Member of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization and Head of the Palestinian Expatriate Affairs Department, Tayseer Khaled labeled the final statement issued by the Paris meeting on 15 January as lacking balance, real guarantees, real will to put an end to the Israeli occupation, and clear mechanisms for following-up and accountability.
In a statement, Khalid said that it is positive that participants emphasized the two-state solution and the right of the Palestinian people to statehood and sovereignty, and to put an end to the Israeli occupation that begun in 1967, and to resolve all final status issues on the basis of United Nations resolutions, as well as emphasizing the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 2334, on 23 December 2016, which clearly condemned settlement activity in the occupied Palestinian and calling on the Israeli occupation to stop all settlement activities, which destroy the chances of a political settlement the chances of the so-called two-state solution.
Khaled said, however, that the final statement lacks balance, particularly, in the context of the obligations of the parties and the Israelis and the Palestinians compliance with the international law, including international humanitarian law and human rights, ignoring that the essence is Israel’s crimes and its daily violations of Palestinian human rights under the occupation and the daily suffering of the Palestinian people . He criticized the statement for stressing tirelessly on the security needs of Israel, without taking into account the minimum of Palestinian security needs, or without taking note of the report of the Quartet of July 1, 2016 and its recommendations, at the time, the Executive Committee expressed its opposition to that report and recommendations due to its blatant bias toward the policy of the government of Israel and its full embracement to the Israeli narrative and vision of the conflict.
He stressed that the imbalance in the statement clearly reflected in calling upon both the Palestinian and the Israeli sides to refrain from taking unilateral steps that prejudge the outcome of final status negotiations in a bid to put heavy restrictions on the right of the Palestinian side to internationalize its cause, either through the United Nations and the UN Security Council or the International Criminal Court, or even through joining the United Nations’ organizations and agencies regarding that as unilateral steps threaten the two-state solution as Israel’s actions do including settlement activities, Judaization and ethnic cleansing in East Jerusalem, the Palestinian Jordan Valley , south of Hebron and other West Bank areas.
Khaled strongly condemned the pressures exerted by the US administration on the participants , which led to a political scandal, namely; writing off what was in the draft statement and the UN Security Council Resolution 2334 concerning the non-recognition of any changes in the fourth of June 1967 border lines, including Jerusalem, excluding those agreed by the parties in the final status negotiations.
He noted that the US administration, along with Britain and other European countries opposed the Palestinian claims regarding the need for and the importance of an agreement by participating countries on clear follow-up mechanisms and timetables to reach and to implement an agreement in order not for ending the occupation to be just ink on paper and in order not to just go back again to the series of futile negotiations used by Israel as a cover for its settlement activity and its destructive policy that may destroy the two-state solution.