Russia and China have exercised their veto power to block a UN resolution sponsored by the United States, which called for an immediate cease-fire in Gaza.
Russia and China have vetoed a United Nations resolution sponsored by the United States that called for an “immediate and sustained cease-fire” in the ongoing Israel-Hamas war in Gaza. Both countries deemed the resolution ambiguous and argued that it did not directly address the global call to end the conflict.
The vote in the Security Council turned into another tense confrontation between global powers embroiled in disputes elsewhere. The United States faced criticism for not taking a stronger stance against its ally Israel, whose ongoing military offensive has resulted in a severe humanitarian crisis for the 2.3 million Palestinians in Gaza.
The United States has shifted its stance on the resolution, finding itself in disagreement with many countries. Even allies of Israel are now advocating for an unconditional cessation of hostilities.
The U.S. has previously combined calls for a cease-fire with demands for the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza in its resolutions. However, this resolution takes a more open-ended approach, still connecting the two issues, but not as strongly.
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and U.S. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield have been accused of deliberately misleading the international community.
According to Zhang Jun, China’s U.N. ambassador, the U.S. proposal has set preconditions and has not met the expectations of council members and the broader international community.
According to the speaker, if the U.S. truly intended to establish a cease-fire, it wouldn’t have repeatedly used its veto power to reject numerous council resolutions. Instead of being ambiguous and evasive on important matters, the U.S. would have taken a more direct approach.
The United States has used its veto power three times to block resolutions that called for a cease-fire. The most recent veto occurred on February 20th when an Arab-backed measure received support from 13 council members, with only one abstention.
During the council meeting, Thomas-Greenfield passionately advocated for the adoption of the resolution. She emphasized the urgent need for a cease-fire and the release of the hostages. Additionally, she called for the council’s attention to the dire humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Thomas-Greenfield also highlighted the importance of supporting the ongoing diplomatic efforts led by the United States, Egypt, and Qatar.
In a notable decision, 11 out of 15 members of the council expressed their support for the vote, while three members, including Algeria, representing the Arab nations, voted against it. Guyana, on the other hand, chose to abstain from the vote.
In the aftermath of the vote, Thomas-Greenfield pointed out that Russia and China had cast their votes for what she called “deeply cynical reasons.” She highlighted their failure to condemn the terrorist attacks carried out by Hamas in southern Israel on October 7. This resolution would have marked the first time such condemnation was expressed.
Russia has once again been accused of prioritizing politics over progress and displaying audacity and hypocrisy by launching an unwarranted invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
According to national security spokesman John Kirby at the White House, Russia and China prefer to shoot down something just because it was authored by us.
The most recent resolution, although not legally binding, would have not brought an end to the fighting or secured the release of hostages. However, it would have increased the pressure on Israel in the face of global calls for a cease-fire, particularly during a period of heightened tensions between the U.S. and Israeli governments.
The 10 elected members of the Security Council have finalized their own resolution, calling for an immediate humanitarian cease-fire during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, which started on March 10. The resolution emphasizes the importance of respecting the cease-fire, with the ultimate goal of achieving a permanent and sustainable end to the conflict. According to the Palestinian U.N. ambassador, the vote on the resolution is scheduled for Saturday morning.
The resolution further emphasizes the urgent need to protect civilians and deliver humanitarian aid throughout the Gaza Strip, while also demanding the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.
In a recent meeting, the Russian, Chinese, and Algerian ambassadors appealed to the council members to endorse the proposed text. However, Thomas-Greenfield expressed her concerns, stating that the current form of the text does not effectively support delicate diplomacy in the region. Furthermore, she emphasized that it might inadvertently provide Hamas with a justification to reject the existing agreement.
The Security Council has already passed two resolutions addressing the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza, but neither of them has called for a cease-fire.
In late October, a resolution sponsored by the U.S. was vetoed by Russia and China. The resolution aimed to secure pauses in the fighting, facilitate aid delivery, protect civilians, and halt the arming of Hamas. The reason behind the veto was that Russia and China believed the resolution did not align with the global demands for a cease-fire.
On the day prior, the United States put forth an alternative resolution, which underwent significant modifications during the course of negotiations before the vote on Friday. Originally, the resolution aimed to endorse a temporary cease-fire that was contingent upon the release of all hostages. Furthermore, the initial draft supported international endeavors to secure a cease-fire as a component of a hostage agreement.
Israel is under increasing pressure to simplify the process of delivering aid to the Gaza Strip, expand the number of land crossings, and reach a ceasefire agreement. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has expressed his intention to shift the military offensive to Rafah, a southern city that has become a safe haven for approximately 1.3 million displaced Palestinians. Netanyahu argues that Rafah is a stronghold for Hamas.
The U.S. resolution, in its final form, removed the clause from the original draft which stated that Israel’s offensive in Rafah “should not proceed under current circumstances.” Instead, the council expressed its concern in the opening paragraph that a ground offensive into Rafah would lead to more harm to civilians, their displacement to neighboring countries, and significant implications for regional peace and security.
Zhang from China expressed strong disapproval of the reversal in the clear and unwavering opposition from the United States, arguing that it would send a completely incorrect message and result in serious repercussions.
