UN Security Council’s resolution and afterward

The way to put an end to this inhumane situation is a political solution. In foreign policy, however, it is not easy to unite humanly thoughts with the requirements of real politics. An example is the U.N. Security Council Resolution Number 1860 adopted on Thursday. The resolution’s main points:

1. Calls both Israel and Hamas for an immediate and durable cease-fire. However, this is achievable only if other conditions are satisfied.

2. Stresses the urgency of and calls for an immediate, durable and fully respected cease-fire leading to the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza in a certain period of time.

3. Welcomes the initiatives aimed at creating and opening humanitarian corridors and other mechanisms for the sustained delivery of humanitarian aid.

4. Condemns all acts of violence and terror directed against civilians and all acts of terrorism. In other words, both Israel and Hamas are being condemned.

5. Calls upon member states to intensify efforts to ensure lifting the Israeli blockade over Gaza and the sustained reopening of the crossing points.

6. Calls upon member states to intensify efforts to prevent illicit trafficking in arms and ammunition through underground tunnels from Egypt to Gaza. This is something Israel critically dwells upon.

Babacan’s vote
The council adopted Resolution 1860 (2009) by a vote of 14 in favor with the United States abstaining. The United States abstinent was a surprise to all sides. The draft resolution penned by Britain and supported by France was submitted after talks between the Arab League and the United States. Despite that the United States abstaining could be explained by the influence of the Israeli lobby in the United States.

Apparently, Turkey is satisfied with the resolution, considering Foreign Minister Ali Babacan’s remarks following a "Yes" vote and the adoption. Both Israel and Hamas rejected Resolution 1860, however. So it couldn’t be effective for a cease-fire. Skirmishes continue in Gaza and people continue to die in Gaza.

It is easy to see why Israel turned down the resolution. Israel wants to keep up the attacks until they get what they want. But to see why Hamas rejected the decision is rather difficult. With this, Hamas makes humanitarian aid to the Palestinian people in Gaza impossible. Besides, if Hamas complies with the resolution, Israel will be the one engaging in attacks unilaterally and will, therefore, be subjected to international pressure more. Resolution 1860 revealed a few facts as well. First of all, the Islamic and the Arab countries have no consensus over Hamas. Syria, Iran, Qatar and Libya support Hamas as others seem not much complaining about a blow on Hamas.

Secondly, the solution to the issue of who will represent the Palestinian people is the prerequisite of a durable solution. Thirdly, an effective control by Egypt to prevent arm trafficking from Gaza is necessary. Egypt has failed in arm trafficking so far. Then there should be an international surveillance.

New roles for Turkey
And lastly it seems that unless the Obama administration shows that the United States does not support every move of Israel and seeks a radical change in U.S.-Israel relations, prevention of Israel from lopsided attacks for security reasons is difficult. Since clashes continue in Gaza, the issue will be taken up at the Security Council in the upcoming days again. But this time, the council will discuss Gaza in the frame of the seventh chapter of the U.N. law and focus on measures to bring peace and calm to the region. Turkey, in the meantime, may have new active roles in international arena.



Rıza Türmen is a former judge at the European Court of Human Rights, or ECHR, and a columnist for the daily Milliyet in which this piece appeared yesterday. It was translated into English by the H rriyet Daily News & Economic Review's staff.