 "Is UN Security Council’s Gaza ceasefire resolution enforceable?")
After 172 days of the Israel-Hamas war, there’s hope beyond the darkness. On Monday, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) demanded for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza after the United States, Israel’s ally which vetoed previous drafts, abstained.
The abstention by the US led to Israel cancelling a high-level delegation visit to Washington, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accusing its ally of “retreating” from a “principled position” by allowing the vote to pass without conditioning the ceasefire on the release of hostages held by Hamas.
On the other hand, other countries welcomed the vote, with elected members of the council applauding it in the council chamber after the vote on Monday.
But what exactly is the resolution and, more importantly, what does it mean for the ongoing Israel-Hamas war? Can it be enforced by law? We get you all the answers.
What’s in the resolution?
On Monday (25 March), the UNSC passed a resolution with a 14-0 vote, demanding for a ceasefire in Gaza.
The resolution called for a truce to lead to a “lasting, sustainable ceasefire” and demanded that Hamas and other militants free hostages seized in the 7 October attack. A BBC report quoting Mark Lyall-Grant, who was the UK ambassador to the UN from 2009 to 2015, said that the resolution meant that Israel was now “under an obligation, essentially, to stop its military campaign for the next 15 days” — the duration of the remainder of the Muslim holy month of Ramzan, which the text stipulated for the ceasefire.
Impact Shorts
More ShortsThis resolution was sponsored by Algeria with Amar Bendjama, the representative of the nation, saying: “The Palestinian people have been suffering terribly for five months. This bloodbath has been going on too long. It’s our obligation to put an end to it. Finally, the Security Council is taking responsibility.”
In favour: 14
— United Nations (@UN) March 25, 2024
Against: 0
Abstention: 1
The UN Security Council has adopted a resolution demanding an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and the immediate, unconditional release of all hostages.https://t.co/nOBuQOkxnj pic.twitter.com/QkZ7J7wHgi
It’s important to note here that four similar resolutions have failed, three of them vetoed by the US and another last week by Russia and China. Earlier, the US had supported calls for a ceasefire only if they were linked to the release of the hostages.
When asked why they abstained from the voting of this resolution and not the prior ones, US secretary of state Antony Blinken said that as the final text of the resolution didn’t include “key language we view as essential, notably a condemnation of Hamas, we could not support it”.
The US ambassador to the UN, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, echoed similar sentiments. She said that said that while the latest resolution included edits requested by the US, Washington could not vote yes because it “did not agree with everything.”
“A ceasefire could have come about months ago if Hamas had been willing to release hostages,” the ambassador said, calling on member states and the Security Council to demand that Hamas “accepts the deal on the table.”
“Any ceasefire must come with the release of all hostages,” she added.
How did Israel react?
Israel is unhappy with the vote as well as US abstention . Israel prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office called US’ failure to veto the resolution as a “clear retreat” from its previous position and would hurt war efforts against Hamas as well as efforts to release Israeli captives held in Gaza.
Netanyahu also announced that he would no longer send a delegation to Washington requested by President Joe Biden to discuss Rafah .
In fact, Israel’s defence minister Yoav Gallant, who is already in Washington, in his first statement after the vote said that Israel has “no moral right to stop the war in Gaza”.
מתחיל את ביקורי בוושינגטון, במסר הברור שאעביר ליועץ לביטחון לאומי סאליבן ומזכיר המדינה בלינקן:
— יואב גלנט - Yoav Gallant (@yoavgallant) March 25, 2024
אין לנו זכות מוסרית לעצור את המלחמה בעזה עד אשר נחזיר כל החטופים לביתם. עצירת המלחמה בעזה לפני הכרעה ברורה מסכנת את ביטחון ישראל ועלולה לקרב אותנו למלחמה מצפון. pic.twitter.com/QY6U0YPoJJ
A Times of Israel report quoted him as calling the UN decision “scandalous”. “We will act against Hamas everywhere, even in areas where we have not been yet,” he was quoted as saying by Times of Israel. “We will create an alternative to Hamas so that the IDF can complete its mission.”
What did other countries say?
While Israel expressed its displeasure at the vote and its ally, the US’ abstention, other countries such as France, Germany welcomed the decision, calling it a significant point in the ongoing war.
The UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, said the resolution “must be implemented”, adding that failure to do so would be “unforgivable”. Even European Commission’s president, Ursula von der Leyen, said, “Implementation of this resolution is vital for the protection of all civilians.”
France urged for work to begin on a “permanent” ceasefire. “This crisis is not over. Our council will have to remain mobilised and immediately get back to work,” said French UN representative Nicolas de Riviere. “After Ramzan, which ends in two weeks, it will have to establish a permanent ceasefire.”
Human rights groups and NGOs such as Amnesty International and Oxfam also hailed the resolution, calling it “long overdue.” Oxfam’s UN representative Brenda Mofya told AFP that the resolution should provide “much-needed respite from the relentless and devastating Israeli violence”.
What’s the significance of the resolution?
What does the passage of such a resolution mean on the ground, though? According to Al Jazeera’s diplomatic editor James Bays, this is a “significant development”.
“After almost six months, … the vote, almost unanimous,” has demanded a lasting and immediate ceasefire in Gaza.
For Israel, a continuation of the war despite the resolution would lead to a discussion in the international community about violating the Security Council’s decision.
A senior official was quoted as telling Ynetnews that the resolution puts international pressure on Israel and not on the other side. “Today’s resolution gives Hamas hope that international pressure will force Israel to accept a ceasefire without the release of our hostages, thus harming both the war effort and the effort to release the hostages,” said an Israeli official.
Are UNSC resolutions binding?
Now that the UNSC has voted in favour of an immediate ceasefire, is it binding on member nations? Under the United Nations Charter, Security Council resolutions are legally binding on its 193 member nations, though they are often flouted.
As per the UN website, if the UN Security Council has decided anything – to impose sanctions on a country or force a ceasefire in a conflict zone – the order must be carried out. No one can ignore the collective will of the P5 (permanent members of the UNSC), which actually determines the decisions of the UN Security Council.
Earlier while passing the resolution, the South Korean representative questioned the legal validity of the resolution on the basis that it does not contain the word “decide” and was not adopted under Chapter VII.
However, according to an article in Verfassungsblog, the text of the resolution adopted is unequivocal and strong: it explicitly demands an immediate ceasefire for the month of Ramzan as well as the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.
While it is now understood that the resolution is legally binding, the issue at hand is the enforcement of it. It ultimately falls to the parties of the conflict to heed the Security Council’s call, and to the Council itself to enforce its requests.
And if the recent past is any indication of the future, then there’s little to celebrate. However, as Al Jazeera noted that a resolution being passed after five vetoes in itself is significant.
With inputs from agencies
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
