The message to Washington

The UN Security Council (UNSC) met Friday upon the request of eight members of the 15-member council to discuss the legality and far-reaching implications of the decision of President Donald Trump to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and to announce his intention to relocate the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem as soon as possible.

President Trump dropped this bombshell last Wednesday, and as can be expected triggered widespread tremors across the globe. 

The UNSC did not consider this grave development in a vacuum. Having decided last December that "it will not recognise any changes to the June 4, 1967 lines including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations". Fourteen UNSC members voted for the landmark resolution with the US abstaining. 

The will and jurisprudence of the council is therefore clear and unequivocal. This is not to mention the many other UN General Assembly and UNSC resolutions on Jerusalem pointing all in the same direction. 

On the eve of the Friday council's meeting, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres spoke out in as clear as possible words when he told reporters in the wake of Trump’s address:  "I have consistently spoken out against any unilateral measures that would jeopardise the prospect of peace for Israelis and Palestinians." 

Guterres went on to add that "there is no alternative to the two-state solution. There is no plan B". 

So this is the background against which the UNSC met Friday to consider President Trump's maverick decisions on Jerusalem. 

It came as no surprise therefore that the overwhelming majority of the council members reaffirmed their precedents on Jerusalem including its last December resolution and voted once again to reject the attempt of Trump to rewrite the international law and international jurisprudence on the status of Jerusalem. 

All 14 members voiced their collective judgements that the Trump move is a unilateral action and contrary to the international law and the council's own resolutions on Jerusalem. 

The 14 members also feared that the US move would compromise the peace process or what's left of it and end all options to revive it. Only US Ambassador Nikki Haley remained outside the consensus of the council and tried to sugar-coat President Trump's decisions, but to no avail. 

By stating that Washington continues to support the two-state solution and that it has not foreclosed all future negotiations on the boundaries of Jerusalem and above all that the US upholds the status quo over the holy sites in East Jerusalem based on His Majesty King Abdullah's internationally recognised status as the custodian of these shrines, Ambassador Haley was desperately trying to rally support for her position.

The council is expected to convene again after the emergency meeting of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation which is expected to be held this week. 

The Friday’s emergency meeting of the council was significant as it provided an opportunity to test the legality and legitimacy of the US decisions on Jerusalem. 

It is clear from the Friday interventions by member states that there is unanimity among them with the sole exception of the US that these decisions are illegal, unwarranted and dangerous. 

The message to Washington on the Jerusalem issue was therefore loud and clear. The world therefore awaits what President Trump will do next.