Two states to achieve peace | Opinion
This Tuesday, Spain recognised the Palestinian State in a decision coordinated with the Republic of Ireland and Norway, described as historic by those responsible for their respective governments. It is in no hurry nor is it the result of the opportunism of an electoral campaign, quite the opposite. In a long-considered and negotiated manner, Spain has taken a step that is taking place at a particularly worrying moment, coinciding with the atrocious massacre perpetrated by the Israeli army in a camp in Rafah and the start of an offensive that the United States considers the red line of your support. The bombing and burning of tents in an area classified as a refuge where civilians lived has disqualified Washington from any Israeli intention to sell the military occupation of southern Gaza as bloodless for the population, and has made Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responsible for the tragedy, admitting a “tragic mistake”.
The recognition of Palestine has an immediate task, widely shared by the international community, which is to exert maximum pressure on Israel to stop its attacks on the civilian population, guarantee vital supplies to Gazans and negotiate a permanent ceasefire that allows the immediate release of hostages kidnapped by Hamas. The diplomatic movement joins resolutions arising from two international courts, the United Nations and the Statute of Rome. The first has demanded the cessation of hostilities and the resumption of supplies, and the prosecutor of the second has declared Netanyahu and his defense minister, Yoav Galant, suspects of war crimes, and therefore susceptible to arrest for siege and famine. The civilian population is subjected to the same consideration that has been applied to Hamas leaders.
Far from being a symbolic gesture, recognising Palestine is an inspiration for other European countries and eventually the Union itself to join the 143 UN countries that already recognise it. It coincides with the unanimous call of the 27th Association Council between the EU and Israel to verify for the first time its compliance with Israeli commitments on human rights within the framework of the privileged relationship and close cooperation with European countries.
The formula adopted is not just a declaration with protocol effects, but a commitment that aims to transcend the peace paradigm launched in Madrid and Oslo in the nineties. Experience shows that the point of arrival that was the Palestinian State must now become the point of departure, so that Israel and Palestinians are forced to negotiate bilaterally on the basis of the borders recognized by the United Nations. The paradigm shift is supported by Netanyahu’s political career, which aims to avoid the existence of a Palestinian State altogether, promote the colonization and occupation of its territory, divisions among Palestinians and even settle the terrorist and Islamist organization Hamas in Gaza, to the detriment of the peaceful and secular Palestinian Authority.
According to President Sánchez, this decision is not only a historic necessity and justice, but also “the only way to move towards the solution that we all consider the only possible one to achieve a future of peace: a Palestinian State that coexists with the State of Israel in peace and security.” Spain refuses that Israel maintains its military presence or administers the Strip and believes that only the Palestinian Authority can regain control over the entire territory. He wants Palestine to become a viable State, based on East Jerusalem, Gaza and the West Bank, the latter two connected by a land corridor. And it bases this resolution on UN Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, which expose the open illegitimacy of the Jewish occupation colonies built after 1967.
The Spanish idea, based on the European position, leads to negotiations not about the possible status of the Palestinian state, but about the precise delimitation of the borders between the two states, which assumes an exchange and adjustment of territories. As a result, Madrid, “will not recognize changes in the 1967 border lines other than those agreed by the parties.” The irritation this has caused in a government like Netanyahu’s is understandable, since if this path succeeds it will be forced to negotiate on the same terms as it has been since Oslo, and the expansionist pretensions of the Israeli right will become obsolete throughout the area between Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea.
The madness of Foreign Minister Israel Katz’s angry and unjustified reaction against Spain is incomprehensible, thereby plunging prestigious Israeli diplomacy into a mire of insults and coercion, defamation and manipulation of history, uncivilized practices and alien to good diplomatic customs. This extreme right-wing government, which Israel is suffering from, acts as if its country has only rights and no obligations, not even in polite and civilized forms, retreats from international legality and the rules of the game in general whenever it suits it and accepts them only when they exactly suit its interests. The citizens of Israel do not deserve this, nor do Israel’s numerous friends in Spain and the world.
(TagsToTranslate)Opinion