Trump hints at cutting foreign aid over U.N. vote on Alquds

[Arabi]

• General assembly to vote on rejecting US recognition of city as Israeli capital
  

• Trump: ‘We’re not going to be taken advantage of any longer’
• 

President Donald Trump on Wednesday suggested that the U.S. could pull foreign aid from nations that vote against it at the United Nations, a warning delivered ahead of a General Assembly vote expected to criticize the Trump administration’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

“For all of these nations that take our money and then they vote against us at the Security Council or they vote against us, potentially, at the Assembly, they take hundreds of millions of dollars and even billions of dollars and then they vote against us,” Trump said at a Cabinet meeting on Wednesday.

“Well, we’re watching those votes,” he continued. “Let them vote against us. We’ll save a lot. We don’t care. But this isn’t like it used to be where they could vote against you and then you pay them hundreds of millions of dollars and nobody knows what they’re doing.”

Included in Trump’s warning was praise for the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, who wrote in a letter to other member states that Trump and the U.S. government would take those votes “personally.”

“As you know, the General Assembly is considering a resolution about President Trump’s recent decision on Jerusalem,” Haley wrote in letter to member states that was provided to POLITICO by a U.N. source. “As you consider your vote, I want you to know that the President and U.S. take this vote personally. The President will be watching this vote carefully and has requested I report back on those countries who voted against us. We will take note of each and every vote on this issue.”

Trump said at his cabinet meeting on Wednesday that “I like the message that Nikki sent yesterday at the United Nations.” He said he had received “a lot of good comment on it” and promised that “we’re not going to be taken advantage of any longer.”

The sentiment in Haley’s letter echoed one she put out on Twitter Tuesday, where she wrote that “At the UN we're always asked to do more & give more. So, when we make a decision, at the will of the American ppl, abt where to locate OUR embassy, we don't expect those we've helped to target us. On Thurs there'll be a vote criticizing our choice. The US will be taking names.”

The resolution before the General Assembly is expected to mirror one that the U.S. vetoed in the Security Council earlier this week. That resolution, which each Security Council member except for the U.S. voted in favor of, declared that decisions made on the status of Jerusalem were “null and void and must be rescinded,” and called on member states to “refrain from the establishment of diplomatic missions in the holy city.”

Trump’s decision earlier this month to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and begin the process of moving the U.S. Embassy there from Tel Aviv has proved controversial, sparking violence and protests in the Middle East, as well as condemnation and criticism from U.S. allies and partners. Jerusalem’s status remains a contested point in peace negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians, with each side seeking to claim the city as its capital in any two-state solution.

In making his announcement, the president pointedly did not rule out the possibility of a divided Jerusalem serving as the capital for both Israel and Palestine in a two-state solution, nor did he take a position on any other contested boundaries or issues. Trump’s announcement also did not shift the U.S. position on control of Muslim and Jewish holy sites in Jerusalem.

The president and others in his administration have said the move amounted to little more than an acknowledgement of the reality that Jerusalem is Israel’s capital. Haley repeated that position in her letter to United Nations member states.

“The U.S. announcement is an acknowledgement that peace is best advanced, not set back, when all parties are honest with each other about the basic facts,” she wrote. “Jerusalem has been the capital of Israel since the country’s founding nearly seventy years ago. The President’s honest assessment of this reality does not foreclose any of the options considered by Israelis and Palestinians for decades. I know that many in the General Assembly are also committed to the cause of peace, and I ask that you consider whether a GA resolution contributes to that cause or fuels the heated rhetoric and violence.”

Politico

 

[Yaseen1]

russia and china should make new u.n without u.s

 

[New World]

Should i call it an End of United Nations?

 

[XDescendantX]

The nations that receive foreign aid aren't voting against the U.S. they're voting against the sub-human scum Trump & his idiotic racist policies!

 

[koolio]

As long as Trump is in charge UN will remain a sitting duck, UN as whole should be disbanded and form new organisation similar to UN without US.

 

[Jungibaaz]

Pointless, again the US undermines its own interests, diplomatic relations and international opinions of itself to support a rogue state like Israel in its brazen violations of international law.

Patriotic Americans should oppose this.

 

[vizier]

We know that usa does not care about un decisions and acts unilaterally as was the case in Iraq but also uses its influence and control over certain bodies within un to gain legitimacy for military operations like the un reports of chemical attacks attributed to Syrian govt using selective evidence to connect selected dots to justify certain scenarios instead of through investigation and revealing the bigger picture.
It is possible that threats will not work and a majority vote will pass but it will of course be vetoed by Usa. Maybe the result would be too much reaction against veto rights of 5 permanent members to abolish the veto altogether. So although can be limitied for certain cases veto would still have its use in my opinion and it is more complicated than that. Since 2011 there were several vetos by Russia and China that averted military operations or tough measures that would gain momentum and immediately after lead to Usa unilateral military action against Syria like Iraq then Usa claiming at least some legitimacy over the passed un measures against Syria.
The solution should be to make Un an objective body instead of Usas strings attached making objective investigations as well as justice-legal norms above its decisions rather than the majority vote. This time a symbolic punishment against israel might pass as a victory for our emotional reaction after removal of veto rights but later on if Un is not reformed based on justice-objectivity like a mafia tv series gang members voting for removal of one member from the table Usa by means of carrot-sticks-agents and makeshift evidence-scenarios can come up with %50+1 and decide action to remove any unwanted country that can later get strong and make trouble threatening israels and its interests later on. So unless whole body is reformed someway to prevent this kind of action by usa or anyone else veto rights need to stay to avert wars.

 

[jewishm]

i love him

 

[Dalit]

Talk about shooting your own foot. Dumb rednecks.