Iran has found itself in the unusual position of being on the same side as the United States—opposing Palestinian statehood.
But their motives for their opposition couldn’t be more different.
The United States called the request for statehood under the two-state solution “counterproductive,” urging him to pursue a solution through negotiations with Israel. But Iran maintains that any solution that results in the division of the region into two states—one for Israelis and one for the Palestinians—is unacceptable.
Although most of the world appears to be supporting the call by Mahmoud Abbas, head of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and president of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), Washington is lined with Israel in opposing the call while the Islamic Republic is lined up with the PLO’s rival, Hamas, which rules in the Gaza strip, in opposing the call.
“Our declaration is the freedom of Palestine, not the freedom of parts of Palestine,” Khamenehi said Saturday in his opening speech at the 5th International Conference on the Palestinian Intifada. Major excerpts from the speech appear on page six,
More than 50 parliamentary delegations, political figures and intellectuals from Muslim and non-Muslim countries attended the two-day conference in Tehran, according to organizers. The attendees came from 20 countries and included the Syria-based Hamas leader, Khaled Mashaal.
“Any plan that seeks to divide Palestine is totally rejected,” the Supreme Leader said.
He reiterated his alternative plan that involves the return to Europe of Jews who came to Israel in the 20th Century and the repatriation of Palestinians who were displaced since. He repeated his 2001 proposal for a referendum to decide the fate of Palestine, with voting confined to those born in the traditional area called Palestine or in the Palestinian Diaspora. By that definition, Arabs outnumber Jews by a wide margin.
“We do not propose a conventional war by Islamic countries, throwing the Jews into the sea or arbitration by the UN and other international bodies,” he said, rejecting the harsh rhetoric of past years that worked against the Palestinian cause, and also rejecting any role by the major world powers, which both the PLO and Israel want to guarantee—and pay for—any peace settlement.
He referred to Israel as a “cancerous tumor” and a “permanent threat” to the Middle East.
Not unexpectedly, his comments drew sharp criticism from Israel.
The “hateful declarations of the Ayatollah’s regime about the destruction of Israel reinforce our determination to protect the security needs of our citizens and to demand that Israel be recognized as a Jewish state,” Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said.
President Ahmadi-nejad echoed the Supreme Leader’s comments, saying the Islamic Republic was proposing a “simple solution” to the Israeli-Palestinian problem. “The solution is simple…everyone should go home,” he told the conference.
“Some poor people were brought to Palestine on the promise of security and jobs while they made the Palestinian people into refugees…. So now the Palestinians should go home [to what is now Israel] and the Israelis should go to their homes [in Europe],” he said.
The Islamic Republic’s prescription would also mean that a few million Israelis would return to the Arab countries and Iran. But no one in Iran made that clear.
Khaled Mashaal, representing Hamas, struck a different chord. Although he agreed with the Supreme Leader in opposing the two-state solution, he differed with him on how to achieve Palestinian statehood.
“Palestinians must resort to resistance no matter how costly it is until Palestine is free and Israel is destroyed,” he said.
Iran’s stance on the two-state solution differs from the position of most other Muslim countries, including most Arab states. The Supreme Leader said Muslim countries cannot claim to be supporting the rights of the Palestinians while maintaining ties with Israel.
“The proof of Muslim governments’ honesty lies in their support for the Palestinian nation and in their decision to break off their overt and secret political and economic relations with the Zionist regime.”
He also questioned President Obama’s political motives.
“The US president says that Israel’s security is his red line. What factor has determined this red line? Is it the interests of the American people or Obama’s personal need for the money and support of Zionist companies to ensure his second term as US president?”