U.S. veto thwarts UN resolution condemning settlements

Finally found the full text

Full text: UN Security Council draft resolution

The Security Council,

Recalling its relevant resolutions, including resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 446 (1979), 452 (1979), 465 (1980), 476 (1980), 478 (1980), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003), and 1850 (2008),

Reaffirming the applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, to the Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the other Arab territories occupied since 1967,

Reaffirming that all Israeli settlement activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, are illegal and constitute a major obstacle to the achievement of peace on the basis of the two-State solution,

Condemning the continuation of settlement activities by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and of all other measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Territory, in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions,

Bearing in mind also the obligation under the Quartet Roadmap, endorsed by its resolution 1515 (2003), for a freeze by Israel of all settlement activity, including “natural growth”, and the dismantlement of all settlement outposts erected since March 2001,

Reiterating its vision of a region where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders,

Taking note of the strong support expressed by the Quartet for the resumption of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations for the resolution of all final status issues within one year,

Stressing the urgency of achieving a just, comprehensive and lasting peace on the basis of the relevant resolutions, the Madrid terms of reference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative and the Quartet Roadmap,

Reaffirms that the Israeli settlements established in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, are illegal and constitute a major obstacle to the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;

Reiterates its demand that Israel, the occupying Power, immediately and completely ceases all settlement activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all of its legal obligations in this regard;

Calls upon both parties to act on the basis of international law and their previous agreements and obligations, including under the Roadmap, aimed, inter alia, at improving the situation on the ground, building confidence and creating the conditions necessary for promoting the peace process;

Calls upon all parties to continue, in the interest of the promotion of peace and security, with their negotiations on the final status issues in the Middle East peace process according to its agreed terms of reference and within the timeframe specified by the Quartet in its statement of 21 September 2010;

Urges in this regard the intensification of international and regional diplomatic efforts to support and invigorate the peace process towards the achievement of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

Decides to remain seized of the matter.

It's actually not much different from the 1979 resolution 446, kind of like an updated version.

The day before the Veto

The veto happened on the 18th. On the 17th Obama was still considering not vetoing the resolution. Here are some statements from staunch Israel supporters in the US House of Representatives:

Thursday, February 17, 2011
The chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee...
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL).

"Support for this anti-Israel statement is a major concession to enemies of the Jewish State and other free democracies. It telegraphs that the U.S. can be bullied into abandoning critical democratic allies and core U.S. principles," she said in a statement on Thursday.

"Pretending that criticism of Israel is OK if it comes in a ‘Presidential Statement' instead of a resolution isn't leadership, it's unacceptable. Twisting and turning and tying yourself in knots to avoid using our veto to defend our allies and interests isn't leadership, it's unacceptable. The administration should change course, stand unequivocally with Israel, and publicly pledge to block any anti-Israel UN Security Council action," she said.

"This is too clever by half," said Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY). "Instead of doing the correct and principled thing and vetoing an inappropriate and wrong resolution, they now have opened the door to more and more anti-Israeli efforts coming to the floor of the U.N. The correct venue for discussions about settlements and the other aspects of a peace plan is at the negotiating table. Period."

Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY), the House Appropriations State and Foreign Ops subcommittee ranking Democrat, agreed.

"Compromising our support for Israel at the U.N. is not an option. The United States must veto the U.N. resolution on settlements to make clear we will not support such a blatant attempt to derail the peace process," she said.

So, to summarize:

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL):
1) Upholding Fourth Geneva Convention is against core U.S. principles
2) US should "stand unequivocally with Israel" ie ignore any and all criminal activity.

Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY)
The "Honest Broker" US should leave everything for the negotiating table.
Israel-US-Tony Blair vs Palestinians

Fist and foremost The United States will not be bullied into taking a total and complete stace with any nation regardless of friend or foe status.

Second, 2) US should "stand unequivocally with Israel" ie ignore any and all criminal activity - is no more and done as it has now caused us and continues to threaten our security domestically and abroad.

Third, the entire Israeli-Palestinan issue is threatening to tip global security into a state of world war as some elements are abusing it which directly threatens which is covered by :

- Resolves that if the Security Council, because of lack of unanimity of the permanent members, fails to exercise its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security in any case where there appears to be a threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression, the General Assembly shall consider the matter immediately with a view to making appropriate recommendations to Members for collective measures, including in the case of a breach of the peace or act of aggression the use of armed force when necessary, to maintain or restore international peace and security." - meaning when the UN looks the other way and contnually fails to act harshly against Israel it will time and time again be a threat to everyone's security as everyone who is looking the other way or simply doesn't care is seen as being culpable and an accessory to the fact and is instantly deemed and tried as guilty which threatens the security of every nation backing the crimes which are a direct violation of Geneva 1949.