U.S. cuts UNESCO funding after Palestinian vote

catefrances

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-201 ... nian-vote/



November 1, 2011 9:24 AM PrintText U.S. cuts UNESCO funding after Palestinian vote
)
(CBS/AP) WASHINGTON - The Obama administration on Monday cut off funding for the U.N. cultural agency, after its member countries defied an American warning and approved a Palestinian bid for full membership in the body.


The lopsided vote to admit Palestine as a member of UNESCO, which only the United States and 13 other countries opposed, triggered a long-standing congressional ban on U.S. funding to U.N. bodies that recognize Palestine as a state before an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal is reached. The State Department said a $60 million payment to UNESCO scheduled for November would not be made as a result, and U.S. officials warned of a "cascade" effect at other U.N. bodies that might follow UNESCO's lead.


UNESCO approves Palestinian membership
Israeli minister calls Abbas "obstacle" to peace
Quartet makes push for Israel-Palestinian talks


"Today's vote by the member states of UNESCO to admit Palestine as a member is regrettable, premature, and undermines our shared goal of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East," State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters. She said the U.S. remained committed to UNESCO and its goals, which include the promotion of science, education and culture, and that the administration would work with Congress to preserve U.S. interests and influence in the body.


But, while Nuland said the U.S. would maintain its membership and participation in UNESCO, the organization's internal rules will strip Washington of its vote if it is delinquent in paying its dues for two years.


It is not clear how U.S. membership would work in the interim, especially since UNESCO depends heavily on U.S. funding. The U.S. provides 22 percent of its budget — roughly $80 million a year — but has survived without it in the past: The United States pulled out of UNESCO under President Ronald Reagan and rejoined two decades later under President George W. Bush.


Of potential greater concern to the administration is the possibility that the Palestinians, buoyed by the 107-14 vote in their favor at UNESCO, will apply for membership in other U.N. organizations that the United States values, like the World Intellectual Property Organization, the World Health Organization, the International Civil Aviation Organization, or the International Atomic Energy Agency.


On Tuesday, Ibrahim Khraishi, the top Palestinian envoy at the U.N. in Geneva, told The Associated Press that Palestinian diplomats are now planning to capitalize on Monday's landslide vote by preparing papers to join the other U.N. agencies and a variety of other international organizations.


"Now we are studying when we are going to move for full membership on the other U.N. agencies," Khraishi said. "It's our target for (us to join) the international organizations and the U.N. agencies."


He said the UNESCO vote sets a precedent to allowing such broad memberships.


"We are working on it, one by one," he said. "Because it's now precedent that we are a full member in one of the biggest and one of the most important U.N. agencies, UNESCO. So it will open the door for us now to go further in our efforts to join other U.N. agencies."


The UNESCO vote was a fallback for the Palestinian leadership that presented its plan for U.N. recognition as a state and full membership in the global body in September. Israel has fiercely opposed the bid, and it has no chance of passing because the Obama administration has promised to veto any resolution in the Security Council.


Becoming a UNESCO member could give the Palestinians an advantage in joining the U.N. World Intellectual Property Organization, whose rules say membership is "equally open" to those already a member of other U.N. specialized agencies.


But it's not clear whether that means membership is automatic, and Geneva-based spokeswoman for the organization Samar Shamoon declined to comment on that Tuesday.


Assistant U.S. Secretary of State Esther Brimmer emphasized Monday that Palestinian membership in the U.N. World Intellectual Property Organization, known as WIPO, "could have serious implications for U.S. leadership in this organization," which supports global infrastructure helping U.S. companies to protect their business interests around the world, according to State Department briefing notes.


"The United States is a leading global voice on issues related to patent, copyright, and trademark matters, and should the U.S. be unable to provide its contributions to WIPO, the impact of that voice could be significantly diminished," the U.S. agency said.


Of course, a withdrawal of U.S. funding from WIPO also could leave U.S. companies vulnerable.


Senior State Department officials were meeting Monday with executives from numerous high-tech firms to consider options if the U.S. is forced to restrict its participation in WIPO.


Fadela Chaib, spokeswoman for the World Health Organization, another Geneva-based U.N. agency, said any nation that is part of the U.N. can join. For those that are not part, she said, the annual World Health Assembly can approve membership by a simple majority vote if a written request is received at least 30 days beforehand.


Cutting U.S. funding for WHO would hurt, she conceded.


"Of course we need it. The U.S. funding is quite important, I guess for all the U.N. organizations," Chaib told reporters. "It's a vital funding need for WHO."



arsehats.

redrock

Cutting off the nose to spite the face.

The US is fast losing credibility (and influence) with the rest of the world. They should stop blindly/automatically supporting Israel and take a critical view of what is happening 'out there'.

And in 'punishment' for the daring deed of Palestine, Israel is stepping up the construction of illegal settlements. Are the US going to say anything about this? Guess if they do, it will just be a little 'tut-tut' with no consequence.

polaris_x

canada will likely do the same thing ... we have moved very right in the last few years and now that the conservatives have a majority ... we can expect this kind of action ...

EdsonNascimento

We'll keep this thread on topic

Anyway - this move is not in opposition to a Palestinian state. It is in opposition to the UN recognizing a country that doesn't exist. It actually hurts any attempt at a peace accord that would create a Palestinian state. So, the UN move is actually counter productive and will cost lives. So, while Israel and those representing Palestine will pull the triggers, the UN now has blood on its hands. Good for the US in trying to avoid that.

Let's get both parties back to the table without this end around. It is not just Israel that needs to give.

gimmesometruth27

EdsonNascimento wrote:

We'll keep this thread on topic

Anyway - this move is not in opposition to a Palestinian state. It is in opposition to the UN recognizing a country that doesn't exist. It actually hurts any attempt at a peace accord that would create a Palestinian state. So, the UN move is actually counter productive and will cost lives. So, while Israel and those representing Palestine will pull the triggers, the UN now has blood on its hands. Good for the US in trying to avoid that.

Let's get both parties back to the table without this end around. It is not just Israel that needs to give.

so does this make the un more useless to you then??

seriously. us brokered peace talks have failed for decades. the only condition the palestinians ask for for them to return to negotiations is that israel stop expanding the settlements on palestinian land. in a "fuck you!" move to the palestinians, isreal has not only continued to build on these settlements, but has sped up the expansion and construction process. if i were palestine i would do exactly what they are doing, because america has done fuck all to help them, and they have blindly supported israel at every turn. if america refuses to help, perhaps the international community will help. that is why the un exists. and i think it is funny how stupid america looks in the eyes of the international community because of their stance against the palestinians.

EdsonNascimento

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

so does this make the un more useless to you then??

seriously. us brokered peace talks have failed for decades. the only condition the palestinians ask for for them to return to negotiations is that israel stop expanding the settlements on palestinian land. in a "fuck you!" move to the palestinians, isreal has not only continued to build on these settlements, but has sped up the expansion and construction process. if i were palestine i would do exactly what they are doing, because america has done fuck all to help them, and they have blindly supported israel at every turn. if america refuses to help, perhaps the international community will help. that is why the un exists. and i think it is funny how stupid america looks in the eyes of the international community because of their stance against the palestinians.

You see? This is the problem. Just because you are for something (Israel) does not make you against something else (Palestine) even if those things are at odds with each other. Now, obviously, it means you favor one over the other.

But, how about mentioning that one of the things that has been asked for by Israel (and supported by the US) is that Palestine and its allies recognize Israel? They have folks (including internally) that have stated they will NEVER recognize Israel. Don't you see the problem? Or, are you just blindly supporting Palestine?

gimmesometruth27

EdsonNascimento wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

so does this make the un more useless to you then??

seriously. us brokered peace talks have failed for decades. the only condition the palestinians ask for for them to return to negotiations is that israel stop expanding the settlements on palestinian land. in a "fuck you!" move to the palestinians, isreal has not only continued to build on these settlements, but has sped up the expansion and construction process. if i were palestine i would do exactly what they are doing, because america has done fuck all to help them, and they have blindly supported israel at every turn. if america refuses to help, perhaps the international community will help. that is why the un exists. and i think it is funny how stupid america looks in the eyes of the international community because of their stance against the palestinians.

You see? This is the problem. Just because you are for something (Israel) does not make you against something else (Palestine) even if those things are at odds with each other. Now, obviously, it means you favor one over the other.

But, how about mentioning that one of the things that has been asked for by Israel (and supported by the US) is that Palestine and its allies recognize Israel? They have folks (including internally) that have stated they will NEVER recognize Israel. Don't you see the problem? Or, are you just blindly supporting Palestine?

dude, almost every faction involved has stated that they will recognize israel's right to exist AT THE PRE 1967 BORDERS because anything after that is on stolen land. war plunderred land. israel has a right to exist, yes. but they do not have a right to encroach on the land of it's neighbors. they stole that land after the 6 day war. we went to war in iraq for stealing land where kuwait sits. after most wars land has been given back. look at europe in WWII, all of the land taken by germany has been returned to it's rightful owners. fuck, i would not recognize anybody's right to exist on land that is not theirs.

EdsonNascimento

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

dude, almost every faction involved has stated that they will recognize israel's right to exist AT THE PRE 1967 BORDERS because anything after that is on stolen land. war plunderred land. israel has a right to exist, yes. but they do not have a right to encroach on the land of it's neighbors. they stole that land after the 6 day war. we went to war in iraq for stealing land where kuwait sits. after most wars land has been given back. look at europe in WWII, all of the land taken by germany has been returned to it's rightful owners. fuck, i would not recognize anybody's right to exist on land that is not theirs.

I think Ahmadinejad would disagree with you.

gimmesometruth27

EdsonNascimento wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

dude, almost every faction involved has stated that they will recognize israel's right to exist AT THE PRE 1967 BORDERS because anything after that is on stolen land. war plunderred land. israel has a right to exist, yes. but they do not have a right to encroach on the land of it's neighbors. they stole that land after the 6 day war. we went to war in iraq for stealing land where kuwait sits. after most wars land has been given back. look at europe in WWII, all of the land taken by germany has been returned to it's rightful owners. fuck, i would not recognize anybody's right to exist on land that is not theirs.

I think Ahmadinejad would disagree with you.

agreed, but iran is not directly involved in the negotiations.

EdsonNascimento

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

dude, almost every faction involved has stated that they will recognize israel's right to exist AT THE PRE 1967 BORDERS because anything after that is on stolen land. war plunderred land. israel has a right to exist, yes. but they do not have a right to encroach on the land of it's neighbors. they stole that land after the 6 day war. we went to war in iraq for stealing land where kuwait sits. after most wars land has been given back. look at europe in WWII, all of the land taken by germany has been returned to it's rightful owners. fuck, i would not recognize anybody's right to exist on land that is not theirs.

I think Ahmadinejad would disagree with you.

agreed, but iran is not directly involved in the negotiations.

I realize that. But, that is a microcosm of what Israel is dealing with. Not that I would accuse anyone in Palestine leadership now because I have no facts, but that has also been the long held position of the PLO. So, do we have any information to the contrary that that has changed?

In most international matters, I assume I know very little of what is going on. And, this is no different. If President after President enters office saying Israel must give, but wind up shortly after taking office saying what Obama is basically saying now (which is what all his predecessors have held), I believe there's something more than meets the eye. Call me naive. But, I can certainly understand Israel being overly cautious after what has been done and said about them in that region since their inception. Don't you think it's possible Ahmadinejad is just the only one "brave"/stupid enough to say that out loud, but is not the only one thinking that, including the Palestinian leadership?

polaris_x

well ... canada is committed to their binding contribution but said they would not fill the gap left by the US ...

which is expected from our conservative gov't ...

fuck

EdsonNascimento wrote:

I realize that. But, that is a microcosm of what Israel is dealing with. Not that I would accuse anyone in Palestine leadership now because I have no facts, but that has also been the long held position of the PLO. So, do we have any information to the contrary that that has changed?

In most international matters, I assume I know very little of what is going on. And, this is no different. If President after President enters office saying Israel must give, but wind up shortly after taking office saying what Obama is basically saying now (which is what all his predecessors have held), I believe there's something more than meets the eye. Call me naive. But, I can certainly understand Israel being overly cautious after what has been done and said about them in that region since their inception. Don't you think it's possible Ahmadinejad is just the only one "brave"/stupid enough to say that out loud, but is not the only one thinking that, including the Palestinian leadership?

So you don't even know that the PLO recognized Israel's "right to exist" during the Oslo Accords, almost two decades ago? How do you even try to legitimately take a position on this topic, a quite extreme one, without even knowing some of the most basic facts regarding the history of the conflict?

polaris_x

fuck wrote:

So you don't even know that the PLO recognized Israel's "right to exist" during the Oslo Accords, almost two decades ago? How do you even try to legitimately take a position on this topic, a quite extreme one, without even knowing some of the most basic facts regarding the history of the conflict?

that's what i was trying to tell him in his other thread ...

EdsonNascimento

fuck wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

I realize that. But, that is a microcosm of what Israel is dealing with. Not that I would accuse anyone in Palestine leadership now because I have no facts, but that has also been the long held position of the PLO. So, do we have any information to the contrary that that has changed?

In most international matters, I assume I know very little of what is going on. And, this is no different. If President after President enters office saying Israel must give, but wind up shortly after taking office saying what Obama is basically saying now (which is what all his predecessors have held), I believe there's something more than meets the eye. Call me naive. But, I can certainly understand Israel being overly cautious after what has been done and said about them in that region since their inception. Don't you think it's possible Ahmadinejad is just the only one "brave"/stupid enough to say that out loud, but is not the only one thinking that, including the Palestinian leadership?

So you don't even know that the PLO recognized Israel's "right to exist" during the Oslo Accords, almost two decades ago? How do you even try to legitimately take a position on this topic, a quite extreme one, without even knowing some of the most basic facts regarding the history of the conflict?

Yep. Well aware of the accords. And well aware of what has been subsequently stated.

Hey, I have children. I know when folks are saying stuff to say it. And they always (As they did in this instance) eventually show their true colors. But, continue to see only what you want to see.

Cosmo

Well... maybe China can make up the $80 million in donations that we won't be making and UNESCO can continue without us.

MookiesLaw

EdsonNascimento wrote:

But, how about mentioning that one of the things that has been asked for by Israel (and supported by the US) is that Palestine and its allies recognize Israel? They have folks (including internally) that have stated they will NEVER recognize Israel. Don't you see the problem? Or, are you just blindly supporting Palestine?

WTF? You've never heard of the Oslo Accords? Each side signed a Letter of Mutual Recognition. The PLO recognized the right of Israel to exist and Israel recognized the PLO as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people,

catefrances

Cosmo wrote:

Well... maybe China can make up the $80 million in donations that we won't be making and UNESCO can continue without us.

can you imagine???

EdsonNascimento

EdsonNascimento wrote:

Yep. Well aware of the accords. And well aware of what has been subsequently stated.

Hey, I have children. I know when folks are saying stuff to say it. And they always (As they did in this instance) eventually show their true colors. But, continue to see only what you want to see.

For someone who might have trouble reading an entire 1 page thread.

Byrnzie

EdsonNascimento wrote:

We'll keep this thread on topic

Anyway - this move is not in opposition to a Palestinian state. It is in opposition to the UN recognizing a country that doesn't exist. It actually hurts any attempt at a peace accord that would create a Palestinian state. So, the UN move is actually counter productive and will cost lives. So, while Israel and those representing Palestine will pull the triggers, the UN now has blood on its hands. Good for the US in trying to avoid that.

Let's get both parties back to the table without this end around. It is not just Israel that needs to give.

Yet the U.N recognized Israel as a state in 1948, despite that state not existing at the time. But you don't have a problem with that.


'UN General Assembly Partition Resolution 181 of 1947, which established the Jewish state’s international legitimacy, also recognised the remaining Palestinian territory outside the new state’s borders as the equally legitimate patrimony of Palestine’s Arab population on which they were entitled to establish their own state, and it mapped the borders of that territory with great precision. Resolution 181’s affirmation of the right of Palestine’s Arab population to national self-determination was based on normative law and the democratic principles that grant statehood to the majority population. (At the time, Arabs constituted two-thirds of the population in Palestine.) This right does not evaporate because of delays in its implementation.'

As for the so-called 'peace-talks', they are nothing but a stalling tactic allowing Israel to steal more land. The whole world supports U.N resolution 242 which calls for an immediate Israeli withdrawal from land seized during and after the 1967 war. The whole World is one side, and the U.S and Israel are on the other side, blocking a peaceful settlement.

Byrnzie

EdsonNascimento wrote:

But, how about mentioning that one of the things that has been asked for by Israel (and supported by the US) is that Palestine and its allies recognize Israel? They have folks (including internally) that have stated they will NEVER recognize Israel. Don't you see the problem? Or, are you just blindly supporting Palestine?

http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0311-26.htm

Sunday, March 11, 2007 by the Los Angeles Times
Why Does The Times Recognize Israel's 'Right to Exist'?
by Saree Makdisi

'AS SOON AS certain topics are raised," George Orwell once wrote, "the concrete melts into the abstract and no one seems able to think of turns of speech that are not hackneyed: Prose consists less and less of words chosen for the sake of their meaning, and more and more of phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated henhouse." Such a combination of vagueness and sheer incompetence in language, Orwell warned, leads to political conformity.

No issue better illustrates Orwell's point than coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the United States. Consider, for example, the editorial in The Times on Feb. 9 demanding that the Palestinians "recognize Israel" and its "right to exist." This is a common enough sentiment — even a cliche. Yet many observers (most recently the international lawyer John Whitbeck) have pointed out that this proposition, assiduously propagated by Israel's advocates and uncritically reiterated by American politicians and journalists, is — at best — utterly nonsensical.

First, the formal diplomatic language of "recognition" is traditionally used by one state with respect to another state. It is literally meaningless for a non-state to "recognize" a state. Moreover, in diplomacy, such recognition is supposed to be mutual. In order to earn its own recognition, Israel would have to simultaneously recognize the state of Palestine. This it steadfastly refuses to do (and for some reason, there are no high-minded newspaper editorials demanding that it do so).

Second, which Israel, precisely, are the Palestinians being asked to "recognize?" Israel has stubbornly refused to declare its own borders. So, territorially speaking, "Israel" is an open-ended concept. Are the Palestinians to recognize the Israel that ends at the lines proposed by the 1947 U.N. Partition Plan? Or the one that extends to the 1949 Armistice Line (the de facto border that resulted from the 1948 war)? Or does Israel include the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which it has occupied in violation of international law for 40 years — and which maps in its school textbooks show as part of "Israel"?

For that matter, why should the Palestinians recognize an Israel that refuses to accept international law, submit to U.N. resolutions or readmit the Palestinians wrongfully expelled from their homes in 1948 and barred from returning ever since?

If none of these questions are easy to answer, why are such demands being made of the Palestinians? And why is nothing demanded of Israel in turn?

Orwell was right. It is much easier to recycle meaningless phrases than to ask — let alone to answer — difficult questions. But recycling these empty phrases serves a purpose. Endlessly repeating the mantra that the Palestinians don't recognize Israel helps paint Israel as an innocent victim, politely asking to be recognized but being rebuffed by its cruel enemies.

Actually, it asks even more. Israel wants the Palestinians, half of whom were driven from their homeland so that a Jewish state could be created in 1948, to recognize not merely that it exists (which is undeniable) but that it is "right" that it exists — that it was right for them to have been dispossessed of their homes, their property and their livelihoods so that a Jewish state could be created on their land. The Palestinians are not the world's first dispossessed people, but they are the first to be asked to legitimize what happened to them.

A just peace will require Israelis and Palestinians to reconcile and recognize each other's rights. It will not require that Palestinians give their moral seal of approval to the catastrophe that befell them. Meaningless at best, cynical and manipulative at worst, such a demand may suit Israel's purposes, but it does not serve The Times or its readers.

And yet The Times consistently adopts Israel's language and, hence, its point of view. For example, a recent article on Israel's Palestinian minority referred to that minority not as "Palestinian" but as generically "Arab," Israel's official term for a population whose full political and human rights it refuses to recognize. To fail to acknowledge the living Palestinian presence inside Israel (and its enduring continuity with the rest of the Palestinian people) is to elide the history at the heart of the conflict — and to deny the legitimacy of Palestinian claims and rights.

This is exactly what Israel wants. Indeed, its demand that its "right to exist" be recognized reflects its own anxiety, not about its existence but about its failure to successfully eliminate the Palestinians' presence inside their homeland — a failure for which verbal recognition would serve merely a palliative and therapeutic function.

In uncritically adopting Israel's own fraught terminology — a form of verbal erasure designed to extend the physical destruction of Palestine — The Times is taking sides.

If the paper wants its readers to understand the nature of this conflict, however, it should not go on acting as though only one side has a story to tell.

Byrnzie

EdsonNascimento wrote:

I realize that. But, that is a microcosm of what Israel is dealing with. Not that I would accuse anyone in Palestine leadership now because I have no facts, but that has also been the long held position of the PLO. So, do we have any information to the contrary that that has changed?

Yes, we do:

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-d ... s-1.318835

PLO chief: We will recognize Israel in return for 1967 borders


Senior Palestine Liberation Organization official Yasser Abed Rabbo said on Wednesday that the Palestinians will be willing to recognize the State of Israel in any way that it desires, if the Americans would only present a map of the future Palestinian state that includes all of the territories captured in 1967, including East Jerusalem.

In response to U.S. State Department Spokesman Phillip Crowley's statement on Tuesday night that the Palestinians should respond to the Israeli demand, Abed Rabbo told Haaretz, "We want to receive a map of the State of Israel which Israel wants us to accept."

"If the map will be based on the 1967 borders and will not include our land, our houses and East Jerusalem, we will be willing to recognize Israel according to the formulation of the government within the hour," added Rabbo.

Abed Rabbo continued, "It is important for us to know where are the borders of Israel and where are the borders of Palestine. Any formulation the Americans present – even asking us to call Israel the 'Chinese State' – we will agree to it, as long as we receive the 1967 borders. We have recognized Israel in the past, but Israel has not recognized the Palestinian state."