Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks to the media, March 16, 2023, in Berlin, Germany. Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images

Yesterday, the United States opted not to veto a U.N. Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza, the first of several proposed resolutions to be adopted since the start of the war. The resolution called for an immediate ceasefire for the duration of Ramadan leading to a “lasting sustainable” ceasefire, the unconditional release of hostages and expanding humanitarian access.  

The U.S. abstention ignited a firestorm of criticism from Netanyahu. He responded by canceling a visit to Washington by Tzachi Hanegbi and Ron Dermer, two of his top advisers, to align the U.S. and Israel on the question of Israel’s pending Rafah invasion. He attacked the Biden administration for “abandoning” its policy at the UNSC and undermining his country’s efforts to defeat Hamas and bring home the hostages. 

Israelis have long chafed against international public opinion. Large constituencies across the globe have long rejected or minimized Israel’s national aspirations and right to security, leading Israelis to view criticism from abroad — legitimate or otherwise — with derision. 

Netanyahu’s ire actually has little to do with the resolution itself. It is politically motivated outrage masquerading as righteous opposition to real anti-Israel bias at the U.N. and supposed U.S. abandonment of Israel. While it may personally benefit Netanyahu, it comes at a high cost for Israel itself.

This um shmum — Israelis’ nickname for the U.N. — mentality has particular resonance today amid mounting international criticism of Israel’s war against Hamas and, simultaneously, foot-dragging to condemn Hamas’ devastating Oct. 7 attack on Israel. The world hates us anyway and doesn’t care if we live or die, so the thinking goes, so what good does it do to try appeasing it?

It’s a powerful narrative that speaks to Israelis’ emotions, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is trying to use it to his political advantage.

Israel has legitimate reasons to be opposed to the Security Council’s resolution. It is certainly problematic that the text of the resolution calls for an immediate ceasefire without explicitly condemning Hamas and identifying its terror attack as the inciting incident. It also did not explicitly spell out releasing the hostages as a precondition for a ceasefire, as is being negotiated in the Israel-Hamas talks in Qatar. 

Last week’s draft resolution for a ceasefire submitted by the United States did make both of those points, and was vetoed by Russia and China as a result (with an additional “no” vote from Algeria). The message this sends to Israelis is that the U.N.’s most powerful body does not recognize their right to safety and security, the violation of which led to this war in the first place. Adding to Israelis’ sense of alienation from the international community is the constant gaslighting about Hamas’ acts of sexual violence on Oct. 7 and the ongoing case at the International Court of Justice accusing Israel of genocide.

But Russia, China and Algeria are not the only countries responsible for this resolution. Aside from the U.S., the other 14 members of the Security Council voted in favor, including the UK and France. The vote marked a departure from the standard paradigm of the U.S. “shielding” Israel from UNSC resolutions it finds unfavorable. It speaks to the unique challenges this moment poses to the U.S.-Israel relationship, where President Joe Biden is attempting to reconcile his steadfast support for Israel with his frustration for Netanyahu’s flouting of U.S. policy priorities.   

The question is not whether Israel should embrace yesterday’s non-binding Security Council resolution. It is how Israel should respond diplomatically to this message from the international community. There are essentially two options: Israel could consider how to address the concerns that prompted its allies to vote for a resolution it found unfavorable, or it could throw up its hands and proclaim that the entire world is hopelessly against it.

Netanyahu chose the latter because it serves him politically. It provides a perfect opportunity for him to deepen the rift he has deliberately dug with his country’s most essential security and diplomatic partner.

From the start of the war, Netanyahu dragged his feet to let humanitarian aid into Gaza and has continually campaigned against Biden’s plan to return the PA to the territory — quite possibly at the expense of normalization with Saudi Arabia. His government has largely been apathetic to U.S. concerns regarding the humanitarian crisis, even as the U.S. continues to support Israel militarily. 

Israelis have legitimate concerns about seeing Gaza come under the PA’s control and understandable emotional apathy to the tragedies endured by Palestinians in Gaza. Netanyahu has sought to capitalize on these sentiments by framing himself as the only leader who can stand up to the U.S. and resist an international community that is inexorably biased against its interests.

Now, in a deliberate snub to the U.S., Netanyahu is using yesterday’s UNSC resolution as a pretext for canceling a meeting intended to align Israel and the U.S. on mitigating the humanitarian repercussions of Israel’s pending invasion of Rafah. His office also cited the resolution as a reason for Hamas rejecting Israel’s latest proposal for a hostages-for-ceasefire deal.

By doing so, he is proclaiming to his right-wing base that he won’t capitulate to outside pressure to sacrifice the efficacy of Israel’s military operation. It’s a compelling message to Israelis who are already predisposed to see the world as against them. It also conveniently placates Netanyahu’s far-right partners and delays the inevitable political reckoning that awaits him once the war dies down.

It is Israelis, however, who will pay the price for this defiant rebuke of international public opinion. Downgrading Israel’s participation in the hostage-deal negotiations puts the hostages’ freedom farther out of reach. Canceling the Hanegbi/Dermer visit to Washington will test the Biden administration’s patience and cast doubt on the possibility of reaching an agreement over the nature of an Israeli invasion of Rafah. 

Losing U.S. support for the war could have disastrous implications for Israel, and increases the likelihood of an end to the fighting that leaves Hamas somewhat intact as a military and political force in Gaza. As unsatisfying as it may be to pay attention to what the world thinks, diplomatic isolation is a high price to pay for “total victory.”

A message from our Publisher & CEO Rachel Fishman Feddersen

I hope you appreciated this article. Before you go, I’d like to ask you to please support the Forward’s award-winning, nonprofit journalism during this critical time.

The coming year promises to be filled with more complex and historic developments. We are entering an era where independent, fact-based Jewish journalism will be more important than ever. We need to be ready for whatever 2025 will bring, and with your help, we can be.

We’ve set a goal to raise $260,000 by December 31. That’s an ambitious goal, but one that will give us the resources we need to invest in the high quality news, opinion, analysis and cultural coverage that isn’t available anywhere else.

If you feel inspired to make an impact, now is the time to give something back. Join us as a member at your most generous level.

—  Rachel Fishman Feddersen, Publisher and CEO

With your support, we’ll be ready for whatever 2025 brings.

$36 $500

$120 $180 Other amount