Powered by WebAds

Friday, January 09, 2009

Breaking: Security Council 'close' to resolution; Israel: They won't dictate to us; UPDATE: Agreement reached?

Israel Radio reports that the UN Security Council is said to be 'close' to reaching an agreed resolution on Israel's activity in Gaza. It is not clear yet whether the resolution will call for an immediate suspension of fighting and whether it will require Israel to withdraw immediately thereafter.

Any Security Council member can insist on a 24-hour delay after a resolution is introduced, so there may not be a vote tonight. Israel Radio just reported that France is likely to do that to ensure there is no American veto, so Israel will have at least another day to fight.

The foreign ministry is saying that Israel will not withdraw from Gaza until the operation's aims have been attained. We did not invade Gaza to obtain another hudna. There were also complaints that Condi Clueless tricked Israel on this resolution and is supporting something she said she would not support. If that sounds familiar, it should.

JPost adds:
A copy of the draft resolution circulated Thursday afternoon included language calling for an "immediate, durable and fully respected ceasefire" and supporting the efforts by the Egyptians to broker a deal with Hamas. The British proposal also called for "arrangements and guarantees" to prevent illicit trafficking of arms into Gaza and to ensure the re-opening of crossings on the basis of the 2005 agreement between the Palestinian Authority and Israel.

Arab negotiators were pushing for the addition of language calling for an immediate withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza and a lifting of the Israeli blockade on Gaza, both key sticking points.

The British draft also called for the continuation of negotiations on a comprehensive, two-state peace deal between the Israelis and the Palestinians as well as a reconciliation effort between Hamas and the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority.

Israeli officials, meanwhile, said they had not seen any draft resolutions and maintained their opposition to any Security Council action that would put Hamas on the same footing with Israel.

Israel, as a member state, would be legally bound by any resolution in a way that Hamas, operating outside the control of the Palestinian Authority's Fatah leadership and listed as a terrorist organization by the US and Israel, would not - an asymmetry typically not seen in conflicts involving Security Council consideration.

"This is why Israel says it did not want a [Security Council] meeting from the beginning," said Israeli mission spokeswoman Mirit Cohen. "[Hamas] is not part of the UN and you can't compare between a member state and a terrorist organization." [Unfortunately, they do anyway when the member state is Israel. CiJ]
And perhaps this is the place to add that when Israel expelled all the Jews from Gaza in 2005 and withdrew, the plan was that Israel would maintain its presence in the Philadelphi corridor (see the map above). It was Condi Clueless who shoved an 'agreement' to abandon Philadelphi down Israel's throats. Instead, European monitors were put in place. The monitors lived on the Israeli side of the border, and when Hamas took over, they ran away.

By the way, read that last post I linked. It sounds prophetic eleven months later. And that's yet another reason why if you have not done so in the last 24 hours, please vote for my blog, Israel Matzav, as Best Midsize blog in the 2008 Weblog Awards by going here.

Lauren Booth is waiting in the wings if you fail. Heh.


USA Today reports that an agreement has been reached (Hat Tip: NY Nana).
Haaretz says the resolution does not call for an immediate cease-fire, which the Arab League sought, but "[s]tresses the urgency of an immediate, durable and fully respected cease-fire."

The diplomatic accord comes as Israeli envoys went to Cairo, Egypt, and held talks with Egyptian officials about a temporary true put forth by the presidents of Egypt and France. Hamas has not yet agreed to participating, saying it has major reservations about the plan.
If this is correct, it's may not be too bad. It doesn't call for an immediate cease fire. And a cease fire can't really be durable when one side isn't bound by it because it's not a member state. So I'm not sure that this resolution does a whole lot. And Israel Radio says it won't be voted on for another 24 hours.

But the Haaretz article has a HUGE caveat that USA Today just plain missed:
It should be noted, however, that the draft was of 5.15 P.M local time in Israel [That's 10:15 am New York Time! CiJ], and is still subject to further discussion before it is voted on in the Council on Thursday evening.

The draft was composed by the United States, France and Britain. It also expresses "Grave concern at the escalation of violence and the deterioration of the situation in Gaza and southern Israel, in particular the resulting civilian casualties since the failure to extend the period of calm and the firing of rockets into Israel followed by Israeli military operations." [This is good because it makes clear who's to blame. CiJ]

The resolution also calls for security arrangements that will guarantee an end to the smuggling of weapons into Gaza, a key U.S. demand.
And nothing about opening crossings? I'll believe that when I see it.


At 12:55 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What happens if Israel rejects the resolution? Can they do that?

At 1:10 AM, Blogger NormanF said...

They can reject it. The UN can of course impose sanctions upon Israel. Israel cannot be forced to commit national suicide regardless of anything the UN decides.

At 1:58 AM, Blogger NormanF said...

After hearing your update, Carl if that reported language stands in the final draft, its a major victory for Israel. As for the ceasefire, so far Hamas has rejected being bound by one. And until it does accept it, Israel is free to continue to act militarily against the terrorist group. Israel is not bound by any resolution that does take into account its wartime aims. It would be a dead letter. By the way for you, Carl - Ann Bayesfky had a good piece on Israel and the UN in the New York Daily News. Consider it a Hat Tip from me.

Hat Tip: Bush And Rice: Don't Sell Out Israel

Read it all.

At 4:46 AM, Blogger NormanF said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

At 4:47 AM, Blogger NormanF said...

UPDATE: The UN approved the ceasefire resolution but the US abstained. That's a signal its completely meaningless and a sop to ward off further Arab pressure. Its a safe bet Hamas won't accept it. It changes nothing on the ground and the war will go on. A ceasefire only occurs if the losing side wants it and if Hamas weren't a bunch of Islamist fanatics, this would give them what they want. But the last reason they will agree to it is it would obviate their raison d'etre which is to attack the Zionist entity. Don't look for the guns to fall silent any time soon.

At 5:30 AM, Blogger Lydia McGrew said...

Carl, I realize this is OT, but is there any way you can make you r site load faster? I come here several times a day, and it always makes me wonder if there's something wrong with my connection, but there never is. I think it may have something to do with the high volume of videos embedded, but I'm not sure.

I'm still voting for you repeatedly in the blogger contest, though. :-)

At 10:08 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

any terror organization must be killed!

At 10:08 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

the "hamas" must DIE!!!

At 5:26 PM, Blogger JohnRJ08 said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

At 5:28 PM, Blogger JohnRJ08 said...

Israel was prepared to come to the table for peace talks, but Hamas rejected the UN proposal because it "hadn't been consulted." In other words, Hamas is enjoying the current conflict since it is exactly what it desired all along.

If the UN, our sole international peace-keeping organization, had any teeth at all, there wouldn’t be anything to report in Gaza right today. It hands out resolutions and sanctions like candy on Halloween, but has no intention of ever enforcing those things in any meaningful way.

If the UN did have real fangs, Israel could have gone to it back in 2005 about the missile barrage coming in from Gaza and that would have been it. No more missiles. Same goes in every other trouble spot in the world. The UN is paralyzed by a structure which allows one nation to hobble its usefulness with a single vote in the Security Council. This is the same organization that once put Syria in charge of peace-keeping forces. While it’s true that the U.S. often uses its veto to stop actions against israel, the U.S. is the only balance against a block of anti-Israeli countries who use their votes to pander to the oil rich Muslim countries surrounding Israel.

Given the current predicament the world finds itself in, the only way that the UN could be an effective peace-keeping entity is if it were run by extraterrestrials who had no axe to grind in any of these situations. That would be the only way to ensure that the resolutions were fair and objectively applied. Alas, there are no ETs in the UN, although some of them definitely act like monsters from outer space.

At 8:45 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

There seems to be such a clear line between the acts committed by Hamas, etc. and the countries that they inflict themselves on. Their methods are examples of classic cowardice in that they use helpless women and children to perpetrate and to hide behind. These are not the acts of honorable men or nations. It is the way that rank criminals function. Can they not join the international community in responsible negotiation, respecting contracts and humane statdards, etc. Shockingly undeveloped thinking, in my opinion. I makes me think of the 2 year old that holds his breath until he turns blue, to get his way. Except that the consequences are the complete obliteration of peaceful and secure life. NO communication or reasonable problem solving is employed just mindless, blind stubbornness and a primitive type of devotion to even ancient grudges and revenge. There is a dangerous level of sanctimonious self-rightousness that smacks of zealous and irrational thniking. How can this kind of a mind be enlightened? Therein may lie the answer.


Post a Comment

<< Home