by Saeed Shabazz
Staff Writer

UNITED NATIONS (FinalCall.com)�The situation in the Middle East was ablaze and none of the protagonists seem to be capable of putting out the fire, charged Jagdish Koonjul, representative from Maurutius. He was speaking during a special session of the United Nations Security Council, which began on Dec. 14�ending at 2 a.m. the next day. The session had been called to consider the situation in the "occupied Palestinian territory" and to take action "in that regard."

However, the Security Council failed to pass a draft resolution that would send monitors to Palestine. The resolution, sponsored by Egypt and Tunisia, included a demand that the parties resume the peace negotiations and end all forms of violence.

The United States Ambassador, John D. Negroponte, said he would exercise U.S. veto power because the resolution was "flawed." He further charged that the resolution sought to isolate Israel politically and "failed to mention the recent acts of terrorism against Israelis or those responsible for them."

The "Permanent Five" of the Security Council�United States, United Kingdom, France, China and the Russian Federation�can use their veto power to stop a resolution from passing. It only takes one veto to stop the process.

By terms of the draft, the Council would have demanded the immediate cessation of all acts of violence, provocation and destruction, as well as the return to the positions and arrangements, which existed before September 2000, when the present Intifada began.

The draft received 12 votes in favor, with two abstentions (Norway, United Kingdom). UK Ambassador Sir Jeremy Greenstock said the resolution was "incomplete". He did not offer any specifics. Ambassador Greenstock did say that his government was committed to a settlement that would provide security to Israel through recognized borders and the establishment of a Palestinian State.

[At Final Calll press time, the militant group Hamas had called for an end to suicide bombing attacks.]

However, the representatives who sponsored the resolution and many that supported it said it was time for the United Nations to do its job.

Ahmed Aboul Gheit, representing Egypt and chairman of the Arab Group, said the basic reason for the tension, violence, provocation and destruction is Israel�s military occupation.

"It is incumbent upon the Council to implement recommendations that would represent a complete freeze on Israeli settlements," Mr. Gheit said, adding, "This is the only way for a just and permanent settlement that would take in the interests of both sides."

The other members of the Permanent Five, China, Russian Federation and France disagreed with the U.S. allegation that the resolution was not balanced.

Russian Federation representative Sergey V. Lavrov said the draft before the Council was "balanced and that its text decisively condemned terrorism."

"The draft resolution before the Council is a balanced and realistic perception of the current situation," Shen Guofang of China said.

The draft took into account the concerns of France and provided a clear-cut condemnation of all forms of violence. "The text before the Council gives a clear direction of where the Council was supposed to go," Jean-David Lavitte, UN ambassador from France, said.

"The draft deserves support and Ireland intends to vote in favor of it," Gerard Corr, representing Ireland told his colleagues. The majority echoed this opinion.

But the strongest condemnation of the U.S. veto came from Bruno Rodriguez Parilla, Cuba�s UN ambassador. He said the situation in the Middle East was a "true war" in which the "occupying army" had sophisticated weaponry.

"Without the US weapons, Palestinian civilians could not be killed and neither would this meeting of the Council be taking place," he said.

Mr. Parilla said that innocent Israeli civilians were suffering due to policies of their government. Taking a final swipe at the United States, he said the recent history of the Middle East "would be different without vetoes or threats of vetoes."

Dr. Nasser Al-Kidwa, permanent observer of Palestine at the UN, told reporters that the responsibility of the international community and the Security Council was clear. "However, today it appears that the Council will again be prevented from assuming its responsibility under the Charter because of the negative position of one of the permanent members. Nevertheless, the Palestinians appreciated the attempt," Dr. Al-Kidwa said.

But, the Egyptian representative would not give up, convincing the General Assembly to reconvene a Dec. 20 emergency session on the Palestinian issue.

A reporter asked Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Dec. 19, at his year-ending press conference, if the emergency session was a good idea at this time. Mr. Annan replied, "I cannot prejudge or anticipate how discussions will proceed, but one cannot prevent them from going to the General Assembly to have it discussed."

The General Assembly adopted a text the same as the draft resolution rejected by the U.S. on Dec. 14, which called for a halt to all forms of violence and a return to peace negotiations. The resolution passed with 124 votes in favor, six against and 25 abstentions.

In explaining why the United States was voting against the General Assembly resolution, Ambassador Negroponte said, "The proper role of the UN was to facilitate and strengthen agreements that Israel and the Palestinians reached with each other." He said that the General Assembly was imposing its will by calling for the monitoring mechanism.

"What is it that the U.S. cannot understand about fairness?" asked Ambassador Omar Dorda of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. In an exclusive interview outside the Great Hall, Mr. Dorda told The Final Call that while the General Assembly vote was not legally binding, it showed Israel that the "international community wants the illegal occupation of Palestine ended."