Barbados indicated on Friday its intention to recognise Palestine as an independent State says Minister of Foreign Affairs Kerrie Symmonds in talks that according to the official started in September last year. ⠀
The FM said there is an incongruity and inconsistency because "how can we say we want a two-state solution if we do not recognise Palestine as a state?” ⠀
The Palestine State recognition it is expected to be very welcomed by the local pro-Palestinian campaign group, the Caribbean Against Apartheid in Palestine (CAAP), which has been pushing for Prime Minister Mia Mottley, who has previously condemned the genocide in Gaza, to do more to stop the Israeli siege.
Declared a state by the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) in November 1988, and accepted as a UN non-member observer state in 2012, the State of Palestine has so far been recognised by 140 of the UN’s 193 member states.
Just because there’s a UN Resolution passed, doesn’t mean everything that’s proposed magically happens. Governments of all levels accept long-term plans, but then they need to do further actions to follow through on those plans (or in many cases, they don’t do anything and those plans just stay as dreams and what-ifs).
Israel is a state because they’ve declared it and the UN has accepted Israel as a member, it’s really that simple. If you want to know why Israel’s statehood was accepted, that’s very, very complicated and involves millennia of history. I certainly can’t condense it here, maybe others could, but I doubt it. I honestly think Wikipedia’s a pretty good source for the history of Israel, and I’d suggest starting the British Mandate and looking back if you need more context.
Israel was not established through direct negotiations between Israel and Palestine. Why the double standard?
I don’t understand your question. Can you please explain it?
Maybe the answer is colonialism?
Israel gets to be recognized as a state despite not negotiating with Palestine.
Palestine isn’t allowed to be a state without negotiating with Israel.
It’s a double standard.
It’s immensely unfair, but I’m not sure I’d call that a “double standard.”
I’m no expert, Israel was accepted as a UN when they pledged to implement the partition plan. They’ve never followed through, so you could argue they lied to get in, but once they’re in, it’s difficult to expel/suspend a member.
It looks like it wasn’t until decades later that Palestine sought UN membership. So it kind of makes sense to say the applicant needs to appease the existing members. You could also argue the partition plan was/is unfair, and many wars have been fought over it. I’m just not sure the situations are similar enough to be a “double standard.”
This isn’t about appeasing existing members, it’s just the US blocking everything. Also, asking the colonized to negotiate with their own colonizers is absurd - just wolves and deer negotiating on what’s for dinner.
…still not a “double standard”
The double standard is “Israel gets to be a state without negotiating with the people it’s stealing the land from, Palestine doesn’t get to be a state without negotiating with the people who stole their land.” It’s a double standard enforced by the US, but it’s definitely a double standard and the rest of the world can see it.
All the US is doing is destroying its own credibility and the legitimacy of the UN. This shit is going the way of the League of Nations.
Alright, thanks. I took your advice and I think I found my answer in the 1948 Palestine war: