The United States used its veto power again in the United Nations Security Council this Friday afternoon, blocking a resolution and triggering urgent calls for a humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza. The United Kingdom, another permanent member with veto authority, abstained from the text, while the remaining thirteen council members voted in favor.
Washington’s stance was anticipated. Earlier, Sabah had raised the issue at a separate council session. Robert Wood, the U.S. representative, was the sole voice to oppose the Emirates-sponsored resolution within a twenty-four hour window. More than ninety-seven countries weighed in, including Spain.
This posture from the United States, a close ally of Israel, is not new. As recently as October, Washington employed its veto to block a Brazilian measure calling for humanitarian pauses, arguing more time was needed for diplomacy. Yet on this occasion, the decision not to back the Emirates plan marks the sixth veto the Council has issued since the crisis began on October 7. It represents another setback for Palestinians and also for the United Nations and its Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who faces mounting pressure from member states and civil society.
The decision in Porto, Portugal, stands out as unprecedented during the secretary-general’s tenure and carries only four historical precedents in the organization’s record. It invoked Article 99 of the United Nations Charter, a provision that allows the secretary-general to bring before the Council any matter deemed to threaten international peace and security.
staring into the abyss
In the morning session, Guterres underscored the gravity of the Gaza situation, calling it critical and unsustainable. He spoke of a turning point, stating that Gaza’s people are staring into the abyss. He warned of a real risk of the entire humanitarian support system collapsing in Gaza and the devastating consequences for both the enclave and the broader regional security landscape.
Guterres did not shy away from criticizing acts of violence and the reports of sexual violence tied to the attacks by Hamas and the ensuing hostage-taking on October 7. He condemned such savagery while insisting that it can never justify collective punishment of the Palestinian people.
He drew attention to the rocket fire and the complex dilemma of civilians used as human shields. He stressed that such behavior by any party does not absolve others of violations of international law. The secretary-general reminded member states that international humanitarian law must be applied without selectivity, and that the obligation to protect civilians, uphold proportionality, and ensure the unhindered delivery of aid remains non-negotiable. Yet, he also noted that the conditions for delivering humanitarian aid in Gaza have grown impossibly difficult.
A solution without perspective
The U.S. representative, Wood, contended that backing an immediate ceasefire would risk seeding the next round of conflict rather than resolving the core issues. Meanwhile, the United Kingdom abstained, arguing that the resolution failed to condemn the October 7 atrocities with the clarity and force needed.
Washington’s position mirrors what was conveyed earlier in the day on the council floor. Israeli Ambassador Gilad Erdan argued that a ceasefire would prolong the suffering, while Palestinian envoy Riyad Mansour urged urgency and respect for lives and rights. The exchange reflected a stark clash over how to balance immediate relief with the broader political objectives in the region.
Before the vote, Secretary‑General Guterres was firm but cautious. Spokesman Stéphane Dujarric indicated that there was no clear answer about possible steps the secretary-general might take next after activating Article 99. The next steps, he suggested, would be considered step by step, with a careful assessment of evolving circumstances and veto dynamics that ultimately shape the Council’s choices.