On the 74th anniversary of the partition resolution, why is Abbas brandishing alternative options in the conflict with Israel?

Ramallah

- Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has threatened to resort to several options if Israel continues to turn its back on the two-state solution, including returning to Resolution 181 to partition Palestine as a basis for resolving the issue, after Resolution 242 remained the basis for the stalled negotiations with Israel for nearly three decades.

There are differences between the two resolutions - according to specialists - most notably that Resolution 181 allocates to the Palestinian state twice the area of ​​the lands occupied in 1967, on which the Palestinians seek to establish their state.

Resolution 181 - which was issued in 1947 - explicitly stipulates the establishment of a Palestinian state on about 44% of the area of ​​historical Palestine, while Resolution 242 stipulates the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the occupied territories in 1967, which constitute approximately 22% of the area of ​​historical Palestine.

Today, Monday, November 29, marks the 74th anniversary of the issuance of the United Nations resolution dividing Palestine into two Jewish and Arab states, and placing the city of Jerusalem under international trusteeship.

The partition decision detailed the lands and borders of the two states, giving the Jews - who made up about 33% - the largest area by about 56%, compared to about 44% for the Palestinians, who made up 67% of the population.

Resolution 242 was issued by the UN Security Council on November 22, 1976, and stipulates "the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territories (territories) occupied in the last conflict (1967)."

According to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, Jews today constitute 50.3% of the total population, and they exploit more than 85% of the total area of ​​historical Palestine of 27 thousand square kilometers.

A threat to return to Resolution 181

On the second of last October, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said that Israel's rejection of the two-state solution forces the Palestinians to go to other options, including demanding the partition resolution of 1947.

Before that, the Palestinian president, in his speech at the United Nations on September 24, gave the Israeli occupation authorities "one year to withdraw from the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem."

He said that the Palestinian people will continue their struggle to reach their rights to self-determination, adding that the options are open, "including the option to return to a solution based on Partition Resolution No. 181 of 1947, which gives the State of Palestine 44% of the land, which is twice the area of ​​the land based on the 1967 borders. ".

The Americans always tell me why the Palestinian Authority rejected the partition decision. Perhaps this map is shown. The white color is the Jewish ownership of the lands in 1944, and the black color is the Palestinian ownership.

Imagine that this is your country and this is your land ownership and then they ask you to give up more than half of it, would you agree?

pic.twitter.com/6pFXWcGdij

— Samar D Jarrah (@SamarDJarrah) June 14, 2021

Envoys to the countries of the world

Palestinian diplomacy is active these days to convey the message of the Palestinian president to the countries of the world, to emphasize the seriousness of its position on the two-state solution on the one hand, and the extent of its seriousness in implementing the resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly and Security Council on the other.

In this context, Abbas continues to send envoys to various countries of the world, according to the head of the United Nations General Administration in the Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Dr. Omar Awadallah.

In his speech to Al Jazeera Net, the Palestinian official adds that Palestinian diplomacy has "many legal options to reach the goals of the Palestinian people," and that its message on the anniversary of the division of Palestine is to focus effort on ending the colonial occupation and all its manifestations in the occupied land of Palestine, he said.

Awadallah continues that the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination is "an inalienable and non-negotiable right," explaining that any demand for the implementation of Resolution 181 will not affect Palestine's status in international bodies and organizations because the State of Palestine "was declared based on UN resolutions, and any international retreat is reverse its decisions.

The one who enjoys international legal personality is the Palestine Liberation Organization, not the Palestinian Authority (Al-Jazeera)

More space, narrow horizon

For his part, Professor of International Law at Birzeit University, Dr. Yasser Al-Amouri, explains that Resolution 242 has represented the ceiling of the negotiating process since the peace conference in Madrid in 1991.

Al-Amouri adds that Resolution 242 does not talk about the establishment of a Palestinian state, but rather the withdrawal of Israel from the occupied territories, whose area is 22% of historic Palestine, while Resolution 181 talks about the establishment of a political entity and an Arab state on 44% of historic Palestine.

The professor of international law points out that after the 1948 war and until the signing of the armistice agreements in 1949, Israel laid hands on an area that exceeds the internationally recognized area, amounting to about 78% of historic Palestine.

Since the Palestinians resort to international legitimacy resolutions in pursuit of their right to self-determination, Al-Amouri believes that it is a fortiori to resort to the partition resolution, and not the resolution that deals with the effects of the 1967 aggression, a matter that "depends on the political will and the political program."

On the impact of the adoption of Resolution 181 on the existence of the Palestinian Authority, Al-Amouri said that the authority "is not important in this matter because it does not have the international legal personality, and the one who has the international legal personality is the Palestine Liberation Organization."

According to Al-Amouri, "the authority and even the Palestinian state are not a substitute for the PLO. The authority is temporary until the Palestinian people exercise their right to self-determination, while the PLO must be empowered as the representative of the Palestinian people."

On the Palestinian side, the first step in the Palestinian approach is to activate international legitimacy starting with Resolution 181 and all international resolutions, and to activate the international judicial approach by going to the courts and others, and thirdly, popular activation in all countries, highlighting the racist practices it practices against an entire people, and proving that Israel is an occupying state.

— Dr. Naji Shurrab (@drnagish1) November 8, 2021

Doubting the seriousness of the move

Bilal Al-Shobaki, a professor of political science at the Palestinian University of Hebron, doubts the seriousness of the Palestinian threat to return to Resolution 181, and tells Al Jazeera Net that whoever has not been able to achieve the minimum that the Palestinians accepted, a state within the 67 borders, cannot achieve the partition decision.

Al-Shobaki believes that the Palestinian president’s waiver of the partition decision is an attempt to create cards of power, as he tried previously when he threatened to stop communicating with the occupation, “but it has been proven on the ground for the Israelis and many observers that this attempt is less than pressure cards.”

The political science professor continues that Abbas's suggestion is not based on practically any strengths, whether from the factions or the people, "which reflects the lack of seriousness in the proposal."

He adds, "We cannot, as Palestinians or observers at the international level, take the vision seriously unless it is presented in a context broader than a passing word in a speech."

In his vision of the reality of the Palestinian Authority, Al-Shobaki says that it has become an obstacle rather than a crossing bridge for the Palestinian state, and instead of growing, it has become more like a major municipality as desired by the Israeli government.