Kenya on Wednesday abstained from voting as United Nations members passed a resolution demanding Israel to end its “unlawful” presence in Gaza, within a year.
The resolution which calls for Israel to withdraw from the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem and was adopted at a time when Israel's conflict with Hamas militant group in Gaza is nearing its first anniversary on October 7.
Kenya, Ethiopia, Canada, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda, and South Sudan, among others, abstained from the resolution backed by 124 other countries. But Kenya’s decision was curious, especially since Nairobi had in May supported Palestinian Territories to sit in the UN General Assembly (Unga) and be able to draft resolutions.
Kenya’s peers in the region, including Uganda, Tanzania, Djibouti, Burundi and Mauritius voted for the resolution whose origin was based on a case filed by South Africa at the International Court of Justice. Earlier in July, the ICJ based at The Hague in the Netherlands, had ruled that Israeli’s presence in Palestinian territory was unlawful.
The 15-judge bench had on July 19 listed a number of violations committed by Israel, including the building and expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, exploitation of Palestinian resources like water, annexation of land and discrimination against Palestinians in general. But the ruling was non-binding because it was only an advisory.
On the floor of the Unga, Kenya abstained even though it said it backs the quest for Palestinian statehood and independence.
Mr Ekitela Lokaale, Kenya’s permanent representative to the UN said Kenya backs “centrality of political solutions in resolving conflict”, suggesting the resolution at hand was providing a legal solution to a problem of political nature. The Unga resolution will also be non-binding but could provide more moral ammunition for Palestine to continue portraying Israel as the aggressor.
Kenya decried collective punishment of Palestinians, including the most vulnerable women, children and the sick, and obliterated destruction of essential civilian infrastructure by Israeli forces.
For Kenya, the stance on Israel and Palestine has been somewhat vague lately. Traditionally a supporter of a two-state solution, Kenya has also often maintained strong ties with Israel, sometimes on the pressure from the US.
During negotiations for a trade deal under President Donald Trump, Washington suggested a clause that could technically compel Kenya to support the Israeli cause.
When Hamas attacked Israel last year in October, killing more than 1200 people and abducting 250 others, Kenya condemned Hamas ‘terrorism’ and pledged firm solidarity with Israel. But after the death toll of civilians mounted in Palestine, Kenya amended its stance, calling for restraint while condemning terrorism. More than 40,000 Palestinians have died in the conflict since October last year.
Later, President William Ruto admitted the conflict was convoluted, asking that military action be slowed.
“In consideration of the complex and delicate context of the security situation in Israel-Palestine, Kenya also makes a call for the de-escalation of violence and urges all parties to restrain from further military action, given its potential to intensify carnage and the suffering of innocent civilians, and to trigger heightened tension in the region and beyond,” Ruto said earlier this year.
The resolution was supported by 124 countries, while 43 (including Kenya) abstained and 14 (including Israel and the United States) voted against it.
Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the US Ambassador to the UN criticised what she labeled as flaws in the resolution.
“We have provided support to defend themselves and that does not mean that in any way we want to see this war continue, we want to end and our President Joe Biden has put every effort to try and find a solution and move us to which is peace,” said Thomas-Greenfield whose country voted against the resolution.
“This goes beyond the International Court of Justice ruling and doesn't recognise that Hamas is a terrorist organisation in control of Gaza or that Israel has a right to defend itself, she said.
“In our view, the resolution does not bring about tangible benefits across the board for the Palestinian people, Thomas-Greenfield said. I think it could complicate the situation on the ground, complicate what we're trying to do to end the conflict, and I believe it impedes reinvigorating steps toward a two-state solution.
The resolution also demands the withdrawal of all Israeli forces and the evacuation of settlers from the occupied Palestinian territories, like the West Bank and East Jerusalem, without delay. It urges countries to impose sanctions on those responsible for maintaining Israel's presence in the territories and halt arms exports to Israel if they're suspected of being used there.
But some Jewish observers said the resolution was flawed because it did not compel Hamas to also end its violence. The Simon Wiesenthal Center, which holds consultative status at the United Nations, said the resolution would expose Israel to destruction.
“This one-sided and unjust resolution ignores all of the history that pre-dated the 1967 war, a war launched upon Israel with full support of the PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organisation) for the express purpose of destroying the world’s only Jewish state; as well as Israel’s reasonable concerns to not exchange territory without legitimate security guarantees,” said Rabbi Abraham Cooper, The Centre’s Associate Dean and Global Social Action Director.
“This resolution makes no parallel demand of the Palestinian Authority to stop incitement in its media & schools calling for Israel to be destroyed.”
He also argued there were problems with the definition of ‘Palestinian territory’ something he argued will lead to a new point of struggle in future.
In addition, the resolution calls for Israel to pay reparations to Palestinians for the damage caused by its occupation and urges countries to take steps to prevent trade or investments that maintain Israel's presence in the territories.
The Islamic Relief Worldwide, a charity, since welcomed the decision by a majority of the countries, however, with doubts about whether it will be implemented.
“This is an important statement but it will be meaningless? Unless it’s accompanied by a significant increase in international pressure to ensure that Israel complies with it. Regardless of how they voted today, all governments must now use all their leverage to pressure Israel to end its occupation and respect the ruling of the International Court of Justice.
This includes halting arms sales that could be used in violation of international law, legislating to ban trade with illegal Israeli settlements, and suspending partnership agreements,” Islamic Relief Worldwide said.
“The Israeli occupation denies Palestinians their fundamental human rights, undermines their dignity and entrenches discrimination and poverty. Lasting peace is impossible without it ending.”
Danny Danon, Israel's ambassador to the UN argued the decision by the member states to back the Palestinian Authority's ‘diplomatic terrorism’ was shameful.
“Instead of condemning Hamas and calling for the release of all 101 of the remaining hostages, the General Assembly continues to dance to the music of the Palestinian Authority, which backs the Hamas murderers,” Mr Danon said.
The resolution requests UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to submit a report to the General Assembly within three months on implementing the resolution, including any actions taken by Israel, other states, and international organizations, including the United Nations.
"I will implement any decision of the General Assembly in that regard,” Guterres said.
