TRANSCRIPT
"Draft resolution A/E-S-10/L-31/Revision 1 is adopted."
On overwhelming majority in the United Nations General Assembly.
With 142 nations voting in favour of a non-binding resolution, calling for Israel to end the occupation of Palestinian territories within a year.
Twelve countries voted against the resolution, and 43 abstained - including Australia.
"We regret that we were not in a position to support this resolution."
That's Australia's Foreign Minister Penny Wong.
She says the wording of the resolution wasn't something Australia could support.
"We would have preferred to have been in a position where we could support a resolution that reflected the International Court of Justice's advisory opinion, and we worked very hard in New York with other countries to try and get changes to the resolution that would enable us to support it. We voted for two different resolutions over the last few months because we were able to get a set of words that we could support. Unfortunately, this was not the case. Nevertheless, we support the principle of self determination for the Palestinian people."
The resolution follows the International Court of Justice advisory opinion in July that found Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories to be illegal under international law.
It called on Israel to end to its presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territories as rapidly as possible, cease new settlements, provide reparations, return all land, asset and other property seized since 1967, and evacuate all existing settlers.
It also put obligations on other countries to assist the U-N in ending Israel's presence in the O-P-T, to not recognise any changes to the borders since 1967, and to not assist Israel in maintaining the situation or its presence in the territories.
That advisory opinion is one Australia has accepted, but Australia's representative at the United Nations, James Larsen, says the resolution strayed from those findings.
"We wanted to vote for a resolution that clearly offered the Palestinian people a path to self-determination and gave the world a path to a two-state solution. And, we wanted to vote for a resolution that gave the international community a clear way to respond to the International Court of Justice's Advisory Opinion. However, we are concerned that by making demands of the entire United Nations membership that go beyond the scope of the Advisory Opinion, the resolution distracts from what the world needs Israel to do."
The resolution calls for Israel to comply with international law, withdraw its military, cease all new settlement activity immediately, and remove all settlers from occupied land.
Chris Sidoti was a commissioner on the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
He says it's unclear what parts of the resolution the Australian government had issue with.
"I consider that the resolution, and I've looked at it closely, falls completely within the scope of the opinion. That's why I am particularly concerned to hear from the Australian Government why it doesn't think that. If it has good reasons, let them be published so that we can all examine them. Maybe we'll be persuaded alternatively, maybe we'll have a chance to persuade them."
The resolution calls on states to abstain from relations with Israel concerning the Occupied Palestinian Territories by not entering related trade deals and halting diplomatic missions.
It also required states to ensure their citizens and companies don't assist with the occupation, stopping imports of products originating in Israeli settlements, ceasing arms trade to Israel, and imposing sanctions on settlers.
Those steps weren't directly stated by the International Court of Justice earlier this year, but Mr Sidoti says it was part of the process.
"The court gave broad guidelines. It indicated that there should be nothing that politically or diplomatically supports or recognises the occupation. It said there should be nothing to assist or otherwise aid the maintenance or extension of settlements. It called for the occupation to be ended as quickly as possible, and settlements to be withdrawn as quickly as possible, and for states to support that, to find ways to enable that to occur. So the court provided very clear guidance as to the areas in which action should be taken, but it left it to the General Assembly to decide on the specifics, and that's precisely what the General Assembly was doing in this resolution."
The State of Palestine's Ambassador to Australia, Izzat Abdulhadi ((is-art abdool-had-ee)) says he respects the Australian government's decision to abstain, but he also says it remains unclear to him what specific concerns the Australian Government had.
"Our own representative in New York were engaged in robust, bold negotiations with different countries to encourage them and urge them to support this important, very important resolution, actually. And based on my own understanding we've changed and modified the version several times to respond to these concerns. So, if Australia has some concerns, I think we effectively responded maybe to some of it, because we can't also compromise the substance and essence of the of this resolution."
The government has received backlash on its decision to abstain.
Opposition Foreign Affairs spokesperson Simon Birmingham says it should have been opposed.
"We think government should have had the courage to oppose this resolution. It was counterproductive. It was clear that the text wasn't text Australia could support, and if we couldn't support it, then we should have had the courage to oppose it, as the United States did, given it was counterproductive to long term efforts to secure peace and security."
Alex Ryvchin ((riv-chin)) from the Executive Council of Australian Jewry agrees.
Whilst Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi say Australia should have voted in favour of the resolution.
"The Labor Government has shown itself to be gutless fence sitters by abstaining on a vote in the UN for Israel to end its occupation of Gaza and the West Bank. That is just plain cowardly."
Penny Wong says the government has been taking other steps towards ending the conflict.
"You've seen us vote for ceasefire. You've seen us work with Canada and New Zealand at leader level statements to call on Israel and other parties, including the terrorist organisation Hamas, to agree to a ceasefire. You've seen us vote in a vote that was highly criticised by some for greater recognition of the Palestinians delegation at the United Nations you've seen us put sanctions on settlers. We don't export weapons to Israel, and we will continue to look at ways we can add our voice to a pathway out of this conflict, because we also want peace in the Middle East. "
