The UN's Choreography of Inaction

When it comes to Israel and Gaza, the Biden administration and Security Council are dancing in circles

credit: UN Photo

I originally intended to write today about the growing power of the global youth vote in the wake of elections in Indonesia and Pakistan – not to mention the influence of the Gen Z vote here in the United States. But today's failed United Nations Security Council vote calling for a ceasefire in Gaza made me so frustrated, I felt the need to write about it. I will write the youth story later this week.

Now to the United Nations. In the arena of international politics, where tragedy and farce often share the same stage, the Security Council's latest performance in the Israeli-Palestinian saga deserves a special mention. Not for its novelty, but for its adherence to a time-honored tradition of diplomatic déjà vu, complete with the Council lamenting the tragedy yet somehow surprised by the plot.

Another time-honored cliché is that diplomacy is a “dance.” President Joe Biden, in a role he never auditioned for but seems born to play, finds himself in a diplomatic tango with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The music is a composition of mixed messages, veto threats, and resolutions that read more like wishful thinking than actionable plans.

Biden seems hesitant to call Netanyahu's bluff—especially as he threatens to move on the southern Gaza city of Rafah without a clear plan for civilian evacuation. Rafah is now home to more than 1.4 million people who have fled south to avoid Israel’s military offensive, and even Germany’s foreign minister warned that an offensive would be a “humanitarian catastrophe in the making.”

In diplomacy, as in dance, there's a fine line between leading and following. Currently, the Biden administration appears to be doing neither, stuck in a loop of reactive measures and cautious statements. Biden's frustration with Netanyahu is palpable, yet his reluctance to fully leverage the considerable tools at his disposal, including the United Nations, is perplexing.

Today was the third time the US has vetoed a UN Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. To date, the United States has used its Security Council veto 46 times since 1945 to protect Israel from critical resolutions. A UNSC resolution was passed in late December, but it was roundly criticized by human rights organizations and others for being a “watered down” version of the original proposal in order to get the U.S. vote – a move Amnesty International called “disgraceful.”

The continued US veto has prompted the General Assembly to pass a pair of resolutions calling for a cease-fire, to which the US also voted no. They are non-binding, meaning the international community can’t use force to implement them, but the last resolution in December was supported by an overwhelming majority of the 193-member body, receiving 153 votes. That should give you an idea of where the international community stands on the conflict.

This time, the Biden administration is trying to be too cute by half, suggesting a temporary ceasefire while simultaneously trying to avoid stepping on Netanyahu's toes. The proposed U.S. draft resolution, calling for a "temporary ceasefire as soon as practicable," reads less like a strategy and more like a hopeful sigh, a diplomatic shrug in the face of an intractable conflict.

But let's not single out Washington. The United States asked for a delay of today’s vote of the Algerian-led text to seek more time for hostage negotiations, which was rebuffed. And in the past, both the UN Security Council and the General Assembly have refused to accept American amendments to the text that sought to add language condemning Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack or reference to the hostages and could have garnered Washington’s support. So in the end, nothing was accomplished except some grandstanding, a lot of hand-wringing, and further evidence that the UN Security Council is the nightclub where good intentions go to die.

Yet, amidst this stalemate, a glimmer of hope remains. Not in the grand gestures or the vetoed resolutions, but in the possibility of a unified approach. Imagine if Washington, alongside its partners on the Security Council, crafted a resolution that kept everyone’s eyes on the prize. One that not only aimed for an immediate cessation of hostilities but also laid down a concrete plan for humanitarian aid delivery into Gaza and the secure release of hostages.

This resolution would call for a collaborative international effort to ensure the safe passage and distribution of aid, alongside a monitored process for hostage release, underpinned by guarantees for the security of all parties involved. Furthermore, it would set the stage for a comprehensive ceasefire agreement, with clear mechanisms for enforcement and monitoring, thereby preventing further escalation.

Before you call me naive, such an effort would have everyone invested in the outcome. By securing unanimous support, such a resolution could present a united front that even Israel might find difficult to dismiss. More importantly, it could serve as a catalyst for a broader dialogue, paving the way for discussions on a sustainable post-war reconstruction of Gaza and reigniting conversations around a two-state solution. This approach would not only address the immediate crisis but also offer a glimpse into a future where both Israelis and Palestinians turn the page on this sad, ugly chapter of war.

And for the love of God, please add in some language that the Hamas attack on Israel is against the principles of the United Nations itself. Call me crazy, but if a country can’t condemn the heinous attack and murder of innocent civilians, the taking of hostages, including children, and the rape and torture of women from any country, they don’t deserve to be members of the United Nations, let alone vote on the Security Council.

In the end, diplomacy, like any dance, requires partners willing to move in unison towards a common goal. It's high time for the United States and the UN Security Council to find that rhythm, or risk the music stopping on their watch.