New York Declaration: An International Step Towards a Two-State Solution Amidst Complex Realities
Font Size:
16
The United Nations General Assembly approved the "New York Declaration" last Friday with a sweeping majority of 142 votes, in a move described as an attempt to revive the two-state solution path between Palestinians and Israelis. The declaration came as a French-Saudi initiative, culminating from a high-level conference held in late July, in the context of a complex international situation in the Middle East, especially with the ongoing war in Gaza and the accompanying diplomatic movements.
The declaration serves as a non-binding roadmap aimed at achieving "concrete and time-bound irreversible steps" towards establishing an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel. The declaration received broad support but faced opposition from ten countries, including the United States and Israel, while 12 countries abstained from voting, and about 20 countries were absent from the session.
The declaration calls for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, the release of all prisoners, the disarmament of Hamas, and its exclusion from governance in the sector, while emphasizing the necessity of global recognition of the State of Palestine as a fundamental element for achieving peace. Additionally, the declaration envisions a Palestinian authority controlling all Palestinian territories, with the establishment of a transitional administrative committee immediately upon the ceasefire, and support for a temporary international mission to achieve stability under the auspices of the United Nations.
Symbolically, the vote represents a confirmation of the increasing international support for the two-state solution idea, especially in light of the recent military escalation in Gaza. The Palestinian ambassador to the United Nations noted that the overwhelming support reflects "almost everyone's desire to open the door to a peace option." However, the reactions from the concerned parties were varied.
While Palestinian diplomacy welcomed the decision, Israel strongly condemned it. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated hours before the vote: "There will be no Palestinian state," and the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations described the declaration as a "theater" and a "gift to Hamas." For its part, the United States opposed the decision, labeling it a "propaganda ploy" and "inappropriate" and "threatening serious diplomatic efforts."
This American stance comes in a historical context of traditionally steadfast support for the two-state solution, but with a refusal to recognize the State of Palestine unilaterally. However, the current U.S. administration, as well as potential statements should a Trump administration return, show a variation in positions, ranging from conditional support for the Deal of the Century to opposition to the Palestinian state following the events of October 2023.
While the declaration remains non-binding, it sends a strong political message regarding the increasing isolation of the United States and Israel on the two-state solution stance. It also opens the door for future diplomatic moves, such as the recognition by several countries of the State of Palestine during the current General Assembly sessions.
But the deeper question remains: Can this declaration achieve a breakthrough in a path that has been frozen for decades? The answer depends on the international community's ability to translate this political will into effective pressure on the ground, while simultaneously overcoming the internal complexities of Israelis and Palestinians, and the complex geopolitical reality in the region. Without a clear implementation mechanism and genuine will from the concerned parties, the declaration may remain just another statement in the United Nations record.
The declaration serves as a non-binding roadmap aimed at achieving "concrete and time-bound irreversible steps" towards establishing an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel. The declaration received broad support but faced opposition from ten countries, including the United States and Israel, while 12 countries abstained from voting, and about 20 countries were absent from the session.
The declaration calls for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, the release of all prisoners, the disarmament of Hamas, and its exclusion from governance in the sector, while emphasizing the necessity of global recognition of the State of Palestine as a fundamental element for achieving peace. Additionally, the declaration envisions a Palestinian authority controlling all Palestinian territories, with the establishment of a transitional administrative committee immediately upon the ceasefire, and support for a temporary international mission to achieve stability under the auspices of the United Nations.
Symbolically, the vote represents a confirmation of the increasing international support for the two-state solution idea, especially in light of the recent military escalation in Gaza. The Palestinian ambassador to the United Nations noted that the overwhelming support reflects "almost everyone's desire to open the door to a peace option." However, the reactions from the concerned parties were varied.
While Palestinian diplomacy welcomed the decision, Israel strongly condemned it. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated hours before the vote: "There will be no Palestinian state," and the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations described the declaration as a "theater" and a "gift to Hamas." For its part, the United States opposed the decision, labeling it a "propaganda ploy" and "inappropriate" and "threatening serious diplomatic efforts."
This American stance comes in a historical context of traditionally steadfast support for the two-state solution, but with a refusal to recognize the State of Palestine unilaterally. However, the current U.S. administration, as well as potential statements should a Trump administration return, show a variation in positions, ranging from conditional support for the Deal of the Century to opposition to the Palestinian state following the events of October 2023.
While the declaration remains non-binding, it sends a strong political message regarding the increasing isolation of the United States and Israel on the two-state solution stance. It also opens the door for future diplomatic moves, such as the recognition by several countries of the State of Palestine during the current General Assembly sessions.
But the deeper question remains: Can this declaration achieve a breakthrough in a path that has been frozen for decades? The answer depends on the international community's ability to translate this political will into effective pressure on the ground, while simultaneously overcoming the internal complexities of Israelis and Palestinians, and the complex geopolitical reality in the region. Without a clear implementation mechanism and genuine will from the concerned parties, the declaration may remain just another statement in the United Nations record.
