Diplomats Prepare Ground For June Conference On Two-State Solution For Israel And Palestine
23 May 2025
The preparatory session brought together UN Member States to align expectations and finalise arrangements for eight thematic roundtables that will help shape the conference's outcome.
General Assembly President Philémon Yang urged countries to seize the crucial opportunity to finally make progress.
'The horrors we have witnessed in Gaza for over nineteen months should spur us to urgent action to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The devastating cycles of death, destruction, and displacement cannot be allowed to continue,' he said.
'This conflict cannot be resolved through permanent war, nor through endless occupation or annexation. It will only end when Israelis and Palestinians can live side by side in their own sovereign, independent States, in peace, security, and dignity,' he added.
General Assembly President Yang addresses the preparatory meeting.
Concrete outcomes needed
Co-chairs France and Saudi Arabia emphasised the need for the June conference to go beyond reaffirming principles and achieve concrete results on the ground.
'We must urgently move from words to deeds. We must move from ending the war in Gaza to ending the conflict itself,' said Anne-Claire Legendre, Middle East and North Africa advisor to French President Emmanuel Macron.
'Faced with the facts on the ground, the prospects of a Palestinian State must be maintained. Irreversible steps and concrete measures for the implementation thereof are necessary.'
Alongside, she reiterated calls for a lasting ceasefire, an immediate influx of humanitarian aid and the release of hostages.
Historic moment
Manal bint Hassan Radwan, head of the Saudi Arabian negotiating team, called the moment 'historic,' stating that the preparatory meeting must 'chart a course for action, not reflection.'
'Civilians continue to pay the price of a war that must end immediately. The escalation in the West Bank is equally alarming. Despair grows deeper by the day,' she said.
'This is precisely why we must speak not only of ending the war, but of ending a conflict that has lasted nearly eight decades,' she continued, adding efforts to end fighting and secure release of hostages and detainees must be 'anchored in a credible and irreversible political plan that addresses the root cause of the conflict and offers a real path to peace, dignity and mutual security.'
Outcome document
The General Assembly decided to convene the conference in its resolution ES-10/24. Further details were outlined in resolution 79/81.
As outlined in General Assembly resolution 79/81, the Conference will produce an action-oriented outcome document entitled 'Peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine and implementation of the two-State solution'.
The aim is to chart a clear and irreversible pathway toward a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace in accordance with UN resolutions.
About the Conference
The conference will include a plenary session with statements from the President of the General Assembly, the UN Secretary-General, and the co-chairs, followed by interventions from Member States and observers.
According to a concept note from the co-chairs, the conference will also feature eight thematic roundtables, each focused on critical dimensions of the two-State solution.
The working groups include security arrangements for both Israelis and Palestinians, the economic viability of a Palestinian State, and humanitarian action and reconstruction.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
2 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
‘Just let them do it' an ideological attack on regulations
For a Bill set to transform New Zealand into a libertarian nightmare, it has an extremely boring name. The Regulatory Standards Bill (RSB) sounds like one of those pieces of legislation debated on a dreary Thursday afternoon in an almost empty House of Representatives. Not because anyone in particular wants it, but because those whose job it is to monitor the efficacy or otherwise of government regulations declares it to be necessary. MPs protesting to their respective party whips that they know absolutely nothing about this sort of Bill's content are told that participation in such debates is good for them. Speaking for 10 minutes about something one knows absolutely nothing about is key political skill. Without it, no politician should expect to do more than shepherd boring Bills through a nearly empty House for the rest of their (short) political career. The RSB may sound like one of those Bills, but it is anything but. According to one critic, the Bill will "neuter the ability of lawmakers to consider anything outside of individual liberty and property rights". That this proposed piece of legislative dynamite is the product of the Act New Zealand party is entirely unsurprising. David Seymour and his caucus are the most disciplined band of ideologically driven politicians in our Parliament. Liberty and property are their twin lodestars, and by them they navigate the choppy seas of New Zealand's resolutely non-ideological politics. Knowing exactly where they want to go has made it much easier for Act to determine, often with alarming and near-revolutionary clarity, what they ought to do. Boiled down to its essence, Act's political mission is captured in the French expression laissez-faire — loosely translated as "let them do it". If the actions of individuals cause no harm to others — let them do it. If those actions involve only their own property — let them do it. Contrariwise, if some individuals seek to compel other individuals for any reason other than preventing them from causing harm to others, then don't let them do it. And if that compulsion involves regulating the use of other individuals' private property, then definitely don't let them do it. Understandably, socialists are not (and never have been) great fans of laissez-faire. The collective welfare is (or used to be) their lodestar. Individuals determined to put themselves, and their property, ahead of measures designed to serve the common good should not be allowed to do it. Obviously, a great deal rests on how "harm" is defined. If your dairy farm is polluting the streams and rivers that others are accustomed to fishing and swimming in, does that constitute harm? If it does, then, surely, the state is entitled to regulate your farming practices? To restrict the ways in which you can legally use your private property. Alternatively, if a friend undertakes to sell you a few grams of cannabis, what business is it of the state's? Why should smoking weed, which most medical scientists have determined to be essentially harmless, be punishable by law? Why aren't individuals, if they're old enough to assess and accept the consequences of using cannabis, and it causes others no harm, allowed to do it? If pressed, Act will always put the rights of individual New Zealanders, and the sanctity of their private property, well ahead of the nation's collective welfare. These twin principles are what, with National's and New Zealand First's backing, Act intends to enshrine in the RSB. If it becomes law, then all regulatory legislation will be weighed carefully by an appointed board against the rights of liberty and property. If Parliament, in its wisdom, elects to override those rights, then the citizens required to surrender them must be fairly compensated. Naturally, environmental groups, iwi, trade unionists and the overwhelming majority of the inhabitants of NGO-land regard the RSB with horror and dismay. They no doubt believed that, having been soundly defeated several times already, such libertarian legislative forays were things of the past. The Left, generally, is flabbergasted and outraged that the coalition remains committed to the RSB's passage. Boy, are they making a fuss. To hear them talk, the Bill might have been co-sponsored by Sauron and Voldemort. But, don't be alarmed. One parliament cannot bind another. If the RSB looks like transforming Aotearoa-New Zealand into Mordor, then the next government can simply repeal it. ■Chris Trotter is an Auckland writer and commentator.
NZ Herald
10 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Bodies of two Israeli-American hostages retrieved from Gaza
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says the bodies of two Israeli-Americans killed in Hamas' October 7, 2023, attack and held in Gaza have been returned to Israel. 'In a special operation by the [security agency] and the [military] in the Gaza Strip, the bodies of two of our hostages held
Otago Daily Times
16 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
US vetoes UN demand for Gaza ceasefire
The United States has vetoed a draft United Nations Security Council resolution demanding an "immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire" between Israel and Hamas militants in Gaza and unhindered aid access across the war-torn enclave. The other 14 countries on the council voted in favour of the draft on Wednesday as a humanitarian crisis grips the enclave of more than 2 million people, where famine looms and aid has only trickled in since Israel lifted an 11-week blockade last month. "The United States has been clear: We would not support any measure that fails to condemn Hamas and does not call for Hamas to disarm and leave Gaza," Acting US Ambassador to the UN Dorothy Shea told the council before the vote, arguing that it would also undermine US-led efforts to broker a ceasefire. Washington is Israel's biggest ally and arms supplier. The Security Council vote came as Israel pushes ahead with an offensive in Gaza after ending a two-month truce in March. Gaza health authorities said Israeli strikes killed 45 people on Wednesday, while Israel said a soldier died in fighting. Britain's UN Ambassador Barbara Woodward criticised the Israeli government's decisions to expand its military operations in Gaza and severely restrict humanitarian aid as "unjustifiable, disproportionate and counterproductive." Israel has rejected calls for an unconditional or permanent ceasefire, saying Hamas cannot stay in Gaza. Israel's UN Ambassador Danny Danon told the council members who voted in favour of the draft: "You chose appeasement and submission. You chose a road that does not lead to peace. Only to more terror." Hamas condemned the US veto, describing it as showing "the US administration's blind bias" towards Israel. The draft Security Council resolution had also demanded the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages held by Hamas and others. RIVAL AID OPERATIONS The war in Gaza has raged since 2023 after Hamas militants killed 1200 people in Israel in an October 7 attack and took some 250 hostages back to the enclave, according to Israeli tallies. Many of those killed or captured were civilians. Israel responded with a military campaign that has killed over 54,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza health authorities. They say civilians have borne the brunt of the attacks and that thousands more bodies have been lost under rubble. Under global pressure, Israel allowed limited UN-led deliveries to resume on May 19. A week later a controversial new aid distribution system was launched by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, backed by the US and Israel. Israel has long accused Hamas of stealing aid, which the group denies. Israel and the US are urging the UN to work through the GHF, which is using private US security and logistics companies to transport aid into Gaza for distribution at so-called secure distribution sites. "No one wants to see Palestinian civilians in Gaza go hungry or thirsty," Shea told the Security Council, adding that the draft resolution did not "acknowledge the disastrous shortcomings of the prior method of aid delivery." The UN and international aid groups have refused to work with the GHF because they say it is not neutral, militarizes aid and forces the displacement of Palestinians. No aid was distributed by the US-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation on Wednesday as it pressed the Israeli military to boost civilian safety beyond the perimeter of its so-called secure distribution sites after a deadly incident on Tuesday. The GHF said it has asked the Israeli military to "guide foot traffic in a way that minimises confusion or escalation risks" near military positions, provide clearer civilian guidance and enhance training of soldiers on civilian safety. 'DELAYS AND DENIALS' The GHF posted on Facebook that "ongoing maintenance work" would delay the opening of its distribution sites on Thursday. It said on Tuesday that it has so far distributed more than seven million meals since it started operations. Despite US and Israeli criticism of the UN-led Gaza aid operation, a US ceasefire plan proposes the delivery of aid by the United Nations, the Red Crescent and other agreed channels. Israel has agreed to the ceasefire plan but Hamas is seeking changes that the US has rejected as "totally unacceptable." Ahead of the Security Council vote, UN aid chief Tom Fletcher again appealed for the UN and aid groups to be allowed to assist people in Gaza, stressing that they have a plan, supplies and experience. "Open the crossings – all of them. Let in lifesaving aid at scale, from all directions. Lift the restrictions on what and how much aid we can bring in. Ensure our convoys aren't held up by delays and denials," Fletcher said in a statement. The UN has long-blamed Israel and lawlessness in the enclave for hindering the delivery of aid into Gaza and its distribution throughout the war zone. "Enough of suffering of civilians. Enough of food being used as a weapon. Enough is enough is enough," Slovenia's UN Ambassador Samuel Zbogar told the Security Council. A similar humanitarian-focused draft resolution is now expected to be put to a vote in the 193-member UN General Assembly, where no countries have a veto power and it would likely pass, diplomats said. Danon warned: "Don't waste more of your time, because no resolution, no vote, no moral failure, will stand in our way."
