By: Jordan Schneckloth

Monday afternoon’s session of the United Nations Security Council B (UNSC B) saw the topic for consideration shift from one crisis to another: the Palestinian Question. The subsequent debate opened with spitfire from the Representatives of the United States and the Russian Federation on opposing sides of the issues; however, it was determined soon thereafter that Representatives of Israel and the State of Palestine should be invited into the Council’s meeting. The entire Security Council saw it beneficial to involve the Representatives of Israel and Palestine in these discussions, however the arguments that soon followed revealed a double standard in the philosophy of the Council’s Permanent Five Representatives. 

As expected, the United States was in full support of Israel’s argued and supposed right to defend itself against foreign aggressors, while the remaining fourteen members of the Security Council favored Palestinian sovereignty. This debate made it clear that any action taken to begin the statehood process would be immediately shot down by the United States. Charged rhetoric from the Representatives of Israel only emboldened further debate, especially from the Representatives of the Russian Federation. Tensions had boiled as the United Nations Security Council B took time away from their formal session to converse among allies and draft resolutions.

The International Press Delegation asked the Representatives of the United States and the Russian Federation about their State’s philosophy when it comes to determining potential statehood or territorial sovereignty, such as Ukraine or Palestine, noting that the same rules or process do not apply equitably across the board. The Representatives of the Russian Federation and the United States agreed on a non-answer. When the permanent member states of the United Nations Security Council B, like the Russian Federation and United States, can apply an inconsistent moral weight to their support of statehood or sovereign recognition, situations like that of the Palestinian Question remain forever deadlocked.

This power that the permanent five Member States of the Security Council wield, deciding who is granted legal recognition and protections under the United Nations and its treaties, is a corruptive and deeply political tool.