The history of Palestine's membership in the UN is complex and tumultuous. It began in 1947 when the UN proposed dividing Palestine into two independent states, one Arab and one Jewish, with Jerusalem internationalized. However, this plan was rejected by Arab states, and Israel declared independence in 1948, leading to the Arab-Israeli War.
Over the years, the UN has passed numerous resolutions supporting Palestinian self-determination and statehood.
In 1974, the General Assembly granted the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) observer status, and in 1988, the PLO declared Palestine's independence.
In 2011, Palestine submitted an application for UN membership, but it was blocked by the US, citing concerns about Palestinian statehood and the peace process.
In 2012, the General Assembly voted to upgrade Palestine's status to a non-member observer state, which was seen as a significant victory for Palestinian diplomacy.
Palestine's bid for full UN membership has been consistently blocked by the US applying its veto in the Security Council arguing that Palestinian statehood can only be achieved through direct negotiations with Israel - UN recognition would undermine the peace process.
UK and France have also expressed reservations about Palestinian statehood, citing concerns about Israel's security and the need for a negotiated settlement. However, many countries, including most Arab and Muslim states, as well as some European countries, have recognized Palestine as a sovereign state and support its bid for UN membership.
The UN continues to play an important role in promoting Palestinian statehood.
In 2020, the General Assembly adopted a resolution reaffirming the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and statehood.
On 10 May 2024, the UN General Assembly recognized that Palestine met the requirements for UN membership. The Security Council rejected Palestine's request due to a US veto. The US claimed that Palestine doesn't meet the membership criteria outlined in the UN Charter and that statehood should come through direct negotiations between Palestine and Israel.
Russia criticized the US veto, calling it a "hopeless attempt to stop the inevitable course of history". France supported Palestine's membership bid, believing it could facilitate a two-state solution and strengthen the Palestinian Authority. China expressed disappointment, stating that some countries are challenging Palestine's eligibility for membership.
Palestine is an Observer State, but full membership requires a Security Council recommendation and a two-thirds majority vote in the General Assembly. The Palestinian bid for UN membership has been dragging on since 2011
Historically, Palestine was among former Ottoman territories placed under UK administration by the League of Nations in 1922. All of these territories eventually became fully independent States, except Palestine, where in addition to “the rendering of administrative assistance and advice” the British Mandate incorporated the “Balfour Declaration” of 1917, expressing support for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”.
During the Mandate, from 1922 to 1947, large-scale Jewish immigration, mainly from Eastern Europe took place, the numbers swelling in the 1930s with the Nazi persecution.
Arab demands for independence and resistance to immigration led to a rebellion in 1937, followed by continuing militant actions and violence from both sides. UK weighed various options to bring independence to a land devastated by vicious conflict. By then, the UK, itself, was sliding into being a declining colonial power.
By 1947, the UK turned the Palestine problem over to the UN. The UN tested out numerous options including the Partition plan. This plan launched in 1947 through the UN resolution 181, proposed dividing Mandatory Palestine into independent Arab and Jewish states, with Jerusalem under international control, but it faced immediate rejection and violence from the Arab community, and led to the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.
The disintegration of the Ottoman Empire had a serious impact on the creation of Palestine. The Great Powers in Europe – Britain, France, and Russia positioned themselves to create compasses of influence in the declining Ottoman Empire. Considering that the geography included claims to places sacred to three world religions, an international regime was initially envisaged for Palestine. Britain was mandated to oversee the process of this.
European Powers recognized that sovereignty would ultimately be vested under the control of the rulers and people of the Arab territories with specified recognition of an “independent Arab State” or, at least, a “confederation of Arab States”.
The UK recognized these Arab national aspirations as natural owing to religio-cultural identities. The agreements guaranteed sovereign independence for the Arab peoples after the defeat of the Axis Powers, created during the 2nd World War and included German, Italy, and Japan.
The UN concluded the British Mandate and partitioned Palestine into two independent States, one Palestinian Arab and the other Jewish, with Jerusalem internationalized. One of the two envisaged States proclaimed its independence as Israel and in the 1948 war involving neighbouring Arab States expanded to 77 percent of the territory of Mandate Palestine, including the larger part of Jerusalem.
In what is referred to as ‘The Nakba’ (catastrophe), over half of the Palestinian Arab population fled or were expelled. Jordan and Egypt controlled the rest of the territory assigned by resolution 181 to the Arab State. In the war of 1967, Israel occupied these territories (Gaza Strip and the West Bank) including East Jerusalem, subsequently annexed by Israel. There was a second exodus of Palestinians, assessed at half a million.
Security Council Resolution 242 (1967) formulated the principles of a just and lasting peace obliging an Israeli withdrawal from territories and a just settlement of the refugee problem
The 1973 hostilities were followed by Security Council Resolution 338, which obliged peace negotiations between the parties concerned. In 1974 the General Assembly reaffirmed the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination, national independence, sovereignty, and to return.
The following year, the General Assembly established the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People and conferred on the PLO the status of observer in the Assembly and in UN conferences.
The blame has been laid on the United Nations for failing to come up with the solution for failing to come up with a solution. The US has its interests in protecting Israel whatever the cost, and regardless of its horrific crimes against international law. The Question of Palestine is not one that requires charity and welfare. Palestine requires freedom and liberty rooted in principles of justice. The Palestinians will suffer brutality because it is brute power that controls the situation.
Europe knows just what must be done to bring Israel on its knees. Boycotts, Sanctions, divestments are options that South Africa showed as workable. The ANC also used the armed struggle to deplete apartheid abuse of power. Hamas has shown how a military fight backs has scared the living hell out of the Israeli army who are now running with their tails between their legs. Reservists have fled the country.
The world can also shut military aid, and European abstentions at the UN must cease. Desmond Tutu famously said: "If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor." Europe must learn this basis lesson.
The UN has its own limitations, the primary obstacle to addressing the Palestine situation is the influence wielded by powerful countries that prioritize their own interests over justice and human rights.
The underlying principles demand a transformation which converts it into a functional and equitable body that can evolve consensus and participatory approaches rather than what is now hierarchical, power-centric and far too western dominated.
The establishment of Israel in 1948 and its admission to the UN in 1949 was a significant event for the Jewish people, particularly after the horrors of the Holocaust. Palestine's passage into the UN is more complex than a single event. There was post-WWII guilt and sympathy for Jewish victims of the Holocaust.
Then came strategic interests in the Middle East, particularly access to oil resources. There was anti-Arab and anti-Muslim racism, which contributed to the displacement and marginalization of Palestinians. remains contentious, with ongoing debates about issues like Palestinian statehood, refugees' right of return, and Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
The rushed and imperfect process of establishing Israel, without adequately addressing Palestinian rights and concerns is something that must be reversed as the pre-condition for justice for the Palestinians.
In the context of UN reform, powerful countries often prioritize their own strategic interests over the principles of justice and human rights. In the case of Palestine, the US has historically been a strong supporter of Israel.
The UN's complex bureaucratic structure can hinder swift and effective action. The UN relies on member states to implement its decisions, but it lacks robust enforcement mechanisms to ensure compliance. The veto power held by the five permanent members (P5) - the United States, Russia, China, France, and the United Kingdom is already a significant obstacle to reform. They will not easily relinquish their veto power, as it gives them considerable influence over UNSC decisions.
The current composition of the UNSC is seen as unrepresentative of the modern world. Many countries, particularly from the Global South, are underrepresented, while others argue that the current permanent members hold undeserved significant economic and military power. They perpetuated colonialism by military power. This is simply not tenable in the contemporary world.
Any significant changes to the UNSC would require amendments to the UN Charter. That will pre-suppose radical changes. It is asked why a single country should wield privileged power. Such power should at first be evenly distributed so that regional representatives manage the UNSC over fixed periods and this term circulates. No Permanent membership.
The decision on veto power and permanent membership is a product of historical circumstances and geopolitical realities at the time of the UN's founding. The original five permanent members were the main Allied powers after World War II.
The veto power has indeed been used by the P5 to further their own interests or block decisions they deem unfavourable. Common examples include the United States using its veto to block resolutions critical of Israel. Russia used its veto to block resolutions related to Ukraine, Syria, and other issues. China is using its veto to block resolutions related to its interests in the South China Sea.
These illustrations have flashed debates about the need for reform and greater accountability within the UNSC. The UNSC is not just a question of the expansion of permanent and non-permanent seats, veto power, and representation. It demands looking into streamlining development programs, humanitarian aid, and sustainable development goals. It entails strengthening human rights mechanisms, international law, and accountability. Most of all, it needs improving UN management, transparency, and accountability.
Yet, there have been examples of good practice. In the late 1990s, Kosovo, a province of Serbia, was embroiled in a violent conflict between ethnic Albanians and Serbs. The European Union (EU) and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), played a crucial role in addressing the crisis.
The UN needs to invoke the principle of subsidiarity and abdicate its huge, expensive structures in Geneva and New York. They created the United Nations Mission in Kosovo to promote peace, stability, and security in Kosovo, facilitating the return of displaced persons, and supporting the development of democratic institutions. A new initiative is taking shape, marking a small but meaningful step toward empowering the next generation of women leaders in Kosovo.
Today, weaker countries are assertive about their dignity. In Burkina Faso, Captain Ibrahim Traoré, the interim leader of Burkina Faso, rose to power in September 2022 after leading a coup in his efforts to promote self-reliance and reduce dependence on foreign aid. He wants African nations to shed their "cap in hand" mentality and has implemented initiatives to boost Burkina Faso's agricultural sector, including increasing rice production and establishing partnerships with countries like Qatar and Turkey.
Burkina Faso's GDP grew from approximately $18.8 billion to $22.1 billion. Traoré rejected loans from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, has forged ties with Russia and Turkey, while distancing Burkina Faso from Western influence. The African Union (AU) is progressively reducing Western interference prioritizing African-led solutions to regional challenges, reducing reliance on external intervention or assistance. Trust in the West is eroding.
The United Nations has passed numerous resolutions concerning Palestine. Early Resolutions (1947-1966) by the General Assembly called for the partition of Mandatory Palestine into Arab and Jewish states, with Jerusalem under international administration.
There were more following that to address the rights of Palestinian refugees and assistance to Palestinian refugees. Between 1967-1989, the UN Security Council adopted 131 resolutions directly addressing the Arab-Israeli conflict, including the call for Israel's withdrawal from occupied territories, urging ceasefire and negotiations, affirming Palestinian right to self-determination and statehood.
There were also resolutions on settlement expansion in occupied territories. Importantly, there was a call to provide assistance to Palestinian refugees and address humanitarian needs. All these resolutions demonstrate the UN's ongoing efforts to address the complex issues surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the rights of the Palestinian people.
Resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could have far-reaching implications for global peace. A peaceful resolution could stabilize the Middle East, reducing tensions and the risk of conflict between Israel and its Arab neighbours.
The conflict's resolution could help to reduce anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim sentiment, promoting greater understanding and tolerance worldwide. A peaceful resolution could foster greater international cooperation, as nations work together to address shared challenges and promote economic development in the region.
Finally, establishing a sovereign Palestinian state could provide a sense of dignity and self-determination for the Palestinian people, promoting stability and prosperity in the region.
Among potential solutions, there must be an independent Palestinian state alongside the State of Israel, with mutually agreed-upon agreements on key issues: borders and security arrangements issues, such as borders, settlements, and Jerusalem's status. A united international community working to support a just and peaceful resolution in a unified secular state would, far and away, be the most ideal of solutions.
For the Palestinians, justice must be a pre-condition and the entire world must share a common conscience for their freedom and liberation.
Ranjan Solomon is a writer and activist. The views expressed here are the writer’s own.