top of page

The Possibility of Peace: Ceasefire Resolution Passes

25th of March, 2024. The United Nations Security Council is in meeting when 10 non-permanent members of the council table a resolution to call for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. The resolution also demands the release of all hostages in Gaza, and aims to ensure humanitarian access to the city. After 4 failed proposals, none of the 15 permanent members vetoes. With 14 out of 15 permanent members voting in favor and one member abstaining, the resolution passes. This is, or should be, a “turning point” according to the ambassador of the observer state of Palestine in the Security Council. However, the policies of different parties involved in the situation are contradictory.


Since the passage of the resolution, the ambassadors and representatives in the council have had mixed ideas on the situation. The permanent representative of Israel, Gilad Erdan, has expressed dissatisfaction with the resolution and argued that the council “discriminates” among victims by failing to condemn the Nova Music Festival massacre of October while it openly condemned the Moscow concert hall attack. On the other hand, some other ambassadors like Algeria’s have been hopeful of the outcomes of the resolution. Hamas has had a warm outlook on the resolution and stated that they were ready to exchange prisoners with Israel. Israel’s reaction was less positive.



Israel refused to ceasefire, and their defense minister Yoav Gallant stated that he believed they had “no moral right” to stop the war when there were still hostages in Gaza. He openly rejected the idea of a ceasefire, also claiming the absence of certain victory in Gaza could lead to another war up north. This approach was not well-received by the rest of the world, and it became increasingly obvious that Israel was losing allies. A United Nations human rights rapporteur even stated that there were “reasonable grounds” to claim that Israel was committing 3 out of the 5 acts defined to be genocide. Israel’s greatest dispute, however, has been with its previous ally, the United States. The United States had vetoed 3 of the past 4 resolutions, but their position changed when they put forth a resolution demanding a ceasefire in exchange for the release of all hostages on March 22nd. The resolution didn’t pass because it was vetoed by China and Russia. On March 25th, When the U.S. abstained from voting for the resolution demanding a ceasefire,  Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu canceled a scheduled visit to the U.S.. The rising tensions were also noticed when Donald Trump stated that Israel had to be very careful and that it was “losing a lot of support”. The ambassador of the U.S. and permanent member of the Security Council Linda Thomas-Greenfield said that the United States “fully supported the critical objectives” and also pointed out that their proposed resolution from March 22nd was in line with the objectives of the new resolution. However, she also added that Washington “did not agree with everything” and hence could not vote yes although the decision to abstain ultimately led to the resolution’s passing. Later on, she stated that Hamas had already been ready to release the hostages and that a ceasefire could have happened much earlier, also openly accusing the Security Council of slowing down the journey to peace.


Overall, although there is much debate and many different viewpoints on the resolution, many agree that it is a step towards improvement. The resolution even being able to pass without any vetoes is an indication that the desire for peace is getting stronger. As Israel continues to strike, even though Hamas could potentially agree to a ceasefire, they risk losing support from over the world. The Security Council’s resolution, whether it be belated, unaccepted, or controversial, is a step toward peace according to many.



Kommentare


bottom of page