UN Security Council fails to pass cease-fire resolution on Gaza | DW News

During today’s meeting of the UN Security Council, Russia and China vetoed a resolution, which had been put forward by the United States. The measure called for an "immediate and sustained cease-fire" tied to the release of hostages held by Hamas. It's the fourth time the council has failed to pass a vote calling for a cease-fire.

1:02 DW Washington correspondent Stefan Simons knows more
5:42 Mairav Zonszein, senior Middle East analyst, International Crisis Group

#unitednations #gaza #israel

Follow DW on social media:

[snizami]

First interviewed reporter is a joke. The resolution was a barely disguised non-call for a ceasefire. It at best said "please continue negotiating" and framed it to sound like a ceasefire demand. Reporter knew the US will take no further action too, because reporting like his gets the job done of helping them pretend they tried to get a ceasefire. Both brilliant and shameful.

[informaciondesarroll]

NOT a cease-fire resolution.
DW, have some morals!

[robvannNS]

This was NOT a cease-fire resolution. Read the actual resolution, it is tied to the hostage negotiations and is nothing more than a delaying tactic.

[kunsa]

This DW expert didn't even read or understand the resolution. Like many other anti-Palestinian media houses. What a joke

[jammek]

This wasn’t Ceasefire request immediately, it was a request for moment to get the hostages back by the US if one could read between the line….

[sihr]

Absolutely hate to give it to the Russians, but the shamelessness of the US ambassador is just unbearable.

[jamesdixon]

The only reason America is putting a resolution on the table is because its election time.

[NuestraPatriaGrande]

This is not a ceasefire! No one that wants a ceasefire should vote against the U.S. play on words!!

[joexavier]

Us lost its moral ground teach others about human rights

[sihr]

Strongly demand that DW gets an actual reporter on this serious subject instead of this Simons guys…unbelievably biased and misguiding

[mfh]

You people lack a fundamental understanding of what's happening. No one is coming to help. It's over. Bibi will not stop.

[wufqscm]

Dw did not show all the speech, shame on you

[Harz]

US call for imperative for ceasefire rather than actual ceasefire. Basically it’s like saying “let’s agree that we should stop fighting” instead of saying “let’s stop fighting”. Meanwhile the language for release of hostage is CRYSTAL!

[snizami]

That's not what the resolution called for. Why is everyone presenting it like that? And why quote the US ambassador rather than the vetoing members as to their reasons?

[silafaupaulmeredith]

This was not a resolution it was a delaying tactics. This women is lying through her teeth after vetoing actual ceasefire Resolutions.

[rollingdownfalling]

I understood now. So basically US is using weak language by adding unnecessary words like 'Imperative' in its draft to make a definitive statement like 'calling for an immediate ceasefire' into a more suggestive language such as 'determines the imperative of an immediate ceasefire...

It's kind of like saying "do this right now" compared to "knowing the importance of doing this right now" just sounds more suggestive and ambiguous.

[journalwatch]

Completely misleading!!! They weren't the only one.
Neighs (3): Algeria, China, Russia
Abstentions (1): Guyana
Yeah (11): Ecuador, France, Japan, Malta, Mozambique, S. Korea, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, Switzerland, UK, US

Palestinian Ambassador to the United Nations, Riyad Mansour, stated in the post- UN Security Council Meeting interview that they had supported "...the ambassador of Algeria, who spoke inside the security council, reflects, unanimously, the unified Arab position visa vi the draft resolution which was not adopted in the security council..." and he continues, saying "...I [Ambassador Mansour] want to highlight the very strong and convincing ‏statements of the representative of Guyana in which she gave point-by-point reasons why she did not support that draft resolution". So there are two ambassadors, Amar Bendjama and Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett, that are NOT Russian or Chinese that had their own rational reasons, other than hawkishness between their two nations.

This news report completely ignores the objections and explanations of the other two representative states' and their claims. If you want to know why it was denied just listen to what the representatives from Algeria and Guyana had to say. You can find the recording under "Threats to international peace and security - Security Council, 9585th meeting" or under Meeting Recording ID "S/PV.9584" and a press release file on the UN page, "SC/15637", should be out by now with more details.

[ytrewq]

Brazil asked days after the start.
Condemning |-|amas, immediate cease-fire and help to all.
Russia and China accepted.
But, someone vetoed because needed to sell weapons...

[richarddefortune]

Our embassador has asked so childishly. "You vetoed my resolution because you're mean." 😭😭😭

[AP-eijt]

Another shameless piece from DW for twisting the facts and acting as a running dog for geno.