Global Policy Forum

By Barbara Crossette

The longer it takes Israel to begin a significant withdrawal from Palestinian towns overrun by troops and tanks since the end of March, the more broadly the government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is coming under attack in the Security Council and behind the scenes throughout the United Nations.

As Israel's military push continues, there are other concerns about the opening for mischief being created for regional nations like Iraq and Syria. Iraq, which on Monday announced a 30-day oil sales moratorium to disrupt world energy supplies and prices, today proposed a war crimes tribunal to try Mr. Sharon for genocide and crimes against humanity. Syria, United Nations officials fear, has the capacity to reopen fighting along the border of Lebanon and Israel, where several United Nations peacekeepers were attacked last week.

The credibility of the Security Council is also being thrown into question, as frustration grows over Israel's refusal to heed recent resolutions calling for a withdrawal. Today, Arabs stepped up demands for a punitive resolution against Israel that could authorize sanctions and the dispatch of an international monitoring force, essentially to protect the Palestinians. Such a resolution would never be allowed by the United States, which holds a veto.

But an American veto, several diplomats suggested, would only make the United States seem like an accomplice the Israeli campaign and set back efforts American diplomats have made here to be evenhanded in casting blame. European and American diplomats were working today to have the Arab-sponsored resolution modified. Nevertheless a vote, or a showdown, could come on Wednesday, the Palestinians said.

American diplomats say the Council is suffering "resolution fatigue." On Monday, Ambassador John D. Negroponte, the United States representative, said, "We do not need any more resolutions." The darkening mood surrounding the Israelis marks a reversal of a more moderate attitude that had been developing toward Israel in an organization that has been traditionally hostile. Moves to end Israeli isolation had been growing steadily over the 1990's, after the end of the cold war.

Now, inescapable television pictures of the damage Israeli attacks are inflicting on people and places — often playing on screens around the building — are fodder for expressions of disbelief and condemnation from around the world. Today, in the latest of what has become an almost daily Security Council debate on the Israeli-Palestinian fighting, Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation, took the floor to call the Israeli tactics "carnage," and Turkey, once one of the region's friendliest nations toward Israel, demanded that "the tanks should turn back now."

On Monday, Ireland's envoy, Richard Ryan, said: "Making a desert and calling it peace is hardly a wise policy." Sir Jeremy Greenstock, the British representative, said that while he recognized that Israel had been the target of "appalling acts of terrorism," the Sharon government should consider the futility of trying to defeat terror "by the disproportionate use of military violence."

All but gone now in the debate — as the Israeli ambassador, Yehuda Lancry, noted today — are condemnations of Palestinian suicide bombings. After another round of debate ended this afternoon, the Palestinian observer, Nasser al-Kidwa, was asked if the latest proposed resolution would not complicate the work of Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and other envoys from Europe working toward a cease-fire and negotiations.

"Some people also raised the argument that you can't do that while Powell is conducting an important mission in the region," he said. "Our response is simple. We, in this resolution, are not dealing with the mission. We are basically dealing with the Israeli withdrawal, something which should have been achieved Thursday, on the basis of the U.S. position. The U.S. position, as we understand it, is that the withdrawal should take place before the arrival of Secretary Powell."

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C íŸ 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.