#Gaza / UN security council passes [a draft] resolution calling for immediate ceasefire, as US abstains
The UN Security Council voted today (Monday) in favor of a draft resolution including a "demand" for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire during the month of Ramadan, which ends in about two weeks, and for the "immediate and unconditional release" of the hostages. 14 countries supported the draft resolution, the United States abstained, since it does not include condemnation of #Hamas - but did not use its veto.
Ben-Gvir suggests that #Biden aligns himself with #Hamas, its leader Yahya Sinwar, and, wait... Rashida Tlaib. Looks like Biden is discovering the truth behind the adage "If you lie down with dogs, you'll get up with fleas"
[...] Netanyahu and his far-right partners have made increasingly harsh remarks criticizing the Biden administration. In a recent interview, Mr. Ben-Gvir, the national security minister, accused Mr. Biden of tacitly supporting Israel’s enemies like Yahya Sinwar, Hamas’s leader in Gaza, and Rashida Tlaib, a Democratic congresswoman of Palestinian descent who represents a Michigan district.
[cont'd] Opinion: Netanyahu is dealing with the U.S. like a spoiled teenager dealing with his parents (Nakhum Barnea, also spelled Nahum Barnea)
PM is pouring out on the U.S. the troubles he has at home. The administration in Washington is a true friend, but it is [our] parents. In the end, even they will get fed up.
[...] "What was Netanyahu thinking? That if he takes his two officials off the plane at Ben Gurion Airport, America will be scared and will now veto any anti-Israeli proposal at the UN?"
[cont’d] In response to Gantz remarks, #Netanyahu stated that after #Hamas welcomed the Security Council's decision "Benny Gantz is still proposing to send a delegation to Washington." He added that he rejects Gantz's proposal.
The State of Israel has a moral obligation to continue the fight until the return of the captives and the removal of the Hamas threat, and we will do so. The Security Council's decision has no operational significance for us, and in any case, we will continue to listen to our friends, and always do what is right for Israel's security.
And alongside that, it is important to remember - the special relationship between Israel and the United States is an anchor in Israel's security and foreign relations, and direct dialogue with the U.S. administration is a vital asset that must not be given up even when there are challenges and disagreements.
The U.S. did well to clarify that a ceasefire will take place contingent on the return of the captives.
It is good that the Defense Minister is currently in the U.S., and will discuss with senior administration officials the political and security issues on the agenda and our need to continue the fighting.
Not only is it right for the delegation to travel - the Prime Minister would do well to go to the U.S. himself, and hold a direct dialogue with President Biden and senior administration officials. This is true routinely, and it is certainly true now, when the weight of U.S. support for Israel is so critical.
I really am concerned that people in Israel do not understand that insisting on letting Netanyahu run this war is going to come at the cost of delivering the US government into the hands of the fascist Republican Party, which likes to use Christian Zionism to whip up its most fanatical & racist base, but which builds its electoral strategy around intentionally increasing #antisemitic terrorism & scapegoating Jewish Americans. Do they think this is wise? Not care?
"important to remember…direct dialogue with the U.S. administration is a vital asset that must not be given up...the Prime Minister would do well to go to the U.S. himself, & hold a direct dialogue with President Biden & senior administration officials. This is true routinely [&]certainly true now, when the weight of U.S. support for Israel is so critical" @israel@palestine
@oatmeal
I assume the vast majority in #Israel, who distrust & loathe #Netanyahu & want him replaced, are picking up what Gantz is laying down about #Israel's real natsec interests (i.e., maintaining diplomatic respect & trust with the US-which is obviously impossible w/Bibi calling the shots).
Serious Q: Have Israelis decided keeping #Bibi in power forever is worth pushing US power to the "Jews Will Not Replace Us" party (GOP) for keeps? B/c that's where all this is headed. @israel@palestine
Like fascist US ethno-state booster Richard Spencer, who calls himself a "white Zionist" & praises the state of #Israel for being “the most important & perhaps most revolutionary ethno-state."
[cont’d] A senior Israeli diplomatic source addressed the UN Security Council's decision to call for a ceasefire in the war, separate from the release of the captives held by Hamas. According to the source, "This is a very complex and dangerous decision. We argued that a ceasefire is a result of releasing the captives - and the decision essentially says that a ceasefire is a value in itself. #Netanyahu's response exacerbates the problem, as he is backing us further into a corner by canceling the delegation to the U.S."
#Putinyahu: "The U.S. did not veto the new text today calling for an unconditional ceasefire without the release of the captives. This is a clear retreat from the consistent position of the #UNSC since the beginning of the war. This retreat harms both the war effort and the effort to release the captives, because it gives #Hamas hope that international pressure will allow them to get a ceasefire without releasing our captives."
[cont’d] Hamas: If a Ceasefire Occurs According to the Security Council Resolution, We Are Ready to Immediately Enter a Process of "Prisoner Exchange From Both Sides"
#Hamas welcomed the #UNSC resolution and stated that a "comprehensive ceasefire that leads to the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Strip and the return of the displaced to their homes" is required. It was further stated that if such a ceasefire occurs, Hamas is ready to immediately enter a process of "prisoner exchange that will lead to the release of captives and prisoners on both sides."
@oatmeal@israel@palestine The most interesting thing about this morning's #UN Security Council resolution is that the ambassador from the #USA suggested that it's non-binding! #Israel#Gaza
@oatmeal@israel@palestine Confusion still abounds around today's UN resolution that the U.S. ambassador called non-binding.
"China's U.N. Ambassador Zhang Jun said Security Council resolutions are binding".
"Deputy U.N. spokesperson Farhan Haq said Security Council resolutions are international law, "so to that extent they are as binding as international law is"."
Granted, #Israel has ignored or condemned every other resolution it disagrees with.
CC/ @kravietz
I think the confusion originates from misunderstanding the role of international law versus national law in general. In case of national laws there’s always the whole apparatus - lawmaking, judiciary, law enforcement.
In case of international law there’s lawmaking, based mostly of voluntary ratification of international conventions, judiciary is very limited (ICoJ, ICC but a country first has to recognise them!) and law enforcement is non-existing.
To put that simply, you can’t do anything to a country that chooses to ignore international law, which Russia or Syria had been doing for decades.
I'm no expert, but the impact of such decisions, even if not binding or can't be imposed directly, is litigation, censures, boycotts, etc. Cross-litigation with the ICJ case, for example, the sanctions against individuals as we've seen so far, and more and more. There's no need for direct enforcement to seriously kneecap a country, especially Israel, whose military operations are so dependent on the US and others.
This is what Erdan for example said (quoted on #Ynet):
"Now petitions will begin that Israel is violating the Security Council resolution, and courts may intervene. The pressure on the U.S. will increase, and the implication for us is severe. This could cause significant damage because it allows a process of deterioration that we don't know where it will lead."
As a benchmark, take Russia. There had been litigation, pressure, boycott, sanctions. They just don’t give a shit and plenty of countries passively support them by buying goods from them or abstaining on other UN votes. Putin even has an arrest order from ICC… so what?
Just to be clear, you’re absolutely right about all the instruments you listed, but these are all peer pressure at best and none of them is enforceable in the same sense as national laws are, where violation of law is followed by enforcement by court and law enforcement institutions. On the international law level it doesn’t really work this way and the only actual way of enforcement is military.
Because it’s not. As a reminder, UN passed a number of resolutions calling Russia to withdraw from Ukraine, which Russia duly ignored. For something to be binding you need means of enforcement.
Add comment