By Brad Ryan in Washington DC with wires
The vote in the 193-member general assembly was 124-14 in favour of the resolution, with 43 abstentions.
The vote in the 193-member general assembly was 124-14 in favour of the resolution, with 43 abstentions.
The United Nations General Assembly has overwhelmingly voted in favour of a Palestinian resolution demanding Israel end its "unlawful presence" in Gaza and the occupied West Bank within a year.
The vote in the 193-member world body was 124-14, with Australia one of 43 members states to abstain. The United States voted against it.
Australia's ambassador to the UN, James Larsen, said it had several concerns with the resolution, and was "deeply disappointed" they were not addressed before the vote. He said Australia supported many of the resolution's principles.
Foreign Minister Penny Wong later said Australia had "worked very hard in New York with others, including the Palestinian delegation, to seek amendments that would enable us to support" the resolution.
"We were disappointed the amendments we and many others sought were not accepted," Senator Wong told the ABC's AM program.
The resolution was adopted as troubled efforts to broker a ceasefire deal in Gaza press ahead.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken is holding meetings with mediators in Egypt even as attacks elsewhere in the region — including a fresh wave of explosions across Lebanon — raise fears of escalating conflict in the Middle East.
Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian UN ambassador, called the vote a turning point "in our struggle for freedom and justice".
But Israel's UN ambassador, Danny Danon, said the vote showed the general assembly "continues to dance to the music of the Palestinian Authority, which backs the Hamas murderers".
Mr Larsen said Australia had wanted to vote for a resolution that "directly reflected" a recent advisory ruling from the World Court, which said Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories was unlawful.
Australia also wanted a resolution that "clearly offered the Palestinian people a path to self-determination and gave the world a path to a two-state solution", the Australian ambassador said.
He told the general assembly that Australia was already doing a lot of what the resolution called for. It had not supplied weapons to Israel in at least five years, was sanctioning extremist Israeli settlers, and had doubled funding to the UN's Palestinian refugee agency, UNRWA, he said.
Human rights groups had been lobbying Australia to support the resolution. "The Australian government has a responsibility to use its influence [in] the general assembly to uphold international law," Amnesty International's Mohamed Duar said ahead of the vote.
Riyad Mansour conceded Israel probably wouldn't pay any attention to the resolution. (Reuters: David 'Dee' Delgado, file)
The UK abstained for similar reasons to Australia. "Not because we do not support the central findings of the [World Court's] advisory opinion, but rather because the resolution does not provide sufficient clarity to effectively advance our shared aim of a peace premised on a negotiated two-state solution," UK ambassador Barbara Woodward said.
Australia has previously voted for a ceasefire at the general assembly.
US opposes 'one-sided' resolution
The resolution is the first put forward by the Palestinian Authority since member states, including Australia, voted to give it new rights and privileges. They include a seat among UN members in the assembly hall and the right to propose draft resolutions.
The US called it "one-sided" because it did not recognise that Hamas still exerted power in Gaza, nor state that Israel had a right to defend itself from terrorism.
"This resolution will not bring about tangible progress for Palestinians," the US mission argued. "In fact, it could both complicate efforts to end the conflict in Gaza and impede reinvigorating steps toward a two-state solution, while ignoring Israel's very real security concerns."
What is Israel's 'Hannibal Directive'?
Photo shows image of Israeli tank operating in Gaza
The controversial "Hannibal Directive" was reportedly enacted after the October 7 Hamas attack, with revelations detailing strikes by IDF tanks and helicopters on homes and vehicles returning to Gaza.
Unlike in the UN Security Council, the US does not have veto powers in the general assembly.
The resolution also demands the withdrawal of all Israeli forces and the evacuation of settlers from the occupied Palestinian territories "without delay". It calls for Israel to pay reparations to Palestinians for the damage caused by its occupation.
Neither the resolution, nor the World Court's advisory ruling, are legally binding. The resolution asks UN secretary-general Antonio Guterres to submit a report within three months on putting the resolution in place.
“We fully abide by the decisions of the International Court of Justice," Mr Guterres told reporters. "I will implement any decision of the general assembly in that regard."
Mr Mansour said Israel probably wouldn't pay attention to the resolution and that the Palestinians would then follow up with a stronger one.
ABC/wires
The vote in the 193-member world body was 124-14, with Australia one of 43 members states to abstain. The United States voted against it.
Australia's ambassador to the UN, James Larsen, said it had several concerns with the resolution, and was "deeply disappointed" they were not addressed before the vote. He said Australia supported many of the resolution's principles.
Foreign Minister Penny Wong later said Australia had "worked very hard in New York with others, including the Palestinian delegation, to seek amendments that would enable us to support" the resolution.
"We were disappointed the amendments we and many others sought were not accepted," Senator Wong told the ABC's AM program.
The resolution was adopted as troubled efforts to broker a ceasefire deal in Gaza press ahead.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken is holding meetings with mediators in Egypt even as attacks elsewhere in the region — including a fresh wave of explosions across Lebanon — raise fears of escalating conflict in the Middle East.
Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian UN ambassador, called the vote a turning point "in our struggle for freedom and justice".
But Israel's UN ambassador, Danny Danon, said the vote showed the general assembly "continues to dance to the music of the Palestinian Authority, which backs the Hamas murderers".
Mr Larsen said Australia had wanted to vote for a resolution that "directly reflected" a recent advisory ruling from the World Court, which said Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories was unlawful.
Australia also wanted a resolution that "clearly offered the Palestinian people a path to self-determination and gave the world a path to a two-state solution", the Australian ambassador said.
He told the general assembly that Australia was already doing a lot of what the resolution called for. It had not supplied weapons to Israel in at least five years, was sanctioning extremist Israeli settlers, and had doubled funding to the UN's Palestinian refugee agency, UNRWA, he said.
Human rights groups had been lobbying Australia to support the resolution. "The Australian government has a responsibility to use its influence [in] the general assembly to uphold international law," Amnesty International's Mohamed Duar said ahead of the vote.
Riyad Mansour conceded Israel probably wouldn't pay any attention to the resolution. (Reuters: David 'Dee' Delgado, file)
The UK abstained for similar reasons to Australia. "Not because we do not support the central findings of the [World Court's] advisory opinion, but rather because the resolution does not provide sufficient clarity to effectively advance our shared aim of a peace premised on a negotiated two-state solution," UK ambassador Barbara Woodward said.
Australia has previously voted for a ceasefire at the general assembly.
US opposes 'one-sided' resolution
The resolution is the first put forward by the Palestinian Authority since member states, including Australia, voted to give it new rights and privileges. They include a seat among UN members in the assembly hall and the right to propose draft resolutions.
The US called it "one-sided" because it did not recognise that Hamas still exerted power in Gaza, nor state that Israel had a right to defend itself from terrorism.
"This resolution will not bring about tangible progress for Palestinians," the US mission argued. "In fact, it could both complicate efforts to end the conflict in Gaza and impede reinvigorating steps toward a two-state solution, while ignoring Israel's very real security concerns."
What is Israel's 'Hannibal Directive'?
Photo shows image of Israeli tank operating in Gaza
The controversial "Hannibal Directive" was reportedly enacted after the October 7 Hamas attack, with revelations detailing strikes by IDF tanks and helicopters on homes and vehicles returning to Gaza.
Unlike in the UN Security Council, the US does not have veto powers in the general assembly.
The resolution also demands the withdrawal of all Israeli forces and the evacuation of settlers from the occupied Palestinian territories "without delay". It calls for Israel to pay reparations to Palestinians for the damage caused by its occupation.
Neither the resolution, nor the World Court's advisory ruling, are legally binding. The resolution asks UN secretary-general Antonio Guterres to submit a report within three months on putting the resolution in place.
“We fully abide by the decisions of the International Court of Justice," Mr Guterres told reporters. "I will implement any decision of the general assembly in that regard."
Mr Mansour said Israel probably wouldn't pay attention to the resolution and that the Palestinians would then follow up with a stronger one.
ABC/wires
No comments:
Post a Comment