The UN's Gordian Knot
The United States veto to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution in demanding an immediate humanitarian cease-fire in Gaza [1] has brought criticism far and wide from other UN member states, the media, and observers. The UAE’s deputy ambassador to the UN, Mohamed Issa Abushahab, questioned the veto as a perplexing message the world is sending to the Palestinian people in seeking to find a humanitarian halt to the bombardment by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) where the message of unity is present but the power to stop it is not. Two other permanent UNSC members, France and Russia, had voiced their objections of the U.S. veto citing lack of unity among the Security Council from French ambassador Nicolas De Rivière and the Russian ambassador, Dmitry Polyansky, accusing the U.S. of providing a death sentence for thousands of innocent Palestinians and noted that Washington will get its just desserts for using its veto. Odd rationale from an ambassador whose country he represents is invading a sovereign nation 1,200 miles to the north.
Was the U.S. veto, cast by UN ambassador Robert Wood, the right call? The veto was driven by context in which the resolution was formed from, mainly words – but more importantly – a lack thereof. Despite Secretary-General António Guterres own condemnation of Hamas’ actions for the October 7th attacks on Israeli citizens as acts of terror, no mention was made in his Article 99 memorandum[2], seeking to call upon the Security Council condemn the same acts made by Hamas nor place the group on the United Nations Security Council Consolidated List [3] which is the closest equivalent to a terrorist list maintained by the UN comparable to lists that other countries and the EU utilizes to identify terrorist groups worldwide such as Al Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, and Al-Shabaab.
The organization that is Hamas [4] was born out of the Muslim Brotherhood in 1987 by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin as the political arm of the Brotherhood and to some degree as a counter to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad movement. Its first charter [5] revealed in 1988 linked many of its established articles to the Surahs of the Quran. Its doctrine was one of staunch refusal of any attempts of peaceful solutions initiated by diplomatic means and stressed the only “solution for the Palestinian question (is) through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors.” Though found later in the charter, Hamas does describe jihad as not confined to armed conflict and can be employed by other measures, yet the fact remained that its origins was to resist the establishment of a Western-backed Israeli state and claims the historical boundaries of Palestine for Islam. It’s current charter, A Document of General Principles and Policies [6], reveals a less overtly religious tone but still retains its aim and objectives against Israel, arguing for Jerusalem as its capital, the right of return to the whole of Palestine, refusing to recognize the legitimacy of the “Zionist entity” (though interestingly not with the Jewish people merely for their religious beliefs), and any Western-crafted political solutions to the Palestinian question. In addition, it declares that the establishment of Israel as “entirely illegal” and ideally seeks a “full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea” (though again interestingly the organization appears to be OK with the established borders arising from the 6-Day War in 1967). Despite this perceived diplomatic bent, the General Principles and Policies for Hamas is anything but diplomatic because of its refusal to come to the table and find a negotiated settlement and instead opting for action like that witnessed on October 7th.
In 2007 Hamas was able to win parliamentary elections [7] in Gaza and eventually broke away from the internationally recognized entity representing the Palestinians, the Palestinian Authority (PA). Recently, Hamas’ popularity among Gazans had waned as the humanitarian conditions in Gaza have grown worse [8] due to mismanagement and corruption [9]; yet the current Israeli Defense Force operation in Gaza has created a surge [10] in polling popularity for Hamas [11].
Still, Hamas should not be considered the legitimate voice for the Palestinian Gazans, that designation still belongs to the Palestinian Authority [12]. The goal for the UN should be to not only seek humanitarian relief for the people of Gaza but to also convince them that Hamas is causing them this Israeli retaliation and that further support of Hamas is to support terrorism as a solution to the conflict. Video released after the initial incursion by Hamas into Israel shows what looks to be overwhelming approval of Hamas’ actions when the group parades hostages taken from the raid and driven through the streets [13] in Bani Suheila, Gaza. Images and reports like this only solidify assumptions that Gazans approved of the attack by Hamas. In the end, such support for the group only works against the Palestinians. As images of the Palestinian elderly, women, and children are seen huddled among the rubble of buildings destroyed by the IDF and the dead wrapped in shrouds with loved ones mourning over them are displayed on our computer and TV screens as a striking reminder that violence must be avoided where other alternatives present themselves, there still exists reports of Hamas plotting to commit acts of terror in other states outside of the Middle East [14]. Activity like this is not normal nor acceptable actions of legitimate political groups. They are acts of terrorists and should be considered as such.
Ambassador Wood was correct to call out Hamas as a continued threat to Israel. What many news reports didn’t include was that Ambassador Wood also noted [15] that “that Israel must respect international humanitarian law and conduct its operations in a way that minimizes civilian harm” and that the “US has supported establishing an effective humanitarian deconfliction mechanism with the UN” concerning the situation in Gaza and lastly “underscored that Israel must avoid further mass displacement of civilians in the south of Gaza” and to provide humanitarian support for those still displaced. Leaving those comments out of news reports without a doubt provides ammunition for those to criticize the U.S. decision as insensitive to the plight of the Palestinians in Gaza and tries to create a narrative that the United States is seeking to eliminate the possibility of a future Palestinian state. Nothing could be further from the truth. The United States does want peace in the region, but it seeks a durable one and certainly not one led by one side that promotes terrorist acts on civilian populations.
The most recent Security Council resolution, 2720 (2023) [16], adopted on December 22nd allowed for a more expedited means to render humanitarian aid to Gaza to help relieve the suffering of civilians there. Russian ambassador Vassily A. Nebenzia still went on the record to bash the U.S. abstention and accused it of blackmailing and arm-twisting other UNSC members to get the resolutions worded in their favor [17].
Still, the resolution makes no mention of condemning Hamas for their acts on Oct. 7th or to consider placing it on its Consolidated List [18]. Though claiming to be a political party, terrorist acts such as suicide bombings and the use of vehicle explosives have also been attributed to the group [19], hardly a legitimate political activity. It has been designated a terrorist group most notably by the United States [20] since 1997, and by the EU [21] but EU member and UNSC member France seems to have forgotten that designation though it declared its efforts to financially hamper the organization [22]. Even UN-generated media [23] has been careful to not label Hamas as a terrorist group, opting to identify it as an “extremist” group. Most recently, the EU had placed [24] Mohammed Deif, Commander General of the military wing of Hamas and Marwan Issa, the deputy Commander of the military wing of Hamas to its terror list in response to the terror attacks of October 7th.
Refusing to bring to light Hamas’ actions in the UNSC is to merely further concede to terrorist organizations and encourage indiscriminate killing, rape [25], and kidnapping of Israeli citizens like that committed on October 7th.
The Gordian Knot that is the long-standing Israeli-Palestinian conflict is wrought with many layers to untie. To find a solution to this perplexing puzzle, one must first untie the first knot – that being the consensus of UNSC member states to condemn Hamas’ actions on October 7th as a terrorist act and further identify the organization as a terrorist group so that it can be identified on its Consolidated List. From that point all other knots can be undone. Immediate humanitarian assistance will materialize, then the UNSC can require Israel to reassess its strategies and tactics in eliminating Hamas to avoid a high civilian casualty count in Gaza.
In addition, both Israel and the Palestinians - as well as their supporters - should acknowledge the text of Resolution of 242 (1967) [26]. For Israel they should drop the semantics argument of what they think the resolution meant and acknowledge that the acquisition of territory through war is inadmissible under the UN Charter and to concede the Palestinian territories of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem identified on the eve of the 1967 war (the Golan Heights occupation lies with UNSC Resolution 497 and this author believes the Trump Administration’s decision to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the area only served to add more fuel to the fire rather than settle the occupation issue), while at the same time adhere what they originally accepted and committed to for UN membership in 1949, that being Resolution 181 (II) [27] as well as 194 (III) [28] relating to the Palestinian question; while for the Palestinians they need to simply accept the proposals outlined by Resolution 181 (II) in the plan for partition of both an independent Israel and Palestine.
For the Palestinians, the quest for independence begins with Resolution 181 (II). All other claims going as far back as the inadmissibility of the Balfour Declaration and their hollow argument to Article 22 of the League of Nations is a moot point. The League is no more and the British holding the Palestinian Mandate, as unfair it may have been in the first post-war period, was given to the UN to settle. Palestinians must accept the resolution to move forward. This is where Hamas’ role ends; they will never see to a two-state solution and merely seek to delegitimize Israel. Hamas is still living in the early 20th century arguing for something that has long been dismissed.
For some in the Palestinian Authority, they must quit giving Hamas a lifeline [29] as a legitimate entity and work to abolish it as what it is, a terrorist organization. There are, however, some in the PA that sees Hamas’ acts and doctrine as a spoiler in the peace process [30]. Yet, while this is a potential touchstone to determine the viability of further talks to peace, it is still not enough. Hamas cannot be part of the legitimate process and cannot be given support either within Gaza and beyond.
There can be support for the Palestinian people – support in their rights, support in humanitarian assistance, and support for a peaceful and free Palestinian state, but Hamas cannot be included in the conversation; the UN must acknowledge this, and this is the first step in which to untie the Israeli-Palestinian Gordian knot that has taken so long to untie. Israel, like Alexander the Great in the popular version of the legend, is using force to untie the knot; but there is an alternative version to the story and the version that should be adopted here, removing the linchpin that is Hamas to expose both ends of the cord beginning with condemning Hamas’ actions as acts of terrorism which will expose the group as what they are will begin to expose other knots more easily and make them easier to untie. If not, the cut of the sword by Israel whose only option is to resort to force to untie the knot will likely be met with prolonged conflict for decades to come.
References
[1] United Nations. (2023, December 8). US vetoes resolution on Gaza which called for ‘immediate humanitarian ceasefire’. https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144562?_gl=1*1uodxss*_ga*MTg2ODkwODQxNy4xNzAzMzQ0OTc3*_ga_TK9BQL5X7Z*MTcwMzM0NDk3Ny4xLjEuMTcwMzM0NTA3MS4wLjAuMA
[2] Guterres, Antonio. (2023, December 6). Letter to José Javier de la Gasca Lopez Domínguez, President of the UN Security Council. https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/sg_letter_of_6_december_gaza.pdf?_gl=1*nlx18n*_ga*ODUxOTA4OTQxLjE3MDI1MDU0NDY.*_ga_TK9BQL5X7Z*MTcwNDMzNjk2OS4yMi4wLjE3MDQzMzY5NjkuMC4wLjA.*_ga_S5EKZKSB78*MTcwNDMzNjk2OS41LjAuMTcwNDMzNjk3Mi41Ny4wLjA.
[3] United Nations. (n.d.). United Nations Security Council Consolidated List. https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/un-sc-consolidated-list#composition%20list
[4] Robinson, K. (2024, October 17). What is Hamas. Council of Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-hamas
[5] The Avalon Project. (2008). Hamas Covenant 1998. Yale School of Law. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp
[6] A Document of General Principles and Policies (The Islamic Resistance Movement “Hamas”. (2017, May) https://palwatch.org/storage/documents/hamas%20new%20policy%20document%20010517.pdf
[7] El Deeb, S. (2023, October 15). What is Hamas? The group that rules the Gaza Strip has fought several rounds of war with Israel. Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/hamas-gaza-palestinian-authority-israel-war-ed7018dbaae09b81513daf3bda38109a
[8] Krauss, J. (2021, April 29). Abbas delays Palestinian elections; Hamas slams ‘coup’. Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/hamas-middle-east-elections-religion-government-and-politics-e88636bc919f8aab455e01fbbd4b4391
[9] Akram, F. (2021, February 3). Tarnished by its Gaza rule, Hamas may struggle in elections. Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/europe-middle-east-elections-hamas-gaza-c748ed6d65f3e30fb3e7eaf47deda7a7
[10] Laub, K. (2023, December 13). Palestinian poll shows a rise in Hamas support and close to 90% wanting US-backed Abbas to resign. Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-palestinians-opinion-poll-wartime-views-a0baade915619cd070b5393844bc4514
[11] Carey, A. and Salman, A. (2023, December 21). Palestinians support Hamas decision to go to war with Israel, survey suggests, with no political solution on horizon. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/21/middleeast/palestinians-back-hamas-survey-intl-cmd/index.html#:~:text=Hamas%2C%20unsurprisingly%20perhaps%2C%20finds%20growing,September%202023%20and%20December%202023
[12] As the UN votes on Israel-Gaza war, Palestinians can only observe. (2023, October 27). Al Jazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/27/as-the-united-nations-votes-on-gaza-palestine-can-only-observe
[13] Sohyun Lee, J. and Piper, I. (2023, October 7). Video shows captives in Gaza and Israel. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/10/07/videos-show-captives-gaza-israel/
[14] Gretener, J., Schmidt, N., Tawfeeq, M., et al. (2023, December 15). Four suspected members of Hamas arrested in Europe over alleged terrorism plot. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/14/europe/hamas-suspects-arrested-terror-plot-europe-intl/index.html
[15] Wood. R. (2023, December 8). Remarks at a UN Security Council Briefing on the Situation in the Middle East. United States Mission to the United Nations. https://usun.usmission.gov/remarks-at-a-un-security-council-briefing-on-the-situation-in-the-middle-east-22/
[16] Resolution 2720. (2023, December 22). United Nations. https://www.jurist.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2023/12/SCRes4.pdf
[17] United Nations. 2023, December 22). Security Council adopts key resolution on Gaza crisis; Russia, US abstain. https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1145022?_gl=1*xxh8jg*_ga*ODUxOTA4OTQxLjE3MDI1MDU0NDY.*_ga_TK9BQL5X7Z*MTcwMzQyODAxMi4xNy4xLjE3MDM0MjgwMjAuMC4wLjA
[18] United Nations. (n.d.). United Nations Security Council Consolidated List. https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/un-sc-consolidated-list#composition%20list
[19] Global Terrorism Database. (n.d.). National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, University of Maryland. https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/
[20] U.S. Department of State. (n.d.). Foreign Terrorist Organizations. https://www.state.gov/foreign-terrorist-organizations/
[21] European Union. (2023, July 20). Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1505. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32023R1505
[22] Ambassade de France au Royaume-UNI. (2023, December 5). France is fully committed to hindering Hamas’s efforts. https://uk.ambafrance.org/France-is-fully-committed-to-hindering-Hamas-s-efforts-through-financial
[23] United Nations. (2023, December 12). UN General Assembly votes by large majority for immediate humanitarian ceasefire during emergency session. https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144717#:~:text=Member%20States%20adopted%20a%20resolution,as%20%E2%80%9Censuring%20humanitarian%20access%E2%80%9D.&text=The%20acting%20President%20of%20the%20General%20Assembly%20adjourned%20the%20meeting
[24] European Council and the Council of the European Union. (2023, December 8). Fight against terrorism: Council adds two individuals to the EU terrorist list in response to the 7 October terrorist attacks. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2023/12/08/fight-against-terrorism-council-adds-two-individuals-to-the-eu-terrorist-list-in-response-to-the-7-october-attacks/
[25] In harrowing detail, NYT reports on weaponization of rape, sexual violence on Oct. 7. (2023, December 29). Times of Israel. https://www.timesofisrael.com/in-harrowing-detail-nyt-shows-weaponization-of-rape-sexual-violence-during-oct-7/
[26] United Nations. (1967, November 22). Resolution 242 (1967). https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/90717?ln=en&v=pdf
[27] The Avalon Project. (2008). United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181. Yale Law School. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/res181.asp
[28] Security Council Report. (1948, December 11). Palestine – Progress Report on the United Nations Mediator. https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/IP%20ARES%20194.pdf
[29] PA says it’s working with US on post-war plan for Gaza, hopes to include Hamas. (2023, December 8). Times of Israel. https://www.timesofisrael.com/pa-says-its-working-with-us-on-post-war-plan-for-gaza-hopes-to-include-hamas/
[30] Senior PA official: Hamas must ‘reconsider all of its policies and methods’ after war. (2023, December 17). Times of Israel. https://www.timesofisrael.com/senior-pa-official-hamas-must-reconsider-all-its-policies-and-methods-after-war/
The United States veto to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution in demanding an immediate humanitarian cease-fire in Gaza [1] has brought criticism far and wide from other UN member states, the media, and observers. The UAE’s deputy ambassador to the UN, Mohamed Issa Abushahab, questioned the veto as a perplexing message the world is sending to the Palestinian people in seeking to find a humanitarian halt to the bombardment by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) where the message of unity is present but the power to stop it is not. Two other permanent UNSC members, France and Russia, had voiced their objections of the U.S. veto citing lack of unity among the Security Council from French ambassador Nicolas De Rivière and the Russian ambassador, Dmitry Polyansky, accusing the U.S. of providing a death sentence for thousands of innocent Palestinians and noted that Washington will get its just desserts for using its veto. Odd rationale from an ambassador whose country he represents is invading a sovereign nation 1,200 miles to the north.
Was the U.S. veto, cast by UN ambassador Robert Wood, the right call? The veto was driven by context in which the resolution was formed from, mainly words – but more importantly – a lack thereof. Despite Secretary-General António Guterres own condemnation of Hamas’ actions for the October 7th attacks on Israeli citizens as acts of terror, no mention was made in his Article 99 memorandum[2], seeking to call upon the Security Council condemn the same acts made by Hamas nor place the group on the United Nations Security Council Consolidated List [3] which is the closest equivalent to a terrorist list maintained by the UN comparable to lists that other countries and the EU utilizes to identify terrorist groups worldwide such as Al Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, and Al-Shabaab.
The organization that is Hamas [4] was born out of the Muslim Brotherhood in 1987 by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin as the political arm of the Brotherhood and to some degree as a counter to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad movement. Its first charter [5] revealed in 1988 linked many of its established articles to the Surahs of the Quran. Its doctrine was one of staunch refusal of any attempts of peaceful solutions initiated by diplomatic means and stressed the only “solution for the Palestinian question (is) through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors.” Though found later in the charter, Hamas does describe jihad as not confined to armed conflict and can be employed by other measures, yet the fact remained that its origins was to resist the establishment of a Western-backed Israeli state and claims the historical boundaries of Palestine for Islam. It’s current charter, A Document of General Principles and Policies [6], reveals a less overtly religious tone but still retains its aim and objectives against Israel, arguing for Jerusalem as its capital, the right of return to the whole of Palestine, refusing to recognize the legitimacy of the “Zionist entity” (though interestingly not with the Jewish people merely for their religious beliefs), and any Western-crafted political solutions to the Palestinian question. In addition, it declares that the establishment of Israel as “entirely illegal” and ideally seeks a “full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea” (though again interestingly the organization appears to be OK with the established borders arising from the 6-Day War in 1967). Despite this perceived diplomatic bent, the General Principles and Policies for Hamas is anything but diplomatic because of its refusal to come to the table and find a negotiated settlement and instead opting for action like that witnessed on October 7th.
In 2007 Hamas was able to win parliamentary elections [7] in Gaza and eventually broke away from the internationally recognized entity representing the Palestinians, the Palestinian Authority (PA). Recently, Hamas’ popularity among Gazans had waned as the humanitarian conditions in Gaza have grown worse [8] due to mismanagement and corruption [9]; yet the current Israeli Defense Force operation in Gaza has created a surge [10] in polling popularity for Hamas [11].
Still, Hamas should not be considered the legitimate voice for the Palestinian Gazans, that designation still belongs to the Palestinian Authority [12]. The goal for the UN should be to not only seek humanitarian relief for the people of Gaza but to also convince them that Hamas is causing them this Israeli retaliation and that further support of Hamas is to support terrorism as a solution to the conflict. Video released after the initial incursion by Hamas into Israel shows what looks to be overwhelming approval of Hamas’ actions when the group parades hostages taken from the raid and driven through the streets [13] in Bani Suheila, Gaza. Images and reports like this only solidify assumptions that Gazans approved of the attack by Hamas. In the end, such support for the group only works against the Palestinians. As images of the Palestinian elderly, women, and children are seen huddled among the rubble of buildings destroyed by the IDF and the dead wrapped in shrouds with loved ones mourning over them are displayed on our computer and TV screens as a striking reminder that violence must be avoided where other alternatives present themselves, there still exists reports of Hamas plotting to commit acts of terror in other states outside of the Middle East [14]. Activity like this is not normal nor acceptable actions of legitimate political groups. They are acts of terrorists and should be considered as such.
Ambassador Wood was correct to call out Hamas as a continued threat to Israel. What many news reports didn’t include was that Ambassador Wood also noted [15] that “that Israel must respect international humanitarian law and conduct its operations in a way that minimizes civilian harm” and that the “US has supported establishing an effective humanitarian deconfliction mechanism with the UN” concerning the situation in Gaza and lastly “underscored that Israel must avoid further mass displacement of civilians in the south of Gaza” and to provide humanitarian support for those still displaced. Leaving those comments out of news reports without a doubt provides ammunition for those to criticize the U.S. decision as insensitive to the plight of the Palestinians in Gaza and tries to create a narrative that the United States is seeking to eliminate the possibility of a future Palestinian state. Nothing could be further from the truth. The United States does want peace in the region, but it seeks a durable one and certainly not one led by one side that promotes terrorist acts on civilian populations.
The most recent Security Council resolution, 2720 (2023) [16], adopted on December 22nd allowed for a more expedited means to render humanitarian aid to Gaza to help relieve the suffering of civilians there. Russian ambassador Vassily A. Nebenzia still went on the record to bash the U.S. abstention and accused it of blackmailing and arm-twisting other UNSC members to get the resolutions worded in their favor [17].
Still, the resolution makes no mention of condemning Hamas for their acts on Oct. 7th or to consider placing it on its Consolidated List [18]. Though claiming to be a political party, terrorist acts such as suicide bombings and the use of vehicle explosives have also been attributed to the group [19], hardly a legitimate political activity. It has been designated a terrorist group most notably by the United States [20] since 1997, and by the EU [21] but EU member and UNSC member France seems to have forgotten that designation though it declared its efforts to financially hamper the organization [22]. Even UN-generated media [23] has been careful to not label Hamas as a terrorist group, opting to identify it as an “extremist” group. Most recently, the EU had placed [24] Mohammed Deif, Commander General of the military wing of Hamas and Marwan Issa, the deputy Commander of the military wing of Hamas to its terror list in response to the terror attacks of October 7th.
Refusing to bring to light Hamas’ actions in the UNSC is to merely further concede to terrorist organizations and encourage indiscriminate killing, rape [25], and kidnapping of Israeli citizens like that committed on October 7th.
The Gordian Knot that is the long-standing Israeli-Palestinian conflict is wrought with many layers to untie. To find a solution to this perplexing puzzle, one must first untie the first knot – that being the consensus of UNSC member states to condemn Hamas’ actions on October 7th as a terrorist act and further identify the organization as a terrorist group so that it can be identified on its Consolidated List. From that point all other knots can be undone. Immediate humanitarian assistance will materialize, then the UNSC can require Israel to reassess its strategies and tactics in eliminating Hamas to avoid a high civilian casualty count in Gaza.
In addition, both Israel and the Palestinians - as well as their supporters - should acknowledge the text of Resolution of 242 (1967) [26]. For Israel they should drop the semantics argument of what they think the resolution meant and acknowledge that the acquisition of territory through war is inadmissible under the UN Charter and to concede the Palestinian territories of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem identified on the eve of the 1967 war (the Golan Heights occupation lies with UNSC Resolution 497 and this author believes the Trump Administration’s decision to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the area only served to add more fuel to the fire rather than settle the occupation issue), while at the same time adhere what they originally accepted and committed to for UN membership in 1949, that being Resolution 181 (II) [27] as well as 194 (III) [28] relating to the Palestinian question; while for the Palestinians they need to simply accept the proposals outlined by Resolution 181 (II) in the plan for partition of both an independent Israel and Palestine.
For the Palestinians, the quest for independence begins with Resolution 181 (II). All other claims going as far back as the inadmissibility of the Balfour Declaration and their hollow argument to Article 22 of the League of Nations is a moot point. The League is no more and the British holding the Palestinian Mandate, as unfair it may have been in the first post-war period, was given to the UN to settle. Palestinians must accept the resolution to move forward. This is where Hamas’ role ends; they will never see to a two-state solution and merely seek to delegitimize Israel. Hamas is still living in the early 20th century arguing for something that has long been dismissed.
For some in the Palestinian Authority, they must quit giving Hamas a lifeline [29] as a legitimate entity and work to abolish it as what it is, a terrorist organization. There are, however, some in the PA that sees Hamas’ acts and doctrine as a spoiler in the peace process [30]. Yet, while this is a potential touchstone to determine the viability of further talks to peace, it is still not enough. Hamas cannot be part of the legitimate process and cannot be given support either within Gaza and beyond.
There can be support for the Palestinian people – support in their rights, support in humanitarian assistance, and support for a peaceful and free Palestinian state, but Hamas cannot be included in the conversation; the UN must acknowledge this, and this is the first step in which to untie the Israeli-Palestinian Gordian knot that has taken so long to untie. Israel, like Alexander the Great in the popular version of the legend, is using force to untie the knot; but there is an alternative version to the story and the version that should be adopted here, removing the linchpin that is Hamas to expose both ends of the cord beginning with condemning Hamas’ actions as acts of terrorism which will expose the group as what they are will begin to expose other knots more easily and make them easier to untie. If not, the cut of the sword by Israel whose only option is to resort to force to untie the knot will likely be met with prolonged conflict for decades to come.
References
[1] United Nations. (2023, December 8). US vetoes resolution on Gaza which called for ‘immediate humanitarian ceasefire’. https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144562?_gl=1*1uodxss*_ga*MTg2ODkwODQxNy4xNzAzMzQ0OTc3*_ga_TK9BQL5X7Z*MTcwMzM0NDk3Ny4xLjEuMTcwMzM0NTA3MS4wLjAuMA
[2] Guterres, Antonio. (2023, December 6). Letter to José Javier de la Gasca Lopez Domínguez, President of the UN Security Council. https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/sg_letter_of_6_december_gaza.pdf?_gl=1*nlx18n*_ga*ODUxOTA4OTQxLjE3MDI1MDU0NDY.*_ga_TK9BQL5X7Z*MTcwNDMzNjk2OS4yMi4wLjE3MDQzMzY5NjkuMC4wLjA.*_ga_S5EKZKSB78*MTcwNDMzNjk2OS41LjAuMTcwNDMzNjk3Mi41Ny4wLjA.
[3] United Nations. (n.d.). United Nations Security Council Consolidated List. https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/un-sc-consolidated-list#composition%20list
[4] Robinson, K. (2024, October 17). What is Hamas. Council of Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-hamas
[5] The Avalon Project. (2008). Hamas Covenant 1998. Yale School of Law. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp
[6] A Document of General Principles and Policies (The Islamic Resistance Movement “Hamas”. (2017, May) https://palwatch.org/storage/documents/hamas%20new%20policy%20document%20010517.pdf
[7] El Deeb, S. (2023, October 15). What is Hamas? The group that rules the Gaza Strip has fought several rounds of war with Israel. Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/hamas-gaza-palestinian-authority-israel-war-ed7018dbaae09b81513daf3bda38109a
[8] Krauss, J. (2021, April 29). Abbas delays Palestinian elections; Hamas slams ‘coup’. Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/hamas-middle-east-elections-religion-government-and-politics-e88636bc919f8aab455e01fbbd4b4391
[9] Akram, F. (2021, February 3). Tarnished by its Gaza rule, Hamas may struggle in elections. Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/europe-middle-east-elections-hamas-gaza-c748ed6d65f3e30fb3e7eaf47deda7a7
[10] Laub, K. (2023, December 13). Palestinian poll shows a rise in Hamas support and close to 90% wanting US-backed Abbas to resign. Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-palestinians-opinion-poll-wartime-views-a0baade915619cd070b5393844bc4514
[11] Carey, A. and Salman, A. (2023, December 21). Palestinians support Hamas decision to go to war with Israel, survey suggests, with no political solution on horizon. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/21/middleeast/palestinians-back-hamas-survey-intl-cmd/index.html#:~:text=Hamas%2C%20unsurprisingly%20perhaps%2C%20finds%20growing,September%202023%20and%20December%202023
[12] As the UN votes on Israel-Gaza war, Palestinians can only observe. (2023, October 27). Al Jazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/27/as-the-united-nations-votes-on-gaza-palestine-can-only-observe
[13] Sohyun Lee, J. and Piper, I. (2023, October 7). Video shows captives in Gaza and Israel. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/10/07/videos-show-captives-gaza-israel/
[14] Gretener, J., Schmidt, N., Tawfeeq, M., et al. (2023, December 15). Four suspected members of Hamas arrested in Europe over alleged terrorism plot. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/14/europe/hamas-suspects-arrested-terror-plot-europe-intl/index.html
[15] Wood. R. (2023, December 8). Remarks at a UN Security Council Briefing on the Situation in the Middle East. United States Mission to the United Nations. https://usun.usmission.gov/remarks-at-a-un-security-council-briefing-on-the-situation-in-the-middle-east-22/
[16] Resolution 2720. (2023, December 22). United Nations. https://www.jurist.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2023/12/SCRes4.pdf
[17] United Nations. 2023, December 22). Security Council adopts key resolution on Gaza crisis; Russia, US abstain. https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1145022?_gl=1*xxh8jg*_ga*ODUxOTA4OTQxLjE3MDI1MDU0NDY.*_ga_TK9BQL5X7Z*MTcwMzQyODAxMi4xNy4xLjE3MDM0MjgwMjAuMC4wLjA
[18] United Nations. (n.d.). United Nations Security Council Consolidated List. https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/un-sc-consolidated-list#composition%20list
[19] Global Terrorism Database. (n.d.). National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, University of Maryland. https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/
[20] U.S. Department of State. (n.d.). Foreign Terrorist Organizations. https://www.state.gov/foreign-terrorist-organizations/
[21] European Union. (2023, July 20). Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1505. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32023R1505
[22] Ambassade de France au Royaume-UNI. (2023, December 5). France is fully committed to hindering Hamas’s efforts. https://uk.ambafrance.org/France-is-fully-committed-to-hindering-Hamas-s-efforts-through-financial
[23] United Nations. (2023, December 12). UN General Assembly votes by large majority for immediate humanitarian ceasefire during emergency session. https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144717#:~:text=Member%20States%20adopted%20a%20resolution,as%20%E2%80%9Censuring%20humanitarian%20access%E2%80%9D.&text=The%20acting%20President%20of%20the%20General%20Assembly%20adjourned%20the%20meeting
[24] European Council and the Council of the European Union. (2023, December 8). Fight against terrorism: Council adds two individuals to the EU terrorist list in response to the 7 October terrorist attacks. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2023/12/08/fight-against-terrorism-council-adds-two-individuals-to-the-eu-terrorist-list-in-response-to-the-7-october-attacks/
[25] In harrowing detail, NYT reports on weaponization of rape, sexual violence on Oct. 7. (2023, December 29). Times of Israel. https://www.timesofisrael.com/in-harrowing-detail-nyt-shows-weaponization-of-rape-sexual-violence-during-oct-7/
[26] United Nations. (1967, November 22). Resolution 242 (1967). https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/90717?ln=en&v=pdf
[27] The Avalon Project. (2008). United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181. Yale Law School. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/res181.asp
[28] Security Council Report. (1948, December 11). Palestine – Progress Report on the United Nations Mediator. https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/IP%20ARES%20194.pdf
[29] PA says it’s working with US on post-war plan for Gaza, hopes to include Hamas. (2023, December 8). Times of Israel. https://www.timesofisrael.com/pa-says-its-working-with-us-on-post-war-plan-for-gaza-hopes-to-include-hamas/
[30] Senior PA official: Hamas must ‘reconsider all of its policies and methods’ after war. (2023, December 17). Times of Israel. https://www.timesofisrael.com/senior-pa-official-hamas-must-reconsider-all-its-policies-and-methods-after-war/