What Palestinians Want From UN Membership

Anchor Lisa Mullins talks with Hussein Agha, Senior Associate Member of St. Antony’s College, Oxford University, about the Palestinian bid for full membership at the UN.

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

Lisa Mullins: Hussein Agha is a senior associate member of St. Anthony’s College in Oxford where he researches Israeli-Palestinian relations.  He was an advisor to the Palestinian leadership, and he says the Palestinians had little choice but to bring their bid to the UN.

Hussein Agha: They cannot sit back, do nothing, see what they think of as being their territory being taken over consistently and progressively by Israel’s building of settlements.  They cannot sit back and do nothing when the avenue of negotiation has been denied to them because they feel that the requisites for negotiations have not been put in place.  So they have to move. This is a legitimate move by them, their response to international law, so it is one of the few avenues left to them. If they’re not to do that the whole position of the leadership will become very tenuous.  It will not be leading anymore, and given the kind of climate in the region of Arab Spring, of people being not satisfied with their rulers, it will not be too long before that will reach the Palestinians and they will be involved in the kind of activities that will be much more dangerous than the current one.

Mullins: Let me ask you this, we spoke with representatives of the Israeli government and Palestinian politicians as well.  Friday, Israel’s ambassador to the US told us that Israel is committed to direct talks with Palestinians, and that this unilateral move by Palestinians at the United Nations he said is not helpful. Yesterday on this program a Palestinian member of parliament, Mustafa Barghouti, told us that it is not Palestinians who are taking unilateral action, but it’s Israel, that negotiations could have been resumed if Israel had agreed to just freeze and stop settlement activities. It’s another case where the two sides seem unable to connect.  Do you see a way forward?

Agha: We were hoping that the United States would provide a way forward, specifically the current administration; but I will not be revealing any secrets if I say that they have failed in that.  So, the issue is that the Palestinians have been negotiating for 18 years as part of the Oslo Agreement, and for 20 years as part of the Madrid Process.  And it has not proven to be helpful in getting them anywhere nearer to what they aim to achieve. And so you have this dilemma that both sides want negotiations, but you have a history of failed negotiations and you have no indications that any future negotiations will be any different.  And this is exactly why we find ourselves where we are now, is because those other ways did not really lead to anywhere.  So let’s try this for a change, at least there is something complete that might come out of it. When you find yourself with your back against the wall you pursue what is open to you and this is one avenue that is at least it is not a violent one, and this is the way it should be looked at.  If you don’t have this kind of move I think the likelihood of a systemic breakdown in the Palestinian territories and violence will increase dramatically.  So there is a positive aspect to this, which is it provides you with an alternative to violence.

Mullins: So take us to the day after the United States presumably vetoes this move on the part of the Palestinians.  What would you want to see Washington do next?

Agha: It has to go talking to both parties to get them back to negotiate, and it has to formulate the kind of framework that will give hope that the new phase of negotiation that will be embarked upon will have some chance of success.  It’s not something really that profound to identify what it is, but the United States is the only party that both local parties have decided is going to be the mediator and the sponsor of peace talks. And the United States has to engage on this in a realistic, hard headed and intelligent way that was not the case in the past two years.

Mullins: All right, we’re gonna leave it there.  Hussein Agha, of St. Anthony’s College in Oxford, speaking to us from London.  Nice to talk to you.

Agha: Thank you, ma’am.

Copyright ©2009 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.