This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/23/us-abstention-allows-un-to-demand-end-to-israeli-settlements

The article has changed 10 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
US abstention allows UN to demand end to Israeli settlements US abstention allows UN to demand end to Israeli settlements
(35 minutes later)
The United States has delivered a blow to its relations with Israel after abstaining in a vote that allowed the UN security council to demand an end to Israeli settlements. The United Nations security council has adopted a historic resolution demanding a halt to all Israeli settlement in the occupied territories after Barack Obama’s administration of refused to veto the resolution and instead chose to to abstain.
The vote came in defiance of pressure from the president-elect, Donald Trump, as well as Israel and several US senators who urged Washington to use its veto. The resolution passed by a 14-0 vote on Friday night. Loud applause was heard in the packed security chamber when the US ambassador, Samantha Power, abstained.
The resolution was put forward at the 15-member council by New Zealand, Malaysia, Venezuela and Senegal a day after Egypt withdrew it under pressure from Israel and Trump. They then called on the US to veto the measure. The resolution says Israel’s settlements on Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, have “no legal validity” and demands a halt to “all Israeli settlement activities,” saying this “is essential for salvaging the two-state solution”. The resolution reiterated that Israeli settlement was a “flagrant violation” of international law.
It was adopted with 14 votes in favour, to a round of applause. It is the first resolution the security council has adopted on Israel and the Palestinians in nearly eight years. The vote was scheduled at the request of four countries - New Zealand, Malaysia, Senegal and Venezuela - who stepped in to push for action after Egypt put the draft resolution on hold on Thursday.
The US abstention was a relatively rare step by Washington, which usually shields Israel from such action, and is regarded as a parting shot by the outgoing president, Barack Obama, who has had an acrimonious relationship with Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. The decision by the US overturned a years-long policy of US of vetoing resolutions critical of Israel, underlining the tension between Obama and the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, who had made furious efforts to prevent a US abstention.
The resolution demanded that Israel “immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem” and said the establishment of settlements by Israel had “no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law”. A resolution requires nine votes in favour and no vetoes by the United States, France, Russia, Britain or China to be adopted.
A resolution needs nine votes in favour and no vetoes by the United States, France, Russia, Britain or China to be adopted. Explaining the US decision to abstain, Power said the Israeli settlement “seriously undermines Israel’s security”, adding : “The United States has been sending a message that the settlements must stop privately and publicly for nearly five decades.”
The Palestinians want an independent state in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, areas that Israel captured in a 1967 war. Israel disputes that the settlements are illegal and says their final status should be determined in talks on Palestinian statehood. The last round of US-led peace talks between the Israelis and Palestinians collapsed in 2014. Power said the US did not veto the resolution because the Obama administration believed it reflected the state of affairs regarding settlement and remained consistent with US policy.
The passage of the resolution changes nothing on the ground between Israel and the Palestinians and will probably be largely ignored by the incoming Trump administration, but it was more than merely symbolic. “One cannot simultaneously champion expanding Israeli settlements and champion a viable two-state solution that would end the conflict. One had to make a choice between settlements and separation,” Power said.
It formally enshrined the international community’s disapproval of Israeli settlement building and could spur further Palestinian moves against Israel in international forums. The US decision was immediately hailed as a victory by Palestinian officials, but Israel’s energy minister, Yuval Steinitz, seen as a mouthpiece for Netanyahu said the United States had abandoned Israel.
Trump, who called for a veto along with Netanyahu, is likely to be a staunch supporter of Netanyahu’s rightwing policies. He named a hardline pro-Israel ambassador and vowed to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. “This is not a resolution against settlements, it is an anti-Israel resolution, against the Jewish people and the state of the Jews. The United States tonight has simply abandoned its only friend in the Middle East,” Steinitz told Channel Two News.
A senior Israeli official said on Thursday that there was “zero chance” the Israeli government would abide by the measure. Under the UN charter, UN member states “agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the security council.” The vote will be seen as a major defeat for Netanyahu, who has long had a difficult relationship with the Obama administration.
Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, said after the vote: “It was to be expected that Israel’s greatest ally would act in accordance with the values that we share and that they would have vetoed this disgraceful resolution. I have no doubt that the new US administration and the incoming UN secretary general will usher in a new era in terms of the UN’s relationship with Israel.” Netanyahu had tried to prevent the vote by appealing to the president-elect, Donald Trump, who will not be sworn in until late January, and to the Egyptian president, Abdel Fatal al-Sisi.
While the resolution is largely symbolic in some senses, it will be seen as empowering an increasingly tough EU over Israel and will give pause to international companies who have interests in the occupied territories.
Originally drafted by Egypt, the original version of the resolution had been supposed to go to a vote on Thursday night, but was withdrawn by Sisi under pressure orchestrated by Israel.
Following the vote Trump, tweeted: “As to the UN, things will be different after Jan 20.”
Pro-Israel senators and lobby groups also weighed in following the vote. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), one of the most influential pro-US lobby groups, said it was “deeply disturbed by the failure of the Obama administration to exercise its veto to prevent a destructive, one-sided, anti-Israel resolution from being enacted by the United Nations security council”.
It also pointedly thanked Trump for his attempts to intervene: “AIPAC expresses its appreciation to president-elect Trump and the many Democratic and Republican members of congress who urged a veto of this resolution.”