The United Nations Security Council has voted in favor of one resolution drafted by the United States which strengthens President Donald Trump’s peace plan for Gaza. The resolution provides for deployment of an international force and a transitional government body for the Strip. There were 13 votes in favor of the text, which the United States called “historic and constructive”, with Russia and China abstaining, but without any veto.
The UN resolution is considered fundamental for legitimize a transitional governing body and reassure countries that are considering sending troops to Gaza. Trump celebrated the vote, saying it will lead to “further peace throughout the world” and that “it will go down in history as one of most important approvals in the history of the United Nations”.
What’s in the UN resolution on Gaza
The UN resolution serves as legitimating and coordinating framework for the next steps to take to end the conflict, authorizing and regulating the concrete actions envisaged by Trump’s plan. The peace plan authorizes the creation of a International Stabilization Force who would work with Israel, Egypt and a Palestinian police trained to help secure border areas and demilitarize the Gaza Strip.
The force has the mandate to work for the “permanent decommissioning of the weapons of non-state armed groups” (hence the disarmament of Hamas), protect civilians and guarantee humanitarian corridors. Without the resolution, any intervention by foreign troops would be politically and legally controversial: Arab and other Muslim countries that had expressed interest in providing troops for an international force had reported that the authorization of the Security Council it was essential to be able to participate.
The resolution authorizes the force to “use all necessary measures to fulfill its mandate” in compliance with international law, a UN formulation that is equivalent to the use of military force. As international force establishes control and brings stability, the text provides that the Israeli forces will withdraw from Gaza “based on standards, milestones and timescales related to demilitarization.” These must be agreed by the Stabilization Force, Israeli forces, the United States and the ceasefire guarantors.
The plan also authorizes the formation of a Board of Peacea transitional governing body for Gaza, theoretically chaired by Trump, charged with overseeing the governance of a technocratic and apolitical Palestinian committee and to supervise the reconstruction of Gaza and the delivery of humanitarian aid.
UN Resolution: towards a Palestinian state?
In rather vague terms, the resolution also mentions a possible future Palestinian state. The text states that “conditions may finally be conducive to a credible path towards Palestinian self-determination and statehood”, once thePalestinian Authoritywhich exercises limited control over the West Bank, will have implemented a reform program and the revitalization of Gaza will be advanced.
The future Palestinian state, therefore, is considered only as a possible development if conditions were favourable. “The United States will establish a dialogue between Israel and the Palestinians to agree on a political horizon of peaceful and prosperous coexistence,” the text reads.
Some important Arab states had put pressure on the drafters of the resolution to include Palestinian self-determination in the text: however, Israel firmly opposes the creation of a Palestinian state, a significant obstacle on the path to future statehood. Hamas has rejected the resolutionstating that it does not respect the “requests and rights“of the Palestinians. ThePalestinian Authority instead, it declared that it was ready to participate in its implementation.
Previously, Russia, China and various regional states have pushed for amendments to the text: the main controversy focused on the Board of Peacea body with broad governance powers and devoid of any Palestinian participation or approval. The inclusion of the theoretical recognition of Palestinian self-determination, in any case, was sufficient to avoid a veto by Beijing or Moscow.
While many countries remain concerned about the details (or lack thereof) in the resolution, the support of a broad coalition of Middle Eastern states probably favored its approval. Neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians were formally included in the negotiations, but Israel allegedly cooperated closely to the definition of the text.
