The UN Security Council in session. The UNSC has five permanent members (victors of WW2 – UK, USA, China, Russian Federation and France – the last being much disputed as it collaborated with the Nazis during most of the European war) and 10 members, elected by the general assembly (UNGA) serving 2-year terms. Currently these are Angola, Egypt, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Senegal, Spain, Ukraine, Uruguay and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of). UNSC was scheduled to hold a special debate on Israel’s illegal settlements in the West Bank on October 8th but this was replaced by an emergency debate about the relentless catastrophe in Syria. It should now be held next week. See second item.
Will Obama lift the veto?
By Sara, Palestine Briefing
October 09, 2016
The gap between the election of the next US president on November 8 and her (or his) inauguration on January 20 is 73 days. That is the gap in which the outgoing president has a relatively free hand to do what he wants with only a minimum of consequences.
Some commentators have believed for some time – and the Israeli government now fears they are right – that Barack Obama will use this opportunity to lift the US veto and allow a resolution calling on Israel to stop building settlements to pass in the United Nations Security Council.
Until the middle of September it looked as if Obama had decided not to make any dramatic last-minute attempt to get the peace process restarted. He tried twice and failed twice. As an Israeli commentator said:
“The one who promised ’yes we can’, was revealed at the end of two terms as not only one who cannot, but one who doesn’t even try. He appears to have thrown in the towel.”
But in the last few weeks there have been a number of hints that Obama may try one last time to reset the bearings of the Middle East peace process with the US joining in a major international effort to put sufficient pressure on the Israeli government to change course.
The first hint came in the Lotte New York Palace hotel where Obama held a 30-minute talk with Netanyahu during the UN General Assembly. Obama raised “profound concerns about the corrosive effect” of settlements on the two-state solution.
“The Jewish people weren’t born to rule another people.”
Why would he raise this issue if he was just drawing attention to his own failure? If the most powerful man in the world highlights an issue, it could be because he intends to do something about it.
One week later Obama found himself in Jerusalem, leading the tributes to the former Israeli president Shimon Peres.
Peres fought in the Haganah, started the settlements, launched Israel’s nuclear programme and presided over the occupation, so Palestinians have no fond memories of him. But towards the end of his life he became – in his public speeches if not in his actions – a leading “dove”.
Obama was not only the only speaker to mention the “unfinished business of peace” but he made a point in his tribute of quoting Peres’ most “dovish” remarks: “The Jewish people weren’t born to rule another people.” “We are against slaves and masters.” “True security comes from making peace with your neighbours.”
Most tellingly, he quoted Peres’ statement that Israel “will be best protected when Palestinians have a state of their own”.
Few people noticed that in his peroration he drew parallels between the early days of American democracy and today’s Israeli democracy. Both had flaws, he said. He didn’t specify what the flaws were, but there can be little doubt that he was talking about slavery and the occupation of Palestine.
Netanyahu’s response – as so often to Obama’s criticisms – was to announce the building of a new settlement. The Israeli Supreme Court has ordered the evacuation of an illegal outpost in the West Bank and instead of relocating the settlers to Israel, Netanyahu announced that he will decant them into 300 new homes to be built elsewhere in the West Bank.
According to Israeli ministers this is just “building a few dozen homes” for the residents of the outpost and the 300 new homes “do not constitute a new settlement”, but Obama’s spokesmen have not bought these excuses.
We are against slaves and masters
White House press secretary Josh Earnest said: “I guess when we’re talking about how good friends treat one another, that’s a source of serious concern.”
State Department spokesman Mark Toner said it was “disheartening” that while the world mourned Shimon Peres, the Israelis were busy advancing plans “that would seriously undermine the prospects of the two-state solution he so passionately supported.”
The Israeli press have said it was “especially insulting” coming just a few weeks after President Obama signed a deal giving Israel $38 billion in military aid over 10 years.
Payback will start on Friday October 8th when the Security Council holds a special debate on Israel’s illegal settlements in the West Bank initiated by the Palestinians. The usual US defence of Israeli actions is expected to be muted, if not entirely absent.
There will be no vote on Friday, but there can be a vote on a French resolution on the settlements which is expected any time after Tuesday November 8th – the date of the US elections. The US veto – which has protected the Israelis at least 40 times in the past – may be absent this time.
The last time the veto was used was February 18th 2011 in a similar motion condemning Israeli settlements which was supported by 14 of the 15 countries on the Security Council (including the UK). Only the US using its veto against – even though the motion was in line with US policy at the time.
This time Obama is being urged to lift his veto from many different directions – including the New York Times who say the “best idea would be to have the United Nations Security Council, in an official resolution, lay down guidelines for a peace agreement, covering such issues as Israel’s security, the future of Jerusalem, the fate of Palestinian refugees and borders for both states”.
True security comes from making peace with your neighbours.
Both Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump have asked the President not to sign any “one-sided” motions against Israel, but in between election and inauguration they could press but not prevent him from doing so, and once the Security Council has passed the resolution they will not be able to revoke it.
Since the US veto was first used on September 10th 1972, Israel has been shielded by the US from any effective action to bring it into line with international law and with United Nations resolutions. If Obama ends Israel’s 44 years of immunity and joins with the international community in putting pressure on Israeli to comply with international law, it will be no inconsiderable legacy.
UN Security Council to Hold Special Meeting on Israeli Settlements
Israeli officials concerned that meeting would be especially critical and prepare ground for anti-settlement resolution.
Barak Ravid, Haaretz premium
October 06, 2016
The UN Security Council is to hold a special meeting next week on Israeli settlement building in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
The Arria Formula* meeting will not involve a vote and is expected to be open to the media. Foreign Ministry officials fear it will turn into an international demonstration of condemnation of the government’s policy in the territories and set the stage for an anti-settlement resolution in the Security Council after the U.S. elections.
The meeting will be held on October 14 at the behest of Egypt, Venezuela, Malaysia, Senegal and Angola, with a push from the Palestinians. Arria Formula meetings allow all council members to initiate debates on subjects of specific interest to them. Attendance is not mandatory.
In May the group held a Security Council meeting to discuss international protection for the Palestinians in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza.
Jerusalem officials say they believe all Security Council members will attend the meeting, stressing that the Palestinians and the host nations succeeded in exceptional fashion to open the session to the press. Jerusalem officials fear that in the wake of the U.S. condemnation of the decision to establish a new settlement for the Amona evacuees, Security Council members will level particularly harsh criticism. They fear the atmosphere from the informal meeting could affect the Security Council’s monthly meeting on the Middle East on October 28.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas told the UN General Assembly last month that the Palestinians would renew their efforts to pass a Security Council resolution condemning the settlements and declaring them illegal. Arab UN ambassadors met in New York on Wednesday to discuss possible articles for a resolution, though Arab states have not reached a consensus on a draft resolution.
Senior Israeli officials and Western diplomats believe the Palestinians are unlikely to push seriously for a Security Council resolution on the settlements until after the November 8 U.S. election. Foreign Ministry and Prime Minister’s Office officials fear that President Barack Obama will advance Security Council resolutions on the settlements or the principles for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. A senior Israeli official said this issue was at the center of a Foreign Ministry meeting on Thursday.
The official, who requested anonymity because of the issue’s sensitivity, said some senior Foreign Ministry officials presented more pessimistic scenarios. One figure suggested that the latest State Department and White House condemnations express a mood that could lead to U.S. steps in the Security Council after the election.
* “Background Note on the “Arria-Formula” Meetings of the Security Council Members
From Working Methods Handbook, United Nations Secretariat
2002
The “Arria-formula meetings” are a relatively recent practice of the members of the Security Council. Like the informal consultations of the whole of the Security Council, they are not envisaged in the Charter of the United Nations or the Security Council’s provisional rules of procedure. Under Article 30 of the Charter, however, the Council is the master of its own procedure and has the latitude to determine its own practices.
The “Arria-formula meetings” are very informal, confidential gatherings which enable Security Council members to have a frank and private exchange of views, within a flexible procedural framework, with persons whom the inviting member or members of the Council (who also act as the facilitators or convenors) believe it would be beneficial to hear and/or to whom they may wish to convey a message. They provide interested Council members an opportunity to engage in a direct dialogue with high representatives of Governments and international organizations — often at the latter’s request — as well as non-State parties, on matters with which they are concerned and which fall within the purview of responsibility of the Security Council.
The process is named after Ambassador Diego Arria of Venezuela, who, as the representative of Venezuela on the Council (1992-1993), initiated the practice in 1992. Although Ambassador Arria, as the then President of the Security Council, had himself convened in 1992 as an “Arria-formula meeting”, the recent practice suggests a preference for such initiatives to be taken by members of the Council other than the President. The convening member is also chairing such meetings.
The “Arria-formula meetings” differ from the consultations of the whole of the Council in the following respects:
- Such informal gatherings do not constitute an activity of the Council and are convened at the initiative of a member or members of the Council. Participation in such meetings is for individual members to decide upon and there have been instances when some members chose not to attend.
- They are held in a Conference Room, and not in the Security Council Consultation Room.
- The convenor issues a written invitation to the other fourteen members, indicating the place, date and time of the “Arria-formula meeting”, as well as the name of the party to be heard, by a fax from his/her Mission rather than by notification from the Secretariat.
- They are not announced in the daily Journal of the United Nations.
- Unless so invited, members of the Secretariat are not expected to attend, except for interpreters and a Conference Officer.
Source: Informal Non-Paper of 25 October 2002, prepared by the United Nations Secretariat.
