The Israeli press is abuzz with reactions to statements by Yasser Abed Rabbo, a key Palestinian peace negotiator, who called for a unilateral declaration of independence if reconciliation with Israel stumbles. Almost all of the reactions were judgmental and non-sympathetic. Few were even cynical.
None saw a valid comparison with the Kosovo case. If Abed Rabbo's proposal was meant to shake the Israelis in any way, it had clearly failed to do so.
The US immediately rejected the comparison with Kosovo. There were few encouraging voices from the Arab world as well, and in some cases the call drew unexpected flak. After all this was not the first time the Palestinians had made such a caveat.
On November 15, 1988 the Palestinian National Council in Algeria declared the establishment of the state of Palestine within the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital. About 100 countries recognised the state of Palestine, but that did not end the Israeli occupation.
Only when the Americans got into the game, by putting together the Madrid peace conference, that the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) and Israel began talking to each other.
That paved the way for the Oslo agreement and the historic signing of the Washington Accord in 1993, under which the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) was created. From there on it was a bumpy ride - and remains dangerously so.
The creation of an independent Palestinian state was always seen as the endgame of the peace negotiations. But after more than 15 years since Oslo the Palestinian dream remains elusive. And even after President George W. Bush reiterated his vision for a two-state solution in the Holy Land, the struggle continues.
Abed Rabbo's statements reflect a growing Palestinian frustration with the peace process, which had failed to take off even after last November's Annapolis conference. On the ground the situation is grim.
Gaza is a part of the future state, but governed by an Islamist movement that has cut itself loose from the PNA and is bent on challenging Israel and rejecting the peace negotiations.
In the West Bank, the PNA has symbolic control while Israel continues to fatten and build colonies and cordon off East Jerusalem.
On the face of it, the threat of a unilateral declaration of statehood under such circumstances is unlikely to change facts on the ground. Kosovo could not have declared independence from Serbia without US, EU and UN support.
In fact if the Palestinians wanted a more applicable example of independence they could cite East Timor, which unilaterally declared itself independent on November 28, 1975 but could only achieve it in 2002, after its people exercised their right of self-determination.
Legally and in spite of Israeli presumptions, the Palestinians have a water-tight case to present to the world body and its courts. Their right to self-determination was reaffirmed as far back as 1974 by the UN General Assembly and accordingly recognised by the majority of countries.
In addition, in their call for an independent state the Palestinians could refer to UN resolutions 181, also called the partition resolution, 194 and 273 to make their case.
Over and above they have the Security Council resolutions of 242 and 338 to back their claim as Occupied Territories from which Israel must withdraw and remains non compliant.
But regardless of the Kosovo and the East Timor cases, the fact remains that the Palestinian question, the oldest on the UN agenda, was never taken seriously by the world powers, in particular the United States.
Successive US vetoes and biased policies gave Israel the necessary cover to maintain its occupation of Palestinian territories.
The Palestinians have made numerous compromises and eventually accepted to build their state over less than 8 per cent of the total land mass of historical Palestine. To this date they are unable to achieve that goal.
In fact Israel is creating new realities on the ground in the Occupied Territories that will make the possibility of establishing a contiguous and viable state over the West Bank and Gaza simply undoable.
Peoples' right
And yet the PNA can go ahead and declare the birth of an independent Palestinian state over lands occupied in 1967 in accordance with international law. By doing so it would risk the collapse of the peace talks with Israel and an extension of occupation.
But it would also set its own boundaries - within the scope of UN resolutions - and force the world to meet its obligations towards the Palestinian people.
The sceptics fear that the concept of temporary boundaries would do more harm than good. But they are mistaken. The Palestinian issue is not a dispute over boundaries and territory, as Israel would have the rest of the world believe.
It is a legal, natural and moral right of a nation that has suffered enormously as a result of conspiracy, collusion, appeasement and deceit.
In fact Abed Rabbo's call should be followed by an immediate dissolution of the PNA and a forming of a national salvation government by the PLO, the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people all over the world.
President Mahmoud Abbas should not use the threat to declare a Palestinian state as a tactic but as a long-term strategy.
He should announce that Israel has violated the previous agreements and that accordingly he is labelling the Palestinian territories of the West Bank and Gaza, including East Jerusalem, as the Occupied Territories of the independent state of Palestine.
Such a move requires both courage and commitment to a cause that has been betrayed by the world for decades. It should also repatriate the Palestine Question to the UN, where it belongs and from where it should never have left!
Osama Al Sharif is a veteran publisher and journalist based in Jordan.
