By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The United States is denying visas to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and approximately 80 other PA officials for the upcoming UN General Assembly. This controversial move, which the State Department attributed to the PA and PLO’s actions, has drawn criticism from several European countries, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, and experts, who argue it hinders ceasefire diplomacy in Gaza. The State Department’s decision, however, was praised by Israeli officials and appears to be a further step to punish those involved in international tribunals’ probes of alleged crimes committed by Israel. The denial of visas is viewed by many as a violation of the UN Headquarters Agreement, which recognizes Palestine as a non-member observer state.
Read the original article here
US announces it will deny visa to Palestinian Authority president and other officials ahead of UN General Assembly | CNN Politics, and the immediate reaction seems to be a mix of disbelief, anger, and a dash of “well, here we go again.” It’s not exactly a shocker, but it’s the kind of move that raises eyebrows and questions about the US’s role as a host to the UN. The central issue revolves around the denial of visas to the Palestinian Authority (PA) president and other officials, preventing them from attending the UN General Assembly.
The prevailing sentiment is that this decision undermines the very principles of the UN. If the US, as the host nation, can selectively choose who gets to participate, it loses its claim to being an unbiased facilitator. Some commentators are quick to draw parallels to past events, framing it as a political maneuver with questionable motives. The fact that this is happening, and that the US has potentially allowed visas for individuals perceived as “worse,” definitely fuels this perspective. The argument here is, why deny the PA access while extending it to others?
One of the main arguments to justify the US visa denial seems to center on the PA and PLO’s rejection of terrorism. This is clearly presented as a sticking point. The underlying thought is that supporting peaceful resolutions is the way forward, and any actions not taken in that spirit may have consequences. Some find this action valid, citing concerns about the PA’s alleged ties to terrorism. Others are quick to question this reasoning.
The situation could push the UN to relocate its headquarters. Several voices openly suggest moving the UN to a country with a better track record on human rights and democratic values. Geneva and Luxembourg are offered as alternatives. This sentiment points to a growing distrust in the US’s commitment to international cooperation and its ability to host such an organization impartially.
A closer examination of the PA’s actions reveals a more nuanced picture. The suggestion is that the PA does not, in fact, support terrorism, as evidenced by their efforts to counter extremists. The commentators point out that since the Second Intifada, the PA has largely moved away from armed resistance, and they are supported by Western countries as a result. Also, attacks originating from the West Bank are very rare, and funding is used mostly for families who have lost a loved one.
This is where things get complicated. The “martyr fund” is cited as an area of concern, but it’s argued that the US has been complicit in this and has provided funding and support for a while. Given the complex political situation, it’s easy to see why this creates confusion. It’s a classic case of conflicting narratives.
There’s also the suggestion that the US is using this as a show of strength. Some view the decision as political theater, suggesting that it undermines the US’s own principles. Others see it as a long time coming, given the PA’s alleged support for terrorism and their history.
In summary, the visa denial is a complex issue, but the main points seem clear. It raises questions about the US’s impartiality in the UN, the PA’s stance on terrorism, and the future of the UN itself. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the coming months.