The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has passed a resolution calling for a ceasefire between the two sides for the first time in the war that has erupted in Gaza since Hamas launched an attack on southern Israel on October 7.
The resolution, adopted on March 25, said that a ceasefire between Israel and the Palestinian factions should be implemented “immediately” and that “all parties should respect the month of Ramadan by implementing a permanent ceasefire”.
Security Council resolution 2728 also called for the unconditional release of all hostages and for humanitarian access to Gaza.
Read more>>
Now there is a debate going on in different countries whether to comply with this recommendation or not.
Who is in favor of the proposal?
Fourteen of the UN Security Council member states voted in favor of the resolution. No one voted against. Only the United States abstained from voting.
Earlier, the United States had vetoed three draft resolutions of the Security Council. They said at the time that the resolutions would not guarantee the release of the hostages or that the resolutions did not adequately condemn the October 7 attacks by Hamas in southern Israel.
Biden-Netanyahu have clashed over the Gaza war. File photo: AFP
What is Israel’s response to the proposal?
Israel has expressed strong displeasure with the actions of the United States regarding the aggression in Gaza. This has created tension between the two countries.
Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, Gilad Erdan, said, “Unfortunately, this council still refuses to condemn the October 7 massacre, which is a shame.”
Read more>>
Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu canceled a planned visit to Washington by two senior Israeli officials after the resolution passed.
A statement issued by his office said that the US has abandoned its position of declaring a ceasefire in exchange for the release of the hostages. Unfortunately, the United States did not veto the new proposal.
Is it mandatory to accept this offer?
According to Article 25 of the UN Charter, the members of the UN Security Council agree to adopt and implement the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter.
According to the UN website, there is a legal obligation to comply with resolutions passed by the UN that are approved by the Security Council.
However, the United States has described Resolution 2728, which was passed on March 25, as non-binding. They argued that the resolution used the expression ‘requested a ceasefire’ instead of the words ‘decided on the need for a ceasefire’.
US State Department spokesman Matthew Miller also told reporters that it was not a binding proposal.
Read more>>
But other UN officials say otherwise. Zhang Jun, China’s ambassador to the United Nations, said that it is mandatory to accept the Security Council’s resolution.
Mark Lyall-Grant, who served as the UK’s ambassador to the UN from 2009 to 2015, told BBC radio that the passage of the resolution would mean Israel would now be under an obligation to cease military operations for the next 15 days.
He added that the proposal is legally binding on Israel, but not on Hamas. Because the Palestinian group is not a state.
UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haque said the Security Council’s recommendations are international law. Therefore, they are as binding as international law.
The queue of dead bodies is getting longer in Gaza. Photo: AFP
Will Chapter VII of the UN Charter be used?
Chapter VII of the UN Charter is one of the most powerful tools for binding member states to accept resolutions.
It was used to send a multinational police force to restore law and order in Haiti in October 2023. It was used during the investigation and trial of those responsible for the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and the deaths of more than 20 people.
Read more>>
In 2006, it was under Chapter VII that Iran was barred from supplying arms to other countries and imposed strict sanctions on the country.
According to Patrik Johansson’s writing published in the Nordic Journal of International Law, a Security Council resolution can be considered ‘a Chapter VII resolution’ if ‘the situation under consideration constitutes a threat to the peace of people, a breach of the peace or an act of aggression’.
Riyad Mansour, the Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations, has tried to use this chapter. He said, we have come to the Security Council. Now they say, it is not mandatory. We do not accept that … Security Council resolutions are binding.
Riyad Mansour said that if Israel fails to implement it, then the Security Council’s responsibility is to use Chapter Seven to compel them to comply with the Council’s resolutions and take punitive measures.
Maya Unger of the International Crisis Group, a Brussels-based think tank, said the US was trying to provide an explanation based on a legal framework that some might accept.
He told CNN the U.S. believed the resolution would not be binding unless it used the word “decision” or “call” in Chapter VII.
Source: BBC Bangla
KAA/
#resolution #pass #war #Gaza