On the fifth attempt, the UN Security Council adopted a resolution on humanitarian pauses in Gaza

On the night of November 16, the UN Security Council (SC) in Moscow adopted resolution No. 2712 calling for expanded humanitarian pauses in the Gaza Strip. The previous four attempts to accept her ended in failure. The latest option, introduced by Malta, was successful thanks to the fact that three of the five permanent members of the Council – the US, Russia and the UK – abstained. In total, the UN Security Council has met 10 times to discuss the situation in Gaza since October 7, to no avail. About it it says in a statement from the organization’s press service.

The document adopted by the UN Security Council calls for “urgent and expanded humanitarian pauses and corridors” in the Gaza Strip for “a sufficient number of days” to ensure full, rapid, safe and unhindered access for UN agencies and partners. The Security Council “calls for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages held by Hamas and other groups, especially children, and for immediate humanitarian access” to those in need.

The UN Security Council calls on all parties to the conflict to refrain from depriving the civilian population in the Gaza Strip of basic services and assistance necessary for their survival. However, the resolution does not condemn the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, which “launched the current wave of violence and the struggle for control of the Gaza Strip.” Amendments proposed by Russia and supported by five members of the UN Security Council calling for an immediate ceasefire were rejected. These amendments were opposed by the United States and its allies.

The Russian side welcomed the adoption of “at least some humanitarian product,” said Russia’s representative to the UN Security Council Vasily Nebenzya. “This is the only reason why we turned a blind eye to all the numerous shortcomings of the text,” the Foreign Ministry press service quotes him as saying. He called the main shortcoming of the “Maltese” resolution on Gaza “the lack of a call for an immediate ceasefire.”

“Humanitarian pauses are not and cannot be a substitute for a ceasefire or even a truce. This is only a short pause, after which hostilities resume with renewed vigor,” Nebenzya explained. He also criticized the US for sabotaging attempts to adopt “a balanced and depoliticized document aimed at taking real and urgent measures to de-escalate the situation.”

British permanent representatives Barbara Woodward and US permanent representatives Linda Thomas-Greenfield expressed regret and “horror” that the Hamas attack on October 7 was not condemned in any way in the resolution. But they noted that Malta’s document would at least save lives. The permanent representative of the PRC, which voted for the resolution (president of the UN Security Council in November), Zhang Jun, said that the body should have adopted a more decisive resolution earlier. But despite the fact that “one member was blocking progress toward consensus” (without directly naming the United States), Zhang expressed confidence that the Maltese resolution “makes a difference.” “The main thing is to implement the resolution and its provisions “to the letter,” he said.

Israel’s deputy envoy Brett Jonathan Miller said the crisis could end immediately if all Israeli hostages were returned unharmed and Hamas laid down its arms and surrendered. He criticized the resolution adopted by the UN Security Council, noting that it is “out of touch with the reality on the ground” and “remains tone deaf when it comes to Hamas and other terrorist organizations.”

“The resolution focuses solely on the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip. The resolution makes no mention of what led up to this point. It makes it seem like what we’re seeing in the Gaza Strip happened on its own,” Miller said. He added that Israel’s top priority is returning the hostages home, “and since Security Council resolutions have no impact on terrorists, Israel will continue to do everything possible to achieve this goal.” According to Miller, the war will end immediately “if Hamas decides to lay down its arms, surrender and hand over the hostages unharmed.”

The permanent representative of the UN observer state, the Palestinian National Authority (PNA), Riyad Mansour, just like Russia, stated the need to call on the UN Security Council for an immediate ceasefire, and not for humanitarian pauses. Mansour condemned Israel, saying its plan is to continue dispossession, displacement and denial of the rights of the Palestinian people in order to end the Nakba [с ар. «катастрофа» –  переселение арабов с занятых Израилем территорий в 1948 г.]”This madness must end. The time for peace has come,” the PNA spokesman said.

Israel is unlikely to take the resolution into account when making further decisions regarding the Gaza Strip, says Lyudmila Samarskaya, a researcher at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at the IMEMO RAS. This is partly explained by the fact that despite the formal binding nature of the Security Council resolution, there are no suitable mechanisms for enforcing its implementation.

She also noted that the US decision was explained by its reluctance to vote for a text that did not unequivocally condemn Hamas. In general, Samarskaya believes, Washington agrees with the resolution. “However, it is difficult to judge the prospects for implementing the provisions of the document in the current situation,” says Samarskaya.