US Veto & The Settlement Question

By: Lisa Fiorilli




On Friday the 18th of February, there was a key vote held at the UN Security Council. The PLO had backed a resolution that would categorize Israeli settlement activity as "illegal" and would then necessitate halting all further settlement activity. 14 Security Council members, including Britain, Germany and France backed the resolution on the basis that the settlements are in fact illegal under international law. Interestingly, all 3 of these nations voiced their hope that a Palestinian member state can enter the UN as of September 2011. However, to no one's real surprise, the US vetoed the resolution, angering Palestinians, the majority of the Arab states as well as supporters of Palestinian nationalism. Obviously, they had the choice to abstain, which would have angered Israel and chose the veto route instead. The interpretations of this vote are interesting depending on which media source is used.

For example, Al Jazeera focuses on the fact that the USA has angered the majority of Arab nations and is increasingly alone among world powers on the conflict issue. They also make note of the American lobbying of the PA to avoid backing the resolution to avoid having to use the veto, but to no avail. Here, the Americans are portrayed essentially as using the veto to appease Israel at the expense of the Middle Eastern nations, and as fundamentally opposed to the peace process through their actions.
The Palestine News and Info Agency also emphasizes that this veto will increase tensions and disapproval of American policies in the Middle East, as well as contribute to increasing Israeli settlement activity that is widely seen as contrary to peace and international law.
Ma'an news agency, a news provided popular in the occupied territories, agreed that the US move would  complicate matters in the region further and contribute to further deterioration of peace talk progress.
This matter was portrayed in a different light in both Haaretz and the Jerusalem Post.
In Haaretz, the move was seen as fundamentally contradictory to American policy as it had been articulated, and they conceded that it would probably affect the peace talks in a negative fashion. The major difference in this article is that they emphasize in great detail the efforts made by the Obama administration to persuade Abbas to not push for this resolution in order to secure strategic Middle Eastern interests which are seen as precarious with the recent turmoil in the region, especially among key allies. They list what concessions what Abbas was offered in order to persuade him to abandon this resolution, but they note that this was important political capital for Abbas to secure in the light of the revelations of the Palestine papers.
Jerusalem Post on the other hand emphasizes the calls for a "Day of Rage" in the occupied territories, and takes the expected pro-Israel stance. Here, the emphasis is on Israel's urging of direct talks contrasted with Abbas' refusal to engage unless the settlement question is met. The focus on the responses of both Fatah and Hamas demonstrate that the Jerusalem Post has the objective of presenting the veto as unilaterally angering the Palestinians, which demonstrates their ultimate unwillingness to engage in talks.
Therefore, there are many arguments that emerge out of these articles, and the real impact of this decision will most likely be felt in upcoming days and weeks.

So what is really at stake here? Are the Palestinians right to be upset about the US exercising a veto about an issue that is widely recognized to be illegal under international law? What was the motivation of the US to use the veto as opposed to an absention? In this case, in light of the turmoil in Yemen, Bahrain and Egypt, would the US have been better off not using a veto to risk inflaming anti-American sentiment in the region? What are the implications of the other 14 members of the Security Council recognizing the illegality of settlement activity?



Links:
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/02/2011218201653970232.html
http://english.wafa.ps/index.php?action=detail&id=15228
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=361271
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/pa-to-call-urgent-un-session-over-settlement-resolution-veto-1.344479
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=208925