News |
November 18, 2025


The UN Security Council approved – Monday evening, New York time – an amended American draft resolution that supports US President Donald Trump’s plan to end the war in the Gaza Strip, and calls for its full implementation and the maintenance of the ceasefire.

13 members of the Security Council voted in favor of the draft resolution, while Russia and China abstained from voting, without either of them using the right of veto.

What are the most prominent provisions of the American project adopted by the Security Council?

The resolution issued by the Security Council includes a number of provisions that provide a general administrative and security framework for the post-ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, especially with regard to the establishment of a peace council and the establishment of an interim international force.

The following are the most prominent provisions of the resolution voted on by the Security Council:

  • The UN Security Council Resolution No. 2803 adopts the comprehensive plan to end the conflict in the Gaza Strip, which is known asUS President Donald Trump’s plan The 20-point plan to end the conflict in Gaza, issued on September 29, 2025, called on the parties to fully implement it and maintain the ceasefire without delay.
  • The resolution welcomes the establishment of the Peace Council as a transitional administrative body with international legal personality to oversee the reconstruction of Gaza until the completion of the Palestinian Authority’s reform programme, adding a statement affirming that the Council’s work must be consistent with the principles of international law.
  • The resolution indicates that completion of the reform of the Palestinian Authority and progress in reconstruction may create conditions for a path toward self-determination and Palestinian statehood, while opening a US dialogue between the parties on the political horizon.
  • The resolution affirms the necessity of resuming the entry of humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip in cooperation with the Peace Council, and ensuring that its use is limited to peaceful purposes.
  • The resolution authorizes the participating countries and the Peace Council to establish operational entities with international powers to manage transitional governance, reconstruction, services, aid, and regulate movement in and out of the Gaza Strip.
  • The Security Council invites the World Bank and financial institutions to support the reconstruction of Gaza and to establish a dedicated fund for this purpose.
  • The resolution authorizes the establishment of a temporary international stabilization force in the Gaza Strip that operates under a unified command accepted by the Peace Council, in coordination with Egypt and Israel, and has the right to use all necessary measures in accordance with international law to carry out its tasks.
  • It states that the stabilization force will work to demilitarize Gaza, protect civilians, train Palestinian police, and help secure humanitarian corridors.
  • Under the resolution, the international force will also work to assist the Peace Council in monitoring the implementation of the ceasefire in Gaza, and concluding arrangements that may be necessary to achieve the objectives of the comprehensive plan.
  • The decision states that as control progresses, Israeli army forces will withdraw according to agreed criteria and timetable.
  • The resolution specifies the expiration of the mandate of the International Civil and Security Peace and Presence Council on December 31, 2027, unless the Council decides otherwise.
  • The resolution calls on countries and organizations to provide financial and logistical support to the Peace Council and the International Stabilization Force, and to submit a report to the Council every 6 months.

How did Security Council members vote on the project? Did he face opposition or reservations?

13 members of the Security Council voted in favor of the draft resolution, while the Russian and Chinese delegates abstained from voting.

After abstaining from voting, Russian delegate Vasily Nebenzia said – according to the United Nations website – that his country could not support the resolution that did not affirm the two-state solution, adding that this is “not a theoretical issue, but a very practical issue, and it is of particular importance given that we have received unequivocal public statements from the highest levels of the Israeli leadership stating that it is unacceptable to establish a Palestinian state.”

He added that the resolution appears to allow the Peace Council and the International Stabilization Force to act with absolute independence “without any regard to the position or opinion” of the Palestinian Authority, which may consolidate the separation of the Gaza Strip from the occupied West Bank.

He pointed out that this “reminds us of colonial practices and the British mandate in the League of Nations over Palestine when the opinion of the Palestinians themselves was not taken into account.”

Nebenzia also raised questions about the mandate of the international force that was not initially supposed to participate in disarming Gaza, which could turn it “into a party to the conflict that goes beyond peacekeeping.”

In turn, China’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Fu Cong, said – after abstaining from voting – that the resolution specifies the governance arrangements for Gaza after the war, “but Palestine seems to be completely absent from it, and that Palestinian sovereignty and Palestinian ownership are not fully reflected.”

He added – according to the United Nations website – “It is particularly worrying that the draft resolution did not explicitly confirm the firm commitment to the two-state solution as an international consensus.”

He stressed the need for any post-war arrangements to respect the will of the Palestinian people, and to give full play to the vital role of the Palestinian National Authority.

Cong stressed that the United Nations has extensive experience and capabilities in the field of recovery and economic reconstruction after the conflict, and therefore it should play a vital role in managing the Gaza Strip after the war, “but the draft resolution did not include any such arrangement.”

What is the position of the Palestinian and Israeli parties on this decision?

The Palestinian Authority welcomed the adoption by the UN Security Council of the US draft resolution on Gaza, and affirmed its readiness to accompany implementation and assume its full responsibilities.

It also stressed in a statement “the necessity of working immediately to implement the UN resolution to ensure the return of normal life, protect our people in the Gaza Strip, prevent displacement, complete withdrawal of the occupation and reconstruction forces, stop undermining the two-state solution, and prevent annexation.”

It expressed its full readiness to cooperate with the US administration, members of the Security Council, Arab and Islamic countries, the European Union and its member states, the United Nations, and all parties of the international coalition and partners in the New York Declaration, in order to implement this resolution in a way that leads to ending the suffering of our Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and to move to the political path that leads to achieving peace, security and stability between the Palestinians and the Israelis, in accordance with the two-state solution based on international law and international legitimacy.

As for the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), it criticized the UN resolution, stressing that it does not rise to the level of the political and humanitarian demands and rights of the Palestinian people, especially in the Gaza Strip.

The movement added, in a statement, that the Security Council resolution imposes an international guardianship mechanism on the Gaza Strip, which is rejected by the Palestinian people, its forces, and its factions. It also imposes a mechanism to achieve the goals of the occupation, which it failed to achieve through a brutal war of extermination.

According to the movement’s statement, the Security Council resolution separates the Gaza Strip from the rest of the Palestinian geography and attempts to impose new facts.

Hamas stressed that assigning the international force to tasks and roles inside the Gaza Strip, including disarming the resistance, strips that international force of its neutrality and turns it into a party to the conflict in favor of the occupation.

In turn, the Islamic Jihad movement announced its rejection of the American draft resolution on Gaza, which was adopted by the UN Security Council last night, adding that it constitutes international guardianship over the Strip.

The movement added in a statement that the right of the Palestinian people to resist the occupation by all legitimate means is a right guaranteed by international law, and the weapons of resistance are a guarantee of this right.

The statement condemned transforming humanitarian aid, relief for those affected, and opening crossings from a humanitarian duty into a tool for political pressure or blackmail.

He stressed that imposing an American governing body at an international level on part of the Palestinian people without their consent or approval is a violation of international humanitarian law.

Earlier, the Palestinian factions and forces warned of the danger of the draft resolution, considering that it constitutes an attempt to impose international guardianship over the Gaza Strip and pass a vision biased towards the occupation.

The factions confirmed – in a political memorandum – that the wording of the resolution paves the way for external hegemony over the Palestinian national decision by transferring the administration of Gaza and reconstruction to an international body with broad powers, thus stripping the Palestinians of their right to manage their affairs.

She also stressed that any discussion of the arms issue must remain an internal national matter linked to a political path that guarantees an end to the occupation, the establishment of a state, and the achievement of self-determination.

In Israeli reactions to the Security Council resolution, the head of the “Israel Our Home” party, Avigdor Lieberman, said that what happened last night at the United Nations is the result of failed management by the Israeli government, and that the face of the Middle East is changing, but not in its favor.

He considered that the decision brought a Palestinian state, a Saudi nuclear weapon, and stealth planes to Turkey and Saudi Arabia, which is considered a deal to liquidate Israel’s security.

As for the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, he believed that the disarmament of Hamas is a basic condition in the American resolution voted on by the Security Council, asserting that there will be no future in Gaza as long as Hamas possesses weapons.

What role did the United States play in formulating and passing this project?

The United States has been working for weeks to pass the new resolution on Gaza in the Security Council.

The United States has prepared a draft resolution on the international force based on Trump’s 20-item plan to stop the war in the Gaza Strip. This force is supposed to replace the Israeli occupation army as it enters the Strip and begins its work.

Amendments were published for the third time to the US draft resolution last Thursday, before it was voted on Monday evening in the Security Council.

This plan represents the most clear American version of the “Day After” plan in the Gaza Strip after two years of continuous brutal Israeli aggression.

What is the expected impact of adopting this project on the course of the war in Gaza?

The resolution seeks in theory – according to what was said – to consolidate the ceasefire agreement, ease restrictions on relief aid to Gaza, and open a horizon, even if narrow, towards establishing a Palestinian state, but many obstacles will stand in the way of implementing the requirements of the resolution.

The Palestinian resistance factions have repeatedly confirmed their refusal to disarm, and have emphasized more than once that handing over their weapons is contingent on the establishment of a Palestinian state and the end of the occupation.

Israel or some of its political parties also have reservations about what was stated in the resolution regarding the establishment of a Palestinian state.

Before the Security Council adopted the resolution, Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper reported from informed sources that Trump’s plan included provisions that were uncomfortable for Tel Aviv, while Channel 13 said that fundamental differences still existed between America and Israel regarding moving forward with the implementation of the agreement.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *