Estonia to Abstain on Palestine Vote (13)

Published: 28.11.2012 21:10

Foreign Minister Urmas Paet ( Photo: Dyen za Dnyom/Scanpix )

See Also

With Europe split on whether to grant Palestine enhanced status in the UN in a key vote Thursday, Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet said his country would abstain, citing Israel's criticism that supporting the bid would slow the peace process.

"Our position right now is that Estonia will abstain, like a large part of the European Union's member states," Paet told uudised.err.ee.

"The reason is that if we look at the principal goal - to achieve peaceful stability in the Middle East - this is a two-state solution. The precondition for a Palestinian state that could co-exist normally with Israel is that Israel and Palestine are able to ultimately agree on this."

Paet said that "Israel has clearly said" that the vote will not result in better solutions but could in fact postpone them.

Of regional countries whose position is known so far, Norway and Denmark plan to support the non-member-state status for Palestine. Finland has also signaled it would support it. Lithuania has signaled it would abstain.

As to the major European powers, Britain is likely to abstain, while France supports and Germany opposes non-member status for Palestine.  

Comments

For adding comments,enter the ERR website with your user name and password , or use the form below to comment without logging in.


Guidelines for commenting can be found here.

Comments (13)

  • Foreigner

    29.11.2012 00:39

    Replace Israel with Russia, and Palestine with Estonia, and this has a complete different meaning...

  • richard

    29.11.2012 07:34

    Interesting tortured doublespeak coming out of the Foreign Ministry these days. "We want a two-state solution....but as one of the two states says the existence of the other state is not the best option, we can't support the two-state solution." It would take a lot fewer words just to say "Israel doesn't want us to vote yes."

  • Dutch

    29.11.2012 10:51

    @Foreigner: 100% spot on!

  • @Foreigner

    29.11.2012 11:58

    The two situations are not analogous at all.

  • avatar

    knut_albers

    29.11.2012 12:31

    Speaking in Thailand Sunday, Obama said that "there's no country on Earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders." Well, that's a very interesting thing to say at a time when the U.S. is regularly raining missiles down on Pakistan and Yemen.

  • @knut_albers

    29.11.2012 14:34

    Unlike Pakistan and Yemen, Israel is not in a state of anarchy and harboring al Qaeda. Should be an easy distinction to make.

  • avatar

    knut_albers

    29.11.2012 16:09

    Well, I judged by Obama's words as "no country" means no country and I take it more from civilians perspective that do suffer in all these countries (including Israel) from the bombardments. Of course Israel does not deliberate harbour Jihadists as well the allies of the West, but we do send them however from other third party countries to Syria currently, for instance, where again, civilians are suffering from that (including eviction of Christians from there) as well with an unknown outcome of the conflict. It is not immediately obvious to me why a diverse opposition with Jihadist elements (al Qaeda) is preferable to an Iranian and Russian backed regime that welcomes the support of terrorist organizations, as if the Middle East would be not messy enough as it is. Therefore, Estonia's Abstain on the Palestine Vote may be well advised indeed as long we do not know what do we actually want to achieve there (and how). It is hard to believe, once Jihadist elements took over Syria, that they would not target Isreal next they would suddenly share a border with. They will try to bring things to an end there that is ultimately to wipe out Israel from the map. Has actually one seen the Jihadist commercials on Hamas TV during Israel's operating two weeks ago? They are best described as an appeal of genocide against Israel. The world isn't that easy to wash things just in black and white, ut all I'm saying is that Obama's arguments was not a strong one that leaves a lot of room to ask a lot of questions in different directions.

  • avatar

    knut_albers

    29.11.2012 17:55

    "The two situations are not analogous at all." I agree. We are not in a cold war anymore and not in a sectarian fight. Besides, folks who PARTY HARD don't kill each other (and Estonians as well Russians are fairly doing well at that)!

  • 5aturn

    29.11.2012 18:26

    Can't wait for all the countries that will vote yes in this case to show their eager support to grant the following countries enhanced status: Kosovo, Chechnya, Tibet, Western Sahara, and Kurdistan. It's funny that the attitude of some of the yes voting countries is so radically different when it concerns groups that they themselves are in conflict with.

  • Jüri Estam

    03.12.2012 15:59

    There was a better time when the right to self-determination for all was the guiding doctrine and the guiding light of the West. I'm old enough to remember this. As concerns "partying hard" - if having a bottle of cheap vodka or moonshine or blue window cleaner with your nettle soup is partying hard, you can go ahead and see it that way. The native peoples of Australia and Canada are into petrol sniffing, but for some reason I suspect the reason they indulge themselves in this pastime is not the same as for those who can still afford to go clubbing at the bars of Ibiza and Mallorca.

  • avatar

    knut_albers

    03.12.2012 17:00

    "There was a better time when the right to self-determination for all was the guiding doctrine and the guiding light of the West." True indeed, every single word.

  • 5aturn

    04.12.2012 15:14

    "There was a better time when the right to self-determination for all was the guiding doctrine and the guiding light of the West." When was that? I don't remember anything of the sort. There was verbal support for the Baltics in the early 90s, and the West looked the other way when Russia butchered Chechnya 2 or 3 years later. Even in Baltics' case, most the West waited until it was clear that Russia would allow them to become independent and no Baltic country got a seat in the UN not even as an observer prior to that.

  • P. de File

    07.12.2012 09:27

    I think that the solution is clear. Bomb the whole middle east including Israel... problem solved!