Unilateral Palestinian State Building

As readers know because I write about this on a far too regular basis, the Palestinians are embarking on a state building initiative that would erect institutions in the territories for a future state. This effort has been dubbed as unilateral actions and the Palestinians taking control of their destiny (cue music from Star Wars).

In order to supplement the Palestinian Authorities state building efforts, the Palestinian administration released a report last week that outlines various institution building priorities for 2010, many of which focus on security. These priorities include training and security infrastructure development.

However, until the Palestinians complete their institution building efforts, they still need help. And the United States and the United Nations are more than willing. The State Department announced today that it will provide $40 million to supplement the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East in order to support the group’s humanitarian and emergency services. UNRWA’s efforts compose some of the institutions that Palestinians need to erect themselves, albeit an effective security apparatus and economic system are at the top of the list.

Similarly of note, are comments from Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad on his institution building campaign. He acknowledges that the initiative is a unilateral move for Palestinians to take ownership of their future. As transcribed by Middle East Progress, Fayyad said at a recent conference:

“That exercise we have embarked on related to getting ready for statehood was ascribed by some as a source of concern on the grounds that it is or represents unilateralism by the Palestinians. And I’m here to tell everyone that indeed it is–it is unilateral, as it should be, because it’s about building a Palestinian state, it’s about getting ready for Palestinian statehood, and the state that is being built here is a Palestinian state and if we Palestinians don’t build it, who is going to build it for us? This is not about declaring a state, it’s about getting ready for one. And the program we have embarked upon was not supposed to be in lieu of the political process, it was supposed to reinforce it. These two paths are mutually reinforcing. The political process path is absolutely necessary because that’s what’s going to bring about an end to the occupation. That involves negotiations with the help of the international community, with a key role played by the United States and has been for a long period of time, acting on its own behalf, on behalf of the Quartet and international community at large. …

“The path we’re taking … by mid-2011 … by then we will have amassed a critical mass of positive change on the ground consistent with the emergence of the Palestinian state, to where if the political process, the other track, will not have produced the end of occupation that we all desire, that critical mass or positive change on the ground consistent with the emergence of Palestinian state will exert so much pressure on that political process to produce the end of occupation … it’s been described as bottom-up … for it to succeed there is the top-down that is required in the sense of political horizon to give us, but also to give our partners in the international community who’ve been investing in this process, trying to make it happen, that sense of possibility, because like us they’re not interested in continuing to invest in a process–not only financially and economically but also politically and even morally–if they did not really get sense of possibility.”