UN Gaza Aid Resolution Draws Criticism as Insufficient, Meaningless
TEHRAN (Tasnim) – The United Nations Security Council faced backlash for its resolution on Gaza aid, deemed 'woefully insufficient' and 'nearly meaningless' due to its delayed passage, weakened language, and absence of a ceasefire call in the Israeli war on Gaza.
Despite finally being adopted with 13 in favor, none against, and the United States and Russia abstaining, the resolution only urged steps "to create the conditions for a sustainable cessation of hostilities," falling short of explicit ceasefire advocacy. It stressed the necessity for parties to allow unhindered humanitarian aid delivery to Palestinian civilians.
Delays and tough negotiations aimed at appeasing Washington, which previously vetoed a resolution for an immediate ceasefire, preceded this resolution. However, Alan Fisher of Al Jazeera highlighted the historical trend of some countries, ignoring UNSC resolutions.
According to Palestinian officials, over 20,000, mostly civilians, including many women and children, have been killed since the commencement of Israel’s offensive on October 7.
While humanitarian organizations welcomed the call for more aid, they found the resolution lacking in addressing the urgent needs of Gaza's 2.3 million inhabitants, emphasizing widespread displacement, looming famine, and escalating health crises.
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres expressed hope for improved aid delivery but stressed that a humanitarian ceasefire remains the vital starting point to alleviate Gaza's dire situation.
Leaders from organizations such as the WHO, Oxfam America, Doctors Without Borders (MSF), and Amnesty International echoed the need for an immediate ceasefire and decried the resolution's dilution, citing its minimal impact on Gaza's civilian lives.
Critics, including experts like Tamer Qarmout and Ardi Imseis, lamented the Security Council's inefficacy and politicization, highlighting the failure to prioritize civilian well-being and resolve the conflict, attributing it to the US veto power and political allegiances overshadowing humanitarian needs.
Tamer Qarmout, an assistant professor at the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, criticized the UN's irrelevance in resolving conflicts, emphasizing its politicization due to powerful nations' influence, especially those with veto power. He expressed skepticism about the UN's ability to resolve the war in Gaza, highlighting its growing irrelevance and politicization.
Ardi Imseis, an international law assistant professor at Queen’s University, condemned the UNSC's failure to ensure international peace, attributing it to the US favoring Israel. Imseis highlighted the dire consequences faced by civilians in Gaza due to the ongoing Israeli war, emphasizing their vulnerability and suffering amidst the international impasse.
Following the vote, the Palestinian resistance movement criticized the resolution, asserting it fails to address the pressing needs of the besieged Palestinians in the Strip, condemning the US's efforts to weaken the resolution.
In a statement released on Saturday, the Iranian Foreign Ministry described the resolution as a “positive but insufficient” measure.
Russian envoy Vassily Nebenzia criticized the diluted language in the resolution, considering it "toothless" and "neutered," expressing concern that the softened stance, calling for the creation of "conditions for a sustainable cessation of hostilities," might allow Israel to continue its operations unchecked.
