NEW YORK – The United Nations Security Council on Monday, in a significant diplomatic development, endorsed a comprehensive peace plan proposed by United States President Donald Trump aimed at ending the protracted conflict in Gaza. The resolution passed with a vote of 13-0, with permanent members Russia and China abstaining, signaling a rare consensus on a path forward, yet highlighting deep geopolitical fractures.

The US-drafted resolution, which took place late Monday in New York (early Tuesday, East Africa Time), authorizes the establishment of a temporary International Stabilisation Force (ISF) to provide security across the devastated territory. It also outlines a framework for a transitional authority, dubbed the Board of Peace, to oversee reconstruction and demilitarisation.

Addressing the council after the vote, US Ambassador to the UN, Mike Waltz, described the resolution as a historic move to chart “a new course in the Middle East for Israelis and Palestinians.” The plan's text includes conditional language on a future for Palestinians, stating that once the Palestinian Authority undergoes reforms and reconstruction is advanced, “conditions may finally be in place for a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood.”

Immediate Rejection Creates Stalemate

Despite the international endorsement, the plan faces formidable obstacles. On the eve of the vote, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reiterated his government's staunch opposition to the creation of a Palestinian state. “Our opposition to a Palestinian state on any territory west of the Jordan River exists, is firm, and has not changed in the slightest,” Netanyahu stated at a cabinet meeting on Sunday. His defiant stance comes amid pressure from far-right members of his coalition government who have threatened to collapse the government over any concessions toward Palestinian statehood.

Simultaneously, Hamas issued a statement rejecting the resolution, describing the proposed international force as an attempt to “impose an international guardianship mechanism on the Gaza Strip.” The group insisted it would not disarm, framing its arsenal as a tool of legitimate resistance, a position that directly contradicts the resolution's call for the “permanent decommissioning of weapons from non-state armed groups.”

Implications for Kenya and East Africa

While Kenya is not currently a member of the Security Council, the conflict's trajectory has direct and significant consequences for the nation and the broader East African region. Somalia, a new non-permanent member for the 2025-2026 term, represents the region's voice on the council.

Kenya's official foreign policy, recently enshrined in law, supports a two-state solution to the conflict. However, its recent voting patterns at the UN have shown a complex alignment, sometimes abstaining on resolutions critical of Israel, a shift from previous administrations. President William Ruto has described Israel as a "great friend" while also affirming belief in a Palestinian state, reflecting a delicate diplomatic balance.

The most immediate impact on Kenyans is economic. Persistent conflict in the Middle East fuels instability in the Red Sea, a critical artery for global shipping. Attacks on vessels have forced many shipping lines to bypass the Suez Canal and reroute around Africa's Cape of Good Hope. According to the Shippers Council of Eastern Africa, this diversion has increased freight costs to Mombasa by up to 20% and extended transit times from 24 to 40 days, driving up the cost of imported goods and making Kenyan exports like tea, coffee, and avocados less competitive. These disruptions risk negating recent gains against inflation in Kenya.

As a nation with a long history of contributing to UN peacekeeping missions, Kenya will also monitor the formation of the proposed International Stabilisation Force. While Kenyan involvement is not confirmed, the nation's experience in regional peace efforts, including in Somalia, makes it a significant stakeholder in discussions on international security deployments.

With the UN's framework approved but rejected by the primary belligerents, the international community faces a diplomatic impasse. The coming weeks will be critical in determining whether diplomatic pressure can salvage the plan or if the region is destined for continued conflict, with ongoing security and economic repercussions for Kenya and the world.