Global Research

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Global Research Fundraising: Stop the Pentagon’s Ides of March

***

After six months of blocking ceasefire resolutions at the United Nations, the US delegation submitted its own draft resolution on Friday ostensibly aimed at stopping the hostilities so humanitarian aid can reach the starving people of Gaza. Unfortunately, the American team linked the proposed ceasefire to the release of hostages and to the repudiation of Hamas which merely restates the Israeli position on a final settlement. The draft resolution also failed to explicitly demand an immediate ceasefire, but inserted deliberately-ambiguous language intended to give Israel sufficient legal flexibility to continue its aggression. In short, the US draft resolution was a cynical hoax concocted by the backers of Israel’s bloody campaign in Gaza that blew up in the US delegations face heaping more shame on the administration and the American people.

The media’s coverage of the ceasefire fiasco has been predictably biased and deceptive. The US delegation did not “call” for an “immediate ceasefire” as has been widely reported in the West. In fact, that was the issue that prompted the Russian and Chinese vetoes. What the draft resolution said was that “an immediate and sustained ceasefire” was “imperative.” There is a world of difference between a resolution that invokes the authority of the UN to ‘demand’ a ceasefire, and one that merely says a ceasefire is necessary. And, it is a difference that senior-level diplomats fully grasp, because in diplomacy, words matter. The words that the US delegation chose, were intentionally chosen to subvert the process, link the ceasefire to a release of the hostages, and to give Israel a green light to continue its military operations until a diplomatic agreement could be reached. The Russian ambassador summed it up like this:

If this resolution were adopted, it would definitively close the debate on the need for a ceasefire in Gaza, give Israel a free hand and condemn Gaza and its entire population to extermination or expulsion.

He’s right, this maliciously-worded resolution was designed to legitimize Israel’s rampage and provide legal cover for future aggression. Here is the excerpt from the US draft resolution that has drawn the most attention and criticism:

(The Security Council) Determines the imperative of an immediate and sustained ceasefire to protect civilians on all sides, allow for the delivery of essential humanitarian assistance, and alleviate humanitarian suffering, and towards that end unequivocally supports ongoing international diplomatic efforts to secure such a ceasefire in connection with the release of all remaining hostages.

And here’s a brief explanation from political analyst Trita Parsi:

The clause does not demand a ceasefire but determines that it is imperative. Its support is not directly for the ceasefire but for the negotiation process the U.S. has been co-leading and whose parameters the U.S. has sought to determine in favor of Israel. The text points out that this effort to secure a ceasefire is “in connection with the release of all remaining hostages. Why the Ceasefire Proposal Failed at the UNSC, Responsible Statecraft

In other words, the draft resolution is not aimed at bringing the hostilities to an end at all but, rather, to transforming the Security Council into another battlefield on which Israel’s bloody war can be waged. So, to dismiss this meticulously-engineered hoax as merely another example of US trickery, vastly understates the real objective of the operation which is to provide legal cover for the killing of civilians. Andre Damon at the World Socialist Web Site summed it up like this:

The cynicism of Biden’s call for a “ceasefire” while continuing to fund and arm the government massacring over a hundred Palestinians every day and starving the entire Gazan population is beyond description. The Biden administration hopes that by proclaiming its support for a “ceasefire” loudly enough, it will make the world’s population forget that it fully supports and enables the US-Israeli “final solution” of the Palestinian question. The Fraud of Biden’s call for a “ceasefire” in Gaza, Andre Damon, World Socialist Web Site

The point we’ve been trying to make becomes clearer when we consider the comments of US ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield who said the following just prior to the voting:

Many of us here share the same goals. First, we want to see an immediate and sustained ceasefire as part of a deal that leads to the release of all hostages which are being held by Hamas and other groups and that will allow much more life-saving humanitarian aid to get into Gaza … By adopting the resolution before us, we can put pressure on Hamas to accept the deal on the table... I urge all council members to vote “yes”; to vote for a resolution that at long last condemns Hamas for its horrific terrorist attacks and sexual violence that makes clear that all civilians ….should be able to live without fear of violence. United Nations News (see video)

Thomas-Greenfield is mistaken; the purpose of the ceasefire is not to resolve the hostage crisis or to “condemn Hamas” or “to put pressure on Hamas to accept the deal on the table.” Those are Israel’s objectives not the Security Council’s. The purpose of the ceasefire is to stop the killing of innocent civilians and to make sure they get the food and medicine they need to survive. Full stop. As we said earlier, the US ambassador is merely parroting the demands of the Israeli government and then characterizing those demands as a ceasefire. Naturally, the Russians saw through this ruse and voted accordingly. Nevertheless, the ploy has succeeded in providing the Biden team with a welcome public relations triumph by making them look like peacemakers. (which is entirely undeserved.)

Without a doubt, the most powerful analysis of Washington’s failed draft resolution was by Russian ambassador Vassily Nebenzia who—once again—revealed himself to be principled statesman with a keen grasp of the issues. Here’s a lengthy excerpt of his comments that (predictably) appear no where in the western media and can only be found on the Kremlin website:

Mr. President,

For six months now, the UN Security Council has been unable to adopt a resolution demanding a ceasefire in Gaza. Time and again, the United States thwarted any attempt to do so by using a veto in cold blood as many as four times.

During that time, we have heard many different excuses from our American colleagues. For example, that it is premature to seek a ceasefire because it is necessary to give space “for Israel’s counter-terrorism efforts”; that the Council should not interfere with Washington’s “effective diplomacy on the ground”; that we should wait until Ramadan, when, they say, an agreement on a cessation of violence will definitely be made.

Now, six months later, when Gaza has been practically leveled to the ground, the US representative says without batting an eye that Washington has finally started to realize the need for a ceasefire. This leisurely thinking process by Washington has cost the lives of 32,000 Palestinian civilians, two-thirds of them women and children.

And even now we see a typical hypocritical show, when in the cloak of a “ceasefire” the United States is trying to sell to the members of the Security Council and the entire international community something else – a vague phrase about “defining the imperative of a ceasefire”. Such philosophy about ‘moral imperatives’ might seem normal in the works of Immanuel Kant, but it’s not going to save the lives of Palestinians. And that is not at all what the mandate of the UN Security Council suggests, which has a unique toolkit to demand a ceasefire and, if necessary, enforce it.

In an official interview to Al Hadath in Jeddah on 20 March, Secretary of State Blinken said, “Well, in fact, we actually have a resolution that we put forward right now that’s before the UNSC that does call for an immediate ceasefire tied to the release of hostages and we hope very much that countries will support that”. However, the US-proposed draft resolution does not make such call. It appears that either the US Permanent Representative to the United Nations or the US Secretary of State is deliberately misleading the international community.

Colleagues,

From the very beginning, it was obvious that the “negotiations” on the draft resolution held by our American colleagues were only meant to (buy) time. All our comments and “red lines” were ignored, as well as the proposals of a number of other delegations….

The US draft is a thoroughly politicized document, which only aims at pulling on voters’ heartstrings before the US elections by throwing them a “bone” in the form of at least some mention of a “ceasefire” in Gaza. The draft also seeks to consolidate US policy in the region through “terrorist labels” and to ensure impunity for Israel, whose criminal actions the draft gives no assessment to.

Let me also stress that the American draft contains a de facto green light for Israel to conduct a military operation in Rafah. At least, the sponsors have tried to make sure that nothing in their draft would prevent West Jerusalem from completing the deadly cleanup of southern Gaza.

That is actually what Washington wants. We already said that we will no longer pass meaningless resolutions that do not demand a ceasefire and lead us nowhere.

This draft must not pass with the majority of UNSC votes in order to send a message that Washington’s not even palliative but devious concepts are unacceptable. It will be extremely strange if those members of the Council (and they are the majority), who realize this and have been saying to us that the US draft is a flawed one, will now raise their hand in favor. If you do so, you will smear yourselves in disgrace.

Think what this will make you look in the eyes of the people of the Middle East and your own countries, if you support this hypocritical endeavor designed to disorient the international community and, in fact, undermine the authority of the Council by rendering it unable to influence the situation on the ground and making it “stay out of White House’s way”. Are you ready to play a part in this shameful show?

Russia will not do this. As a permanent member of the Security Council and one of the founders of the United Nations, we recognize the global historical responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security and cannot allow the Council to become a tool of Washington’s destructive policy in the Middle East. If this resolution were adopted, it would definitively close the debate on the need for a ceasefire in Gaza, give Israel a free hand and condemn Gaza and its entire population to extermination or expulsion.

In our work, we are not guided by what pleases Washington or its satellites who are ready to cast a vote at the US behest, but by what is necessary for the Palestinians and what promotes peace.

We urge the members of the UN Security Council to prevent this and vote against the American draft resolution. Permanent Representative Vassily Nebenzia at the UNSC vote on US-proposed draft resolution on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question, Russian Federation

Perfectly stated.

Bravo, Vassily.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on The Unz Review.

Michael Whitney is a renowned geopolitical and social analyst based in Washington State. He initiated his career as an independent citizen-journalist in 2002 with a commitment to honest journalism, social justice and World peace.

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).  

Featured image is from TUR