The United States vetoed a U.N. Nations
Security Council resolution calling for an Israel-Hamas ceasefire on
Wednesday morning, citing its failure to condition a halt in hostilities
directly to the release of the hostages, whom Hamas continues to hold
in the Gaza Strip.
“We could not support an unconditional
ceasefire that failed to release the hostages,” Robert Wood, deputy U.S.
ambassador to the United Nations, told the council.
Wood accused Hamas—and not Israel—of
blocking a negotiated ceasefire and cited Israel’s reference for a
temporary ceasefire and a phased release of hostages.
Washington cast the lone vote against the
measure among the 15-member body. It is one of five permanent members of
the council that has veto power.
The E10, a group of the council’s 10
elected members, put the resolution forward at Algeria’s urging. The
North African country is the Security Council’s de facto representative
for the Palestinians and the Arab and Muslim world.
Amar Bendjama, Algeria’s envoy to the
global body, called it a “sad day” for the council and claimed that the
Jewish state has “impunity in this chamber.”
Amar Bendjama, Algeria’s envoy to the UN, called the U.S. veto a “sad day” for the council The vetoed resolution demanded an
immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire, as well as the
immediate and unconditional release of all hostages who remain in Gaza.
It rejected “any effort to starve
Palestinians” and demanded immediate access to basic services and
humanitarian assistance for civilians in Gaza. It also called for aid to
enter the Strip at scale and be delivered, including to “civilians in
besieged north Gaza.”
Wednesday marked the 12th time that the
Security Council has voted on a resolution about the Israel-Hamas war.
Only four have been adopted. None of the prior 11 appears to have had a
substantive effect on halting hostilities or securing the release of
hostages or delivery of aid.
Danny Danon, Israel’s ambassador to the
United Nations, told reporters ahead of Wednesday’s vote that the
resolution “is nothing short of a betrayal.”
“It betrays the 101 innocent hostages
still held by Hamas, their grieving families and the very principles the
United Nations claims to defend,” he told journalists.
It is “not a resolution for peace. It is a
resolution for appeasement” that abandons the hostages and validates
and rewards terrorism, he added.
Softened language
The latest resolution was negotiated
extensively and underwent multiple drafts. The first iteration demanded
an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire but only insisted
upon immediate, unconditional release of all hostages in the next
paragraph.
The United States and Japan, among others,
requested a revised draft repeatedly, and the next version placed the
two demands in the same paragraph. (That followed the agreed-upon text
from a prior resolution in March, upon which Washington controversially
abstained, allowing it to pass.)
This time around, the Biden administration
insisted on an explicit conditional link between the demands for
ceasefire and hostage release. This was the formula that was articulated
in a June resolution, which called for a phased ceasefire and hostage
release scheme. That resolution passed with a Russian abstention.
The E10 rejected the demand, leading to a stalemate—and Wednesday’s U.S. veto.
Washington won other concessions on the text of the resolution, including a critical deletion of language relevant to Chapter VII
of the U.N. Charter. The original text of the resolution determined
“that the situation in the Gaza Strip and the regional escalation
constitute a threat to international peace and security.”
Danny
Danon, Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, briefs reporters ahead
of the U.N. Security Council meeting on the situation in the Middle
East, including the Palestinian question, Nov. 20, 2024.
That specific language triggers Chapter
VII, which empowers the Security Council to take collective action it
deems fit, up to and including the use of force. The Biden
administration insisted that it be removed.
The new draft also softened language about
implementing the International Court of Justice’s ruling on provisional
measures that it said Israel must take in Gaza and on text rejecting
actions that undermine the mandate of the U.N. Relief and Works Agency
for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, which Israel has said has many
employees that are part of Palestinian terror groups and that
participated directly in the Oct. 11 attacks.
Despite U.S. pressure, the resolution did
not condemn Hamas explicitly, nor did it establish a standing mechanism
to review Israel’s allegations about UNRWA.
No comments:
Post a Comment