Context-

Israel’s ongoing conflict with Gaza has brought a renewed focus on several ethical, political, and diplomatic questions. Among these, the issue of Palestine’s application for membership in the United Nations (UN) has gained significant attention. Despite persistent efforts, Palestine's quest for full membership remains impeded, primarily due to geopolitical dynamics and the strategic interests of key players within the UN, especially the United States.

Historical Context and Previous Attempts

• Palestine’s Pursuit of UN Membership : Palestine’s pursuit of UN membership is not a new endeavor. In 2011, Palestine submitted a request to become a full member of the UN. However, this request was thwarted by the United States, a permanent member of the UN Security Council (UNSC) with veto power. Consequently, Palestine was granted non-member observer status, a significant but limited recognition that falls short of full membership.
• Non-Member Observer Status : The non-member observer status allows Palestine to participate in General Assembly debates but without voting rights. This status also enables Palestine to join international bodies and treaties, a move that has been strategically utilized over the years to strengthen its international standing and advocate for its rights.

The 2024 Application and UNSC Dynamics

• Renewed Application in 2024 : In April 2024, Palestine renewed its application for full membership in the UN. The UNSC, however, was unable to reach a consensus due to the lone veto cast by the United States. This veto underscored the geopolitical calculations and strategic interests that often influence UNSC decisions. The U.S. stance is rooted in the belief that UN membership should follow a negotiated resolution to the Israel-Palestine conflict, not precede it.
• UN General Assembly Intervention : The inability of the UNSC to agree on Palestine’s membership led to intervention by the UN General Assembly (UNGA). On May 10, 2024, the UNGA adopted a resolution overwhelmingly supporting Palestine’s eligibility for full membership and urging the UNSC to favorably consider the application. This move by the UNGA highlights the broader international support for Palestine, contrasting sharply with the geopolitical maneuvering within the UNSC.

Norms and Procedural Hurdles

• Membership Criteria : The UN Charter stipulates that membership seekers must be “peace-loving” states capable of fulfilling the obligations of the Charter. While these criteria are interpreted flexibly, the procedural requirements for admission are stringent and often politically charged. An application for membership requires the recommendation of the UNSC, which must not be opposed by any of the five permanent members (P5) wielding veto power: the U.S., Russia, China, the UK, and France.
• Historical Deadlocks and the ICJ Ruling : This procedural hurdle has historically been a significant barrier. During the early years of the UN, Cold War politics often led to deadlocks in the UNSC, preventing the admission of several states. To address this, the UNGA sought the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) opinion on whether it could admit states without UNSC recommendation. The ICJ ruled in 1948 that the UNSC’s recommendation was a prerequisite, reinforcing the procedural constraints dictated by the political dynamics of the P5.

Comparative Case: Mongolia’s Membership

• Mongolia’s Application Process : A pertinent historical parallel can be drawn with Mongolia’s application for UN membership. In the face of a similar deadlock in the UNSC, the UNGA adopted a resolution advocating for Mongolia’s membership. Eventually, Mongolia was admitted as a member in 1961, illustrating how persistent international advocacy can sometimes overcome geopolitical barriers.
• Relevance to Palestine : This precedent is relevant to Palestine’s current situation, indicating that sustained UNGA support and international pressure could potentially influence the UNSC's stance, though the specific geopolitical context of each case varies significantly.

India’s Support and Historical Consistency

• India’s Endorsement of the 2024 Resolution : India has been a consistent supporter of Palestine’s right to full UN membership. In May 2024, India joined 142 other member countries in endorsing the UNGA resolution favoring Palestine’s application. India’s stance is rooted in its long-standing foreign policy principles, dating back to the Nehruvian era, which advocate for inclusive UN membership without discrimination.
• Historical Support for UN Membership : Historically, India has supported the admission of various states to the UN, including Pakistan in 1947 and the People’s Republic of China in 1971, despite complex and often contentious bilateral relations. This consistent policy underscores India’s commitment to a rules-based international order and its support for the sovereign rights of states.

Geopolitical Implications and Future Scenarios

• Challenges in the UNSC : The prospect of Palestine achieving full UN membership remains uncertain, primarily due to the entrenched geopolitical interests of the U.S. and other major powers. China and Russia, for instance, are wary of setting a precedent that could facilitate the admission of entities like Taiwan or Kosovo, which they oppose for various strategic reasons.
• Potential Shifts in Geopolitical Calculations : However, there are theoretical scenarios where changes in geopolitical calculations could alter the current deadlock. For example, if the U.S. were to abstain from vetoing Palestine’s application as a diplomatic signal to Israel, this could pave the way for Palestine’s admission. Such a move, though unlikely, would require a significant shift in U.S. policy and a recalibration of its strategic interests in the Middle East.

Tactical Moves and Alternative Approaches

• Expanding Participatory Privileges : In the absence of a breakthrough in the UNSC, alternative strategies could be considered to enhance Palestine’s status within the UN framework. One possible approach is the further expansion of Palestine’s participatory privileges in the UNGA, short of full membership. This could involve granting Palestine greater roles in various UN bodies and increasing its influence in international deliberations.

• Historical Precedents : Historical precedents exist for such tactical moves. During the apartheid era, South Africa was barred from participating in the UNGA, and similar measures were taken against the Serb Republic of Yugoslavia during the ethnic cleansing period. These measures stopped short of full suspension or expulsion but effectively marginalized the offending states within the UN framework.

Conclusion

The question of Palestine’s UN membership is deeply intertwined with the broader geopolitical landscape and the strategic interests of key international actors. Despite overwhelming support from the majority of UN member states, the procedural and political hurdles within the UNSC continue to impede Palestine’s bid for full membership. However, history shows that persistent advocacy and international pressure can sometimes overcome these barriers.

Ultimately, the pursuit of UN membership for Palestine reflects a broader struggle for recognition, sovereignty, and the right to self-determination. In an increasingly multipolar world, the evolving dynamics of international diplomacy will continue to shape the prospects for Palestine’s full integration into the global community.

Source- The Hindu