US veto thwarts UN Gaza ceasefire resolution despite Guterres’ dramatic appeal

The UN Security Council met this Friday to discuss a proposed resolution for a humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza presented by the United Arab Emirates on behalf of the Arab countries of the organization, and co-sponsored by another hundred members. The convening of the highest UN body came at the behest of Secretary-General António Guterres, who on Wednesday resorted to Article 99 of the founding Charter to try to force a humanitarian ceasefire to alleviate the catastrophic situation in the Strip and the suffering of the civilian population. Guterres’ gesture, infrequent in the history of the organization and unprecedented in his mandate, sounded like a last resort to prevent the definitive collapse of the Palestinian enclave, but US opposition to any option that sounds like a ceasefire derailed his initiative. The text received 13 votes in favor and one abstention, that of the United Kingdom, in addition to the US negative vote.

Despite the Secretary General’s dramatic appeal, reiterated on Friday, recalling that it is impossible to delay action any longer, the proposal reached the vote effectively dead, with the U.S. having previously stated its intention not to support any new measures on the conflict. To be adopted, any Council resolution requires at least nine votes in favor and no vetoes from the five permanent members: United States, Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom. The outcome of the vote revealed the correlation of forces, the same that has been blocking executive action by the body in charge of ensuring world peace and security since the war in Ukraine began (in this case, because of Russia’s veto).

In earlier discussions throughout the morning, the objections of the U.S., which like Israel is convinced that a ceasefire would only favor Hamas, and the U.K. had become clear. In their opening remarks, the two countries proposed replacing the language calling for a ceasefire with, respectively, calling for “another urgent humanitarian truce” and encouraging “efforts to restore humanitarian pauses”. These are roughly the same semantic quibbles — truce, pause, buffer, humanitarian corridor, etc. — that have held the Council hostage since the war began two months ago. Both the United Kingdom and the United States proposed adding a mention of condemnation of the Hamas attacks of October 7. It was not added to the text put to the vote.

The final draft was amended to state that both Palestinian and Israeli civilians must be protected in accordance with international humanitarian law and to demand the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages. The United States abstained last month to allow the Security Council to adopt a resolution calling for a pause in the fighting, the first after four failed attempts and several weeks of war. A seven-day truce — during which Hamas released hostages and humanitarian aid was increased to Gaza — expired on Dec. 1.

The food is running out

Guterres reminded the 15 Council members, whom he thanked for immediately convening the meeting following his call on Wednesday, that food is running out in Gaza. He cited the latest data from the UN World Food Program, according to which 83% of households in the southern Strip are adopting extreme consumption strategies to survive. He also detailed the ravages of two months of bombardment on civilian infrastructure, as well as the exhaustion of hospitals. As he did in his exceptional appeal on Wednesday, Guterres put the two balance sheets of damage on the Palestinian and Israeli sides next to eachother, not forgetting a specific mention of the Hamas atrocities of October 7. The Secretary General is in the crosshairs of Israel, which has called for his resignation, after asserting at the end of October that the Gaza war did not come out of nowhere, but after 56 years of suffocating occupation.

Guterres has put his prestige and diplomatic credibility on the line by trying to move the Council to action, although some analysts believed his proposal had a chance of going through. “Critics are right that secretaries general rarely use Article 99 to ask the Security Council to act, and when they do, there has been little change in the course of the brutal violence,” George A. Lopez, professor emeritus of Peace Studies at Notre Dame University in Indiana and an expert on the U.N., explained Thursday. “But by invoking Article 99, the secretary-general intends to nudge the five permanent members from their non-opposition to resolution 2713 three weeks ago, which called for refraining from depriving the civilian population of the Gaza Strip of basic services....” That resolution, the Council’s first after four failed attempts, went through thanks precisely to the US abstention.

Lopez pointed to a confluence of factors that, in his opinion, could have favored Guterres’ bid: Ecuador, representing the global south and outside the polarization of the P5, as the quintet of permanent members is called, serving as the Council’s monthly president; the United Arab Emirates rushing through its last month on the Council (the 10 non-permanent members are elected for a two-year term), while Israel’s supporters among the P5 privately insist to it that without a humanitarian ceasefire it faces universal condemnation. “This may be the best chance to achieve some relief and protection for the beleaguered Palestinian population,” Lopez concluded. Friday’s vote turned his predictions into a dust.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition