ALMOST 70 years since the United Nations (UN) voted statehood for Israel, United States (U.S.) President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. will recognise Jerusalem as the capital of that country. This recognition is not without controversy, despite the U.S. Congress voting for such years ago, but more particularly the historical role of U.S. governments in working to ensure a peaceful resolution to the internecine conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, who are fighting over the land. It is reasonable therefore to contend that the deferral of Congress’s decision by Trump’s predecessors was not without due consideration of the political climate in the Middle East and the desire to amicably reach a solution between the foes.

Though in reality President Trump’s announcement of recognition and the move to relocate the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem will take some time to materialise, that recognition and the process of realising establishment has sparked new unrest between the two sides, and not without casualties. The UN last Thursday passed a Resolution condemning Trump’s decision and Guyana was among the 128 nations that registered condemnation, as 35 abstained and 21 did not participate. In moments such as these, Guyana continues to distinguish herself and stand with those desirous of worldwide comity.

The UN was established in 1945 after World War II that saw the destruction of countries, dislocation of and brutalities to ethnicity, and the deaths of tens of millions. It was the intent of this institution to bring about and ensure freedom and world peace, guided by a body of rules known as declarations and charters by which participating countries would be bound. Instructively, the U.S. was not only a co-founder, but played a leading role under President Franklin Roosevelt to bring the institution to realisation.

Though he did not live to see its establishment, stirring speeches delivered by his widow Eleanor Roosevelt, the U.S.’s first Delegate/Ambassador to the UN, reminded us that “Freedom makes a huge requirement of every human being. With freedom comes responsibility. For the person who is unwilling to grow up, the person who does not want to carry his own weight, this is a frightening prospect.”

Incidentally, as the world celebrates the birth of Jesus Christ who was born in Jerusalem, this space considered sacred by three of the world’s major religions — Jews, Muslims and Christians — continues to see turmoil. With candidness it can be admitted Israel’s several violations of the fundamental rights of the people of Palestine to peaceful settlement in this area. This is not to say that Palestine has not been culpable, but merely to make the point how tenuous and delicate the matter is. The peace treaty (Camp David Accord) reached on 17th September, 1978, facilitated by U.S. President Jimmy Carter, between Egypt and Israel that called for the introduction of Palestinian self-government in the West Bank and Gaza, should have been given a chance to work before the U.S. seeks to antagonise an already volatile situation. In 2016, none other than Senator Bernard “Bernie” Sanders, during the Democratic Party primary to identify a presidential candidate, said, “Israel has a right to exist in security, and at the same time the Palestinians have a state of their own.”
And whereas Israel remains an ally of the U.S. and a vital partner in the Middle East, it cannot be ignored that recognition and appreciation of these have allowed in some instances turning a Nelson’s eye to its excesses. It is often seen in politics the desire to align and reluctance to condemn irrespective of whatever action is taken. Those who dare stray off the proverbial reservation are sure to face condemnation.

Giving recognition to one group over others that consider the same space unique to their religion and identity is a recipe for conflict, and hope resides it does not escalate into another war. Before the vote was taken on Thursday, U.S. Ambassador to the UN, Nikki Halley’s speech was not without a tinge of veiled threats to nations, including the UN, who would support the Resolution. This is most unfortunate, more so at the UN, where alliances are built on mutual respect, including the right to self-determination.

Issues and decisions at the international level should still be driven by universally acceptable principles. Where in this period of man’s history there are questions, concerns and fears about the U.S.’s domestic and foreign policies as they relate to diversity and other time-honoured principles, it is more imperative that institutions such as the UN continue to function. It cannot be over-emphasised the importance for nations to have respect for each other, and working the international corridors (diplomacy) to find common ground with a view to protecting and respecting humanity.