There is a growing civil society movement in Palestine and around the world demanding Israel’s expulsion from the United Nations or suspension from its current session over its apartheid regime in the occupied Palestinian territory, ongoing war crimes in Gaza and other persistent violations of the UN Charter.
This demand is in line with the goals and ambitions of the global Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement. For months, however, there have been discussions within the movement over the pros and cons of calling for the revocation of Israel’s membership with hesitation primarily stemming from concerns over potential Israeli retaliation. Some feared Israel might respond by blocking UN agencies from providing essential services to Palestinians, particularly in Gaza, where such aid is critically needed. However, recent laws passed by the Israeli Knesset that ban UNRWA, the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, from operating in territory under Israeli control have removed this pragmatic restraint. By crossing this red line, Israel has undermined the main reason for those committed to Palestinian liberation not to call for its expulsion from the UN, paving the way for the powerful slogan “expulsion for expulsion”.
So why did Israel ban UNRWA from operating in territory it occupies?
As Naser Sharaya’a, the spokesperson for the Popular Services Committees in the occupied West Bank’s refugee camps, spelled out in a recent statement: “Israel’s ban on UNRWA is part of a broader strategy aimed at undermining the right of return for Palestinians who were uprooted from their homeland in the 1948 Nakba, when the state of Israel was established.”
More than 700,000 Palestinians were forcefully displaced leading up to Israel’s creation in 1948, which Palestinians remember as the Nakba, or “the catastrophe”. Soon after the Nakba, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 194, which affirmed the rights of these Palestinian refugees – and their descendants – to the homes they were forced to leave. A year later, UNRWA was created on the back of this resolution and was tasked with providing essential services to Palestinian refugees, such as education and primary healthcare, as they awaited their return.
As part of its operations, UNRWA is required to maintain a registration log of Palestinian refugees and their descendants. The registry includes refugees from 1948 as well as those expelled or forced to flee during later conflicts. This official registry is recognised internationally and serves as legal proof of refugee status. In many ways, the UN agency serves as the protector of the Palestinian right of return, keeping the refugees and their UN-recognised right to return to their homes and lands in the global spotlight.
By banning UNRWA, Israel aims to erase the Palestinian right of return, entrench its settler-colonial practices and make its colonisation permanent.
This intent is particularly evident in Gaza, where Israel’s strategic military efforts seek to replace UNRWA with a humanitarian aid apparatus that aligns with its long-term colonial goals. Israel has been working towards this goal since the beginning of its genocidal war on the Gaza Strip, trying to undermine UNRWA by attacking its facilities, killing numerous staff members and accusing many others of involvement in resistance activities – a claim that it ultimately failed to substantiate.
One scenario Israel appears to be contemplating in Gaza is private security contractors working with NGOs to deliver aid to the occupied population. This model, developed by Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq, has been widely criticised for militarising aid and enabling unchecked abuse of refugees at the hands of private security operators. If implemented in Gaza, this scenario would in effect transform the enclave into a web of isolated, heavily militarised ghettos policed by private contractors. It would deepen Israel’s apartheid, introducing a level of segregation that surpasses even the one practised in apartheid South Africa.
So what should be done to counter Israel’s apparent strategy of banning UNRWA, erasing the Palestinian right of return and making its occupation and apartheid permanent?
The best way to counter this strategy is to unseat Israel from the UN. Expulsion from the UN would isolate Israel from the global community and make it increasingly difficult for it to continue its war on Gaza, invasion of Lebanon and unlawful attacks against other UN member states and agencies. It would also serve as a strong response to the state’s persistent and unapologetic attacks on the UN, its employees and agencies.
But the process to achieve this is complicated by procedural steps and the balance of power among UN member states. According to Article 6 of the UN Charter, the UN Security Council (UNSC) is responsible for recommending to the General Assembly the expulsion of any state that persistently violates UN principles. Obtaining such a recommendation from the UNSC requires that none of its permanent members with veto power opposes it.
If no country with veto power exercises this right – which is a big if given the United States’s position on the issue – the matter would then move to the UN General Assembly, where a two-thirds majority of its members would need to support the recommendation for it to pass. However, from a practical standpoint, achieving this majority would also be difficult due to the prevailing global balance of power. Not only would the US and its European allies likely oppose such a recommendation, but they would also exert their influence over other nations to prevent the move from gaining traction.
An alternative route to unseating Israel from the UN involves the UN General Assembly designating Israel as an apartheid state. This designation would create more opportunities for civil society initiatives worldwide to rally support for a decision to suspend Israel’s participation in the UN. The legal basis for such action can be found in UN General Assembly Resolution 3068 (XXVIII), which defines apartheid as a crime against humanity and calls for its “suppression and punishment”.
Practical evidence supporting the classification of Israel as an apartheid state can be drawn from numerous UN resolutions that highlight Israel’s settler-colonial practices in the occupied Palestinian territory, particularly through the construction and expansion of settlements. This characterisation is further reinforced by Israel’s “Nation-State Law”, which grants full citizenship rights exclusively to Jews while restricting the rights of Palestinian citizens of Israel who remained in their homeland after the Nakba in 1948. Several special UN rapporteurs and many leading international NGOs, including Amnesty and B’tselem, have also published reports detailing Israel’s apartheid practices. Most importantly, the UN’s primary judicial body, the International Court of Justice, in a landmark advisory opinion issued in July found Israel responsible for apartheid and racial discrimination in the occupied Palestinian territory.
Israel banned a UN agency’s operations in the territory it controls largely to be able to continue violating the UN Charter and resolutions with impunity. This came on the back of its military intentionally destroying UN facilities, killing dozens of UN employees and baselessly accusing them of criminality for more than a year. There is no longer any reason for anyone believing in the UN’s mission and supporting Palestinian liberation to refrain from demanding Israel’s removal from the organisation. While the global power dynamics makes it highly difficult to secure a suspension, the efforts to achieve this goal would only help the Palestinian struggle.
Excluding Israel from the UN would make clear the global community’s commitment to ending apartheid, eliminating racial discrimination and upholding the principles of the UN Charter. It would also send a clear message to the Palestinians that the world stands with them and recognises the abuse they suffer under Israel’s lawless rule and occupation.
It is time for “expulsion for expulsion”. It is time for the world to take action in defence of the international order and kick Israel out of the UN.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
