Detainees, Truce and Agreements *title altered at OP's request*

[stormy4319trevor]

Continuing broad discussion of the release of detainees, hostages and prisoners and the agreements around this.

Bernie Sanders tweet

The situation in Gaza is a humanitarian disaster. The U.S. must not provide another $10 billion to the right-wing extremist Netanyahu government to continue their war against the Palestinian people which has already killed thousands of innocent men, women, and children.

He is certainly being forthright in his challenge to the government. Additional 10 billion dollars is such a huge sum. I don't know where the US finds it when they can't provide universal healthcare and have terrible poverty and homelessness. Economics are a mystery to me. But I think you are right and that there is pressure from people like Sanders to agree some kind of pause and to rethink what they are funding.

@stormy4319trevor

The US has so far spent $100 billion on military aid for Ukraine and there is political wrangling about an additional $100 billion to Ukraine.

So $10 billion is relatively not a lot.

€10bn on an unjust war that is targeting civilians is a different story though.

@1dayatatime No 10 billion is not huge compared to 100 billion, true. But the US already provided 14 billion and so that's 24 billion in just over two months. It could mount up if this goes on as long as Ukraine. And if they keep funding Ukraine as well I really don't know how they can afford it.

The UN ceasefire resolution is now supported by the US - 'conditions suitable for a ceasefire have replaced the ceasefire and includes various other US amendments

Russia [also a permanent member with a veto] and 'other nations' may not now support the the resolution in it's current form

Nearly 70% of US voters and approx 70% of UN delegates support a ceasefire

It's very hard to watch these assholes tying themselves in knots to not call for a ceasefire when Gazans are being blown to bits for the last two and a half months.

I'm not sure how the vote is going to go now with how much the initial resolution has been changed

Won? Is that a euphemism for invading and annexing Gaza in 1967?
Egypt hasn’t controlled the border from it to Gaza (which is part of Israel) for decades. Egypt can’t afford 2 million Palestinian refugees, nor should they have to bear the brunt of Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Gaza.

Israel is just now saying they can inspect and let in more aid, but they aren’t. And their casting blame on the UN is laughable given the record of their actions so far. Thousands of trucks waiting days to get through. Even to the point of fresh food rotting while waiting and them having to turn back.

UNWRA has been audited repeatedly by the EU and US and there has been zero evidence of corruption or of any aid directly or indirectly benefitting Hamas. Your comment otherwise is propaganda.

The high number of UNGA resolutions is due to the GA sending on resolutions to the SC, them being vetoed by the US and then the GA rewriting and resubmitting, only to be vetoed again. The high number is evidence of the protection Israel clearly enjoys keeping any resolutions from going from advice from GA to SC to being passed by the SC to be binding on Israel. We are witnessing this today, with multiple ceasefire resolutions going to the SC to be vetoed.

Iran was human rights chair in a set rotation on one single focus group meeting, they are not the overall UN HR Chair, that garbled version is the propaganda version.

UN head is expected to do a speech around 5.30 after the vote
So we should see the vote happening soon unless further delays
This is the new wording of the resolution

The wording now calls for "urgent steps to immediately allow safe and unhindered humanitarian access, and also for creating the conditions for a sustainable cessation of hostilities".

It's very different to the original resolution

The new resolution doesn't call for a release of hostages either

Can't believe it. What is the US playing at? People are dying all the time, including hostages, yes @Toothyfruity Just stop it already. I worry it will escalate, and just can't believe the US constantly putting a spanner in the works.

If they don’t pass a resolution today, then that means nothing until after Christmas and likely after the New Year. Meaning, the US will have used delaying tactics to give Israel an extra month. Israel knows time is running out, according to some military analysts, they are saying this is why the bombing has intensified as well as an increase in disregard for the Geneva convention as seen in disturbing reports like todays arresting and torturing of dozens of Red Cross/Crescent paramedics and ambulance drivers.

Watered down version has passed with US and Russia abstaining. It only calls for more aid. It doesn’t call for a ceasefire or even pauses.

So UNGA will have to start all over again at submitting a resolution trying to get a ceasefire. A new draft probably won’t get voted on until the new year.

Just seen. Its pathetic
Why do we need a UN resolution for allowing in more humanatarian aid?
Gaza is at the brink of a famine. Surely that's sometime that should be happening without the need of a resolution
So the US changed most of the original resolution and then still abstained

We don’t. And it’s madness to think that humanitarian aid can be safely delivered and distributed when IDF is doing ground operations that mean any vehicle is at risk of being “accidentally” blown up. IDF have attacked ambulances, civilian cars, they aren’t going to respect a truck that says “World Food Program” on the side.

So the US changed most of the original resolution and then still abstained

It’s called giving the appearance of being reasonable. They were under fire for vetoing every cease fire, so they took a plan B which is negotiate it out and then abstain so they don’t have a 100% veto record. It’s purely a face saving exercise for them while still providing protection to Israel.

@BabaBarrio it seems like it

Also this part I am wondering how it will be implemented by both sides as it is pretty vague.

conditions for sustainable cessation of hostilities

Playing devils advocate and meant respectfully..::
I assume it's the 'way' aid is sent into Gaza that's the disagreement. Maybe let's see if the UN provide more and let Israel process more.
I agree more needs to go through.
I imagine the fact US and Russia have both abstained is not coincidental. Neither would agree with what the other wanted from it.
And the uk?

conditions for sustainable cessation of hostilities

According to the Russian delegate this gives the green light to Israel to carry on 'as you were.' I'm paraphrasing - I think he said that displacing people and indiscriminate bombing could all be argued to be bringing about a sustainable cessation. I suppose he means it will end when there's no Palestinians left in Gaza?

I mean when there are none left there would be a sustainable cessation I suppose. Not sure if that's what he meant. I do think it's as useful as a chocolate teapot, for the reasons others of you have said.

@Stomacharmeleon UK voted for the resolution.

Yes the uk voted for. There was really nothing in there for them to vote against
Russia introduced their own ammendment to the resolution but it didn't get enough votes