海角大神

鈥� A daily summary of global reports on security issues.

United Nations member countries voted overwhelmingly to change the Palestinian status from an observer to a non-member observer state yesterday, but how this will play out in terms of Israeli-Palestinian relations, and prospects for peace, is still an open question.

Held on the 65th anniversary of the 鈥渂irth鈥� of Israel 鈥� when the UN voted to partition the British mandate of Palestine into one Jewish state and one Arab state 鈥� there is no question that yesterday鈥檚 vote was symbolic for Palestinians and their supporters, according to The New York Times. The vote passed 138 to 9, with 41 states abstaining.

"The General Assembly is being asked today to issue the birth certificate of Palestine," Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said in his speech before the vote.

The new UN status doesn鈥檛 change borders, or give Palestinians control of 鈥渢heir borders, airspace or trade鈥�; they still have 鈥渟eparate and competing governments in Gaza and the West Bank, and they have no unified army or police,鈥� according to CBS News.

But it does grant Palestinian officials greater tools to 鈥渃hallenge Israel in international legal forums for its occupation activities in the West Bank, including settlement-building, and it helped bolster the Palestinian Authority, weakened after eight days of battle between its rival Hamas and Israel,鈥� reports The New York Times.

In the lead-up to the vote, world headlines showed the mix of emotion surrounding the UN vote. In the Palestinian territories, hope was evident. The Arabic daily Al-Hayat al-Jadida had a map on its front page showing how UN member countries voted for the Palestinian bid for full membership to UNESCO in 2011, and a headline that read 鈥淧alestine the state 鈥�Tonight.鈥澛犅�

In the United States, one of the most outspoken against the bid, the tone was different. Headlines ranged from "Israel: UN can't break 4,000-year-old bond between the people of Israel and land of Israel" to "New York Pols: U.N. Vote On Palestine A 'Distraction' And 'Mistake'." The Washington Post's headline read: "Israel braces for Palestinian victory in UN status vote", and 海角大神 asked, "Who backs Palestine UN bid? Ehud Olmert, among others."

Directly following the vote, the US ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice said, "Today's unfortunate and counterproductive resolution places further obstacles in the path of peace鈥�. Today's grand pronouncements will soon fade and the Palestinian people will wake up tomorrow and find that little about their lives has changed save that the prospects of a durable peace have only receded."聽

According to the Palestinian Ma鈥檃n News Agency, 鈥淭he Palestinian Authority foreign ministry said Thursday it would re-evaluate ties with countries that oppose Palestine's bid to upgrade its status at the UN.鈥�

Even with the vote secured, uncertainty prevails about how this affects Palestinian-Israeli relations, as well as those between President Abbas鈥檚 administration and the Hamas movement in Gaza.

The Washington Post鈥檚 editorial board wrote ahead of the vote that the Palestinian Authority鈥檚 victory 鈥渨ill be a pale triumph for President Mahmoud Abbas and his West Bank-based Fatah movement.鈥�

The United Kingdom abstained from casting a vote in the end.

Kenneth Bandler, the American Jewish Committee鈥檚 director of media relations, wrote in a commentary for Fox News that Abbas鈥檚 UN bid distracted from the threat of Hamas:

And many walked the line that the Palestinian win was a bad omen for progress and peace with Israel.

In Australia, opposition foreign affairs spokeswoman Julie Bishop echoed the sentiments of many of the nine countries that voted against the resolution (those included the US, Israel, Canada, the Czech Republic, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, and Panama), and the 41 who abstained, which includes Australia.

鈥淚 do not believe that passing this vote will resolve the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians, in fact it could well cause an escalation of the conflict or prolong the situation by taking it into the realm of the international court,鈥� Ms. Bishop said, according to the Australian newspaper.

The Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accused Abbas of spreading "mendacious propaganda" against Israel, and said the vote 鈥渨on't change anything on the ground 鈥� It won't advance the establishment of a Palestinian state, but rather, put it further off," reports CBS.

The Council on Foreign Relations鈥� Robert M. Danin echoed that sentiment, writing that, 鈥淭he fundamental problem with Abbas鈥� approach is that rather than encourage such talks, his U.N. gambit is more likely to delay, if not undermine, the prospects for negotiations that would lead to genuine Palestinian statehood and peace with Israel anytime in the immediate future.鈥� However, Mr. Danin notes:

But others, like Yehudit Oppenheimer, the executive director of Ir Amim, an NGO dedicated to establishing an 鈥渆quitable and stable Jerusalem with a negotiated political future鈥� believe the Palestinian bid is 鈥渘ot an anti-Israeli step.鈥� Mr. Oppenheimer wrote in Haaretz that: