J Street opposes Palestinian statehood bid at UN

The pro-Israel organization J Street decided to reject the Palestinian statehood bid in its new position paper on Thursday, aligning with the Obama administration's position to oppose the unilateral move.

In the recent days, many left-wing Jewish organizations in the United States were cautious about endorsing the Palestinian bid at the United Nations, and J Street ultimately decided to reject the move.

"J Street does not support the Palestinian effort to become a member of the United Nations at this time because we do not believe that, in the current context, it will advance peace, enhance security and improve conditions on the ground", the organization officials wrote in the position paper.

"J Street therefore supports the U.S. intention to veto such an effort in the Security Council. We urge an assertive American and international diplomatic initiative that could lead the Palestinians to defer their approach to the UN by jumpstarting efforts to reach a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/j-street-opposes-palestinian-statehood-bid-at-un-1.383314

:party:

... is right twice a day.

<snip>

We started J Street to make the voice heard of Americans – Jews and non-Jews – who believe in the right, in fact, the necessity of Palestinian statehood not as a favor to the Palestinian people but in Israel’s own interest.

So how is it then, I’ve been asked, that J Street supports an American veto at the Security Council of a Palestinian application for UN membership?

The question raised by the UN vote, as we see it, isn’t whether we’d like to see a Palestinian state one day. The answer to that is a resounding yes.

The question is whether a vote at the UN Security Council right now will advance or set back the prospects of a two-state solution.

It’s a tough call.

We’re worried that the U.S. Congress will respond counterproductively by suspending critical financial assistance to the Palestinian Authority (PA).

We’re worried that in the aftermath of a veto or in response to the lack of real change on the ground, there could be marches and protests, intended to be non-violent but that inadvertently spark a clash that spirals out of control.

We’re worried about the Israeli response. Will they really deem the Oslo Accords broken? Will they suspend tax transfers to the PA? Will they formally annex West Bank settlements?

The application to the UN without any possibility of an agreement between the sides and the real prospect of conditions worsening on the ground seems to us to risk setting back the cause of peace.

So we recommend that the Palestinians defer the application at this time and, if they don’t, that the U.S. veto it at the Security Council.

But then, many ask, what sets J Street apart from the many other groups supporting a US veto?

<snip>

more...
http://jstreet.org/uncategorized/j-street-supports-a-palestinian-state/

This explanation seems a tad convoluted.