UN Gaza ceasefire motion finally passes, as US shifts stance

After more than five months of bloodshed, the UN Security Council has finally passed a resolution calling for an “immediate ceasefire” in Gaza, after the US toughened its stance towards Israel and refrained from vetoing the motion for the first time.

As expected, Washington’s abstention this afternoon has intensified the rift between Israel and its staunchest ally. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was quick to blast Washington’s “clear retreat” and, in protest, has cancelled his plan to send an Israeli delegation to Washington this week. 

Today’s resolution – which all other 14 members of the security council, including the UK, voted in favour of – demands “an immediate ceasefire for the month of Ramadan”, set to finish on 9 April. It adds that the pause in fighting should lead to a “lasting sustainable ceasefire”.

Netanyahu hit out at the text this afternoon, declaring: “It gives Hamas hope that international pressure will allow them to accept a ceasefire without the release of our hostages.”

The much-debated wording of the resolution demands the immediate release of hostages as well as an immediate ceasefire. However, it does not make the ceasefire dependent on hostage release, a link the US has previously insisted on. This prior insistence has seen the US veto three previous ceasefire resolutions. 

Russia and China – both Permanent UN Security Council members with veto powers – have refused to support the two diluted resolutions put forward by Washington as an alternative. Last Friday, both countries blocked the more recent US-drafted resolution from passing, objecting to its “weak” language which called for “an imperative for an immediate ceasefire” as opposed to an “immediate ceasefire” itself. 

Such disagreements have left the Security Council at an impasse since October, unable to agree on any ceasefire call, until today. That the resolution disagreement has turned into a stand-off between the US on one side and Russia and China on the other is also a reminder that there are always vested national interests at play, guiding these council votes.

Today, it was Washington that backed down. While not content enough with the terms to actually vote in favour of the resolution, it succumbed to global pressure to, at the very least abstain, amid looming famine in Gaza and an evergrowing death toll. 

Israel’s offensive has killed over 32,000 Palestinians, according to the Gaza’s Health Ministry. The Hamas-run agency does not differentiate between civilians and combatants in its count, though it claims women and children make up two thirds of the dead.

And Israeli intelligence officials estimate that Hamas is still holding around 130 hostages captive inside Gaza, 32 of whom are thought to be dead. Roughly 91 are Israeli or dual nationals, eight are Thai, one is Nepali, and one is French-Mexican.

Will today’s resolution actually change anything? 

It is a non-binding resolution, meaning neither party is under any obligation to pay attention to it. The more immediate impact is always going to come from talks unfolding in Qatar on an actual ceasefire and hostage release.

Though that’s not to say the motion doesn’t hold any significance. It will certainly have consequences for Israel’s relationship with the US, and is a strong signal of Washington’s growing disapproval over its ally’s war objectives. While this disapproval could moderate Israel, a fallout could end up having the exact opposite effect. 

The Israeli delegation, heading to Washington prior to today’s fallout, was due to discuss Israel’s planned offensive in the city of Rafah in Gaza – an offensive that the Biden administration, along with every other UN security member, has vocally opposed.

Washington will no longer have a chance to persuade the delegation to rethink a full ground invasion of a town, where over half of Gaza’s 2.3 million residents are sheltering.

Last week, Anthony Blinken, the US Secretary of State, warned that a military ground operation in Rafah would intensify the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and “risks further isolating Israel around the world and jeopardising its long-term security and standing”. 

But Netanyahu – insisting that the town is the last major Hamas stronghold – retorted that Israel would “do it alone” if necessary.

Washington will hope it has called his bluff.

Write to us with your comments to be considered for publication at letters@reaction.life