In April 2022, the United Nations Assembly adopted a resolution that became known as the “Veto Initiative,” according to which the General Assembly committed to discussing the rationale for using the veto in the Security Council.

The US administration had resorted to using its veto on February 20, when the UN Security Council met to review the draft resolution submitted by Algeria, which calls for an immediate cessation of fighting in Gaza, ensuring the access of humanitarian aid to the residents of the Strip, and rejecting the forced displacement of Palestinians. Immediately release all hostages.

The vote resulted in 13 members supporting it, with the United Kingdom abstaining from voting, while the United States voted against it.

The use of the veto often leaves the Security Council deadlocked, as is the case with the three previous resolutions to provide aid and demand a ceasefire in Gaza, all of which were rejected by Washington.

Criticism of Washington

General Assembly President Dennis Francis (from the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago) acknowledged the value of the veto initiative, and expressed his regret at the necessity of resorting to it in this case and discussing the rationale for Washington’s use of this right, noting that the situation in Gaza has become “disastrous, unreasonable and shameful.”

Relief organizations around the world stress their concern about the situation in Gaza, and stress that the ceasefire will allow supplies, food and medical care to be safely transported to the area.

However, the United States still refuses to vote in favor of implementing the ceasefire resolution, and instead is acting within the framework of its own negotiations.

Speakers before the General Assembly warned that the United States’ use of its veto power only encourages Israel to continue its crimes against the Palestinian people, stressing that the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip is catastrophic and is getting worse as a result.

Qatar's representative to the United Nations, Sheikha Alia Ahmed bin Saif Al Thani, speaking on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council, said that the use of the veto cost the Council an opportunity to promote international peace and security, and instead, it sent messages of double standards in international relations. She also expressed her concern about " "The worst humanitarian disaster in modern human history."

It strongly condemned Israeli threats to launch a ground military operation in Rafah, as well as measures for the forced displacement of civilians. She also highlighted the efforts made by her country, Egypt and the United States to achieve a ceasefire, as well as the release of detainees and prisoners.

While Algeria's Permanent Representative to the Security Council, Ammar Benjama, highlighted the importance of the draft resolution presented by his delegation in the Council. He explained that the text presented a clear demand, in line with the call of millions of people around the world, for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza.

Consequences of the American decision

During the US veto discussion session, Washington announced that it would propose to the Security Council its own resolution calling for a temporary ceasefire on the condition that the Israeli hostages are released.

The US veto resulted in slowing down the access of humanitarian aid to civilians as the situation in Gaza worsened. Observers considered that the American position increases Washington's diplomatic isolation and further distances it from the rest of its allies.

In a speech before Dartmouth University, Andor Miller, an official at the US State Department, indicated that his country cannot accept a Security Council resolution that “returns the situation to what it was before last October 7th.”

The representative of the United States, Ambassador Robert Wood, Deputy Head of the American Mission to the United Nations, also indicated that his delegation clearly said last month that the resolution presented to the Security Council will not achieve the goal of sustainable peace, and may in fact conflict with it. He added that the decision in itself would not have resulted in a ceasefire.

Source: Al Jazeera