Too little, too late: UNSC ceasefire vote finally passes but Israel ignores it

A US abstention allowed the vote to pass after three previous vetoes. Since then, Israel has ignored it, and an embarrassed US downplayed its significance, calling it non-binding.

Reuters

British UN representative Barbara Woodward and Algeria’s UN representative Amar Bendjama vote in favour of a Gaza resolution demanding an immediate ceasefire at the UN headquarters in New York on March 25, 2024.

Too little, too late: UNSC ceasefire vote finally passes but Israel ignores it

Majed Kayali

last update on 27 Mar 2024

United Nations Security Council Resolution No. 2728, calling for an immediate and provisional ceasefire after 171 continuous days of a relentless Israeli assault on Gaza, was finally passed on Monday.

The United States—which vetoed three past attempts for a ceasefire resolution over the course of the six-month-long Israeli assault on Gaza—allowed the resolution to pass this time by abstaining from the vote.

The resolution demands a halt to the hostilities during the month of Ramadan that has resulted in over 130,000 Palestinians being killed, injured, captured, or missing, alongside the destruction of nearly 70% of Gaza's infrastructure.

The resolution's preamble strongly condemns all acts of violence, attacks, and terrorism against civilians from both sides and prohibits hostage-taking.

Shortcomings and false equivalencies

However, by equating Israel's genocidal war on the Palestinians with the Hamas attack on 7 October, which killed only a fraction of people compared to Israel, the resolution overlooks the drastic disparity in military power between the two 'warring' parties, drawing a false comparison.

The language of the resolution also does not reflect the very serious accusations levied against Israel by the world's highest court.

In a document of over 80 pages – which makes for very grim reading – an exhaustive legal case compiled by South Africa was put to the International Court of Justice in January, highlighting Israel’s serial vicious behaviour.

Reuters — South Africa's case put forth to the ICJ accused Israel of genocide in The Hague, Netherlands, on January 26, 2024.

Not only did Israel's warplanes, drones and quadcopters rain death and destruction on Gaza, making it uninhabitable, but its leaders said from the beginning of the conflict that it would cut food, water, electricity and fuel to the strip, which is collective punishment and a war crime under international law.

The resolution contains two main provisions. The first clause calls for an immediate ceasefire during Ramadan, aimed at halting hostilities that, while seemingly aligned with the interests of Israel and the United States, ostensibly seeks to establish the groundwork for a durable peace.

However, its effectiveness and longevity remain uncertain. Crucially, it calls for the unconditional release of all hostages held by Hamas, and, in exchange, it calls on Israel to allow the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza.

It does not, however, mention the fate of the more than 20,000 Palestinian prisoners and detainees held by Israel. This includes thousands of Palestinians recently arrested by Israel in the West Bank, those held in Israeli prisons before the conflict, and Palestinians abducted by Israel in Gaza during its offensive.

The second clause details plans to increase humanitarian aid to Gaza's civilians and enhance their protection. Yet, it lacks clarity on how this would be executed, especially since the resolution falls outside the enforcement mechanisms provided by Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter.

Key issues, like Israel's 57-year occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, are also notably absent from the resolution. Nor does it mention Israel's genocidal campaign on the Palestinians in Gaza under the guise of combatting Hamas.

The UNSC resolution overlooks the drastic disparity in military power between the two 'warring' parties, drawing a false comparison.

The resolution seems to be a compromise, reflecting the desires of Israel and the United States despite Israel's official rejection, which continues to portray itself as the victim.

By refusing to mention Palestinians' right to self-determination and self-defence, the resolution doesn't do enough to counter Israel's stated goal of maintaining military control over Gaza after the 'war' ends, which essentially means it will re-occupy the Strip.

The US abstention was an attempt to placate the growing domestic opposition to its unequivocal support for Israel. A public pressure campaign has been mounting in the United States over the past six months with mass demonstrations, disruptions of politicians' speeches, and closure of roads, bridges and airports.

As a result of this public pressure, particularly from the Democratic voter base, influential figures like Chuck Schumer, the Majority Leader in the US Senate, are now changing their tone and becoming more critical of Israel's campaign by pinning the blame largely on Netanyahu and his right-wing government.

This opposition reflects a broader concern with maintaining Israel's image as a liberal and democratic nation with principles that align with the United States.

The United States' about-face in the Security Council can also be seen as an attempt to align more closely with the positions of its allies in the West, which have increasingly become reluctant to support Israel as it inflicts unspeakable horrors on the Palestinians of Gaza.

AFP — An injured man holds another injured child, both survivors of Israeli bombardment, while a nurse bandages his head at a trauma ward at Nasser Hospital in Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip on October 24, 2023.

In December, the UN General Assembly passed a ceasefire resolution for Gaza, with 153 out of 193 countries voting in favour. Only ten countries, including the US, Israel, Austria, the Czech Republic, and some other island nations with insignificant populations, voted against it.

Notably, the United States' key allies, like Britain, Germany and Italy, abstained, while a broad coalition of Western countries, such as France, Spain, and Sweden, and others including Australia, Canada, South Korea, and New Zealand, supported the ceasefire, indicating a shift towards a more balanced stance on the conflict.

This recent Security Council resolution, being the third following resolutions 2712 and 2923 from late 2023, which primarily focused on humanitarian issues, is particularly significant for its explicit call for a temporary ceasefire.

This marks a departure from previous resolutions, underlining the growing international emphasis on de-escalating the conflict and addressing the immediate cessation of hostilities.

However, it is important to be realistic and not think this will lead to a more fair and balanced approach by the US toward Israel.

Despite seeming disagreements between Biden and Netanyahu, the US continues to support Israel's military actions in Gaza robustly.

The US abstention is an attempt to gently nudge Israel toward a more palatable approach to its "war".

It continues to send it a bottomless cache of weapons, ammunition, political endorsement, and financial assistance, despite statements by American officials which call on Israel to wage its campaign 'more carefully', alleviate the suffering of Palestinians, and work towards the goal of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza.

Against this backdrop, it is best to view the American abstention at the Security Council as an attempt to gently nudge Israel toward a more palatable approach to its "war" and—using the American axiom—to "save Israel from itself" using the American axiom.

Until this happens, Israel's global reputation continues to diminish. The international community increasingly perceives Israel as an oppressor instead of a victim and as shifting away from its democratic and liberal founding principles.

However, the US abstention has done little to tame Israel's intransigence. In fact, right before the vote, Netanyahu threatened his American ally, saying if it didn't veto the resolution, it would cancel a planned delegation visit to Washington, DC, which it indeed did.

In the hours and days since the vote, Israel has completely ignored the resolution, bombing several locations around the Gaza Strip, killing dozens upon dozens.

For its part, the United States has seemingly downplayed the significance of the UN Security Council ceasefire vote by saying that it was non-binding when, in fact, UNSC resolutions are binding.

Washington's senseless non-stances are increasingly being viewed around the world as proof that it is either unwilling or nable orto use its substantial leverage over Israel to change its policies and behaviour.

+ / -