US Decision on Golan Sparks Wide Rejection at Security Council

Syrian flags are seen in the village of Ain el-Tineh in the Golan Heights. AFP file photo

“The UN position on the Golan is known and clear. That position is reflected in the relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions, notably Security Council Resolutions 242 (1967) and 497 (1981),” said Rosemary DiCarlo, UN Under-Secretary-General for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs, during her brief to the Security Council on the situation in the Middle East on Wednesday.
 
“We hope that the recent developments will not be used as an excuse by anyone to pursue actions that could undermine the relative stability of the situation on Golan and beyond. We will continue to closely monitor developments on the ground and will keep the Council informed, as appropriate,” she added.
 
She also called on the Guarantor States to work together to address the issue of terrorist groups on the Security Council’s list, in full compliance with international humanitarian law, noting that this was a necessary step to avoid mass migration and another humanitarian catastrophe.
 
Meanwhile, during a Tuesday meeting on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, a number of Security Council members (some European countries, South Africa, Indonesia, China, and others) expressed dissatisfaction with the US decision to break with international consensus on the Golan Heights, considered by the UN as “occupied territory.”
 
“We do not recognize Israel’s sovereignty over the territories it occupies since June 1967, including the Golan Heights,” said the five European permanent members of the Security Council (Germany, France, Britain, Belgium and Poland) in a statement.
 
They also stressed that the annexation of territory by force was prohibited by international law. “Any unilateral border changes go against the rules-based international order and the UN Charter,” they emphasized.
 
“We raise our strong concerns about broader consequences of recognizing illegal annexation and also about the broader regional consequences,” the statement concluded.