UN Security Council Set to Vote on Resolution Demanding Ramadan Gaza Ceasefire

 22 March 2024, Palestinian Territories, Gaza: Men sit on the ruins of buildings destroyed by Israeli bombardment in Jabalia refugee camp. (dpa)
22 March 2024, Palestinian Territories, Gaza: Men sit on the ruins of buildings destroyed by Israeli bombardment in Jabalia refugee camp. (dpa)
TT

UN Security Council Set to Vote on Resolution Demanding Ramadan Gaza Ceasefire

 22 March 2024, Palestinian Territories, Gaza: Men sit on the ruins of buildings destroyed by Israeli bombardment in Jabalia refugee camp. (dpa)
22 March 2024, Palestinian Territories, Gaza: Men sit on the ruins of buildings destroyed by Israeli bombardment in Jabalia refugee camp. (dpa)

The UN Security Council is set to vote on a resolution demanding a humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, but the United States warned the measure could hurt negotiations to halt Israeli-Hamas hostilities.

The resolution, put forward by the 10 elected council members, is backed by Russia and China, who vetoed a US-sponsored resolution Friday that supported “an immediate and sustained ceasefire” in the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.

The 22-nation Arab Group at the UN issued a statement Friday night appealing to all 15 council members “to act with unity and urgency" and vote for the resolution "to halt the bloodshed, preserve human lives and avert further human suffering and destruction.”

“It is long past time for a ceasefire," the Arab Group said. Ramadan began March 10 and ends around April 9.

The council is expected to vote on the resolution Monday morning. The vote was earlier scheduled for Saturday morning, but it was delayed early Saturday, according to a UN diplomat.

Many members are hoping that the UN’s most powerful body, which is charged with maintaining international peace and security, will demand an end to the war that began after Gaza's Hamas rulers launched a surprise attack into southern Israel on Oct. 7, killing about 1,200 people and taking some 250 others hostage.

Since then, the Security Council has adopted two resolutions on the worsening humanitarian situation in Gaza, but none has called for a ceasefire.

More than 32,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed during the fighting, according to the Gaza Health Ministry. It does not differentiate between civilians and combatants in its count, but says women and children make up two-thirds of the dead.

Gaza also faces a dire humanitarian emergency, with a report from an international authority on hunger warning this week that “famine is imminent” in northern Gaza and that escalation of the war could push half of the territory’s 2.3 million people to the brink of starvation.

The brief resolution scheduled for a vote Monday demands an immediate humanitarian ceasefire for Ramadan “leading to a permanent sustainable ceasefire.” It also demands “the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages” and emphasizes the urgent need to protect civilians and deliver humanitarian aid throughout the Gaza Strip.

US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield told the council after Friday’s vote that the resolution’s current text “fails to support sensitive diplomacy in the region. Worse, it could actually give Hamas an excuse to walk away from the deal on the table.”

“We should not move forward with any resolution that jeopardizes the ongoing negotiations” being carried out by the United States, Qatar and Egypt, she said, warning that if the diplomacy isn't supported, "we may once again find this council deadlocked.”

“I truly hope that that does not come about,” Thomas-Greenfield said.

The United States has vetoed three resolutions demanding a ceasefire in Gaza, the most recent an Arab-backed measure. That measure was supported by 13 members with one abstention in a Feb. 20 vote.

Russia and China vetoed a US-sponsored resolution in late October calling for pauses in the fighting to deliver aid, the protection of civilians and a halt to arming Hamas. They said it did not reflect global calls for a ceasefire.

They again vetoed the US resolution on Friday, calling it ambiguous and saying it was not the direct demand to end the fighting that much of the world seeks.

A key issue was the unusual language that said the Security Council “determines the imperative of an immediate and sustained ceasefire.” The phrasing was not a straightforward “demand” or “call” to halt hostilities.

The vote in the Security Council became another showdown involving world powers that are locked in tense disputes elsewhere, with the United States taking criticism for not being tough enough against its ally Israel, even as tensions between the two countries rise.

Before the vote, Russia's UN Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said Moscow supports an immediate ceasefire, but he criticized the diluted language, which he called philosophical wording that does not belong in a UN resolution.

He accused US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield of “deliberately misleading the international community” about calling for a ceasefire.

“This was some kind of an empty rhetorical exercise,” Nebenzia said. “The American product is exceedingly politicized, the sole purpose of which is to help to play to the voters, to throw them a bone in the form of some kind of a mention of a ceasefire in Gaza ... and to ensure the impunity of Israel, whose crimes in the draft are not even assessed.”

China’s UN ambassador, Zhang Jun, said the US proposal set preconditions and fell far short of expectations of council members and the broader international community.

“If the US was serious about a ceasefire, it wouldn’t have vetoed time and again multiple council resolutions,” he said. “It wouldn’t have taken such a detour and played a game of words while being ambiguous and evasive on critical issues.”

The vote in the 15-member council was 11 members in favor and three against, including Algeria, the Arab representative on the council. There was one abstention, from Guyana.

After the vote, Thomas-Greenfield accused Russia and China of vetoing the resolution for “deeply cynical reasons,” saying they could not bring themselves to condemn Hamas’ attacks in southern Israel on Oct. 7, which the resolution would have done for the first time.

A second “petty” reason, she said, is that “Russia and China simply did not want to vote for a resolution that was penned by the United States, because it would rather see us fail than to see this council succeed.” She accused Russia of again putting “politics over progress” and having “the audacity and hypocrisy to throw stones” after launching an unwarranted invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

The resolution did reflect a shift by the United States, which has found itself at odds with much of the world as even allies of Israel push for an unconditional end to fighting.

In previous resolutions, the US has closely intertwined calls for a ceasefire with demands for the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza. This resolution, using wording that’s open to interpretation, continued to link the two issues, but not as firmly.



Arab, International Momentum to Support Lebanon Kicks Off with Macron’s Visit

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam at the Presidential Palace (Reuters)
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam at the Presidential Palace (Reuters)
TT

Arab, International Momentum to Support Lebanon Kicks Off with Macron’s Visit

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam at the Presidential Palace (Reuters)
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam at the Presidential Palace (Reuters)

The election of Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and the designation of Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam to form the first government of the new presidential term have drawn unprecedented Arab and international attention. This growing interest is reflected in a series of high-level visits, starting with French President Emmanuel Macron’s visit to Beirut on Friday.
While Spanish Foreign Minister and EU High Representative Josep Borrell visited Lebanese officials on Wednesday, coinciding with similar meetings held by Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres is expected to arrive in Beirut on Saturday. Additionally, Arab and international officials are set to visit the Lebanese capital starting next week.
In comments to Asharq Al-Awsat, former Lebanese Ambassador to Washington Antoine Chedid stated that Lebanon “is of great importance to the region and the world, and the changes happening in the country are part of broader regional transformations.”
“International interest in Lebanon didn’t begin today. It became evident during the recent Israeli war, when the United States, Saudi Arabia, and France played pivotal roles in achieving a ceasefire,” he remarked.
Chedid further noted that Macron’s visit will mark the start of a series of trips by international and Arab leaders expressing their firm support for Lebanon’s state institutions, including its president, government, army, and constitutional bodies.
“We are witnessing an unprecedented phase of international support for Lebanon’s presidency and state institutions,” he said. “What matters now is for Lebanon to embrace this support positively.”
Former minister Rashid Derbas highlighted that international attention to Lebanon “clearly indicates that the country has moved past its state of unrest and security disruptions and is no longer a platform for undermining regional stability.”
Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, Derbas said: “Macron’s visit, followed by the arrival of Arab and global leaders, restores confidence among Lebanese citizens. Electing a president and forming a government has reignited hope.”
He added: “This renewed openness paves the way for assisting Lebanon in investing in stability, development, and conflict resolution, steering the country away from chaos and disorder.”
Derbas stressed that certain factions, “particularly the Shiite duo, have failed to recognize regional changes and shifting power dynamics, clinging instead to rhetoric that clouds their judgment.”
He criticized their rejection of past opportunities, stating: “When the Shiite duo had strong leverage in choosing the president and forming the government, they dismissed all proposals, squandering opportunities until external forces imposed decisions on them.”
Derbas expressed hope for an end to the cycle of missed opportunities and constitutional violations, which he said have “isolated Lebanon from its allies under the pretext of sovereignty, while maintaining a rhetoric about liberating Palestine and weakening Israel.”
The decision by the Shiite duo (Amal Movement and Hezbollah) to boycott non-binding consultations has cast a shadow over the atmosphere as international and Arab officials prepare to visit Lebanon. Political analyst Toufic Hindi warned that the duo’s choice to boycott consultations “sends a discouraging message and does not align with the will of the Lebanese people or the intentions of Lebanon’s Arab and international allies.”
Hindi praised Aoun’s inaugural speech, describing it as “a source of hope for the Lebanese people and a signal of reassurance for the international community.” Similarly, he commended Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam for outlining a clear framework for state-building during his speech at the presidential palace.