#United States National Security Council

[sayruq]

The U.S. will use its veto power against a Palestinian bid to be recognized as a member state of the United Nations during a vote at the Security Council expected to take place Thursday evening. Vedant Patel, principal deputy spokesperson for the State Department, described as premature an effort by the Palestinian Authority (PA) to gain member status at the U.N. He said there was not unanimity among the Security Council’s 15 members that the Palestinian Authority had met the criteria for membership, with unresolved questions over the governance of the Gaza Strip, where Israel is in a war to defeat and eliminate the controlling power, Hamas. “And for that reason, the United States is voting no on this proposed Security Council resolution,” Patel said.

Earlier it was revealed that the United States was secretly pressuring other members of the Security Council to shoot down a Palestinian state membership so the US wouldn't have to use its veto as that would lead to a wave of local and international criticism for Joe Biden.

[workersolidarity]

🇺🇸⚔️🇵🇸 🚨

UNITED STATES VETOS PALESTINIAN MEMBERSHIP TO THE UNITED NATIONS

In a vote today in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) on a resolution to grant membership into the UN for Palestine was vetoed by the United States.

The vote for Palestinian membership was supported by the vast majority of UNSC members, with 12 votes in favor, one against, and two abstentions.

US representative to the UN for Special Political Affairs, Robert Wood, argued that Palestine could not be admitted as long as Hamas controlled the Gaza Strip, echoing Zionist arguments over Palestine's membership, at one point arguing, “there are unresolved questions as to whether [Palestine] meets the criteria to be considered a state," without ever mentioning the Israeli occupation that makes such criteria unlikely to ever be satisfied.

Palestine is currently a "Permanent Observer State" without voting rights at the United Nations.

#source

@WorkerSolidarityNews

[phoenixyfriend]

The Shift in America's Support of Israel as of 3/25/24

Okay, so there have been three specific incidents recently that I'd like to cover for you guys.

Chuck Schumer's speech calling for a new election in Israel, which I have spoken about here and here. (3/14/24)

Congress voting to ban UNRWA funding until 2025, which I've seen a lot of people talking about, but often without an actual understanding of what the situation actually is. (It's bad, but it's not the same type of bad as people think.) (3/24/24)

The US abstaining from a UN Security Council vote, which is effectively voting against Israel when they have thus far been the only ones to use veto power in this manner. (3/25/24)

I'm not going to go into detail about Schumer, since I've already covered it. tldr: it's a very specifically worded speech that does not explicitly threaten Israel, but if you do even the slightest bit of reading between the lines, that is absolutely what is happening.

Also, before I move forward: the US may not be donating to UNRWA for the rest of the fiscal year, but you can. They have direct donation links.

UNRWA funding has been on hold for a while, but this is... complicated. Not morally, because UNRWA does need funding and to defund it is truly unconscionable, but many of the "Biden signed it into law" posts are approaching it with this implied message that UNRWA would have funding if not for Biden signing it.

Except that isn't really how the US government works. Especially this government.

Funding for 2024 was supposed to be passed months ago. We are on the verge of another government shutdown. UNRWA funding is not on the table until the House swings blue. I hate to be the one to say this, but it's... like, it's not something I can change alone. I know you're tired of hearing it, but voting in November is the key to fixing a whole lot of problems.

One of the core duties of Congress is passing budgets. For those budgets to pass, they need to be approved by the House (Republican Majority), the Senate (Democrat Majority), and the President. The reason it has taken five months to pass a yearly budget (the deadline iirc was September or October) is because anything approved by one chamber is shot down by the other.

UNRWA's de-funding is tied to Ukraine funding (and a few other things). Biden refusing to sign would not have brought back UNRWA funding. The funding is already on hold. We do not have the votes to bring it back. We just straight up do not have enough seats in the House to make that happen. Biden refusing to sign would have resulted in both UNRWA and Ukraine not having funding, indefinitely. Signing it resulted in one of the two getting funding.

This is not a situation where funding was approved and now cut. This is not a situation where money was already flowing to UNRWA. This is a situation where money wasn't going anywhere, because Congress is a split shitshow.

Think of it like this: Funding is water coming from a spigot. Congress can turn it on or off, and it's currently off. Biden can smack away the hand coming to twist the valve, but he can't touch the valve himself. That's what the presidential veto is. Unfortunately, the spigot is already off, and Biden can't twist it back on when Congress isn't already reaching to do so.

Is this bad? Yes! UNRWA's funding should never have been cut! We should still be very, very upset about this! But I need you to understand that the way the US government works is not a dictatorship. Biden cannot just overrule Congress, especially when we're on the verge of another shutdown.

I do not think it is fair or even really acceptable that UNRWA's funding was viewed as an appropriate point of compromise. I'm just, unfortunately, also aware that this particular legislation is a tug-of-war that was never going to end with funding going to Palestine, not with the current Republican control of the House.

"But Biden sent money to Israel a bunch of times--" Yeah, and he's paying for it in the polls. He's aware that people are pissed at him. That choice is already biting him in the ass.

Biden is not perfect and I am never going to claim he is, but please recognize that the UNRWA funding pull is not a current action. It is a past action that is now being sustained because the House is red. You want to bring back UNRWA funding? Get rid of Marjorie Taylor Green and her entire cohort.

The other reason I'm less than eager to view that UNRWA thing as Biden being pro-Israel is because the US has finally abstained on a UN vote instead of vetoing.

When the US has been the only voice on Israel's side in the Security Council this whole time, abstention is functionally voting against them. We already knew that 13-14 of the other 14 members were going to vote pro-ceasefire. They have been this entire time. The US abstaining is functionally agreeing.

Why did the US not just vote for the ceasefire, then? No idea. Might be a treaty thing. I don't really need to know, because the result is that the UN Security Council has finally passed a measure against Israel, and those things are legally binding, and we know it's a big step because Israel's government is not happy.

When paired with the Schumer speech from a week and a half ago, it indicates a major shift in US foreign policy.

From the Al Jazeera article:

The US had repeatedly blocked Security Council resolutions that put pressure on Israel but has increasingly shown frustration with its ally as civilian casualties mount and the UN warns of impending famine in Gaza. Speaking after the vote, US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield blamed Hamas for the delay in passing a ceasefire resolution. “We did not agree with everything with the resolution,” which she said was the reason why the US abstained. “Certain key edits were ignored, including our request to add a condemnation of Hamas,” Thomas-Greenfield said. [...] The White House said the final resolution did not have language the US considers essential and its abstention does not represent a shift in policy. But Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said the US failure to veto the resolution is a “clear retreat” from its previous position and would hurt war efforts against Hamas as well as efforts to release Israeli captives held in Gaza.

This action has also resulted in Israel pulling plans for "a high-level delegation" to visit the US for discussions on the invasion of Rafah (which Biden has purportedly been warning against for a while).

“We’re very disappointed that they won’t be coming to Washington, DC, to allow us to have a fulsome conversation with them about viable alternatives to them going in on the ground in Rafah,” [John] Kirby told reporters. [...] Last week, Netanyahu promised to defy US appeals and expand Israel’s military campaign to Rafah even without its ally’s support.

There are other complications and details here, such as that the resolution does not call for a permanent ceasefire, and that US tensions with Russia and China are still somehow playing a role in the negotiations over the ceasefire text, but ultimately...

The US abstaining is a good thing. Schumer's speech is a good thing. They are not enough, but they are good things. They are steps forward.

The pull of funding from UNRWA is not a good thing. It is, in fact, a very, very bad thing. It just also looks a lot like it was unavoidable.

So call your reps, and vote come November. It's a long slog and we all know it, but we can't make change without dedication.

To support my blogging so I can move out of my parents’ house, I do have a ko-fi. Alternately, you can donate to one of the charities I list in this post.

[i-am-aprl]

Every word uttered is a FACT

[justinspoliticalcorner]

EDITH M. LEDERER at AP, via NewsNation:

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — The United States vetoed a widely backed U.N. resolution on Thursday that would have paved the way for full United Nations membership for the state of Palestine. The vote in the 15-member Security Council was 12 in favor, the United States opposed and two abstentions. The resolution would have recommended that the 193-member General Assembly, where there are no vetoes, approve Palestine becoming the 194th member of the United Nations. Some 140 countries have already recognized the state of Palestine, so its admission would have been approved. This is the second Palestinian attempt to become a full member of the United Nations, and it comes as the war in Gaza, now in its seventh month, has put the more than 75-year-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict at center stage. Before the vote, U.S. deputy State Department spokesman Vedant Patel said the United States has “been very clear consistently that premature actions in New York — even with the best intentions — will not achieve statehood for the Palestinian people.” Palestinian membership “needs to be the outcome of the negotiation between Israel and the Palestinians,” U.S. deputy ambassador Robert Wood said. It ��is something that would flow from the result of those negotiations.” Anything that gets in the way “makes it more difficult to have those negotiations” and doesn’t help move toward a two-state solution where Israel and Palestine live side by side in peace, which “we all want,” Wood told reporters. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas first delivered the Palestinian Authority’s application for U.N. membership to then-Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in 2011. That initial bid failed because the Palestinians didn’t get the required minimum support of nine of the Security Council’s 15 members. The Palestinians then went to the General Assembly and by more than a two-thirds majority succeeded in having their status raised from a U.N. observer to a non-member observer state in November 2012. That opened the door for the Palestinian territories to join U.N. and other international organizations, including the International Criminal Court. The Palestinians revived their bid for U.N. membership in early April, backed by the 140 countries that have recognized Palestine as an independent state.

This is such a disgraceful decision by the Biden Administration vetoing making the State of Palestine a full UN member.

[maaruin]

The UN security council passed a resolution that called, among other things, for a ceasefire in Gaza (until the end of Ramadan). Unlike in previous resolutions, the US did not veto it, but instead abstained.

That is best understood as a warning towards Israel. It is basically saying: We are unhappy with what you are doing, and if you don't change your approach, we will withdraw support.

We will see if it has any effects - I doubt Israel and Hamas will actually do what the resolution calls for, but if the warning has its desired effect Israel will get more aid into Gaza and the bombing campaign will be significantly toned down.

[palestinegenocide]

The Shift: “What the hell is the point of the UN or the UN Security Council?”

On Monday the UN Security Council passed a resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. The U.S. didn’t veto it but don’t count on policy changes.

[historyforfuture]

The reporters and journalists in gaza gathering, singing to Gaza 💝✌🏼 Palestine

موطني ياأنا

[provendermalkin]

oh NOW Israel wants the UN? NOW the UN is a valid authority? NOW rulings and censure by the UN matter? All of a fucking sudden, huh? What did you THINK was going to happen holy shit

[sayruq]

AHEAD OF THE United Nations Security Council action to consider the Palestinian Authority’s application to become a full member of the international body, the United States is lobbying nations to reject such membership, hoping to avoid an overt “veto” by Washington. The lobbying effort, revealed in copies of unclassified State Department cables obtained by The Intercept, is at odds with the Biden administration’s pledge to fully support a two-state solution. In 2012, the U.N. General Assembly passed a resolution granting Palestine the status of a non-member observer state. The diplomatic cables detail pressure being applied to members of the Security Council, including Malta, the rotating president of the council this month. Ecuador in particular is being asked to lobby Malta and other nations, including France, to oppose U.N. recognition. The State Department’s justification is that normalizing relations between Israel and Arab states is the fastest and most effective way to achieve an enduring and productive statehood. While clarifying that President Joe Biden has worked vigorously to support “Palestinian aspirations for statehood” within the context “of a comprehensive peace that would resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” a diplomatic cable dated April 12 details U.S. talking points against a U.N. vote for Palestinian statehood. The cable says that Security Council members must be persuaded to reject any proposal for Palestinian statehood — and thereby its recognition as a sovereign nation — before the council’s open debate on the Middle East, scheduled for April 18. “It remains the U.S. view that the most expeditious path toward a political horizon for the Palestinian people is in the context of a normalization agreement between Israel and its neighbors,” the cable reads. “We believe this approach can tangibly advance Palestinian goals in a meaningful and enduring way.” “We therefore urge you not to support any potential Security Council resolution recommending the admission of ‘Palestine’ as a U.N. member state, should such a resolution be presented to the Security Council for a decision in the coming days and weeks.”

[workersolidarity]

🇺🇳🇵🇸 🚨

UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY PASSES RESOLUTION TO REEVALUATE PALESTINE UN MEMBERSHIP BID

The United Nations General Assembly passed on Friday a resolution calling for the reevaluation of Palestine's bid for membership to the General Assembly, and to grant the State of Palestine additional rights.

The resolution, which was drafted and pushed by the United Arab Emirates, co-sponsored by Turkiye, and signed onto by an additional 80 nations, was passed and adopted by an overwhelming majority of 143 member-states voting in favor, with just 9 countries voting against the resolution, and another 25 abstentions.

Further, the adopted resolution lamented the previous veto by the United States of a resolution calling for Palestinian membership, voted on in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), while calling for the preservation of Justice and respect for Palestinians' fundamental human rights.

The resolution emphasized the importance of respecting the territorial integrity of the occupied Palestinian territories and East Jerusalem, pointing out that Palestine is "qualified for membership in the United Nations" in accordance with UN Charter of Article 4. It also urged the UNSC to reconsider Palestine's membership bid "favorably."

Previously, in 2011, the State of Palestine applied for full membership at the United Nations, but could not gather enough support to pass a resolution in its favor, only receiving "permanent observer status" as of 2012.

#source1

#videosource

@WorkerSolidarityNews

[chimaeraonwards]

The US ambassador bemoaned the fact that it took so long for the council to act, failing to mention that she vetoed an identical resolution four weeks ago.

al jazeera is out here calling out the US ambassador's hypocrisy and i am here for it

Source: Al Jazeera (16/11/23 Live Reporting)

UPDATE 6:09 GMT: I think the update got removed so its no longer in the link i mentioned above. oooooops. full screenshot in the reblogs

[news4dzhozhar]

How is the US going to claim that their only issue is with Hamas and not the Palestinian people? There are over 100 members of the UN so if the US isn't as hateful as Israel towards Palestine, why is the US expected to veto Palestine becoming a full member of the United Nations? 🤬

[starlightshadowsworld]

The UN Security Council held a vote today (18.10.2023) for a resolution.

All the information here comes from this UN Security website page, this site for more info.

And the Israel/Gaza-Humanitarian aid and situation briefing video on the United Nations YouTube page.

Slightly unrelated, they live streamed this... Which is just insane to think about.

Anyway.

Prior to this vote they had been 2 amendedments of a draft resolution proposed by Russia.

It called for an end to indiscriminate attacks on civilians and infrastructure.

And a condemnation of the blockades and calling for a ceasefire.

Neither were passed by the UN Security Council.

Because despite it saying it would condemn "all violence and hostilities directed against civilians and all acts of terrorism."

Say it with me now, it didn't condemn Hamas.

Hell it didn't even mention Hamas.

... Do you guys know how to read? Like, genuinely?

But yeah it didn't pass, Russia was pissed and said:

"The council once again has found itself a hostage to the selfish intentions of the Western bloc of countries."

And has failed as a collective.

Which, yeah.

Can't believe I'm saying this, but I agree with Russia.

Huh...

The current draft resolution they voted on today was lead by Brazil.

This draft condemned "all acts of terrorism, violence and hostilities."

And emphasised that it "rejects and condemns the heinous terrorist attacks by Hamas."

... We get it okay.

It also called for a "humanitarian ceasefire" in Gaza to deliver lifesaving aid to millions in Gaza.

Glad we're on the same page for that.

Their are 15 members that make up the UN Security Council.

Currently they are: Albania, Brazil, China, Ecuador, Gahbon, Russia, Ghana, Japan, the UK, Malta, Switzerland, the US, France, Mozambique and the UAE.

12 voted in favour for this resolution.

2 abstained from voting.

These being the UK and Russia.

The UK, because "the text needed to be clearer on Israel's inherit right to self defence."

... One moment.

Screams into my pillow

... Fucking hate this country...

I'm just glad you guys decided not to vote, keep your mouth shut.

Russia... For obvious reasons, see above.

And 1 voted no.

And you'd think that means the draft would pass.

I mean it's 12 to 1.

... But it won't because the one who said no was the US.

The UN has 5 permanent members on its council, China, France, Russia, the UK and the US.

And if one of these members votes no than no action is taken.

It's called Veto.

And because the US said no.

The resolution can't be passed.

Why did they say no?

Because it didn't mention Israel's right to self defence.

... People are being bombed and shot, being killed by the thousands.

By weapons you supplied them with mind you.

And you're priority isn't giving them humanitarian aid, isn't calling for a ceasefire.

Its whether or not the people oppressing them, who've oppressed them for 75 years.

Who have dropped 6000 bombs on them in one week.

You're bothered about whether or not they have the right to self defence.

Their blood is on your hands.

... Get your fucking priorities in order.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Julian Borger and Lorenzo Tondo at The Guardian:

The UN general assembly has voted overwhelmingly to back the Palestinian bid for full UN membership, in a move that signalled Israel’s growing isolation on the world stage amid global alarm over the war in Gaza and the extent of the humanitarian crisis in the strip. The assembly voted by 143 to nine, with 25 abstentions, for a resolution called on the UN security council to bestow full membership to the state of Palestine, while enhancing its current mission with a range of new rights and privileges, in addition to what it is allowed in its current observer status. The highly charged gesture drew an immediate rebuke from Israel. Its envoy to the UN, Gilad Erdan, delivered a fiery denunciation of the resolution and its backers before the vote. “Today, I will hold up a mirror for you,” Erdan said, taking out the small paper shredder in which he shredding a small copy of the cover of the UN charter. He told the assembly: “You are shredding the UN charter with your own hands. Yes, yes, that’s what you’re doing. Shredding the UN charter. Shame on you.”

The Palestinian envoy, Riyad Mansour, pointed out the vote was being held at a time when Rafah, the southernmost town that is last haven for many Gazans, faced attack from Israeli forces. “As we speak, 1.4 million Palestinians in Rafah wonder if they will survive the day and wonder where to go next. There is nowhere left to go,” Mansour said. “I have stood hundreds of times before at this podium, often in tragic circumstances, but none comparable to the ones my people endured today … never for a more significant vote than the one about to take place, a historic one.” Friday’s resolution was carefully tailored over the past few days, diluting its language so as not to trigger a cut-off of US funding under a 1990 law. It does not make Palestine a full member, or give it voting rights in the assembly, or the right to stand for membership of the security council, but the vote was a resounding expression of world opinion in favour of Palestinian statehood, galvanised by the continuing bloodshed and famine caused by Israel’s war in Gaza.

Even before the vote in the assembly on Friday morning, Israel and a group of leading Republicans urged US funding be cut anyway because of the new privileges the resolution granted to the Palestinian mission. The US mission to the UN, which voted against the resolution, warned that it would also use its veto again if the question of Palestinian membership returned to the security council for another vote. “Efforts to advance this resolution do not change the reality that the Palestinian Authority does not currently meet the criteria for UN membership under the UN charter,” the mission’s spokesperson, Nathan Evans, said. “Additionally, the draft resolution does not alter the status of the Palestinians as a “non-member state observer mission”. The other nations which voted against the resolution were Argentina, Czechia, Hungary, Israel, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau and Papua New Guinea. The UK abstained.

According to the resolution, the Palestinian mission will now have to right to sit in the general assembly among other states in alphabetical order, rather than in its current observer seat at the back of the chamber. Palestinian diplomats will have the right to introduce proposals and amendments, they can be elected to official posts in the full chamber and on committees, and will have the right to speak on Middle Eastern matters, as well as the right to make statements on behalf of groups of nations in the assembly. But the resolution also makes plain that “the state of Palestine, in its capacity as an observer state, does not have the right to vote in the general assembly or to put forward its candidature to United Nations organs.”

The UN General Assembly voted 143-9 with 25 abstentions in favor of backing a bid to make the State of Palestine its 194th member and to grant more privileges as an observer state.

Further, the UNGA recommends that the UN Security Council reconsider the matter to grant the State of Palestine full membership. The US is likely to veto it.

Sadly, the US (along with 8 other countries such as Israel, Czech Republic, and Argentina) voted no in order to protect Israel Apartheid interests.

[noctomania]

“National Archives - Palestine - National Security Council. Central Intelligence Agency. (09/18/1947 - 12/04/1981). - This film is a Columbia Broadcasting Service (CBS) documentary with Mike Wallace on the Palestinian leadership and their use of paramilitary organizations, such as Black September and the Palestine Liberation Organization, to promote terrorism in Israel. - DVD Copied by IASL Scanner Thomas Gideon. - ARC 643907 / LI 263.346 “ 

Publication date: 1976

watch time: 20min