International

Palestine’s path to full membership in the UN will be long

Palestine’s request to become the 194th State of the United Nations could follow the relatively rapid steps of other States that have joined the UN throughout the 21st century, but in its case it faces the probable veto of the United States in the Security Council.

The most recent State to take a seat at the UN as a full member was South Sudan, which in 2011 separated from Sudan after a friendly agreement. His incorporation into the UN was made by acclamation on July 14 of that year, just a week after his declaration of independence.

In 2006, Montenegro, another state that emerged from the dismemberment of the former Yugoslavia, separated after a popular referendum from the last remaining remnant of that federation and proclaimed its independence from Serbia. The referendum took place on June 3 and on the 28th of that same month the state was admitted to the UN.

And 2002 was a very special year because the UN welcomed two members: Switzerland did so in September, thus putting an end to an anomaly that made it welcome numerous international organizations but did not sit at the UN for the sake of a principle of neutrality inscribed in its DNA.

Much more traumatic was the chaos of Timor Leste, which was also admitted in September 2002. The new Asian country, a former Portuguese colony, lived 24 years of occupation and resistance against Indonesia and then almost three years of supervised administration of the UN, but its entry into the United Nations was unanimously approved by the Assembly.

20250501_mh_noexigencia_dui_728x90

In 2011, Palestine first presented its formal request to enter the United Nations, but the procedure ran aground in its first stage: it did not get the support of 9 of the 15 members of the Security Council (that is, the qualified majority), so that request did not reach the General Assembly, the second stage of the process.

Palestine had to settle for acquiring the status of “observer state,” an anomaly that only the Vatican has in the United Nations, which is not even considered a country with its own attributes.

Palestine obtained 138 votes in the General Assembly in favor of its new observer status, while 9 voted against (including Israel, the United States and Canada) and 41 abstained.

It is foreseeable that Palestine will not have it as easy as South Sudan, Montenegro or Switzerland had, and all observers assume that Washington will use the veto tool in the Security Council, which is the instance where the incorporation process begins and ends.

According to the UN letter, the request for a new State necessarily goes through the following stages: it is formulated before the Security Council, which appoints an ad hoc committee to study it formed by the fifteen members, and if the committee approves it, the Council then assesses whether it is “a peace-loving state” (article 60), in which case it sends the issue to the General Assembly.

20250501_mh_noexigencia_dui_728x90

In the Assembly, the votes of two-thirds of the Member States are needed to move forward, and if this happens, the final decision returns to the Security Council.

The United States, as a permanent member of the Security Council, has the right to veto the process at any time – in 2011 it threatened to do so, but did not need it – and few doubt that he will also use it on this occasion.

If this happens, the dream of Palestine will have fallen by the wayside.

But something has changed since 2011: now, every time a permanent member uses the right of veto, the question comes to the General Assembly, where that country must explain its position and submit to a non-binding vote.

At the current juncture, the United States will once again be evident in the face of a very large majority of states that are expected to support Palestinian membership.

20250501_mh_noexigencia_dui_728x90

International

Marco Rubio warns Cuba could be Trump administration’s next target

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio did not rule out that Cuba’s communist government could become the next target of the Trump administration, just one day after the arrest of Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro.

In an interview on Meet the Press, Rubio issued a warning to Havana, stating that Cuban authorities are “in a lot of trouble.”

“Is the Cuban government the next target of the Trump administration?” journalist Kristen Welker asked.
“Well, the Cuban government is a major problem. Yes,” Rubio replied.
“So that’s a yes?” Welker pressed.
“I think they’re in a lot of trouble, yes,” the Secretary of State added.

In a separate appearance, Rubio—who is the son of Cuban immigrants—claimed that Venezuela’s intelligence services were “full of Cubans” and said the island nation had effectively taken control of Venezuela.

“In some cases, one of the biggest challenges Venezuelans face is having to declare their independence from Cuba,” Rubio said from President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club. “They basically tried to colonize the country from a security standpoint. So yes, if I were living in Havana and part of the government, I would at least be worried.”

20250501_mh_noexigencia_dui_728x90

During a press conference on Saturday, President Trump himself said the United States seeks to be surrounded by “good neighbors.”

“It’s very similar in the sense that we want to help the people of Cuba, but we also want to help those who are forced to leave and live in this country,” Trump said. He also described the island as a “nation in decline” that is “not doing very well right now.”

The Cuban government has not yet responded to Rubio’s remarks. However, as a staunch ally of Maduro’s regime, Cuban authorities strongly condemned recent explosions and U.S. operations in Caracas.

“All nations in the region must remain alert, as the threat looms over everyone. In Cuba, our determination to fight is firm and unbreakable. The decision is one and only one: Homeland or Death,” Cuban officials said in a statement.

20250501_mh_noexigencia_dui_728x90

International

Trump signals possible expansion of U.S. regional policy beyond Venezuela

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Saturday that Cuba could become a subject of discussion as part of a broader regional policy, highlighting the possibility that Washington may expand its focus beyond Venezuela amid rising tensions in Latin America.

The remarks suggest that the White House is considering a recalibration of its strategy toward the region, in a context shaped by recent actions and warnings related to political stability and hemispheric security.

International

World leaders react to U.S. attacks on Venezuela, sparking global divide

The following are international reactions to the U.S. attacks carried out on Saturday against Venezuela:

Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs

China said it was “deeply shocked” and strongly condemned the use of force by the United States against a sovereign country, as well as the use of force against the president of that nation.

“China firmly opposes this hegemonic behavior by the United States, which seriously violates international law, infringes upon Venezuela’s sovereignty, and threatens peace and security in Latin America and the Caribbean,” the ministry said. It urged Washington to comply with international law and the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, and to cease actions that violate the sovereignty and security of other countries.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot

20250501_mh_noexigencia_dui_728x90

Barrot stated that the military operation that led to the capture of Nicolás Maduro violates the principle of non-use of force, which underpins international law. He stressed that no lasting political solution can be imposed from outside and that only sovereign peoples can decide their own future.

Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Russia said the United States had committed an act of armed aggression against Venezuela, describing the move as deeply troubling and condemnable.

“The pretexts used to justify such actions are unfounded,” the ministry said, adding that ideological animosity had prevailed over pragmatism and the willingness to build relations based on trust and predictability.

Moscow emphasized the need to prevent further escalation and to focus on resolving the crisis through dialogue. It reiterated that Latin America should remain a zone of peace, as declared in 2014, and that Venezuela must be guaranteed the right to determine its own destiny without external — especially military — interference.

20250501_mh_noexigencia_dui_728x90

Russia also said it supports calls by Venezuelan authorities and Latin American leaders for an urgent meeting of the United Nations Security Council.

United Nations

UN spokesman Stéphane Dujarric said Secretary-General António Guterres continues to stress the importance of full respect for international law, including the UN Charter. He added that the secretary-general is deeply concerned that international legal norms were not respected.

Government of Argentina and President Javier Milei

Argentine President Javier Milei, a close regional ally of Donald Trump, posted on X: “FREEDOM MOVES FORWARD. LONG LIVE FREEDOM, DAMN IT,” alongside a video showing him at a summit describing Maduro as a threat to the region and supporting the pressure exerted by Trump on Caracas.

20250501_mh_noexigencia_dui_728x90

In a statement, the Argentine government praised “the decision and determination shown by the President of the United States and his administration in the recent actions taken in Venezuela that led to the capture of the dictator Nicolás Maduro, leader of the Cartel of the Suns.”

Argentina said it hopes these developments represent a decisive step forward in the fight against narcoterrorism in the region.

Mexican Foreign Ministry

Mexico strongly condemned and rejected the unilateral military actions carried out in recent hours by U.S. armed forces against targets in Venezuelan territory, calling them a clear violation of Article 2 of the United Nations Charter.

The Mexican government reiterated that dialogue and negotiation are the only legitimate and effective means to resolve disputes and reaffirmed its willingness to support any effort aimed at facilitating dialogue, mediation, or accompaniment to preserve regional peace and prevent confrontation.