Think carefully about Palestinian bid for statehood

In an attempt to get the Palestinians to put their quest for statehood on hold, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said he is ready to enter into direct peace negotiations with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

Abbas is today planning to ask the UN Security Council in New York to approve the membership of a Palestinian state. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has been informed that he may press ahead with the request in spite of the threat of a veto from the US.

And if the Security Council does not approve full UN membership, the Palestinians will ask the UN General Assembly to upgrade Palestinian status to that of a non-voting observer state. The latter decision would be solely up to the General Assembly, and members of the Security Council would not be able to veto it.

A majority of the members could be expected to support recognition of Palestinian statehood. But one can be certain that the aftermath of any such decision would not be pretty for a lot of people.

Over the past week, the US and its allies have been trying desperately to get the Palestinians to put off the plan, but have not come up with any meaningful alternatives.

After decades of occupation and 20 years of failed talks with Israel, the world shares the frustration of the Palestinians and their leaders. What's worse, Israel has become increasingly hawkish over the years, refusing to heed to demands like an end to illegal housing construction on Palestinian lands, knowing full well that this is an obstacle to peace.

Abbas and his camp think that if the world recognises a Palestinian state, they then can negotiate with Israel on equal terms. But from the look of it, such a move could complicate things further and scupper any chance of a peace deal.

The US, instead of being able to play a more constructive role in the rebuilding of the Arab world, could very well be sidelined because of this very veto. Some in the US Congress are already threatening to cut off US aid to the Palestinian authorities should they go ahead with the unilateral move to declare statehood.

And because of this reason, Abbas should give Netanyahu just one more chance. He should put off the decision until he hears him out first in New York.

Palestinian statehood at this juncture could only have more symbolism than substance - given the fact that Palestinian air, land and sea are occupied and under blockade. A state without much to offer its people in terms of protection, rights, goods and services would not last very long in its citizens' hearts and minds.

And let's not forget that the opposition Hamas have full control of the Gaza Strip. It's bad enough that much of your territory is under occupation. It's even worse when a sizeable portion of it is inaccessible because the opposition party will not let you in.

Yes, Israel is part of the cause of the Palestinians' misery but that doesn't mean the Palestinians' own leaders are out of the loop.

Abbas needs to settle his differences with Hamas, put off the unilateral effort for statehood and negotiate this with Israel. At the least, meet Netanyahu in New York and then make a decision.

Thailand, as a member of the UN, will have to cast its vote. The Thai government can go along for the ride with the rest of the world by voting for a Palestinian state and come out without a scratch on this matter. But Bangkok needs to think beyond "playing it safe" because any decision it makes could very well lead to "paying for failure". A no vote will alienate its Muslim population, who don't hide their feelings on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

There is really no "play it safe" this time around. Like the US, Thailand and other Asean members, like Singapore and Burma, who are said to be against Abbas's move for a unilateral state, could find themselves unwanted guests - or (unwelcome) khaeks - in the future development of Arab lands and societies that are currently going through serious change and overhaul.

Some of the new Arab leaders will ask: How did Asean vote on this matter and did the very issue of Arab and Palestinian dignity enter their minds when they voted against a Palestinian state? Essentially, this is what this unilateral move is pretty much about.