Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Why is there only one country that vetoes at the UN when it comes to israel ?

  1. Aug 3, 2006 #1
    why is there only one country that vetoes at the UN when it comes to israel ??

    why is there only one country that vetoes at the UN when it comes to israel ?? but the rest of the entire world votes for the resolution.
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 3, 2006 #2


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    There are only 5 countries with veto power, so your characterization (the US and Israel against the world) is inaccurate. The reality is far more complicated.
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2006
  4. Aug 3, 2006 #3
    but my point is russia/england/china and france make up 80% of the veto countries why have they never vetoed a resolution condeming israel ??

    so iwas just wondering why is it only america that vetoes ??
  5. Aug 3, 2006 #4
    The answer to that is quite simple really, in the last vetoed resolution which was a treaty between Israel and Palestine where Israel and Palestine were invited to attend although not vote for obvious reasons, the vote went.10 for 4 abstain(UK, Denmark,Argentina,?forgot) 1 veto US. There is a link(I'll fish it out later) To the UN resolution detailing a fair and I though equal partition plan with a two party state and the return of some Palestinian concerns, with a will to cease terrorist activity, it was a compromise that should in theory have been passed if the votes were cast in an unbiased manner.

    The reason for this is that the Israelies were not ready to accept the treaty so the US used their veto to stop it passing, it's not a complicated situation at all, Israel simply has a proxy power of veto, sure the US will try and say it was the Palestinians fault but at the end of the day whos power of veto is it? America is Israels big brother in this situation and simply put, I think the Bush administration has lost all perspective, where as before it at least tried to maintain an air of the impartial even if it never was, now the US sees no side but the Israelis as being important, if this is not the case then it's certainly not giving the world that impression.

    Since Camp David at least got people to sit down nothing has been achieved in the Middle East. What is needed is a real will for peace, and sadly I'm not seeing the US strategy as being indivcative of this, I'm not bashing the US necessarily just saying it as I see it, you can say this is a loaded question, or it's simply not that simple, but to my mind it's a deal less complicated than US politicians have been making it.

    Let's just hope this pointless war between Israel and Lebanon has the effect of making people realise that there is no peace without neutrality, and a will to work for both sides. In other words leave it to the UN, and we will see at least a proposal to the solution, anything else pretty much seems to fail if history is any judge, this whole situation is a circular mess, that it seems from the perspective of hindsight neither side wants to solve, and those who should be neutral have chosen sides already, this is the complication side, it's politically complicated but only because as of yet I've seen no will to work towards peace, just talk, and talk my friends is dirt cheap.
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2006
  6. Aug 3, 2006 #5


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Here they are: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/usvetoes.html
    And here are all resolutions related to the Arab/Israeli situation: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/gatoc.html

    Looking into this, I didn't realize that the "veto" isn't really a veto - its just that all UNSC resolutions must be passed unanamously.

    Also, unlike genera assembly resolutions, UNSC resolutions are binding. I agree with the US position that the UNSC should not be making demands about things that should be negotiated.
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2006
  7. Aug 3, 2006 #6
    EDIT: The Jewish virtual library although you could accuse it of bias if you liked has always struck me personally as an excellent resource, given that it has pages about all the things that have happened in the Middle East, even if they do paint a rather less appealing case for Israel, they are there, for example, the King David hotel bombing, and I believe the Lavon affair are on here. Along with all the UN proposals as noted.

    The negotiation tactic has been tried on several occasions and failed on several occasions, if a neutral force such as the UNSC(or as nuetral as your going to get can't pass resolutions because of blanket veto) And the Oslo accords are dismissed eventually by both sides, then how do you attain a peace? There must be some way of decision making, we can't have a catch-22 here, the last resolution to be vetoed by the US was a simillar deal to the Oslo accords that both sides had agreed to, it changed these to fit in with a more realistic proposal, again both sides disagreed over the meat of the proposal, because it meant a deal of work for both sides, and a compromise, what then is the solution, I'm keen to hear some thoughts as to how peace can be made into a resolution that both sides can agree to?

    First off Palestine needs to be recognised as a state by all the world, by granting it membership to the UN, it isn't much to ask, since 2/3rds of the worlds surface already do grant it statehood. Why is it so hard for the US even to accept this minor concesion?

    Here's the latest press release about the meeting chaired following Qana.


    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 22, 2017
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook