On Wednesday, the U.S. was one of just a handful of countries to vote against a resolution in the UN General Assembly this week calling for an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, despite the Biden administration’s supposed renewed efforts to obtain a ceasefire before Donald Trump is in office.
The resolution, which also called for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, passed the assembly 158 to 9, with 13 abstentions. Italy and Germany, which have previously abstained from similar votes, voted for a ceasefire for the first time, leaving the U.S. one of the only major world powers to not approve of a ceasefire resolution.
The vote comes after the U.S. vetoed a ceasefire resolution in the UN Security Council last month, the sixth time the U.S. has done so in the past 14 months. The vote also comes after Amnesty International, one of the largest and most prominent human rights organizations in the world, found in a landmark report that Israel’s assault on Gaza and concerted efforts to block humanitarian aid constitute a genocide.
The U.S. also voted against a General Assembly resolution affirming full support for the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) in the face of bills passed by Israel’s Knesset barring the agency from operating in the occupied Palestinian territories. The resolution passed 159 to 9 on Wednesday, with the U.S. and Israel voting against it.
Despite voting against the UN ceasefire resolution, which is nonbinding, U.S. officials have claimed for months that they are working around the clock to obtain a ceasefire. This past week, reports have found that the U.S. is reportedly pursuing a ceasefire deal in a renewed effort to secure one before Trump’s inauguration.
“We’re going to pursue every avenue we can in the time that we have left to try to get the hostages back and to get a ceasefire,” said Secretary of State Antony Blinken recently, of the renewed efforts.
The current ceasefire deal is far weaker than previous proposals, including the one presented by the Biden administration earlier this year calling for a permanent ceasefire and full withdrawal of Israeli troops. Reports have found that the current deal would only last 60 days and involve a limited captive exchange.
Meanwhile, according to reports by The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal, Hamas has softened its stance on Israel’s demand that it be allowed to occupy a strip of land along Gaza’s southern border with Egypt — despite this stance previously having been recognized by other countries’ negotiators as a non-starter brought by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seemingly in order to kill the talks.
The U.S. has repeatedly blamed Hamas for obstruction of a ceasefire deal, but Hamas has been openly in favor of a deal and has even previously pushed for the adoption of the Biden administration’s deal, while Israeli officials have been clear throughout the genocide that they are not interested in a ceasefire in Gaza.
Indeed, in explaining its vote against the UN resolution, the U.S. claimed that it was opposed because it would “vindicate Hamas’s cynical strategy of stalling and obstruction” in releasing Israeli hostages — despite the fact that Hamas officials have been offering to release their captives in exchange for the thousands of Palestinians Israel has taken captive since the first weeks of the genocide.
And, when negotiators suspended talks earlier this fall, the State Department blamed Hamas for not wanting a ceasefire, even though it was Netanyahu who was bringing last minute demands to negotiations and insisting that Israel be allowed to continue its genocide.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.