Mediator Qatar said on Tuesday that a U.N. Security Council resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire between Israel and Hamas had no immediate impact on talks.
The United Nations on Monday called for a moratorium on hostilities during Ramadan and the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages in Gaza.
Fourteen Council members voted in favor of the resolution, except the United States, which abstained.
The United States had previously opposed the resolution, but after multiple failed attempts, it decided not to veto it, paving the way for its passage and angering its ally Israel.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said on Tuesday that Hamas had made “delusional” demands that showed the Palestinians were not interested in a deal. Hamas accuses Israel of delaying its bombing of Gaza.
What does this resolution mean?
The resolution is called Resolution 2728proposed by the 10 non-permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, Strict requirements Gaza ceasefire during Ramadan.
In addition to calling for a ceasefire, it also demanded the immediate release of hostages and the delivery of humanitarian aid to Gaza.
However, the Security Council failed to call for a “permanent and sustainable ceasefire” under an amendment proposed by Russia.
Council reject The proposal was adopted with three votes in favor (Algeria, China and the Russian Federation), one vote against (United States), and 11 abstentions.
How was the resolution received?
Arab countries praised the resolution. Algeria’s ambassador said a ceasefire would end the “carnage” in Gaza, while the observer state’s Palestinian ambassador said: “This must be a turning point.”
The representative of Yemen, speaking on behalf of the Arab Group, said the resolution should be seen as a preliminary step towards a binding and permanent ceasefire.
However, Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations condemned the resolution’s failure to condemn the October 7 terrorist attack by Hamas, calling the omission a “disgrace.”
Referring to the music festival targeted by Hamas, he said: “Civilians, wherever they live, deserve to enjoy music in safety and security, and the Security Council should have the moral clarity to condemn this horrific act without discrimination. “Militants were involved in the attack, which killed 1,200 people.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres said the resolution “must be implemented” and failure to do so would be “inexcusable”, according to health authorities in the Hamas-controlled enclave. 32,333 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza.
Will the resolution stop the war?
The resolution adopted after 171 days of war in Gaza is binding, but legal experts say U.N. resolutions require interpretation, are difficult to enforce and are often ignored.
As a result, Dr. Haim Abraham, a law lecturer at University College London, said it was difficult to say whether the vote would have any real impact on Israel’s military operations in Gaza.
“While Security Council resolutions are binding, they are open to interpretation to varying degrees and can be challenging to implement,” Dr. Abraham told us I.
He added that Israel’s legal team may argue that it has found an interpretation of the resolution and public international law that allows the country to continue its military activities while complying with international law.
“It is doubtful that international courts and academics would reach the same conclusion,” he said.
Dr. Russell Buchan, professor of international law at the University of Reading, noted that Israel must abide by the resolution According to Article 25 of the Charter of the United Nations.
“Because Security Council Resolution 2728 ‘requires’ an immediate ceasefire, it can be considered a Security Council ‘decision’ and therefore binding,” Dr Bakken told reporters. I.
“Therefore, states’ claims that the resolution is ‘non-binding’ are baseless and an attempt to undermine the Council’s authority and circumvent its will.”
If Israel does not comply with the resolution, it will constitute a violation of international law, have a “serious” reputational impact on the defaulting party, and may subject Israel to submit claims to international tribunals such as the International Court of Justice or the International Court of Justice, Dr. Bakken added.
Follow us on Google news ,Twitter , and Join Whatsapp Group of thelocalreport.in
