It is not that PM Netanyahu is merely upset by the fact that Pres. Abbas of the PA is applying to 15 organs of the UN to join various conventions and treaties, but that this application is contrary to internatioanl law, because the PA is not a State and further that it is contrary to a signed obligation that the PA undertook as part of the Oslo Accords, which is the only peace agreement that Israel and the Palestinians have signed so far. By taking these unilateral steps the PA not only negates all previous UN resolutions that require negotiations between the two sides, but also by negating the Oslo Accords, leaves Israel free to do so as well. If the Accords no longer apply to the Palestinians they also no longer apply to Israel.
The whole existence of the PA itself is based on the division of the West Bank and Gaza into three areas A, B and C, under these Accords, in which area A is administered by the Palestinians as the PA, C remains under Israeli jurisdiction, and B is controlled jointly. If this treaty is abrogated, it would be legitimate under international law for Israel to return to the status quo ante, namely the full occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Whether or not Israel would chose to do this is uncertain, but the Israeli Government might decide to reoccupy and then annex those areas of Jewish serttlement in Judea and Samaria that they would have claimed in any negotiated peace agreement with the Palestinians. If there is no such negotiation and no possibility of a peace agreement and if the Palestinian side takes unilateral action, so will Israel.
To consider these applications by the PA to the UN in more detail, the treaties and conventions of the UN are applicable to States only, that are recognized, that control their own territory, that are self-supporting and that are sovereign. The Palestine Authority exhibits none of these characteristics of a State. Furthermore, should the UN unaccountably recognize Palestinian rights under these treaties, it would change the situation considerably, according to Alan Baker, Legal Advisor to the Israel Foreign Ministry, because the obligations of a State would apply to the Palestinian Authority, hence they would be responsible for all and every terrorist action that occurs against Israel from any part of their territory. Thus, if Hamas lobs a missile against Israel from Gaza, the ultimate authority for this would be Pres. Abbas in Ramallah. Thus, Israel would be legitimately within its rights under international law to retaliate against the PA in Ramallah.
On two occasions the Palestinians were offered a great deal, by PM Ehud Barak to Yasir Arafat in 2000 and by PM Ehud Olmert to Pres. Abbas in 2008. In both cases the PA leaders rejected these deals and continued on the course of terrorism and rejection of Israel’s right to exist. Now they can never expect a better deal from the current Israeli Government because Israel in response has moved rightwards, after those deals were rejected and both Barak and Olmert were rejected by the Israeli populace in elections. Now, if the PA takes these unilateral; actions and they lose out they will only have themselves to blame.
IsBlog 