Q: Direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians have reached some agreements, but not produced any tangible results. What other options do the Palestinians have other than to go to the world's highest body and ask for the right of having a sovereign nation?
Phil Rees: Israel acts unilaterally all the time. It behaves as if there is no other partner when it comes to dealing with the Palestinians. So I think for the Palestinians to do something unilaterally, it's about time.
I think what Israel has done ever since the Camp David agreement is it's created a kind of tame Palestinian Authority that it manages and manipulates and corrupts -- and we know that. So what this is doing is that for the first time, members of Fatah, the Palestinian Authority separate from Hamas of course… and the unity government is another issue here of course, but it's seen to do something now that's separate because whenever they've been involved in negotiations, nothing has been achieved.
Israel has grabbed more and more land; more and more people have settled illegally on Palestinian land, so they've had no real option. The Palestinian Authority has of course been discredited; we saw Wikileaks earlier talking about them fawning to the American administration.
Basically why Israel is so opposed to this is not because it matters in a practical sense, but symbolically it's an assertion by the Palestinian Authority that we're separate; we're not under you anymore, we're not playing by your rules; we're actually doing something separate.
Q: Both the US House of Representatives and the US Senate have approved bills that threaten the suspension of American aid to the Palestinian Authority if it insists on the UN recognition statehood plan. What does that move say about the US role especially as an honest broker between Israel and the PA?
Phil Rees: I don't think the US has ever been an honest broker in that sense in terms of it being a level playing field; no of course not. I think the threat to withdraw funds is something the US feels is part of its foreign policy tools when things don't go its way.
Any country that signed to the International Criminal Court (ICC), for example… it threatened to withdraw funds from any of those countries who bring any American citizens before the court. So I think the use of aid is considered a foreign policy tool of the US.
I think what this shows though is a real concern in Israel. We're talking at a point now where the Arab spring has come about; we're talking about a possible fusion of that with the Palestinian issue; we saw what happened on the Day of Nakba, the killing of the people there. Virtually all of Israel's Arab borders are now in a really tense state.
So I think Israel, after years ever since Camp David, has basically been the controlling power in the region with of course American help and also all of its Arab leaders who are also a part of that consensus -- I really think that they feel this is in danger.
Indeed if there was a third Intifada, this would have implications in Jordan; it would have implications in the new Egypt now, so the whole stability in the region in the way that stability means basic control by the US and Israel of the region is under threat.
Q: If Palestine becomes an independent state, what impact is it going to have on negotiations between themselves and Israel?
Phil Rees: Well, I think it would be one step up in achieving a level playing field. I don't think on a practical level it will help a lot, but it's exactly why Netanyahu is so worried now, the symbolism, now the Palestinians can do something for themselves.
And secondly, because everything to do with Palestine in terms of the US and Israel they kick up to the UN Security Council. Well, this is the United Nations, the real United Nations; the General Assembly of the world coming together and voicing their opinion on this. And I think that will be a real indictment on Israel and their attempts to continue to manipulate and control the lives of the Palestinians.
/106
