A capital mistake: on UN resolution against US’ Jerusalem move:
Context
Jerusalem issue
No tolerance for pressure
- The world witnessed in the past few days at the United Nations, on a resolution demanding that the U.S. rescind its recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, was an unprecedented display of the arrogance of power
- Never before in the history of the UN has a member state threatened, so publicly and so inelegantly, fellow member states with dire consequences if they did not fall in line with its position as the U.S. did. It should not come as a surprise if in the coming weeks and months the U.S. loses an election to one of the UN organisations, just as Britain lost its bid to a seat on the International Court of Justice, and for the same reason
- The member states are not willing to put up any longer with the hubris of the Permanent Five
Damage to peace process
The Jerusalem issue is easily the most contentious one between the the Palestinians and the Israelis. Any attempt to unilaterally change its status will kill the peace process
Muted reactions
The immediate international reaction to Mr. Trump’s decision on Jerusalem was rather muted. Instead of condemning it, most voiced concern at the negative impact it would have on the peace process
- Several Arab countries were not very vocal in their criticism. But soon, the Arab street asserted itself and forced the governments to take a more robust position
- Egypt seems to have played a lead role in this. It drafted a resolution which avoided mentioning the U.S. by name; that would have made it difficult for Britain and others to support the draft
- After the veto in the Security Council, Egypt and Turkey lost no time in bringing the matter to an emergency session of the General Assembly, where there is no veto
Voting on the resolution
- In all, 172 member states cast their votes
- This means 21 countries did not vote at all
- A few of them seem to have lost their right to vote because of arrears in payment of their mandatory dues to the organisation
- The resolution passed with 128 votes in favour, a comfortable two-thirds majority. Nine voted against, and 35 abstained
- It would be interesting to watch how the presidential threat works out in practice in the case of Pakistan which voted against the U.S. Among India’s neighbours, Bhutan abstained
- This might be explained either by its desire to demonstrate its independence from India or not to alienate the U.S., or perhaps a combination of the two
India’s voting
India voted in favour of the resolution. How this decision fairs with respect to Israel & US? Let’s have a look.
Israel
- It has excellent relations with Israel, as ought to be. But an objective analysis suggests that it is Israel which needs India more than the other way around
- India buys at least a third of Israel’s defence production. India is also very important to Israel for diplomatic and political reasons
- Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will not cancel his forthcoming visit to India
US
In this case interest is mutual
- Indian interest: We need American support for a few things such as the sale of their defence platforms and membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group
- US interest in India’s markets: The U.S. has a huge interest in India’s markets, especially given the latter’s insatiable desire to acquire, and almost limitless capacity to pay for, expensive military hardware
- China factor: There is also the China factor. But since Mr. Trump has very recently described India as a leading global power and expressed his readiness to support it in reaching that status, India can perhaps relax. It is fortunate since it is not dependent on American aid, which can be cut off or reduced at will
Silence of Muslim community
Noteworthy has been the silence of the Muslim community in India, judging from the electronic and English language print media. Jerusalem has always been a ‘red line’ issue for them. The government would be justified in drawing its own conclusions from the relative absence of a Muslim reaction to the U.S. move
