The White House’s defense of its failure to veto an anti-Israel UN Security Council resolution doesn’t pass muster (“White House defends its refusal to block cease-fire resolution,” web, March 25). Indeed, it contradicts the established record, as well as America’s illustrious history of fighting the UN’s anti-Israel bias.
Spokesman Jon Kirby has claimed that President Joe Biden is “perplexed” that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu canceled a trip by top Israeli officials in protest of America’s abstention on a resolution calling for a “ceasefire.” Yet, for months the White House has vetoed UN resolutions demanding precisely that. What changed, it seems, was the political calculus.
Some have argued that the White House is concerned about losing votes among the progressive, anti-Israel fringe in key battleground states like Michigan. This may explain the administration’s decision to let the UN Security Council Resolution pass.
What is clear, however, is that there was a “ceasefire” already in place—and that Hamas violated it on October 7, 2023 by carrying out the largest slaughter of Jewish civilians since the Holocaust. A “ceasefire” now will enable Hamas to live to fight another day—something that Israeli officials of various political stripes have called a non-starter.
It is unsurprising that the UN, with its long history of feting dictators and condemning Israel, would move to limit Israel’s ability to defend itself. But it is truly perplexing that the US would stand aside and let that happen.
Sean Durns
Senior Research Analyst, Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis
Washington D.C.
(Note: A slightly different version of this letter appeared in the Washington Times on March 26, 2024)