Why Might Ireland and Spain Want to Formally Recognize a Palestinian State?
The question of why Ireland and Spain would formally recognize a Palestinian state is not primarily motivated by political gain. Instead, it stems from a deep ethical and humanitarian affirmation. The overwhelming support in the United Nations for the principle that no entity can operate outside international law with impunity underscores the vital motivation behind such recognition.
However, the more intriguing angle is whether a Hamas-led Palestinian state would recognize Spain. According to Article 11 of Hamas's Charter from 1988, any land conquered by Muslims remains sacred and undivisible. This belief positions Spain’s historic Reconquista as an act of theft, echoing a complex historical and ideological narrative.
The Waning of Israeli Propaganda and the Rise of Anti-War Activism
The overarching geopolitical landscape is shifting. The iron grip of Zionist control is weakening as the Israeli propaganda machine encounters fierce resistance from the far left and mass anti-war demonstrations. These movements are not isolated; they are interconnected with the broader struggle for Palestinian statehood across the globe.
In the United States and European college campuses, there is a growing consensus that Ireland, Spain, and Norway should recognize Palestine as a member state in the United Nations. This alignment is rooted in the belief that supporting Palestine aligns with ethical and humanitarian principles over political expediency.
Implications and Alliances
Parallels can be drawn between the alliances forming around this issue and historical alliances during the Second World War. The UN and its partners are attempting to enforce international borders and divisions on Israel, much like the post-war Allies did with Germany and Berlin. This reflects a complex web of geopolitical interests and the desire to maintain a balance of power.
Irish, Spanish, and Norwegian support for UN resolutions such as Resolution 242 and voting in favor of Palestinian statehood in the UN mirrors the actions taken by post-war allies. They are seen as violating international law and fostering a divide within Israel, seeking to divide Jerusalem into two hostile entities. This is akin to how the Allies divided Germany, which had significant geopolitical implications.
The PLO Charter and Hamas Charter both call for the extermination of Jews, a clear parallel to Nazi ideology. Supporting a state that seeks to exterminate an entire ethnic group is a morally reprehensible act. Therefore, countries that align themselves with such groups are essentially validating Nazism and apartheid.
Refugee Complexities
The issue of Palestinian refugees is another layer to this complex geopolitical tapestry. Countries like Ireland, Spain, and Norway that support a Palestinian state may be asked to address the issue of refugees. Historically, no Arab country has been willing to accept these refugees, as exemplified by the Jordanian-led expulsion of Arafat and his PLO during Black September in 1970.
The mass population transfer of Palestinians has had profound and lasting effects. In 1970, Jordan expelled Arafat and his PLO, and they found refuge in Lebanon. The subsequent civil war in Lebanon, still evident in its scars, is a stark reminder of the consequences of these actions. Similarly, Kuwait, after the Bush I coalition victory, expelled all Iraqi dhimmi Arab refugees.
Sadly, this historical narrative is often oversimplified in mainstream discourse. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is complex and multifaceted, with both local and global dimensions. Understanding these complexities is crucial for forming informed and ethical foreign policies.
In conclusion, the motivation for Ireland and Spain to recognize a Palestinian state is rooted in ethical and humanitarian principles, rather than political gain. The broader context of global alliances, historical precedents, and the complexities of the refugee issue all contribute to this complex geopolitical landscape.