On September 12, 2025, the United Nations General Assembly passed a historic declaration calling for an immediate ceasefire, the recognition of a sovereign Palestinian state, and “time-bound, irreversible steps” toward a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. This declaration—backed by 142 countries, with only 10 opposed and 12 abstentions—marked a significant turning point in global opinion. Yet, two key states were glaringly absent from the proceedings: Israel and the United States, now under the leadership of President Donald J. Trump in his second term.

The absence of these two governments from the debate and their outright opposition to the resolution sent shockwaves across diplomatic circles. Their stance raises grave questions about international law, human rights, and the growing perception that the U.S., through its military and political support, is complicit in what many observers—including UN special rapporteurs—are now calling a genocide in Gaza.

The UN Declaration: A Global Consensus

The September 12 resolution, part of the broader New York Declaration, represents the most sweeping international demand in years for a comprehensive political resolution to the decades-long Israeli occupation and, more urgently, to the ongoing war in Gaza.

It calls for:

• Recognition of Palestinian statehood
• An international stabilization mission for Gaza
• The release of hostages
• A reform or transition away from Hamas-led governance
• Full adherence to international humanitarian law, including the protection of civilians and access to humanitarian aid

The resolution explicitly condemns the October 7, 2023 Hamas attacks while also criticizing Israel’s military campaign in Gaza as disproportionate and destructive, resulting in mass displacement, famine, and tens of thousands of civilian deaths. 

Why the U.S. and Israel Were Absent

1. Strategic Boycott & Political Messaging

Israel and the Trump administration chose not to participate in the debate as a form of protest. Both governments have framed the declaration as biased, “anti-Israel”, and favorable to terrorist entities—despite the resolution’s clear condemnation of Hamas.

By absenting themselves, both countries aimed to delegitimize the process. Prime Minister Netanyahu’s office dismissed the UN as “hostile and irrelevant,” while Trump’s Secretary of State labeled the resolution “a political stunt that empowers terrorists and punishes a democracy.” 

2. Opposition to International Oversight

Both nations oppose international involvement in what they consider to be sovereign matters. The declaration’s call for a UN-led stabilization mission in Gaza, as well as monitoring of Israeli military operations and Palestinian governance reform, was seen as external interference in Israeli defense and U.S. foreign policy priorities.

3. Internal Political Considerations

Trump’s return to office has come with renewed commitments to unconditional support for Israel, aligned with evangelical, nationalist, and pro-Israel segments of his political base. Any move that appears to curb Israeli military actions, recognize Palestinian sovereignty, or constrain U.S. foreign policy under international frameworks is viewed by the administration as politically untenable.

U.S. Complicity in an Unfolding Genocide

While Israel continues its military campaign in Gaza—accused by rights groups and legal experts of war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and genocide—the Trump-led U.S. government has doubled down on its support.

1. Military Aid and Weapons Transfers

The U.S. remains Israel’s largest military benefactor. Under Trump’s renewed foreign policy doctrine, military aid has not only continued—it has expanded.

• In early 2025, the U.S. approved a $14 billion emergency aid package to Israel, including bunker-buster bombs, armored vehicles, and surveillance drones.
• These weapons were used in densely populated areas of Gaza, including refugee camps and hospitals.
• Despite publicized mass civilian casualties, the U.S. has not placed any conditions on the use of its weapons. 

2. Diplomatic Shielding

The Trump administration continues to use its veto power at the UN Security Council to:

• Block calls for a ceasefire
• Reject international investigations into war crimes
• Oppose referrals to the International Criminal Court (ICC)

This shielding effectively prevents accountability for potential violations of the Genocide Convention, to which both the U.S. and Israel are signatories.

3. Downplaying or Denying Genocide Claims

UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese and legal scholars have concluded that Israel’s actions in Gaza—particularly the destruction of infrastructure, use of famine as a weapon, and mass killings—are consistent with the legal definition of genocide.

Yet, the Trump administration has dismissed such claims as “antisemitic propaganda”, choosing instead to describe Israel’s campaign as “a necessary defense against terror.”

This denialism, coupled with continued material and diplomatic support, places the U.S. in a position of legal and moral complicity.

Gaza: A Catastrophe of Unprecedented Scale

As of September 2025:

• Over 38,000 Palestinians have been killed, more than 70% of them women and children
• Over 80% of Gaza’s housing stock is destroyed
• The healthcare system has collapsed
• Starvation, water shortages, and disease outbreaks affect nearly 2 million people

Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Doctors Without Borders, and the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs have all documented systematic attacks on civilian infrastructure and the denial of aid, which violate customary international humanitarian law.

This is no longer a war zone—it is, in the words of one UN official, “a mass grave with live survivors.”

Legal Implications for the U.S.

Under the Genocide Convention (1948) and customary international law, the U.S. is obligated to:

• Prevent genocide
• Not assist or enable genocide
• Punish acts of genocide, including complicity

By:

• Funding Israeli military operations
• Shielding Israel from accountability
• Refusing to acknowledge the scale of the humanitarian crisis

…the U.S. risks violating international obligations. Lawsuits have already been filed in U.S. federal courts accusing the government of aiding and abetting genocide, and international legal experts are compiling evidence for future prosecution.

A Turning Point?

The UN vote reflects a near-total global consensus—a diplomatic rebellion against both Israel’s actions and America’s unwavering support. Major countries, including France, Brazil, Ireland, South Africa, and Indonesia, have not only voted in favor but have moved to formally recognize the State of Palestine.

By contrast, the U.S. is becoming diplomatically isolated—out of step with international law, global moral sentiment, and increasing domestic outrage.

Conclusion: Will History Remember?

The September 12 UN Declaration was a plea for peace, dignity, and the restoration of international law. It was also a test—a test the Trump-led U.S. government failed.

Instead of participating in a dialogue for justice, it chose absence.

Instead of restraining a close ally amid allegations of genocide, it chose to fund the bombs.

Instead of standing with the world, it stood against it.

History will remember the dead. It will also remember those who remained silent—or worse, those who armed the perpetrators.

  #Accountability, #CeasefireNow, #DiplomaticIsolation, #EndTheOccupation, #GazaGenocide, #GlobalConsensus, #HumanRights, #InternationalLaw, #Israel, #JusticeForPalestine, #Netanyahu, #Palestine, #PeaceAndJustice, #ProtectCivilians, #StopTheWar, #TrumpAdministration, #TwoStateSolution, #UnitedNations, #USForeignPolicy, #WarCrimes