In the recent resolution on the Israel-Palestine conflict adopted by the United Nations, the US was isolated when only 12 countries joined Washington and Tel Aviv at the UN General Assembly in opposing a motion calling for a sustained humanitarian truce leading to a cessation of hostilities.
Hours after Israel had extended its attack in Gaza, Jordan’s motion was passed in New York by 120 votes to 14, with 45 countries abstaining. Many believe that the outcome was significant as it revealed limited support for the world’s superpower, the United States. Notably, even France, Spain and the UK did not join the bandwagon of the United Sates in voting against the motion.
Since 1945, a total of 36 UNSC draft resolutions related to Israel-Palestine have been vetoed by one of the five permanent members – the US, Russia, China, the United Kingdom, and France. Out of these, 34 were vetoed by the US and two by Russia and China.
Ayman Safadi, the foreign minister of Jordan, expressed his happiness over the outcome, stating that the UN General Assembly had “spoken for justice.” He asserted that the resolution “is a clear stand on the side of international law, against Israel’s war, against the killing of Palestinians, and against war crimes.”
It undoubtedly demonstrates Israel’s fundamental legal obligation under international law to make sure civilians are not deprived of necessities for survival. Yet, the resolution is merely a snapshot of global opinion and is not legally enforceable. The US or Russia has been able to use their veto power to prevent the UN Security Council, which has the authority to adopt legally binding resolutions, from passing a motion regarding the crisis.
A draft UN Security Council resolution on the Israel-Palestine conflict proposed by the US would have completely “dashed” the two-state solution if it had been passed, which is why Beijing opposed it, said China’s envoy to the UN. Speaking at the council on Nov. 1, Ambassador Zhang Jun said the proposal departed “from the spirit of previous UN resolutions and embeds the dangerous logic of clash of civilizations and the justification of war and use of force.”
“If adopted, it will completely dash the prospect of the two-state solution and plunge the Palestinian and Israeli peoples into a vicious cycle of hatred and confrontation,” he added, according to an official transcript of his remarks.
Very recently China insisted on an immediate ceasefire in the Israel-Palestine conflict and demanded respect for the UN resolution on a humanitarian truce and an end to hostilities. The Beijing-backed resolution “calls for the lifting of the emergency evacuation order in the northern Gaza Strip and opposes the forced relocation of Palestinian civilians,” spokesman Wang Wenbin said.
“The root cause of the recurring conflict between Palestine and Israel is that the Palestinian territory has been illegally occupied for a long time, that the Palestinian people’s right to establish an independent state has been ignored for a long time, and that the basic rights of the Palestinian people have not been fundamentally protected for a long time,” he stressed.
According to the spokesman, “This historical injustice must not continue”; so, he urged full implementation of the UN General Assembly resolution.”
In the past, a number of times, it has been debated that UN should be reformed in order to make it more effective and meaningful. Some have even argued that what is the use of any resolution passed if it cannot be implemented on the ground. The same has once again happened and vetoing any resolution passed by the overwhelming majority is a mockery of democratic norms. And, therefore, there should be serious introspection on the effectiveness of UN. In order to make the UN effective, many national and international intellectuals and thinkers have categorically said that the veto power of the permanent members of the UN Security Councilshould be abolished because it has lost its purpose and every time this power is being misused and abused.
According to Dr. Daud Salim Faruquie, Director, Centre for Evidence-Based Policy, Practice and Interventions, (FEDI), former President of Oxford University SAARC Society, “The United Nations Organization mainly purports to maintain international peace and security, promoting cooperation among nations, and addressing global challenges. There are several important roles that UNO plays but its efficacy comes into limelight when the parties involved in a regional conflict bypass its directives.”
Dr Faruquie further said, “To enhance its effectiveness in such situations, the UNO must relook its strategies of peacekeeping and peace building. Since the deployment of power in a conflicted situation adds more fuel to fire, the UN needs to take a long term but trusted route. By expanding their already evidence-based decision-making approach, the UN should go proactive to understand intergroup differences prevailing in different parts of the world.”
The FEDI Director opined, “Considering economics, geography, sociology and politics of different groups while factorising their fears, aspirations and concerns, the UN could synthesize the deep-rooted issues which later grow into major conflicts. The approach will definitely help to improve their capacities of diplomacy, conflict prevention, peace building, tools to resolve conflicts, transparency and justice. By following an overarching pro-active approach of evidence-based outreach and regional interventions of behaviour change, the UN could expand its accessibility as a better peace builder.”
Washington based Mike Ghouse, President, Center for Pluralism and Director World Muslim Congress said, “United Nations is a great international body. It had all the powers to interfere in conflicts and restore harmony among nations. Unfortunately, our rogue president George Bush destroyed it, bypassing the body and going it alone and committing genocide of Iraqi and Afghanistani people. Israel is the biggest violator of the resolutions passed, thus making the UNO less effective.”
Ghouse averred, “The veto power the 5 nations have is very undemocratic and needs to be stripped. The UNO operates with consensus. We need a powerful president from the United States to take the bold steps to make it an effective body in the conflict zones. It is still doing a great job through UNICEF, relief and other bodies.”
In my earlier Face-to-Face with Tariq Ramadan, then Professor of Contemporary Islamic Studies at Oxford University who was elected by Time magazine in 2000 as one of the seven religious innovators of the 21st century and in 2004 as one of the 100 most influential people in the world and by Foreign Policy readers as one of the top Global Thinkers, on the question of abolition of veto power, Ramadan said, “Yes, of course, it should be abolished. United Nations’ order today is the order of the dominant. So you can have 150 countries against a motion or resolution and the United States could just stop it. And that’s nonsense. It is the democratic process of the powerful.”
He added, “We have exactly the same in IMF. In IMF too, all the countries could decide but the United States of America has 17 percent and with only 17 percent America can block any decision. This is not democracy, this is a joke. And that is why Netanyahu could say: you keep on talking and I am not going to follow or respect. Seventy-two United Nations Resolutions against Israel but none was respected.”
Yvonne Ridley in her piece, “The ‘final’ downfall of Israel was predicted by Einstein,”(Middle East Monitor, June 4, 2021) has described Albert Einstein’s popular views on Israel and Palestine. According to Ridley, “Ten years before the state declared its “independence” in 1948 on land stolen from the people of Palestine, Albert Einstein described the proposed creation of Israel as something which conflicted with “the essential nature of Judaism.” Having fled Hitler’s Germany and eventually becoming a US citizen, Einstein needed no lessons in what fascism looked like.”
Ridley added, “One of the greatest physicists in history, and supported by some other high profile Jewish intellectuals, Einstein spotted the flaws and fault lines in 1946 when he addressed the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry on the Palestinian issue. He couldn’t understand why Israel was needed. “I believe it is bad,” he said.
On her findings on Einstein, Ridley said, “While researching Einstein’s views I came across another of his letters, less well known but probably far more revealing than any other he had penned on the subject of Palestine. As brief as it was – just 50 words – it included his warning about the “final catastrophe” facing Palestine in the hands of Zionist terror groups:
“When a real and final catastrophe should befall us in Palestine the first responsible for it would be the British and the second responsible for it the Terrorist organizations build [sic] up from our own ranks. I am not willing to see anybody associated with those misled and criminal people.”