US vetoes UN Security Council resolution demanding Gaza ceasefire
The US was the only nation to oppose the resolution. Fourteen others, including the United Kingdom, voted in favor. There were no abstentions.
Dorothy Camille Shea, the United States ambassador to the UN, said the US opposed the resolution because it did not call for Hamas to disarm and leave Gaza.
'(The resolution) is unacceptable for what it does say, it is unacceptable for what it does not say, and it is unacceptable for the manner in which it has been advanced,' she said in comments before the vote took place.
The US 'has taken the very clear position since this conflict began that Israel has a right to defend itself, which includes defeating Hamas and ensuring they are never again in a position to threaten Israel. In this regard, any product that undermines our close ally Israel's security is a nonstarter,' she added.
This is not the first time the US has vetoed a UN Security Council draft resolution on Gaza. In November 2024, it vetoed one calling for an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire, on the grounds it would not have secured the release of hostages.
The United Kingdom said it 'regrets' that the latest resolution 'was unable to reach a consensus.'
'The United Kingdom voted in favor of this resolution today because of the intolerable situation in Gaza,' the UK's Permanent Representative to the United Nations in New York Barbara Woodward said following the vote.
'We are determined to see an end to this war, secure the release of the hostages held by Hamas and alleviate the catastrophic humanitarian situation for Palestinians in Gaza,' she added.
Woodward described Israel's expansion of its military operations in Gaza and its severe restrictions on aid as 'unjustifiable, disproportionate, and counterproductive.'
Israel in mid May launched a major new offensive in Gaza it says is aimed at destroying Hamas and freeing hostages, sparking condemnation from the United Nations and aid organizations who warn civilians are bearing the brunt of the expanded assault.
The ambassador also said the UK condemned Hamas' October 7, 2023, attack on Israel and demanded the militant group release all the hostages 'immediately and unconditionally,' saying 'Hamas can have no role in the future governance of Gaza.'
The ambassador also restated the UK's position that 'a two-state solution is the only way to bring the long-lasting peace, stability and security that both Israelis and Palestinians deserve.'
Meanwhile, Israel's Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar thanked US President Donald Trump and the US administration 'for standing shoulder to shoulder with Israel and vetoing this one-sided resolution in the UN Security Council.'
'The proposed resolution only strengthens Hamas and undermines American efforts to achieve a hostage deal,' he added in a post on X shortly after the voting.
The draft text had demanded 'an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in Gaza respected by all parties' and the 'immediate and unconditional lifting of all restrictions on the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza and its safe and unhindered distribution at scale.' It also demanded 'the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages held by Hamas and other groups.'
Israel launched the war in Gaza after Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups carried out a surprise attack on southern Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and taking 251 hostages. It was the deadliest terror attack in Israel's history.
The Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza said the number of people killed by Israel's offensive in Gaza in the wake of the October 7 attacks now exceeds 54,000, most of whom are women and children.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
28 minutes ago
- NBC News
South Korean and U.S. militaries begin annual summertime drills to cope with North Korean threats
SEOUL, South Korea — South Korea and the United States began their annual large-scale joint military exercise on Monday to better cope with threats by nuclear-armed North Korea, which has warned the drills would deepen regional tensions and vowed to respond to 'any provocation' against its territory. The 11-day Ulchi Freedom Shield, the second of two large-scale exercises held annually in South Korea, after another set in March, will involve 21,000 soldiers, including 18,000 South Koreans, in computer-simulated command post operations and field training. The drills, which the allies describe as defensive, could trigger a response from North Korea, which has long portrayed the allies' exercises as invasion rehearsals and has often used them as a pretext for military demonstrations and weapons tests aimed at advancing its nuclear program. In a statement last week, North Korean Defense Minister No Kwang Chol said the drills show the allies' stance of 'military confrontation' with the North and declared that its forces would be ready to counteract 'any provocation going beyond the boundary line.' Ulchi Freedom Shield comes at a pivotal moment for South Korea's new liberal President Lee Jae Myung, who is preparing for an Aug. 25 summit with President Donald Trump in Washington. Trump has raised concerns in Seoul that he may shake up the decades-old alliance by demanding higher payments for the American troop presence in South Korea and possibly reducing it as Washington shifts its focus more toward China. Tensions on the Korean Peninsula remain high as North Korea has brushed aside Lee's calls to resume diplomacy with its war-divided rival, with relations having soured in recent years as North Korean leader Kim Jong Un accelerated his weapons program and deepened alignment with Moscow following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. 'What's needed now is the courage to steadily take steps toward easing tensions, grounded in a firmly maintained state of ironclad security readiness,' Lee said during a Cabinet meeting on Monday. South Korea also on Monday began a four-day civil defense drill involving thousands of public workers, often scheduled alongside the allies' summertime military exercises. Seoul's previous conservative government responded to North Korean threats by expanding military exercises with the United States and seeking stronger U.S. assurances for nuclear deterrence, drawing an angry reaction from Kim, who last year renounced long-term reconciliation goals and rewrote the North's constitution to label the South a permanent enemy. In his latest message to Pyongyang on Friday, Lee, who took office in June, said he would seek to restore a 2018 inter-Korean military agreement designed to reduce border tensions and called for North Korea to respond to the South's efforts to rebuild trust and revive talks. The 2018 military agreement, reached during a brief period of diplomacy between the Koreas, created buffer zones on land and sea and no-fly zones above the border to prevent clashes. But South Korea suspended the deal in 2024, citing tensions over North Korea's launches of trash-laden balloons toward the South, and moved to resume frontline military activities and propaganda campaigns. The step came after North Korea had already declared it would no longer abide by the agreement. When asked whether the Lee government's steps to restore the agreement would affect the allies' drills, the South's Defense Ministry said Monday that there are no immediate plans to suspend live-fire training near the Koreas' disputed western maritime border. While the allies have postponed half of Ulchi Freedom Shield's originally planned 44 field training programs to September, U.S. military officials denied South Korean media speculation that the scaled-back drills were meant to make room for diplomacy with the North, citing heat concerns and flood damage to some training fields. Dating back to his first term, Trump has regularly called for South Korea to pay more for the 28,500 American troops stationed on its soil. Public comments by senior Trump administration officials have suggested a push to restructure the alliance, which some experts say could potentially affect the size and role of U.S. forces in South Korea. Under this approach, South Korea would take a greater role in countering North Korean threats while U.S. forces focus more on China, possibly leaving Seoul to face reduced benefits but increased costs and risks, experts say.
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Liberals play partisan games with economic news
Will Democrats put politics aside and applaud as the American economy shows a strength and resilience that so many of them doubted? Probably not. Thanks to President Donald Trump's bold policies, it appears that the United States will avoid a recession this year − one that so many liberals were predicting only months ago. Will Democrats put politics aside and applaud as the American economy shows a strength and resilience that so many of them doubted? Probably not. The Bureau of Economic Analysis on July 30 released more good news about our nation's vibrant economy. Gross domestic product grew a healthy annual rate of 3% in the second quarter after recording a less than 1% decline in the first three months of this year. Fears of a recession should now dissipate like morning haze after the sunrise. Nearly all markers of a strong economy are in top form. Unemployment is low, hovering at 4.1%. The past three months have seen steady job growth. Average hourly earnings for U.S. workers grew 3.7% over the 12 months ending in June. Consumer spending is expected to rise, and there's been a modest uptick in consumer confidence. The Consumer Price Index, which measures inflation, increased 2.7% over the 12 months ending in June, far below the 40-year high recorded in President Joe Biden's term. Even the average price of eggs has dropped dramatically, to $3.31 per dozen, down from a spike to $8 in February and back to roughly the same price level as a year ago. Stock indexes continue to grow at a strong pace, recovering from the sell-off this spring driven by concerns over Trump's tariffs. The Nasdaq and S&P 500 have set multiple record highs in July, a boon to millions of Americans with retirement accounts and other investors. On the tariff front, Trump's new trade deal with the European Union should be a catalyst for further economic growth, particularly in the energy and construction sectors. If this is what a recession looks like, let's keep it coming. Critics said Trump was destroying the economy Despite such healthy economic markers, I doubt I'll see many kudos offered to the Trump administration for powering past a recession, which the left predicted in doomsday terms. Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman wrote in May that Trump and "MAGAnomics" were "destroying the economy and waging war on the middle class and the poor." The headline thundered that Trump was "making America backward again." Opinion: Trump's EU trade deal ushers in a golden age for blue-collar workers Interestingly, Krugman claimed that the U.S. economy was in good overall shape when Biden left office in January. He charged Trump with wrecking the economy in a mere three months. Now, that the data clearly shows otherwise, will Krugman admit his errors? I doubt it. Krugman, to be fair, wasn't the only so-called expert spouting off about our supposedly crumbling economy. CNN published an analysis in April with a headline that claimed "Trump took the US economy to the brink of a crisis in just 100 days." That same month, the Center for American Progress bemoaned that "President Donald Trump's decision to unilaterally launch a global trade war could be one of the worst economic statecraft blunders in American history." Opinion newsletter: Sign up for our newsletter on conservative values, family and religion from columnist Nicole Russell. Get it delivered to your inbox. I read these articles in the mainstream news media and wonder if we share the same universe. Do progressives not see the same healthy economic markers that millions of other Americans and I see? The answer, of course, is that they do see − but they are too blinded by partisanship to admit it. Good economic news should be nonpartisan I don't have a problem with liberals criticizing Trump. Sometimes he deserves it. But when it comes to obvious wins like a blossoming economy, the constant derision is tiresome and pedestrian. A robust economy under any president is good news for Americans, regardless of their party affiliation. Right? I didn't care for Biden's leftist policies. But I didn't cheer when the economy struggled. It was bad news not just for Biden but, far more important, also for our nation and its citizens. More than a year after Biden entered the White House, annual inflation spiked to 9% in June 2022, the highest rate in four decades. Americans were hit with sudden increases in food, housing and transportation costs. Opinion: Nvidia CEO says Trump gives America an advantage. Hear that, progressives? Compounding the pain, the Federal Reserve acted to cool inflation by raising interest rates, which pushed up consumers' payments for auto, housing and credit card loans. Democrats tried to blame decisions made in Trump's first term, including federal spending used to fight consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. But Biden spent more even as the pandemic began to wane. In 2024, more than half of American voters said the economy was the issue that mattered to them the most. It's why Trump won more than 77 million votes and returned to the White House. Now, he is delivering on his promises to rebuild our nation's economy. But not everyone is happy about it. It's too bad liberals can't separate economic success from Trump's party affiliation. I can't help but wonder if they wanted a recession so they could blame Trump even more. Nicole Russell is a columnist at USA TODAY and a mother of four who lives in Texas. Contact her at nrussell@ and follow her on X, formerly Twitter: @russell_nm. Sign up for her weekly newsletter, The Right Track, here. You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Zelenskyy brings Europe's top leaders with him to meet Trump on ending Russia's war
WASHINGTON (AP) — Ukraine's future could hinge on a hastily assembled meeting Monday at the White House as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy brings with him an extraordinary cadre of European leaders to show U.S. President Donald Trump a united front against Russia. The European political heavy-hitters were left out of Trump's summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin last Friday, and they are looking to safeguard Ukraine and the continent from any widening aggression from Moscow. By arriving as a group, they hope to avoid any debacles like Zelenskyy's February meeting in the Oval Office, where Trump chastised him for not showing enough gratitude for American military aid. The meeting also is a test of America's relationship with its closest allies after the European Union and United Kingdom accepted Trump's tariff hikes partly because they wanted his support on Ukraine. Monday's showing is a sign both of the progress and the possible distress coming out of the Alaska meeting as many of Europe's leaders are descending on Washington with the explicit goal of protecting Ukraine's interests, a rare and sweeping show of diplomatic force. 'It's important that America agrees to work with Europe to provide security guarantees for Ukraine, and therefore for all of Europe,' Zelenskyy said on X. The night before the meeting, however, Trump seemed to put the onus on Zelenskyy to agree to concessions and suggested that Ukraine could not regain Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014, setting off an armed conflict that led to its broader 2022 invasion. "President Zelenskyy of Ukraine can end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to, or he can continue to fight," he wrote Sunday night on social media. 'Remember how it started. No getting back Obama given Crimea (12 years ago, without a shot being fired!), and NO GOING INTO NATO BY UKRAINE. Some things never change!!!' Zelenskyy appeared to respond with his own post late Sunday, saying, 'We all share a strong desire to end this war quickly and reliably.' He went on to say that 'peace must be lasting,' not as it was after Russia seized Crimea and part of the Donbas in eastern Ukraine eight years ago, and 'Putin simply used it as a springboard for a new attack.' The sitdown in Alaska yielded the possible contours for stopping the war in Ukraine, though it was unclear whether the terms discussed would ultimately be acceptable to Zelenskyy or Putin. Upon arrival in Washington, Zelenskyy said in another social media post: 'We all equally want to end this war quickly and reliably. And the peace must be lasting." He expressed hope that together with the U.S. and European countries Ukraine will be able to force Russia to 'true peace.' The European heavyweights coming to Washington Planning to join Zelenskyy in America's capital are European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Italian Premier Giorgia Meloni, Finnish President Alexander Stubb and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte. On the table for discussion are possible NATO-like security guarantees that Ukraine would need for any peace with Russia to be durable. Putin opposes Ukraine joining NATO outright, yet Trump's team claims the Russian leader is open to allies agreeing to defend Ukraine if it comes under attack. Trump briefed Zelenskyy and European allies shortly after the Putin meeting, and details from the discussions emerged in a scattershot way that seemed to rankle the U.S. president, who had chosen not to outline any terms when appearing afterward with Putin. 'BIG PROGRESS ON RUSSIA,' Trump posted Sunday on social media. The president also bemoaned media coverage of his summit with Putin and said on Truth Social: "I had a great meeting in Alaska." Following the Alaska summit, Trump declared that a ceasefire was not necessary for peace talks to proceed, a sudden shift to a position favored by Putin. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Sunday that a ceasefire was still possible but that 'the best way to end this conflict is through a full peace deal." The issues on the table for the European allies European officials confirmed that Trump told them Putin is still seeking control of the entire Donbas region, even though Ukraine controls a meaningful share of it. And Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, said the U.S. and its allies could offer Ukraine a NATO-like commitment to defend the country if it came under attack as the possible security guarantee. "How that's constructed, what we call it, how it's built, what guarantees are built into it that are enforceable, that's what we'll be talking about over the next few days with our partners who are coming in from overseas,' Rubio told NBC's 'Meet the Press.' Rubio said on Fox News' 'Sunday Morning Futures' that such a commitment 'would be a very big move" by Trump. He expects the delegations will 'spend six, seven hours talking about these things, maybe more, and try to get to a point where we have something more concrete.' Monday's meeting will likely be very tough for Zelenskyy, an official close to the ongoing talks said. That official spoke on condition of anonymity to speak openly about thinking within Ukraine and between allies. Zelenskyy needs to prevent a scenario in which he gets blamed for blocking peace talks by rejecting Putin's maximalist demand on the Donbas, the official said. It is a demand Zelenskyy has said many times he will never accept because it is unconstitutional and could create a launching pad for future Russian attacks. If confronted with pressure to accept Putin's demands, Zelenskyy would likely have to revert to a skill he has demonstrated time and again: diplomatic tact. Ukrainian leadership is seeking a trilateral meeting with Zelenskyy, Trump and Putin to discuss sensitive matters, including territorial issues. Zelenskyy is looking to avoid another Oval Office blowup After enduring a public tirade by Trump and Vice President JD Vance in February, Zelenskyy worked to repair relations with the U.S. Constant diplomatic communication and a 15-minute meeting at the Vatican in April on the sidelines of Pope Francis' funeral helped turn the tide. Trump appeared at the time to be swayed by Zelenskyy's conditions for peace. But Trump says he cares primarily about ending the war, an ambition that led him after his meeting with Putin to discard the need for a ceasefire. European allies also have worked with Trump, reaching a deal in July for NATO allies to buy weapons from the U.S. for Ukraine. Ahead of Monday's meeting, France's Macron stressed the importance of building up Ukraine's military and the need to show Putin that Europe interprets his moves as a threat to other nations. 'If we are weak with Russia today, we'll be preparing the conflicts of tomorrow and they will impact the Ukrainians and — make no mistake — they can impact us, too,' Macron said.
