Al Jazeera Net correspondents
Kampala- I finished “Movement of Non-Aligned CountriesAt the conclusion of its last summit, it reached a position that cannot be described as unique or high-profile regarding the Israeli aggression against Gaza stripdespite it being the most prominent title that dominated the discussions of leaders and presidents and the meetings that preceded them.
This was represented by the position of the Ugandan President Yuri Museveni Who adjourned the final session and announced the conclusion of the summit without reading the final statement, and without reading the Palestine document prepared by the delegations through meetings that lasted 5 days, so that the attendees contented themselves with discussing the draft document and announcing its general lines.
In the “Kampala Document”, the political paper approved by leaders and presidents at the conclusion of Summit No. 19, the Non-Aligned Movement called for an immediate ceasefire in the Gaza Strip and the release of Israeli detainees held by the Palestinian resistance.
It was noteworthy that the Secretary-General of the United Nations participated António Guterres At the final public session of the Presidents’ Summit, where he reaffirmed his position calling for an immediate ceasefire and the release of detainees, Guterres added that “it is unacceptable for Israel to refuse to recognize the right of the Palestinians to establish their state,” warning that “the expansion of the war is an issue that poses a threat to international security.” .
The position on Palestine
The Palestinian file imposed itself on the activities of the movement’s meetings as the most urgent at the political level, surpassing in terms of priority other hotspots, whether in Africa, which is hosting the summit, or in a geography beyond it.
With a clear plan of action, the “Arab Bloc,” according to the expression used by the Secretary-General of the Ugandan Foreign Ministry, Vincent Bageria, set out to demand a comprehensive position on the Palestinian file. These efforts were led by Palestine’s representative to the United Nations, Riyad Mansour.
At the continental level, South Africa spearheaded the defense of Palestine, secretly and openly, and its Foreign Minister, Naledi Pandor, presented a plea explaining the background of the lawsuit that she referred tointernational justice Courtin which it requested an exceptional resolution forcing Israel to immediately cease fire.
With the support of its neighbor Namibia, South Africa engaged behind closed doors in a round of political and legal discussions, trying to include the term “genocide” in the political declaration on Palestine, but the position of India and Singapore prevented achieving a consensus, under the pretext that the matter was now in the custody of the Court of Justice, which “ “It is at the core of its jurisdiction to determine the legal definition of what Israel is doing.”
Change of positions of countries
India, one of the founding countries of the movement, did not hide where it stood on the issue of the war on Gaza, and its Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar said, “The humanitarian crisis requires a permanent solution, and a two-state solution must be pursued.” He added, “We must be clear that terrorism and hostage-taking are unacceptable.”
Delhi's position represents a reversal from its usual position on the Palestine issue, which it has historically supported since ancient times. Jawaharlal Nehrupassing byIndira GandhiHowever, with the arrival of the Bharatiya Janata Party to power, India began to lean towards Israel, timidly at first, and then with complete openness today.
The surprise came from Nairobi, even if it was relative. Kenya, which is a country close to Israel, described the suffering in Gaza as a “big problem,” and that “the time has come to stop the military operation.” Foreign Minister Alfred Mutua said, “The Israeli response to the October 7 attacks “October reached a level where the humanitarian crisis and loss of life became catastrophic,” but he decided that his country would not sever its relationship with Israel.
The economic concerns of African countries were present at the summit, whose slogan was “Strengthening cooperation for global prosperity,” as no speech by any African delegation was devoid of talk about economic aspirations, and this issue was not absent from the agenda of the summit and the accompanying activities.
In this context, Uganda focused (host country) To re-present its markets as a potential destination for incoming investment, benefiting from optimistic expectations for its indicators in the medium term, it also attended to other calls, albeit timidly, related to ending intra-African conflicts and disputes, especially the emerging crises in the east of the continent.