UN passes Gaza ceasefire resolution

[Barack_America]

From Al Jazeera

UN passes Gaza ceasefire resolution

The United Nations Security Council in New York has passed a resolution calling for an "immediate, durable and fully respected ceasefire" in Gaza.

The resolution passed with 14 votes in favour and only the US abstaining.

Drafted by the US, UK and France in consultation with Arab leaders, it urges a full withdrawal of Israeli forces, but does not give a timeframe.

<snip>

Al Jazeera's Ghida Fakhry, reporting from the UN, said the resolution was only a partial victory for Arab leaders, who succeeded in pushing through a resolution when the US and other nations were keener on issuing a non-binding "presidential statement".

But they were also frustrated that an earlier Libya proposal was abandoned in favour for the US, UK and France resolution, our correspondent added.

The resolution "stresses the urgency of and calls for an immediate, durable and fully respected ceasefire leading to the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza".

It also calls for an opening of the Gaza crossings but does not offer a time frame for a withdrawal, our correspondent said.

It condemns all violence directed against civilians and all acts of "terrorism", but there is no specific condemnation of Israel's offensive and no mention of Hamas rocket fire.

And though the resolution is legally binding, it does not have any enforcement mechanism, and Israel has ignored dozens of UN resolutions over the years, our correspondent said.

It was also unclear whether Hamas would accept a text which does not mention the lifting of Israel's 18-month blockade on Gaza, which it has demanded, she added.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2009/01/2009191340884788.html

[Shaktimaan]

1. Why would Hamas have to accept any text?

It isn't exactly up to them.

I mean, there's no danger that this resolution will have any real influence on the situation in Gaza, is there?

[Barack_America]

2. Because without any way for the UN to enforce it it's up to Hamas and Israel...

...to abide by it or ignore it.

We can all probably guess how this is going to end. *sigh*

[Shaktimaan]

5. that was kinda my point.

That this resolution doesn't really have any bearing on the situation in Gaza now. It's just a diplomatic way for the respective SC member states to appease various constituents. It barely has anything to do with Gaza really.

[Kurska]

3. Short aswer: No

Long answer: No way, this resolution is pretty non binding regardless of what thy call it. It says stop doing that and lists no consequences for not stopping doing it. Unless the U.N passes a resolution with some real teeth on it (Unlikely with both libya and the united states onboard to try and sink any possible anti-Israel OR anti-hamas resolution) their voice is going to be pretty mute on this.

[Shaktimaan]

4. If it makes you feel any better,

UN resolutions are never enforceable. They're never anything more than "suggestions" that dictate what actions the international community endorses. They have some legal ramifications. But for the most part they are never enforceable instructions that the respective states MUST abide by.

Remember the UN Partition Plan for example? When the Arab states and the Palestinians rejected the terms it became null and void. I mean, no one is suggesting that the UN should have legal jurisdiction over Jerusalem now, are they? No, their resolutions are only viable if everyone involves agrees to agree to them.

And that's not likely to happen here.