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.

20260224_estafa_mh_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.

20260224_estafa_mh_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.

20260224_estafa_mh_728x90

International

Iran rejects negotiations as tensions escalate with United States

Iran has no intention of entering negotiations and will continue to resist, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Wednesday night, dismissing recent statements by U.S. President Donald Trump about possible talks.

Speaking to state television, Araghchi argued that Washington’s call for negotiations reflects a position of weakness. He added that the Islamic Republic seeks to end the war on its own terms, ensuring that such a conflict does not recur in the future.

Meanwhile, the White House issued a stark warning, stating that Trump would “unleash hell” on Iran if it refuses to accept a deal to end the conflict. Despite Tehran’s rejection, U.S. officials maintained that discussions remain ongoing.

White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt reinforced the administration’s position, warning that failure to acknowledge what she described as Iran’s military defeat would result in even stronger action from Washington.

The increasingly aggressive rhetoric from both sides has diminished hopes for a near-term de-escalation in the conflict, which began following U.S. and Israeli strikes against Iran on February 28.

20260224_estafa_mh_728x90

As tensions continue to rise, the prospect of a diplomatic resolution remains uncertain amid conflicting narratives and escalating threats from both governments.

International

Maduro appears again in New York court amid drug trafficking charges

Ousted Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro appeared in a New York federal court on Thursday for the second time since his capture on January 3 during a U.S. military operation in Caracas.

Maduro, 63, and his wife, Cilia Flores, 69, have been held in a detention facility in Brooklyn for nearly three months. Their only previous court appearance took place on January 5, when Maduro declared himself a “prisoner of war” and pleaded not guilty to drug trafficking charges.

A large police convoy departed the detention center early in the morning, heading toward the federal courthouse in Manhattan, where the hearing was scheduled. Security around the building was reinforced as both supporters and opponents gathered outside.

Among those present was Venezuelan educator Carlos Egana, who expressed frustration and called for justice, reflecting the polarized reactions surrounding the case. At the same time, left-wing activists displayed banners demanding Maduro’s release and criticizing U.S. foreign policy.

Maduro governed Venezuela from 2013 until his removal from power earlier this year. Following his ouster, Delcy Rodríguez assumed the interim presidency, initiating a shift in relations with the United States.

20260224_estafa_mh_728x90

The former leader faces multiple charges, including narco-terrorism conspiracy, cocaine importation, and illegal possession of weapons.

During Thursday’s hearing, scheduled for 11:00 a.m. local time, Maduro’s legal team was expected to push for the dismissal of the case, while also addressing disputes over how his legal defense will be financed amid ongoing U.S. sanctions.

His lawyer, Barry Pollack, has argued that restrictions on accessing Venezuelan state funds could affect Maduro’s right to legal representation, adding another layer of complexity to a case with significant political and international implications.

International

German president says trust in U.S. leadership is ‘lost’ amid global tensions

German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier said on Tuesday that trust between the United States and its Western allies has been “lost,” warning that the damage could persist beyond the presidency of Donald Trump.

“The rupture is very deep, and the loss of trust in U.S. great power policy is significant—not only among its allies, but also, as I observe, globally,” Steinmeier said during a speech in Berlin marking the 75th anniversary of Germany’s Foreign Ministry.

Referring to the future of transatlantic relations, he stated that “there is no return to the situation before January 20, 2025,” the date marking the start of Trump’s second term in the White House.

“Even a future U.S. administration will no longer be able to resume the role of a benevolent hegemon guaranteeing a liberal international order,” added Steinmeier, who previously served as Germany’s foreign minister.

He also criticized the war against Iran, describing it as “contrary to international law” and calling it “a political mistake with serious consequences.”

20260224_estafa_mh_728x90

“This war is avoidable and unnecessary,” he said.

Although the German presidency is largely ceremonial, Steinmeier’s remarks reflect a broader concern within Germany, aligning with the government’s cautious stance while going further in tone.