THE vociferous US-Israeli opposition to the prospect of tentative recognition by the UN of Palestinian statehood suggests they have something to fear from what could easily be seen as little more than a symbolic gesture.

They are inclined, not surprisingly, to see it as a problem rather than an opportunity.

It isn’t impossible to imagine a different scenario. A couple of prominent members of the Israeli Labour party — once considered the natural party of government but lately much diminished — have suggested that their country could have scored a diplomatic coup by actually supporting the Palestinian Authority’s initiative, and thereafter using it as the basis for final negotiations towards a two-state solution.

That suggestion isn’t as bizarre as it sounds, given that 15 years ago Benjamin Netanyahu became the first Israeli prime minister to concede the inevitability of a Palestinian state. Which isn’t the same, of course, as accepting the minimum conditions necessary for a sovereign Palestinian republic to coexist alongside Israel. Yet even the theoretical concession would not entirely be incompatible with formal recognition — which could be construed not as the end of occupation, but perhaps the beginning of the end.

Honourable intentions, however, have never been a part of the Israeli diplomatic arsenal. The state’s chief sponsor has always been aware of this. The US also knows that its leverage in this context is unparalleled. Israel is able to routinely brush off White House or State Department criticism of its determination to expand illegal settlements in the West Bank only because it realises the mild reprimands entail no cost. A vow to suspend the generous military aid that sustains the Israeli war machine would produce immediate results.

That the power of the Israeli lobby makes such a gesture unthinkable for any US administration is taken for granted. Were the lobby to face a serious challenge, it may well turn out to be little more than a paper tiger. But the Obama administration is hardly likely to take that chance, and the possibility of capitalising on the forthcoming UN test as a means of pressurising Israel may never have occurred to it.

Merely an inclination on the part of Washington to support the Palestinian resolution unless Netanyahu moved forthwith towards meaningful negotiations would forcefully have concentrated Israeli minds.

But that’s pure fantasy. What we have, instead, is the threat of a Security Council veto — which would inevitably rile the Arab world, which is why diplomatic efforts have been concentrated on trying to persuade Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority to abandon their efforts.

The Israeli ambassador to the UN concedes that his country doesn’t stand a chance in the General Assembly, where a resolution elevating Palestine’s status from an ‘observer entity’ to an ‘observer state’ requires two-thirds support; reports suggest 130 out of 193 UN member states are inclined to vote in favour of such a resolution.

The weight of overwhelming international opinion does not matter much to Israel — just as it didn’t matter to apartheid South Africa, until the US changed its stance. Ronald Reagan resisted congressional pressure for sanctions against South Africa for as long as he could; one of the differences today is that Netanyahu appears to enjoy more support in the US Congress than Barack Obama.

Israel has indicated it will be satisfied by winning support from a “moral minority” — what makes it ‘moral’, of course, is its unwillingness to take a stand against Israel. Inevitably, concerted attempts are being made to ensure that the key nations of Europe adhere to the minority position.

The European Union discussions had not concluded at the time of writing, but an opinion poll released at the weekend suggested overwhelming support for the Palestinian position among the citizens of France, Germany and Britain.

The Palestinians themselves are somewhat less enthusiastic. In some cases this is the consequence of a cynicism bred by a series of disappointments over the past 20 years — the notion that a symbolic triumph at the UN won’t change the reality of the occupation and that the dim prospect of meaningful nationhood may recede further as a result.

In other quarters — notably in the case of Hamas and Islamic Jihad — there is resentment that the initiative is associated chiefly with Abbas and the PA. For the latter, it’s an expression of frustration over the lack of a peace process even after they bent over backwards to appease Israel and the US, including in their reluctance to follow through on the reconciliation effected with Hamas in May.

Another concern is that the change of status at the UN would entail representation only for those under PA jurisdiction, disenfranchising the substantial Palestinian diaspora and effectively relinquishing the right of return.

Israel, meanwhile, is yet to come to terms with the rapidly changing political environment in its neighbourhood and perturbed by deteriorating relations with Egypt and Turkey, until recently its closest allies in the region. Huge protests by Israelis against deteriorating economic circumstances have at the same time dented its self-image as a model state.

The ideal of a non-denominational democracy across historic Palestine could conceivably qualify as such. Although favoured by some Israelis and Palestinians, there is little to suggest it could be achieved in the foreseeable future.

A two-state outcome based on the 1967 borders remains a possibility, and UN recognition of Palestine as a putative state may somewhat enhance the negotiating power of its representatives. But prospects for peaceful progress and coexistence depend to a great extent on Israel changing its stance.

Last month, addressing a predominantly Christian fundamentalist crowd in Jerusalem, Glenn Beck — the broadcaster who proved too right-wing even for Fox News — saluted Israelis as “people who stand against the entire tide of global opinion”.

Israelis would be doing themselves — and the world — a huge favour were they to reject such dementedly damaging advice and, instead, join the tide.

mahir.dawn@gmail.com