The United Nations Security Council is poised to vote on a resolution spearheaded by Algeria, calling for an end to Israel’s military operations against Hamas. The Biden administration has yet to announce its stance, sparking widespread speculation and concern. Critics argue that the resolution undermines Israel’s legitimate right to self-defense and could bolster Hamas’s position in the ongoing conflict.
The resolution comes as Israel continues its response to the October 7 terrorist attacks by Hamas, which left over 1,400 Israelis dead and more than 200 hostages taken into Gaza. Israel has emphasized the need for decisive action to dismantle Hamas’s terror network and recover its citizens. However, the draft resolution, reportedly supported by anti-Israel factions at the U.N., calls for an immediate ceasefire without explicitly addressing the release of hostages or Hamas’s actions.
The Biden administration’s silence recalls the closing weeks of the Obama administration, when the U.S. failed to veto a similar anti-Israel resolution at the U.N. Security Council. Speculation has arisen that the current administration might take a similar approach, allowing the resolution to pass without objection. Critics, including Republican lawmakers, fear this would send a dangerous signal to Israel’s adversaries.
Republican lawmakers in the U.S. have also weighed in, with Senator Ted Cruz calling the resolution an attack on Israel and a deliberate attempt to weaken the incoming Trump administration’s pro-Israel stance. In an interview with Fox Digital, Cruz stated, “I will work with my Republican colleagues and with President Trump to take whatever steps are necessary to undo these measures, including fundamentally reevaluating our relationship with the U.N. and the Palestinians, broadly cutting aid, imposing sanctions on specific officials responsible for those measures, and countering governments and NGOs pushing or implementing them.”
U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Linda Thomas-Greenfield addressed the Security Council on Monday, stressing the administration’s priorities: securing the release of hostages, providing humanitarian aid to Palestinians, and avoiding a broader regional conflict. While, she did not directly comment on the draft resolution she noted, “The United States has exercised leadership and resolve in pursuing clear objectives: End the war in Gaza — end the war in Gaza by securing the release of hostages, while surging aid to Palestinians, who did not start and cannot end this conflict. Avoid a broader regional war while forcefully countering Iran’s terrorist proxies and destabilizing activities, and demonstrating an ironclad, unprecedented commitment to Israel’s security.” This omission has raised alarm among pro-Israel advocates who argue the administration may be deliberately vague to avoid backlash before taking a controversial position.
Prominent voices in the U.S. have decried the resolution. Anne Bayefsky, president of Human Rights Voices, accused the administration of enabling anti-Israel sentiment under the guise of humanitarianism. She claimed the draft resolution ignores the root causes of the conflict, including Iran’s role in supporting Hamas and fostering antisemitism, while failing to address Israel’s right to self-defense. Bayefsky warned that allowing the resolution to pass would prolong the suffering of hostages and civilians alike.
In Israel, Ambassador to the U.N. Danny Danon strongly condemned the resolution, stating that any ceasefire without conditions for hostage release would effectively abandon those still held by Hamas. Danon asserted that Israel would continue its fight to protect its citizens and recover hostages, regardless of international pressure. “The decision being promoted in this Council only strengthens Hamas and terrorism,” Danon told the Council. “We cannot allow the U.N. to tie the hands of the State of Israel from protecting its citizens.”
Algeria’s role in drafting the resolution has been met with skepticism, given its long history of anti-Israel positions at the U.N. The proposal is seen by some as part of a broader effort to constrain Israel’s military capabilities and preemptively undermine the Trump administration’s potential policy shifts.
The vote, scheduled for Tuesday, could mark the fifth time since October 7 that the Biden administration has allowed U.N. resolutions critical of Israel to pass without explicitly condemning Hamas. Observers warn that this pattern risks emboldening Iran and its proxies, as well as anti-Israel elements within the U.N.
