A majority of United Nations (UN) member states have voted in favour of a resolution ”demanding an end to Israel’s occupation of Palestine within the next twelve months”.
There werein favour of the resolution and 14 against. Australia was one of 43 countries that did not vote (abstained).
The UN resolution is not legally binding and Israel has described it as “diplomatic terrorism”.
It follows an— when the UN’s highest court declared Israel’s settlements were “unlawful”.
UN motion
This week, 29 countries and the state of Palestine introduced a UN motion, urging Israel to “end without delay its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory” within a year.
Earlier this year, the state of Palestine was granted expanded rights as a UN member. This is the first time it’s been able to co-author a motion at the UN General Assembly.
The motion “welcomed” a recent ICJ advisory opinion that declared Israel’s continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory was illegal. Israel rejected this ruling.
Australia
Australia abstained from this week’s vote in the UN General Assembly.
Your contribution ensures The Daily Aus can continue doing the work you love.
I want to give $10 monthly to help TDA keep doing the news.
Your details:
Foreign Minister Penny Wong said she regrets that Australia and its ally, the UK, “were not in a position to support this resolution.”
“We will continue to look at ways we can add our voice to a pathway out of this conflict,” Wong said.
The UK’s UN Ambassador, Barbara Woodward, said the motion didn’t outline a clear plan “to effectively advance our shared aim of a peace premised on a negotiated two-State solution”.
Israel & U.S.
Israel and the U.S. were among the UN members who voted against the resolution.
Israeli Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, said the motion represented “one-sided resolutions” that fail “to consider what the Israeli people have endured”.
U.S. Ambassador, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, said her country remains firmly opposed to Israel expanding its settlements. However, she said the motion failed to outline terms for “progress towards two States and living in peace, side by side”.
What now?
meaning the demand for Israel to withdraw cannot be enforced.
However, the UN noted a resolution carries “immense moral weight, representing the collective resolve of the UN membership on a matter of grave importance”.
