In the UN Human Rights Council yesterday, the US was the only country to
vote against a resolution supporting the Palestinians' right to
self-determination. Forty-five countries voted in favor, none abstained.

tinyurl.com/noselfdetermination

National self-determination has been a fundamental US ideal from at least
the early part of the Twentieth Century, being made famous by Woodrow Wilson
during World War I. While actual American policy often strayed from that
ideal, the US government always paid at least lip service to it.

Supporting the UNHRC resolution would not really have necessitated change in
the status quo; it did not mean the actual termination of the Palestinians'
subordination to Israel. But the US could not bring itself to even vote in
favor of this innocuous, symbolic measure.

The "no" vote is especially significant because the US professes to believe
that the Palestinians should have their own state in a two-state solution.
If the Palestinians are not allowed self-determination, then what type of
state would they have? It would seem that the only type of "state" without
self-determination would be one controlled by Israel-in short, it would be a
puppet state. This is what the critics of Israel claim is Israel's
intention.

Certainly, "despite Washington's much-hyped tiff with Tel Aviv," the US
vote showed that it would continue to fall lockstep in line with Israel. If
the US dared not to offend Israel on this inconsequential matter, it is
impossible to believe that it would ever take any real action to pressure
Israel to allow for the creation of an independent, viable Palestinian
state.