US vetoes UN Security Council resolution demanding an immediate Gaza ceasefire
National News
The United States on Wednesday vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution demanding an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza because it was not linked to the release of hostages, saying it would embolden Hamas militants.
All 14 other members of the council voted in favor of the resolution, which described the humanitarian situation in Gaza as “catastrophic” and called on Israel to lift all restrictions on the delivery of aid to the 2.1 million Palestinians in the territory.
The resolution before the U.N.'s most powerful body also did not fulfill two other U.S. demands: It did not condemn Hamas’ deadly attack in Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, which ignited the war, or say the militant group must disarm and withdraw from Gaza.
Acting U.S. Ambassador Dorothy Shea, speaking to the council immediately before the vote, said the resolution would undermine the security of Israel. a close U.S. ally, and diplomatic efforts to reach a ceasefire “that reflects the realities on the ground.”
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the resolution would only have empowered Hamas. “Hamas could end this brutal conflict immediately by laying down its arms and releasing all remaining hostages,” he said in a statement.
Israel’s U.N. Ambassador Danny Danon thanked the United States for refusing to abandon the hostages. He said the resolution’s failure to make the release of hostages a condition for a ceasefire would have put all the pressure on Israel and handed Hamas “time, leverage and political cover.”
But the U.S. veto of the resolution ? its fifth since the start of the war ? was roundly criticized by other members of the council, who accused the United States of providing Israel with impunity. The Chinese ambassador to the U.N. said Israel’s actions have “crossed every red line” of international humanitarian law and seriously violated U.N. resolutions. “Yet, due to the shielding by one country, these violations have not been stopped or held accountable,” Ambassador Fu Cong said.
Britain’s U.N. Ambassador Barbara Woodward, a usual U.S. ally, lashed out at Israel. “This Israeli government’s decisions to expand its military operations in Gaza and severely restrict aid are unjustifiable, disproportionate and counterproductive, and the U.K. completely opposes them,” she said.
Pakistan’s Ambassador Asim Iftikhar Ahmad said the U.S. veto “will be remembered as a complicity, a green light for continued annihilation. A moment where the entire world was expecting action. But yet again, this council was blocked and prevented by one member from carrying out its responsibility.”
Slovenia’s U.N. Ambassador Samuel ?bogar, the coordinator for the council’s 10 elected members, stressed that it was never the intention to provoke a veto and therefore the resolution focused on the humanitarian crisis and the urgent need for unimpeded access to deliver aid.
Related listings
-
Supreme Court sides with the FDA in its dispute over vaping products
National News 04/08/2025The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled for the Food and Drug Administration in its crackdown on sweet-flavored vaping products following a surge in teen electronic cigarette use.But the justices’ unanimous decision throwing out a federal appeals ...
-
Trump administration says South African ambassador has to leave the US
National News 03/16/2025The State Department says South Africa’s ambassador to the United States, who was declared “persona non grata” last week, has until Friday to leave the country.After Secretary of State Marco Rubio determined that Ambassador Ebrahim ...
-
Americans’ trust in nation’s court system hits record low, survey finds
National News 01/14/2025At a time of heightened political division, Americans’ confidence in their country’s judicial system and courts dropped to a record low of 35% this year, according to a new Gallup poll.The United States saw a sharp drop of 24 percentage p...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.