Biden Administration Blocks International Law with Vetoes and So-Called "Ceasefire" Proposal -- and How to Overcome that Obstruction

“Israel has destroyed the remaining buildings of Al-Azhar University in central Gaza. It has demolished all the universities in Gaza, higher education institutes, and hundreds of government and UN schools.”

[While people have obsessed in recent days over political machinations, much of which is stage-managed as I’ve reported, the fundamentals about what is happening in Gaza hasn’t changed. A version of this piece was recently published by the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.]

Since October, the US government has used its diplomatic and other powers to ensure the continuation of Israel's genocide in Gaza. 

One mechanism for this was vetoing several UN Security Council resolutions for a ceasefire in Gaza. The first of these vetoes was on Oct. 18. Then there was another on Dec. 8. 

Following that, on Dec. 12, the General Assembly voted for a ceasefire by an overwhelming 153 countries voting for, 23 abstaining and 10 countries voting against. The problem with that resolution is that it had no teeth, which it could have had, see below. 

As a result of South Africa's Genocide Convention case against Israel, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to stop all genocidal actions on Jan. 26. The US vetoed a resolution which referenced the ICJ orders on Feb. 20. 

On March 25, a US abstention finally allowed a ceasefire resolution to pass. Sort of. It called for a Ramadan ceasefire, but half the holy month was already done. And then the US government repeatedly lied to undermine the resolution, falsely claiming it was "non-binding".

South Africa repeatedly went back to the ICJ for more orders. On May 24, the ICJ ordered Israel to halt its offensive against Rafah, which the Court ruled had started on May 7. The Biden administration had claimed during this period that it was opposed to an Israel invasion of Rafah, but took no action to stop it, continually claiming that the invasion was not under way. 

It is the proper role of the ICJ to issue orders, but as a court it can't implement them. They should be implemented by the equivalent of a sheriff. In this context, that's the UNSC. 

On May 28, Reuters reported that Algeria was proposing UNSC action that referenced the ICJ orders to stop the attack on Rafah. The US government apparently stalled that and then Biden’s May 31 statement about an alleged "ceasefire" plan tried to derail it completely. The UNSC adopted the so-called US "ceasefire" resolution on June 10. This resolution completely ignored the ICJ and its orders. Instead it claimed Israel had accepted the plan and backed the US government's alleged new process.  

Further, Biden claimed the proposal was Israel's, though Netanyahu would quickly distance himself from it. 

Biden would also boast of the UNSC backing his proposal in the CNN "debate" on June 27 with Trump, claiming that Israel was for it and Hamas was the lone holdout. Trump accurately said that Israel was the one refusing a peaceful outcome, but thought it was a good thing: "let them finish the job" he said before criticizing Biden for having allegedly "become like a Palestinian." The following day, Biden would say that even though he wasn't able to debate as well as he used to, “I know how to tell the truth”.

Thus, you had the Biden administration hijacking the rhetoric of "ceasefire" to obstruct the ICJ orders and international law. 

Still, there is a path forward if other counties are willing to take a stand. Prof. John Quigley notes that "the UN General Assembly can use Uniting for Peace to get around the U.S. veto." They sort of did so with the 153 countries voting for a ceasefire resolution in December of 2023. 

The problem is that resolution had no teeth, but it could. Professor Francis Boyle has argued that such a resolution could “Suspend Israel from participation in its activities as the General Assembly did to the former criminal apartheid regime in South Africa and to the genocidal Yugoslavia; Set up an International Criminal Tribunal for Israel in order to prosecute its highest level civilian and military officials for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide; Recommend economic sanctions against Israel; Recommend UN members sever diplomatic relations with Israel; Admit Palestine as a full-fledged UN member state.”

UN whistleblower Craig Mokhiber, who headed the New York office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, has said: “You could have seen a resolution with teeth" even "the deployment of a protection force." 

This was actually done in 1956 in the Suez Crisis. When Israel, Britain and France invaded Gaza and Egypt, the US and USSR and most other governments overcame the British and French veto at the UNSC by passing a Uniting for Peace resolution at the General Assembly. That created the first UN peacekeeping force; the United Nations Emergency Force ensured the withdrawal of the invading armies.

Thus, the US and Israeli government machinations are not the only problem. Other countries have clearly been reluctant to put their shoulder to the wheel and utilize all the legal options available to them, such as the General Assembly using Uniting for Peace.