Tuesday, October 21, 2014
5

Los argumentos en pro de Palestina

RAMALLAH – En ningún caso resultan más evidentes los agravios que perpetúan la violencia y la guerra que en la Palestina actual, pero los políticos del mundo siguen dando vueltas en torno al problema, en lugar de afrontarlo. La reciente violencia mortífera en Gaza es tan sólo la última prueba de que un pueblo que vive bajo una ocupación y un asedio necesita un horizonte político y no un simple cese el fuego: los argumentos a favor de un Estado de Palestina independiente nunca habían sido tan convincentes como en la actualidad.

La decisión del Presidente palestino, Mahmoud Abbas, de continuar con el plan para obtener una votación esta semana sobre el reconocimiento de Palestina en la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas se ha hecho realidad pese a las presiones, promesas y amenazas de Israel y algunos de sus aliados occidentales. Según esos interlocutores, en lugar de seguir el rumbo marcado por las NN.UU., los palestinos, deben seguir dependiendo de unas negociaciones asimétricas que apenas han servido más que de oportunidad para una fotografía.

La votación en las NN.UU. (que coincide con el Día Internacional de Solidaridad con el Pueblo Palestino) no concedería a Palestina la adhesión de pleno derecho, sino que la ascendería a un nivel comparable al del Vaticano, lo que permitiría a sus dirigentes políticos presentar alegaciones de crímenes de guerra israelíes ante el Tribunal Penal Internacional de La Haya.

En 1947, los sionistas de Palestina se alegraron, a raíz de la votación de la Asamblea General de las NN.UU. a favor de la división en un Estado judío y un Estado árabe. Resulta irónico que, cuando los cohetes procedentes de Gaza alcanzan los alrededores de Tel Aviv, los israelíes que celebraron la división y sus descendientes no vean la importancia de que se cumpla la otra mitad del plan de división.

Es cierto que los palestinos, que componían la inmensa mayoría de la población y eran propietarios de un porcentaje abrumadoramente mayoritario del territorio, no estaban contentos con el plan de división, que les concedió el 46 por ciento de la Palestina bajo Mandato. En la actualidad, los palestinos aspiran a obtener la estatalidad de tan sólo el 22 por ciento del territorio que había formado parte de la Palestina bajo Mandato hasta que se estableció unilateralmente a Israel en zonas mucho mayores que las concedidas por la Resolución 181 de la Asamblea General de las NN.UU. en 1947.

La aspiración de Palestina a la estatalidad dentro de las fronteras existentes el 4 de junio de 1967 se ajusta exactamente al derecho internacional. El Consejo de Seguridad de las NN.UU. resolvió en noviembre de dicho año que “la adquisición de territorio mediante la guerra” es inaceptable. Posteriores resoluciones del Consejo de Seguridad y tratados internacionales han ratificado ese principio.

De hecho, un Estado palestino basado en las fronteras de 1967 es exactamente lo que el Presidente de los Estados Unidos, Barack Obama, ha pedido. De forma semejante, la Unión Europea ha abogado desde hace mucho por la solución con dos Estados y el establecimiento de Palestina en zonas ocupadas por Israel en 1967.

Como ha dicho Abbas, la próxima votación de la Asamblea General no va encaminada a deslegitimar a Israel. Sigue a la declaración del Consejo Nacional Palestino en 1988 de un Estado palestino junto al Estado de Israel. También sigue a la Iniciativa Árabe de Paz, aprobada por la Liga Árabe en su Cumbre de Beirut de 2002 (y a la que Israel no ha respondido aún).

La Iniciativa de la Liga Árabe, que también fue aprobada por la Organización de la Conferencia Islámica, hace suya una solución con dos Estados basada en las fronteras de 1967, pero va más allá, al pedir una solución “justa” y “acordada” para la espinosa cuestión de los refugiados palestinos. Al aceptar la palabra “acordada”, los palestinos, los árabes y otros países de mayoría musulmana han admitido que Israel no reconocerá el inalienable derecho de los refugiados palestinos a regresar a sus hogares, lo que debería aplacar los temores de Israel de que el derecho de regreso acabara con su existencia como Estado judío.

Abbas irá a Nueva York con una carta aún más importante. La reciente y brutal violencia de Israel en Gaza ha unido a los palestinos, que estaban divididos en líneas partidistas. Los dirigentes de la facción de Al Fatah de Abbas, que controla la Autoridad Palestina, radicada en la Ribera Occidental, y de Hamás, radicada en Gaza, han estado reuniéndose periódicamente para aplicar el plan de reconciliación egipcio-qatarí. Presos políticos de ambos bandos han sido liberados y una delegación de alto nivel de Al Fatah acaba de visitar Gaza.

Los funcionarios de Hamás, incluido Mahmoud Ramahi, dirigente de un bloque del Consejo Nacional Palestino, han apoyado públicamente la solicitud de reconocimiento por las NN.UU. Según Musa Abu Marzook, dirigente adjunto de Hamás, su movimiento no se opone a la iniciativa diplomática de Abbas.

El de una Palestina independiente y libre junto a un Israel seguro es un plan que el mundo entero aprueba. Los palestinos han demostrado que están dispuestos a aceptar permutas de territorio de menor importancia y no descartan la posibilidad de examinar ideas creativas para resolver el problema de Jerusalén, posiblemente conforme a los criterios expuestos por el Presidente Bill Clinton de los Estados Unidos al final de su segundo mandato.

Lo que ahora se necesita más que nunca es voluntad política para dar un impulso en serio al proceso de paz. Obama, libre ahora de ataduras electorales, y la comunidad internacional deben dar una oportunidad a las pacíficas gestiones de los palestinos. Los argumentos a favor de Palestina nunca habían estado tan claros. Una votación a favor del reconocimiento de la estatalidad palestina es una votación a favor de la paz.

Traducción del inglés por Carlos Manzano.

Hide Comments Hide Comments Read Comments (5)

Please login or register to post a comment

  1. CommentedSamuel Jew

    I appreciate that all communities are imagined communities and the Palestinians are no different. At the same time, the Arab world may as well be pining for the return of the Ottoman Empire.

    Furthermore, the existence of the state of Israel is apparently ordained by God as an eschatological imperative. People of all Abrahamic faiths should celebrate it as the fulfillment of prophecy. Appeals instead to the moral authority of the UN are both laughable and unseemly.

  2. CommentedIsmail OURAICH

    Here is comment on a previous article, and which points out to the main problem to be resolved if to reach a permanent solution. This comment was in reaction to a comment by Avraam Dectis, which I copy-paste as well.

    "Avraam Dectis 1 week ago

    This conflict could be ended with a genuine peace plan that would be barely acceptable to everyone. I propose one.
    The current situation has two groups in close proximity who will continue to fight for eternity until they are separated like the quarreling children they really are - much like the Greeks and Turks ceased fighting after the Treaty of Lausanne.
    The Israelis will never go. This only leaves the Gazans.

    You cannot force people to migrate, it would be barbaric. Thus you have to bribe them.

    What bribe would be acceptable?

    Israel could offer $25,000 to every Gazan that would agree to go to another Arab country. A family of six would get $150,000. That might be acceptable.

    Israel could even sweeten the pot by offering free houses in Egypt for whomever left.

    People with immovable assets would be given at least ( or more ) fair market value for them.

    The Gazans would not like this because they would be leaving and psychologically would feel defeated.

    The Israelis would not like this because the cost would be huge and would decades to pay off the cost.

    Ultimately, however, it is the only civilized solution and the only barrier is the expense. Money is easier to replace than people.

    The alternative is that, a century from now, you will read about Palestinians and Israelis killing each other.

    Money or peace, take your pick."

    @Avraam Dectis: How about bringing a little twist to your solution of bribing Palestinians to leave their forefathers land.

    Why not do the same for the Israelis, who in fact have been "bribed", if I could use the term, to settle in a land that did not belong to them, or at least that was settled by a certain populace before the latter was forced out through well-documented terror-tactics.

    When I say that modern day Israelis have been "bribed" to settle in Palestine, it is with regard to the fact that most Jews emigrated from Europe and Ex-USSR under the threat of growing antisemitism and anti-religion bias, which reached its climax in Nazi Germany. Antisemitism is still alive in Europe, much as it was under the Inquisition, though the policies have changed, but the spirit remains the same.

    How about Europe (including Ex-USSR) bribes its Jewish citizenry to go back to their forefathers' land in which they were born for generations. Most of Israelis came from those countries under the threat as I said of growing antisemitism and the promise of material well-being.

    Now, I would argue that indeed Jews and Christian minorities in Muslim majority countries were not treated as full-fledged citizens, yet they had their rights protected more than in Europe and that is a historical fact that one can check by indulging in factual reading of trusted historical sources. The problem is that as countries in the Middle-East and North Africa started to get their independence in the post-empire era, and going into the nation-state era, European politics of hegemony that aimed at maintaining the old-paradigm of Empire (albeit through more nuanced means) have created sectarian frictions and divides that are at the sources of the current situation.
    Read more at http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/egypt-s-efforts-to-broker-a-ceasefire-in-gaza-by-itamar-rabinovich#P4jmR5vpysZu9ylK.99

  3. CommentedCher Calusa

    I agree that bilateral agreements or statehood for Palestine will not put an end to strife in the Middle East. There are still too many loose ends in Palestine. During the recent bombings the world should have noticed that the West Bank, home of the PLO was very quiet. There are likely internal struggles that are due to general suspicion and disagreement between the PLO and Hamas as indicated by the need to reinvestigate Mr. Arafat's death. What would happen if the Palestinian people themselves actually did have the right of self determination and ceased to be pawns in the world's games? The people of this world have failed to come together in order to cooperate and grow. We are facing global catastrophe environmentally, fiscally and socially as a species. World leaders don't yet share a vision of how to build a better and sustainable future. This will take a major shift in thinking. Our geographic boundaries mean little or nothing, however, our interlocking connections on many levels will dictate how we succeed or fail.

  4. CommentedChris Milton

    It's worth noting that the UK's price of voting for Palestine's observer status is that they forgo the right to join either the International Criminal Court of the International Court of Justice.

  5. CommentedZsolt Hermann

    I would not want to argue with the main part of the article as it is interpreted very differently depending on which side the observer is standing on. I would like to cite only one sentence:
    "...An independent and free Palestine alongside a safe and secure Israel is a plan upon which the entire world agrees..."
    Well this statement is clearly not true. Since the formation of the Jewish state in 1948 neither the Palestinians nor any major Arabic country apart from Jordan and Egypt (as a result of military defeat) accepted Israel's' right to exist either in a "safe and secure" or in any other way.
    And not only they do not accept the "right to exist" their openly declared aim is to wipe the country off the map killing all of the inhabitants (and other Jews in other parts of the world).
    There were many instances starting from the initial 1948 partition, when the 2 state solution could have been accepted, offers were tabled from Israel extremely close to the present Palestinian demand.
    The problem is that the Palestinian people are used as live baits or proxies by much stronger and larger countries to exert pressure on Israel, which pressure Israel handles rightly or wrongly depending on who observers it and how measurements are made.
    The point is that the situation will be never solved by simple Palestinian statehood, or bilateral agreements.
    Any solution would need to involve the whole region, and even non-regional powers also "assisting" in the background.
    For that to happen everybody without exception would need to understand the principles and necessities of a global, interconnected world where everybody depends on everybody else, and we simply cannot "wipe off", or oppress, incarcerate nations, cultures either physically or ideologically without inflicting the greatest harm on ourselves.
    None of the seemingly unsolvable crisis and flash-point in the world today can be solved without this understanding.
    Humanity has become a single, interconnected organism whether we want to accept it or not, and if we want to build a sustainable future we have to adapt accordingly.

Featured