The UN Security Council voted Monday in favor of a US-drafted resolution bolstering Donald Trump’s Gaza peace plan that includes the deployment of an international force and a path to a future Palestinian state.There were 13 votes in favor of the text, which US President Trump claimed would lead to “further Peace all over the World,” with only Russia and China abstaining — but no vetoes.Trump posted on social media that the vote “acknowledging and endorsing the BOARD OF PEACE, which will be chaired by me…will go down as one of the biggest approvals in the History of the United Nations, (and) will lead to further Peace all over the World.”US ambassador to the UN Mike Waltz said after the vote that “today’s resolution represents another significant step that will enable Gaza to prosper and an environment that will allow Israel to live in security.”But Hamas, which is excluded by the resolution from any governance role in Gaza, said the resolution did not meet Palestinians’ “political and humanitarian demands and rights.”The text, which was revised several times as a result of high-stakes negotiations, “endorses” the US president’s plan, which allowed for a fragile ceasefire between Israel and Hamas to take hold on October 10 in the war-wracked Palestinian territory.The Gaza Strip has been largely reduced to rubble after two years of fighting, sparked by Hamas’s attack on Israel on October 7, 2023.The peace plan authorizes the creation of an International Stabilization Force (ISF) that would work with Israel and Egypt and newly trained Palestinian police to help secure border areas and demilitarize the Gaza Strip.The ISF is mandated to work on the “permanent decommissioning of weapons from non-state armed groups,” protecting civilians and securing humanitarian aid corridors.- Palestinian statehood pathway -It also authorizes the formation of a “Board of Peace,” a transitional governing body for Gaza — which Trump would theoretically chair — with a mandate running until the end of 2027.In convoluted language, the resolution does mention a possible future Palestinian state.Once the Palestinian Authority has carried out requested reforms and the rebuilding of Gaza is underway, “the conditions may finally be in place for a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood,” the text says.That eventuality has been firmly rejected by Israel.The resolution also calls for the resumption of humanitarian aid deliveries at scale through the UN, ICRC and Red Crescent.”We must also substantially step up our work to support the UN humanitarian effort. That requires opening all crossings and ensuring that aid agencies and international NGOs can operate without obstruction,” said a British ambassador to the UN, James Kariuki.Israeli ambassador to the UN Danny Danon said ahead of the vote that the resolution would “make sure that Hamas will not pose a threat against Israel anymore.”Veto-wielding Russia circulated a competing draft, saying the US document does not go far enough towards backing the creation of a Palestinian state.Moscow’s text, seen by AFP, asked the Council to express its “unwavering commitment to the vision of the two-state solution.”It would not have authorized a Board of Peace or the deployment of an international force for the time being, instead asking UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to offer “options” on those issues.”Security Council members were, in practice, not given the time to do the work in good faith,” Moscow’s ambassador Vasily Nebenzya said.”The US document is yet another pig in a poke. In essence, the Council is giving its blessing to a US initiative on the basis of Washington’s promises, giving complete control over the Gaza strip to the Board of Peace.” The US won the backing of several Arab and Muslim-majority nations, publishing a joint statement of support for the text signed by Qatar, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Pakistan, Jordan, and Turkey.

COP30 hosts Brazil on Monday extended negotiations into the night at the UN climate talks as they pushed for a rapid compromise among countries very much at deep odds. Following a difficult first week, Brazil set a deadline for nations to finalize “a significant part” of the negotiations by Tuesday evening for approval the following day.”It’s super difficult as you know… but all involved thought that it’s worth a try” said COP30 President Andre Correa do Lago in the rainforest city of Belem where the talks are underway.Sleepless nights are assured, with Correa do Lago extending the program so negotiators were “able to continue working at night.”They have their work cut out.No progress has been made to reconcile differences over weak climate commitments, insufficient financial pledges and trade measures.China and India are leading a push for COP30 to adopt a decision against unilateral trade barriers, singling out the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) for attack.Tested since 2023 and set to become fully operational in 2026, CBAM targets imports of carbon-intensive goods such as steel, aluminum, cement, fertilizers, electricity and hydrogen.The head of China’s COP30 delegation, Li Gao, told AFP last week that nations should “avoid the negative impact of, for example, geopolitical unilateralism or protectionism.”But the EU’s climate commissioner, Wopke Hoekstra, hit back at attacks over the bloc’s flagship policy and defended carbon pricing as “something that we need”.”We’re not going to be lured into the suggestion that actually CBAM is a unilateral trade measure. And in that realm, we’re also not going to discuss it,” Hoekstra said in a news conference.EU and Chinese officials were due to hold talks later Monday.- Sleepless in Belem -UN climate chief Simon Stiell urged negotiators to tackle “the hardest issues fast” to avoid going into overtime at the summit’s close on Friday.”When these issues get pushed deep into extra time, everybody loses. We absolutely cannot afford to waste time on tactical delays or stonewalling,” he said.The COP30 presidency published a memo Sunday evening summarizing the divergent viewpoints and proposing options.Money is again at the heart of the negotiations, after last year’s summit in Baku ended with an agreement for developed countries to provide $300 billion annually in climate finance to poorer nations — a figure criticized as greatly insufficient.Developing countries, especially from Africa, want COP30 to point the finger at developed nations for falling short on providing financing to help adapt to climate change and cut emissions.Another divisive issue was a push by island states — backed by Latin American nations and the EU — for COP30 to respond to the latest projections showing the world will fail to limit warming to 1.5C.But major emerging countries, from China to Saudi Arabia, are wary of any text that implies they are not doing enough to curb climate change.”For Small Island Developing States, 1.5C is not a political slogan. It is a non-negotiable survival threshold for our people, our culture, and our livelihoods,” said Steven Victor, the environment minister of Palau, which is chairing the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS).- Fossil fight -Victor told fellow ministers that AOSIS was disappointed over a lack of progress since nations agreed in 2023 at COP28 in Dubai to transition away from fossil fuels.Host nation Brazil wants COP30 to send an ambitious signal on fossil fuels, but it remains unclear what form this might take.Even supporters are doubtful that stronger language on fossil fuels could be agreed by all countries at COP30 given fierce opposition from major oil-producing nations, among others.”At the end of the day… it’s about phasing out fossil fuels if we are to solve this problem,” a delegate from a European country supportive of Brazil’s fossil fuel push told AFP.”They are not talking about it in the negotiating rooms. Someone has to do something about it.” Brazil’s Vice President Geraldo Alckmin urged ministers on Monday to agree to “integrated action plans” for transitioning away from fossil fuels.Alckmin said President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva might come to Belem this week, which would be “extremely positive.””Brazil is committed to combating climate change,” he said.ia-ico-alb-lth-np/bjt

Ecuador’s Donald Trump-aligned President Daniel Noboa was dealt a major blow Sunday by voters who spurned his plans for a return of foreign military bases to the country battling rampant cartel violence.Despite opinion polls projecting a comfortable referendum victory for the millennial president, Ecuadorans roundly rejected all four of his proposals.Besides an overwhelming “No” to overturning a ban on foreign military bases, voters also shot down proposals to end public funding for political parties, to reduce the number of lawmakers, and to draft a new constitution. Analysts say Noboa was unable to convince the electorate that his ideas were the best way to deal with what is a very real problem of sky-high crime and murder rates.- ‘They don’t care’ -Noboa last year deployed the military to Ecuador’s crime-riddled prisons and streets, and raised taxes to fund his war on drug gangs — also a major focus of US President Trump.Seeking to boost cooperation with Washington, which has been carrying out deadly strikes on alleged drug-smuggling boats in the Caribbean and Pacific, Noboa proposed reopening a US base at Manta on the Pacific coast.But voters told AFP this was not a problem for the United States to solve.”Does the United States care if our children are robbed on the street? They don’t care,” said Daniela Cordova, a 44-year-old university employee who voted “No” in the referendum.Security “does not depend on a constitution or on military bases”, she added.Political scientist Santiago Cahuasqui from Quito’s Universidad Hemisferios said voters punished Noboa for “grandiose communication that is completely divorced from reality.””There hasn’t been a single result” from Noboa’s heavily-publicized anti-crime campaign, said Andres Delgado, a 23-year-old university student. “In fact, insecurity is getting worse.” He also voted “No.”Ecuadoran security expert Michelle Maffei said it was a mistake to focus on military solutions without the existence of “crime prevention programs or programs to strengthen institutions” that investigate money laundering and other offenses linked to drug trafficking.- ‘Fear of change’  -Presidential spokeswoman Carolina Jaramillo on Monday blamed “a deep fear of change” for Noboa’s referendum defeat.But voters and analysts told AFP it was more a fear of losing rights to a president who has proposed chemical castration for rapists and intelligence operations that require no warrants.”My ‘No’ vote was a rejection of the government for being dictatorial,” said Ximena Martinez, a 29-year-old vendor in Manta.”Why would he (Noboa) bring US military personnel back to Manta after the abuses they committed here?” asked Martinez, referring to reports by rights groups that the base was used in the past as a launchpad for strikes on boats transporting drugs or migrants. Or sometimes fishermen.Ecuadorans “are punishing Noboa’s authoritarian drive,” added Cahuasqui, the political scientist. – Indigenous ‘repression’ -A military crackdown on recent Indigenous protests against the elimination of a diesel subsidy also seemed to have turned the mood against Noboa.In Imbabura province, where Indigenous protesters blocking roads clashed with security forces — leaving at least two dead — more than two-thirds of the population voted “No” to the referendum’s four questions.Norma Navarro, a 73-year-old retiree, said her rejection was informed by “the brutal repression of the Indigenous people.””That’s what hurt me the most,” she told AFP.