UN Security Council To Vote On Resolution Calling For Humanitarian Pauses And Corridors In Gaza

The UN Security Council is scheduled to vote on a resolution calling for urgent and extended humanitarian pauses and corridors throughout the Gaza Strip in the Israel-Hamas war.

After four failed attempts, the UN Security Council has scheduled a vote on a resolution that would call for "urgent and extended humanitarian pauses and corridors throughout the Gaza Strip" in the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas.

The Draft Resolution

The final draft of the resolution represents a watering down of language from a "demand" to a "call." It also drops a demand for "the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages held by Hamas and other groups" to a call. The resolution, sponsored by Malta, was put to a vote after lengthy negotiations, and several diplomats have expressed their expectation that it will be adopted. For the resolution to pass, it requires nine "yes" votes from the 15-member council and no veto by any of the five permanent members: the US, Russia, China, Britain, and France.

Absence of Cease-fire Mention

It is noteworthy that the draft resolution makes no mention of a cease-fire, nor does it refer to Hamas' surprise attack on Israel on October 7, which resulted in the deaths of around 1,200 people and the taking of 240 hostages. Additionally, it does not mention Israel's retaliatory airstrikes and ground offensive in Hamas-ruled Gaza, which, according to Gaza's health ministry, has led to the deaths of over 11,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children.

Legal Binding and Practical Implications

While UN Security Council resolutions are legally binding, in practice, many parties often choose to ignore the council's requests for action. Richard Gowan, UN director for the International Crisis Group, points out that the Security Council has called for cease-fires in conflicts ranging from the Balkans to Syria, with little or no impact. The Security Council, tasked with maintaining international peace and security, has been paralyzed by internal divisions since the war began, particularly between China and Russia, which want an immediate cease-fire, and the United States, which has called for humanitarian pauses but opposes any mention of a cease-fire, a stance strongly supported by its close ally, Israel.

Humanitarian Pauses and Corridors

The draft resolution calls for humanitarian pauses and corridors throughout the Gaza Strip for a "sufficient number of days" to allow unhindered access by the UN, Red Cross, and other aid groups to provide water, electricity, fuel, food, and medical supplies to those in need. The pauses should also enable the repair of essential infrastructure and facilitate urgent rescue and recovery efforts.

Previous Attempts and the General Assembly Resolution

In the four previous attempts at Security Council approval, a Brazil-drafted resolution was vetoed by the United States, a U.S.-drafted resolution was vetoed by Russia and China, and two Russian-drafted resolutions failed to secure the minimum "yes" votes. Following these failures, frustrated Arab nations turned to the 193-member General Assembly, where they succeeded in gaining wide approval for a resolution calling for a "humanitarian truce" in Gaza, aiming to lead to a cessation of hostilities between Israel and Hamas. This marked the first United Nations response to the conflict. However, unlike Security Council resolutions, General Assembly resolutions are not legally binding, although they serve as a barometer of world opinion. The vote in the General Assembly was 120-14, with 45 abstentions. Notably, among the five veto-holding Security Council members, Russia, China, and France voted in favor, the United States voted against, and Britain abstained.

Limited Aid Delivery and Brewing Humanitarian Catastrophe

Despite the adoption of the General Assembly resolution on October 27, and Israel's subsequent agreement on November 9 to four-hour pauses, only very limited aid has been delivered to Gaza through the Rafah crossing from Egypt. As a result, a humanitarian catastrophe is brewing in the region. Richard Gowan of the Crisis Group emphasizes that the US opposition to a cease-fire provides diplomatic leverage for Russia. While many diplomats believe that Russia's demand for a cease-fire is motivated by cynical reasons aimed at portraying the Americans in a negative light, Moscow's position aligns more closely with the mainstream thinking within the Security Council, making the US stance appear isolated. Gowan suggests that a UN cease-fire call would embarrass Israel without imposing significant constraints, but the US perceives even such a symbolic move as a political risk.