Article:
In a move that has garnered criticism from diplomats worldwide, the United States exercised its veto power in the United Nations Security Council, blocking a resolution aimed at protecting Palestinian civilians in the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas. The decision has raised concerns about the credibility of U.S. efforts to rally support for issues like Ukraine and its ability to garner backing for human rights and humanitarian law.

This is not the first time the U.S. has employed its veto power to shield its ally Israel. In 2017 and 2018, the U.S., under the administration of then-President Donald Trump, cast two vetoes in favor of Israel, hindering its own campaign to reform the U.N. Human Rights Council.

U.S. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield justified the recent veto by citing the need for more diplomatic efforts on the ground, as President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited the region, focusing on brokering aid access to Gaza and negotiating the release of hostages held by Hamas. The U.S. stressed its commitment to addressing the dire humanitarian needs of civilians in Gaza.

However, the veto has drawn parallels to Russia's behavior in Ukraine, allowing critics to highlight similarities between the two situations. Some diplomats believe that the veto by the U.S. and Russia's actions in Ukraine will be used by Moscow and Beijing to emphasize perceived double standards in global diplomacy.

Richard Gowan, U.N. Director at the International Crisis Group, noted that while Israel has always been a special case for the U.S., the vetoed resolution was relatively mild and focused on humanitarian concerns, including calls for aid access to Gaza and compliance with international law.

The ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas has resulted in devastating consequences. Israel has vowed to eliminate the Hamas group, which governs Gaza, following a series of attacks that claimed the lives of 1,400 people, mainly civilians. Gaza has been subjected to intense airstrikes and a complete siege, leading to widespread destruction and displacement, with over 4,000 Palestinians killed and more than a million left homeless, according to Palestinian health officials and the U.N.

Critics argue that the U.S. government's decision not to support the resolution undermines international efforts to ensure the protection of civilian lives and adhere to the principles of human rights and international law. Louis Charbonneau, U.N. Director for Human Rights Watch, stressed the importance of consistent application of these principles, urging Western governments to address Israel's actions in Gaza with the same level of condemnation as those against Russia in Ukraine and the atrocities committed by Hamas in Israel.

While some acknowledge that the origins of the conflicts in Ukraine and Israel are starkly different, the perceived inconsistency in U.S. responses is seen as reinforcing the notion of double standards. Diplomats from various regions expressed concerns about this double standard, stating that the veto compromised U.S. credibility and implied that Ukrainian lives are considered more valuable than Palestinian lives.

As international concern grows over the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza, Russia seized an opportunity to retaliate by attempting to diplomatically isolate the U.S. over its support for Israel. Despite efforts by Russia and Brazil to pass resolutions in the Security Council calling for a humanitarian ceasefire, both attempts failed, with the U.S. using its veto power in the latter case.

The U.S. veto has reignited debates about the need for consistent application of international law and the protection of civilian lives. Diplomats stress that selective invocation of the U.N. Charter's principles in favor of certain nations undermines the credibility of global superpowers and contributes to a more dangerous world. The future of U.N. action and efforts to address the conflict between Israel and Hamas remain uncertain, as the international community grapples with the complexities of the situation and the pursuit of justice for all parties involved.