UN resolution on Gaza crisis better late than never: China Daily editorial

About one and a half months after the outbreak of the conflict in Gaza that has already claimed 12,800 lives, and after four failed attempts to adopt a resolution on the conflict, the United Nations Security Council finally did so on Wednesday.

Drafted by Malta, the resolution calls for "urgent extended humanitarian pauses for (a) sufficient number of days to allow aid access" to the embattled Palestinian enclave, and for Hamas to release all the hostages it is holding.

Among the 15-seat UN Security Council, 12 countries voted for the resolution. The United States and the United Kingdom abstained on the grounds that it contained no explicit criticism of Hamas. So did Russia, as it thinks that rather than "pauses", the resolution should have called for an immediate cease-fire, which it believes is the top imperative.

The US not vetoing it is the key reason why the UN Security Council could finally give the green light to a resolution on the conflict. Late last month, the US had blocked a similar but broader resolution.

It is the number of civilian deaths in Gaza caused by Israel's increasingly indiscriminate offensive that has prompted even its closest ally to shift its position and abstain.

In other words, the UN Security Council could have adopted a more comprehensive and robust resolution earlier if the US had been more objective about what was transpiring in Gaza.

The current resolution, which Israel has rejected, is merely a compromise by the relevant parties necessitated by the mounting pressure of the increasingly grave humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

For instance, the final draft toned down its language from a "demand" to a "call" for humanitarian "pauses". No wonder the Russian side claimed that the mountain has labored and brought forward a mouse, expressing its fear that the absence of an explicit call for a cease-fire will make it less likely that even humanitarian pauses will be forthcoming.

Israel's rejection of the resolution should serve to awaken the international community to the fact that passing the resolution in the UN and implementing it in the Middle East are two different things.

The US, as China has urged, should take full advantage of its influence on Israel to persuade it to immediately stop its military operations against civilian facilities such as hospitals, and cease any forced displacement or relocation of Palestinian civilians.

The international community should also put its weight behind diplomatic efforts to secure the release of the hostages held by Hamas.

It should also strive to reinvigorate the prospect of a two-state solution as this is the only way to ensure a comprehensive, just and lasting solution to the Palestinian question. Any arrangement on the future of Gaza must respect the will and independent choice of the Palestinian people.

But despite the difficulties in implementing it, the resolution is a positive step toward a cease-fire, which is the bottom-line requirement to avert an even greater humanitarian crisis and even broader conflict.