A dilemma awaits him.. How will Biden vote on the decision to condemn Israeli settlements in the Security Council?

Washington -

The UN Security Council is expected to discuss in New York, the day after tomorrow, Monday, a draft resolution calling on Israel to immediately stop all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territories.

Meanwhile, all eyes are on Washington to find out the position of US President Joe Biden's administration on the move, which causes some kind of diplomatic embarrassment to the White House.

The resolution, which is still in draft form, affirms that "Israel's establishment of settlements in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law."

The resolution condemned "all annexation attempts, including the decisions and actions taken by Israel with regard to settlements, including outposts," and calls for their immediate withdrawal.

The UAE mission, which enjoys temporary membership in the Security Council for the years (2022-2023), drafted the draft resolution in coordination with the Palestinian side.

It is not yet certain whether the draft will be submitted to a vote or not, especially in light of speculation of American and Israeli pressure to block it.

Biden during a previous meeting with Netanyahu in Jerusalem (Reuters)

The importance of the decision

The draft resolution has no practical significance on the land under Israeli occupation since 1967, but its symbolic power remains great in the international assertion of the illegality of settlement.

The new draft resolution is not fundamentally different from Security Council Resolution No. 2334, which was adopted by the Security Council on December 23, 2016, after the administration of former President Barack Obama abstained from voting, which enabled the resolution to pass, as 14 members voted for it, and it became the first of its kind since 1979. In which the Security Council called on Israel to stop building settlements in the Palestinian territories.

Egypt (a member of the Council at the time) withdrew the draft resolution condemning Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories after it was officially presented, after Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi received phone calls and demands from then-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then-US President Donald Trump.

Immediately, 4 member states of the Council, namely Venezuela, Malaysia, New Zealand and Senegal, submitted the draft resolution after the Egyptian retreat, and after the Egyptian mission in the Security Council demanded a postponement of the vote based on presidential instructions from Cairo.

Refusal to put pressure on Israel

Officially, the Biden administration opposes the recent Israeli settlement measures, especially the decision of the far-right Israeli government to proceed with building thousands of settlement units in the occupied West Bank.

Washington joined Western capitals in issuing a statement "strongly opposing these unilateral measures, which will only exacerbate tensions between Israelis and Palestinians and undermine efforts to achieve a negotiated two-state solution."

Washington does not want pressure to change Israeli policies.

In an interview with Al-Jazeera Net, Ambassador David Mack, former Assistant Secretary of State for Middle East Affairs, confirmed, "The Biden administration has tools through which it can pressure Israel to stop illegal settlement activities."

But Ambassador Mack, who is now at the Atlantic Center in Washington, notes that "Biden is unlikely to have the political will to use threats to cut military and economic aid to get Israel to back down, and I'm not sure this Israeli government will."

While John Alterman, head of the Middle East Program at the Center for International and Strategic Policy, admitted to Al-Jazeera Net that his country has "tools to pressure the Netanyahu government to do many things and not do them, but at the same time it does not have tools to force the Netanyahu government to do anything."

Mack expects Washington to abstain from voting as a way to remind Israel that it is losing international support (Al-Jazeera Net)

Between veto and abstention

Ambassador Mack expected that "Washington will simply abstain from voting on the UN Security Council resolution as a way to remind Israel that it is losing international support." With the support of progressive American Jews and the growing number of young Americans who are challenging the positions of the Israeli government."

For his part, Alter Mann, who previously headed the Planning Unit at the State Department, expected that “the Biden administration will brandish a veto or abstention from the resolution, to narrow the fundamental differences between the Israeli government and the majority of the Security Council countries. This will ultimately depend on the nature of the resolution.” The Biden administration maneuver and the positions of the rest of the parties.

The former US ambassador to Israel, Martin Indyk, who currently works at the Council on Foreign Relations, indicated that "Biden's choice regarding voting on a UN Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlement activity will be a defining moment for him. If he uses the veto, everyone will see him as supporting a policy." "Netanyahu settlers and makes the goals of his policy incoherent and unattainable. But if he abstains from voting, he will open the door to further UN Security Council actions towards Israel, which will make his position more difficult later."

Exceptional relationships remain

In an interview with Al-Jazeera Net, Indyk, who also served as an envoy for the peace process under former President Barack Obama, indicated that "Biden is a committed friend towards Israel, and he does not see the point of waging a battle over the settlements. On the other hand, he is committed to maintaining hope for a solution." Two states, and the recent decision on the settlements stifles any hope.Besides, he is a Democrat who sees the battle between democracy and authoritarianism as the defining issue of his presidency.Netanyahu is leading Israel down the path of illiberal democracy, and Biden opposes it.So, it is difficult to know how Biden will respond to that. The settlement dilemma.

Indyk threw the ball to the Palestinian side, and said, "If the Palestinians adhere to the language of previous resolutions, especially including a reference to the city of Jerusalem, it will be easier for Biden to use the veto. But if the Palestinians use the language of the American administration, and avoid any controversial issue, it will be difficult for Biden will use the veto because it would be against his administration's settlement policy."

A spokesman for the US State Department had described the Security Council resolution on settlements as "unhelpful," adding, "The introduction of this resolution was not helpful in supporting the conditions necessary to advance negotiations toward a two-state solution."