BLACKMAIL–US ‘could withdraw funding from UN if Palestine state is recognised’


The US could withdraw funding from the United Nations if its members decide to recognise and independent Palestinian state, a close ally of President Barack Obama has warned.

Miss Rice said the Obama administration was devoting ‘extraordinary efforts and energy’ to restarting middle-eastern peace talks Photo: AFP

Susan Rice, the American ambassador to the UN, said there was “no greater threat” to US support and funding of the UN than the prospect of Palestinian statehood being endorsed by member states.

Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian authority, plans to ask the UN general assembly, which comprises all 192 members, to vote on recognition at its annual meeting in New York in September.

The US and Israel are pressing Mr Abbas to drop his plans. Mr Obama has strongly opposed the move, raising the prospect of a veto in the UN Security Council, which is expected to vote on a Palestinian statehood proposal in July.

But Palestinian officials have spoken of their determination to a circumvent a US veto by deploying a rarely used Cold War mechanism known as “Uniting for Peace” under which a two-thirds majority in the General Assembly can override the Security Council.

Although Palestinians believe they are close to securing such a majority, the General Assembly does not have the power to confer UN membership on a new Palestinian state, meaning that a successful vote would represent little more than a symbolic triumph.

Even so, Republicans in the US Congress are promising to react aggressively to any approval of statehood. Two congressmen have already vowed to initiate bills to withdraw UN funding in the House of Representatives.

Such a development could be devastating to the UN. The US provides almost a quarter of its $2.5 billion (£1.6 billion) annual budget, making a yearly contribution of almost $600 million (£375 million).

Speaking at an event in Washington, Miss Rice said the Obama administration was devoting “extraordinary efforts and energy” to restarting middle-eastern peace talks so that a vote in September could be avoided.

On the prospect of it being approved, she said: “This would be exceedingly politically damaging in our domestic context, as you can well imagine.

“And I cannot frankly think of a greater threat to our ability to maintain financial and political support for the United Nations in Congress than such an outcome”.

A video of Miss Rice making the comments has been removed from the internet.

Attempting to play down their significance, a spokesman for the ambassador said: “These were informal remarks in a domestic setting.”

The US is desperate to avoid being put into a position of having to wield its veto. With growing international support for Palestinian statehood, even in Europe, the US is looking increasingly isolated in its support for Israel and a veto would badly damage Mr Obama’s credentials in a rapidly changing Middle East.

But the president faces a politically damaging backlash from the pro-Israeli lobby and its many supporters in Congress if he does not block a resolution, a move that could also cost all-important Jewish votes in key swing states like Florida during next year’s presidential election.

Mr Obama has already angered the Israeli government and its US supporters by calling for a Palestinian state that roughly corresponds to the existing boundaries of the West Bank and Gaza, which Israel occupied after the Six Day war of 1967.

The move was intended to rejuvenate the stalled Middle East peace process.

But Palestinian officials, in public at least, say they remain committed to a UN vote as the only realistic way of breaking the deadlock.

Western powers have backed a two-year Palestinian state-building programme that reaches fruition at the end of August. It has already been judged a success by the World Bank and International Monetary Fund and Palestinian officials say it would be hypocritical for the West to back the state-building exercise but not its “logical outcome”.

Britain has indicated that it would not join the US in vetoing Palestinian statehood in the Security Council. But David Cameron is also hoping to avert a highly divisive vote in the general assembly.

“The question is whether we can do anything that might deflect the Palestinians from going ahead with this,” a British diplomatic source said.

Some Palestinian officials have conceded in private that they do not want to fall out with Mr Obama and are working on ways to resume peace talks with Israel and postpone a statehood vote.

  1. #1 by B.Benhamid on June 29, 2011 - 3:47 pm

    Let the evil plan of these two wicked witches of the West bite the dust forever.

  2. #2 by Ingrid B. on June 29, 2011 - 5:43 pm

    Isn`t it utterly unbelievable, that these people have to fight for what is rightfully theirs..

  3. #3 by Gary on June 29, 2011 - 8:10 pm

    Susan Rice, also known as israel’s political whore in the UN

  4. #4 by funky d on June 30, 2011 - 12:34 am

    all the american politicians are WHORES OF THE PARASITIC JEWISH SH*THOLE; i would also include the un/uk/nato/eu as the same types of whores.

    as a result of them being c*ck sucking/exposing whores, there is no chance the un will ever be allowed to do anything in support of the palestinians. they may vote in favour, but that will be just a staged drama created to deflect from the truth about the holocausts in the islamic/arab nations.

  5. #5 by Hassan Akida on June 30, 2011 - 3:44 am

    Withdrawing their support for the UN will probably be the best thing that can happen to World Body. UN will survive without the US contributions. Hopefully, the UN headquarters will eventually move to (preferably) a “third world country.” And the five will lose their veto power in the Security Council.

  6. #6 by kruitvat on June 30, 2011 - 11:31 am

    Thanks for the publication of this article.

    Some days ago the Israeli government said also that it could withdraw the funding from UN if the Palestine state is recognised.
    It proves again that the UN is funded by the U.S. and Israel.
    All the UN decisions are taken by the US and its allies + Israel.
    It is for that reason that:
    – Washington and Tel Aviv are able to block all the UN resolutions critical of Israel and that Israel can go on with building settlements in the Palestinian bantustans.
    – UN will do nothing against the US and Israeli attacks of the activists of the aid flotilla for Gaza.
    – Libya can be destroyed and Libyan civilians can be murdered by NATO-bombings with an UN-mandate.
    – the Libyan leader Gaddafi can be killed by NATO-bombings with an UN-mandate.
    – the UN imposed a travel ban on Gaddafi’s wife.

  7. #7 by kruitvat on June 30, 2011 - 11:34 am

    UN-resolutions critical of Israel are blocked:

    On November 15, 2010, U.S. President Barack Obama praised Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for urging his cabinet to accept a U.S. proposal to extend a freeze on West Bank settlement building for 90 days. Under the plan, Washington would block UN resolutions critical of Israel, and supply Israel with fighter jets worth $3 billion. The US government also promisedIsrael that after the 90-day moratorium, they would not seek an extension, and settlement construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem (all of which is illegal under international law) could continue unabated.
    In February 2011, more than 100 nations voted for a U.N. resolution that would have condemned illegal Israeli settlements and halted any new construction. The United States vetoed it.
    On February 19, 2011, Israel said it was deeply grateful to the United States after it vetoed a United Nations resolution put forward by the Palestinian leadership condemning Israeli settlement activity.

  8. #8 by kruitvat on June 30, 2011 - 11:40 am

    US, Israel + UN and the war against Libya:

    1) 1.3.2011- Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said he believed a no-fly zone should be imposed on Libya to stop a “danger of genocide”. Speaking at a conference in Brussels, Ayalon said international moves to impose a no-fly zone over Libya to stop Moamer Kadhafi using air strikes against his own people, ‘had not been discussed by the Israeli government’. ‘There is a danger of genocide in Libya. Morally we have to stop it and its best to have the UN’s okay,” he said. (AFP) Ayalon was the Israeli ambassador in the U.S.
    2) On 2.3.2011 (one day after the visit of Danny Ayalon to Brussels where the headquarter of NATO is located), US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that a no-fly zone could be imposed on Libya, ‘in order to prevent Gaddafi from bombing his own people’. She hinted strongly that ‘direct military intervention is on the cards’ and said that ‘it is time for Gaddafi to go’.

  9. #9 by kruitvat on June 30, 2011 - 11:43 am

    US, Israel, NATO and drones:

    The drones (unmanned aircraft) used by NATO to bomb Afghanistan, Pakistan and Libya are designed by Israel. The Israelis are denied entry into Afghanistan, but nevertheless, the Israeli drones provide ‘security’ for the coalition in Afghanistan. Israeli drones are used by Canada, France, Australia and Germany in Afghanistan. Today, Israeli specialists are on the air base at Ein Shemer for training the flight of “Herons” repainted in the colors of Germany. Many of Israeli military products are standard NATO-compatible.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,611 other followers

%d bloggers like this: