Palestinians, U.S. at odds over U.N. bid for statehood (Reuters)

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) – The Palestinian foreign minister said on Tuesday he was confident most U.N. Security Council members would endorse Palestinian statehood but the United States underscored its pledge to veto the move despite the risk of diplomatic fallout.

Diplomats still hope to avert the political crisis looming over this year’s meeting of the U.N. General Assembly, but Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Malki said he thought at least nine of the 15 members of the Security Council would back the Palestinian bid.

“We’re working toward it and I think we’ll manage it,” Malki told reporters. “We hope the United States will revise its position and be on the side of the majority of nations or countries who want to support the Palestinian right to have self determination and independence.”

A veto by the United States, one of the five permanent members of the council and a firm ally of Israel, would still block approval even if most other members agree — something that is far from certain.

But securing the nine votes necessary to claim a Security Council majority would allow the Palestinians to highlight the U.S. veto as an obstacle, increasing the diplomatic risks for Washington during a period of unprecedented political turmoil in the Middle East.

It would also raise the pressure on Israel, which has offered direct peace talks with the Palestinians but has not made any of the concessions that the Palestinians say would make such talks possible.

The White House vowed again to block any Palestinian move at the Security Council, saying President Barack Obama would use his speech to the General Assembly on Wednesday to lay out his view that Palestinian statehood can only be achieved through direct negotiations with Israel.

“We will oppose a Palestinian move to have a state through the Security Council and if need be would veto that effort,” White House deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes told reporters. “That continues to be the state of play.”

NO PROGRESS YET

Obama is due to meet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday on the sidelines of the General Assembly meeting. While he has no meeting planned with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, White House officials say the schedule may still change.

Highlighting the political minefield Obama faces on the issue, Republican presidential challenger Rick Perry blasted the administration over its Middle East policy, saying U.S. peace efforts had “encouraged the Palestinians to shun direct talks.”

Perry’s comments were a reminder that Obama must keep in mind the political calculus of what is shaping up as a tough campaign for re-election in 2012 and he cannot afford to alienate Israel’s broad support in Congress and with the American public.

In the West Bank, clashes broke out as angry Jewish settlers protested against the Palestinian plans — another sign of growing tensions in the territory that some fear could spin dangerously out of control.

Senior diplomats from the United States, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations — the Quartet of Middle East mediators — are meeting throughout the week in hopes of a last-minute breakthrough.

The Quartet has been trying to put together guidelines for future peace talks for months, so far without result. British Foreign Secretary William Hague acknowledged there had been no progress.

Even if the Palestinians file their Security Council application on Friday, an immediate vote is unlikely. This may allow more time for diplomacy aimed at restarting peace talks, said French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe.

“There’s a procedure for dealing with such requests and it can take a few days or weeks more, which means there is room for other initiatives,” Juppe told Europe 1 radio.

“We hope to find a way of convincing all involved to get back around the negotiating table, and in a serious fashion.”

IMPASSE OVER TALKS

Israel says the U.N. move is aimed at delegitimizing the Jewish state. The Palestinians say their U.N. bid will open the door to new peace talks among two equal sovereign states.

Direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians collapsed a year ago after Israel refused to extend a moratorium on new settlements in areas the Palestinians want for a future state.

Israel has occupied the West Bank and the Gaza Strip since the 1967 war, and the two sides are divided on borders, the status of Jerusalem, the future of Palestinian refugees and whether Israel should be acknowledged as a Jewish state.

The Palestinians want the West Bank and the Gaza Strip for their future state, with East Jerusalem as their capital.

With a U.S. veto certain at the Security Council, the Palestinians may also ask the U.N. General Assembly to upgrade them from an “entity” to a “non-member state.” Such a step, they say, would be backed by at least 126 of the assembly’s 193 members and give further legitimacy to their claim.

The Palestinian decision to force a confrontation at the United Nations has cast new doubt over the Obama administration’s effort to harness the “Arab Spring” uprisings to forge a new set of U.S. relationships in the Middle East.

“A U.S. veto … will be seen by the region as once again a double-standard policy of selectively standing by certain people in the region yearning for freedom, but not others,” said Marwan Muasher, a former Jordanian foreign minister and now vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment.

(Additional reporting by Lou Charbonneau, Susan Cornwell, Tom Perry, Edith Honan, Matt Spetalnick and Alistair Lyon; writing by Andrew Quinn; editing by Mohammad Zargham and Christopher Wilson)

— ’re ’s , . : A ‘Malign Intellectual Subculture’ – George Monbiot Smears Chomsky, Herman, Peterson, Pilger And Media Lens.