UN’s Resolve Wanes Amid Escalating Gaza Crisis

For nearly eighty years, the conflict in Palestine has persisted as a profound global issue that remains unresolved. This ongoing struggle raises questions about justice and international accountability, particularly in the context of the United Nations’ commitment to peace and protection for the oppressed.

The Palestinian crisis has repeatedly highlighted the failures of international law, especially when it comes to the actions of Israel, which have often gone unchecked. The United States has played a crucial role in this dynamic, utilizing its veto power to shield Israel from accountability and undermining the principles laid out in the UN Charter.

Since 1972, the United States has employed its veto power more than 50 times to protect Israel, which accounts for approximately half of all vetoes cast in the Security Council. Here are some key instances:

• September 1972: The first veto was exercised when the U.S. blocked a resolution condemning Israel’s bombardment of Lebanon.
• 1982: The U.S. vetoed measures condemning Israel’s invasion of Lebanon.
• 2011: A resolution declaring Israeli settlements as “illegal” was vetoed, despite the U.S. agreeing with its contents.
• 2017: The U.S. stood alone in vetoing a resolution that rejected Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.
• 2023 and 2024: The U.S. blocked multiple calls for a Gaza ceasefire, even amidst significant civilian casualties.

This pattern of vetoes is not a balanced approach to foreign policy; rather, it reveals complicity in ongoing injustices.

The UN General Assembly, which is not subject to the veto, has repeatedly condemned Israel. Between 2015 and 2023, it passed a total of 154 resolutions condemning Israel, while only 71 resolutions were directed at all other member states combined. In 2024, an additional 17 resolutions were adopted, including a landmark resolution calling for Israel to withdraw from the territories it occupies within a year.

In reality, the United States is not powerless to limit Israel’s actions; it simply chooses not to. Israel is viewed as a strategic ally and a democratic presence in the Middle East, coupled with a partnership in military technology and intelligence. However, domestic political considerations in the U.S. make any attempts to condition aid politically risky. Successive administrations frame their vetoes as a means to block “unbalanced” texts, but in essence, they are obstructing justice.

This protective shield has emboldened Israel to extend its military operations beyond its borders. Historical military actions include:

• Warfare with Egypt and Jordan since 1948.
• Multiple invasions of Lebanon.
• Airstrikes on Syria and Iraq, including the destruction of the Osirak reactor in 1981.
• Assassinations of PLO leaders in Tunisia in 1985.
• The infamous Entebbe raid in Uganda in 1976.
• Recent attacks on sites in Sudan and Yemen.

Throughout its relatively short history, Israel has engaged in military actions against ten different countries, a remarkable feat for a nation of its size, made possible largely due to the unwavering support from the United States.

For the Muslim world, the situation in Palestine transcends geopolitical interests; it is fundamentally a moral issue. The Qur’an emphasizes the sanctity of life and the imperative to support the oppressed. Yet, the international system allows a single veto to undermine the lives of thousands. Palestinians perceive not only an occupation of their land but also a superpower that guarantees the occupier’s impunity.

While there are alternatives to this status quo, they require courage and decisive action. The General Assembly can utilize the ‘Uniting for Peace’ procedure if the Security Council remains blocked. Additionally, nations may:

• Impose arms embargoes or suspend export licenses that contribute to the occupation.
• Recognize Palestine as a sovereign state.
• Sanction businesses involved in settlement activities.
• Make trade with Israel conditional based on its adherence to international law.

Humanitarian measures, such as establishing protected corridors for aid, medical personnel, and journalists, would also signify progress.

However, waiting for action from the Security Council is futile. True liberation has never been granted by institutions; it has always been fought for by people and nations willing to rise above the constraints of great-power vetoes.

History will remember not the procedural intricacies of the UN but the countless children buried under rubble in Gaza, the villages erased in the West Bank, and the sprawling refugee camps in Lebanon and Jordan. America’s vetoes are not simply votes; they serve as shields for ongoing injustice, while the General Assembly’s condemnations are more than mere paperwork—they are powerful testimonies of a world betrayed.

If the international system is incapable of protecting Palestine, the most visible symbol of dispossession in our time, it cannot lay claim to safeguarding anyone’s rights. For Iran, the Arab world, and Muslims globally, this represents more than just a diplomatic failure; it reflects a critical measure of whether dignity, justice, and international law have any relevance in the twenty-first century.