US Abstention from Security Council VotingParting Obama Rebuff of Israel?

--Ziauddin Choudhury
The United States created history by abstaining from Fridays (December 23) voting on UN Security
Council resolution condemning Israel for creating Jewish settlements in the West Bank, and asking it to
stop the settlements. The Security Council passed the resolution 14-0, with USA abstention. The almost
unanimous resolution may not actually deter Israel from continuing with the settlements as such
resolutions affecting Israel would be mostly unenforceable but its significance is immense. This is the
first time in last four decades that USA has not vetoed a UN resolution against ally Israel. In all previous
cases where the UN body has attempted to pass any resolution against Israel, this has been routinely
vetoed by the US, but not in this case.
Some say this US abstention is the last official rebuke that Obama administration could hurl at Israel
before Obama leaves office on January 20. While the World may cheer, but this has dismayed not only
Israel but most Republicans and specially the President-elect Donald Trump. In fact the President-elect
made an all-out effort to stop the Security Council voting by calling upon President Obama to use veto
power, and requesting the Egyptian President to seek postponement of the resolution since Egypt was
the sponsor. But the voting went on because four other non-permanent members of the council
Malaysia, New Zealand, Senegal and Venezuela put it on vote the next day.
The US administration under President Obama has been steadfastly asking Israel to stop building
settlements in the West Bank that had been constantly increasing since 1968 after Israel occupation of
the West Bank. The objectives of the settlement started by Israel were to secure a Jewish majority in the
strategic regions of the West Bank. There are now over 400,000 Jewish settlers spread in 150 or so
settlements in the West Bank, and another 200,000 settlers in Jerusalem.
The US had not officially approved or disapproved the settlements but in discussion with Israel past and
present US presidents had urged upon Israel to stop these calling these as impediments to a peaceful
negotiation between Palestine and Israel. (The international community and the Arab countries had
severely criticized these settlements calling them illegal.) Time to time under different Presidents the
topic has surfaced as a sticky point in arriving at peace between the two adversaries, but no US
administration twisted Israels arms to stop the settlement. Meanwhile, Israel had continued to build
these settlements despite international concern.
The latest spat between US and Israel on the settlement issue came from Israel allowing a new
settlement, one of a string of housing complexes that threaten to bisect the West Bank. US had strongly
urged Israel not to proceed with this, but Israeli authorities bent under pressure from the settlers who
had to be removed from an illegal settlement nearby. Obama administration was particularly upset
because the Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu had not indicated approval of the new settlement when
he visited Israel in September this year a few weeks before this Israeli decision. It was particularly
upsetting for Obama as the US and Israel had signed a lucrative military package earlier.

A UN resolution asking Israel to stop the West Bank settlements has been long overdue. It did not
happen because all previous US administrations in the past, democratic or republican, did not want to
openly chastise its staunch ally in the Middle East. Much as the previous administrations promoted
dialogue for peace between Israel and Palestine, they also knew the powerful political support Israel had
created in the US. Any public display of displeasure with Israel on any issue could be costly in the
domestic politics of the country where Israel has cultivated powerful and wealthy friends. Therefore,
this public spat with Israel by the outgoing US administration is naturally not being viewed well by the
Republicans. Ironically the President-elect, who had once declared during his campaign that he would be
neutral in Israel-Palestine relationship, had been the most critical of this UN resolution adding that
things will be very different for UN after takes office.
The sentiment expressed by the President-elect on the UN resolution captures only a glimpse of changes
to come Israel Palestinian issue and for that matter the entire Middle East after President Obama leaves
office. Donald Trump has already nominated as US Ambassador to Israel who is an open advocate of
Israeli settlement in the West Bank. The President-elect has also made known his intention to move US
embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, a city severely contested by the Palestinian Authority for its own
seat of Government. In fact, the status of Jerusalem has been the thorniest issue in any peace
negotiation between the two rivals. Should Donald Trump follow through his assurance to Israel, this
alone would seriously jeopardize negotiations between Israel and Palestinian Authority.
US abstention in the Security Council voting may prompt a few cheers from the Palestinians and other
countries however ineffective the resolution may be. But the US facilitation of passing of the resolution
through abstention also shows not only Obama administrations exasperation with Israel, it is also an
acknowledgment of Israels critics in the US who seriously disapprove of Israels policies to expand its
territories by browbeating its weaker neighbor. There are hundreds of organizations in the US who
disapprove this policy and continue to mobilize public opinion against the settlements. In the past such
protests did not get a chance to get international support, but last Friday (November 23) they did.
Unfortunately, this may be the last time that USA would ever show such official disapproval of Israel in
an international forum. The next administration has already shown the extra mile it would go in support
of Israel, be it expansion of the settlements or helping Israel move its capital to Israel. It is possible that
with a more overtly friendly ally in the White House and a Republican Congress Israel come January 20,
2017, Israel will feel free to expand its hold over the West Bank, and try to fulfill its goal of making
Jerusalem its capital. But in helping Israel at its bidding will only further jeopardize US relations with the
Middle East and question its role as an honest broker in the elusive peace process in that region.