
Ramadan Ceasefire: UN Peace Resolution Consideration
The United States has cautioned that the proposal, which calls for a humanitarian cease-fire in Gaza during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, might harm efforts to end hostilities between Israel and Hamas. The UN Security Council is scheduled to vote on the resolution. The resolution, which was proposed by the ten elected council members, has the backing of China and Russia, which rejected a resolution sponsored by the United States that called for “an immediate and sustained cease-fire” in the Israel-Hamas conflict in Gaza.
The Role of the UN security council
In a statement, the 22-nation Arab Group at the UN urged the 15 council members to act swiftly and unitedly in support of the resolution that would stop the carnage, protect human life, and prevent more pain and devastation for people. There should have been a cease-fire long ago. The council is anticipated to cast a vote on the resolution.
A UN envoy said that the vote, which was originally supposed to take place on Saturday morning, was postponed early on Saturday. Many members are holding out hope that the most powerful body in the United Nations, tasked with upholding global peace and security, will demand an end to the war that broke out on October 7th, when the Hamas rulers in Gaza launched an unexpected attack into southern Israel, killing about 1,200 people and kidnapping about 250 more.
The proposed resolution
Since then, two resolutions on the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza have been voted on by the Security Council nevertheless, none of them have called for a cease-fire. The Gaza Health Ministry reports that during the war, more than 32,000 Palestinians had died in Gaza. It states that women and children account for two-thirds of the deaths but does not distinguish between fighters and civilians in its tally. Famine is imminent in northern Gaza and that a further escalation of the conflict might drive half of the 2.3 million people living there to the verge of starvation. Gaza is also facing a catastrophic humanitarian disaster.
A quick humanitarian cease-fire for Ramadan is demanded in the brief resolution up for voting, with the goal of “leading to a permanent sustainable cease-fire.” It also highlights the pressing need to safeguard people and provide humanitarian aid across the Gaza Strip, calling for “the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.” The resolution’s existing language, according to US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield, “fails to support sensitive diplomacy in the region,” she told the council afterwards. Even worse, it may provide Hamas with a justification to back out of the agreed upon agreement.
Potential impact and challenges
Three resolutions calling for a cease-fire in Gaza have been vetoed by the US; the most recent resolution has support from the Arab world. Thirteen members voted in favor of the proposition, with one abstaining. A resolution proposed by the US that called for stops to the combat to provide supplies, safeguard people, and stop equipping Hamas was vetoed by China and Russia. They stated it did not represent appeals for a cease-fire made throughout the world. Once more, they rejected the US resolution, claiming it was vague and did not directly call for a halt to hostilities, as many throughout the globe believed.
The peculiar phrase stating that the Security Council determines the imperative of an immediate and sustained cease-fire was a major problem. It wasn’t an obvious demand or “call” to end hostilities in the wording. The Security Council decision turned into another confrontation between powerful nations embroiled in contentious conflicts overseas, with the US coming under fire for not being firm enough on its friend Israel despite growing tensions between the two.
Call for international cooperation:
Prior to the voting, Russian Ambassador to the UN Vassily Nebenzia stated that Moscow is in favor of an early cease-fire but expressed disapproval of the resolution’s weakened phrasing, calling it philosophical in nature and unfit for a U.N. resolution.
He charged that US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield and Secretary of State Antony Blinken had deliberately misled the international community by advocating for a cease-fire. Nebenzia said, This was kind of an empty rhetorical exercise. The American product has become extremely political, with the only intention of pandering to the people by hinting at a possible cease-fire in Gaza. and to guarantee Israel’s impunity, while their crimes in the draft remain unpunished.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Eleven of the fifteen members of the council, including Algeria, the Arab representation, voted in favor and three against. Guyana was the only one to abstain.