The full text of resolution 2334 (2016)

“The Security Council,

“Reaffirming its relevant resolutions, including resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 446 (1979), 452 (1979), 465 (1980), 476 (1980), 478 (1980), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003), and 1850 (2008),

“Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and reaffirming, inter alia, the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,

“Reaffirming the obligation of Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and recalling the advisory opinion rendered on 9 July 2004 by the International Court of Justice,

“Condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions,

“Expressing grave concern that continuing Israeli settlement activities are dangerously imperilling the viability of the two-State solution based on the 1967 lines,

“Recalling the obligation under the Quartet Roadmap, endorsed by its resolution 1515 (2003), for a freeze by Israel of all settlement activity, including “natural growth”, and the dismantlement of all settlement outposts erected since March 2001,

“Recalling also the obligation under the Quartet roadmap for the Palestinian Authority Security Forces to maintain effective operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantling terrorist capabilities, including the confiscation of illegal weapons,

“Condemning all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation, incitement and destruction,

“Reiterating its vision of a region where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders,

“Stressing that the status quo is not sustainable and that significant steps, consistent with the transition contemplated by prior agreements, are urgently needed in order to (i) stabilize the situation and to reverse negative trends on the ground, which are steadily eroding the two-State solution and entrenching a one-State reality, and (ii) to create the conditions for successful final status negotiations and for advancing the two-State solution through those negotiations and on the ground,

“1. Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;

“2. Reiterates its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all of its legal obligations in this regard;

“3. Underlines that it will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations;

“4. Stresses that the cessation of all Israeli settlement activities is essential for salvaging the two-State solution, and calls for affirmative steps to be taken immediately to reverse the negative trends on the ground that are imperilling the two-State solution;

“5. Calls upon all States, bearing in mind paragraph 1 of this resolution, to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967;

“6. Calls for immediate steps to prevent all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation and destruction, calls for accountability in this regard, and calls for compliance with obligations under international law for the strengthening of ongoing efforts to combat terrorism, including through existing security coordination, and to clearly condemn all acts of terrorism;

“7. Calls upon both parties to act on the basis of international law, including international humanitarian law, and their previous agreements and obligations, to observe calm and restraint, and to refrain from provocative actions, incitement and inflammatory rhetoric, with the aim, inter alia, of de-escalating the situation on the ground, rebuilding trust and confidence, demonstrating through policies and actions a genuine commitment to the two-State solution, and creating the conditions necessary for promoting peace;

“8. Calls upon all parties to continue, in the interest of the promotion of peace and security, to exert collective efforts to launch credible negotiations on all final status issues in the Middle East peace process and within the time frame specified by the Quartet in its statement of 21 September 2010;

“9. Urges in this regard the intensification and acceleration of international and regional diplomatic efforts and support aimed at achieving, without delay a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East on the basis of the relevant United Nations resolutions, the Madrid terms of reference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative and the Quartet Roadmap and an end to the Israeli occupation that began in 1967; and underscores in this regard the importance of the ongoing efforts to advance the Arab Peace Initiative, the initiative of France for the convening of an international peace conference, the recent efforts of the Quartet, as well as the efforts of Egypt and the Russian Federation;

“10. Confirms its determination to support the parties throughout the negotiations and in the implementation of an agreement;

“11. Reaffirms its determination to examine practical ways and means to secure the full implementation of its relevant resolutions;

“12. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Council every three months on the implementation of the provisions of the present resolution;

“13. Decides to remain seized of the matter.” ________________________________________

December 24, 2016 | 3 Comments »

Leave a Reply

3 Comments / 3 Comments

  1. just for Arabs with no Jews allowed while the Jewish state includes non-Jewish Arabs. Yet if Israel were to copy the Arab pattern and move all of its current non-Jewish Arab citizens to the new Arab state, they would be accused of racism and ethnic cleansing.

    Best to first review the evidence to clearly understand exactly how each party perceives the problem being addressed and their goals before proposing any solutions.

    Foundation Documents – Links

    Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS)
    http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp

    Party of God/Party of Allah (Hezbollah/Hizballah)
    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah

    Palestine Liberation Organization
    http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/plocov.asp

    Victory (or Conquest) Party (Fatah or Fateh)
    http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=68&x_article=1704

    Phased Plan for the Liberation of Palestine
    http://www.iris.org.il/plophase.htm

    Israel’s Declaration of Independence
    http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/israel.asp

  2. having read and re read this item it fails to state which sovereign state J,S. is part of? when did J. S. become legal terrorist territory??

  3. NZ FM McCully says UNSC Res 2334 is ‘symbolic’, “to protect space for the two-state solution” :

    Israeli ambassador recalled from New Zealand after UN resolution

    12:22 PM Saturday Dec 24, 2016
    “…Asked if it was a victory, McCully said: “It is a victory for those who are keen to see the Security Council take some action on the Middle East peace process after eight years of complete inaction.”

    It was certainly a step by the council to protect space for the two-state solution the Secretary General had been telling the council for months was being undermined by events on the ground.

    Asked if the resolution would affect the settlement process, McCully said it was a question for the Israeli Government to answer.

    “We hope that the parties, all of them, now will reflect on the position and try and find a more constructive pathway forward.”

    He said would not use the term “toothless” to describe the resolution, but said it was “symbolic.”

    “A good deal of what the UN does is symbolic. It can’t make countries do things. You can try and set some benchmarks in terms of international opinion and I think what the council has done here is reassert the international community’s commitment to the two-state solution as being the basis for a durable peace in the Middle East. …”
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11772739