This resolution for an immediate ceasefire is a path to sustainable stabilization in the region. However, not everyone benefits from stabilization, as became clear once again during the vote on the resolution: 14 members of the UN Security Council supported the proposal, while 1 member took a different stance. Which country is this?
The Exile Who Was Not Exiled
No surprise there: the issue of excluding this member from the UN Security Council has been raised multiple times, and the foreign policy of this state is recognized as the greatest threat to global security at the moment. So, it’s Russia.
Openly voting against an immediate ceasefire by its representative, of course, Russia could not do, as it would require direct demands for Russia to justify its position. Therefore, Russia opted to abstain.
The essence of the resolution lies in the fact that the Israeli side accepted the proposal from the US President of May 31, which outlined points whose implementation by both sides of the conflict would lead to an immediate ceasefire. Now it remains for HAMAS to support it, and in order to officially express the position of the UN Security Council, the resolution needs to be approved by a majority of countries.
To Be or Not to Be
Several steps have already been taken in this direction. US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield directly appealed to HAMAS to accept the ceasefire proposal. The aforementioned resolution is evidence of the UN’s serious intentions. As soon as Israel and HAMAS accept it, the fire will cease literally in that same moment.
The agreement is three-fold:
- Release of hostages from Israel (120 individuals held by HAMAS), for which hostilities will cease for a minimum of 1.5 months.
- Commencement of negotiations between the two sides.
- Final ceasefire with the signing of relevant documents.
It is worth noting that the representative from the People’s Republic of China voted for the resolution, but this did not stop him from criticizing its essence. He finds the text “ambiguous” and one that does not clarify the mechanism for implementing agreements.
He could have been accused of belonging to the Eastern Axis of political confrontation, had almost the same not been stated by the representative of Israel. He further added that “nonsensical and endless negotiations” could arise, in which Israel would not participate. These words sound particularly strange considering that Biden emphasizes: Israel has willingly accepted this proposal.
