In a vain effort to press the Biden administration to drop its opposition to calling for a halt to the fighting, the foreign ministers of Egypt, Jordan, the Palestinian Authority, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey were all in Washington on Friday.
Along with the vote, the Arab diplomats’ mission served to shift responsibility more squarely onto the United States for protecting Israel from growing demands to stop the airstrikes that are killing thousands of Palestinian civilians.
Ambassador Nicolas De Rivière of France, a veto-wielding permanent council member who supported the resolution, lamented its lack of unity and pleaded “for a new, immediate and lasting humanitarian truce that should lead to a sustainable cease-fire.”
The council called the emergency meeting to hear from Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who for the first time invoked Article 99 of the U.N. Charter, which enables a U.N. chief to raise threats he sees to international peace and security.
Guterres said he raised Article 99 — which hadn’t been used at the U.N. since 1971 — because “there is a high risk of the total collapse of the humanitarian support system in Gaza.” The U.N. anticipates this would result in “a complete breakdown of public order and increased pressure for mass displacement into Egypt,” he warned.
And Louis Charbonneau, U.N. director at Human Rights Watch, said that by providing weapons and diplomatic cover to Israel “as it commits atrocities, including collectively punishing the Palestinian civilian population in Gaza, the U.S. risks complicity in war crimes.”
The original article contains 1,194 words, the summary contains 248 words. Saved 79%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
It omits why the U.S. vetoed it, which is that no one was willing to condemn Hamas or address how a cease fire would only encourage Hamas to carry out more attacks against Israel because they have shown no desire to end their attacks. No one has presented any support to find and stop Hamas attacks, only for Israel to end their attacks.
So a cease fire would only last as long as the next Hamas attack.
Edit: downvoted for sharing the U.S. side. Interesting. Anyone have a solution for stopping Hamas let alone actually condemning them in a movee to stop Israel’s attacks?
So a cease fire would only last as long as the next Hamas attack.
Which we’ve literally observed several times before where Israel will sign a cease fire and hours later Hamas will attack… A ceasefire at this point is just signing up Israel for extra deaths and saves no one else.
Edit: For you morons downvoting me. I suggest you actually do some searches on who ended each ceasefire on all previous signed ceasefires.
Lmao. Sure if you ignore the fact that Israel has never stopped committing acts of war. How can you have peace while one side is blockading the other? It’s one of the oldest acts of war there is. But you just ignore that. You just ignore the peaceful protests that the IDF shoots at. You just ignore the settler violence that gets a slap on the wrist if anything at all. You ignore Israel assassinating doctors and teachers merely because they had a Hamas party card.
Then when Hamas and other Palestinians resort to the only thing they’ve been left Israel puts on a big Pikachu face. This is an old story. Repeated all throughout the colonial age. And Israel is nothing but a modern colony.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
In a vain effort to press the Biden administration to drop its opposition to calling for a halt to the fighting, the foreign ministers of Egypt, Jordan, the Palestinian Authority, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey were all in Washington on Friday.
Along with the vote, the Arab diplomats’ mission served to shift responsibility more squarely onto the United States for protecting Israel from growing demands to stop the airstrikes that are killing thousands of Palestinian civilians.
Ambassador Nicolas De Rivière of France, a veto-wielding permanent council member who supported the resolution, lamented its lack of unity and pleaded “for a new, immediate and lasting humanitarian truce that should lead to a sustainable cease-fire.”
The council called the emergency meeting to hear from Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who for the first time invoked Article 99 of the U.N. Charter, which enables a U.N. chief to raise threats he sees to international peace and security.
Guterres said he raised Article 99 — which hadn’t been used at the U.N. since 1971 — because “there is a high risk of the total collapse of the humanitarian support system in Gaza.” The U.N. anticipates this would result in “a complete breakdown of public order and increased pressure for mass displacement into Egypt,” he warned.
And Louis Charbonneau, U.N. director at Human Rights Watch, said that by providing weapons and diplomatic cover to Israel “as it commits atrocities, including collectively punishing the Palestinian civilian population in Gaza, the U.S. risks complicity in war crimes.”
The original article contains 1,194 words, the summary contains 248 words. Saved 79%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
The bot fails to present both sides of the argument.
???
It omits why the U.S. vetoed it, which is that no one was willing to condemn Hamas or address how a cease fire would only encourage Hamas to carry out more attacks against Israel because they have shown no desire to end their attacks. No one has presented any support to find and stop Hamas attacks, only for Israel to end their attacks.
So a cease fire would only last as long as the next Hamas attack.
Edit: downvoted for sharing the U.S. side. Interesting. Anyone have a solution for stopping Hamas let alone actually condemning them in a movee to stop Israel’s attacks?
Well one idea would be to stop occupying Palestine. You know, their one wish list item they’ve had for their entire 40 years of existence.
What you are saying is the US vetoed it because they accept the false dichotomy in the Israeli narrative of the situation.
Oh no is this poor bot being antisemetic? :(
Just missing context, which is important and why we shouldn’t rely on bots for getting all the news that matters.
Yeah, I would agree if this comment had REALLY been about the bot’s performance. Instead it turns into ass kissing Israel.
Which we’ve literally observed several times before where Israel will sign a cease fire and hours later Hamas will attack… A ceasefire at this point is just signing up Israel for extra deaths and saves no one else.
Edit: For you morons downvoting me. I suggest you actually do some searches on who ended each ceasefire on all previous signed ceasefires.
Lmao. Sure if you ignore the fact that Israel has never stopped committing acts of war. How can you have peace while one side is blockading the other? It’s one of the oldest acts of war there is. But you just ignore that. You just ignore the peaceful protests that the IDF shoots at. You just ignore the settler violence that gets a slap on the wrist if anything at all. You ignore Israel assassinating doctors and teachers merely because they had a Hamas party card.
Then when Hamas and other Palestinians resort to the only thing they’ve been left Israel puts on a big Pikachu face. This is an old story. Repeated all throughout the colonial age. And Israel is nothing but a modern colony.