Is the recognition of a Palestinian state harmful to peace?

(BRUXELLES2, opinion) European embarrassment over the request for recognition of the Palestinian state at the UN this week is clearly visible. Because this request appears to participate, objectively, in the European objective of having a solution based on the "coexistence of two States, with a State of Israel and an independent, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine, coexisting in peace and security“. Of course, the Europeans have always advocated that this solution be obtained through negotiations. But for several months, even years, this negotiation has been blocked. regret ", their " disappointment ", their " deep concern to see these negotiations blocked (*).

Isn't there a moment when you have to change gears, redistribute the cards in hand to provoke a movement? In this case, the Palestinian Authority's request seems all the more legitimate since the Palestinians have this time chosen to take action, not by violence or in a terrorist manner as in the past, but most peaceful way and through the most international channel possible, namely the United Nations. All notions (multinational forum, peaceful action...) that Europeans regularly defend.

Considering that this will harm the peace process seems like a pale excuse. This process does not exist. The indirect talks relaunched in May 2010 have stalled. And we cannot say that the Israeli state is doing much to make it happen. Currently what harms the peace process is the construction of new colonies, carried out to the detriment of international law by the Israeli government, and regularly condemned verbally by the international authorities. There are countless statements from the Quartet or the EU made recently on this subject (at least one per month).

Paradoxically, the existence of a State - even if not recognized - should thus facilitate negotiation between equals. Indeed, it will not be easy for Israel, which will henceforth be placed in a much more difficult situation than in the past. But the mythology of the good Israeli against the bad Palestinian has long since been outdated, so much the realities are much more complex and much more blurred.

Even if the situations are slightly different, one cannot help noticing that in the situation in Kosovo, a "state" recognized by a far smaller proportion than that of Palestine, the Europeans have adopted a noticeably different attitude. We did not wait to recognize the State until it had settled - in a process of negotiation - all these questions with the neighboring States, in particular Serbia, for most European States to recognize it and give it their support. Nor can it be said that the existence of Kosovo has harmed peace. It is precisely the existence of the Kosovar state that makes it easier to negotiate a peaceful "separation" with Serbia and not its non-recognition. It should be the same for Palestine.

The EU should push for the resumption of a negotiation process. But it must not make this process a game of barter against the abandonment of the process of recognition of a State. One cannot be linked to the other.