The Chinese and Russian delegations at the United Nations on March 22 vetoed a U.S.-led resolution that expressed a need for a cease-fire in the Israel–Hamas war in the Gaza Strip.
The U.S. delegation had announced the U.N. Security Council resolution early last week. A draft version of the resolution was presented before the 15-member council on the morning of March 22 and came to a vote, with 11 member nations in support, three against, and one abstaining.
China and Russia are among the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and thus have veto power over any measure before the body. Any single veto can block a resolution from moving forward.
The northern African country of Algeria, which does not have veto power, was the third country to vote against the resolution. The South American country of Guyana abstained from the vote.
The U.S. delegation has used its veto power to block three Gaza cease-fire resolutions previously presented to the U.N. Security Council since the start of the conflict. Russia and China had supported those prior cease-fire proposals.
Explaining his veto decision on March 22, Russian U.N. Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said this latest U.S.-backed cease-fire resolution does not explicitly order a cease-fire but merely states that such a cease-fire is “imperative.” Mr. Nebenzia said this language is “not enough” and the council must “demand a cease-fire.”
What Would the US Resolution Have Done?
According to a U.N. summary, the U.S. resolution “makes imperative an immediate and sustained ceasefire,” states that Israel and all other armed groups in the conflict must comply with international law and protect humanitarian workers, and calls for expanded humanitarian assistance in Gaza. The U.N. summary states that the resolution also directly condemns “all acts of terrorism including the Hamas-led attacks of 7 October, the taking and killing of hostages, murder of civilians, sexual violence and ... the use of civilian buildings for military purposes.”The U.S.-backed resolution demands that the Hamas terrorist group allow humanitarian organizations access to all hostages that it’s still holding in the Gaza Strip.
The U.S.-led U.N. Security Council resolution comes about as the United States and some Middle Eastern nations are engaged in a separate set of direct cease-fire negotiations. Those negotiations appear to be focused on a limited six-week cease-fire, although the Biden administration has said that the offer could provide a framework for a more prolonged pause in the conflict. Although Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may be willing to pause the fighting, he has not backed away from his wartime goal to completely eradicate Hamas.
Nate Evans, a spokesperson for the U.S. Mission to the U.N., said the resolution was “an opportunity for the council to speak with one voice to support the diplomacy happening on the ground and pressure Hamas to accept the deal on the table.”
NTD News reached out to the U.S. State Department for more details about the cease-fire resolution but did not receive a response by press time.
Algerian U.N. Ambassador Amar Bendjama criticized the United States for vetoing its own cease-fire proposal in February, which he said could have saved thousands of innocent lives in the Gaza Strip. Mr. Bendjama insisted that the Algerian delegation had offered some amendments to the new U.S.-backed effort and acknowledged that some of his country’s proposals had been accepted, but he said the latest draft still fell short.
China Pushes Alternative Cease-Fire Framework
Following the March 22 vote, U.S. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield accused China and Russia of opposing the U.S.-led resolution for purely “cynical” and “political” reasons. She specifically criticized China and Russia for refusing to condemn Hamas for the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks and allegations that Hamas members have committed acts of sexual violence. She also alleged that the two countries were refusing to support the U.S.-led resolution specifically because it was drafted by the U.S. delegation.Chinese Ambassador Zhang Jun said on March 22 that China is supporting a different draft resolution that “is clear on the issue of a cease-fire.”
Ms. Thomas-Greenfield acknowledged that an alternative resolution is in the works but said “that text fails to support sensitive diplomacy in the region.” She said the alternative resolution could also give Hamas an excuse to walk away from the cease-fire deal the U.S. side has already been pressing it to accept.
“If that alternative resolution comes up for a vote and does not support the diplomacy happening on the ground, we may once again find this council deadlocked,” Ms. Thomas-Greenfield said. “I truly hope that that does not come about.”
