In fact, the issue of Palestine's accession to the United Nations began 13 years ago, that is, in 2011. Not surprisingly, it was vetoed by the United States. So the following year, perhaps out of compensation or sympathy, the United Nations granted Pakistan the status of an "observer state".
So what is an "observer state"? In fact, in the vernacular, you can understand it as "not in the compilation", or it can be understood as "reserve", no matter how you understand it, the author wants to emphasize that it has always been "the wind rises at the end of Qingping, and the waves become between the waves".
The real meaning of this "observer state" for suffering Palestine is to give hope. That is to say, 13 years later, the UN General Assembly has overwhelmingly passed the resolution on Palestine's accession to the UN, which began 13 years ago. The reason is simple – the general trend of today's history began then.
During the current ballot, the resolution was adopted by 143 votes in favour, 9 against and 25 abstentions. Obviously, the most interesting thing is, which countries do these 9 negative votes come from? So, let's start with why these nine countries oppose it.
The nine countries are: the United States, Israel, Argentina, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, and Papua New Guinea.
As soon as this list comes out, no matter how dull people are, they will probably understand what the "general trend of history" is, because almost all the countries in the core of the United States have chosen not to follow.
For example, the G7 countries and the Five Eyes Alliance, as well as the newly formed "Aukus Three", etc., only the United States acts as a "conspicuous bag", and the rest of the countries either abstain from voting, such as the United Kingdom, or are in favor of, such as Japan. Therefore, there is no doubt that the United States is once again standing on the opposite side of the world and confronting international justice and the general trend of history.
As for Argentina, as if it was joining the Kuomintang in 1949, it was supposed to be a situation where the BRICS welcomed you, but as soon as the new Argentine president came to power, he had to cling to the thigh of the United States.
If Argentina chooses not to participate in the BRICS, then it will not participate, after all: the Tao is not the same, and the twisted melon is not sweet. However, the accession of Palestine to the United Nations is a major issue of right and wrong, but it is still so "unreasonable", it can only be said that the poor people must have something to hate!
And what about the Czech Republic? The Czech Republic voted against it, not surprisingly. As early as October 27 last year, when the UN General Assembly adopted the Palestinian-Israeli draft, Czech Defense Minister Jana Cernochova openly expressed her opposition to the draft and threatened to withdraw from the United Nations.
As a result, the Czech Republic has dragged on until now, and has not taken action to withdraw from the United Nations. Therefore, it is not surprising that he has the qualifications to vote against the resolution on Palestine's accession to the United Nations.
The only surprise is Hungary - so why did Hungary vote against, it stands to reason that it shouldn't, you know, Hungary has always been known as a "clear stream" or "the first anti-backbone" in NATO and the EU, and he is against almost everything that NATO or the EU wants to do.
In fact, standing in the long river of history to analyze, everything is normal. Because the historical Kingdom of Hungary was at the forefront of the struggle against the Ottoman Turkish Empire, and defeated the Turkish army in Belgrade.
This made the Pope in Rome overjoyed, and ordered the whole of Europe to ring the bell 12 times to celebrate. Therefore, Hungary has been known as the "shield of Christianity" and "the savior of Christianity" since then.
The so-called historical grievances have created Hungary's "anti-bone" character. If you can oppose NATO and the European Union, you will naturally be able to oppose Palestine's accession to the Union based on history.
To emphasize, China has always emphasized harmony without difference. So don't take the set of things from the United States and the West and put them on yourself, it will be seriously unsuitable for the soil and water - our journey is the sea of stars.
What are we doing when the United States is building small courtyards and high walls every day, and the whole world is pulling small circles to play confrontation? In the moon - this is our mind and bearing.
As for the latter countries: Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, not much to say. After all, the influence is too small, and it can only be said that it respects its choice, or that when the causal relationship occurs, it is enough to remember the original choice, which applies to any country and individual.
The only thing that shocked the author about this Palestinian accession resolution is that I didn't expect to make Gaddafi, who has been dead for many years, red, why? Let's take a look at what the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, Erdan, said and did.
After the adoption of the resolution on the accession of Palestine, Erdan said: "After the Allied victory, the United Nations was established as an institution with the mission of ensuring that Nazi tyranny never rose again. What you are going to do today is the opposite of what you want to do, to promote the establishment of a Palestinian terrorist State. The country will be led by Hitler of our time. You are tearing apart the Charter of the United Nations with your own hands! ”
Then Eldan used a small paper shredder to shred the Charter of the United Nations in front of everyone.
This scene seems familiar, because the last person to do such a thing was Gaddafi. The only difference is that at that time Gaddafi tore it off by hand, while Eldan did it with the help of a "shredder".
The author's first emotion is: science and technology have progressed. After all, it takes a lot of effort to tear by hand, how can you use a shredder to save effort.
However, the problem is that Gaddafi's hand tearing is more imposing or the expression of emotion is stronger and more impactful, while Eldan's use of a "shredder" to crush it is lost to the momentum and emotional expression.
The author's second emotion is: Everyone knows that not long after Gaddafi did this, he broke down and died. So will Israel follow in its footsteps? This starts with two aspects.
First: Can the United States, Israel's "golden bell jar", still be "covered"? Taking stock of the current situation and development, the author is pessimistic. Because in the face of the general trend of history, no matter how bullish the forces or countries are, they will be crushed, which is the iron law of history.
Second: there is a big problem in Israel. The focus of Eldan's speech was to emphasize their suffering in World War II. But the real problem is that Israel is living more and more like the people who caused it the suffering in the first place. So, it's Israel that's really the opposite, not the world today.
What are the consequences of such a big problem in Israel itself, but it is still so introspective and restrained? Naturally, everything is self-evident!