BOSCMUN 2014
TOPIC MANUAL
FOR
PALESTINIAN STATEHOOD
Subtopics:
1. Palestinian Refugees & Israeli
Settlements
2. Peace Initiatives
3. Jerusalem
4. Water rights
"The heroes of the world community are not those who withdraw when difficulties ensue,
not those who can envision neither the prospect of success nor the consequence of failure
-- but those who stand the heat of battle, the fight for world peace through the United
Nations."
-- Hubert H. Humphrey (38th US Vice President)
Topic #3
Palestinian Statehood
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VOCABULARY
2
TIMELINE
3
GEOGRAPHY
4-5
SUBTOPIC #1 – PALESTINIAN REFUGEES & ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS
6-9
SUBTOPIC #2 – PEACE INITIATIVES
9-12
SUBTOPIC #3 – JERUSALEM
12-13
SUBTOPIC #4 – WATER RIGHTS
13-16
CURRENT EVENTS
16-19
WORKS CITED
20
VOCABULARY
1.
Al-Aqsa Mosque
14.
Land for peace
2.
Aquifers
15.
Occupied Territories
3.
Arab League
16.
Oslo Accords
4.
Camp David Accords
17.
Palestinian Authority / PLO
5.
Diaspora
18.
Quartet
6.
Dome of the Rock Mosque
19.
Refugees
7.
Fatah
20.
Right of return
8.
Gaza strip
21.
Roadmap to peace
9.
Golan Heights
22. Sabra and Shatila
10. Hamas
23. Settlements
11. Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount
24.
West Bank
12. Hezbollah
25.
Western Wall (Wailing Wall)
13. Intifada
26.
Zionism
2
Palestinian Statehood
TIMELINE
Ancient History
2000-1800 BCE
63 BCE
27-30 CE
70 CE
133 CE
622 CE
640 CE
mid 1000-1200 CE
1517
CE
Modern History
1917
1920
1921
1930-39
1939
1939-45
1947
May 14, 1948
May 15, 1948
Dec. 1948
1956-57
1967
Nov. 1967
1972
1973
1978
1982
Sept. 1982
1987
1993
2000
2002
2003
2004
2005
2007
2008
2009
Abraham moves from Mesopotamia to Canaan
Rome conquers Jerusalem
Jesus life and teachings in Canaan
Jewish revolt: Rome destroys the Temple and expels Jews
2nd Jewish revolt---Judea renamed Palestine
Mohammad founds religion of Islam
Arabs conquer Jerusalem
Crusades between Muslims and Christians for control of the Holy
Land
Ottomans conquer Holy Land
Balfour Declaration
League of Nations grants British & French mandates to divide and
govern former Ottoman Empire
British mandate of Palestine created west of Jordan River (13% of
the population is Jewish)
Jews flee Hitler---Jewish population in Palestine swells
Britain limits immigration to 15,000 Jews per year to Palestine
WWII and the Holocaust
Britain ends its mandate---UN votes to partition the territory into
separate Palestinian & Jewish states -- Jews accept, Arabs do not
British troops leave, Jews declare their independence, U.S.
recognizes the new nation
Arab states attack Israel
UN Resolution 194
Suez Canal Crisis
Six Day War
UN Resolution 242
Munich Olympics---terrorists kill 11 Israeli athletes
Yom Kippur War
Camp David Accord
Israel attacks PLO in Lebanon
Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon permits massacres of
Palestinian civilians in Shatila and Sabra refugee camps in Lebanon
Intifada in West Bank and Gaza
Oslo Accords
Second Intifada begins
Arab Peace Initiative
Roadmap to Peace
Yasser Arafat dies
Israel withdraws from the Gaza Strip
Palestinian movement splits; Hamas seizes control of Gaza
Israel & Hamas strike at each other across Gaza border
UNSC passes resolution 1860, w/14 votes in favor & only USA
abstaining, that "stresses the urgency of, and calls for an
immediate, durable and fully respected ceasefire, leading to the full
withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza"
3
Palestinian Statehood
GEOGRAPHY
4
Palestinian Statehood
5
GEOGRAPHY
Israel and the Occupied Territories 2002
Israel:
Capital: Disputed. Israel claims Jerusalem as its capital, but most
countries have embassies in Tel Aviv.
Area: 8,019 sq mi, slightly smaller than New Jersey. Hot and dry
in southern and eastern desert areas. Negev desert in the south;
low coastal plain; central mountains; Jordan Rift Valley.
Population: 5,938,093 (July 2001 est.).
Gaza Strip:
Israeli occupied territory with limited Palestinian selfgovernment.
Area: 139 sq mi, mostly limestone hills.
Population: 1,178,119 (2001 est.)
West Bank:
Israeli occupied territory with areas of limited Palestinian selfgovernment.
Area: 2,263 sq mi, flat to rolling sand- and dune-covered coastal
plain.
Population: 2,090,713 (2001 est.) note: 176,000 Israeli settlers in
the West Bank, about 6,900 in the Gaza Strip, about 20,000 in the
Israeli-occupied Golan Heights (August 2000 est.).
Palestinian Statehood
6
SUBTOPIC #1 -- PALESTINIAN REFUGEES
& IRAELI SETTLEMENTS
Palestinian Refugees
The fate of Palestinian Refugees and the future of peace in the Middle East are closely ties together. The problem
of the refugees and the right of return presents formidable obstacles to the achievement of a lasting, peaceful
resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The problem is significant not only because of the large number of
refugees but also because of the need for a multilateral solution that is acceptable to all the countries in the region that
have been affected by the issue.
In the negotiations for peace between Palestine and Israeli parties are likely to find it especially difficult to arrive at
mutually satisfactory solutions of the refugee problem. For the Palestinian refugees their right to return to their homes
or receive compensation for their loss is seen as a fundamental issue that must be resolved. Israel refuses to consider
the idea of allowing the refugees to return in mass and reclaim their land as it sees them as a threat to the Jewish state.
These are two completely opposed views that result from the history of conflict in the region. The Palestinians feel that
they were forcibly expelled by Jewish forces or left in a panic flight to escape massacres committed by Jewish forces.
While at the same time Israelis see the situation as a result of the war that the Arab nations launched against Israel
making the refugee a problem of the region not Israel.
There exist many different counts of the actual number of refugees. Any solution to the refugee issue will be
expensive and place a great strain on any country, that must bear it. Currently refugees are spread out over all the
countries in the region under the supervision of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in
the Near East (UNRWA) that provides education, health, and relief and social services to 4.6 million registered
Palestine refugees in Jordan, Lebanon, the Syrian Arab Republic, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
Besides the
political and economic sides of this issue is the fact that the Palestinian refugees are frequently denied basic human
rights because they lack permanent citizenship. This prevents them from attending school, receiving health care,
getting jobs, participating in government and owning property. It also severely limits their freedom of movement in
and between countries.
Finding a solution to the Palestinian refugee problem is a very complicate and difficult-to-achieve goal. The large
numbers of refugees complicate the problem along with the number of international players in this issue, and the
extreme difficulty of finding a realistic and satisfactory solution. If peace is to replace violence in the Middle East, the
refugee problem has to be solved. . .
Brief History of the Problem
The roots of the problem go deep into the turbulent history of both the Palestinians and the Israelis. Most recently
it is a result of the conflict between Israel and its neighbors during the 1940’s. Starting in the later half of the 19th
century foreign immigration to Palestine increased significantly including many Zionists seeking to establish a Jewish
homeland. During World War I this area suffered as it became the sight for many campaigns of that war and eventually
came under the control of Great Britain. In 1917 British issued the Balfour Declaration in support of a “national
homeland for the Jewish people” in Palestine. Following World War II on November 29, 1947, the UN General
Assembly voted to partition Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish state, while Jerusalem and its environs were to be
under UN control. This division was biased towards the Jewish minority that received not only a larger piece but also
the more fertile areas. This led to armed conflict between he Zionist and the Palestinians and Arabs. Then in 1948 the
state of Israel was declared and recognized by the major world powers. War broke out between Israel and the
Palestinians backed by Arab armies of the region. After a year Israel emerged triumphant and in control of the rest of
Palestine. Palestine had ceased to exist.
This is not the end of the plight of the Palestinians, for in 1967 Israel launched a surprise attack on the Arab
countries, fearing that an Arab invasion was imminent. This resulted in a surprisingly quick 6-day war with Israel the
victor and occupier of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, the Sinai desert, and the Golan Heights. As a result about 400,00
Palestinian refugees were forced out into the neighboring Arab countries mainly into refugee camps (Topic Briefs).
Who is a Palestinian refugee? Under UNRWA's operational definition, “Palestine refugees are persons whose
normal place of residence was Palestine between June 1946 and May 1948, who lost both their homes and means of
livelihood as a result of the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict. UNRWA's services are available to all those living in its area of
operations who meet this definition, who are registered with the Agency and who need assistance. UNRWA's
definition of a refugee also covers the descendants through the male line of persons who became refugees in 1948. The
Palestinian Statehood
7
number of registered Palestine refugees has subsequently grown from 914,000 in 1950 to more than 4.6 million in
2008, and continues to rise due to natural population growth (UNRWA).”
Past United Nations Action
There are two main areas of action taken by the UN in relation to the Palestinian refugee problem. The first is
providing humanitarian assistance to the refugees mainly through UNRWA. The second is issuing several UN
Security Council resolutions that ask for the restoration of the refugees to their homes. Following the 1948 Arab-Israeli
conflict, UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, was
established by United Nations General Assembly resolution 302 (IV) of December 8, 1949 to carry out direct relief and
works programs for Palestine refugees. The Agency began operations on May 1, 1950. In the absence of a solution to
the Palestine refugee program, the General Assembly has repeatedly renewed UNRWA’s mandate, most recently
extending it until June 30, 2002.
Since its establishment, the Agency has delivered its services in times of relative calm in the Middle East, and in
times of hostilities. It has fed, housed and clothed tens of thousands of fleeing refugees and at the same time educated
and given health care to hundreds of thousands of young refugees. UNRWA is unique in terms of its long-standing
commitment to one group of refugees and its contributions to the welfare and human development of four generations
of Palestine refugees. Originally envisaged as a temporary organization, the Agency has gradually adjusted its
programs to meet the changing needs of the refugees. Today, UNRWA is the main provider of basic serviceseducation, health, relief and social services- to over 3.7 million.
There is a series of United Nations and Security Council resolutions issued since 1948 that have recognized
Palestinian nationhood, sovereignty and right of return. In December 1948 the Security Council unanimously adopted
resolution 194, maintaining that Palestinian refugees wishing to return to their homes, “and live in peace with their
neighbors,” must be allowed to do so “at the nearest opportunity possible.” It also recognized the right of Palestinians
to compensation if they did not wish to return. Israel’s membership in the UN was contingent upon it agreeing to
Resolution 194 when they were entered Israel refused to comply with resolution. This lead to the adoption of
Resolution 513 which was to allow for assistance to refugees in building homes else where if they did not return to
their original homes. In 1973, the General Assembly issued Resolution 3089, reiterating the Palestinian refugees’ right
of return. This led to the adoption Resolution 242, which established the concept of land for peace as a basis for a
solution tot he refugee issue. This is not a complete list of all UN resolutions or actions by the UN, but it shows the
main attempts at solving the issue and dealing with the humanitarian concerns.
Positions
In discussing final status issues, Palestinians and Israelis approach the question of the refugees and the right of
return from radically different perspectives. The Palestinians narrative maintains that the Zionists forcibly expelled the
Arab refugees in 1948. The Palestinians insist on the right of the refugees to return to their homes or, for those who
choose not to do so, to accept compensation. And they demand that Israel unilaterally acknowledge its complete moral
responsibility for the injustice of the refugees’ expulsion.
In contrast, the Israeli narrative rejects the refugees’ right of return. Israel argues that it was the Arabs who caused
the Palestinian refugee problem, by rejecting the creation of the State of Israel and declaring war upon it -- a war
which, like most wars, created refugee problems, including a Jewish one. Israel sees the return of Palestinian refugees
as an existential threat, insofar as it would undermine the Jewish character and the viability of the state (Topic Briefs).
Statement by UNRWA Commissioner-General, Karen AbuZayd
United Nations Security Council Closed Consultations Session
New York, 27 January 2009
Mr. President, distinguished members of the Security Council:
At the outset, allow me to thank you for your kind invitation to address you today on the humanitarian situation in
Gaza. I am honored to be the first Commissioner-General of UNRWA to be given this privilege. I also want to express
my appreciation for the amount of attention the Council has devoted to the Gaza conflict. . . .
I come to you from UNRWA Headquarters in Gaza where I spent the first week of the recent war and the first
week after the cease fire. I bring with me perspectives from our sixty year old humanitarian and human development
Agency whose mandate is to assist and protect a population of 4.6 million refugees in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and the
occupied Palestinian territory. . . .
In my tours around Gaza since the ceasefire of 18 January, I have been deeply saddened to see what appears to
have been systematic destruction to schools, universities, residential buildings, factories, shops and farms. I have
Palestinian Statehood
8
observed the atmosphere of shock and sorrow among the people of Gaza. . . . There is rage against the attackers for
often failing to distinguish between military targets and civilians and there is also resentment against the international
community for having allowed first the siege and then the war to go on for so long. . . .
As to the broader implications of the recent experience in Gaza, it is worth recalling that for more than sixty years,
the Security Council has wrestled with the issues of Palestinians and Palestine refugees as classic questions of
international peace and security. What we witnessed in Gaza seared the global conscience with harrowing images of
broken bodies and shattered homes, of thousands of Palestinian and tens of Israeli civilians – men, women and children
– wounded, dying and fleeing from indiscriminate violence. The guns have fallen silent, but the images linger,
reminding us of the futility of seeking military solutions to political problems and of the perils of political inaction. . . .
Equally disturbing is that besides its devastating impact on civilian lives and infrastructure, the conflict has placed in
further jeopardy the authority of international law in the Middle East. It has raised hard questions about the ability of
the community of States to be effective in its role as the custodian of international legality in this particular regional
context (AbuZayd).
Israeli Settlements
Israel has pursued a policy of building settlements on the
West Bank for security and religious reasons. Settlements and
their adjoining territory cover large parts of the West Bank.
Currently 59% of the West bank is officially under Israeli civil
and security control. Another 23% of it is under Palestinian civil
control, but Israeli security control. The remainder of the territory
governed by the Palestinian National Authority (Key Maps).
is
Colonization of Palestine precludes peace
March 17, 2006 Jimmy Carter
For more than a quarter century, Israeli policy has been in
conflict with that of the United States and the international
community. Israel's occupation of Palestine has obstructed a
comprehensive peace agreement in the Holy Land, regardless of
whether Palestinians had no formalized government, one headed
by Yasser Arafat or Mahmoud Abbas, or with Abbas as president and Hamas controlling the parliament and cabinet.
The unwavering U.S. position since Dwight Eisenhower's administration has been that Israel's borders coincide
with those established in 1949, and since 1967, the universally adopted UN Resolution 242 has mandated Israel's
withdrawal from the occupied territories. This policy was reconfirmed even by Israel in 1978 and 1993, and
emphasized by all American presidents, including George W. Bush. As part of the Quartet, including Russia, the UN
and the European Union, he has endorsed a "road map" for peace. But Israel has officially rejected its basic premises
with patently unacceptable caveats and prerequisites.
. . . The preeminent obstacle to peace is Israel's colonization of Palestine. There were just a few hundred settlers in
the West Bank and Gaza when I became president, but the Likud government expanded settlement activity after I left
office. President Ronald Reagan condemned this policy, and reaffirmed that Resolution 242 remained "the foundation
stone of America's Middle East peace effort." President George H.W. Bush even threatened to reduce American aid to
Israel. Although President Bill Clinton made strong efforts to promote peace, a massive increase of settlers occurred
during his administration, to 225,000, mostly while Ehud Barak was prime minister. Their best official offer to the
Palestinians was to withdraw 20 percent of them, leaving 180,000 in 209 settlements, covering about 5 percent of the
occupied land. The 5 percent figure is grossly misleading, with surrounding areas taken or earmarked for expansion,
roadways joining settlements with each other and to Jerusalem, and wide arterial swaths providing water, sewage,
electricity and communications. This intricate honeycomb divides the entire West Bank into multiple fragments, often
uninhabitable or even unreachable. Recently, Israeli leaders have decided on unilateral actions without involving either
the United States or the Palestinians, with withdrawal from Gaza as the first step. As presently circumscribed and
isolated, without access to the air, sea or the West Bank, Gaza is a nonviable economic and political entity.
The future of the West Bank is equally dismal. Especially troublesome is Israel's construction of huge concrete
dividing walls in populated areas and high fences in rural areas - located entirely on Palestinian territory and often with
Palestinian Statehood
9
deep intrusions to encompass more land and settlements. The wall is designed to surround a truncated Palestine
completely, and a network of exclusive highways will cut across what is left of Palestine to connect Israel with the
Jordan River Valley. This will never be acceptable either to Palestinians or to the international community, and will
inevitably precipitate increased tension and violence within Palestine, and stronger resentment and animosity from the
Arab world against America, which will be held accountable for the plight of the Palestinians.
Acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and others pointed out years ago that Israel's permanent occupation will be
increasingly difficult as the relative number of Jewish citizens decreases demographically both within Israel and in
Palestine. This is obvious to most Israelis, who also view this dominant role as a distortion of their ancient moral and
religious values. Over the years, opinion polls have consistently shown that about 60 percent of Israelis favor
withdrawing from the West Bank in exchange for permanent peace. Similarly, an overwhelming number of both
Israelis and Palestinians want a durable two-state solution. Casualties have increased during the past few years as the
occupying forces imposed tighter controls. From September 2000 until March 2006, 3,982 Palestinians and 1,084
Israelis were killed in the conflict, and this includes many children: 708 Palestinians and 123 Israelis.
There is little doubt that accommodation with the Palestinians can bring full Arab recognition of Israel and its right
to live in peace. Any rejectionist policies of Hamas or any terrorist group will be overcome by an overall Arab
commitment to restrain further violence and to promote the well-being of the Palestinian people. Down through the
years, I have seen despair and frustration evolve into optimism and progress and, even now, we need not give up hope
for permanent peace for Israelis and freedom and justice for Palestinians if three basic premises are honored:
Israel's right to exist - and to live in peace - must be recognized and accepted by Palestinians and all other
neighbors; the killing of innocent people by suicide bombs or other acts of violence cannot be condoned; and
Palestinians must live in peace and dignity, and permanent Israeli settlements on their land are a major obstacle to this
goal.
Former U.S. president Jimmy Carter led The Carter Center/National Democratic Institute observation of the Palestinian elections in January (Carter).
SUBTOPIC #2 -- PEACE INITIATIVES
Camp David Accords (September 1978)
 Treaty Participants:
Egyptian President, Anwar Sadat; Israeli Prime Minister,
Menachem Begin; President Carter of the U.S.

Terms:
Israel returned the Sinai Peninsula and Egypt recognized
Israel’s right to exist. The U.S. increased its military aid to both countries.
Oslo Accords (September 1993)
 Treaty Participants:
Yassir Arafat leader of the PLO; Israeli Prime Minister
Yitzhak Rabin; President Clinton of the U.S.

Terms:
Arafat renounces armed conflict (terrorism) and removed anti-Israel language from the
PLO charter. Israel recognized the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people
and allowed self-rule in Gaza and Jericho.
Palestinian Statehood
10
The Arab Peace Initiative
 Proposed by Saudi Arabia -- Also known as Beirut Declaration. Adopted by Arab League in 2002.
The Council of Arab States at the Summit Level at its 14th Ordinary Session,
Reaffirming the resolution taken in June 1996 at the Cairo Extra-Ordinary Arab Summit that a
just and comprehensive peace in the Middle East is the strategic option of the Arab countries, to be
achieved in accordance with international legality, and which would require a comparable
commitment on the part of the Israeli government,
Having listened to the statement made by his royal highness Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz,
crown prince of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, in which his highness presented his initiative calling
for full Israeli withdrawal from all the Arab territories occupied since June 1967, in implementation
of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, reaffirmed by the Madrid Conference of 1991 and the
land-for-peace principle, and Israel's acceptance of an independent Palestinian state with East
Jerusalem as its capital, in return for the establishment of normal relations in the context of a
comprehensive peace with Israel,
Emanating from the conviction of the Arab countries that a military solution to the conflict will
not achieve peace or provide security for the parties, the council:
1. Requests Israel to reconsider its policies and declare that a just peace is its strategic option as well.
2. Further calls upon Israel to affirm:
I- Full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian
Golan Heights, to the June 4, 1967 lines as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories
in the south of Lebanon.
II- Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in
accordance with U.N. General Assembly Resolution 194.
III- The acceptance of the establishment of a sovereign independent Palestinian state on the
Palestinian territories occupied since June 4, 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East
Jerusalem as its capital.
3. Consequently, the Arab countries affirm the following:
I- Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and
provide security for all the states of the region.
II- Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace.
4. Assures the rejection of all forms of Palestinian patriation which conflict with the special
circumstances of the Arab host countries.
5. Calls upon the government of Israel and all Israelis to accept this initiative in order to safeguard
the prospects for peace and stop the further shedding of blood, enabling the Arab countries and
Israel to live in peace and good neighbourliness and provide future generations with security,
stability and prosperity.
6. Invites the international community and all countries and organisations to support this initiative.
7. Requests the chairman of the summit to form a special committee composed of some of its
concerned member states and the secretary general of the League of Arab States to pursue the
necessary contacts to gain support for this initiative at all levels, particularly from the United
Nations, the Security Council, the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the Muslim
states and the European Union (Whitaker).
The Roadmap for Peace
What exactly is the so-called roadmap and how has it been doing?
o Launched in June 2003, it’s intended to be a goal-driven, phase-by-phase route to ending the conflict
between Israelis and Palestinians within 2 years. It was also meant to have specific target dates,
benchmarks and reciprocal confidence-building measures built in.
o The plan was pieced together by diplomats from the United States, Russia, the European Union and
the United Nations (the Quartet), and was amended after consultations with Israelis and Palestinians.
Palestinian Statehood
o
11
Though still backed by the US, the roadmap has failed to take off since its launch. The Palestinian
militant groups declared a temporary ceasefire, but this has not held. The suicide bombings, though
less frequent, continue. Israel has reneged on commitments to pull down un-authorised settlements and
has continued with its policy of assassinating political and military leaders of militant groups. (Q & A:
What's in the Mid-East roadmap).
The Roadmap for Peace
Bureau of Public Affairs
Washington, DC
July 16, 2003
"The Roadmap represents a starting point toward achieving the vision of two states, a secure State of Israel and a
viable, peaceful, democratic Palestine. It is a framework for progress towards lasting peace and security in the
Middle East..."
--President George W. Bush
PHASE I: Ending Terror and Violence, Normalizing Palestinian Life, and Building Palestinian Institutions
* Palestinian leadership issues unequivocal statement reiterating Israel’s right to exist in peace and security
and calling for an immediate end to all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere.
* Israeli leadership issues unequivocal statement affirming its commitment to the two-state vision of an
independent, viable, sovereign Palestinian state living in peace and security with Israel, and calling for an
immediate end to violence against Palestinians anywhere.
* Palestinian institution-building includes drafting a constitution for Palestinian statehood and conducting free
elections.
* Israel withdraws from Palestinian areas occupied since September 2000, as security progresses, freezes all
settlement activity, and dismantles outposts. It takes measures to improve the Palestinian humanitarian
situation.
PHASE II: Transition
* An independent Palestinian state is created with provisional borders and attributes of sovereignty. The
Palestinian leadership continues to act decisively against terror and to build a practicing democracy based on
tolerance and liberty.
* An international conference will be convened by the Quartet after the Palestinian elections to support
Palestinian economic recovery. Multilateral Middle East issues also will be addressed, including water,
environment, economic development, refugees, and arms control issues.
PHASE III: Permanent Status Agreement and End of Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
* Palestinian reform is consolidated and its institutions stabilized while effective security performance is
sustained. Israeli-Palestinian negotiations aim at a permanent status agreement in 2005.
* A second international conference convened by the Quartet leads to a final, permanent status resolution on
borders, Jerusalem, refugees, and settlements. It also supports a comprehensive peace settlement between Israel
and Lebanon and Israel and Syria, as soon as possible.
The United States and the Roadmap
 President Bush's vision of two states living side-by-side in peace and security as articulated in his June 24 speech,
was the Roadmap foundation.
 The U.S. worked extensively with Russia, the United Nations, and the European Union (the Quartet) to design the
Roadmap, and will work with them to advance it.
 President Bush traveled to the region in early June to initiate the Roadmap process.
 Secretary Powell traveled to the region in May and late June to help restore dialogue between
 the Israelis and the Palestinians and advance the Roadmap process (Roadmap).
Palestinian Statehood
SUBTOPIC #3 – JERUSALEM
Jerusalem is considered holy by
three religions that make up more
than half of the world’s population:
Judaism, Christianity and Islam. In
the most dramatic example of how
religious claims to the city literally
overlap, Islam’s Al-Aqsa mosque
and the nearby Dome of the Rock sit
atop the site that held the Jews’ 2nd
Temple before Romans destroyed it.
A remaining wall of the 2nd temple,
revered by Jews as the Western
(Wailing) Wall, is a stone’s throw
from the place where Muslim
worshippers congregate for prayers
at the Al Aqsa Mosque.” The
Temple Mount is important to
Orthodox Jews because according to
their prophets the promised Messiah,
who will bring peace on earth,
cannot return until the temple is
rebuilt on this holy site.
However, in order to rebuild the temple on the Temple Mount, two Muslim mosques would have to be
destroyed. One of those mosques is the Dome of the Rock mosque, holy to Muslims because this is
where the prophet Muhammad is said to have ascended to heaven on the night of miracles.
The 1947 U.N. proposal to provide the area into Jewish and Arab nations called for Jerusalem to be
under international control. This vision was never realized. The Arabs rejected the U.N. proposal and
declared war, while the Jews accepted it and declared statehood. In the fighting that ensued, Jerusalem
was divided east and west between Jordan and Israel. Israel took control of Jerusalem in the Six-Day War
of 1967 and has held the city since. Israel claims it as its “eternal” capital, though most nations’ embassies
are in Tel Aviv. Israel has opposed any re-division of Jerusalem. Palestinians have said they cannot
accept a final settlement with Israel that does not include Jerusalem as their capital. In peace talks in
2000-01, the idea of a Palestinian capital in east Jerusalem, along with some sort of Muslim sovereignty
over the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock, was discussed but not finalized (Israeli-Palestinian
Conflict).
12
Palestinian Statehood
13
Eviction in East Jerusalem
February 24, 2009
More than one and a half thousand Palestinians living in East Jerusalem have been told they will be evicted from
their homes. Israel has ordered 88 Palestinian homes to be demolished under the premise that they were built illegally
and without permits in East Jerusalem's Silwan neighborhood. But under international law, Israel's claim to the
neighborhood itself is illegal since it is not recognised by world powers as part of the Israeli capital.
In forming Israel's next government, Benyamin Netanyahu, who opposes the two-state solution and supports the
expansion of West Bank settlements, hopes to stabilise a coalition government with the support of Tzipi Livni's centrist
Kadima party. If he fails, he will be forced to rely on a narrow coalition of right-wing and religious parties that may
mean more Palestinians evicted from their homes illegally. The EU has voiced concerns that these developments may
halt peace talks with the Palestinians. Israel's ties with Washington may also be harmed as Barack Obama, who
supports a two-state solution and the ending of illegal settlements, is eager to pursue a peace deal immediately. If
Netanyahu is unable to secure a broad-based unity government the prospects of working towards a peace process with
his US counterparts may become even more elusive. While Israeli authorities suggested in a council meeting that they
may consider relocating the families to a nearby area – agreements have yet to be made. Is this another Israeli attempt
to Judize the occupied city?
What will be the future of Jerusalem? Does the two state solution still stand a chance? And is a peace process
possible under a right-wing Israeli government (Eviction)?
SUBTOPIC #4 – WATER RIGHTS
Introduction
One of the most significant problems facing the Middle East region is a lack of water resources a problem that is
heightened by a growing population and tensions over allocation. The Middle East being an arid region faces not only
a lack of rain fall but also a lack of rivers and underground aquifers. Heightening the problem is that many of the
regions conflicts have been attributed to disputes over control of the little water resources that do exist. In addition to
the potential for conflict over the resource it is becoming clear that under existing uses there simply will not be enough
water for the growing population. The problem is a combination of allocation issues and use issue, both of which need
to be addressed to solve the problem of the area.
The Middle East region is facing major water constraints with only Turkey, Iran, and the Sudan having water
consumption levels about the currently accepted minimum. The entire region is facing a critical shortage because there
is simply not enough water to go around, and claims and counterclaims have inflamed already emotional sentiments.
The most severely affected area is Gaza, which faces problems of contamination and salinity in the little water it
controls. In Gaza alone the lack of water affects almost a million people, many of the refugees. Despite the lack of
water resource the little that does exist has been over-exploited by an ever increasing population and inefficient and
wasteful use, irrigation systems are inefficient and half of all urban supplies are lost through leakage. The uncontrolled
dumping of water increasingly contaminates the aquifers, rivers and reservoirs in Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia and Egypt.
The Middle East serves as an important example of what happens when water use exceeds supply because it is the first
major region in the world to run out of water.
The tensions surrounding the allocation of water and the control of water rights increase the already heightened
tensions in the area and serve as a potential source of conflict. Israel is involved in a succession of water disputes with
Syria, Lebanon and Jordan, as well as with the Palestinian Authority (PA). . . . As populations increase at a rapid pacethe equation will become more intractable, especially since most of those involved are wary of one another if not
downright suspicious. Water supply has become part of the volatile region’s strategic equation, with Israel, Turkey and
Egypt the controlling powers of the main river basins- the Jordan and the Litani in Lebanon, the Euphrates and the
Tigris, and the Nile- insisting their requirements take precedence over other claimants. With all these disputes and
conflicting claims many feel that the next war in the Middle East will be over water. Water is becoming the most
precious commodity in the region for almost al have less than they need and all need more to support their growing
populations and economies. According to Ahmad Abu el Shamat, a Syrian professor of economics and international
law, “the water issue has emerged as one of the most urgent problems that has threatened Arab security over the past
two decades because more then 85% of Arab water resources originate from non-Arab lands.”
In a arid area water is always important and a potential source of conflict but in the Middle East right now the
situation is becoming critical. There simply is not enough water in the region to support the growth of the population
and economies of all the countries. The little water that does exist is under increasing threat of contamination from
pollution or seawater seepage either of which makes it unusable for irrigation or human consumption. The water that
remains is not used efficiently; instead it is wasted through leakage and farming practices that allow most of it to
Palestinian Statehood
14
evaporate way. This puts great pressure on countries to secure all the water they can leading to tensions over
disputed border claims and issues for those down stream if the water is not allowed to flow at normal rates as a result
of up stream uses.
This is a problem that must be addressed not only to solve for the immediate tensions in the area but to also
provide for the future population of the area. If this issue is not addressed in a cooperative and regional manner the
water that is there now will be used up or become unsuitable for use and there is a great chance for there to be another
regional war.
Brief History of the Problem
This history of the water problem in the Middle East is tied to disputed borders that were determined by far off
powers or recent military conquest. It is an issue that gets tied up in both strategic and cultural issues. The area is also
suffering the worst drought in six decades.
As mentioned in the Bible, conflicts over the Jordan River have occurred since inhabitants moved to the areas in
ancient times . . . The recent conflict between Jordan and Israel dates back to the establishment of the State of Israel in
1948. . . . Israeli fears that Jordan and Syria were planning to divert the headwaters of the Jordan and Syria were seen
by some as a prime cause of the Arab-Israeli war in 1967 and many believe Israel’s presence in south Lebanon was
motivated as much by a desire to control the Litani River as to maintain a security zone against cross-border raids.
These conflicts have been aggravated by the lack of clear boundaries and rights between the countries of the area. .
. . The borders were drawn up by sovereign powers following the first world war and reflected their interests not
necessarily those of the people who actually lived there. The 1923 border came out of seven years of negotiations
between France and Britain, the mandatory powers for Syria and Palestine respectively . . . As the chief British
negotiator Lt. Col. S.F. Newcombe put it: “ Road rights for the French and water rights for Palestine.” From this
starting point many wars have been fought making the determination of actual borders even harder. . . . To complicate
matters many of the aquifers are shared between countries and are being over exploited by both sides.
Past United Nations Action
The UN, the World Bank and other organizations have launched efforts to bring governments together to rethink
water policies and face the harsh reality of the disaster that stares them in the face if they do not work together.
However, given the deep-rooted hostilities that still exist in the region, it could be a long time before a workable joint
effort on water management and sharing by the countries if the region could emerge. Beyond this the UN is involved
with the refugees of the area one of the groups most seriously hurt by the lack of water.
Proposed Solutions
Solutions for the problem must address both allocation and use issues. There is simply not enough water to go
around and even if all available water was divided up fairly and the borders were not contested many would be left
with out enough. The first step to be taken is to get the claims to water resolved. With guarantees made that those who
control the source of the water will not deny it to those down stream. Equally important is developing more efficient
used of the water and implementing programs to protect the little water that exists from pollutions and over
exploitation. This will mean new ways of irrigating, fixing city water systems and reforming water use practices. This
solution will probably require regional cooperation and a sharing of technology.
An alternative solution is the investment in Desalination. This is an expensive option that so far only some of the
Gulf states have been able to afford. The World Bank estimates the regional states would have to invest $45-60 billion
in water over the 10 years from 1996 to achieve an integrated water management system; that is far beyond their
means.
Palestinian Statehood
15
Positions
Israel, gripped like the rest of the Middle East by the worst drought in six decades, tried to reduce the water flow to
Jordan from the Yarmouk River earlier this year (1999). It was forced to rescind that move- albeit only for 1999rather than jeopardize its 1994 peace treaty with the Hashemite kingdom, its closest Arab partner.
The Arab League, meanwhile, has accused Israel of stealing underground water in the West Bank and selling a
fifth of it back to the Palestinians.
The shortage of water is a global problem that is even starting to affect water-rich countries such as the USA. Yet
it is most acute in the Middle East, where the problem increasingly resonates with political and security challenges.
Many see it as a potential cause for war as populations swell while water sources, particularly underground aquifers,
steadily diminish (Topic Briefs).
BBC News: Obstacles to peace: Water
By Martin Asser
The Arab-Israeli dispute is a conflict about land - and maybe just as crucially the water which flows through that land.
The Six-Day War in 1967 arguably had its origins in a water dispute: moves to divert the River Jordan, Israel's
main source of drinking water. Years of skirmishes and sabre rattling culminated in all-out war, with Israel quadrupling
the territory it controlled and gaining complete control of double the resources of fresh water.
A country needs water to survive and develop. In Israel's history, it has needed water to make feasible the
W
influx of huge numbers of Jewish immigrants. Therefore, on the margins of one of the most arid environments on a
earth, the available water system had to support not just the indigenous population, mainly Palestinian peasant farmers,
t
but also hundreds of thousands of immigrants. In addition to their sheer numbers, citizens of the new state were intent
e
on conducting water-intensive commercial agricultural such as growing bananas and citrus fruits.
r
Shared water
c
Israel says the 1967 war was forced upon it by the imminent threat of hostile Arab countries and there was no
a
intention to occupy more land or resources. But the war's outcome left Israel occupying an area not far short of the
r
territory claimed by the founders of the Zionist movement at the beginning of the 20th Century. In 1919, the Zionist r
delegation at the Paris Peace Conference said the Golan Heights, Jordan valley, what is now the West Bank, as well as
i
Lebanon's river Litani were "essential for the necessary economic foundation of the country. Palestine must have... the
e
control of its rivers and their headwaters".
r
In the 1967 war Israel gained exclusive control of the waters of the West Bank and the Sea of Galilee, although not
:
the Litani. Those resources - the West Bank's mountain aquifer and the Sea of Galilee - give Israel about 60% of its
fresh water, a billion cubic metres per year. Heated arguments rage about the rights to the mountain aquifer. Israel, and
M
Israeli settlements, take about 80% of the aquifer's flow, leaving the Palestinians with 20%. Israel says the proportiona
of water it uses has not changed substantially since the 1950s. The rain which replenishes the aquifer may fall on then
occupied territory, but the water does flow down into pre-1967 Israel. But the Palestinians say they are prevented from
y
using their own water resources by a belligerent military power, forcing hundreds of thousands of people to buy water
from their occupiers at inflated prices. Moreover, Israel allocates its citizens, including those living in settlements in P
a
the West Bank deemed illegal under international law, with between three and five times more water than the
Palestinians. This, Palestinians say, is crippling to their agricultural economy. With water consumption outstripping l
e
supply in both Israel and the Palestinian territories, Palestinians say they are always the first community to be rationed
s
as reserves run dry, with the health problems that entails.
t
Fruitless discussions
i
Not surprisingly, during the era of Arab-Israeli peacemaking in the 1990s, water rights became one of the trickiest
n
areas of discussion. They were set aside to be dealt with in the "final status" Israel-Palestinian talks, which were never
i
concluded Meanwhile, Israeli settlement activity continued in some of most sensitive water areas in the West Bank, a
n
despite Israel's undertaking not to act in ways that prejudice final status talks.
Stalled negotiations on Syria's dispute with Israel over the Golan Heights - occupied by Israel in 1967 and annexed
in 1980 - also foundered on water-related issues. Syria wants an Israeli withdrawal to 5 June 1967 borders, allowing f
Syria access to the Jordan and Yarmouk rivers. Israel wants to use boundaries dating back to 1923 and the British a
r
Mandate, which give the areas to Israel.
By contrast, the Jordan-Israel treaty of 1994 produced notable agreement on use of wells in the Wadi Araba areamin
e
the south and sharing the Yarmouk in the north.
r
s
a
Palestinian Statehood
16
In the 21st Century Israel has tried to solve the Palestinian problem unilaterally, pulling troops and settlers from
Gaza and building a barrier around West Bank areas with the largest concentration of Palestinians. Although Israel
says this is a temporary security measure, the barrier encroaches deep onto occupied territory - especially areas of high
water yield.
Better future?
Middle Eastern rhetoric often portrays the issue of water as an existential, zero-sum conflict - casting either Israel
as a malevolent sponge sucking up Arab water resources, or the implacably hostile Arabs as threatening Israel's very
existence by denying life-giving water. Former UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali may not have been right
when he said in the 1990s that the next war in the Middle East would be about water not politics, but a future war over
water is not out of the question. Demand for water already outstrips supply, requirements are rising and current supply
is unsustainable. Hydrologists say joint solutions need to be found, because water requirements are interdependent and
water resources cross political boundaries. That necessitates improved conservation and recycling by both sides.
Improving the political atmosphere would allow supplies to be piped from neighbouring countries. Also crucial,
experts say, are investment in desalination and other technical advances. Such solutions are desperately needed in the
medium to long term. In other words, Israel and the Palestinians must work together, because they cannot survive as
combatants (Asser).
CURRENT EVENTS
BBC NEWS
September 10
Middle East peace talks: Where they stand
As the Obama administration relaunches direct Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, the BBC's Paul Reynolds outlines where
the three parties stand on the core issues of the conflict.
Jerusalem
Israel
The Israeli government is unwilling to divide Jerusalem, held to be the political and religious centre of the
Jewish people. It stands by the 1980 basic Israeli law that "Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel". In
the past there has been room for manoeuvre on the margins. In talks in 2000 and 2007, the then Israeli governments
proposed exchanging some outlying annexed districts.
Palestinians
The Palestinians want East Jerusalem, which was controlled by Jordan before being captured by the Israelis in
1967, as the capital of a Palestinian state. The Old City contains the third holiest place in Islam, the al-Aqsa mosque,
and the Dome of the Rock, from where Mohammed is said to have visited heaven on his winged steed Burak.
Borders
Israel
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accepts that there should be a Palestinian state and that there will have to
be an Israeli withdrawal from parts at least of the West Bank (captured by Israel in 1967) to accommodate this. Israel
has already withdrawn from Gaza. Israel would like the borders to include Jerusalem and the major Israeli settlements
that have grown up on the West Bank.
Palestinians
They want the talks to start from the basic position that all the land occupied by Israel in 1967 belongs to a
future Palestine. Any land given to the Israelis would have to be compensated for by a balanced land swap.
Settlements
Israel
The Israeli government insists on keeping the major Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.
Any departure from this would break up the coalition which forms the government. An immediate problem is that an
Israeli moratorium on West Bank settlements ran out on 26 September.
Palestinians
Palestinian Statehood
17
Ideally, the Palestinians would like all settlements to be abandoned as they were in Gaza. However, they
appear to accept that some will have to stay but they will argue for a minimum number and a land swap for any that are
left. They threatened to leave the talks if the Israeli moratorium was ended on 26 September.
Refugees
Israel
Israel rejects the idea that Palestinian refugees from previous wars should be allowed any "right of return" to
their former homes. They say that this is a device to destroy the state of Israel by demography in order to re-establish a
unitary state of Palestine. For that reason Mr Netanyahu has called for Israel to be recognised as a Jewish state.
Palestinians
Formally, they maintain the "right of return", arguing that without it a great injustice would not be put right.
However, there has been regular talk among Palestinians that this "right" could be met by compensation. They refuse to
recognise the concept of Israel as a "Jewish state", saying that this is unnecessary and that it ignores the Israeli-Arab
citizens of Israel.
Security
Israel
The Israeli government is afraid that a Palestinian state might one day fall into the hands of Hamas and will be
used as a stepping-stone to turning Israel into Palestine. Therefore it is insisting that it keeps a large measure of
security control, including in the Jordan Valley, and that a state of Palestine be largely demilitarised.
Palestinians
They argue that security will come from a stable two-state solution not the other way round. They want as
many attributes of a normal state as possible. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas fears that client-status
would be untenable and open to a Hamas takeover.
Palestinians to give Israelis deadline to accept ‘ground rules’ on settlements, border
By Associated Press, Published: March 3
JERICHO, West Bank — Palestinian officials said Saturday they plan to give a deadline to Israel to accept ground
rules for negotiations, and suggested that a ‘no’ will allow them to shelve Mideast talks until it does.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is to spell out the requirements in a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu, said Palestinian Foreign Minister Riad Malki. He said he did not know by when Netanyahu would have to
respond.
Abbas has long said he will not resume talks unless Israel freezes settlement construction on occupied lands and
recognizes the pre-1967 war frontier as a baseline for talks on a border between Israel and a future Palestine. The
Palestinians want to establish their state in the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem, captured by Israel in 1967.
Netanyahu has rejected both demands, insisting that negotiations resume without what he has portrayed as
preconditions. A government official reiterated Saturday that Israel is ready to resume talks immediately.
Palestinian officials have said there is no point negotiating with the rightist Netanyahu government, arguing that there
is not enough common ground for reaching an agreement. A negative Israeli response to the Abbas letter would free
the Palestinian leader to pursue other options, including reviving a bid to win U.N. membership for a state of Palestine.
Abbas has been under international pressure to keep negotiating with Israel; the last round of full-fledged negotiations
between Abbas and Netanyahu’s predecessor, Ehud Olmert, broke down in 2008. Netanyahu has retreated from
Olmert’s positions, insisting for example that he will not relinquish east Jerusalem, the Palestinians’ hoped-for capital.
Palestinian Statehood
18
In January, Abbas reluctantly agreed to low-level border talks with Israel, but quit after five rounds, complaining
that Israel did not present detailed proposals, as required by the Quartet of international Mideast mediators, made up of
the U.S., the U.N., the European Union and Russia.
Both Netanyahu and Abbas are eager to not get blamed for the continued deadlock.
With the letter, Abbas “wants to make sure that he tried every possible way” to resume negotiations, said Hanan
Ashrawi, a senior PLO official.
Malki said the Palestinians don’t expect a positive Israeli response, but that the letter is meant to help explain to the
world why the Palestinians would abandon negotiations.
“The Palestinian leadership will inform the world of the details of the content of this letter ... to understand the
(Palestinian) leadership, in case it is forced to take any measures to protect the Palestinian rights,” he said.
An Israeli government official said that “if the idea (of the letter) is to reinforce preconditions, that would be a
mistake.” He spoke on condition of anonymity because he has not seen the letter.
A Palestinian official said the Palestinians would hand the letter to Netanyahu after the Israeli leader returns from
Washington next week. Netanyahu meets with President Barack Obama at the White House on Monday, but the
growing tensions over Iran’s nuclear program are likely to preoccupy the two leaders and push the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict to the side.
The Palestinian official said the letter will spell out the requirements for serious negotiations and list Israel’s perceived
violations of its peace obligations.
Abbas will also describe a continued erosion of the authority of his self-rule government by Israel, said the official who
spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss internal deliberations. Abbas’ Palestinian
Authority has partial control in 38 percent of the West Bank, while Israel fully controls the rest of that territory.
With Security Council report, Palestinian statehood bid stalled at U.N.
By Mick Krever and Joe Vaccarello, CNN
2011-11-11
United Nations (CNN) -- The Palestinian bid for statehood at the United Nations was effectively stalled Friday after
the Security Council approved a report stating its inability "to make a unanimous recommendation."
"We knew from the beginning ... that we might not be able to succeed in the Security Council because there is a
powerful country that has the veto power," said Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian envoy to the United Nations. He said
that he believed the report was "objective."
The United States has been vocal about its intention to veto any Palestinian bid for statehood. Last week, France and
the United Kingdom said they would abstain from the vote. Those three nations, along with China and Russia, have
veto power in the Security Council.
"We thought that with diligent diplomatic efforts, with success at the UNESCO, of being admitted in the U.N. system
as the state of Palestine ... that Palestine would be admitted as a member state," Mansour said.
UNESCO is the U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, which recently granted the Palestinian
Authority full membership
Palestinian Statehood
19
The report, written by a special Security Council committee and obtained by CNN, was the result of seven weeks of
meetings. It details myriad disagreements between the council members on whether Palestine fulfills the requirements
set forth in the U.N. charter for members countries.
By contrast, when the committee met to discuss the application of South Sudan -- a territory and now country involved
in no small dispute of its own -- it came to an agreement after a single 10-minute meeting.
According to the charter, countries seeking membership must be "peace-loving," "accept the obligations" of the U.N.
charter, and "willing and able to carry out" those obligations.
According to the report, the 15 council members fall into three categories: those countries that support Palestinian
membership, those that can't support it at this time (for whom abstention was envisaged in the event of a vote), and
those countries that say the requirements were not met and couldn't vote for recommendation.
In order for a vote to take place, one of the 15 council members must request it. Diplomats say, however, that the ball
is largely in the Palestinians' court to push for a vote. Were a council resolution to pass, the membership bid would be
forwarded to the General Assembly, where passage is all but assured.
A vote in the near term does not seem likely. But should it take place, diplomats say that the Palestinians are unlikely
to get even the nine votes necessary for a resolution to pass, because of a large number of abstentions. The U.S. veto
would effectively be moot.
"The Palestinians have to make their own choice as to how to proceed," said Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the
United Nations. "The United States has made its own views quite clear, both directly to the Palestinians and to the
larger international community and the council membership. We'll look to see what they choose to do."
The next step for the Palestinians remains unclear. They could sidestep the Security Council and go straight to the
General Assembly, where they would get an upgraded observer status, matching that of the Vatican, but not full
membership. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, however, has said that they will not pursue that option.
Abbas is set to meet with the leadership of the Arab League next week. U.N. diplomats say that the Palestinians' next
step may become more clear after that meeting.
The Palestinian Authority — Fatah and Hamas Seek Unity Government
New York Times
Updated March 7,2012
The Palestinian Authority was created by the 1993 Oslo peace accords between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization. It
was meant to be a provisional government of the occupied territories in Gaza and the West Bank, which would eventually be
replaced by a sovereign Palestinian state after a final settlement was reached with Israel.
No final settlement was reached, however, and in 2007 the Palestinian Authority lost control of half of its territory. The Fatah party
founded by Yasir Arafat, the Authority’s president till his death in 2004, was beaten in parliamentary elections in 2006 by Hamas,
the militant group, and the following year Hamas gunmen drove Fatah out of Gaza and set up its own government there.
The split left the Palestinian Authority in control only of portions of the West Bank. Some 60 percent of the West Bank is under
full Israeli control, and both the Palestinians and the Israelis claim East Jerusalem, which is now in Israeli hands.
Over the years, repeated rounds of negotiations meant to bring about the final settlement made little progress, although former
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and the current Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, said later that they had been on the
verge of a sweeping deal when Mr. Olmert was forced from office in 2008.
Palestinian Statehood
The latest round of talks with Israel stalled shortly after they began in September 2010. Mr. Abbas said he would not negotiate
while Israel continued to build on occupied lands, and the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, declined to renew a
construction moratorium that expired three weeks after the talks began.
20
In 2011, as the revolts of the Arab Spring swept through the Mr. Abbas all but abandoned the possibility of productive negotiations
with Israel and focused on two new tracks — healing the rift with Hamas and winning United Nations recognition of full
Palestinian statehood.
Initial talks with Hamas in the spring appeared to lead nowhere. And while Mr. Abbas made his U.N. bid in a dramatic speech in
September, but effort fizzled, with American opposition blocking its path in the Security Council.
In early January 2012, Israeli and Palestinian negotiators met in Jordan in an effort to revive moribund peace talks, although none
of the sides involved suggested any reason to view the meeting as a sign of significant progress. Palestinian officials reported little
or no progress in the meetings and, on Jan. 25, Mr. Abbas said that discussions had ended.
But in February, Mr. Abbas and Khaled Meshal, the leader of Hamas, announced that they had broken a long political deadlock to
form an interim unity government led, at least at first, by Mr. Abbas.
Nevertheless, as spring approached, the Palestinian leadership has found itself orphaned within the region, marginalized by the
attention drawn by the Arab revolts and the rising tensions over Iran’s nuclear program. Politically divided, its peace talks with
Israel collapsed and its foreign support waning, the Palestinian Authority is sidelined, confused and worried that its people may
return to violence.
The Arab Spring may have increased popular attention to the Palestinian cause, freeing Egyptians and others to express anti-Israel
sentiments. But that has actually made things harder on the Palestine Liberation Organization, which negotiated with Israel.
Popular affection has shifted to the Islamists of Hamas. They too have difficulties, however, abandoning their political
headquarters in Syria, facing reduced help from Iran and contending with their increased divisions.
The result is a serial splintering of the Palestinian movement, a loss of state sponsors and paralysis for those trying to build a state
next to Israel. As momentum for a peaceful two-state solution fades, and the effort for recognition at the United Nations remains
stymied, no alternatives have emerged and attention has focused on other conflicts.
As Palestinian frustration grows the chance of an explosion in the West Bank increases. Rock throwing and confrontations with
Israeli troops have picked up in recent months.
Economic Troubles
Economic growth for the West Bank, which from 2008 to 2010 averaged 10 percent, slowed to 5.7 percent in 2011 with
unemployment remaining at 17 percent, according to Oussama Kanaan, of the International Monetary Fund. In 2011, Arab
countries together gave only $340 million dollars to the Palestinian Authority, leaving it with $200 million less than expected.
The authority has been unable to pay its debts to private companies and the public pension fund, leaving it some $500 million in
arrears, in addition to its debt of $1.1 billion to private banks.
Agreements between the Palestinian and Israeli finance ministries to improve Palestinian revenue collection have not been
implemented because the Israeli government has not signed off. Prime Minister Salam Fayyad said that unless those measures go
into effect, he may not attend a donors conference planned for Brussels this month.
At the same time, Israeli troops have stepped up their nighttime raids on West Bank cities, recently shutting down two television
stations and contributing to the sense of impotence.
In January 2012, Palestinians in the West Bank began taking to the streets to denounce Mr. Fayyad, the prime minister of the
Palestinian Authority, and to protest soaring prices and recently-enacted tax increases.
The tax changes proved so unpopular that Mr. Fayyad suspended their enactment until mid-February, pending the outcome of talks
to resolve the matter.
Palestinian Statehood
Condemnation of the fiscal policies of Mr. Fayyad, a Western-educated economist and a political independent, has come from
the private sector, the unions and Fatah, the mainstream nationalist movement that dominates the Palestinian Authority.
21
The Palestinian Authority has suffered a worsening financial crisis over the past two years, a situation that Mr. Fayyad, who is also
the finance minister, has been trying to address.
The rising prices are a function of global processes and more particularly the high cost of living in Israel, because the West Bank
economy is intrinsically linked with Israel’s under the political accords of the 1990s.
Seeking U.N. Recognition
In 2011, with the winds of change swirling through the Arab world, Mr. Abbas shifted gears. Convinced that the talks with Israel
were unlikely to resume, he began focusing on getting the United Nations to recognize Palestine as a sovereign state, which could
increase Palestinian leverage for rolling back Israeli settlements.
Full membership in the United Nations would require the approval of the Security Council, where the United States promised a
veto. But the General Assembly can on its own grant status as an observer state. Even that limited step would give the Palestinians
greater access to international forums and to institutions like the World Bank.
Israel vehemently opposed the idea, saying it would amount to a unilateral repudiation of the Olso agreements. The AmericanIsraeli view was that the only way to achieve peace is through direct talks, although each side maintained that the other presents the
obstacles to negotiations.
Mr. Abbas made the formal request for full United Nations membership as a path toward statehood on Sept. 23 when he appeared
before the General Assembly.
In October, Hamas received a boost when Israel agreed to exchange more than 1,000 Palestinian prisoners for an Israeli soldier
held captive in Gaza for five years, Staff Sgt. Gilad Shalit, in a deal brokered by Egypt that left Mr. Abbas on the sidelines.
Later that month, Unesco — the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization — defied a legally
mandated cutoff of American funding and approved a Palestinian bid for full membership by a vote of 107 to 14, with 52
abstentions.
By early November, the prospect of full membership was inching closer to failure, even without an American veto. In a private
meeting of Security Council members, France and Bosnia said they would abstain on a vote, which would leave the Palestinians
short of the nine votes needed in favor.
Later that month, Mr. Abbas met with Khaled Meshal, the political leader of Hamas. The two agreed to go ahead with elections in
the Palestinian territories in 2012, even as they failed to resolve differences over an interim unity government to prepare for the
vote.
Also in November, to protest the Palestinians’ membership efforts at the United Nations and pursuit of power-sharing with Hamas,
Israel carried out a threat to suspend the transfer of about $100 million in tax payments to the Palestinian Authority. On Nov. 30,
under strong American and international pressure, Isreal agreed to pay the money
After their success at Unesco, the Palestinians are now expected to try to join other United Nations organizations, whatever the
outcome of their bid for full membership through the Security Council, or for observer status through the General Assembly.
But that could cause financial problems for a number of those organizations.
Legislation dating back more than 15 years stipulates a complete cutoff of American financing to any United Nations agency that
accepts the Palestinians as a full member. Unesco depends on the United States for 22 percent of its budget, about $70 million a
year.
Palestinian Statehood
22
Israeli airstrikes enter fourth day in Gaza
By the CNN Wire Staff
March 11, 2012
Gaza City (CNN) -- Israel launched fresh airstrikes early Monday in Gaza, security officials and medical sources said, as talks
about a possible cease-fire after three days of bombing apparently failed. At least 30 people were injured, including one critically,
they said.
A spokeswoman for the Israel Defense Forces confirmed the overnight strikes, saying they were "an indirect response to the firing
into the Israel community in the south." The strikes targeted a weapons storage facility and five rocket launching sites in the Gaza
Strip, the spokeswoman said.
At least 18 people have been killed since Friday in the strikes, while at least 65 people have been wounded.
Israel's "Iron Dome" protection system
Two civilians, including a 13-year-old boy in Gaza, were killed Sunday, Palestinian medical sources said.
The airstrikes are a response to more than 100 rocket attacks from Gaza into Israel since Friday, Israel says.
Eight Israelis have been wounded and 500,000 have been forced into shelters, Israeli military and emergency services said.
An Israeli military aircraft targeted a suspected terrorist moments before he fired a Grad rocket at the city of Ashdod, the Israel
Defense Forces said in a statement. The individual had also fired a Grad rocket into Ashdod earlier in the morning, the IDF said.
"The IDF is prepared to defend the residents of Israel and will respond with strength and determination against any attempt to
execute terrorist attacks," the statement said.
The IDF generally does not comment on other reported casualties in such incidents.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu suggested Sunday that the new cycle of attacks and counterattacks resulted from a
successful Israeli strike on "an arch-terrorist who organized many attacks against the state of Israel."
Two people were killed in that strike: Zuhair al-Qaisy, secretary-general of the Popular Resistance Committees, and Mahmoud
Ahmad Al-Hanini, a Hamas military leader.
"Naturally, this led to another round with the Popular Resistance Committees, Islamic Jihad and other groups," Netanyahu said,
naming Palestinian militant groups.
Israel's military "is striking at them in strength. ... We have exacted from them a very high price; naturally, we will act as
necessary," Netaynahu said.
Palestinian factions met Sunday to discuss the possibility of a truce to be implemented Sunday night, according to a spokesman for
the Salah Edeen Brigades, one of the militant factions. Hamas leadership in Gaza and Egyptian officials were working to trying to
bring about a truce, said the spokesman, who goes by the name Abu Muhamad.
However, Islamic Jihad rejected the possibility of a truce until certain conditions are met, including an end to the airstrikes and
"targeted assassinations," according to the militant group's official radio station.
The IDF statement Sunday warned that groups that "carry out terror attacks against the state of Israel will bear the consequences of
these actions in any future operation embarked upon by the IDF. The Hamas terror organization is solely responsible for any
terrorist activity emanating from the Gaza Strip."
Palestinians named Sunday's child victim as Ayuub Assilla. He was killed near the Jabalia refugee camp, north of Gaza city. The
other victim was a 60-year-old Palestinian man who was guarding a farm grove in Gaza City, Palestinians said.
Palestinian Statehood
They were the second and third civilians killed in the weekend's violence, after a 51-year-old man was killed on the back of a
motorcycle on Saturday. The other victims have been militants, according to Palestinian sources.
23
Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman said Israel makes its "best effort to target terrorists and not the civilian population," but added:
"We will not accept the constant disruption of life in the south of Israel, and I advise all heads of terror to think well about their
actions."
He blamed Hamas, the Palestinian Islamist movement that runs Gaza, and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas for the
violence.
"Abbas must decide if he wants to conduct serious negotiations for peace or align himself with Hamas and Islamic Jihad and
become a part of the map of world terror," Liberman added.
He was referring to ongoing talks between Abbas' Fatah faction and Hamas, aimed at forming a new Palestinian unity government.
The two factions have been bitter rivals since Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip in 2007.
A total of 130 rockets have been fired into southern Israel since Friday, the IDF said. Ninety-three landed in Israel, while 37 were
shot down by Israel's Iron Dome missile defense system, the IDF said.
Israel closed schools Sunday in the southern part of the country as precaution.
Palestinian officials accused Israel of trying to disturb a "truce" that was already in place. But despite efforts to bring about a truce
over the years, rocket attacks have continued from Gaza.
Both sides sent dueling letters to the U.N. Security Council on Sunday, calling for an end to the violence.
Mustafa Barghouti, a Palestinian lawmaker in the West Bank, slammed a "provocation that is planned in cold blood by Israel to
undermine the cease-fire in Gaza and to undermine the nonviolent nature of the Palestinian struggle today."
Hanan Ashrawi, executive committee member of the Palestine Liberation Organization, accused Israel of "targeting of isolated
civilians through air strikes and targeted assassinations."
She insisted Netanyahu was seeking "to provoke the Palestinian side by dragging them to the circle of violence and destabilize the
stability of the region and violate the truce agreement which the Palestinian factions committed to."
"Nothing could be further from the truth," responded Mark Regev, spokesman for Netanyahu. He said instability was being
wrought by "Iran and its allies in Gaza who have been shooting scores of rockets at Israeli civilian population centers, at townships
and at cities.
"I would hope that Dr. Ashrawi would unequivocally condemn the deliberate targeting of innocent civilians by the terrorists in
Gaza."
On Saturday, Abbas called on international leaders to bring a stop to the attacks. However, Hamas' armed wing threatened Israel
over the attacks.
Israel "will pay the price" for its actions in Gaza, said Abu Obaida, spokesman for the Izzedine al Qassam Brigade of Hamas, the
Islamist movement that controls the Palestinian territory of Gaza.
European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton urged both sides to "avoid further escalation" and "re-establish calm."
CNN's Talal Abu Rahma, Guy Azriel, Kevin Flower, Kareem Khadder and Josh Levs contributed to this report.
Palestinian Statehood
BBC News - Q&A: Palestinians' upgraded UN status
30 November 2012 Last updated at 11:23 ET
On 29 November 2012, the United Nations General Assembly voted to upgrade the status of the
Palestinians to that of a "non-member observer state".
It follows a failed bid to join the international body as a full member state in 2011 because of a lack
of support in the UN Security Council.
Here is a guide to the move's likely significance.
What were the Palestinians asking for?
The Palestinians have long sought to establish an independent, sovereign state in the West Bank,
including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip - occupied by Israel during the 1967 Six Day War. The
1993 Oslo Accord between the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and Israel led to mutual
recognition. However, two decades of on-off peace talks have since failed to produce a
permanent settlement. The latest round of direct negotiations broke down in 2010.
Palestinian officials have since pursued a new diplomatic strategy: asking individual countries to
recognise an independent Palestinian state with borders following the ceasefire lines which
separated Israel and the West Bank before June 1967.
In September 2011, Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority (PA) and chairman
of the PLO, sought full member-state status at the UN based on pre-1967 frontiers. But the bid
effectively stalled two months later after Security Council members said they had been unable to
"make a unanimous recommendation". Mr Abbas then submitted a downgraded request to the
General Assembly for admission to the UN as a non-member observer state - the same position
that the Vatican holds. Previously, the PLO only had "permanent observer" status.
The change allows the Palestinians to participate in General Assembly debates. It also improves
the Palestinians' chances of joining UN agencies and the International Criminal Court (ICC),
although the process would be neither automatic nor guaranteed. If they are allowed to sign the
ICC's founding treaty, the Rome Statute, the Palestinians hope prosecutors would investigate
alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes.
What was the general process?
The chances of the Palestinians obtaining non-member observer state status were high - a
resolution need only be passed by a simple majority at the 193-member UN General Assembly, and
there is no threat of veto as there would be at the Security Council. According to the PLO, more
than 130 countries already grant the Palestinians the rank of a sovereign state. Palestinian
officials had said they hoped to win the votes of 150 to 170 countries at the UN to show the
isolation of the US and Israel on this issue. In the event, 138 countries voted in favour.
President Abbas addressed the General Assembly on 27 September and said his government
would seek the UN upgrade in the current session. He said he realised that "progress towards
making peace is through negotiations between the PLO and Israel", acknowledging international
concerns about future talks. "Despite all the complexities of the prevailing reality and all the
frustrations that abound, we say before the international community there is still a chance - maybe
the last - to save the two-state solution and to salvage peace," he added.
After Mr Abbas laid out his intentions, his aides consulted other countries before drafting a
resolution. It was not tabled until after the US presidential election.
The Palestinians' earlier attempt to gain full member-state status failed because it had to be
approved by the 15-member UN Security Council. In the face of strong lobbying by Israel's close
ally, the United States, it could not secure the nine votes it would have required. In any case, as a
permanent member of the council, the US was expected to use its veto power to stop the bid.
Palestinian officials insist they have not abandoned their application to become a full UN member
state, saying it is suspended for the moment.
24
Palestinian Statehood
Is this symbolic or will it change facts on the ground?
Getting recognition of Palestinian statehood on the pre-1967 ceasefire lines has largely symbolic
value. Already there is wide international acceptance that they should form the basis of a
permanent peace settlement.
The problem for the Palestinians is that Israel's Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, rejects these
territorial lines as a basis for negotiations. He has described them as "unrealistic" and
"indefensible". He says that new facts have been created on the ground since 1967: about half a
million Jews live in more than 200 settlements and outposts in the West Bank including East
Jerusalem. These settlements are considered illegal under international law, though Israel disputes
this. Mutually-agreed land swaps have been discussed in previous talks as a way to overcome this
problem.
The Palestinians argue that admission even as a non-member observer state at the UN will
strengthen their hands in peace talks with Israel on core issues that divide them: the status of
Jerusalem, the fate of the settlements, the precise location of borders, the right of return of
Palestinian refugees, water rights and security arrangements. The Palestinians present the step as
necessary to protect their right to self-determination and a two-state solution.
The draft resolution "expresses the urgent need for the resumption and acceleration of
negotiations within the Middle East peace process, based on the relevant United Nations
resolutions, the Madrid terms of reference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab
Peace Initiative and the Quartet Roadmap, for the achievement of a just, lasting and
comprehensive peace settlement between the Palestinian and Israeli sides that resolves all
outstanding core issues".
Israel says that any upgrade of the Palestinian status at the UN would pre-empt final-status
negotiations. The Israeli prime minister's office reacted to the decision with the following
statement: "This is a meaningless decision that will not change anything on the ground. Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has made it clear that there will be no establishment of a Palestinian
state without a settlement that ensures the security of Israel's citizens... By going to the UN, the
Palestinians have violated the agreements with Israel and Israel will act accordingly."
What legal action could the Palestinians consider?
In April, the prosecutor of the ICC rejected a 2009 declaration by the Palestinian Authority
unilaterally recognising the court's jurisdiction. The court said in a statement it could not act
because Article 12 of the Rome Statute established that only a "state" could confer jurisdiction on
the court and deposit an instrument of accession with the UN secretary general and the
Palestinian status at the UN at the time was that of an "observer".
In instances where it was controversial or unclear whether an applicant constituted a "state", it
was the practice of the secretary general to follow or seek the General Assembly's directives on
the matter, the statement added.
While Palestinian chances of joining the ICC would be neither automatic nor guaranteed as a nonmember
observer state, Palestinian officials have indicated they will make a new attempt in light of
the 29 November vote, which allows them in principle to accede to the ICC.
"Those who don't want to appear before international tribunals must stop their crimes and it is
time for them to become accountable," the chief Palestinian negotiator, Saeb Erekat, recently told
reporters.
They must first deposit an instrument of accession with the UN Secretary General stating they
want to become party to the Rome Statute.
If approved, the ratification would come into effect on the first day of the month following a 60day holding period.
In general, ratification gives the ICC jurisdiction for events in the future, not the past. The ICC said
it was studying the legal implications of the 29 November General Assembly vote.
Technically a state joining the ICC also has the option of granting jurisdiction retroactively to the
25
Palestinian Statehood
date when the treaty came into force - on 1 July 2002.
So the Palestinians might seek to have the ICC investigate war crimes allegations from the 20082009 Gaza war, as well as the most recent conflict in Gaza.
According to the Reuters news agency, Mr Netanyahu has privately expressed concern that
Palestinians might accuse members of his government of crimes against humanity including the
forced displacement of populations by establishing settlements on occupied territory.
Why has this happened now?
The main reason is the impasse in peace talks. Ahead of the original UN bid, the Palestinians
pointed to the September 2011 date that US President Barack Obama had laid out at the General
Assembly a year before as the deadline to achieve a two-state solution. The Quartet of Middle
East peace negotiators - the US, European Union, Russia and UN - had worked towards the same
deadline. A later statement by the Quartet called for an agreement by the end of this year.
Despite the lack of progress on restarting direct negotiations with Israel, Palestinian leaders argue
that they have succeeded in building up state institutions and are ready for statehood. The World
Bank has said the same, although it has expressed concern about whether the economies of the
West Bank and Gaza are strong enough to support a future state.
Last year, the full UN membership bid easily won the support of ordinary Palestinians who had
been energised by uprisings in other parts of the Arab world. Although there was disappointment
at what followed, a decisive vote by the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
(Unesco) in favour of admitting the Palestine as a member state in October 2011 helped to
compensate. This was broadly seen as a step towards strengthening the Palestinians' position at
the UN, although it led to the US suspending funding for Unesco.
How does this fit with previous declarations?
In 1988, the late Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, unilaterally declared a Palestinian state within
the pre-June 1967 lines. This won recognition from about 100 countries, mainly Arab, Communist
and non-aligned states - several of them in Latin America.
UN acceptance of Palestine even as a non-member observer state would have greater impact as
the UN is the overarching world body and a source of authority on international law.
Who supported and opposed the latest UN option?
So far this bid has failed to excite public opinion in the occupied territories in the same way as in
2011 and the build-up to it has been more low-key. It is backed by Mr Abbas's Fatah movement,
which controls Palestinian Authority-run parts of the West Bank, and was agreed with
representatives of other groups in the PLO.
It was initially criticised by senior figures in Hamas, the rival Islamist group which governs the Gaza
Strip. However, following the recent eight-day Israeli military offensive on Gaza, Hamas's political
leader, Khaled Meshaal, said he "welcomed" the effort. The militant group, Islamic Jihad is also said
to have given its unofficial support. "There is not a single party or faction that is not onboard,"
senior PLO official Hanan Ashrawi told journalists on 28 November.
Within the wider region, the 22-member Arab League has endorsed the approach.
The main opposition came from Israel. Looking to dissuade President Abbas from his plan, it has
threatened to withhold crucial tax revenues it collects on behalf of the PA and restrict movements
of its officials from the West Bank. On 14 November, a position paper leaked from Israel's foreign
ministry also proposed "toppling" Mr Abbas if Palestine's bid for UN non-member observer state
status was approved. Israeli foreign ministry spokesman Lior Ben Dor said that if President Abbas
continued with the bid, he would be in breach of the 1993 Oslo Accord, under which the PA was
established.
In the past few days, Israeli officials have indicated that immediately after the vote sanctions
would be introduced against the Palestinians. However, they say Israel will not take irreversible
steps and will not act to bring down the PA. Only if the Palestinians use their upgraded UN
membership to press cases at the International Criminal Court will Israel consider more drastic
steps, they add. Speaking to the BBC about the UN bid, deputy Israeli foreign ministry
spokeswoman Ilana Stein said: "It is mainly a declarative move, the question is what will the
Palestinians do with it. Depending on what steps they take, Israel will act accordingly."
The US, a major donor nation to the PA, could also impose some financial penalties. After
26
Palestinian Statehood
Palestine was admitted to Unesco, Washington cut funding to the organisation under legislation
dating back to the 1990s. This mandated such a step if any UN agency granted full membership to
Palestine before a permanent peace settlement.
Reports before the vote said that Israel had attempted to negotiate with the US over the wording
of the UN General Assembly resolution. There were attempts to gain guarantees that the
Palestinians would not go to the ICC. However, on the eve of the vote, Mrs Ashrawi insisted: "We
have not succumbed to blackmail or pressure."
Some European nations which provide large amounts of aid to the PA are worried that the
Palestinians' UN strategy could prove risky. Only nine out of the 27 EU member states recognise
Palestine bilaterally. Out of those which do not, France voted for the bid, and Germany and the UK
abstained. The UK has requested "certain assurances or amendments" from t he Palestinians,
including a commitment not to pursue "ICC jurisdiction over the Occupied Territories at this stage".
The Palestinians described the conditions as "unrealistic".
WORKS CITED
27
Palestinian Statehood
28
AbuZayd, Karen. "Commissioner-General's Statements." UNRWA Newsroom. 27 January 2009. United Nations. 1
Mar 2009 <http://www.un.org/unrwa/news/statements/2009/SecurityCouncil_27jan09.html>.
Asser, Martin. "Obstacles to peace: Water ." BBC News. 6 Mar 2009
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6666495.stm >.
Barrow, Tzippe. “Hamas Official: Abbas Should Resign.” CBN News.
<http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/insideisrael/2010/March/Hamas-Official-Abbas-Should-Resign/>
Carter, Jimmy. "Colonization of Palestine Precludes Peace." The Carter Center. 2006. The Carter Center. 6 Mar
<http://www.cartercenter.org/news/documents/doc2320.html#topLink>.
2009
“HEZBOLLAH CHIEF MEETS AHMADINEJAD.” BBC NEWS. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr//2/hi/middle_east/8539178.stm>
"Key Maps: Israel and the Palestinians." BBC In Depth. BBC News. 6 Mar 2009
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/world/2001/israel_and_palestinians/key_maps/jewish_sett_we st.stm>
Krever, Mike and Vaccarello. “With Security Council report, Palestinian statehood bid stalled at U.N.”CNN. 11
November 2011 < http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/11/world/meast/un-palestinians/index.html>
“Q & A: Palestinians’ Upgraded UN Status”. BBC News. 30 November 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/worldmiddle- east- 13701636
"Q&A: What's in the Mid-East roadmap." BBC News. 18 December, 2003. BBC News. 6 Mar 2009
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2938444.stm>.
Rahma, Talal Abu and Azriel,Guy “Israeli airstrikes enter fourth day in Gaza”Cnn.com. 11 March 2012.
< http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/11/world/meast/gaza-israel-airstrike/ >
“Roadmap for Peace in the Middle East: Israeli/Palestinian Reciprocal Action, Quartet Support.” Bureau of Public
Affairs, Washington, DC. 16 July 2003. <http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/22520.htm >
“Topic Briefs.” Washington State Model UN.
<http://wasmun.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13&Itemid=36>
“The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: The city of Jerusalem.” The Seattle Times. 12 May 2002, The Middle East
Crisis: A Seattle Times Special Report, p6.
“The Palestinian Authority — Fatah and Hamas Seek Unity Government” New York Times. 7 Mar 2012
< http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/organizations/p/palestinian_authority/index.html?inline=nytclassifier>
Whitaker, Brian. “The Arab Peace Initiative, 2002.” An open door to the Arab World. <http://www.albab.com/arab/docs/league/peace02.htm>
"Who is a Palestine Refugee?" UNRWA. United Nations. 6 Mar 2009
<http://www.un.org/unrwa/refugees/whois.html>.