feel is the case in the United States. This sentiment is not based on a bunch of anti-Israel propaganda nonsense, but legitimate and concrete arguments that are hard to counter. Out of my peers and teachers at the London School of Economics and Political Science, who come from a wide range of backgrounds, I have found that for the most part, the only people who support Israel are American, American-educated or Israeli. There were others who used to support Israel, but over the past few months I have noticed that even their opinions have changed. What is frightening about this is that these students and educators developed their opinions based on an in-depth understanding of the situation and that many of them will become, if they are not already, leaders in government, think tanks and media in their home countries. The longer the peace process takes, the more likely it seems that these people, who have no respect for Israel and fully support the Palestinians, will be the ones helping to develop international policies toward Israel, and the less likely it will be that a peace agreement will emerge that is at all favorable to Israel.
It is true that this sentiment is representative of a certain group of people (academia) at a university known for its boycotts of everything Israel. Yet, even my experience with people outside of the LSE suggests the prevalence of anti-Israel sentiment. From a British fitness instructor, who attributed all blame for violence in the Israel-Palestine conflict to the Israelis, to a Norwegian bus driver who advocated for giant bulldozers to turn a part of Israel into an island so that the Israelis would stop causing so much trouble, it is clear that support for Israel outside the United States is rapidly declining, if not already almost non-existent.
As the possibility of a September vote in the U.N. General Assembly on the creation of a Palestinian state has been widely publicized, efforts to halt or push back that process are likely to be viewed as another attempt by Israel and its all too willing allies to deny the oppressed Palestinian people the chance to acquire the rights that they deserve and are due under international law. The longer Palestinian statehood is pushed back because a peace agreement cannot be reached, the more people will start to view Israel as the source of the problems in the region. With this as the prevalent view, how can Israel ever hope that the international community will help to negotiate a favorable peace agreement?
There are several ways in which Israel, the United States and the rest of the international community can negate or slow the spread of such anti-Israel sentiment that will likely result from the postponement of the September vote. First, the instability and violence that would result from the declaration of a Palestinian state without a peace agreement with Israel should be highlighted. This will show that postponement is beneficial to more than just Israel, and in doing so, will hopefully convince the Palestinians to engage in the peace process seriously and not just press for a U.N. vote. It will also hopefully prevent undue resentment from the Palestinians toward Israel and others who campaign against a unilateral declaration, for as I have been told by people who recently met with Palestinian leaders, there is currently much excitement that a Palestinian state will be created soon. In the face of this expectation and excitement, postponing the declaration is likely to lead to resentment that could cause problems in future negotiations.
Second, Israel and the international community should not appear to be indefinitely postponing the creation of a Palestinian state —such indefinite postponement will only feed into the view that Israel wants to forever suppress the Palestinians. Along with this is the third suggestion — a clear process for the creation of a Palestinian state, with defined steps and goals, must be outlined, and the contentious issues between the two sides must be clearly stated. Finally, both sides, as well as the international community, must realize that there will never be a perfect time to negotiate an agreement nor a perfect agreement. Both sides will have to make major concessions and the leaders who do so are likely to lose a lot of political support, but it’s something that must be done sooner rather than later, for the sake of both sides. The longer Israel waits, the more likely it seems that the international community will present it with a solution that fails to resolve its major concerns.
Maggie Fried earned a Bachelor of Arts degree from Colgate University and is currently earning a master’s degree in Global Politics and Global Civil Society from the London School of Economics and Political Science. The article originally appeared on the Global Voices blog of ACCESS, a program of the American Jewish Committee. She is the daughter of Sandi and Ed Fried.
