Palestinian state resolution fails

NEW YORK (JTA)—A Palestinian-backed U.N. resolution setting a one-year deadline for a peace deal with Israel failed to garner sufficient votes for passage in the U.N. Security Council.

The resolution, which was voted on Dec. 30, was aimed at achieving a full Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank by late 2017.

Eight nations on the 15-member council votes yes, two voted no and five abstained. Nine votes were required for passage.

Had nine votes been obtained, the United States, which voted against the resolution, was expected to exercise its Security Council veto. The United States believes a final settlement between Israel and the Palestinians must be negotiated by the parties themselves.

The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Power, called the draft resolution “deeply imbalanced” and slammed the council for the unusual move of putting the resolution to a vote without any debate.

“We voted against it because we know what everyone here knows as well: Peace will come from hard choices and compromises that must come at the negotiating table,” Power said.

“This text addresses the concerns of only one side,” she said. “It would undermine efforts to get back to an atmosphere that achieves two states for two peoples.”

The deadlines in the resolution, she said, “take no account of Israel’s legitimate security concerns.”

Conference of Presidents leaders Robert G. Sugarman, chairman, and Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman/CEO, welcomed the United Nations Security Council vote rejecting the resolution initiated by the Palestinian Authority and brought to the Council by the representative of Jordan on behalf of the Arab states.

“We are grateful for the leadership of the United States in working against the resolution, which would have undermined the chances for peace by setting arbitrary deadlines, prejudicing final status issues, and undermining chances for a negotiated settlement. Australia and other countries expressed opposition to the measure as well, recognizing that only negotiations can lead to a true and lasting peace. We, too, want to see progress, but that will require that President Abbas stop resorting to international bodies to avoid the give and take of direct talks with Israel.”

“We applaud the dedicated effort of Secretary of State Kerry, Ambassador Samantha Power and members of the U.S. Mission to the UN, and Ambassador Prosor and members of Israel’s Mission to the UN, who took the lead in pointing out the faults and misguided content of the resolution that led to the failure to secure the necessary 9 votes to pass,” said Sugarman and Hoenlein.

B’nai B’rith International also commended the United States and Australia for voting against this Palestinian resolution. “By bringing its list of demands to the United Nations and attempting to force Israel to acquiesce through a third party, the Palestinian Authority (PA) sought to exploit the world body to advance its political agenda,” B’nai B’rith International stated in a press release.

B’nai B’rith has vocally objected to any PA attempt to deliver an ultimatum for Israeli compliance with its objectives. The statement concluded, “This latest circumvention of negotiations with Israel is no different. In typical PA fashion, the resolution blatantly failed to ensure Israel’s security and identity as a Jewish state.”