Arab nations are putting to a vote a U.N. resolution demanding an immediate humanitarian cease-fire in Gaza, knowing it will be vetoed by the United States but hoping to show broad global support for ending the Israel-Hamas war.
  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldBEnglish
    0·
    10 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:

    Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield says the Biden administration will veto the Arab-backed resolution because it may interfere with ongoing U.S. efforts to arrange a deal between the warring parties that would bring at least a six-week halt to hostilities and release all hostages taken during Hamas’ surprise Oct. 7 attack in southern Israel.

    In a surprise move ahead of the vote, the United States circulated a rival U.N. Security Council resolution that would support a temporary cease-fire in Gaza linked to the release of all hostages, and call for the lifting of all restrictions on the delivery of humanitarian aid.

    U.S. deputy ambassador Robert Wood told several reporters Monday that the Arab-backed resolution is not “an effective mechanism for trying to do the three things that we want to see happen — which is get hostages out, more aid in, and a lengthy pause to this conflict.”

    Arab nations, supported by many of the 193 U.N. member countries, have been demanding a cease-fire for months as Israel’s military offensive has intensified in response to the Hamas attack that killed 1,200 people and saw some 250 others taken hostage.

    The number of Palestinians killed has surpassed 29,000, according to the Gaza Health Ministry, which doesn’t distinguish between civilians and combatants but says the majority are women and children.

    Algeria, the Arab representative on the council, delayed a vote at U.S. request while U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken was recently in the region, hoping to get a hostage deal.

    The original article contains 900 words, the summary contains 247 words. Saved 73%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

          • DarkMessiah@lemmy.world
            0·
            10 months ago

            I mean, the infrastructure has been actively falling apart for years, people can’t afford the fuel to get to work, half of the country is actively trying to sabotage the rest of it…

            My money’s on 2050, at the latest.

        • bamboo@lemm.ee
          0·
          10 months ago

          You don’t, and because of that the UN is losing its relevance. It was never perfect, but it’s increasingly sidelined by major powers that will just do whatever they want. The Palestinian genocide shows us that it is unable to stop a genocide, the war in Ukraine and previously the war in Iraq show that it can’t stop powers from just invading whomever. Even as a forum it is losing relevance, with smaller groups like the G7 and BRICS, or regional blocs like the EU and ASEAN becoming the source of new international policy.

      • livus@kbin.social
        0·
        10 months ago

        I think there’s a hell of a lot of bread-and-butter stuff that UN agencies do that people are just not thinking about.

        Sure the Security Council is just annoying theatre but there’s a lot of good being done by other agencies.