US Veto Against UN Resolution Demanding Gaza Ceasefire Draws Criticisms

US Ambassador to the United Nations Dorothy Shea (C) speaks during a United Nations Security Council meeting to vote on a resolution calling for a ceasefire and unrestricted humanitarian access in Gaza, at UN headquarters in New York City on June 4, 2025. (Photo by Leonardo Munoz / AFP)
US Ambassador to the United Nations Dorothy Shea (C) speaks during a United Nations Security Council meeting to vote on a resolution calling for a ceasefire and unrestricted humanitarian access in Gaza, at UN headquarters in New York City on June 4, 2025. (Photo by Leonardo Munoz / AFP)
TT

US Veto Against UN Resolution Demanding Gaza Ceasefire Draws Criticisms

US Ambassador to the United Nations Dorothy Shea (C) speaks during a United Nations Security Council meeting to vote on a resolution calling for a ceasefire and unrestricted humanitarian access in Gaza, at UN headquarters in New York City on June 4, 2025. (Photo by Leonardo Munoz / AFP)
US Ambassador to the United Nations Dorothy Shea (C) speaks during a United Nations Security Council meeting to vote on a resolution calling for a ceasefire and unrestricted humanitarian access in Gaza, at UN headquarters in New York City on June 4, 2025. (Photo by Leonardo Munoz / AFP)

The United States on Wednesday vetoed a UN Security Council resolution demanding an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza because it was not linked to the release of hostages, saying it would embolden Hamas militants.

All 14 other members of the council voted in favor of the resolution, which described the humanitarian situation in Gaza as “catastrophic” and called on Israel to lift all restrictions on the delivery of aid to the 2.1 million Palestinians in the territory.

The resolution before the UN's most powerful body also did not fulfill two other US demands: It did not condemn Hamas’ deadly attack in Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, which ignited the war, or say the militant group must disarm and withdraw from Gaza, The Associated Press reported.

Acting US Ambassador Dorothy Shea, speaking to the council immediately before the vote, said the resolution would undermine the security of Israel. a close US ally, and diplomatic efforts to reach a ceasefire “that reflects the realities on the ground."

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the resolution would only have empowered Hamas. “Hamas could end this brutal conflict immediately by laying down its arms and releasing all remaining hostages,” he said in a statement.

Israel’s UN Ambassador Danny Danon thanked the United States for refusing to abandon the hostages. He said the resolution’s failure to make the release of hostages a condition for a ceasefire would have put all the pressure on Israel and handed Hamas “time, leverage and political cover.”

What other members of the Security Council say

But the US veto of the resolution — its fifth since the start of the war — was roundly criticized by other members of the council, who accused the United States of providing Israel with impunity.

The Chinese ambassador to the UN said Israel's actions have “crossed every red line” of international humanitarian law and seriously violated UN resolutions. “Yet, due to the shielding by one country, these violations have not been stopped or held accountable," Ambassador Fu Cong said.

Britain’s UN Ambassador Barbara Woodward, a usual US ally, lashed out at Israel. “This Israeli government’s decisions to expand its military operations in Gaza and severely restrict aid are unjustifiable, disproportionate and counterproductive, and the UK completely opposes them,” she said.

Pakistan's Ambassador Asim Iftikhar Ahmad said the US veto "will be remembered as a complicity, a green light for continued annihilation. A moment where the entire world was expecting action. But yet again, this council was blocked and prevented by one member from carrying out its responsibility.”

Slovenia’s UN Ambassador Samuel Žbogar, the coordinator for the council's 10 elected members, stressed that it was never the intention to provoke a veto and therefore the resolution focused on the humanitarian crisis and the urgent need for unimpeded access to deliver aid.

“Starving civilians and inflicting immense suffering is inhumane and against international law,” he told the council after the vote. “No war objective can justify such action. We had hoped and expected that this was our shared understanding.”

Palestinian UN Ambassador Riyad Mansour said Palestinians are now urging governments to take “real measures” to pressure Israel to get out of Gaza before it implements what he called an Israeli plan “to destroy our people."

And in the coming days, he said, the Palestinians will head to the 193-member General Assembly, where there are no vetoes, with a similar humanitarian-focused resolution. Unlike in the Security Council, assembly resolutions are not legally binding, though they are seen as a barometer of world opinion.

The US vetoed the last Security Council resolution on Gaza in November, under the Biden administration, also because the ceasefire demand was not directly linked to the release of all hostages. Similarly, the current resolution demands those taken by Hamas and other groups be released, but it does not make it a condition for a truce.

President Donald Trump's administration has tried to ramp up its efforts to broker peace in Gaza after 20 months of war. However, Hamas has sought amendments to a US proposal that special envoy Steve Witkoff has called “totally unacceptable.”

Why food aid is not reaching people in Gaza

The vote followed a decision by an Israeli and US-backed foundation to pause food delivery in Gaza after health officials said dozens of Palestinians were killed in a series of shootings this week. Israel and the United States say the new system was designed to prevent Hamas from stealing aid previously distributed by the UN.

The United Nations has rejected the new system. The UN says its distribution system worked very well during the March ceasefire and is carefully monitored.

Gaza is almost completely reliant on international aid because Israel’s offensive has destroyed nearly all food production capabilities. Israel imposed a blockade on supplies into Gaza on March 2, and limited aid began to enter again late last month after pressure from allies and warnings of famine.

The war began when Hamas-led militants stormed into southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, killing around 1,200 people and abducting 251. They are still holding 58 hostages, a third of them believed to be alive, after most of the rest were released in ceasefire agreements or other deals.

Israel’s military campaign has killed more than 54,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry, which doesn’t say how many of the dead were civilians or combatants.

The ministry is led by medical professionals but reports to the Hamas-run government. Its toll is seen as generally reliable by UN agencies and independent experts, though Israel has challenged its numbers



How Egypt Benefits From Expanding Nile Basin Power, Water Projects

Tanzania’s president and Egypt’s prime minister attend the inauguration of the Julius Nyerere Dam in Tanzania last month. (Egyptian Cabinet/Facebook)
Tanzania’s president and Egypt’s prime minister attend the inauguration of the Julius Nyerere Dam in Tanzania last month. (Egyptian Cabinet/Facebook)
TT

How Egypt Benefits From Expanding Nile Basin Power, Water Projects

Tanzania’s president and Egypt’s prime minister attend the inauguration of the Julius Nyerere Dam in Tanzania last month. (Egyptian Cabinet/Facebook)
Tanzania’s president and Egypt’s prime minister attend the inauguration of the Julius Nyerere Dam in Tanzania last month. (Egyptian Cabinet/Facebook)

Egypt is seeking funding for 36 projects in the southern Nile Basin, expanding its role in the region through hydropower, electricity and water schemes that experts say could benefit both Cairo and its neighbors.

The projects include power interconnections, transmission lines, water supplies and multipurpose schemes. Experts told Asharq Al-Awsat that Egypt’s growing involvement was guided by a principle of mutual benefit.

The southern Nile Basin countries are Burundi, Congo, Kenya, Rwanda, South Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda. They are among the Nile’s upstream countries and, together with the eastern Nile countries of Ethiopia, Sudan, Egypt and Eritrea, make up the Nile River Basin region.

Egyptian Minister of Water Resources and Irrigation Hani Sewilam said on Friday that Cairo had agreed to support efforts to mobilize funding for the 36 projects after studying them, exchanging information, assessing their impacts and reaching agreement through consultations.

Sewilam pointed to Tanzania’s Julius Nyerere Dam as a practical example of cooperation among Nile Basin countries. The Egyptian-Tanzanian partnership had brought gains to both sides, he said.

The dam provides electricity for Tanzania, Sewilam said, and its power could also support regional integration, cross-border connections and electricity trade with neighboring countries.

He also cited the Grand Fula Dam project in South Sudan, saying Egypt supported Juba’s development goals, including that project.

Tanzania inaugurated the Julius Nyerere hydropower dam and plant in late August. The Egyptian consortium of Arab Contractors and Elsewedy Electric built it over five years, with 1,700 Egyptian engineers and technicians among a workforce of about 12,000.

Hussein al-Buheiri, an African affairs expert at the National Center for Middle East Studies, said Egypt had the resources and capabilities to play a central role in developing Nile Basin and Horn of Africa countries, particularly through hydropower dams and irrigation and agricultural projects.

He said Egyptian companies’ work on the Julius Nyerere Dam and Egypt’s help in building power plants in countries such as Djibouti showed how the country could act as a strategic development partner.

African countries gained development, while Egypt gained investment and thousands of jobs, he said.

That approach also advanced Egyptian foreign policy and helped protect its Nile water security by drawing basin countries closer to Cairo and countering Ethiopian moves, al-Buheiri said.

Salah Halima, deputy chairman of the Egyptian Council for African Affairs and a former assistant foreign minister, said Egypt’s support for development projects reflected a broader commitment to shared interests and sustainable development across the basin.

Egypt had long supported water and electricity projects in Nile Basin countries, approving and helping carry out dozens of them, he said. That record showed Cairo’s support for those countries’ right to develop without harming others.

Halima described current water projects as an expression of partnership and mutual investment between Egypt and its African neighbors. Their expansion, he said, was part of longstanding collective action and close cooperation.

The message, he said, was clear: understanding and cooperation, rather than confrontation or dispute, should guide the management of international rivers.


Can Libyan Lawmakers Force a Change in Parliament’s Leadership?

A still from the Libyan House of Representatives’ latest session on Sept. 15 (video posted by the House on its Facebook page)
A still from the Libyan House of Representatives’ latest session on Sept. 15 (video posted by the House on its Facebook page)
TT

Can Libyan Lawmakers Force a Change in Parliament’s Leadership?

A still from the Libyan House of Representatives’ latest session on Sept. 15 (video posted by the House on its Facebook page)
A still from the Libyan House of Representatives’ latest session on Sept. 15 (video posted by the House on its Facebook page)

A push to change the rules of Libya’s parliament and rotate its leadership has put a question to the Benghazi-based chamber: Can lawmakers unseat Speaker Aguila Saleh after nearly 12 years at its helm?

The effort has also raised questions about why a bloc opposed to Saleh’s “unilateral decision-making” is acting now, whether its campaign is tied to the “4+4” agreement, and whether that deal can be carried out.

The agreement is seen as a possible route out of Libya’s political divide through a unified executive authority that would lead the country to elections within two years.

The lawmakers opposing Saleh say they will press on with efforts to “reform parliament and change its leadership.”

They say they were blocked from holding a session on the issue in the middle of last week when the chamber’s Benghazi headquarters was closed on its leadership’s orders.

Issam al-Jehani, a prominent member of the bloc, said its 86 lawmakers could meet in any Libyan city where they could carry out their duties.

Their aim was “neither a conspiracy nor an attempt to take Saleh’s seat,” he said, but reform in response to Saleh’s unilateral decisions and determination to stay in office.

Other political figures say the campaign could splinter and fade. Its momentum, they argue, depends on the balance of power in eastern Libya and on regional pressure.

Lawmaker Ali al-Takbali expects it to lose steam. He told Asharq Al-Awsat that a similar call in March for a session to change parliament’s rules came to nothing.

He also questioned whether Saleh’s opponents could keep enough lawmakers together to hold a session to remove him. They may unite over a grievance, al-Takbali said, but become harder to assemble once they return home, particularly if some reconsider their position because of personal interests or tribal ties.

Fellow lawmaker Montaser al-Hassi warned that some members’ actions could split parliament. Lawmakers have the right to amend its rules, he said, but must do so through legal channels.

Libya has long been divided between two governments: the interim Government of National Unity led by Abdulhamid al-Dbeibah in Tripoli, and Osama Hammad’s parliament-appointed government, which runs the east and some southern cities and is backed by Libyan National Army commander Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar.

Under the “4+4” agreement reached late last month by representatives of the Government of National Unity and the Libyan National Army under UN auspices, a new presidential council and unified government would prepare the country for general elections within two years.

Some observers and political figures say regional countries regard Saleh’s continued leadership as a safeguard against a split in the legislature, which they describe as the only institution to have remained intact through Libya’s institutional divisions.

Analyst Hossam Fnish linked the turmoil in parliament to the “4+4” deal. He said the reform bloc’s insistence on changing the rules before holding sessions would delay incorporating the agreement into Libya’s constitutional declaration, hindering a deal that could lead to elections and end the divide.

The UN mission, he said, prefers to incorporate the agreement through a constitutional amendment before seeking Security Council endorsement.

Fathi al-Shibli, head of the Voice of the People party, questioned the reform bloc’s motives. Complaints about Saleh making decisions alone and sessions going ahead without a quorum had circulated for years without drawing objections from lawmakers, he said.

That, in his view, lent weight to suspicions that the dispute was a struggle between blocs backed by powerful interests, rather than a drive for reform.

Al-Shibli expects Saleh to remain in office until the UN mission calls for a constituent council to replace parliament and the High Council of State to implement the “4+4” agreement. He said both bodies oppose a change to Libya’s political landscape.

Political analyst Mohammed Mahfouz likewise described the parliamentary dispute as a contest between powerful groups in eastern and western Libya, each seeking to show the international community that it can control the political scene.

Saleh’s hold on his position rests on two factors, Mahfouz told Asharq Al-Awsat: whether he and his allies can absorb the current anger, and whether regional and Western countries support him.

Saleh’s two deputies may help him contain the challenge, Mahfouz said, because they too could face replacement.


Iraq’s PM Tells UN The State Alone Will Decide War, Peace

Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi speaks during the 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 25, 2026. (AP)
Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi speaks during the 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 25, 2026. (AP)
TT

Iraq’s PM Tells UN The State Alone Will Decide War, Peace

Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi speaks during the 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 25, 2026. (AP)
Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi speaks during the 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 25, 2026. (AP)

Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi said on Friday that one of his government’s priorities was to ensure the state alone decides matters of war and peace, stressing that weapons must remain in the hands of constitutional institutions.

“The practical measures to bring weapons and decisions on war and peace under state control are moving in the right direction,” al-Zaidi told the UN General Assembly.

He called them essential to building state institutions, protecting sovereignty and securing stability.

He said the end of the international coalition’s mission in Iraq would mark a new phase in relations with strategic partners, shifting from military cooperation to economic and development cooperation. Iraq would continue to strengthen its security and military capabilities, he added.

Al-Zaidi called for tighter border controls, the closing of security gaps and continued vigilance against conditions that could fuel extremism.

He reiterated Iraq’s support for dialogue, diplomacy, respect for sovereignty, noninterference and good neighborly relations, and urged countries to resolve conflicts through negotiations and prevent renewed wars.

He urged the world to engage more closely with Iraq, saying the country could contribute to security and stability.

He also highlighted the Development Road project as a “strategic corridor for trade, investment and energy” linking Iraq’s Grand Faw Port to Türkiye and, from there, Europe.

“Iraq has never been on the margins. It is at the heart of history and the pulse of the present, and it deserves a partnership for the future,” he said.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio had warned Baghdad that militias must be disarmed to avoid the “Balkanization of Iraq,” amid growing pressure on the Iraqi government to bring weapons under state control.

Rubio expressed US support for al-Zaidi’s efforts to strengthen state authority and called for armed factions to be dismantled. He warned that competing centers of power could fragment Iraq and weaken its institutions.

Al-Zaidi had proposed a plan beginning with a 90-day period during which armed factions would cease attacks, with the transfer of weapons to the state to be completed by June 30, 2027.