By Aidan Hehir, University of Westminster | –
(The Conversation) – “Where is the UN?” is a question that has often been asked since the start of Israel’s military offensive in Gaza. As the death toll rises and the conflict spreads, the UN appears woefully unable to fulfil its mandate to save humanity “from the scourge of war” – as it was set up to do.
While the UN secretary-general, António Guterres, has repeatedly condemned Israel – and been banned from the country for his pains – his pleas have been ignored. Attempts by the UN to sanction Israel have also failed. UN sanctions require the UN security council’s consent. The US has used its power as a permanent member to veto draft resolutions seeking to do so.
There have also been calls to suspend Israel from the UN. On October 30, the UN special rapporteur on the right to food, Michael Fakhri, called on the UN general assembly to suspend Israel’s membership because, as he said: “Israel is attacking the UN system.”
Francesca Albanese, UN special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories is reported to have told a news conference the same day that the UN should “consider the suspension of Israel’s credentials as a member of the UN until it ends violating international law and withdraws the ‘clearly unlawful’ occupation.”
But suspending a member is more complicated and politically fraught than many appreciate.
Israel and the UN
For decades, Israel’s relationship with the UN has been fractious. This is primarily because of the UN’s stance on what it refers to as Israel’s “unlawful presence” in what it defines as
“occupied territories” in Palestine. In the past 12 months of the latest conflict in Gaza, this relationship has deteriorated further.
Many have argued that Israel has repeatedly violated UN resolutions and treaties, including the genocide convention during its campaign in Gaza. Some UN officials have accused Israel – and certain Palestinian groups – of committing war crimes. Israel has also come into direct conflict with UN agencies – some 230 UN personnel have been killed during the offensive, and many governments and UN officials have alleged that Israel deliberately targeted UN peacekeepers in Lebanon.
But the enmity between Israel and the UN came to a head on October 28, when the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, banned the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (Unrwa) from operating inside Israel, sparking a wave of condemnation.
The UN’s powers
Given this open hostility towards the UN, it is not surprising that some are now calling for Israel’s membership to be suspended.
But can the UN legally suspend a member? The answer is yes. Under articles 5 and 6 of the UN charter a member state may be suspended or expelled if it is found to have “persistently violated the Principles contained in the present Charter”.
But articles 5 and 6 both state that suspension and expulsion require the consent of the general assembly as well as “the recommendation of the security council”. As such, suspending Israel requires the consent of the five permanent security council members: the US, UK, China, Russia and France.
And, given the US’s past record and current president Joe Biden’s affirmation of his “ironclad support” for Israel, this is effectively inconceivable. But while it is, therefore, highly unlikely that articles 5 or 6 will be invoked against Israel, there remains a potentially feasible option.
The South Africa precedent
At the start of each annual general assembly session, the credentials committee reviews submissions from each member state before they are formally admitted. Usually, this is a formality, but on September 27 1974, the credentials of South Africa – which was then operating an apartheid system – were rejected.
Embed from Getty Images
Key Speakers On The Final Day Of The 79th Session Of The United Nations General Assembly. Sheikh Shakhboot Nahyan Al-Nahyan, United Arab Emirates’ minister of state, speaks during the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in New York, US, on Monday, Sept. 30, 2024. World leaders from more than 190 nations have descended on New York City for the general assembly’s annual high level debate as well as discussions on the war in Gaza, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and issues ranging from climate change to the challenge posed by artificial intelligence. Photographer: Jeenah Moon/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Three days later, the general assembly passed resolution 3207 which called on the security council to, “review the relationship between the United Nations and South Africa in light of the constant violation by South Africa of the principles of the Charter”.
A draft resolution calling for South Africa’s expulsion was eventually put to the security council at the end of October, but it was vetoed by the US, the UK and France.
However, on November 12, the president of the general assembly, Algeria’s Abdelaziz Bouteflika, ruled that given the credentials committee’s decision and the passing of resolution 3207, “the general assembly refuses to allow the delegation of South Africa to participate in its work”. South Africa remained suspended from the general assembly until June 1994 following the ending of apartheid.
It is important to note that South Africa was not formally suspended from the UN, only the general assembly. Nonetheless, it was a hugely significant move.
A viable solution?
Could the same measure be applied against Israel and would it be effective? The South Africa case shows it is legally possible. It would also undoubtedly send a powerful message, simultaneously increasing Israel’s international isolation and restoring some much needed faith in the UN.
The 79th session of the UN general assembly began in September, so it’s too late for the credentials committee to reject Israel. But this could conceivably happen prior to the 80th session next year, if there was sufficient political will. But this is a big “if”.
Though a majority of states in the general assembly are highly critical of Israel, many do not want the credentials committee to become more politically selective because they fear this could be used against them in the future. Likewise, few want to incur the wrath of the US by suspending its ally.
As ever, what is legally possible and what is politically likely are two very different things.
Aidan Hehir, Reader in International Relations, University of Westminster
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
© 2024 All Rights Reserved