The U.N. Security Council is expected to discuss a draft resolution in New York on Monday, Feb. 20, that would call for an immediate halt to all Israeli settlement activity in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. In the meantime, all eyes will be on Washington for the position of US President Joe Biden’s administration on the move. The move created a sort of diplomatic embarrassment for the White House.
The resolution, still in draft stage, stresses that Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territory it has occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, have no legal force and constitute a flagrant violation of international law. “
The resolution condemns “all attempts at annexation, including decisions and actions taken by Israel with regard to settlements” and calls for an immediate withdrawal.
The UAE delegation, which serves as an interim member of the Security Council for two years (2022-2023), coordinated with the Palestinian side to draft the draft resolution. It is uncertain whether the draft will be put to a vote, especially amid speculation that the United States and Israel may exert pressure to block the move.
Importance of the resolution
The draft resolution has no practical relevance for the territories Israel has occupied since 1967. Yet its symbolic power remains powerful in international assertions of the settlement’s illegality.
The new draft resolution is not substantially different from Resolution 2334 adopted by the Security Council on December 23, 2016. The resolution was passed after 14 members voted in favor after former President Barack Obama’s administration abstained. The resolution became the first of its kind since 1979, in which the Security Council demanded that Israel stop building settlements in Palestinian territories.
Egypt (then a member of the Security Council) withdrew the draft resolution condemning Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory after it was formally submitted. Earlier, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi received a call and request from then-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then-US President Donald Trump.
Four Security Council members, Venezuela, Malaysia, New Zealand and Senegal, submitted the draft resolution shortly after Egypt withdrew and the Egyptian mission to the Security Council requested a postponement of the vote on instructions from President Cairo.
refuse to pressure israel
Officially, the Biden administration has opposed Israel’s recent settlement measures, particularly the far-right Israeli government’s decision to build thousands of settlements in the occupied West Bank.
Washington and the West issued a joint statement saying it “strongly rejects these unilateral moves, which will only increase tensions between Israelis and Palestinians and undermine efforts to negotiate a two-state solution.”
Washington, however, is reluctant to apply pressure to change Israeli policy. Ambassador David Mack, former assistant secretary of state for Middle East affairs, confirmed in an interview with Al Jazeera that “the Biden administration has the tools to put pressure on Israel to stop illegal settlement activity.”
But Ambassador Mike, who now serves at the Atlantic Council in Washington, pointed out that “Biden is unlikely to have the political will to force Israel to make concessions by threatening cuts in military and economic aid, and I’m not sure that this Israeli government will do that.” .”
While Jon Altman, head of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, admitted to Al Jazeera that his country “has the tools to pressure the Netanyahu government to do and not do a lot of things, but with At the same time it doesn’t have any tools to force Netanyahu’s government to do anything.”
between veto and abstention
Ambassador Mack predicts that “Washington will simply abstain from the UN Security Council resolution to remind Israel that it is losing international support. It is also possible that the Biden administration will try to soften the wording of any UN Security Council resolution so that a vote can be safely in its interest.” , which is expected to win over progressive American Jews as well as a growing number of young Americans who oppose the Israeli government’s position.”
On the other hand, Altman, who once served as the head of the State Department’s planning department, predicts that “the Biden administration will veto or abstain from the resolution in order to narrow the fundamental differences between the Israeli government and most Security Council countries. Ultimately, it will depend on the resolution.” The nature of the Biden administration’s strategy and the positions of other parties.”
“Biden’s choice to vote on a UN Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlement activity will be a defining moment for him,” said Martin Indyk, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel who now works at the Council on Foreign Relations. , everyone would think he supports Netanyahu’s settlement policy, which makes his policy goals incoherent and unattainable. But if he abstains, it will open the door for further UN Security Council action against Israel. This It will make things more difficult for him in the future.”
special relationship still exists
In an interview with Al Jazeera, Indyk, who served as special envoy for the peace process under former President Barack Obama, said, “Biden is a loyal friend of Israel and he sees no point in fighting for settlements. On the other hand, He is committed to keeping hopes of a two-state solution alive, and recent decisions on settlements have killed any hope. Moreover, he is a democrat who sees the struggle between democracy and authoritarianism as a key issue of his presidency .Netanyahu is leading Israel down the path of illiberal democracy, which Biden opposes. So, it is difficult to know how Biden will respond to the reconciliation dilemma.”
Indyk threw the ball to the Palestinians, saying: “If the Palestinians stick to the wording of previous resolutions, especially on the city of Jerusalem, then it will be easier for Biden to use the veto. But if the Palestinians use the language of the US government , and avoid any contentious issues, then it will be very difficult for Biden to use his veto because it would go against his administration’s settlement policy.”
A spokesman for the U.S. State Department called the Security Council resolution on settlements “unhelpful,” noting that “the resolution’s introduction will not help create the conditions necessary to advance negotiations on a two-state solution.”
