Palestinian Statehood Bid- US Says No Substitute for Negotiations

For Palestinians, U.N. statehood would legitimize territorial claims over Israel. It is a means to end. Statehood means recognizing that land in dispute since the turn of the 20th century is part of the sovereign Palestinian authority. But in his address to the U.N. General Assembly this morning, President Obama asserted that Palestinian statehood could not provide the automatic solution the Palestinians were looking for. It could not substitute direct negotiations between the two parties.

In his "pursuit of peace" themed address, the President highlighted the difficulties in multilateral cooperation and made it clear that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could not be solved through any "short cuts" or single U.N. resolutions.

"Ultimately, it is Israelis and Palestinians who must live side by side. Ultimately, it is Israelis and Palestinians – not us – who must reach agreement on the issues that divide them: on borders and security; on refugees and Jerusalem," the President stated.

Obama assured the Assembly that the United States still shares the Palestinian desires for statehood, but the conflict must be resolved before that can be a reality.

He did not mention U.S. plans to veto the Palestinian bid in the Security Council, but rather stated, "Peace is hard. Progress can be reversed. Prosperity comes slowly."

Another year has passed and progress continues to move at a glacial pace. It's undeniable that U.N. statehood wouldn't resolve the conflict. However, would it be a step towards progress to deal with two legitimate states? Can the bifurcated Palestinian authority even be considered a viable candidate for statehood? What are your thoughts?
-Rachel