• Published 21:09 28.03.10
  • Latest update 21:44 28.03.10

Report: U.S. will 'consider abstaining' if UN votes on East Jerusalem

Diplomatic source tells BBC that a U.S. official told Qatari FM the U.S. would not guarantee veto.

By Natasha Mozgovaya Haaretz Service Tags: Israel news East Jerusalem

The United States would "seriously consider abstaining" should the United Nations Security Council pass a resolution condemning Israel's housing construction in East Jerusalem, the BBC reported on Sunday.

That message was passed during a meeting between a senior U.S. official and Qatari Foreign Minister Hamad Bin Jasim Al Thani, a diplomatic source told the BBC.

Sheikh Hamad reportedly asked a senior official from the Obama administration whether the U.S. would promise not to veto a Security Council resolution condemning Israel's settlement activity in East Jerusalem.

The U.S. official reportedly told Hamad in response that the current U.S. position was that it would "seriously consider abstention", according to the BBC.

The White House has not yet responded to Haaretz's request for clarification.

Tensions between Israel and the U.S. flared earlier this month when Jerusalem announced its approval of 1,600 new housing units in East Jerusalem, during U.S. Vice President Joe Biden's visit to the region.

The U.S. termed the timing of the announcement an "insult," and both sides have declared that the incident would not harm the close relations.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last year declared a temporary 10-month settlement halt in the West Bank, but would not include East Jerusalem in that freeze. Netanyahu and members of his coalition have repeatedly declared that construction in Jerusalem would continue.

U.S. Vice President Biden and PM Netanyahu

Photo by: (Archive)
  • Print Page
  • Send to a friend
  • Share
  • Text Size +|-
 
 
    This story is by: Natasha Mozgovaya Haaretz Service
TalkBacks

Why Facebook Connect?

Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.

Add a comment

Add your reply

  • 44. 0 0
    Going against the American people
    • Brod
    • 29.03.10
    • 21:21

    If they do abstain, they will go against the will of the American people-Judeo-Christian America and Congress. And they will have to face Congress. The wrath of Congress can be powerful as it does have the power to impeach the President.

  • 43. 0 0
    what a joke
    • edgar
    • 29.03.10
    • 19:56

    The US has issued its most vociferous protest in years to Israel, one it has made before, aginst building in East Jerusalem, and yet it would only consider ABSTAINING from a UN vote condemning that very construction. No two countries make the UN more of a joke than Israel and the US.

  • 42. 0 0
    us will consider abstaining.
    • anil
    • 29.03.10
    • 11:19

    95+% of the world disagrees with what Isreal is doing. go listen to people in Africa Middleeast,Asia etc. They all know Isreal has been using its media and money power of its supporter to bully everyone. now reality has fianlly come.

  • 41. 0 0
    This would be unconscionable &contradict long standing US policy
    • Dutch
    • 29.03.10
    • 09:04

    Here Is Jimmy Carter noting the America posit-ion on Israeli settlements going all the way back to the Eisenhower Administration..... "The unwavering U.S. position since Dwight Eisenhower's administration has been that Israel's borders coincide with those established in 1949, and, since 1967, the universally adopted UN Resolution 242 has mandated Israel's withdrawal from the occupied territories. This policy was reconfirmed even by Israel in 1978 and 1993, and emphasised by all American presidents, including George W. Bush. As part of the quartet, including Russia, the UN, and the European Union, he has endorsed a "Road Map" for peace " Jimmy Carter http://www.cartercenter.org/news/documents/doc2320.html

  • 40. 0 0
    #39 Howiej
    • J Thomas
    • 29.03.10
    • 08:03

    Howiej, read the letter that so many Congressmen signed. It says almost nothing that Obama or Clinton would not sign themselves. It is in no way in support of Israel against Obama, and it says nothing in support of Israel keeping land outside Israel's 1967 borders. Maybe Congress would object to Obama failing to veto such a UN bill, but that letter does not inform us about that. The Israel Lobby depends heavily on Americans staying uninformed about Israel's issues. They work best by threat, not by carrying out those threats. If the Israel Lobby is involved in an attempt to impeach Obama they will become quite visible and that will lose them much if not most of their power. Whoever the next President is would then be very much insulated from Israeli threats and would be expected to prove it.... The status quo is unsustainable whether or not this particular battle is won.

  • 39. 0 0
    #35 and reality
    • howiej
    • 29.03.10
    • 07:02

    Kelly you should learn to read the real news instead of the Haartez Talkbacks. More than 75% of the U.S. Congress has signed petitions in support of Israel and their government. If Obama does abstain in this vote against Israel in the UNSC, he will not be able to hide behind anyone when his true feelings will be out in the open. I am sure that 80% of the Jews will not be behind Obama except to push him out of the White House. Hopefully he will learn soon that buying the Arab/Moslem friendship at the expense of Israel will backfire.

  • 38. 0 0
    Everybody's exploring possibilities.
    • J Thomas
    • 29.03.10
    • 05:13

    AIPAC has a letter signed by hundreds of congressmen. It doesn't say much. Could they get a stronger one? Could they hint at impeachment? Obama will "consider" abstaining on a vote. Etc, etc. As a later step the USA might not send Israel some of the promised military supplies etc, but hold them ready to airlift to Israel if there is need. And Israel can mentioin the possibility of selling secret US technology to nations the USA does not want to have it.... All just exploring the possibilities, seeing how it might go if there is no agreement. Both sides have a lot to lose, but if one side has a trump then the eventual agreement will tend to go their way.

  • 37. 0 0
    Muslim #33: 100% veto
    • NYC Guy
    • 29.03.10
    • 04:43

    "so they vote the wrong way once... and they are no longer allies or friends ?" Sorry but this is not voting the wrong way. This would be voting the right way and the other 100+ times was voting the wrong way. This is why Israel has gotten so belligerent thinking that they are right when in actuality USA was merely covering Israels butt. This was our mistake for allowing it to go on for so long. If they consider this an act of treachery then so be it. We should consider it treachery that they continually made us have to do that for them and cancelled any treaty we had with them from the very beginning. It is countries like israel that has made the UN appear to be a helpless and useless organization.

  • 36. 0 0
    It's time to show Israel...
    • Cool B
    • 29.03.10
    • 04:16

    who is the boss, to let them know they cannot survive without us, and we are growing sick and tired of their arrogance.

  • 35. 0 0
    More than Obama, this is a message from US jews to Israel
    • Kelly Landau
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:50

    No longer is it possible to get congress to rally behind this right wing govt agenda. Israel wake up, Bush-a-Claus is gone.

  • 34. 0 0
  • 33. 0 0
    #4 US veto 100% of time in favor israel
    • muslim--
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:48

    so they vote the wrong way once... and they are no longer allies or friends ?

  • 32. 0 0
    The Record
    • Axl
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:42

    The United States is already on record as abstaining on UNSC Resolutions 476 and 478 that condemned the Jerusalem Law and held Israel in violation of international law in annexing of East Jerusalem. America's policy on the non-legitimacy of settlements has not changed for 43 years. The United States does not recognize Israel's claims of sovereignty over East Jerusalem. Even AIPAC understands that the foreign policy prerogative of the Executive in the US is exclusive and absolute under the Constitution. The Jerusalem Embassy Act was passed by a veto proof majority in 1995, and has never been signed by Clinton, Bush or Obama. Congress can only do so much. Netanyahu can bruise Obama in this fight, but he cannot win it.

  • 31. 0 0
  • 30. 0 0
    u.s. bluffing in order to twist Israel's arm
    • hidden
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:39

    Only 2 times in history of u.n. has u.n. voted and used military force to enforce resolutions--once in response to n. Korea invading S. Korea in 1950 and in the Iraqi invasion of kuwait .

  • 29. 0 0
  • 28. 0 0
    Take your veto and STUFF IT
    • Lenny
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:38

  • 27. 0 0
    President Obama should join Arab delegation
    • Paul Freedman
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:37

    There is no point, now, of Israel making further unilateral concessions to the Arab and Islamic parties through the pipeline of the current executive administration in the White House. Obama has seriously violated his campaign promises to support a united Jeruslem, his acceptance of a freeze in construction excluding Jerusalem, and has consistently downplayed the anti-Jewish whiff emanating from protests against "Jewification" of Jerusalem, denigration of Jewish history and incitement to program emanating from the Arab and Islamic commmunity. Know, he is aligning the American administration with the policy of international delegitimation and blackmail of Israel's enemies, all, supposedly to start "proximity talks" for gosh sakes. Israel concessions at this point will only encourage further pressure on the Obama administration from those he is apparently more comfortable with than Israel and its Jews and its supporters in the United States. Let him join the Arabs in direct talks.

  • 26. 0 0
    Obama is a lier!
    • marat
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:37

    This guy was spewing about an "undivided Jerusalem" and his "unwavering support of Israel" blah blah throughout his campaign. I feel sorry for the masses of Americans who bought into his rhetoric. Me? He left me cold and I found him opaque, manipulative. Too bad those voters can't sue Barack Hussein. Is he a Trojan Horse?? Maybe.

  • 25. 0 0
    Who will take YOU seriously, racist Dino?
    • Israeli citizen
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:36

    You only spit in this direction. Do you barely know what is happening there, in "neutral" Switzerland?

  • 24. 0 0
    We asked for it
    • Amos
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:30

    with our stupid submission to religious fanatics, extreme right fascist and and ideologically undefinable exsoviet parti we could not hope for any thing better than that. The ilogical staborn positions of BIBI, the timing of construction permits etc made of us a sort of an international paria. If we'll continue like that we'll find ourselves naked and alone with no one ready to even talk to us. Perhaps by then, by manque of choice the messia will decide to come down and save us, it might be the last chance. Just look how He saved Bar Cochva and his kingdom.

  • 23. 0 0
    Well, everything else would be crazy, wouldn't it....???
    • Swiss (Dino)
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:27

    Then the Obama administration would really stand with its pants down in front of the whole world community, after the public row with Israel over the past 3 weeks. I would say that would definitely be the end of any future role of the U.S. as a mediator in the ME, because then no one, and I would emphasize, ABSOLUTELY NO ONE would take them seriously anymore.... Nuff said.

  • 22. 0 0
    International obligation
    • Osama
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:26

    The condemnation by the UN of Israeli occupational actions in Jerusalem and the cleansing of Palestinians should be an international obligation as it is against international laws and human rights. And if the US wants to do anything against this decision, the world should confront them.

  • 21. 0 0
    Jerusalem belongs to the Jews
    • Marco
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:25

    Its time the Jews & the State of Israel stand up to the world & swear by G-D that Jerusalem is and always will be the undivided capital of the JEWISH STATE OF ISRAEL. Where is Rome? Where is Sparta? Where is Great Britain(little island Britain) & where do you think America will be in time..... but Israel & the Jewish people will prevail.

  • 20. 0 0
    Abstention
    • Average US Citizen
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:24

    Don't count on our support when the UNSC declares you guys war criminals either. Just like the British we cannot afford to continue down this path of appeasement.

  • 19. 0 0
    so what?
    • eddie
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:22

    they have already condemned the building, and created a crisis, so why should they oppose a UN vote saying the same thing?

  • 18. 0 0
    Of course, US will abstain
    • Dr. Mamilla-Jerusale
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:20

    This was the gist of Obama's message to Netanyahu. This is a "non-news" news. White House is "leaking" this on purpose. They are already on record condemning East Jerusalem building. There is nothing new here. The real message is that if the UNSC resolution simply states they condemn, US is willing to abstain. This is only a first step. Next step is resolution calling for enforcement. Then, there will be resolution on the West Bank settlements. First, just a denunciation, followed by enforcement resolutions. This is not rocket science, It's very, very straightforward. Of course, Israeli government will mobilize AIPAC, ADL, Wiesenthal, etc. to no avail. When Congress's ;most visible critics are light-weights like Cantor and Ross-Lehtinen, the Israel lobby has some serious problems. After all, they are trying to defend the indefensible. See Reut Institute report, if you want to understand what is really going on.

  • 17. 0 0
    they will then no longer be neutral but must be seen as endorsing
    • ralph
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:17

    our enemies. not the same as becoming our enemies but no longer neutral. and should be treated as such during negotiations.

  • 16. 0 0
    US may seriously consider abstaining?
    • Ethan
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:16

    wow...how dare they...don't they realise that their UN seat is actually ours? Bibi should demand that Obama calls him immediately to explain this insubordinate behavior

  • 15. 0 0
    Finally - Israel Faces The US Nuclear Option
    • chet
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:13

    In a little more than a year that began with the Cast Lead fiasco, various diplomatic blunders and the Biden finger in the eye, Netanyahoo has led israel to its worst-case scenario - a UNSC resolution demanding cessation of WB land theft. Obviously, the Israel-can-do-no-wrongers that inhabit these Talkbacks will beat their chests calling for non-compliance with an "anti-semitic" UN resolution, but I'm certain that they know, in their heart of hearts, that if this happens, it is the beginning of the end. Sanctions, economic and diplomatic isolation....

  • 14. 0 0
    At some point in time the radical Left will understand the damage
    • Gilad144
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:13

    At some point in time, the radical Left in Israel will understand that when it comes to Jews, capitulation on issues only invites more pressure. There will come a time when there will be nothing else to give and still the pressure will continue. Only unity can save the Jewish people now, and there are not many issues to rally Jews around. The Left are so quick to ignore their heritage and history.

  • 13. 0 0
    Obowmao and Hitlery throw IL under the bus
    • Max
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:13

    However, weak quivering shivering pants-peeing the Booboo fails to realise it, he lives in a fantasy world...

  • 12. 0 0
    time will tell if USA is prepared to stop the settlements
    • muslim--
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:11

    it would be big boost to any possible discussions... but implementation with bibi is another story. veto or no veto.. settlements need to stop for any talks to have any value.. the talks and peace should not be a easy way out for expanding settlements.

  • 11. 0 0
    would the US veto?
    • matteo d'agostino,it
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:07

    the US has in the past, in order to please rebel israel, fallen victim, and has many times vetoed resolutions against israel. should the US now veto a security council resolution condemning israel's settlement activity in east jerusalem would be a most grave disappointment against all intelligence and morality.

  • 10. 0 0
    Isreal it the only
    • American
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:07

    DEMOCRATIC ALLIE AND FRIEND TO USA IN THE MD. We need Israel to continue to be strong.

  • 9. 0 0
    vito corleone
    • ben
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:05

    if you look at previous UN resolutions that condemn Israel you will find that America has used its "Veto" powers to reduce the (negative) language of the resolution enough for America to Abstain on the vote... The real test for Obama(if he is a true ally of Israel) will be how severe if any resolution passed by the UN condemning Israel will be...

  • 8. 0 0
    veto?
    • michel
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:02

  • 7. 0 0
    Well I bet that
    • Chris Linthwaite
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:00

    announcing the building of 1600 units for jews in Arab East Jerusalem while the Vice President of the country that Israel depends on for it's survival was visiting isn't looking like a good idea now does it?

  • 6. 0 0
    2010 and 2012
    • gj
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:00

    Zionists vote Republican in 2010 and 2012. DOWN WITH OBAMA, BIDEN, AND CLINTON!!!!!!!!!!!

  • 5. 0 0
    About time!
    • samos
    • 28.03.10
    • 22:00

    About time! QED

  • 4. 0 0
    It would be just about time...
    • Talal
    • 28.03.10
    • 21:55

  • 3. 0 0
    We should have been doing this since 1967.
    • EGB
    • 28.03.10
    • 21:54

    Our support, not of Israel, but of its illegal policies has been wrong. The UN ruled on the matter of borders, and the US agreed. We have agreed since 1967. It is not a bright spot in our history that we then supported Israel's ignoring the resolution. This is a very different matter than being sensitive to Israel's existential concerns. I am encouraged that we now have the courage to say that we erred in the matter of WB and E. J'lem settlements.

  • 2. 0 0
    Barack Hussein Obama
    • Lebanese Muslim
    • 28.03.10
    • 21:46

    Thumps up to Abu Hussein (Barack Hussein Obama). Way to go Israel. your arrogance is going to isolate you from the world. First you treat Turkish Ambassador in a bad way. You kill mabhouh using mafia methods then you treat VP Biden desrespectfully. And now No veto from the USA

  • 1. 0 0
    Yet another laugh
    • chuck l
    • 28.03.10
    • 21:38

    I laughed back then when Bibi said Israel doesn't need U.S. aid. I laughed now when Bibi said that he and Joe Biden are very good friends for 30 years. I'm almost laughing at ongoing almost daily comments by Bibi and his crew how we're going to hit Iran, Hamas etc. And lastly I think we'll all laugh towards the end when in fact Israel pulls out on all fronts.