On September 13, 2025, the United Nations General Assembly witnessed a decisive moment in the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict. By a resounding majority—142 votes in favor, 10 against, and 12 abstentions—the world body adopted the so-called New York Declaration, a nonbinding resolution that lays out a comprehensive roadmap for a two-state solution, aiming to end nearly 80 years of strife and bloodshed. But the story of the vote is not just one of overwhelming support; it’s also about the handful of countries, including Argentina, that stood in opposition, and the deep divisions and hopes that continue to shape this historic conflict.
The New York Declaration, sponsored by France and Saudi Arabia, calls for “urgent and irreversible steps” toward establishing two independent, sovereign states—Israel and Palestine—living side by side in peace and security. According to Haaretz, the declaration’s passage was seen as a clear signal of the international community’s impatience with the status quo and a desire for a tangible path forward. Yet, the road ahead remains fraught with obstacles, both political and humanitarian.
Among the 10 countries voting against the resolution were Israel, the United States, Argentina, Hungary, Paraguay, Ireland, Italy, Panama, Palau, and the Federated States of Micronesia, as reported by AzerNEWS and BBC. Twelve other nations, including Cameroon, the Dominican Republic, and North Macedonia, chose to abstain. The initiative, put forward by France and Saudi Arabia, was the outcome of a high-level conference in July 2025, where the declaration’s wording was hammered out.
The declaration’s provisions are sweeping. It demands an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, the release of all hostages, and the establishment of a “viable and sovereign” Palestinian state. Crucially, it also stipulates the disarmament of Hamas and bars the group from participating in Palestinian governance. The document further calls for the transfer of control over the Gaza Strip to the Palestinian National Authority and the deployment of a temporary international stabilization mission, operating under UN auspices, to protect civilians and oversee the transition. The resolution urges all countries to recognize the state of Palestine, describing this as “an essential and indispensable component” for realizing the two-state solution, according to Reuters and St Andrews.
The backdrop to the vote is the ongoing war in Gaza, ignited on October 7, 2023, when Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups launched a surprise attack that killed around 1,200 Israelis and foreign nationals, taking roughly 250 hostages. Israel’s military response has been devastating. According to the Gaza Health Ministry, more than 64,000 Palestinians have been killed—almost half of them women and children. The Israeli offensive has targeted not just militants, but also journalists, health workers, activists, and aid workers, resulting in a catastrophic humanitarian crisis. Israel’s blockade has led to severe starvation, and humanitarian agencies warn that conditions in Gaza are dire, with hundreds of thousands displaced and struggling for survival. The UN and aid groups have cautioned that further displacement will only intensify the crisis.
International condemnation of the violence has grown. In December 2024, Amnesty International concluded that Israel was committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, a charge echoed by a November UN report that described Israel’s actions as genocidal warfare. The resolution itself does not shy away from assigning blame: it condemns both Hamas for its attacks on Israeli civilians and Israel for its attacks on civilians and infrastructure in Gaza, as well as the resulting siege and starvation.
Political reactions to the vote were predictably polarized. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, speaking just hours before the vote, declared unequivocally, “There will be no Palestinian state.” Israel’s UN Ambassador Danny Danon went further, dismissing the declaration as “another hollow gesture that weakens this Assembly’s credibility.” He argued, “This one-sided Declaration will not be remembered as a step toward peace, only as another hollow gesture that weakens this Assembly’s credibility.” The United States, Israel’s closest ally, echoed this skepticism. U.S. Mission counselor Morgan Ortagus called the resolution “yet another misguided and ill-timed publicity stunt that undermines serious diplomatic efforts to end the conflict,” and added, “Make no mistake, this resolution is a gift to Hamas.”
Argentina’s vote against the declaration marked a sharp departure from much of the international community. Since taking office, President Javier Milei has aligned Argentina closely with Israel and the United States, even pledging to relocate Argentina’s embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem by 2026—a move that would make Argentina only the seventh country globally to do so. This stance is part of Milei’s broader foreign policy vision, positioning Argentina as a vocal Israeli ally on the world stage. Argentina’s decision to vote against the resolution, as The Argentina Independent notes, underscores the government’s commitment to this new alignment, even as it distances the country from most of Latin America and the wider international community.
On the other side, Palestinian representatives and their supporters hailed the resolution as a long-overdue step toward justice and peace. Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian UN ambassador, captured this sentiment, stating, “The yearning of almost everyone, the international community, [is] to open the door for the option of peace.” The Palestinian observer to the UN, Ryad Mansour, further urged, “For those who want to have a two-state solution, to live side-by-side in peace and security and to open the doors for integration in the entire Middle East and for allowing the Middle East to reach its potential in terms of development, innovation, science, and cooperation, come and join us. All these details… are contained in the declaration that we have endorsed today.”
Yet, not all Palestinians are convinced. Some observers criticize the two-state solution for legitimizing Israel’s control over roughly 78% of historic Palestine, leaving Palestinians with only 22%—the West Bank and Gaza. They argue this framework entrenches dispossession and displacement, reduces sovereignty to fragmented enclaves, and sidelines the broader right of return and historical justice for millions of Palestinian refugees. The Palestinian Liberation Organization, it’s worth noting, has accepted the two-state solution since the 1982 Arab Summit, but the debate within Palestinian society remains vigorous and unresolved.
The resolution also draws on a 2024 advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice, which found Israel’s continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory to be unlawful and called for an immediate end to all new settlements and withdrawal from territories occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem. The declaration emphasizes that for a Palestinian state to be viable, Gaza must be unified with the West Bank, free from occupation, siege, territorial reduction, or forced displacement. It places governance responsibilities—law enforcement, infrastructure, and security—squarely with the Palestinian Authority, and calls on international powers, including the U.S., to contribute to reconstruction and support.
As the dust settles on the historic vote, the world is left with a familiar question: will words on paper translate into peace on the ground? The New York Declaration is, at its heart, a plea for an end to violence and the beginning of a just and lasting settlement. Whether it can overcome the entrenched interests, deep-seated fears, and bitter memories that have defined this conflict remains to be seen. But for now, the international community has spoken—loudly, if not unanimously—in favor of a future where Israelis and Palestinians might finally live side by side, in peace and dignity.