A Resolution Not for Implementation!

Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Dr. Mohammad Ali Mohtadi

Despite the adoption of Resolution 1860 by the United Nations Security Council aimed at ceasefire at Gaza Strip, the military operations of the Zionist army are still continuing. In response to these crimes, the Resistance organizations are on the one hand, standing against the advances of the Zionists in ground battles, and continue to fire rockets at Israeli cities and military bases on the other.

It is obvious why the UNSC resolution is not implemented and there is no news about ceasefire. Tzipi Livni, the foreign minister of the Zionist regime has said that Israel has nothing to do with the resolution and would act according to its own interests and requirements related to its citizens. Hamas officials too have underlined that the UN resolution would bring them no obligation because they have not been consulted in the first place and secondly the resolution odes not meet the goals of the Palestinian nation. If neither side to the dispute accepts the resolution, then what is the use of it and why has it been issued at all?

A careful study of the resolution shows:

1.    It seems as though the resolution has no addressee. Even if we accept that one party to the dispute, namely Israel is the addressee of the resolution, then again the question is raised as to who the other party is. The resolution makes no mention of the Resistance, Hamas or even the legal government in Gaza Strip. This is while the government of Ismail Hanieh has come to power in a free election and with massive participation of the Palestinians and in the presence of international observers, including former US President Jimmy Carter. But in the resolution, there is no mention of the elected government or even the Islamic Resistance of Hamas.

2.    As the most horrible crimes are being committed in Gaza and all the international rules and regulations are being violated by the Israeli army, one expected to see a touch of these atrocities in the UN resolution but the content of the resolution is thoroughly indifferent.

3.    If the outcome of the resolution was supposed to be ceasefire, three points must have been basically mentioned in it. The time of starting the truce; the mechanism of its implementation; and the party or authority supervising the truce. None of these are mentioned in the resolution.

4.    The choice of words and their use in the sentences is very distant and indicates indifference. The point that the Security Council underlines the need for immediate ceasefire would not bring any obligation to the parties.

If the Security Council really intended to put an end to the Israeli crimes in Gaza it should have stated: “The Security Council decides that military operations must stop as of … hours.” The same problem exists with the other items of the resolution. Everything falls within hope, demand and encouragement to make efforts. The resolution is filled with sophistry, particularly in humanitarian fields. As though a toy is given to a kid to keep him busy!

It is interesting that in the area of executive mechanism, everything has been delegated to Egypt or the joint initiative of Egypt and France. In other words, the Arab ministers who went to New York with so much publicity to return with a resolution should now go to Egypt and sit down for negotiations with the Egyptian security apparatus which is an accomplice in the conspiracy itself.

The truth is that 16 days after the start of its military crimes, the Zionist regime has not achieved any of its declared or undeclared goals. If ceasefire were declared right now the winner party would be the Palestinian resistance. Therefore, like what happened in Summer 2006 during the Israeli war against Lebanon, the Security Council under US pressure should endeavor to forge some achievement for Israel but it would not be able to do that.

Interestingly, the Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal calls the resolution a “historical accomplishment”. If you asked him: Fine, what next after this historical achievement? He would have nothing but to say: “We should now go to Cairo or Sharm al-Sheikh!” But we were already in Cairo so were Mr. Sarkozy and Mr. Erdogan; then why did you go to New York?!

The truth is that Resolution 1860 has not been issued for implementation. Instead, in view of the great resistance put up by the Palestinian fighters in Gaza and the massive global demonstrations against Israel, the Americans have decided to give enough time to the Zionist army to break up the resistance and at the same time pour a glass of water over the fire of the world public opinion. That is all! ‌

Source: http: //

طراحی و توسعه آگاه‌سیستم