The U.N. and Arab League charades have gone on for so many years now. Never has either body taken serious action when it comes to Israel. Always the U.S. is there to block the way, to twist things from potentially useful to impotent, to manuever so that the U.S. remains dominant internationally and Israel remains dominant in the region.

Long ago the U.N. should have acted seriously regarding Israel. For instance, a suspension of Israel's participation in the General Assembly could be brought about at this time if the Arab nations really wanted to; and such is not even subject to the infamous U.S. veto. As for the current debate in the Security Council about an international force or just plain presence to help "protect" the Palestinians, why not force an American veto if that's what it comes to -- at least that would clearly demonstrate the near-total isolation of Israel and the U.S. Surely that is preferable to another long-winded approved resolution that lacks any teeth and whimpers again into history.

And when it comes to the Arab League, with the Arab states meeting in summit this coming week in Amman, why doesn't the Arab League itself not only finally demand that the U.N. take serious and effective action against Israel, but put some credibility behind such a demand by actually doing so itself?

For so long now both the U.N. and the Arab League have been charades when it comes to dealing with Israel. Tragically, the same is true with what seems about to happen once again this week.

UNITED NATIONS (AP - 24 Mar) - With time running out before a key meeting of Arab leaders this week, the U.N. Security Council huddled Saturday to debate a Palestinian demand for U.N. observers to help end six months of clashes with Israel.

The closed-door meeting focused on proposed Palestinian changes to a watered-down European resolution. Diplomats were trying to reach middle ground before the Mideast summit in Jordan on Tuesday, but British U.N. Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock said they weren't close.

``The spectrum is very wide still,'' he said.

Negotiations were expected to continue Sunday.

The United States, Israel's biggest ally on the council, has threatened to veto a resolution backing the creation of a U.N. force because Israel opposes the measure. As one of the five permanent members of the council, the United States can override any vote.

U.S. officials don't want it to come to that. They fear a veto could spark more violence between the Palestinians and Israel and infuriate oil-rich Arab countries, whose support they need to shore up sanctions against Iraq and Afghanistan.

Europeans also want to avoid a veto. They have drafted a compromise resolution that chides Israel for allowing expanded settlements in Palestinian areas and imposing blockades on Palestinian towns. It also notes that most of the more than 400 people who have died in the violence have been Palestinians.

The European proposal stops short of asking for an observer force.

``This is an attempt to neutralize the possible veto,'' said Nasser Al-Kidwa, the Palestinian representative to the United Nations. ``It may be a European initiative, but one that was cleared in advance with the United States.''

The Palestinians have proposed a number of changes, but the main one revives the request for an observer force.

Al-Kidwa said the Palestinians might agree to a more gradual approach toward monitoring the violence, but would not elaborate.

The Europeans have proposed asking Secretary-General Kofi Annan to investigate the violence and report to the Security Council within a month.

Al-Kidwa said the Palestinians "might be willing to consider this notion of a two-step approach."

In December, a similar Palestinian request for a U.N. force failed by one vote after fierce lobbying by the United States.

Annan said last week that it would be virtually impossible to deploy a U.N. observer force as long as Israel remains opposed.

Annan was heading to Amman on Saturday to address the Arab summit, and council members have urged him to try to break the Palestinian-Israeli impasse. European diplomats said the task would be easier if Annan went armed with a resolution approved by the Security Council.

UNITED NATIONS, March 25 (Reuters) - The U.N. Security Council was nearing its self-imposed deadline on Sunday to take a unified position on the Middle East crisis the United States could back before an Arab summit begins this week.

Palestinians and their supporters were insisting, at a minimum, that the 15-member body show willingness to consider an unarmed U.N. military and police observer force they believe could help save lives in the West Bank and Gaza. Israel rejects any international invention at this time.

To meet Washington's objections on an observer force and prevent a possible U.S. veto, four western European council members put forth an alternative draft resolution.

Their draft would "express the readiness of the council to act immediately upon the agreement of the parties to set up any kind of mechanism to protect civilians."

But U.S. delegates raised objections throughout weekend negotiations, although chief representative James Cunningham hoped some consensus could be found.

"There's a lot of things we agree on, and there are some things that we don't agree on. The question is whether we can separate the two," he said after Saturday's negotiations, which resume on Sunday.

Diplomats said Cunningham opposed numerous provisions in the latest European draft by Britain, France, Norway and Ireland, which included some language from the original Palestinian-initiated resolution

"The spectrum is still very wide," British ambassador Sir Jeremy Greenstock said.

"But we are determined as the European four to try and get an answer from the Security Council that is positive and forward looking rather than taking to task one of the sides for things that have happened in the past."

Council members worry that a failure to agree on a resolution would escalate tensions in the Arab world and make it difficult for U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who will address the Arab League Summit. Middle East foreign ministers are already mapping out an agenda in Amman, Jordan, before presidents and prime ministers speak on Tuesday.

Israel wants no resolution at all, saying it might inflame passions further rather than help end six months of revolt that has killed more than 400 people, most of them Palestinians. Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza after the 1967 Middle East war.

In practice, there can be no observer force without Israel's consent as no country would, under such circumstances, offer the United Nations any personnel. But Palestinians want the council to acknowledge outside help is needed.

"We have a duty to keep coming back and we believe the council has the obligation to take action," Palestinian U.N. delegate Nasser al-Kidwa said.

He called the European text an "Americanized version that did not really reflect European positions."

Israeli envoy Aaron Jacob said that he believed the Security Council should not be involved at all.

"If we want to prevent casualties among civilians, then what it takes is for the Palestinians to stop violence. There is no need for the intervention. We are opposed to the Security Council taking any action," Jacob said.

The European draft, supported by Russia, also asks both sides to resume contacts at all levels and for Israel to end its closure of Palestinian areas and transfer millions of dollars in tax revenue owed to the Palestinians. It expresses concern at planned expansion of Israeli settlements.

Sponsors of the Palestinian-initiated resolution for an observer force include seven members of the Non-Aligned Movement: Bangladesh, Jamaica, Colombia, Singapore, Tunisia, Mauritius and Mali. China supports this group as does the Ukraine, although its position this week was unclear.

A resolution in the 15-member council needs a minimum of nine votes and no veto from its five permanent members to be adopted. A similar resolution failed in December because it did not receive the minimum nine "yes" votes, thereby sparing Washington the use of its veto.

Mid-East Realities

www.middleeast.org

Source: http://www.middleeast.org/articles/2001/3/114.htm