Shalev: UNGA ‘Palestine’ resolution may have real impact
By DAVID HOROVITZ The Jerusalem Post 03/25/2011 05:09
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?ID=213794&R=R1?

Shalev: Israel "only just found out" about Resolution 377; same process used
in 1981 to advance Namibian independence, delegitimize S. Africa.

Israel failed to realize until recently that the Palestinian bid to win
United Nations General Assembly endorsement for statehood in September might
not be merely declarative, but could have profound practical consequences
under the provisions of a little-known UNGA resolution, Gabriela Shalev, the
former Israeli ambassador to the UN, has told The Jerusalem Post.

UNGA Resolution 377, also known as the “Uniting for Peace” resolution, was
passed during the Korean War in 1950, at the initiative of the US, because
the Soviet Union was vetoing UN Security Council action to protect South
Korea.

It permits the General Assembly to recommend a range of “collective
measures” to supportive states, including sanctions and even the use of
force, in cases where the permanent members of the Security Council cannot
reach unanimity and where “there appears to be a threat to the peace, breach
of the peace, or act of aggression.”

The existence of UNGA Resolution 377, and the precedents for its use, said
Shalev, mean that “those who believe that the UN General Assembly’s
deliberations are of a solely declarative importance are mistaken.”

If the Palestinians can gain General Assembly recognition for statehood
under a “Uniting for Peace” resolution, she warned, “it would be a real
obstacle… not just a public relations setback. This would seek to impose on
us some kind of Palestinian state.”

Shalev said that Israel only “just found out about this” – thanks, she said,
to research done by Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi’s The Israel Project.

Palestinian officials have said repeatedly that they intend to seek UN
recognition for “Palestine” by September. It is widely assumed that a
resolution to that effect would not receive the binding approval of the 15-
member Security Council – where it might not gain the nine “yes” votes it
would need, and where, even if it did, the US would likely use its veto.

In the General Assembly, by contrast, a resolution recommending a state of
Palestine would easily receive two-thirds support, diplomatic sources say.

But the assumption in Israel until recently was that while such a vote might
further dent Israel’s international standing, it would have no practical
consequences.

By invoking the non-binding “Uniting for Peace” resolution, however, the GA
could then recommend that “collective measures” be taken by individual
states in support of the statehood resolution.

Richard Schifter, a former US assistant secretary of state, noted a 1981
precedent in which the General Assembly utilized Resolution 377 to advance
the struggle for Namibian independence.

That resolution called upon member states “to render increased and sustained
support and material, financial, military and other assistance to the South
West Africa People’s Organization to enable it to intensify its struggle for
the liberation of Namibia.” And it urged member states to immediately cease
“all dealings with South Africa in order totally to isolate it politically,
economically, militarily and culturally.”

Its passage, said Schifter, who now chairs the board of directors of the
American Jewish International Relations Institute, “was a significant step
in the process of imposing sanctions on apartheid South Africa and
delegitimizing the country.”