Something New has happened in the UN without us being informed, of course, by the Corporate mass media, owned to 90% by 6 Rothschild-dependent Jewish corporations: The UN has made an Ultimatum to Israel to immediately give the Palestinians Sovereignty and all their resources back, pay restitution for Israeli damages in all occupied areas, included annexed Golan Heights, of tremendous military importance – and with fabulous oil sources (Veterans Todaty 15 Oct. 20) in Rothschild possession! (Business Insider 22 Febr. 2013). An this is to follow by the next UN General Assembly in 9 months!
Comment: This is not true: No sovereignty can be restored to Palestinians – for they never had sovereignty. Until 1948 they were a population in a Jordanian province – but never a people.
As this is impossible the UN Resolution is to be seen as a declaration of war By the UN on Israel.
Probably this is nothing more than a blow in the air as long as Usrael is governed by the Zionist Council on Foreign Relations, The Trilateral Commission and AIPAC– but it does make Israel vulnerable to – well, the fulfilment of the Gog prophecy (Ezekiel 38-39) – for this is the screenplay for the Chabad Lubavitch Jews who have colossal influence on the governments of the world – and especially on Putin (Rabbi Berel Lazar). The same is true of the US Pentecostals in the US.
See UN document A/70/480 1. Dec. 2015: “Permanent sovereignty of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and of the Arab population in the occupied Syrian Golan over their natural resources”
UN General Assembly vote: – 164 in favour to 5 against (Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, United States), with 10 abstentions (Australia, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Honduras, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, South Sudan, Togo, Tonga, Vanuatu).
Here follows an excerpt
1.At its 2. plenary meeting on 18 September 2015, the the General Committee, decided to include into the agenda of its 70. session the item PSPP .. and send it to the 2. Committee.
Right: The UN 1947 Israel
II. Consideration of draft resolution A/C.2/70/L.21
5. At the 29th meeting, on 5 November, the representative ofSouth Africa, on
behalf of the States Members of the United Nations that are members of the Group of 77 and China, introduced …. the PSPP
6. At the 31st meeting, on 12 November, the representative of South Africa, on
behalf of the Group of 77 and China, made a statement.
7. Subsequently, Turkey joined in sponsoring the draft resolution.
9. Also at the same meeting, the Committee adopted draft resolution
A/C.2/70/L.21 (see para. 12).
III. Recommendation of the Second Committee
12. The Second Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of
the following draft resolution (PSPP):
Recalling etc. etc. etc. i.a. Deploring the detrimental impact of the Israeli settlements on Palestinian and other Arab natural resources, especially as a result of the confiscation of land and the forced diversion of water resources, including the destruction of orchards and crops and the seizure of water wells by Israeli settlers, and of the dire socioeconomic consequences in this regard……
Left: Theodor Herzl´s, Netanyahu´s, the Israeli Military´s aspired Greater Israel. That is one reason for Middle East wars: divide and conquer Israel´s neighbours.
1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and of the
population of the occupied Syrian Golan over their natural resources, including
land, water and energy resources;
2. Demands that Israel, the occupying Power, cease the exploitation,
damage, cause of loss or depletion and endangerment of the natural resources in the
Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian
3. Recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to claim restitution as a
result of any exploitation, damage, loss or depletion or endangerment of their
natural resources resulting from illegal measures taken by Israel, the occupying
Power, and Israeli settlers in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East
Jerusalem, and expresses the hope that this issue will be dealt with within the
framework of the final status negotiations between the Palestinian and Israeli sides;
4. Stresses that the wall and settlements being constructed by Israel in the
Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, are contrary to international law and are seriously depriving the Palestinian people of their natural resources, and calls in this regard for full compliance with the legal
obligations affirmed in the 9 July 2004 advisory opinion of the International Court
of Justice and in relevant United Nations resolutions, including General Assembly
5. Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to comply strictly with its
obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law, and to cease immediately and completely all policies and measures aimed at the alteration
of the character and status of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem;
7. Further calls upon Israel to cease its destruction of vital infrastructure,
including water pipelines, sewage networks and electricity networks, which, inter
alia, has a negative impact on the natural resources of the Palestinian people,
stresses the urgent need to advance reconstruction and development projects in this
10. Encourages all States and international organizations to continue to
actively pursue policies to ensure respect for their obligations under international
law with regard to all illegal Israeli practices and measures in the Occupied
Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, particularly Israeli settlement
activities and the exploitation of natural resources;
11. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its
seventy-first session on the implementation of the present resolution
The EU’s blind eye to Israel
On 1 September 2008, the European Union decided that meetings with Russia about a new partnership agreement would be postponed until the latter ended its military occupation of Georgia. In contrast, on 16 June 2008 the 27-member EU decided to “upgrade” its relations with Israel. This has now been put into effect by a decision of the EU Foreign Ministers meeting in Brussels on 8 December.
Was this in recognition of Israeli adherence to previous agreements with the EU, or progress in the peace process with the Palestinians? On the contrary, by the EU’s very own standards it appears to have been a reward for Israel’s military occupation of the territory of several countries, and gross violations of human rights and international law, as well as specific commitments made to the EU. If the conditions applied to Russia today were applied to Israel, the EU would immediately terminate its partnership agreements with Israel.
In 2004, Israel became an EU partner within the framework of the EU’s European Neighborhood Policy (ENP), which encompasses both the EU’s Mediterranean and eastern European neighbors. Under the ENP, according to the policy stated on its Web site, the EU’s relations with other states are “a privileged relationship, building upon a mutual commitment to common values (democracy and human rights, rule of law, good governance, market economy principles and sustainable development).” Moreover, the ENP offers “a deeper political relationship and economic integration.” However, this is not unconditional, as “the level of ambition of the relationship will depend on the extent to which these values are shared.”
Yet, despite Israel’s manifest failure to meet its obligations under earlier agreements with the EU, Israel was in the first group of seven states with which the EU agreed ENP “action plans” in December 2004. The “action plan” was based on a 2004 European Commission report which openly states that Israel has systematically discriminated against its Palestinian minority throughout its existence and that human rights violations, including extrajudicial killings, are a continuous feature of Israel’s actions in the occupied territories. One might have thought that a state which indulged in “religious discrimination” and “extrajudicial killings” would be deemed unfit by the EU for an ENP relationship built on common values. However, the EU turned a blind eye to these violations and granted Israel an ENP partnership.
In April 2008, the European Commission, the EU’s secretariat, published a progress report on Israel’s implementation. It concluded that there had been “little concrete progress” on the issues cited in the 2004 action plan. Yet, just months after it reported this lack of “concrete progress,” the EU took its decision to further “upgrade” its relations with Israel.
The Barcelona Declaration
The EU’s disregard of Israel’s violations has a long pedigree. Israel became a partner of the EU in November 1995 with the signing of the Barcelona Declaration, which established the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership. This Partnership encompassed 15 EU states plus 11 states in the Mediterranean region (Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Syria, Tunisia and Turkey) and the Palestinian Authority. Signatories to the Barcelona Declaration agreed to behave according to international norms in their relations with other states, promising to “act in accordance with the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as other obligations under international law.”
The signatories also entered into a number of specific obligations in respect of their “partners” in the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership. This included:
(1) Refrain, in accordance with the rules of international law, from any direct or indirect intervention in the internal affairs of another partner;(2) Respect the territorial integrity and unity of each of the other partners;
(3) Settle their disputes by peaceful means, call upon all participants to renounce recourse to the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity of another participant, including the acquisition of territory by force, and reaffirm the right to fully exercise sovereignty by legitimate means in accordance with the UN Charter and international law.
In 1995, when Israel signed the Barcelona Declaration and undertook to abide by these principles, it was occupying southern Lebanon and had annexed the Syrian Golan Heights. By no stretch of the imagination could it be said that Israel was refraining from intervention in the internal affairs of its Lebanese and Syrian partners, or respecting their territorial integrity, or settling disputes with them by peaceful means. Manifestly, when it signed the Barcelona Declaration, Israel was openly contravening the agreement’s three core obligations.
At that time, Israel was also in breach of the general obligation in the Barcelona Declaration to “act in accordance with the United Nations Charter.” As an occupying power in the West Bank and Gaza, it remains in violation of Articles 2.4 of the UN Charter. It is also in violation of the requirement in Article 25 that UNmember states “accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council.” Indeed, by 1995, Israel was in violation of some 25 Security Council resolutions requiring action by it and it alone. These included demands to: cease the building of Jewish settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, reverse its annexation of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, and open its nuclear facilities to inspection by the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA).
The EU’s double standards do not only target Russia. In the Barcelona Declaration, Israel also agreed to pursue “a mutually and effectively verifiable Middle East Zone free of weapons of mass destruction, nuclear, chemical and biological, and their delivery systems.” In addition, it agreed to work to “prevent the proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons as well as excessive accumulation of conventional arms.”
Israel is the only state in the Middle East that possesses nuclear weapons. So, its disarmament of these weapons is a necessary, and probably a sufficient, condition for bringing about a “Middle East Zone free of weapons of mass destruction,” as required by the Barcelona Declaration. However, progress in bringing this about has been noticeable by its absence since Israel signed up to “pursue” this objective in 1995.
There has been no progress either on the Security Council’s Resolution 487 that calls upon “Israel [to] urgently … place its nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards.” Passed on 19 June 1981, Israel has yet to open its nuclear facilities to IAEA inspection, nor is there any noticeable pressure from the EU to make it do so, let alone disarm in order to produce a nuclear free zone in the Middle East, which parties to the Barcelona Declaration are supposed to “pursue.”
By contrast, Iran’s nuclear facilities, including its uranium enrichment facilities, are open to IAEA inspection. It is worth noting that, after extensive inspection in Iran, the IAEA has found no evidence that Iran has a nuclear weapons program, or ever had one. By contrast, Israel has possessed nuclear weapons and the means of delivering them for around 40 years. It is estimated that today Israel has around 200 nuclear warheads and various delivery systems, including by submarine-launched missiles. Israel is capable of wiping Iran, and every Arab state, off the map at the touch of a button. Despite the European Neighborhood Policy requirement regarding weapons of mass destruction, the EU is actively pressuring Iran about its nuclear activities, but not Israel.
Rewarding Israel’s “collective punishment” of Gaza
In November 1995, Israel signed an Association Agreement with the EU under the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership. Commonly known as the Euro-Med Agreement, it gave Israel privileged access to the EU market from 2000. The Euro-Med Agreement also contains human rights obligations, in particular “respect for human rights and democratic principles.” Compliance with these provisions is an “essential element” of the agreement.
Israel has continuously failed to live up to these obligations, the most recent example being its economic strangulation of the Gaza Strip over the past 19 months. John Holmes, UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, explained to the Security Council on 26 February 2008 that “the effective Israeli isolation of Gaza is not justified, given Israel’s continuing obligations to the people of Gaza. It amounts to collective punishment and is contrary to international humanitarian law.”
Moreover, the EU itself has described the economic strangulation of Gaza as “collective punishment.” The EU’s External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner stated on 21 January 2008 that “I am against this collective punishment of the people of Gaza. I urge the Israeli authorities to restart fuel supplies and open the crossings for the passage of humanitarian and commercial supplies.”
So, the UN and the EU are of the firm opinion that, by its economic strangulation of Gaza, Israel has violated international humanitarian law. Moreover, this policy of collective punishment has been openly acknowledged by the Israeli government for at least two years. Famously, when Israel limited commercial shipments of food into Gaza in 2006, Dov Weissglas, an adviser to then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, explained that “the idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet but not to make them die of hunger.”
In spite of these repeated violations of its human rights obligations, the EU continues to turn a blind eye to Israel’s actions. Indeed, there seems to be no violation Israel can commit that will persuade the EU to halt its favorable treatment, let alone downgrade its relations.
Zionists nuclear weapons threatens the whole world
2002 – 2014 only
UN Documents for Israel/Palestine: Other
|Other||Return to full list|
|30 DECEMBER 2014S/2014/916 version 2||This was the draft resolution on Palestine put into blue by Jordan with Argentina, Chad, Chile, China, France, Jordan, Luxembourg and Russia voting in favour; Lithuania, Nigeria, Republic of Korea, Rwanda and the UK abstaining; and the US and Australia voting against.|
|17 DECEMBER 2014S/2014/916 version 1||This was the draft resolution on Palestine put into blue by Jordan, on behalf of the Arab Group.|
|4 AUGUST 2014S/2014/568||This was a draft resolution on Gaza put in blue by Jordan.|
|11 NOVEMBER 2011S/2011/705||This was the Security Council’s Admissions Committee report on its activities related to Palestine’s 23 September 2011 application for UN membership.|
|18 FEBRUARY 2011S/2011/24||This was the draft resolution on settlements vetoed by the US. The other 14 Council members voted in favour.|
|7 JANUARY 2009S/2009/11||This was a draft resolution circulated by Libya demanding an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and calling for the lifting of the Israeli blockade, the immediate Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, and the deployment of an international observer force in the Gaza Strip to ensure the protection of civilians, allow for humanitarian aid and free movement of persons and goods, prevent illicit arms trafficking and promote restoration of calm.|
|8 JULY 2008S/2008/445||This was a Libyan draft resolution on settlements which was never voted on by the Council.|
|10 NOVEMBER 2006S/2006/878||This draft resolution called upon Israel to cease its military activities in Gaza and upon the Palestinian Authority to take steps to stop the firing of rockets into Israel and requested the Secretary-general to establish a fact-finding mission in Beit Hanoun.|
|12 JULY 2006S/2006/508||This draft resolution called for the immediate and unconditional release of the abducted Israeli soldier and all detained Palestinian officials and civilians. It also called upon Israel to halt its military operations and disproportionate use of force and called upon the Palestinian Authority to take immediate action to bring an end to violence, including the firing of rockets on Israeli territory.|
|5 OCTOBER 2004S/2004/783||This was a vetoed Algerian, Pakistani and Tunisian draft resolution calling on Israel to halt military operations in Gaza.|
|24 MARCH 2004S/2004/240||This was a vetoed Algerian and Libyan draft resolution condemning Israel’s killing of Hamas leader Sheik Ahmed Yassin and six civilians.|
|14 OCTOBER 2003S/2003/980||This was a vetoed Guinean, Malaysian, Pakistani and Syrian resolution claiming the construction of the Israeli security wall is illegal.|
|16 SEPTEMBER 2003S/2003/891||This was a vetoed Pakistani, South African, Sudanese and Syrian draft resolution condemning Israeli treatment of Palestinian President Arafat.|
|19 DECEMBER 2002S/2002/1385||This was a vetoed Syrian draft resolution expressing deep concern at the “deliberate destruction” by Israel of a World Food Programme warehouse.|
|14 DECEMBER 2001S/2001/1199||This was a vetoed draft Egyptian and Tunisian resolution demanding Israel withdraw forces back to pre-September 2000 positions.|
UN Resolutions Targeting Israel and the Palestinians
Number of UN Resolutions Passed in CondemnationIsraelPalestinians0255075100
Aside from the core issues—refugees, Jerusalem, borders—the major themes reflected in the U.N. resolutions against Israel over the years are its unlawful attacks on its neighbors; its violations of the human rights of the Palestinians, including deportations, demolitions of homes and other collective punishments; its confiscation of Palestinian land; its establishment of illegal settlements; and its refusal to abide by the U.N. Charter and the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War.
Source: United Nations Security Council resolutions passed from 1955 through 1992 were detailed in Paul Findley’s book Deliberate Deceptions (1998, pages 192-4). Resolutions passed from 1993-2013 were accessed at UN.org.
UN Resolutions Against Israel, 1955-2013
- Resolution 106: “…‘condemns’ Israel for Gaza raid”
- Resolution 111: “…‘condemns’ Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people”
- Resolution 127: “…‘recommends’ Israel suspend its ‘no-man’s zone’ in Jerusalem”
- Resolution 162: “…‘urges’ Israel to comply with UN decisions”
- Resolution 171: “…determines flagrant violations’ by Israel in its attack on Syria”
- Resolution 228: “…‘censures’ Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control”
- Resolution 237: “…‘urges’ Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees”
- Resolution 248: “…‘condemns’ Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan”
- Resolution 250: “…‘calls on’ Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem”
- Resolution 251: “…‘deeply deplores’ Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250”
- Resolution 252: “…‘declares invalid’ Israel’s acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital”
- Resolution 256: “…‘condemns’ Israeli raids on Jordan as ‘flagrant violation”
- Resolution 259: “…‘deplores’ Israel’s refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation”
- Resolution 262: “…‘condemns’ Israel for attack on Beirut airport”
- Resolution 265: “…‘condemns’ Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan”
- Resolution 267: “…‘censures’ Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem”
- Resolution 270: “…‘condemns’ Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon”
- Resolution 271: “…‘condemns’ Israel’s failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem”
- Resolution 279: “…‘demands’ withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon”
- Resolution 280: “….‘condemns’ Israeli’s attacks against Lebanon”
- Resolution 285: “…‘demands’ immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon”
- Resolution 298: “…‘deplores’ Israel’s changing of the status of Jerusalem”
- Resolution 313: “…‘demands’ that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon”
- Resolution 316: “…‘condemns’ Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon”
- Resolution 317: “…‘deplores’ Israel’s refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon”
- Resolution 332: “…‘condemns’ Israel’s repeated attacks against Lebanon”
- Resolution 337: “…‘condemns’ Israel for violating Lebanon’s sovereignty”
- Resolution 347: “…‘condemns’ Israeli attacks on Lebanon”
- Resolution 425: “…‘calls on’ Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon”
- Resolution 427: “…‘calls on’ Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon’
- Resolution 444: “…‘deplores’ Israel’s lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces”
- Resolution 446: “…‘determines’ that Israeli settlements are a ‘serious obstruction’ to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention”
- Resolution 450: “…‘calls on’ Israel to stop attacking Lebanon”
- Resolution 452: “…‘calls on’ Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories”
- Resolution 465: “…‘deplores’ Israel’s settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel’s settlements program”
- Resolution 467: “…‘strongly deplores’ Israel’s military intervention in Lebanon”
- Resolution 468: “…‘calls on’ Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return”
- Resolution 469: “…‘strongly deplores’ Israel’s failure to observe the council’s order not to deport Palestinians”
- Resolution 471: “…‘expresses deep concern’ at Israel’s failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention”
- Resolution 476: “…‘reiterates’ that Israel’s claims to Jerusalem are ‘null and void’
- Resolution 478: “…‘censures (Israel) in the strongest terms’ for its claim to Jerusalem in its ‘Basic Law’
- Resolution 484: “…‘declares it imperative’ that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors”
- Resolution 487: “…‘strongly condemns’ Israel for its attack on Iraq’s nuclear facility”
- Resolution 497: “…‘decides’ that Israel’s annexation of Syria’s Golan Heights is ‘null and void’ and demands that Israel rescind its decision forthwith”
- Resolution 498: “…‘calls on’ Israel to withdraw from Lebanon”
- Resolution 501: “…‘calls on’ Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops”
- Resolution 509: “…‘demands’ that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon”
- Resolution 515: “…‘demands’ that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in”
- Resolution 517: “…‘censures’ Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon”
- Resolution 518: “…‘demands’ that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon”
- Resolution 520: “…‘condemns’ Israel’s attack into West Beirut”
- Resolution 573: “…‘condemns’ Israel ‘vigorously’ for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters
- Resolution 587: “…‘takes note’ of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw”
- Resolution 592: “…‘strongly deplores’ the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops”
- Resolution 605: “…‘strongly deplores’ Israel’s policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians
- Resolution 607: “…‘calls on’ Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention
- Resolution 608: “…‘deeply regrets’ that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians”
- Resolution 636: “…‘deeply regrets’ Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians
- Resolution 641: “…‘deplores’ Israel’s continuing deportation of Palestinians
- Resolution 672: “…‘condemns’ Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount
- Resolution 673: “…‘deplores’ Israel’s refusal to cooperate with the United Nations
- Resolution 681: “…‘deplores’ Israel’s resumption of the deportation of Palestinians
- Resolution 694: “…‘deplores’ Israel’s deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return
- Resolution 726: “…‘strongly condemns’ Israel’s deportation of Palestinians
- Resolution 799: “…‘strongly condemns’ Israel’s deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return
- Resolution 904: “…‘strongly condemns’ the massacre in Hebron and its aftermath which took the lives of more than 50 Palestinian civilians and injured several hundred others”
- Resolution 1073: “…‘calls for’ the immediate cessation and reversal of all acts which have resulted in the aggravation of the situation, ‘calls for‘ the safety and protection of Palestinian civilians to be ensured”
- Resolution 1322: “…‘condemns’ acts of violence, especially the excessive use of force against Palestinians, resulting in injury and loss of human life”
- Resolution 1402: “…‘calls upon’ both parties to move immediately to a meaningful ceasefire; calls for the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Palestinian cities, including Ramallah”
- Resolution 1403: “…‘demands’ the implementation of its resolution 1402 (2002) without delay”
- Resolution 1405: “…‘emphasizes’ the urgency of access of medical and humanitarian organizations to the Palestinian civilian population”
- Resolution 1435: “…‘demands’ that Israel immediately cease measures in and around Ramallah including the destruction of Palestinian civilian and security infrastructure”
- Resolution 1544: “…‘calls on’ Israel to respect its obligations under international humanitarian law, and insists, in particular, on its obligation not to undertake demolition of homes contrary to that law”
- Resolution 1860: “…‘calls for’ an immediate, durable and fully respected ceasefire, leading to the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza; ‘calls for‘ the unimpeded provision and distribution throughout Gaza of humanitarian assistance, including of food, fuel and medical treatment”
- Resolution 1937: “…‘urges’ the Government of Israel to expedite the withdrawal of its army from northern Ghajar without further delay”
- Resolution 2004: “…‘urges’ the Government of Israel to expedite the withdrawal of its army from northern Ghajar without further delay”
- Resolution 2064: “…‘urges’ the Government of Israel to expedite the withdrawal of its army from northern Ghajar without further delay”
UN Resolutions Against the Palestinians, 1955-2013
- Resolution 1435: “…‘calls on’ the Palestinian Authority to meet its expressed commitment to ensure that those responsible for terrorist acts are brought to justice by it”