The United States has confirmed at the UN that it is preparing its own resolution in the Security Council on the war in Gaza, in which for the first time it will ask for a “ceasefire”, although it specified that it will be “temporary” and with conditions.

Specifically, this ceasefire will be called “when practicable” and will be “based on the formula that all hostages (in the hands of Hamas) are released,” according to the US ambassador, Linda Thomas-Greenfield.

With that, The US seems to want to mitigate the effect left today by its third veto in the Security Council of two resolutions that called for a truce in Gaza in one way or another.systematically opposing them with the main argument that these pauses would only strengthen Hamas.

In the resolution that Washington is preparing – and which does not yet have a voting date – Thomas-Greenfield specified that it will include a condemnation of Hamas, because “it is time for this Council to condemn Hamas.”

But he sent two messages that reflect the concerns of the Palestinians: one, that he “rejects any forced displacement of civilians in Gaza” and that “there can be no reduction in the territory of the Gaza Strip,” as some voices within Israel have argued. .

And about the offensive that Israel is currently preparing against Rafah, the last Gaza city that has not yet been invaded and where people are overcrowded. 1.7 million Palestinians, Thomas-Greenfield said that “under the current circumstances, a new large-scale armed assault should not take place,” in a new call to attention to his Hebrew partner.

In any case, the attitude of the United States has already been criticized today by Russia and China, the two great powers that also sit on the Security Council, and which today have once again highlighted the consequences that the US veto has on the region and on the UN itself.

Russian ambassador Vasili Nebenzia said that with this third veto introduced today, “The United States demonstrates time and again its contempt for international institutions, multilateral diplomacy and international legality,” and this calls “the authority of the UN Security Council into question.”

The Chinese representative, Zhang Jun, said for his part: “The American thesis that the Council resolution (today) interferes in diplomatic efforts is totally unacceptable. Given the situation on the ground, the continued passivity on the ceasefire “It is no different than giving the green light to continue the massacre,” he said, and warned that this inaction only “leads the region into a broader war.”