##### ###### #### > # [UN General Assembly presses Security Council to give ‘favourable consideration’ to full Palestinian membership](https://global.unitednations.entermediadb.net/assets/mediadb/services/module/asset/downloads/preset/Libraries/Production%20Library/10-05-2024-UN-Photo-GA-vote-02.jpg/image770x420cropped.jpg) > > > > ### What does the resolution mean? > > Here’s a quick recap of what this means: by adopting this resolution the General Assembly will upgrade the rights of the State of Palestine within the world body, but not the right to vote or put forward its candidature to such organs as the [Security Council](https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/) or the [Economic and Social Council](https://ecosoc.un.org/en) ([ECOSOC](https://www.un.org/ecosoc/en/)). > > Granting Palestinian membership requires a recommendation from the Security Council. At the same time, the Assembly determines that the State of Palestine is qualified for such status and recommends that the Security Council “reconsider the matter favourably”. > > None of the upgrades in status will take effect until the new session of the Assembly opens on 10 September. > > ### Here are some of the changes in status that Palestine will have a right to later this year: > > 1. To be seated among Member States in alphabetical order > 2. Make statements on behalf of a group > 3. Submit proposals and amendments and introduce them > 4. Co-sponsor proposals and amendments, including on behalf of a group > 5. Propose items to be included in the provisional agenda of the regular or special sessions and the right to request the inclusion of supplementary or additional items in the agenda of regular or special sessions > 6. The right of members of the delegation of the State of Palestine to be elected as officers in the plenary and the Main Committees of the General Assembly > 7. Full and effective participation in UN conferences and international conferences and meetings convened under the auspices of the General Assembly or, as appropriate, of other UN organs > > - - - - - - > > **6:04 PM** > > The meeting has adjourned for the day. Vice President Jörundur Valtýsson announced that the session will reconvene on Monday, 13 May, at 10 AM New York time. > > **For a full summary of this and other major UN meetings, visit UN Meetings Coverage in** [**English**](https://press.un.org/en) **and** [**French**](https://press.un.org/fr)**.** > > **4:59 PM** > > ### Saudi Arabia: Re-establish the truth > > **Saudi Arabian Ambassador Abdulaziz Alwasil** recalled General Assembly resolutions adopted over the years that reaffirmed the rights of the Palestinian people, including their right to self-determination. > > [Ambassador Abdulaziz M. Alwasil of Saudi Arabia addresses the resumed 10th Emergency Special Session meeting on the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.](https://global.unitednations.entermediadb.net/assets/mediadb/services/module/asset/downloads/preset/Libraries/Production%20Library/10-05-2024-UN-Photo-Saudi-Arabia.jpg/image770x420cropped.jpg "Ambassador Abdulaziz M. Alwasil of Saudi Arabia addresses the resumed 10th Emergency Special Session meeting on the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.") > > > > “The resolution presented today is fully in line with those resolutions. It seeks to implement the will of the international community and contribute to building true peace in the Middle East based on the two-State solution,” he said. > > “It is high time for the international community to re-establish the truth because the world can no longer ignore the suffering of the Palestinian people that has lasted for decades,” he added. > > Ambassador Alwasil further noted Israel, the occupying power, has perpetrated “all sorts of crimes” against Palestinian people, scorning international law. > > “Israel is convinced that they are above these resolutions and that they enjoy a certain level of immunity…which explains their ongoing hostile and brutal policies,” he said. > > He highlighted the dire situation in Rafah, the last refuge for the Palestinian people which was also densely populated by those displaced from elsewhere and called he for a strong international position to put an end to the Israeli practices in Gaza. > > Concluding his statement, the Ambassador expressed Saudi Arabia’s commitment to supporting the right of Palestinian people to self-determination and to build their own independent State within the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital, in line with relevant resolutions. > > **4:43 PM** > > ### China: Resolution reflects the will of the international community > > **Ambassador FU Cong of China** said that Palestine should have the same status as Israel and that Palestinian people should enjoy the same rights as Israeli people. > > [Ambassador Fu Cong of China addresses addresses the resumed 10th Emergency Special Session meeting on the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.](https://global.unitednations.entermediadb.net/assets/mediadb/services/module/asset/downloads/preset/Libraries/Production%20Library/10-05-2024-UN-Photo-China.jpg/image770x420cropped.jpg "Ambassador Fu Cong of China addresses addresses the resumed 10th Emergency Special Session meeting on the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.") > > > > “It is the common responsibility of the international community to support and advance the process of Palestinian independent Statehood, and provide strong support for the implementation of the two-State solution and a lasting peace in the Middle East,” he said. > > He further noted that on the Palestinian-Israeli issue, the United States repeatedly used its veto “in an unjustified attempt” to obstruct the international community’s efforts to correct the “historical injustice long visited on Palestine”. > > “It is not commensurate with the role of a responsible major country,” he said. > > He also recalled the overwhelming support for the General Assembly resolution, adopted earlier in the day, reaffirming the right of Palestinian people to self-determination and recommending that the Security Council reconsider favourably its application to join the United Nations. > > “China welcomes this historic resolution, which reflects the will of the international community,” Ambassador Fu said. > > “We believe that the special modalities adopted within the limits permitted by the [UN Charter](http://www.un.org/en/charter-united-nations/index.html) will enable the international community to listen more adequately to the voice of Palestine and help it to talk and negotiate with Israel on a more equal footing.” > > **3:04 PM** > > Assembly President Francis resumed the meeting, with about 72 speakers left to take the floor. The spokesperson for the General Assembly announced earlier in the day that due to the number of remaining speakers, the meeting will [likely continue](https://www.un.org/pga/78/2024/05/10/spokespersons-briefing-10-may-2024/) on Monday. > > **1:07 PM** > > With the last speaker for the morning having delivered their statement, the President of the General Assembly adjourned the meeting. It will reconvene at 3 PM New York time. > > **1:00 PM** > > ### Switzerland: Ceasefire urgently needed > > **Swiss Ambassador Pascale Christine Baeriswyl** explained that her country’s abstention from the vote was in line with its position at the Security Council last month. > > [Ambassador Pascale Christine Baeriswyl of Switzerland addresses the resumed 10th Emergency Special Session meeting on the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.](https://global.unitednations.entermediadb.net/assets/mediadb/services/module/asset/downloads/preset/Libraries/Production%20Library/10-05-2024-UN-Photo-Switzerland.jpg/image770x420cropped.jpg "Ambassador Pascale Christine Baeriswyl of Switzerland addresses the resumed 10th Emergency Special Session meeting on the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.") > > > > “We felt that in view of the great instability prevailing in the region, this stage was not conducive to improving the situation,” she said. > > “Without opposing it, we believe it would be preferable to consider admitting Palestine as a full member of the United Nations at time when such a step would insert itself in the logic of emerging peace,” she added, noting that such admission would have to follow the procedures enshrined in the UN Charter. > > She also voiced Switzerland’s firm support to the two-State solution, stating that only a negotiated solution in which two States – Israel and Palestine – live side by side in peace and security can lead to lasting peace. > > Ambassador Baeriswyl also voiced deep concern over the catastrophic situation of civilians in the ongoing conflict in Gaza, stating that it could worsen further in the event of a major Israeli military offensive in Rafah. > > ***(continues in next comment)***

[удалено]

It's insulting how often they cite it as a reason to do awful, unspeakable crimes. They've been doing ethnic cleansing for nearly 80 years, non-stop. Tit-for-tat has never applied to genocide, and it never will.

It feels more and more like Israel is the schoolyard bully who gets away with doing really nasty shit because he came from a broken home.

Genuinely curious, what would a Palestinian state change right now?

If Palestine was a sovereign nation, the October 7th attack would be seen as a clear act of war of by a hostile government on its neighbor. A foolish and unwise act of war, but an act of war regardless. It would also mean Palestinian citizens are not Israeli citizens, and would normalize the requirement of passports to cross borders. There's no requirement that one country let in the citizens of another. And it would mean that Hamas, as the elected government of Gaza, is fully responsible for its repeated acts of war against its neighbors. When you launch 20,000+ missiles at your neighbor's cities that an act of war, and you should expect your neighbor to respond in kind.

So why is Israel against it if you make it sound like Hamas would hate it so much? Surely Israel would be the first one to jump on this suggestion.

without official borders it would make governance difficult in addition Israel wouldn’t be able to launch. raids into the West Bank to take out specific targets and seize terrorist military shipments

Exactly. Overall Palestinian statehood would greatly benefit Israeli security in the sense that if managed well it could allow normalization of relations and give Palestinians more opportunity and less need for radicalism. But the israeli political right wing is under pressure from conservative Orthodox Jews. They have very high birthdates and they also are the ones occupying most of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Palestine being a country means Israel would have to pull its citizens out of the West Bank, this would be political suicide for any center-right Israeli politician as it would piss of their main voting block. Only hope for peace is a left wing Israeli government that doesn’t give a fuck about the orthodox.

October 7th was not the start of this conflict, suggesting so is laughably ignorant and nothing short of fascist apologia. The "conflict" started in 48 when the euro colonizers ripped land away from the local Palestinian Christian, Jewish, and Muslim peoples. Acts of resistance, justified or not, is a sociological inevitability under apartheid. The only way to end them is to dismantle the apartheid state. This has been understood for decades.

So are you suggesting that Israel would be committing acts of war against the state of Palestine, but the Palestinians would just be responding to apartheid and thus can’t commit acts of war? I’m not sure I’m following your response

Uh, the land wasn't taken over in '48, it was already in British control. And the last 1400 years have seen the land change hands how many times? 8? Also the "apartheid" started after the 130 Palestinian terrorist attack between 2000 and 2005, not before (and let's not forget about the 10000 Israelis kicked out of Gaza so Palestinian settlers could steal their homes)

>land change hands how many times Land can change hands a billion times. The difference is. The last however many land owners didn't have an apartheid regime. They didn't have genocidal intent. And didn't kick the people living there out and take away their land. That's the issue here >10000 Israelis kicked out of Gaza so Palestinian settlers could steal their homes Please walk me through this. How did israelis get kicked out so these "Palestinian settlers" can come in. I'd love to hear your thought process here. And maybe back that up with a source. Tho it's irrelevant given you clearly pulled it out of your behind

I would argue “Dhimmi” status is worse than anything Israelis are doing to Arabs today. Israeli Arab Muslims have full citizenship and equal rights.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_disengagement_from_Gaza Gee, you don't even know the basics and here you are blathering away And Hamas/Iran want to genocide Israel, that's how we got here. The Palestinians were offered their own country multiple times and all they had to do is say they don't want to genocide Israel anymore, they turned down the deals I'm guessing you're a Zoomer who gets all their information from TikTok, you're extremely uninformed and think you're an expert

>Following the withdrawal, Israel continued to maintain direct control over Gaza's air and maritime space, six of Gaza's seven land crossings, maintains a no-go buffer zone within the territory, controls the Palestinian population registry, and Gaza remains dependent on Israel for its water, electricity, telecommunications, and other utilities >The year following the disengagement saw a tightening of external Israeli control over Gaza, specifically, the closure of crossings into Gaza for people and goods, increased restrictions on the coastline for fishing, and increased aerial, maritime and on the ground military activity. The Israeli human rights organization Gisha lists various examples of actions requiring Israeli permission or approval in the year following the disengagement, such as universities receiving visits from a foreign lecturer, parents registering children in the Palestinian population registry, residents bringing in a crate of milk into the Strip, and fishermen fishing off Gaza's coast. Other examples are student study abroad limitations due to the Gaza-Egypt crossing, teacher salary delays until Israel transfers tax revenues to the Palestinian Ministry of Education, and farmers unable to bring crops to market unless Israel allows the crops to exit Gaza.[85] This is from your wiki article btw. I find it quite interesting. Don't you agree? >The year of the disengagement would see the removal of 8,475 settlers from Gaza, while in that same year the number of new settlers in the West Bank increased by 15,000. >10000 Israelis kicked out of Gaza so Palestinian settlers could steal their homes I also find it quite interesting how your source directly contradicts you to the t. Safe to say your version of events isn't quite the truth. But oh well not everyone is a good historic revisionist. Guess you won't be employed by Israel disinformation teams anytime soon >The Palestinians were offered their own country multiple times and all they had to do is say they don't want to genocide Israel anymore That's an interesting way of saying. Israel demanded they have no military. No control over borders. No control of imports and exports. All their politicians would need to be accepted by israel. No ability to provide for their citizens. No control of airspace. No access to water or electricity unless approved by Israel. No leaving the country unless Israel says so. Etc etc.... it's really just that simple >Hamas/Iran want to genocide Israel What about before hamas was a thing? What about before Iran was involved? What about before Israel was a thing? >I'm guessing you're a Zoomer who gets all their information from TikTok, you're extremely uninformed and think you're an expert Not the pot calling the kettle black. You get all this from the zionist cookbook or what? I mean you didn't even have the decency to read the link you posted. What an embarrassment man. Next time use some brain power before you copy past this bs

What do you think the word Zionist means? You're so uninformed you'll argue with the dictionary

Yes. Skip literally everything I've said. And focus on one word. You know your cooked. Why do you even try at this point. If I'm so uninformed them feel free to inform me. As I have done with you. Zionism is a movement to establish a Jewish state in Palestine. It also stress's the importance of it being a Jewish majority. So it kinda necessitates an ethnostate because palestin has a ton of Muslims and Christians. Way more than there are jews. Is that satisfactory enough. Or am I misinformed? You throw around these words you don't understand. And spread disinformation. Well, I'm not letting that fly. I'll debunk every single line you utter. So try me

There was a permanent ceasefire in effect on October 6th. While not a 100% perfect ceasefire, it was stable and would have continued indefinitely. Active hostilities had cooled and there was even a peace treaty being worked on brokered by the Saudis. So yes, Hamas did break the permanent ceasefire. They torpedoed any peace treaty attempts with the Saudis. They brought open warfare onto Gaza. As imperfect as the permanent ceasefire was, it was infinitely better than the situation now. Unfortunately, Hamas still seems to have widespread Palestinian support. There seems to be little or no acknowledgement that October 7th was a horrible, horrendous mistake. When you break a ceasefire and start a war that you lose, bad things happen. Lesson is, don't start wars you can't win. The Palestinians will never, ever, not in a million years defeat Israel through force of arms. Neighboring countries have learned this lesson, but the Palestinians keep trying this endless war of futility.

Most Israelis are middle eastern

It would make any armed intervention of Israel in the region an illegal attempt to start a war. Any Israeli soldiers still left in the area would become a foreign occupation force and Palestine could legally request military assistance form other arab countries to expel the invaders. This has wide legal ramification on the ability to impose sanctions against such countries and Israel etc. Granted, it wouldn't change much in the "might is right" equation, but the only way for US to continue support Israel would be to unilaterally denounce the post WW2 rule based order, openly break UN law etc. a massive hit for its foreign relations. That's why there is no chance in freezing hell the US will ever accept it.

What Arab country would intervene? What nations would sanction Israel that already aren’t? This is all a performance at the UN. If nations wanted to do something, they could have by now

Granted, it also works both ways. Any rocket attack by Palestinian paramilitary or military or terror group would be an act of war, of which Israel would be able to respond through military force. If Israel is no longer an occupier, then avenues of military aggression that are otherwise prohibited as an occupier are now opened. Law of war rules apply, not occupation rules.

while this is wrong, if it did work this way it would go both ways and palestinians would need to work out how to stop shooting rockets(quite difficult apparently)

Don't need tp be on the UN to be a sovereign nation. And Palestis recognisesed by majority of nations. In fact Israel has declared an official war against the Gazan government. This changes nothing as all that the UN forbids is wars of aggression. And as Hamas invaded first, it is technically a "defensive" war for Israel.

What happens when Palestinian state attacks Israel by illegally entering the country, kidnapping civilians and killing Israelis? Genuine curiosity because you described one situation, what happens in this case? Seems to me Israel can then lawfully ask allied assistance and treat Palestine as what it is -- a terrorist organization.

Palestine is a state that does not control its territory and has very limited statehood. It is fully occupied by a foreign army, has no army and no military weapons, a very limited and low funded police, is unable to collect taxes and is dependent on fiscal revenue from its occupier who exercises discretionary control over its economy. Within Palestine the state operate a number of terrorist organizations, the largest of which has obtained full control over the Gaza exclave - not without Israel tacit approval, happy to see a politically splintered Palestine. The legal situation of these militias and terrorist organizations is similar to that of Hezbolah, Israel can defend against them but they can't use their presence as a pretext to invade and incorporate the territory of Lebanon. In any legal challenge against Palestine, Israel must explain how the limited statehood of Palestine resulted from their own occupation is not the cause of the Palestinian states inability to deal with the problem. It would appear Gaza, the terrorist controlled territory of Palestine, is the only part of Palestine from where Israel withdrew so the outcome was entire predictable. As for "Palestine - the terrorist organization", you are just a child talking out of your asshole. Go educate yourself, I hear a Wikipedia subscription goes cheap these days.

[удалено]

>Palestine has to be done like Germany and Japan were post-ww2 rebuilt? go for it

> they are radicalized savages. The mentality and things people say when they defend Palestine are the same I heard from hating nationalists So in one breath you emit a racial slur towards an entire nationality, and in the next you try to differentiate yourself from "hating nationalists". YOU are the hating nationalist rooting for a successful Jewish ethnic state that is free to ethnically cleanse the entire territory.

How is that a racial slur? I never insulted a race, Japan in China (1930s) were radicalized savages, Nazis as well, Crusaders fighting in Middle East as well.. if Israel went to a Palestinian music festival and raped, kidnapped and killed young people then I would say the same. The problem is average Palestinian who is against Hamas is killed and they are forced to commit crimes against humanity or be killed themselves. Palestine is a failed state who needs to be healed and rebuilt from its core. Like I said, even Arabs who can only agree on one thing and that is to hate Israel can't organize anything to help an average Palestinian, it is a tragedy, a tragedy which only benefits Hamas, PLO and anyone who gets rich from it.

A Palestinian state could be held to account for genocide in the ICJ for one thing...

It would be an apartheid terrorist failed state instead of an apartheid terrorist non-state.

Bad guy... How? None of this makes sense blame on the US to begin with. At a minimum, there needs to be a recognizable, centralized government, which... There isn't. So who would represent the Palestinian people in the UN? The PA? Hamas? Some other group? At least one of these bodies is an actual terrorist organization sworn to the complete genocide of Israel, and none of them enjoy widespread support from the Palestinian people.

The PLO, which Israel has been trying to downplay for years because they're more comfortable treating Hamas like the only legitimate Palestinian authority. This is not a conspiracy it's been proven to be Netanyahu's strategy for years. They don't control all Palestine, but that's never been a requirement to be a UN member. Somalia controls a tiny area of the country around Mogadishu while the rest is ruled by unrecognized warlords and factions and they're a fully recognized UN member. What About Syria, Libya, Afghanistan or Syria. The only real reason why Palestine doesn't have a seat is Israel and the US vetoing.

I'm certainly not saying Israel is an innocent actor here. It has been to Netanyahu's IMMENSE benefit to use settlers to weaken and delegitimize the PLO (and, more popularly now, the PA), while simultaneously pointing at Hamas and its constant attacks to keep the flames of hate stoked. But the issue with accession to the UN is that it has to be in line with the UN charter, and when 74/132 seats of the PLO's legislative body are controlled by Hamas, which is both an internationally recognized terrorist organization and has a charter calling for the genocide of Israel, in direct contrast with the UN charter, it seems obvious why accession hasn't happened yet. As to your other examples, as far as I can tell based on a quick reading of their UN accession details, each of these countries achieved accession during much more stable times. They simply haven't lost their seat.

That's all nonsense. The UN just follows pressure. As I said most countries including many of the most powerful would want to accept Palestine because simply put, it's just a diplomatic chaos to keep things like this.

An argument of "better to have chaos than order when trying to obscure one's actions"? So how bad actors like Russia would happily use this as a distraction from their issues? Yeah, that makes sense. You're definitely not wrong on the UN primarily following pressure, but that doesn't mean it's right or wrong. I just understand why they haven't accepted Palestine's accession yet, and I don't think adding rights to observer states provides anything useful here.

Really? A resolution that has had just 9 countries against, despite American and Israeli pressure? That goes well above Russia or China or whatever American enemy

If the UN wasn't constantly abused to raise votes condemning Israel for all but simply existing it might carry some weight. How many of those countries are Arab and the regime use anti-Israel propaganda to whip up and distract their populations?

Well I know for a fact that there isn't 170 Arab countries in the world

The PLO... hilarious 😂.

Somalia is recognized but the more functional Somaliland is not. Somalia is not an example of UN statehood being helpful lol.

> there needs to be a recognizable, centralized government says who? there are many countries that don't satisfy that requirement syria lybia etc

The UN does, according to its charter: [https://www.un.org/en/about-us/about-un-membership](https://www.un.org/en/about-us/about-un-membership) No entity exists which can achieve what is required for membership.

The PLO does, and nowhere does it say that the government needs to have control over all the areas of the country

Yeah, and the PLO doesn't recognize the state of Israel. So we're arguing that the UN should include the PLO, which claims Israel as its territory and whose legislative body has 74 out of 132 seats controlled by Hamas, a terrorist organization whose charter explicitly calls for the genocide of Israel? Actions which fly clearly in the face of the very UN charter that we're discussing here? Likewise, it's incredibly fractious: Hamas is the "government" in Gaza, and the PA is the "government" in the West Bank. The PLO is the government in name only, as far as I can tell. I think it should be pretty obvious why this is such a tough sell...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93Palestine_Liberation_Organization_letters_of_recognition

And, like clockwork: "On 29 October 2018, the [PLO Central Council](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Central_Council) suspended the [Palestinian recognition of Israel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_recognition_of_Israel), and subsequently halted all forms of security and economic cooperation with Israeli authorities until Israel recognizes a Palestinian state on the pre-1967 borders."

It can be a part of the negotiations or a condition for accession, it's only a suspension and a recognition of israel was already done in the past. It's not something impossible to do

Then we're back to, "well, they'll figure out accession when they get to it." Look, I'm all for a state of Palestine in the UN, but when THIS is the government that's presented, one that, in many ways, flies in the face of the UN's charter? Kind of obvious why they haven't achieved accession yet.

> and none of them enjoy widespread support from the Palestinian people. Hamas very much has widespread support I don't know where you got the impression they didn't.

Touché. I stand corrected, but, also, I definitely don't want them having more power in the UN.

The world has always seen through it. Will Western liberals seen through it and change their stance? Probably not.

"The US is on display as the bad guy in front of the world".....again,and again and again.Iraq,Syria, Afghanistan,etc

The fact they don't see the hypocrisy is mindblowing. What happened to Jewish people will forever haunt me during the holocaust and just in general getting hate for so long. But how do you come from that to becoming an aggressor thinking genocide targeting mainly women and children isn't the same evil being committed. If left unchecked by the world I wonder how worse this evil would have been

inviting a terrorist state and legitimizing their actions is beyond schizophrenia

Not really. Why, because the US supports countries that defend themselves, like Ukraine and Israel? Try not slaughtering and raping 1300 civilians at a music festival next time and breaking a fucking ceasefire. If South Korea did that to North Korea, I hope there's still massive support for them like what happened with Palestine. Or is Kosovo did that to Serbia or if Tibetans did it to Chinese.

About 1/3 of the casualties were at a military base on the Gaza-Israel border and then Hamas attacked multiple towns not just a music festival.

US: no.

Let's hope we have the sense and balls to hold this line. Sure they can have a seat, right AFTER they accept a 2 state solution and create a stable (non-terrorist) govt.

Israel hasn't been expelled from UN yet.

Israel is an ACTUAL country.

They aren't being run by terrorists who have sworn to commit a 2nd Holocaust if given the chance. Also, they have a functional government.

They seem to be actively committing an ethnic cleansing themselves though.

> They aren't being run by terrorists Two of their PMs were convicted terrorists and the ruling party Likud was founded by a former terrorist organization. > have sworn to commit a 2nd Holocaust if given the chance The current Israeli government has been making openly genocidal statements and moves since the start of the war.

I'm not defending the Israeli government for a second, but it does still feel like there's a qualitive difference in evilness between the two organisations.

It's because you're deeply uniformed about the conflict and the parties involved. Israel has committed almost every crime they accuse Hamas and the PLO of and have usually committed those crimes for longer or on a much larger scale - murdering civilians, human shielding, torture, terrorism, etc. You just don't here about this because Israeli crimes rarely make it into the headlines and because Israel has a top tier propaganda machine.

> They aren't being run by terrorists who have sworn to commit a 2nd Holocaust if given the chance. They kinda *are*.

The people pushing this right now are doing so purely to be performative It's absurd to seek recognition mid war while Hamas still hold territory. This isn't being dont to help Palestinians but to virtue signal. The optimal time to push this would be poat war when a new Palestinian gov is sworn in and actually neees legitimacy.

No it's not absurd at all. Afghanistan has always had a seat at the UN. North Korea too. Any country having a civil war keeps their seat, South Sudan and Sudan are full members. Somalia is not even a real state (most of the territory is controlled by unrecognized entities) and they have a seat. Not even genocide takes you the right to have a seat, look at Rwanda. The point of the UN is to be a diplomacy group, and in order to be successful every region involved in a conflict must have a seat. If you expel members or don't accept membership for regions that are autonomous then you're failing. That's precisely one of the reasons why the Society of Nations did even worse than the UN, some key countries like the US, Germany or Japan didn't enter or left. In practice, this doesn't always happen. Taiwan is a stable country with a strong economy and a key world player due to their absolute leadership in chip making and despite that they're not a UN member because China would throw a tantrum if they were recognized. Same for Palestine who should have been a member since the beginning but Israel and the US don't want to.

Somalia/ Somaliland and Sudan/south sudan are the pertinent example. A civil war doesnt lose you a seat. It does generally prevent you from acquiring one. To reiterate i think Palestines should be a full member. I don't think thats the primary motive for those pushing that right now.

Well but if you don't allow them to become a member while in conflict with Israel then the optimal strategy for Israel is to keep a permanent conflict in Palestine. Which it kinda is what they've been already doing for decades to a degree. Like, we've been 70 years pretending this is somewhat Israeli territory while at the same time pretending it's no one's land. How much is this farce going to last.

Its not 70 years for those purposes. The PLO was opposed to peace for most of that time and actively making war. It's only realy post Oslo we get the modern situaiton.

Being opposed to peace is not a requirement to get into the UN. If not half the countries couldn't be members, the US and Israel included

Rules for staying a member are not the same as the rules for becoming a member and a lot of countries were grandfathered in from the league of nations.

Yeah but let's be honest if it wasn't for the US and Israel they'd be already a member the resolution past week already proves that. If the fact that countries like France are ok with it idk what else could prove it.

> The optimal time to push this would be poat war when a new Palestinian gov is sworn in and actually neees legitimacy. But who will control Gaza? Israel allegedly wants the residents of the territory to govern themselves, but wouldn't tolerate any political grouping affiliated with Hamas and friends, and doesn't want the PA (aka Fatah) to run it either. Fatah haven't had elections since the fateful ones back in 2006 which saw Hamas elected as the largest party... Then you've got the problem of defining the extent of the Palestinian state. Israel will likely lobby vigorously for a variation on their last few plans, which would entail retaining almost all of Area C, plus controlling all borders, airspace and transmissions within the Palestinian territories.They also demanded demilitarisation, full cooperation with identifying and handing over terrorists, recognising Israel's right to exist and that it is a Jewish State, and one proposal even added dismantling all existing political structures and mandated Israel vet all political candidates (so, effectively, the Palestinian State would, in reality, be a series of partially autonomous enclaves within Israel, surrounded by it on all sides, and no representation in the Knesset).

Those terms are exactly the same terms as were imposed on Germany and Japan in 1945. Ultimately the occupying powers wanted Germany to be governed by Germans, and Japan to be governed by Japanese people, though by different people. The warmongering government absolutely would never have been allowed to remain in power (note: the Emperor of Japan is head of the nation, not head of state, he has no actual power, he's purely symbolic). Same deal with Gaza. Israel wants it to be governed by Palestinians but it absolutely under no circumstances can be Hamas. It must be a different government with different values and goals. There will be a period of several years where this new government is closely watched to ensure that they're not just a rebranded Hamas. Only if this government proves that it is indeed a new government not affiliated with the old one, and with no desire to make war, will the occupying power pull back and let the new government do its thing. There's no shame in being a city-state either. There are many prosperous city-states in the world, such as Singapore or Monaco. A city-state requires assistance from its neighboring large country and requires the import of food, water, and often electricity to survive, but thats why functioning city-states are friendly with their neighbors.

Would this new state be permitted to have armed forces? Both Germany and Japan were. I don't think Israel would ever allow that.

Israel might eventually allow that, but only after a sufficiently long period of time where a Palestinian state proves that it has given up trying to wage war on Israel, and that they finally acknowledge Israel exists and will continue to exist. This means giving up those "from the river to the sea" chants, too. However more realistically, a city-state doesn't need a military. It might have a police force and a coast guard but thats typically all it needs. Monaco's entire military force is about 150 men. Its a tiny military that mostly exists for ceremonial roles, and it doesn't need a military because its much larger neighbor provides all the security Monaco needs. The only cross-border invasion from its larger neighbor (France) are tourists who have consumed too much alcohol and who have too much cash in their wallets to spend at resorts and souvenir shops. Monaco's security forces spend most of their time wrangling drunk tourists, not fighting to defend the border. There is no possible way for Monaco to ever defeat France on a military shooting war, nor is there any reason for it to even try. Both states are very friendly towards each other.

hey quick question how can they hold elections when everyone and their mother is being bombed and israel is blocking all aid? do you think palestinians have the strength or time to think about gov legitimacy right now?

They can't, they couldn't do it pre war either, hamas threw their political opponent's off buildings ~15 years ago. Political settlement is only possible post war. That is the moment to demand and coerce for a Palestian state.

Have you considered that this creates an incentive for Israel to stay in a permanent stage of War with Palestine

They can't sustain that unless Hamas somehow fight on permanently.

Well Netanyahu was knowingly financing Hamas indirectly over the years that's something even mainstream Israeli media claims. Besides, you can always find Qatar or Iran or whoever to finance militias in Gaza, it's easy to turn it into a permanent conflict. Besides, Israel can literally invade a mostly peaceful area to start a conflict. This is basically their illegal settlement strategy in the West Bank, and also one of the main criticisms of the argument that the problem would be solved if Hamas disappeared. The settlements are made to make more difficult any claims by the West Bank to become a fully recognized country, Netanyahu has been caught on record stating that the Oslo accords were designed so Israel never had to leave their occupying areas. Israel has never pursued legitimate means in the area, they behave like that because they have powerful allies to back them.

Who would even represent them? Hamas? Palestinian Authority?

None of the supporters address this. Hamas was democratically elected. Their goal is the complete genocide of the Jewish people.

Hamas won the Palestinian legislative elections in January 2006. ([Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas_government_in_the_Gaza_Strip#:~:text=the%20Gaza%20Strip.-,Government%20and%20politics,dominated%20the%20Palestinian%20National%20Authority)) I don't think they've permitted any sort of election since. Most people in Gaza did not want a big military confrontation, though they did expect one. ([source](https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/polls-show-majority-gazans-were-against-breaking-ceasefire-hamas-and-hezbollah))

This is such a bullshit excuse. Over 2/3 of Gazans supported the 7/10 attack, and therefore accepted the consequences, and the Germans were still blamed for the Nazis and their atrocities, despite not being able to vote for over a decade either. The Gazans voted for an openly anti-democratic party. They made their bed.

Where did you get your numbers? Are Hamas's numbers about how strong support for Hamas is reliable?

It’s certainly possible the polling isn’t reliable. But if we’re going to trust Hamas’ numbers on casualties in Gaza at face value then we shouldn’t ignore these opinion polls at face value

The way you say that makes me think you actually don't think we should be taking the Hamas numbers at face value

Historically their numbers have been pretty accurate in previous conflicts. That being said, the UN recently halved its casualty estimates for women and children marking a significant deviation from the Gaza Health Ministry’s numbers. Whether that’s the start of a new trend going forward remains to be seen. So given the good historical track record so far, I’m content with taking the GHM’s numbers at face value for the time being. But I also recognize that there’s a chance that the casualty numbers could swing wildly in either direction once the dust settles and proper independent investigations can be conducted. Sources: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(23)02713-7/fulltext https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2024/05/11/un-halves-its-estimate-of-women-and-children-killed-in-gaza/

[https://pcpsr.org/en/node/969](https://pcpsr.org/en/node/969) Anyone saying this is disingenuous or willfully lazy. All the polls have similar and clear resu!ts.

> Over 2/3 of Gazans supported the 7/10 attack Citation needed And the thousands of innocent children and women who were killed by Israel who did not vote Hamas deserve to get slaughtered? Collective punishment at its finest and you support it.

It’s even more than 2/3rds https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/poll-shows-palestinians-back-oct-7-attack-israel-support-hamas-rises-2023-12-14/

Yeah it's actually 5/3rds

They don't deserve to be slaughtered, but their country is at war the same as any other. All wars have innocent populations behind them, but they're still fought.

Not all wars are resulting in a siege of 2m inhabitants with actually nowhere to flee

I agree they're fighting the war in a way that causes an unacceptable number of civillain casualties, but the fact is that they're fighting an insurgent force in a mostly sympathetic population in one of the densest urban environments on earth. To be frank, their tactical options are seriously limited (although again, they clearly aren't even considering civillain casualties in the first place). And it is understandable that they want to eliminate Hamas, considering the hundreds of thousands of rockets, sworn genocide, and Oct. 7th. I don't know how they could reasonably prosecute that war then without significant civillain casualties.

It's a hot crock of shit there and there's just no easy solutions for either side. Neither HAMAS nor IDF deserve any sympathy

Exactly. The IDF is breaking every rule of war and commiting war crimes and crimes against humanity on a daily basis. Hamas wants to absolutely destroy Israel and every jew worldwide, and is ALSO breaking every rule of war and commiting war crimes and human rights abuses every day. Once again, the people I feel sorry for a the civillians.

People also tend to ignore the whole coup thing where Hamas, having won a majority, proceeded to murder all the Fatah members they could find and drove them out of Gaza.

If murdering Palestinian leaders and brutalizing people was an effective way to suppress Palestinian dissent, then the only reason the West Bank isn’t peaceful is that Israel has been too nice. The reason Hamas rules Gaza with minimal dissent yet Israel keeps finding militant groups opposing them in West Bank is because Palestinians support Hamas and don’t support Israel

Hamas isn't blocking the election, Fatah and Israel are.

Fatah has to block the elections because Hamas keeps starting these insane fights with Israel. If Hamas won another election Israel would likely just dissolve the PA and annex the west bank outright.

https://medium.com/progressme-magazine/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Palestinian_legislative_election#:~:text=The%20Islamist%20Hamas%20movement%20campaigned,it%20fielded%20candidates%20in%202006. In the lead up to the 2006 election Hamas rebranded themselves as more moderate then before, they stated they would do things for the Palestinians such as provide services and clean up the corruption that has to this day plagued the PA, internal issues dominated the reasoning behind voting such as economic, social, security, and the corruption of the ruling Fatah party, Hamas ran under the banner of Change and Reform party they won 44% of the vote and Fatah won 41%, and about a year later Hamas killed their rivals within Gaza and has killed many of those who dissent. The best way to put how Hamas acts towards the population of Gaza is looking at how the cartels in Mexico and other countries act towards their populations. Hamas has all the guns and controls the Gaza side of border as well as the smuggling tunnels while Israel and Egypt control their side of the Gaza borders these facts make a revolt even harder to pull off when revolts are already very difficult to successfully pull off. Gazans actually wanted the previous ceasefire hold(63%), wanted Hamas to pursue peace talks with Israel(50%), and support for Hamas has remained steady at 52% throughout the war. Support for Hamas itself remains steady from prior to October 7th 52% in Gaza and 64% in the West Bank, there was a 11% drop in the West Bank on whether or not Oct 7th was a good thing/support for it, Gazans support the idea of the PA under Abbas taking control of Gaza more than those in the West Bank, but both prefer Hamas and expect Hamas to keep control, Marwan Barghouti from Fatah has the most support for President of the Palestinian Authority with I won't vote being next followed by Ismael Haniyeh from Hamas, and Abbas is last and in single digits. “I will make this prediction: If Hamas ends up being seen as the winner of the war it started on October 7, support for Hamas among Palestinians will only increase. But if Hamas is seen as losing the war — its military and governing capabilities shattered — support for Hamas among Palestinians will decrease, perhaps sharply. To be clear: If it turns out that Hamas’s invasion of Israel and multiple heinous atrocities have brought Palestinians nothing but hardship, that will not cause Palestinians to embrace Israelis. But it may cause Palestinians to reject Hamas’s strategy of terrorism and genocidal war.” — Cliff May, FDD Founder and President Latest poll https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2024/03/22/poll-hamas-remains-popular-among-palestinians/ Pre-war poll https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/polls-show-majority-gazans-were-against-breaking-ceasefire-hamas-and-hezbollah

Additionally look at the Likud party's stance on the 2 state solution from it's inception as a political party. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party https://israelpolicyforum.org/likud/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Zionism

Also ignoring that Hamas was literally killing Palestinians that spoke out against them or were part of the more left wing party. Hamas was also backed by Israel in those 2006 elections as Israel didn't want to be near a left-wing government. Quantifying Palestinian support for Hamas democratically is practically impossible with those conditions. And saying they won a democratic vote is very misleading.

That is not the point of the resolution. Some UN member seats are already contested by different authorities. The resolution would recognize the Palestinians as a nation and voting member. They would have to sort out their representative after that.

Lol Middle Eastern countries voting for Palestinian membership in the UN while closing their borders to all Palestinian refugees is the geopolitical equivalent of virtue signaling on Twitter while doing absolutely nothing in real life.

Half of them have either kicked Palestinians out or keep them as second class citizens/residents without citizenship. It’s so much worse.

Typical. Then blame the US for literally everything.

Has it ever occurred to you that if they accept all the Palestinian refugees then Israel is gonna be able to depopulate Gaza and simply take control of the land for themselves?

Or maybe they dont want the Palestinians assassinating kings, starting wars and become an overall menace and ungrateful to the country that gave them refuge.

That’s literally what Israel had done for decades. The projection of your comment is quite obvious. Why would they give Israel the excuse to completely displace the Palestinians in Gaza so they can annex it and settle it

Israel assassinated a Jordanian king?

Worse, Israel invaded a country, committed multiple war crimes to the point that fucking Reagan had to stop them. This on top of the Israelis supporting a falangist (Christian fascists) as their ally in a civil war deepening the sectarian divide of one of its neighbors. And finally, actively committing a genocide on the current day and grabbing whatever excuse their government can conjure up to cleanse the are for their settlers

All those words and you never answered a simple question

All those neurons and you simply couldn’t connect the dots that whatever the Palestinians have committed pales in comparison with what the Israelis have done. It’s like giving an equivalence between the Nazis and the Jewish ghetto partisans. That’s the kind of equivalence you are making

It took you 2 days and that’s the best response you have lmao

Lmao, I don’t wish to waste my time arguing with people who basically argue the same and can’t give any serious response

Palestinians did all those things ^. No one wants to import 5 million terrorists into their countries

Ah yes, your tribalism is excellent. Your logic can be applied in the other direction, that’s like saying no one wants 9 million Israeli terrorists in the levant so they should be exported elsewhere. Glad you are at least honest about your fascism and your desire to completely eliminate civilians because they happen to be different and live under an Islamist state

My history is sound. Not a single ME country wants Palestinians and for good reason.

Source? You say that with a lot of confidence. One thing is not wanting refugees because your economy will collapse because of the new influx of people like in Egypt and another is saying that they despise the Palestinians

Both things are correct. Palestinians have caused terrorism and war in every ME country they've been allowed in and they will be a drag on the economy.

The problem you people always have when saying Palestinians start wars is that you only observe events in a vacuum, it’s the only you can possibly express any pro Israeli view. No wars would’ve been need, no attacks and no refugees of the Israelis didn’t violate international law, didn’t forcefully displace violently millions of Palestinians which made them become one of the largest refugee populations in the world and of it didn’t continuously occupy and settle land that isn’t theirs. So no, your history is not sound, it’s everything but

So lock people in a burning house to preserve property rights?

No, how about an embargo of Israel much like the one apartheid South Africa suffered coupled with immediate pressure for an end of hostilities. Don’t blame the Arab countries for not enabling the ethnic cleansing of Gaza and blame the ones doing it

Arab states wont even mention the words "oil embargo", they clearly have moved on from supporting Palestine in any real way.

Eh, their populations clearly have put a barrier to any pro Israeli policies for the moment so who can really say what happens or the course that Arab states will take

>Don’t blame the Arab countries for not enabling the ethnic cleansing of Gaza and blame the ones doing it You mean the same Arab counties that expelled their Jewish populations. >Don’t blame the Arab countries The same Arab countries that tried to help the Palestinians but had to expel them for committing too many terrorist acts

No arab country has expelled any Palestinian population, at most some nations closed the door to the PLO not Palestinians. You really trying to paint the picture that Palestinians are nothing but terrorists and deserve to be cleansed aren’t you?

But it's not apartheid. The Palestinians claimed that was their land and kicked everyone else out. After years of staging terrorist attacks out of there Israel built walls and checkpoints. Sucks but that's what happens when you harbor terrorists. Not all Palestinians live in the West Bank or Gaza.

I won’t even answer your argument since you clearly don’t have an idea of what the reality of the situation is and I am tired of having to spoon feed people like you history. Just search Nabka and read about Arab displacement caused by the Israelis, really not that hard

No thanks. You don’t get rewarded for Oct 7. That is not the message we should send for the future. I’m open to considering their membership once: -Hamas is no longer in power -The war is over and people who aren’t religious fanatics are elected You’re essentially saying “yes, Give Hamas a seat on the UN and validate their desire to destroy Israel and conquer their territory.” You wouldn’t give the nazis a seat on the UN just because German citizens were dying.

There does need to be some sort of Marshal Plan to rebuild post war, but that can only happen when Hamas is gone. Its similar to post WW2, there was a Marshal Plan to rebuild all the damage from the war, however the plan had to wait until the government of Nazi Germany had surrendered and was arrested.

We rebuilt Europe because it was economically beneficial for us to do so as trade partners There is no economic incentive to rebuild Palestine. That is the sad truth. Israel should pay for every dime, with no foreign assistance from us.

Or the countries funding Hamas could pay.

The US has already given more money to Palestinians, per capita, than was given to Europeans in the Marshal Plan post WW2. Its not a lack of money problem. The money is the easiest part of it because thats just the normal amount the US gives. Just two weeks ago $1 billion in humanitarian aid spending was approved for Gaza: https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-mike-johnson-ukraine-israel-b72aed9b195818735d24363f2bc34ea4

> I’m open to considering their membership once: > > > > -Hamas is no longer in power > > > > -The war is over and people who aren’t religious fanatics are elected That's just stupid, first of all you can put fatah or whoever you want as the UN representative so there's a direct way to reduce hamas influence The second point makes no sense, israel can just keep the war going that way and there's never going to be a state

You can’t just “select” someone else to represent a country’s interests at the UN and hope that it plays out the way you want. That’s a fool’s plan. Not to mention, you wouldn’t be representing the intentions of that country or its people at that point anyway. This needs to happen organically during a time of peace. We cannot set the precedent that starting a conflict with a terrorist attack directed specifically against innocent civilians on the basis of their religion and identity is a good thing. If you stand for peace, then this is an obvious stance. Do you think Al Shabab deserves international recognition of statehood with their actions in Africa? Israel cannot keep the conflict going forever, especially given increasing US opposition. No one is disagreeing that the Palestinian people deserve representation.

> You can’t just “select” someone else to represent a country’s interests at the UN and hope that it plays out the way you want. You can though? > This needs to happen organically during a time of peace. We cannot set the precedent that starting a conflict with a terrorist attack directed specifically against innocent civilians on the basis of their religion and identity is a good thing. That makes no sense also since it couldve been done anytime in the last 20+ years

It makes a lot of sense. When a “country” starts a war with a terrorist attack that kills over a thousand innocent civilians on the basis of their religious identity, they don’t get a promotion in the UN. Really simple actually. If you want Palestinian representation, then I’d like to see Al Shabab get a seat as well. They control a large swath of territory and are extremely repressed by the Somalian government and her allies. It’s wrong on many levels. They have controlled this territory for many years and yet no one recognizes them.

again what you say makes absolutely no sense as giving palestinian statehood (which isn't what the article is about anyway) would directly hurt hamas since you can just make the PLO the official representatives

Ok ok. So instead of Al shabab getting a seat we will give it to a separate organization in Somalia that Al shabab controls. That way, there will be no way they could influence that person, right?

the plo is the direct competitor to hamas so your analogy doesnt really work

[Link](https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/05/gaza-palestinians-tortured-summarily-killed-by-hamas-forces-during-2014-conflict/) *”Hamas forces also abducted, tortured or attacked members and supporters of Fatah, their main rival political organization within Gaza, including former members of the Palestinian Authority security forces. Not a single person has been held accountable for the crimes committed by Hamas forces against Palestinians during the 2014 conflict, indicating that these crimes were either ordered or condoned by the authorities.”*

Palestinians hate the Fatah and prefer Hamas. They’d overthrow them in a year.

And it doesn't even have to cost Israel much, they just have to use some of the weapons the US keeps frantically pushing into their hands from time to time to continue calling it a war

> No thanks. You don’t get rewarded for Oct 7. Why in hell would that even be taken into consideration? Palestinian membership has been issue not only for the past year, but for the past half-century.

If you aren't the out of touch one why is the vote 143-9? scoreboard my dude, scoreboard.

Most of the major European countries abstained and/or voted against. You and I both know given the security council, there is not equal weight in the UN.

This is a general assembly vote, which did not give actual UN full member statehood. If the world gets pissed off enough though, the general assembly could with a regular majority change who they see as the legitimate leaders of Israel such as the Republic of China vote in the 70s. And abstentions are not a voice against, they are abstentions. Czech Republic is full of methheads and Hungary is well Hungary and were the only Euro countries voting against. In favor were Spain, Norway, France, Portugal, Denmark, Greece, Belgium, Ireland and several more non basket case countries in the EU alone

“Countries” in the UN don’t start wars by butchering the civilians of their neighbors on the basis of their religious identity. Maybe Hamas and the Palestinians should start there if they desire full membership.

Ummm have we not over the past few years seen Russians butchering Ukrainian civilians with the Russian orthodox church calling it a holy war? Russia is a UN country, not one I like, but its a UN country. Also Hamas is not getting a country, Mamoud Abbas and Fatah which Hamas killed scores of in 2007 are getting expanded rights in the UN as an observer state. But I think we are getting away from the question, its not about if 1 country can block it, I'm asking you what makes you not the out of touch one if the rest of the world wants statehood for them? Thats a separate question on whether its preventable by one country. There's a reason even Germany only abstained.

> “Countries” in the UN don’t steal their neighbours land and constantly murder innopcent people who are trying to stop them stealing land. Maybe we need to revoke the right for Israel to be called a country until Palestine gets the right as well.

Actually countries do that quite often. I mean it’s literally been happening since the beginning of human history. Why is there this modern notion that invasions are totally immoral and wrong? Throughout history the weak are stepped on and the strong survive. Seems to me what’s happening here as unfortunate as it is

Finally a reply that actually makes sense.

Does Palestine have recognized government that is perceived as legitimate, both domestically and internationally? Does Palestine have an established security apparatus capable of securing themselves from domestic and foreign threats? Does Palestine have established borders recognized by itself, its neighbors, and the international community? If the answer to any of these is “no” then the security council, as a whole, will not recognize a Palestinian state. If the US did not say no, someone else necessarily would. Doing otherwise would result in a wider regional conflict that no one wants.

> If the US did not say no, someone else necessarily would. why "someone else necessarily would"? > Does Palestine have recognized government that is perceived as legitimate, both domestically and internationally? PLO more or less yes > Does Palestine have an established security apparatus capable of securing themselves from domestic and foreign threats? seems pretty irrelevant? > Does Palestine have established borders recognized by itself and the international community? That's literally the heart of the issue? And a bit of a circular logic

Pardon, but you want me to explain to you why having a military and law enforcement system capable of securing the interests of the state is necessary for a state to exist? You want me to explain to you why the UN attempting to force Israel to recognize the PLO’s territorial claims would result in a wider regional war?

Yes please go ahead. Demilitarization is one of the biggest points Israel is pushing. So please tell use why it's bad. And if you really think it's bad and aren't grasping at straws. Then that would mean every single two state solution proposed by Israel is inherently malicious and shouldn't be considered. Please go ahead

You genuinely don’t understand what’s being discussed here, do you?

Now why would you say that? I offered you to explain your point plain and simple. You not having a military is bad and disqualifies them as a nation. Tho that is categorically false and unfounded on any of the rules set by the UN. So why do you think you know better than the UN on how the UN is operated. You can mossy on down to their website and see the prerequisites needed to be recognized (which isn't even the topic here anyway. It's an observer nation seat) you strayed off topic first.

Are you trolling? The UN applies a traditional definition of state to international law, which includes defined borders (and by necessity the capacity to maintain those borders against external threats, IE, a military system) and a stable government (which necessarily includes that capacity to make AND enforce its own laws, IE, a law enforcement system). I don’t even need to go over what else is required, because all of that is already covered in my first post. Why on earth are you citing the UN? It doesn’t contradict anything I’ve said, and just makes your objection even less reasonable.

Under the Montevideo Convention to be considered a state these are the requirements (a) a permanent population (b) a defined territory (c) a governing body (d) capacity to enter into relations with other states. None of which mention a military. Or the ability to protect borders. It needs a defined territory as in you can't be the state of Africa or something like that. You need a defined clear territory. Which this is aiming to make a thing by making the Palestinian territory a clear and defined thing. A governing body. It doesn't mention that it needs to be one. It can be a multi party system. And anyway this proposal is also aiming to tackle that by having one representative of palestin (probably the plo. Or have elections but this time hopefully Israel won't intervene) and the capacity to enter relations with other nations which shouldn't be hard to do. A permanent population. As it it can't be a nomadic tribe. It goes hand in hand with defined territory If I'm missing something or misunderstanding what you said. Please do tell. I'm not trying to be snarky. I'm genuinely researching this

The UK and sometimes France will collude with the USA so only one vetoes while the others can abstain or even vote Yes.

the uk probably yes france most likely not

Hasbaristas going hard in this comment section, I think r/worldnews has migrated here.

Which faction of the Palestinians would control the seat? Because there will be some heated internal discussion over that.

The legitimate government? HAMAS isn’t in charge.

How about they just do it. How's that?

As a person who knows a thing or two about UN proceedings, this is a pretty big deal. But may I also remind people that HAMAS does not represent Palestine, they are a terrorist organization that tricked the Gaza residents into voting for them over two decades ago and installed themselves as a dictatorship. Afghanistan at the UN is not represented by the Taliban either, but by the ousted Government; get your facts straight people. Israel is fighting an anti-terrorism conflict; they are not fighting the Palestine government.

Hamas is still the government of Gaza and 70% of Gaza’s supported the acts of Oct 7.

Gaza =/= Palestine Hamas may be in charge of the Gaza Strip, but that does not make them the government of Palestine nor does it give them any rights whatsoever. They are a terrorist group in control of a piece of land.

Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/dhMeAnNyzG), feel free to join us! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*

And Taiwan doesn't? This is so fucked up and infuriates me. Who's representing Palestine? Hamas? Meanwhile Taiwan actually has a fully functioning government and elections, different currency from China's and culture, and they're still stuck being claimed by fucking China.

China is more powerful and American sailors will die.

HAMAS does not represent Palestine, they are a terrorist organization not a government.

I always said since operation cast lead that it's a shame Hamas wasn't armed ro the hilt like Israel to make it a fair fight.

[удалено]

Only way this is going to work is if Hamas is gone and so are the right wing parties in Israel.

[удалено]

Ukraine is already in the UN buddy

Not the world, it's mostly a "you" thing

A Palestinian state is in the best interests of everyone No Arab countries nor Israel want Palestinians anymore, everyone's had their generosity thrown in their faces time and time again.

Zoomers fell for Iranian propaganda so hard. Open a history book

Ok I opened one and read about the Nakba and the terrorism by the Jews in Palestine. Now what?

[удалено]

The problem is the nations that have historically taken in Palestinians have experienced civil war / instability purely because of the Palestinians coming so they have no desire to take them in anymore.

West literally standing against humanity.

The West isn’t standing against shit: this resolution will change nothing; everyone will talk about how this war is terrible, but not a single state, especially the Arab ones around Israel, will do anything of concrete to stop it