On October 18, the United States blocked the adoption by the United Nations Security Council of a resolution on the conflict between Hamas and Israel. A decision which shows that the American President, Joe Biden, is part of the continuity of the historic American position at the United Nations (UN), which consists of almost unwavering support for the Jewish state.
The text, carried by Brazil, condemned both the “heinous” attacks by Hamas and “the violence against civilians” perpetrated by the Israeli army in Gaza. He proposed “humanitarian pauses” to allow aid to be delivered to the enclave’s residents. But the Americans ultimately vetoed it, citing the lack of mention of “Israel’s right to self-defense” and signaling their desire to favor “field diplomacy”, in the middle of their president’s visit to Tel Aviv.
“It’s a missed opportunity for the Council, because it was a good text,” regretted the French representative to the UN, Nicolas de Rivière, who had just voted in favor of the resolution. “This draft resolution was not at all dangerous for Israel: it only asked for a humanitarian corridor, without condemning Israeli colonization,” considers Joan Deas, director of the Institute for Mediterranean Middle East Research and Studies ( Iremmo) specialist in the Palestinian question. Two days earlier, another resolution carried by Russia, calling for a “ceasefire” in Gaza, had been rejected, not only by the United States but also by France and the United Kingdom, notably because that she did not condemn the Hamas attack.
In the Security Council, a text must receive the approval of at least nine of the fifteen member states to be adopted. Each country has one vote, which it can use to approve, reject or abstain on the proposed text.
However, the five permanent members of the Council (France, United States, United Kingdom, Russia and China) have a right of veto, which allows each to block the adoption of the text. This is what allowed the United States to block the October 18 resolution.
The Americans have not always blocked resolutions critical of Israel. For example, they voted for resolution 242 calling for the withdrawal of the Israeli army after the Six-Day War (1967), or resolution 338 calling for a ceasefire after the outbreak of the Yom Kippur War (1973).
The first major American veto on this issue came on September 10, 1972, when the United States refused to condemn Israel’s reprisals against activists of the Palestine Liberation Organization after the attack by the Palestinian Black September commando against Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympic Games.
Since that date, the United States has used its veto power forty-three times to block the adoption of resolutions critical of Israel, each time going it alone, even within the Western camp. Which shows, according to Joan Deas, that “the United States still favors bilateral diplomacy with Israel rather than multilateral and international negotiations.”
The American position has nevertheless experienced brief periods of inflection. Although the United States has not approved a resolution critical of the Israeli government for a long time, it has abstained on several occasions. The last occurrence dates back to the end of Barack Obama’s term: on December 23, 2016, the Democratic president’s abstention allowed the adoption of Resolution 2334, which condemned Israeli colonization in the West Bank. This is the last text on the Israeli-Palestinian question adopted by the Security Council to date.
Indeed, with the arrival of Donald Trump at the White House, the United States renewed its unwavering support for Israel, vetoing two draft resolutions criticizing the policies of the Israeli government, in 2017 and 2018. Joe Biden continued the same policy by opposing the October 18 resolution.
Beyond the United States, China and Russia have also used their blocking power within the Security Council, by opposing several draft resolutions of American origin on the Palestinian question. On October 25, Beijing and Moscow vetoed a text defended by the United States, which called for humanitarian pauses, while recognizing Israel’s right to defend itself against Hamas.
