_____________

OPINION

By Ahmed Hadji

After months of diplomatic efforts and several failed attempts, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) achieved a significant milestone last week by passing Resolution 2728.

The resolution, proposed by the 10 elected members of the council, calls for an immediate ceasefire between Israel and Hamas in Gaza.

The passing of Resolution 2728 marks a crucial step towards ending the ongoing conflict that has ravaged Gaza for more than five months.

With 14 out of 15 UNSC members voting in favour of the resolution, it underscores a collective international effort to address the humanitarian crisis and bring about a lasting peace in the region.

The resolution specifically emphasises the need for an “immediate ceasefire for the month of Ramadhan respected by all parties leading to a lasting, sustainable ceasefire”. Additionally, it calls for the release of Israeli captives held by Hamas since October 7 and highlights the importance of increased humanitarian aid to Gaza while stressing adherence to international law.

However, despite the optimism surrounding the resolution, it has faced criticism from analysts who argue that its impact may be more symbolic than substantive. Nancy Okail, president of the US-based think tank Centre for International Policy, emphasised that while the resolution is significant, it is “still very late and still not enough” to address the root causes of the conflict.

One of the key debates surrounding the resolution is its binding nature. While all UNSC resolutions are considered binding according to Article 25 of the UN Charter, the United States has described Resolution 2728 as non-binding, raising questions about its enforceability.

The US’ abstention from the vote, coupled with its stance on the resolution’s binding status, has sparked discussions among UN officials and Security Council members.

China’s UN ambassador Zhang Jun affirmed that Security Council resolutions are indeed binding, echoing the sentiment that resolutions are as binding as international law itself.

The history of UN resolutions and their enforcement, particularly regarding Israel, has also been a point of contention. Despite previous resolutions condemning Israel’s actions, such as illegal settlements in Palestine, Israel has not always complied with them, raising doubts about the effectiveness of such measures in ensuring lasting peace.

Moreover, the timeframe of the ceasefire outlined in Resolution 2728 has raised concerns about its long-term impact. With Ramadhan ending in early April, the immediate ceasefire may only last for a short period, prompting calls for a more comprehensive and enduring solution to the conflict.

The differences between this resolution and the previous ones that failed to get adopted have also been scrutinised. A recent draft resolution vetoed by Russia and China emphasised diplomatic efforts for a ceasefire linked to the release of hostages and urged member states to suppress financing for Hamas. The final resolution, while securing widespread support, lacks certain elements that some stakeholders deem essential for a comprehensive resolution.

The passing of Resolution 2728 has also brought to the forefront tensions between the US and Israel. The US’ abstention, following multiple vetoed resolutions, has led to strained relations, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu cancelling a delegation’s trip to Washington in response.

Despite these challenges, the international community remains hopeful that Resolution 2728 will pave the way for meaningful dialogue, humanitarian assistance, and ultimately, a sustainable ceasefire that brings relief to the people of Gaza and promotes stability in the region.

As UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres emphasised, “This resolution must be implemented. Failure would be unforgivable.”

The coming days and weeks will be crucial in assessing the practical outcomes and effectiveness of this landmark resolution in achieving its intended objectives.

The writer is a foreign affairs analyst, an adjunct senior fellow with the Center for Policy and Strategic Studies (CPSS) Africa and provost at the Lincoln Institute for Diplomacy and International Relations, Kampala, Uganda