Jerusalem

Condemnatory

Yes

Analysis

• The resolution criticizes Israeli actions in Jerusalem and calls them illegal. Such harsh language is not used even against regimes like Iran. It implies that Israel hinders freedom of religion when the opposite is true. Before 1967, Jordan destroyed Jewish holy sites and denied access to Jews, while under Israel, all faiths have access to the city and enjoy full freedoms. Also, the resolution describes the Temple Mount using the Islamic term "Haram al-Sharif," ignoring Jewish and Christian history. Furthermore, the resolution is redundant and serves no purpose other than to demonize Israel.

Main Sponsors

Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Mauritania, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela, Yemen, Palestine

Vote

Yes - 129, No - 11, Abstain - 31, Absent - 22

See Full Vote

Key Praise

None

Key Criticism

• "Deploring, in particular, Israeli construction and expansion of settlements in and around East Jerusalem…"
• "Expressing its concern about the Israeli excavations undertaken in the Old City of Jerusalem, including in and around religious sites."
• "Recalling the Security Council press statement on Jerusalem of 17 September 2015, in which the Council called, inter alia, for the exercise of restraint, refraining from provocative actions and rhetoric and upholding unchanged the historic status quo at the Haram al-Sharif – in word and in practice…"
• "Reiterates its determination that any actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the Holy City of Jerusalem are illegal and therefore null and void and have no validity whatsoever, and calls upon Israel to immediately cease all such illegal and unilateral measures."