Vote or Vetoe: The Future of Middle East

Jimmy Carter has written some thoughts on the process and Palestine question. He asserts with reasonable assumptions that if the Palestinian statehood is widely recognized despite a U.S. veto in the Security Council, what are the options for the future? He sees this as an opportunity for leadership from Europe, there will be an opportunity for the United States and other members of the International Quartet (Russia, the European Union and the United Nations) to put forward a comprehensive peace proposal based on the fully compatible U.S. official policy, previous U.N. resolutions and the Quartet’s previous demands. There is little doubt that the Arab Peace Proposal could be modified to comply.

It is not clear what he implies by being fully compatible with US official policy. I suppose this was written to the American policy makers as opposed to those agitating for their rights and in their terms.

There is an interesting summary here on the possible outcomes based on the proposed vote at the UN by author/writer B.Z. Khasru. He concludes "If a positive vote by three-fourths of the 193 U.N. member nations, which is expected to be the outcome in the General Assembly, is trampled by the heavy feet of two or three veto-wielding nations, the credibility of Western nations will plunge yet another notch".

While the US has upped it tempo to try delay the vote. Senior officials said the administration wanted to avoid not only a veto but also the more symbolic and potent General Assembly vote that would leave the United States and only a handful of other nations in opposition. The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss diplomatic maneuverings, said they feared that in either case a backlash could sweep the Palestinian territories and the wider Arab world when the region is already in tumult.

You are free to make a choice, your choice is your limitation!