KEY POINTS:
UNITED NATIONS - The United States suddenly withdrew a UN resolution endorsing this week's agreement by Israeli and Palestinian leaders to try to reach a Mideast peace settlement because of Israeli objections even though it had overwhelming support in the Security Council.
The US about-face in less than 24 hours on Friday surprised many UN diplomats and highlighted Israel's difficult relations with the United Nations, which it contends is anti-Israeli and pro-Palestinian. But what surprised UN diplomats most was that the US did not consult Israel, one of its closest allies, before introducing the draft resolution on Thursday afternoon.
With virtually every other Mideast resolution, the United States had consulted Israel in advance, but on Thursday US Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad first presented it at a closed council meeting.
As he left, he welcomed the "very positive" response from council members but told reporters he needed to consult with the Israelis and Palestinians on the text to ensure that the resolution was what they wanted.
It clearly was not what Israel wanted as a first step to support the agreement reached this week at the US-sponsored Mideast conference in Annapolis, Maryland, by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to try to reach a peace settlement by the end of 2008.
Well-informed diplomats said Israel did not want a resolution because it would bring the Security Council, which it distrusts, into the fledgling negotiations with the Palestinians. The diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said Khalilzad introduced the draft resolution not only without consulting the Israelis and Palestinians but without getting broad support from President George W. Bush's administration.
"It's not the proper venue," Israel's deputy ambassador Daniel Carmon told reporters after Friday's council meeting. "We feel that the appreciation of Annapolis has other means of being expressed than in a resolution."
"We were not the only ones to object," Carmon added, saying the Americans had told the Israelis that the Palestinians also objected. Arab diplomats confirmed the Palestinians were not consulted but said they supported the draft.
Abbas told reporters in the Tunisian capital, Tunis, on Friday, that while he did not know the details of the draft resolution it was a sign of the seriousness of the United States, which he also perceived at the Annapolis conference.
"This means, if what we have learned is verified, that there are serious steps that speak to the existence of an American position supporting the negotiations," Abbas said.
Khalilzad was in Washington on Friday for previously scheduled meetings and it was left to US deputy ambassador Alejandro Wolff to announce the US decision to withdraw the resolution, first to council members at a closed meeting and then to reporters.
He said the US had held intensive consultations over the past few days "and the upshot was that there were some unease with the idea" of a resolution.
"The focus, we all realized again, should be placed and remain on Annapolis and the understanding that was reached there," Wolff said. "It's a momentous decision ... and rather than dilute from that and in respect to both parties in terms of what they thought would be most helpful, we reached a conclusion that it would be best to withdraw it," Wolff said.
In Washington, the State Department said that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had decided a resolution was unnecessary.
"We have looked at this and, at the end of the day, the secretary believes that the positive results of Annapolis speak for themselves and there is really no reason to gild the lily," spokesman Sean McCormack said. "I am not sure that we saw the need to add anything else to the conversation. Sometimes, the results and the event speak for themselves."
Two US officials, speaking on condition of anonymity to describe Rice's decision to withdraw the draft document, said there were several concerns about the resolution, including the failure to consult the Israelis and Palestinians on the language and the possibility that some on the Security Council might try to add anti-Israeli language to it.
Qatar's UN Ambassador Nassir Al-Nasser, the only Arab member on the Security Council, had said Thursday he was "happy with the language" in the US draft and "happy that the council is dealing with this issue."
"For me, this is the main thing," Al-Nasser said.
But it was not to be.
Instead of a resolution, Indonesia's UN Ambassador Marty Natalegawa, the current council president, summed up the council's feelings, telling reporters there was "an overwhelming sense of welcome to what has happened in Annapolis."
Council members are "welcoming, supporting and encouraging the parties to diligently follow up," he said.
"There is an absolutely clear message of council unity in supporting Annapolis conference and its achievements, and not to be overly preoccupied at this time on the format or the form of the council's response," Natalegawa said.
Russia's deputy ambassador Konstantin Dolgov said it was the US right as the sponsor to withdraw the resolution.
"What is important is that discussions showed that there is a lot of support for the outcome," he said. "We think that it would be important, of course, for the Security Council to express itself on this issue because the discussions showed that all Security Council members supported the outcome of the Annapolis meeting."
France's UN Ambassador Jean-Maurice Ripert said France understood the US reasons but believes it would be "useful" for the council to support the dynamics created in Annapolis.
"We remain convinced that the support of the international community to the process initiated in Annapolis remains indispensable," he said.
- AP
