The UN Security Council passed Resolution 2334 (2016) 14-0 condemning the construction of Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. The resolution called continuing construction in the Palestinian territory a “flagrant violation” of international law, and it called on Israel to halt all settlement activities in order to salvage a two-state solution.

The U.S. abstained from the vote, in a departure from past U.S. diplomatic practice of vetoing such a resolution in support of Israel.


The US did not use its veto power during the vote and allowed a censure. New Zealand, Malaysia, Venezuela and Senegal, who were co-sponsors of the draft resolution, have requested the vote, which diplomats said was to take place at 1900GMT.

Does this UN resolution have any binding consequences for Israel?

  • 4
    Can you please clarify your question? (1) "What does this mean?" — seems to be too broad; and (2) "Will Israel stop...?" — we can't foretell the future. Commented Dec 24, 2016 at 16:38
  • 1
    I think what you actually mean to ask (and what would be a valid question) is if this UN resolution has any binding consequences for Israel.
    – Philipp
    Commented Dec 24, 2016 at 23:36
  • @Philipp, Yes. and also want to know if Israel would be more cautious about any future resettlements
    – Noah
    Commented Dec 25, 2016 at 2:28
  • 1
    @Philipp The UN definition of "settlement" is anything that had Jews move in after 1928 as well as any area that the Arabs removed Jews from at any time in the past (including Jerusalem). Commented Dec 25, 2016 at 3:39
  • Various comments deleted. Please note that comments are for clarifying and improving the question, not for stating your political opinion about the matter of the question.
    – Philipp
    Commented Dec 25, 2016 at 9:53

1 Answer 1


No, this resolution has no direct binding consequences for anyone. UN resolutions can contain instructions UN members are obligated to follow. But this one is merely a statement of opinion and intent without defining any actual actions or concrete threats of actions.

Politically it can be seen as a declaration of which countries' governments stand on which side of the Israel/Palestine conflict.

But Israel has already taken consequences from this resolution by cancelling all foreign aid to Senegal, one of the countries which co-sponsored the resolution.

The future will tell if any of the countries which voted for this resolution will take any concrete measures with the goal to hinder the Israel settlement programs and if and how Israel will react to this.

  • 4
    Comments deleted. As I said, the backgrounds of this resolution are not part of this question. So please post this somewhere else. We are a Q&A site, not a debate club.
    – Philipp
    Commented Dec 26, 2016 at 19:10

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .