Israel’s ambassador to the organization, Gilad Erdan, has been angered by United Nations (UN) calls for a ceasefire in Gaza, recently saying that the UN is “irrelevant” and has “no legitimacy.” Despite the criticism, however, your country is working behind the scenes in the Security Council to demand changes to the resolutions voted on, even without having a permanent seat on the body or being part of the group of ten countries that hold rotating seats. Brazil is a member. . The channel used for these articulations is usually American diplomacy.
When Brazilian Foreign Minister Mauro Vieira took over the council’s interim presidency in October and proposed a resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza, Israeli diplomacy publicly contradicted the text. Although Brazil managed to secure the approval of twelve members and the abstention of two up to that time the best result for a resolution on the Middle East in seven years the American veto made the proposal unworkable. In the Security Council, the veto of a permanent member brings the discussions back to the point. At that time, Erdan posted on his social networks a thank you to the United States for blocking what he described as a “very bad resolution.”
During the Brazilian presidency, other proposed resolutions were presented: two by Russia and one by the United States, but they were initially rejected because they contained contradictory points such as the ceasefire, which was defended in the Russian text and ignored by the American government. . Brazil was the country that came closest to prosperity.
Since Brazil’s rotating presidency would only last a month, Vieira decided to negotiate submitting a new proposal for a solution to the conflict when the lights went out in October. Brazilian UN Ambassador Sérgio Danese, whose performance at the Security Council in Brasília had been praised, drafted a new text in consensus with the other nine nonpermanent member states. This value would immediately guarantee a more than sufficient majority for approval. In this way, Danese would face the challenge of negotiating the abstentions of the United States, China and Russia, which have had veto power in the past (France and the United Kingdom, which also belong to the Group of Five Permanent Members). (this method has not been used since 1989).
At the end of October, Itamaraty received information that China was likely to vote in favor of the text, which encouraged the Brazilian delegation. Moscow has already signaled that it might abstain. Meanwhile, the United States’ position was still unclear, because although American UN Ambassador Linda ThomasGreenfield was inclined to propose an abstention, Washington still favored a veto. But Brazil was hopeful that ThomasGreenfield could convince the State Department of his position. Vieira’s idea was to present the text on the last day of his presidency, October 31, so that it could be taken into account in the following government and the approvals had already been negotiated.
It turned out that on the eve of the presentation, American diplomacy proposed amendments that had not been agreed with the other members and would therefore have to be renegotiated. Given the limited time remaining in the Brazilian presidency, this bureaucratic procedure would prevent the country from presenting the project. The US’s demands included the termination of the ceasefire and the exclusion of any criticism of Israel’s evacuation order from the Gaza Strip at the beginning of the conflict. Behind the scenes, diplomats in the American delegation explained, in an unusual touch of candor, that the changes came at the request of Israeli diplomacy. At the suggestion of the USA, Russia in contrast to the Americans also suggested points that made the situation even more difficult. The resolution was ultimately shelved.
According to diplomats interviewed PiauíIt is not uncommon for countries that are not members of the Security Council to organize to have their interests represented by the permanent members. However, it noted the United States’ willingness to provide unconditional support to Israel in such a conflictridden environment.
Brazil was replaced in the rotating presidency by China, which showed no interest in submitting a proposal. Malta took the lead on this issue and proposed a text to protect children victims of the conflict. Israeli management was also represented in this episode, in particular the country’s ambassador to Brazil, Daniel Zonshine the same who met with the opposition and Jair Bolsonaro in Congress on November 9th. Among other things, Zonshine lobbied Security Council diplomats to ensure that the resolution provides for the protection of Israeli children.
Taking these points into account, the resolution proposed by Malta was adopted on the 15th without the veto of the United States, which abstained. Ambassador ThomasGreenfield had claimed that she could not vote for a resolution that did not condemn Hamas, as was the case with the text submitted by Malta. But he agreed to abstain. According to Brazilian diplomats interviewed by PiauíThere is little doubt that the American abstention met with Israel’s approval, although Ambassador Erdan publicly criticized the text on his social networks.
One of the UN directors, Richard Gowan, published on his networks a question that many diplomats asked in Brasília on the afternoon of the 15th: a month after the United States vetoed the Brazilian proposal, a very similar text, written by Malta was approved without a veto. Why?
In Itamaraty there are those who believe that the approval at this point is due to increasing pressure from the international community and the United Nations itself for the Security Council to break out of inertia. But there are also those who see the American veto of the Brazilian text as signs of Israel’s retaliation against Brazil.
In the government, communication with Israel is handled by Mauro Vieira through the Chancellery and is generally carried out in a very protocolbased manner. Although it did not risk speaking publicly about retaliation, during its meeting with Jair Bolsonaro in Congress, Itamaraty was unable to identify whether Zonshine had acted at the behest of Israel (the diplomat later explained that he did not know that the former president was going to do so would). the event and claimed that it was normal for diplomatic bodies to also communicate with the opposition). There was also no explanation for the delay in releasing the Brazilians in Gaza Israel assumed it was an Egyptian problem, even though it was the Israeli army’s responsibility to control the Rafah crossing. Celso Amorim, the president’s special adviser, even called his counterpart in the United States, Jake Sullivan, and asked for support. It is still unknown whether the release of the Brazilians in Gaza resulted from this context.
The episode in which the Israeli government commissioned the Mossad to investigate members of the terrorist group Hezbollah in Brazil as part of an investigation that preceded the Hamas attacks also remained without an official explanation.
The core of diplomacy closest to the PT assumes that the situations are interconnected and Brazil’s relations with Iran serve as a background. The Middle Eastern country was recently admitted to the BRICS and President Lula even spoke to Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi after the outbreak of the conflict in Gaza. The country is accused of being one of Hamas’s financial backers. According to this group’s assessment, Israel’s stance (on Hezbollah and Congress) was aimed at mobilizing the proIsrael lobby in the country, particularly the evangelical community, and, moreover, trying to “embarrass” Brazil in its relations with Iran “. to an interlocutor at the Palácio do Planalto who heard the report.
Israel’s UN ambassador himself has pointed out in his remarks that Hamas leader Yahya Ibrahim AlSinwar is not the most dangerous enemy, given the horrors Hamas inflicted at the start of the conflict. According to his social media posts, the biggest threat would be Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s main leader, whom he describes as the current “Hitler.” “The Iranian regime is the Nazi regime of our time. And Hamas is one of their death squads,” he wrote on October 31.
After the arrival of the first group of Brazilians from Gaza on November 13, President Lula sharpened the tone of his criticism of Israel. In a statement the evening he received the Palestinians, he said: “If Hamas has committed an act of terrorism, the State of Israel is also committing an act of terrorism.” But the strategy in his office was to tone down the tone until everyone Brazilians and family members of Brazilians who are in Gaza can leave. Although other Latin American countries such as Chile and Colombia recalled their ambassadors amid increasing attacks on civilian targets in Gaza, Brazil never considered moving in the same direction. At least not as long as there were Brazilians in the conflict region.
What the government wants to do, and it shouldn’t take long, is to demand a change of Israel’s ambassador to the country. The request should not be made publicly, but between chanceries, alleging that Zonshine’s behavior went beyond the limits of diplomacy by apparently acting with the intention of interfering in the country’s internal affairs.
Celso Amorim used the loopholes of diplomatic language to convey messages. Internally, he says he “doesn’t want to believe” that Israel’s stance against Brazil is retaliatory. Translated into practical vocabulary, this means that the government acknowledges the Israeli move but is still hesitant to state its intentions categorically. Faced with the escalation of Lula’s tone, Israeli President Isaac Herzog called the PT MP on the 16th to calm the situation. In the call, he called on Brazil to support Israel’s demands for Hamas to release the hostages.
It was the second time the two had spoken since the conflict began. Lula responded that he would strengthen the demand for release, but also demanded that Israel not take so long to release the Brazilians who are on the second list to leave Gaza. The conclusion is Planalto’s assessment: the country does not want to join Brazil in the chorus of critics.