The controversial anti-Israel resolutions: What you need to know about the document of contention

Скандальная антиизраильская резолюция: Что необходимо знать о документе раздора

1. What is a UN security Council resolution? Text No. 2334 while officially the UN has not released. There are only interpretations of foreign policy departments of the countries-members of the security Council. In his “tweet” the Mission of Ukraine to the UN published an infographic, which displays the essence of the resolution.

Скандальная антиизраильская резолюция: Что необходимо знать о документе раздора

What’s in the document? At its core, is nothing new. The international community recognizes Israel as the country that has occupied Palestinian territory in the West Bank and Jerusalem. The UN’s position on Jerusalem reflected in the resolutions 252 (1968), 267 (1969), 271 (1969), 298 (1971), 465 (1980) and 476 (1980). It was also based on resolution 242 of 22 November 1967, demanded the withdrawal of Israeli troops from territories occupied as the result of the six day war, in accordance with the interpretation of the UN includes the territory of East Jerusalem.

Israel in 1980 declared Jerusalem as its indivisible capital. In response, the UN security Council resolution 478 condemned the Israeli decision. Notice, then, the resolution was adopted by votes of 14 members of the Council with one abstention. Of course, it was the United States. Everything is exactly as it is now. And just as Israel did not accept the decision of the Council, in the same angrily criticized by the international community. “From 1004 BC, when king David established Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish nation, continued in the city’s permanent Jewish presence, as the spiritual attachment to it,” says Israel’s position regarding the affiliation of the ancient city.

Related news: Netanyahu: anti-Israel resolution – part “Swan song of the old world”

Resolution 2253 UN General Assembly on 4 July 1967, any actions by Israel that change the status of Jerusalem, declared invalid, and UN security Council resolution 237 of 14 June 1967, determined that the situation in all occupied by Israel in the 1967 territories, including East Jerusalem, the applicable articles of the 4th Geneva conference on the protection of civilian persons in time of war. For example, article 47 prohibits the annexation of territory, and article 49 — population transfer of the occupying power into the territory. Israel has not recognized the applicability of the Geneva Convention to the occupied 1967 territories, arguing that after the termination of the British mandate there is no legal sovereignty over these territories has not been established, and opposed the adoption of appropriate resolutions in the Security Council and the General Assembly.

In time there were many resolutions on Israeli actions in the middle East. Specifically, the settlements of the latter was adopted by the security Council in 1980.

About 500,000 Jews live in 140 settlements built after 1967 in the West Bank of the Jordan river and East Jerusalem.

2. The impact of the document? They are actually a little. The UN security Council reaffirmed its former position, Israel said that on concessions will not go. From the point of view of the UN, the settlements in the West Bank illegal, from the point of view of Israel is completely legitimate. The failure of Israel to implement the requirements of UN security Council resolutions also contributed to the fact that the decisions of the UN security Council are only Advisory, as submitted, with reference to Chapter VI of the UN Charter “the Peaceful settlement of disputes”. In Article 36 of this Chapter, paragraph 1, defines the competence of the Security Council in action for this article: “the Security Council may, at any stage of a dispute of the nature referred to in article 33 or of a situation of like nature, recommend appropriate procedures or methods of adjustment”.

Скандальная антиизраильская резолюция: Что необходимо знать о документе раздора

Panorama Of The West Bank

The resolution does not call for the imposition of sanctions on Israel. According to Israeli media, there is only the obligation to report every three months about the situation with the construction in the settlements. While in Israel fear that the resolution theoretically allows to apply against the Israeli action in the international Hague Tribunal for violation of international law if a settlement recognized from his point of view is illegal, and opens the way for the introduction of restrictions against settlements and their products.

3. Why the United States blocked a resolution? The United States abstained, although he had the right, under the Charter, the UN security Council not go forward with the document, as has been done more than once.

A draft resolution condemning the actions of Israel were put to the vote by New Zealand, Malaysia, Venezuela and Senegal after Egypt – the original initiator of the document – removed it from the ballot under strong pressure from Israel and the elected President of the USA of Donald trump.

The permanent representative of Israel to the UN, Danny Danon, said that his country expected the US veto on “this shameful resolution.” He also expressed confidence that “the new US administration and the future UN Secretary-General will open a new era in the relations between the UN and Israel.”

News: Avakov: Ukraine Voting for anti-Israel resolution in the UN need to be considered at the Cabinet meeting

Hitherto, the security Council adopted a number of resolutions on Israel and the Palestinians, however, the vote on 23 December was first successful for nearly eight years. In 2011, the U.S. vetoed a similar resolution, citing that it would hurt negotiations on a middle East settlement. USA often blocked anti-Israel resolutions. But not this time. The document was adopted to loud applause by the participants.

Since 1967, the security Council was adopted 47 resolutions on the subject. During the administration of George W. Bush nine resolutions against Israel, was voted, under the administration of bill Clinton – three, and under Barack Obama – until one. Why so far? As write the Israeli and Palestinian media, in January 2017, US Secretary of state John Kerry intends to prepare the documents that will become the Foundation for Palestinian-Israeli negotiations and the future peace Treaty between the parties. Allegedly on the basis of this document will be a Palestinian state in the 1967 borders. The creation of a Palestinian state will be preceded by the exchange of territories, whereby 80% of the settlements will remain under the jurisdiction of Israel. There is a version, not yet supported by official statements.

Скандальная антиизраильская резолюция: Что необходимо знать о документе раздора

Barack Obama was not a friend of Israel, is well known. His purpose, the administration of the 44th President of the United States has put peace settlement in the middle East through concessions to the Palestinians, forcing the parties to negotiate and condemnation of Israeli settlement activity. However, all peacekeeping Obama in the middle East have failed – Libya destroyed, Syria destroyed, virtually destroyed Iraq, Egypt still cannot find stability after the revolution and the military coup, Turkey Washington argued. With the Netanyahu government Washington at loggerheads. During Israeli Prime Minister’s visit to Washington, Netanyahu humiliating for the White house welcomed the Republicans in Congress and in his speech in Parliament harshly criticized the position of Obama. The attempt of the President of the United States before leaving to make the last chord threatens to be self-defeating. Israel will not go on the proposed plan and establishes connections with Donald trump, who criticized the security Council resolution and made it clear that under his administration “there will be different”.

It is interesting that Democrats in Congress are not too happy about this step of Obama. The new leader of the Democrats in the Senate Chuck Schumer, who will assume the post after the inauguration of Donald trump, before the vote was called on the Obama administration to use its veto power.

“Israel rejects this shameful anti-Israel UN resolution and does not comply with its requirements,” – said in response to the statement, Netanyahu’s office.

Netanyahu said that he intends to work together with the elected President of the United States Donald trump to cancel the effect of the UN resolution. Although a mirror resolution to the UN security Council virtually impossible because of the guaranteed veto of Russia and China.

4. Why Ukraine voted “FOR”? This is the most debatable issue in our online spaces. The foreign Ministry expressed its position only a day after the vote.

“For many years, Ukraine is a consistent and balanced position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We advocate the peaceful coexistence of two independent States – Israel and Palestine. The resolution of the conflict must be settled only by peaceful means… … Ukraine has repeatedly condemned Israeli settlement activity as it is contrary to international law. We also condemn the violence and incitement from the Palestinian side,” – said the foreign Ministry. According to diplomats, Israel must stop settlement activity and Palestinian authorities to take effective measures to combat terrorism.

At the same time, there is an unofficial version. The alleged Kiev was forced to vote against Israel because of US demands. Netanyahu also adheres to this version. “According to available information, the resolution, no doubt, was initiated by the Obama administration behind the scenes, prepare the required formulation and adoption,” said Netanyahu at Sunday’s Cabinet meeting.

The Associated Press quoted a senior Israeli policy: “President Obama and Secretary Kerry are behind this shameful step against Israel in the UN.”

News on topic: trump: anti-Israel resolution would complicate the peace

Left unclear is the position of Egypt, who first initiated the resolution, then refused to pay. Supposedly, the President of Egypt Abdul Fattah al-Sisi spoke with trump and he insisted that Egypt did not do this step. There were four other countries. Moreover, these States abstained, what Israel took as a “Yes”vote.

Could Kiev have also to abstain? Of course, this would be the best solution. As he writes in his blog, Israeli journalist and historian Shimon Briman, “Israel did not expect that Ukraine will support him in the vote on the furious resolution on 23 December. But we hoped that Ukraine at least will refrain – as did the United States.”

Скандальная антиизраильская резолюция: Что необходимо знать о документе раздора

For comparison: five important voting in the UN 2014-2016 years, Israel remained neutral and did not participate in voting four times, but recently voted in support of Ukraine on the resolution on human rights in Crimea, declaring it was occupied by Russia at the UN General Assembly on December 19.

In the network of opinion leaders have started to indicate that the voice of Ukraine in the security Council, even the “AGAINST” won’t solve anything. Really, it wouldn’t. Veto non-permanent members of the security Council don’t have a voice against the resolution would not prevent its adoption. But there is another side of the issue. Ukraine has a large Jewish community, relations between the two countries quickly began to improve, Israel helps a lot in Ukraine as in social projects, and the economy (forthcoming, the free trade agreement), are issued work visas for Ukrainian builders. From a moral side to vote against Israel was wrong. Especially if it was possible to abstain, showing the world community that Ukraine is not contrary to the General position of the UN, but also showing Israel that there is value relations with that country.

It is clear that Kiev was between two fires. The state Department probably demanded to vote IN favour, Israel AGAINST. But the Obama administration goes after a month, it is replaced by a Pro-Israeli administration trump. It would be logical to play in the future. Especially when you consider that trust trump Kiev will have to win from scratch.

5. What will be the consequences? They will be tough. Netanyahu is a hawk and not customized for a compromise. If our foreign Ministry expresses its confidence that “the active and emotional political debate in Israel” will not prevent the relations between the two countries, Netanyahu cancels the visit, to Israel and forbids its Ministers to communicate with the official Kiev.

Breeman writes that Israel has paid for treatment of injured Ukrainian, funded seminars psychological rehabilitation of soldiers and officers of the ATO, have increased the participation of Ukrainians in the international programs of our Ministry of foreign Affairs, closed the Consulate in the Crimea and opened a new honorary Consulate in Lviv. In the fall of 2016 Israel agreed to the arrival of 20 thousand Ukrainian builders. We are currently negotiating the details of an Agreement on free trade zone, which is more beneficial for Ukraine, whose exports to Israel twice Israel’s export to Ukraine. “Many years of hard work, partnerships: Ukraine-Israel were buried under the rubble of the Ukrainian “for” instead of “abstained”. To rake these blockages will be difficult”, – the journalist writes.

According to him, the actions of the Ukrainian political leadership has caused such an angry reaction in Israel, because the day of the discussion of the resolution, Prime Minister Netanyahu personally called Prime Minister Groisman and asked a colleague to influence the vote of Ukraine. “Groysman tried to understand and to change something, but faced with a categorical “no” to Ambassador Yelchenko, and foreign Minister Klimkin. An opinion was expressed by President Poroshenko – they say, Ukraine has no other choice but to join the security Council resolution condemning Israel,” writes the Briman.

Related news: Israel withdraws ambassadors from New Zealand and Senegal of the UN resolution

Netanyahu obviously took this step of Ukraine as a personal insult. To cancel the visit of Prime Minister of Ukraine to Israel – it is a big decision. And very offensive to Kiev. Hung in the air the fate of the FTA with Israel and a number of other beneficial for Ukraine programs. Exchange of slaps to the detriment of Ukraine. Israel already accustomed to not agree with the opinion of the world, but Ukraine can feel very real consequences both financial and political. After joining the law of the trump change of President in France, the elections in Germany, who will remain allies of Ukraine in the international arena?

And about the UN. Netanyahu has suspended funding of a number of UN programs. There are two aspects. First – this decision, the Prime Minister of Israel can only isolate their country, deprived of influence in the organization. Second, by making such statements, Israel casts doubt on the norms of international law (we’re not talking about their fairness, etc.). If in each case all countries will arrange demarches, the UN may soon have to wait for the fate of the League of Nations.

Sergey Zviglyanich