“Uniting for Peace”: How the U.N. Can Circumvent a U.S. Veto to Protect Palestinians — And What It Would Take to Make It Real

By Dearborn Blog Editorial Team
Published: September 5, 2025 <!–more–>

TL;DR

There’s a little-used United Nations tool called “Uniting for Peace” that allows the General Assembly (UNGA) to act when the Security Council is blocked by a veto. With the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and a fast-approaching September 18, 2025 deadline stemming from last year’s UNGA resolution tied to the ICJ’s advisory opinion, momentum is building to use that mechanism for concrete measures: a protection force, arms restrictions, credential actions, evidence preservation, and accountability steps. These actions wouldn’t be “Security Council–style” binding, but they carry real legal, political, and economic weight—especially when paired with existing international-law duties not to aid serious violations. Harvard Law Journals Diakonia

We walk through what Uniting for Peace is, what it has accomplished before (think: Suez 1956/UNEF I), what it can and cannot do today, and the practical route to peacekeepers and arms restrictions for Gaza—plus where Dearborn’s voice fits in.

What is “Uniting for Peace”?

Uniting for Peace is the shorthand for UN General Assembly Resolution 377 A(V) (1950). When the Security Council is “failing to act” because of vetoes, the General Assembly can convene an Emergency Special Session (ESS) within 24 hours and recommend collective measures—diplomatic, economic, and, historically, even peacekeeping—to maintain or restore international peace and security. It does not erase a veto; it circumvents the deadlock by moving deliberation to the full membership. Recommendations pass by a two-thirds majority of states present and voting. Security Council Report United Nations

The mechanism has been revived in recent years. In February 2022, after a Security Council veto on Ukraine, the Council adopted Resolution 2623 to call an Emergency Special Session—explicitly invoking Uniting for Peace. The session then produced a string of significant General Assembly resolutions, demonstrating how the GA can mobilize the international system when the Council is stuck. Security Council Report United Nations+1

Has the General Assembly ever deployed peacekeepers without the Security Council?

Yes—famously during the Suez Crisis (1956). The General Assembly created the First United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF I) to separate forces and stabilize the situation after Security Council paralysis. Crucially, deployment required host consent: UNEF was stationed on Egyptian territory (Sinai/Gaza approaches) with Cairo’s approval, while Israel refused deployment on its side of the armistice line. That precedent matters for Gaza today. United Nations Peacekeeping+1 Canada.ca

Since Suez, most UN peace operations have been authorized by the Security Council—that’s the standard today. Still, the Suez example shows the General Assembly can establish a peacekeeping mission when Security Council is blocked, so long as states consent to host forces. Without consent, a robust peace enforcement mandate (using force beyond self-defense) would require Chapter VII action by the Security Council. United Nations Peacekeeping

Why is September 2025 a critical moment?

On September 18, 2024, the General Assembly adopted ES-10/24, welcoming the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) July 19, 2024 advisory opinion that found Israel’s ongoing presence in the occupied Palestinian territory unlawful, and demanded that Israel end that presence within 12 months. That one-year window culminates on September 18, 2025—with the Assembly signaling “further measures” if there’s no compliance. UN Press Reuters Al Jazeera

In the months since, the ICJ has also expanded provisional measures in the separate South Africa v. Israel genocide case—ordering Israel in May 2024 to halt the offensive in Rafah and allow aid—further tightening the legal frame around state obligations not to aid serious violations. Reuters

Democracy Now!’s latest interview with Craig Mokhiber (former director of the UN human rights office in New York) ties that deadline to a renewed Uniting for Peace push: a two-thirds vote could recommend a protection force, arms measures, credential action, and other steps without being blocked by a U.S. veto. Democracy Now!

What could the General Assembly do now under “Uniting for Peace”?

Below are realistic options that match UN practice, international law, and recent UNGA texts. Some require host consent; others are recommendations that bite because states already have independent legal duties (e.g., under the Genocide Convention, customary law on serious breaches, and the Arms Trade Treaty).

1) Mandate planning for a UN Protection Force for Gaza (and West Bank hot-spots)

The GA can establish or request the Secretary-General to plan a civilian protection mission (peacekeeping) and solicit troop/police contributions.
Deployment would still require host consent if there’s no Security Council authorization. Suez shows the GA can act to create and deploy—but where consent is withheld (as Israel did in 1956), forces deploy only where consent exists (e.g., Egyptian territory then; today that could mean Gaza’s crossings and maritime delivery corridors if consent is secured from the State of Palestine and neighboring states). United Nations Peacekeeping+1
UN doctrine underscores that peacekeeping mandates ordinarily come from the Security Council, but the UNEF I precedent remains a lawful GA creation—with consent. “Peace enforcement” (coercive force) would not be available via GA alone. United Nations Peacekeeping

2) Arms measures: call for an immediate halt to transfers fueling atrocities

The GA already used ES-10/24 and companion drafts to urge states to “cease the provision or transfer of arms, munitions and related equipment” to Israel—language several European missions acknowledged even when abstaining. That aligns with UN experts and Human Rights Council resolutions calling for an arms embargo. UN Docs Austrian Foreign Ministry OHCHR ReliefWeb
This is recommendatory, but it interacts with binding state responsibilities: where there’s a serious risk of genocide or grave IHL violations, states must not aid or assist and must prevent. Courts and UN experts have made that link explicit since early 2024. Opinio Juris OHCHR
We’re already seeing practical effect: courts and governments halting or restricting transfers (e.g., the Netherlands ordered to stop F-35 parts; Spain freezing or cancelling deals; Belgian rulings on transit). A renewed GA call would reinforce and broaden these moves. Reuters Opinio Juris AP News Business & Human Rights Resource Centre

3) Evidence preservation and an accountability track

The GA can establish registers and mechanisms—as it did for Ukraine—to document damages and support future claims or prosecutions. Similar steps for Gaza could standardize evidence and coordination with the ICJ and ICC. ReliefWeb

4) Credentials and participation

The GA can decline to accept credentials of delegations—used in the 1970s to exclude apartheid South Africa from Assembly work. It’s politically heavy and legally debated, but it has precedent and doesn’t require Security Council consent. cdn.un.org scholarlycommons.law.cwsl.edu

5) Economic and diplomatic isolation

The GA can recommend trade measures, boycotts, and sanctions—again, not “binding,” but influential. During apartheid, UNGA Resolution 1761 (1962) initiated a global arms and economic campaign that progressively tightened over time. A Gaza-focused ESS could update that menu for today (e.g., settlement goods bans, port restrictions for weapons cargoes). Wikipedia Digital Library

What about the legal duty not to aid serious breaches?

Even without new GA action, states are already bound by international law not to recognize illegal situations, not to aid or assist in maintaining them, and to cooperate to bring them to an end—duties emphasized by the ICJ in July 2024 and echoed in UNGA texts. That raises serious questions about arms supplies, intelligence sharing, and financial flows that foreseeably enable ongoing violations. A GA resolution can crystallize expectations and give political coverage to governments implementing embargoes or suspensions. International Court of Justice UN Press

Peacekeepers for Gaza: the practical pathway

Step 1 — Convene an ESS under “Uniting for Peace.”
This can be triggered either by seven Security Council members (as in 2022) or by a General Assembly majority during session. The agenda would reference ICJ orders, ES-10/24’s one-year deadline, and continuing mass harm in Gaza and the West Bank. Security Council Report

Step 2 — Adopt a resolution with concrete, multi-track measures.
Key elements could include:

Protection Force Planning: Request the Secretary-General to present within days a plan for a civilian protection mission (force size, concept of operations, logistics, command, ROE limited to self-defense), tied to consent by relevant authorities and states controlling crossings and air/sea corridors. Suez/UNEF I provides the model: GA creates; deployment follows consent. United Nations Peacekeeping
Arms Embargo Call: Urge all states to halt transfers of arms, munitions, and dual-use items that could facilitate violations—tracking the ES-10/24 language and UN expert guidance. UN Docs OHCHR
Humanitarian Access & Monitors: Mandate UN humanitarian corridors and deploy civilian monitors to oversee aid delivery, detention sites, and safe zones.
Evidence & Damages Register: Establish a UNGA-mandated registry (like Ukraine’s) for Gaza claims, asset tracing, and reparations proposals. ReliefWeb
Credentials/Participation: Signal readiness to review Israel’s credentials should there be continued non-compliance, recalling the South Africa practice. cdn.un.org
Follow-up Mechanism: Require the Secretary-General to report within 30 days, then monthly.

Step 3 — Build the two-thirds majority.
The numbers are within reach: 124 states backed ES-10/24 in 2024, and more have since voiced support for recognition and accountability measures. Belgium recently announced plans to recognize Palestine and adopt sanctions packages at the UNGA. UN Press The Guardian

Reality check:

Consent is the hinge. Without Israel’s consent, a GA-created force cannot deploy on Israeli-controlled territory; it could still stage at borders, ports, and air/sea corridors where other states consent (e.g., Egypt for Rafah/Kerem Shalom logistics, Cyprus for maritime corridors), and accompany aid into Gaza if/when access is granted. A Security Council mandate would unlock a stronger mandate—but that’s precisely what the U.S. veto has blocked. United Nations Peacekeeping+1
Effectiveness doesn’t require perfect coverage. Even a partial deployment that secures aid lifelines, monitors, and deterrent visibility can save lives and document violations.

Isn’t the U.S. veto still a brick wall?

Not in the General Assembly. While a veto can block Security Council action, it cannot stop UNGA from acting under Uniting for Peace. And visa politics—like the U.S. decision to deny or revoke visas for Palestinian officials ahead of this UNGA—can’t silence the hall: the GA can relocate proceedings, enable remote participation, and press on. In fact, international backlash has already greeted the visa decision. Al Jazeera TIME

“Block arms & more”: what’s already moving

The legal and political pieces are aligning:

ICJ: multiple orders in 2024 (Rafah; humanitarian access), plus the advisory opinion declaring the occupation unlawful and urging non-recognition and no aid or assistance by other states. Reuters International Court of Justice
UN experts/HRC: explicit calls to cease arms transfers to Israel. OHCHR ReliefWeb
Courts & capitals: Dutch appeals court halting F-35 parts; Spain cancelling or freezing deals; Belgian courts ordering transit blocks via Antwerp. Reuters AP News Business & Human Rights Resource Centre
UNGA’s own text (ES-10/24): urging states to stop transfers—language diplomats acknowledged on the floor. UN Docs italyun.esteri.it

A renewed Uniting for Peace resolution in September can consolidate all of this into a coherent international program—giving governments the cover to implement embargoes, port restrictions, and procurement bans consistent with existing law.

Balanced assessment: What this pathway can—and cannot—do

CAN:
- Create and plan a UN protection mission (deployment depends on consent absent a Security Council mandate).
- Mobilize arms restrictions and translate legal duties into policy across blocs.
- Set up evidence/claims mechanisms that matter for long-term accountability.
- Escalate political costs of non-compliance (via credentials and diplomatic isolation).
- Re-center UN institutions around universal rules—the same rules applied in Ukraine. ReliefWeb
CANNOT:
- Bind states the way a Security Council Chapter VII resolution does.
- Authorize coercive peace enforcement; host consent or Council action is needed for robust use of force. United Nations Peacekeeping

Still, history says UNGA action matters. In apartheid South Africa, sustained GA measures catalyzed global civil-society, market, and state behavior; over time they helped shift governments into hard sanctions and ultimately Security Council action. Wikipedia

Dearborn’s voice — and a Green vision

At Dearborn Blog, we hold a pro-Palestine, Green values lens: human rights, nonviolence, democracy, and international law. That doesn’t mean cheerleading any one political faction; it means being consistent. The same legal order that condemns Russia’s invasion is the one that says Israel’s prolonged occupation is unlawful, that starvation tactics and collective punishment are never acceptable, and that weapons supplies facilitating atrocities must stop. Consistency is the point. UN Press

For Dearborn—home to one of the largest Arab and Palestinian communities in the U.S.—this is not abstract. Families here have loved ones under bombardment, under siege, and under occupation. A Uniting for Peace push is not a silver bullet. But it’s a real path for the world’s majority to act, even when the Security Council won’t.

We encourage our readers to stay engaged, support local humanitarian efforts, and press elected officials to align policy with law and life: ceasefire, aid access, arms embargoes, and international protection for civilians. This is the voice of Dearborn—grounded, principled, and hopeful—and we’ll keep amplifying it until the people of Gaza and the West Bank can live in safety and freedom.

Category: LOCAL NEWS

Published by dearbornblogadmin

Dearborn Blog is a space for the diverse voices of the great city of Dearborn to be heard. Dearborn is a city rooted in innovation, entrepreneurship, diversity, tolerance, and building the American Dream. Dearborn Blog aspires to capture that spirit. View all posts by dearbornblogadmin