United Nations
UN Security Council Passes Resolution for Immediate Gaza Ceasefire
On March 25, the UN Security Council passed a resolution calling for an "immediate ceasefire" in Gaza for the remainder of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, that ended on April 9, and the urgent expansion of humanitarian aid deliveries. The resolution was supported by 14 members of the Security Council. The United States withheld its veto and abstained. This resolution came after 171 days of Israel's genocidal war on Gaza and prior attempts to pass a resolution that were undermined, outright vetoed or made unacceptable to other countries by the U.S. Despite the resolution having passed, the U.S. saw to it that it could not be enforced, while Israel simply carried on its slaughter in Gaza and Ramadan ended.
Text of UN Security Council Resolution 2728 (2024)
"The Security Council,
"Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,
"Recalling all of its relevant resolutions on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question,
"Reiterating its demand that all parties comply with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law, and in this regard deploring all attacks against civilians and civilian objects, as well as all violence and hostilities against civilians, and all acts of terrorism, and recalling that the taking of hostages is prohibited under international law,
"Expressing deep concern about the catastrophic humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip,
"Acknowledging the ongoing diplomatic efforts by Egypt, Qatar and the United States, aimed at reaching a cessation of hostilities, releasing the hostages and increasing the provision and distribution of humanitarian aid,
"1. Demands an immediate ceasefire for the month of Ramadan respected by all parties leading to a lasting sustainable ceasefire, and also demands the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, as well as ensuring humanitarian access to address their medical and other humanitarian needs, and further demands that the parties comply with their obligations under international law in relation to all persons they detain;
"2. Emphasizes the urgent need to expand the flow of humanitarian assistance to and reinforce the protection of civilians in the entire Gaza Strip and reiterates its demand for the lifting of all barriers to the provision of humanitarian assistance at scale, in line with international humanitarian law as well as resolutions 2712 (2023) and 2720 (2023);
"3. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter."
The Russian Federation sought to have the resolution read "permanent immediate ceasefire," as it had in a prior draft, but this amendment was vetoed by the U.S.
Israel's Response
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu initially cancelled
a high-level delegation's planned visit to Washington, DC to discuss
the planned invasion of Rafah. He accused the U.S. of "retreating" from
a "principled position" by allowing the vote to pass without
conditioning the ceasefire on the
release of hostages. After continued U.S. insistence, Netanyahu agreed
to send a delegation at a date not yet determined. A video consultation on Rafah
was held April 1 by U.S. National Security Advisor
Jake Sullivan and Secretary of State Antony Blinken with their
Israeli counterparts.
"This withdrawal hurts both the war effort and the effort to release the hostages, because it gives (the Palestinian Resistance movement) Hamas hope that international pressure will allow them to accept a ceasefire without the release of our hostages," the statement said, according to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz.
As concerns those held captive in Gaza, what was left unsaid is that Israel's refusal to negotiate a permanent ceasefire is the reason why there are still Israeli captives being held. Moreover, the all-out bombardment of Gaza for nearly six months, not to mention the enactment of the "Hannibal Directive" permitting Israel's military to shoot its own citizens on October 7, 2023, have resulted in Israel killing many of those Netanyahu claims he wants to rescue. This is to say nothing about the thousands of Palestinian men, women and children unjustly detained by Israel since October 7 and over many years, whose freedom the Palestinian people and resistance are fighting for.
U.S. Response
The White House said in a statement that the U.S. abstention "does not represent a shift in our policy [...] but because the final text does not have the language that we think is essential, like a condemnation of Hamas, we could not support it."
Jake Sullivan, U.S. National Security Advisor, declared at a press conference that the resolution was not binding.
U.S. Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield explained the U.S. abstention by saying, "We are getting closer to a deal for an immediate ceasefire with the release of all hostages. But we are not there yet." She made a ceasefire and humanitarian aid conditional on "the release of all hostages." She made a permanent ceasefire conditional on Israel and the U.S. achieving their common aim of eliminating the Palestinian resistance.
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken also qualified the implementation of the resolution with U.S. "conditions" that are not embodied in the resolution tying aid distribution to release of hostages. Despite the criminal role of the U.S., guilty of genocide for its military, financial and economic backing of the Israeli occupation and Gaza slaughter, he tried to give the appearance of U.S. support for humanitarian aid. He said, "This resolution further explicitly recognizes the painstaking, non-stop negotiations being conducted by the Governments of Egypt, Israel, Qatar, and the United States to achieve such a release in the context of a ceasefire, which would also create space to surge more lifesaving humanitarian assistance for Palestinian civilians, and to build something more enduring."
White House National Security spokesperson John Kirby, like advisor Sullivan, bluntly dismissed the resolution and once again said that Israel has carte blanche from the U.S. to carry out its genocide. He also indicated the U.S. would not uphold its obligations to stop arms shipments and financial aid to Israel. He said, "It is a non-binding resolution. So there's no impact at all on Israel and Israel's ability to continue to go after Hamas." In response to a reporter's question, he affirmed that, "Of course we still have Israel's back. [...] We are still providing tools capabilities, weapons systems, so that Israel can defend itself."
Response by Hamas
Hamas welcomed the UN Security Council resolution and affirmed its "readiness to engage in an immediate prisoner exchange process that leads to the release of prisoners on both sides."
Basem Naim, a senior official in Hamas' political bureau, told Al Jazeera, "It is the role of the international community to oblige Israel and to end this double standard."
Husam Badran, another member of the political bureau said Hamas is exercising resistance while undertaking political and negotiating work to reach a clear and specific goal related to the needs of the Palestinian people in general and the Gazans in particular. Badran said the position of the Hamas negotiating delegation is firm given the steadfastness of the Palestinian people and their resistance on the ground. The Hamas official said an end to Israel's hostilities in the Gaza Strip, the delivery of humanitarian aid and the return of the displaced are the priorities of the resistance movement. The official said Hamas' proposal is based on a clear reconstruction plan and is not limited to the release of prisoners as promoted by the occupying forces.
China Explains Why March 22 U.S.-Drafted Resolution Was Not Passed
The U.S. had tabled a prior resolution which was voted on and did not pass on March 22.
China's Ambassador to the UN, Zhang Jun, explained, "A comparison of the two drafts shows the differences. The current [March 25] draft is unequivocal and correct in its direction, demanding an immediate ceasefire, while the previous one [of March 22] was evasive and ambiguous. The current draft demands an unconditional ceasefire, while the previous one set preconditions for a ceasefire. The current draft reflects the general expectations of the international community and enjoys the collective support of the Arab states, while the previous one was jointly rejected by the Arab states. The differences between the two drafts boils down to whether there should be an immediate and unconditional ceasefire or whether the collective punishment of the people in Gaza should be allowed to continue. On this issue, China, like most members of the international community, has been very clear from the very outset. Whether we voted against it last Friday [March 22], or in favour of it today, our vote has been based on our consistent position and proposition."
This article was published in
Volume 54 Number 26 - April 15, 2024
Article Link:
https://cpcml.ca/Tmlm2024/Articles/MS54268.HTM
Website: www.cpcml.ca Email: editor@cpcml.ca