UN decision on Israeli settlement hailed only as ‘symbolic’ move

AMMAN – Although the UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 2334 is marked as a "milestone" decision, it is most likely to remain "ink on paper" due to Israel's long history in disregarding the international community’s will, according to columnists. 

The UNSC on Friday voted against Israel's settlement activity in the Palestinian territories after the US abstained instead of its customary move of vetoing any resolution that denounces the Israeli occupation.

While acknowledging the "unprecedented" stance of the US against the illegal settlement activity, columnist and veteran diplomat Hasan Abu Nimah said Israel has snubbed UN resolutions for more than five decades. 

“However, I think the decision is very good and it can be used to create the necessary momentum against the illegal settlements and build a strong international stance to boycott goods produced in these territories,” he told The Jordan Times on Saturday.

On the other hand, he noted that the resolution does not entail measures that obligate Israel to adhere by the decision. 

“Israel’s abidance by the resolution requires a strong Arab stance, which is not available now,” Abu Nimah said. 

Columnist Fahed Khitan echoed similar remarks, saying that Israel will most definitely disregard the resolution. 

“But there is a very significant value in the decision as it puts back the settlement issue in the global spotlight. The resolution would help Arab countries and Palestinians build on it in any future negotiations,” he said. 

The columnist underlined the important media and moral impact of the decision internationally as it is expected  to shed light on the illegal settlement activities. 

Jamal Al Shalabi, a professor of political science at the Hashemite University, believes that Resolution 2334 is “more symbolic than applicable”, especially with US President-elect Donald Trump’s supportive stance of Israel. 

“Trump announced that he plans to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. You can infer from such a position how he perceives Israel,” said Shalabi, who speculated that the US outgoing administration’s refrain from vetoing the UN resolution has “more to do with Obama’s personal issues with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu”. 

“The good thing about the decision is that it puts Israel face to face with reality to realise that it cannot continue violating human rights forever and that the West has started to lose patience with it,” noted Shalabi.   

In response, the government on Friday described the resolution as “historic”, the Jordan News Agency, Petra, reported.

The resolution represents consensus among the international community on the illegality of the Israeli settlement and affirms the historical right of Palestinians to their land, said Minister of State for Media Affairs and Government Spokesperson Mohammad Momani in a statement. 

He added: “Having 14 members of the Security Council vote for the resolution and only one member abstain, underlines the international community’s belief in the illegality of settlements.”

The resolution enhances Jordan’s stand and efforts against the Israeli settlement policy, which, the minister said, is a main obstacle to the peace process, based on the two-state solution.

Momani added that it is a positive step towards the solution, which is a higher Jordanian interest.

In 2004, Jordan contributed to issuing an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice stipulating the illegality of the separation wall in the West Bank. 

According to Agence France-Presse , Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected the resolution and criticised Obama in especially harsh language

“Israel rejects this shameful anti-Israel resolution at the UN and will not abide by its terms,” read a statement from his office.

“The Obama administration not only failed to protect Israel against this gang-up at the UN, it colluded with it behind the scenes,” it said.

“Israel looks forward to working with President-elect Trump and with all our friends in Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike, to negate the harmful effects of this absurd resolution.”