The United States has again denied a visa to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and other Palestinian officials ahead of next week’s United Nations General Assembly in New York.Palestine is a non-member observer state at the UN. This status lets Palestinian officials take part in General Assembly debates and lets its leader address the body, but Palestine has no voting rights on resolutions.&nbsp;A similar decision by the Trump administration last year prevented Abbas, who regularly attends the UN General Assembly, from travelling to New York. He addressed the gathering through a video message instead.&nbsp;The US State Department did not name Abbas directly in its statement but said it would deny visas to members of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and officials of the Palestinian Authority (PA).&nbsp;The department said the decision was being taken “as a consequence of their failure to reform, contrary to their commitments to the United States, and their ongoing activities that undermine the prospects for peace.”&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/europe-and-canada-stronger-together-carney-welcomes-eu-s-associate-membership-pitch-amid-strain-in-us-ties-1789640681791">'Europe and Canada stronger together': Carney ‘welcomes’ EU’s associate membership pitch amid strain in US ties</a><h3>US cites Palestinian actions</h3>The State Department said the PLO and PA had “once again, failed to live up to their commitments”.Washington accused the Palestinian organisations of taking steps to “internationalise the Israeli-Palestinian conflict”. It pointed to their actions at the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ).&nbsp;The US also accused the Palestinian leadership of trying to “bypass negotiations through seeking unilateral recognition”.&nbsp;Washington further said the Palestinian Authority continued to pay stipends to terrorists and “glorify acts of terrorism and terrorists in public pronouncements and school textbooks”.&nbsp;The US and Israel have also objected to the Palestinian Authority’s earlier system of payments to families of Palestinians who were imprisoned or killed, including those who carried out attacks against Israelis.&nbsp;The Palestinian Authority has since changed the system. It now says welfare payments are based on the needs of families rather than political affiliation or prisoner status.<h3>Palestinian Authority hits back</h3>The Palestinian Authority criticised the US decision and called it “an unjustified measure”. The Palestinian Foreign Ministry said the move was against efforts to rebuild trust, improve Palestinian-US relations and create the conditions needed to implement a two-state solution.&nbsp;The ministry also “expressed its astonishment at the US statement's disregard for the substantive reforms carried out by the State of Palestine”.&nbsp;It said these reforms included changes to the social welfare system as well as financial, administrative, educational and legal reforms “according to clear, transparent, and verifiable mechanisms.”The US decision also puts Washington at odds with several countries that have recognised a Palestinian state.&nbsp;France was among the countries that recognised Palestine at the United Nations last year. After a conference co-chaired by France and Saudi Arabia, 142 UN member states endorsed a declaration supporting a two-state solution.

The US has again denied Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and other Palestinian officials visas to attend the UN General Assembly, citing their failure to meet US commitments, while the Palestinian Authority called the decision “unjustified”.

The United States has again denied a visa to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and other Palestinian officials ahead of next week’s United Nations General Assembly in New York. Palestine is a non-member observer state at the UN. This status lets Palestinian officials take part in General Assembly debates and lets its leader address the body, but Palestine has no voting rights on resolutions. A similar decision by the Trump administration last year prevented Abbas, who regularly attends the UN General Assembly, from travelling to New York. He addressed the gathering through a video message instead. The US State Department did not name Abbas directly in its statement but said it would deny visas to members of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and officials of the Palestinian Authority (PA). The department said the decision was being taken “as a consequence of their failure to reform, contrary to their commitments to the United States, and their ongoing activities that undermine the prospects for peace.” Also Read: 'Europe and Canada stronger together': Carney ‘welcomes’ EU’s associate membership pitch amid strain in US ties US cites Palestinian actions The State Department said the PLO and PA had “once again, failed to live up to their commitments”. Washington accused the Palestinian organisations of taking steps to “internationalise the Israeli-Palestinian conflict”. It pointed to their actions at the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The US also accused the Palestinian leadership of trying to “bypass negotiations through seeking unilateral recognition”. Washington further said the Palestinian Authority continued to pay stipends to terrorists and “glorify acts of terrorism and terrorists in public pronouncements and school textbooks”. The US and Israel have also objected to the Palestinian Authority’s earlier system of payments to families of Palestinians who were imprisoned or killed, including those who carried out attacks against Israelis. The Palestinian Authority has since changed the system. It now says welfare payments are based on the needs of families rather than political affiliation or prisoner status. Palestinian Authority hits back The Palestinian Authority criticised the US decision and called it “an unjustified measure”. The Palestinian Foreign Ministry said the move was against efforts to rebuild trust, improve Palestinian-US relations and create the conditions needed to implement a two-state solution. The ministry also “expressed its astonishment at the US statement's disregard for the substantive reforms carried out by the State of Palestine”. It said these reforms included changes to the social welfare system as well as financial, administrative, educational and legal reforms “according to clear, transparent, and verifiable mechanisms.” The US decision also puts Washington at odds with several countries that have recognised a Palestinian state. France was among the countries that recognised Palestine at the United Nations last year. After a conference co-chaired by France and Saudi Arabia, 142 UN member states endorsed a declaration supporting a two-state solution.

The US has again denied Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and other Palestinian officials visas to attend the UN General Assembly, citing their failure to meet US commitments, while the Palestinian Authority called the decision “unjustified”.

US again denies visa to Palestinian president, officials to attend UN General Assembly

India refused to vote on a UN General Assembly resolution calling on nations to comply with their obligations on climate change, raising concern over the draft, which "undermines" the "sacrosanct architecture" of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The resolution was passed in the 193-member UN General Assembly on Wednesday with 141 countries voting in favour, eight against it and 28 abstaining, including India. New Delhi stated that it had engaged constructively during negotiations on the resolution and consistently articulated its concerns and positions during the process.&nbsp;"We are therefore disappointed that our concerns were not addressed, despite our best efforts to find common ground," it said. Explanation India's vote, First Secretary at India's Permanent Mission to the UN, Petal Gahlot, said adoption of the resolution by the General Assembly does not impose any legally binding obligations on India. b"Our obligations arise only from outcomes adopted under the UNFCCC process. Hence, in line with our stated position on climate change-related issues, India was not in a position to vote in favour of this resolution," she said.&nbsp;The resolution, titled ‘Advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the obligations of States in respect of climate change’, welcomed the unanimous advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice in July 2025 on countries’ responsibilities regarding climate change. It also recognised the opinion as an authoritative interpretation of existing international law.<h3>Why does India abstains to vote?</h3>India has consistently raised concerns in the past that climate obligations must be negotiated through the UN climate framework, as it recognises the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities". Under this principle, developed countries, which are the largest historical emitters, are supposed to take the lead on emissions cuts initiatives and provide finance and technology support to developing nations.&nbsp;Introduced by Vanuatu, the resolution urged all nations to fulfil their obligations under international law to safeguard the climate system and environment from human-induced greenhouse gas emissions. It also called on countries to take steps, consistent with the Paris Agreement and their respective national circumstances, to limit the increase in global average temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. India, however, maintained that the draft resolution does not adequately emphasise the advisory and non-binding character of the ICJ opinion.&nbsp;"We are therefore seriously concerned that the resolution undermines the sacrosanct architecture of the UNFCCC process, by elevating an Advisory Opinion to a binding or quasi-binding status, attempting to impose obligations on developing countries that have not been multilaterally agreed upon. This is a dangerous precedent that we must all be wary of," Gahlot said.&nbsp;Also read:<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-issues-health-advisory-amid-ebola-outbreak-passengers-from-these-countries-warned-1779344734077"> 'Those with direct contact...': India's DGHS issues health advisory amid Ebola outbreak; Passengers from THESE countries warned</a>&nbsp;India found that the resolution directs a specific mitigation roadmap, imposes external benchmarks for ambition, and setup environment that may invite judicial or quasi-judicial scrutiny of nationally determined contributions. "This seriously undermines national policy space and disrupts the bottom-up architecture of the Paris Agreement," Gahlot said.&nbsp;India, along with several developing nations, has previously voiced concerns that efforts to assign greater legal significance to the International Court of Justice opinion could subject national climate commitments and domestic policy decisions to international legal scrutiny beyond the framework of the negotiated UN climate process.India also raised objections over the omission of the term “climate finance” from the resolution. Calling it a “serious omission”, Petal Gahlot said the climate finance target agreed upon in 2024 is widely acknowledged to be insufficient for the requirements of developing nations and therefore warranted greater emphasis in a resolution dealing with states’ obligations on climate change.&nbsp;She further said India considers the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement to be balanced and internationally agreed frameworks for addressing climate challenges. Gahlot also underlined that sustainable development and poverty alleviation continue to be the foremost priorities for developing countries.&nbsp;"Any transition in energy systems must therefore be just, orderly, and equitable, taking into account the need for energy access, economic growth, and social development. The resolution does not adequately recognise these imperatives and constrains policy space for developing countries.&nbsp;"It is further a case of insult to injury that there is absolutely no reference to the necessity of developed countries continuing to take the lead in mitigation and providing adequate and predictable financing, technology transfer and capacity building to developing countries in order for them to undertake such transitions," Gahlot said.

The resolution urged all nations to take steps, consistent with the Paris Agreement and their respective national circumstances, to limit the increase in global average temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. 

India refused to vote on a UN General Assembly resolution calling on nations to comply with their obligations on climate change, raising concern over the draft, which "undermines" the "sacrosanct architecture" of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The resolution was passed in the 193-member UN General Assembly on Wednesday with 141 countries voting in favour, eight against it and 28 abstaining, including India. New Delhi stated that it had engaged constructively during negotiations on the resolution and consistently articulated its concerns and positions during the process. "We are therefore disappointed that our concerns were not addressed, despite our best efforts to find common ground," it said. Explanation India's vote, First Secretary at India's Permanent Mission to the UN, Petal Gahlot, said adoption of the resolution by the General Assembly does not impose any legally binding obligations on India. b"Our obligations arise only from outcomes adopted under the UNFCCC process. Hence, in line with our stated position on climate change-related issues, India was not in a position to vote in favour of this resolution," she said. The resolution, titled ‘Advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the obligations of States in respect of climate change’, welcomed the unanimous advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice in July 2025 on countries’ responsibilities regarding climate change. It also recognised the opinion as an authoritative interpretation of existing international law. Why does India abstains to vote? India has consistently raised concerns in the past that climate obligations must be negotiated through the UN climate framework, as it recognises the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities". Under this principle, developed countries, which are the largest historical emitters, are supposed to take the lead on emissions cuts initiatives and provide finance and technology support to developing nations. Introduced by Vanuatu, the resolution urged all nations to fulfil their obligations under international law to safeguard the climate system and environment from human-induced greenhouse gas emissions. It also called on countries to take steps, consistent with the Paris Agreement and their respective national circumstances, to limit the increase in global average temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. India, however, maintained that the draft resolution does not adequately emphasise the advisory and non-binding character of the ICJ opinion. "We are therefore seriously concerned that the resolution undermines the sacrosanct architecture of the UNFCCC process, by elevating an Advisory Opinion to a binding or quasi-binding status, attempting to impose obligations on developing countries that have not been multilaterally agreed upon. This is a dangerous precedent that we must all be wary of," Gahlot said. Also read: 'Those with direct contact...': India's DGHS issues health advisory amid Ebola outbreak; Passengers from THESE countries warned India found that the resolution directs a specific mitigation roadmap, imposes external benchmarks for ambition, and setup environment that may invite judicial or quasi-judicial scrutiny of nationally determined contributions. "This seriously undermines national policy space and disrupts the bottom-up architecture of the Paris Agreement," Gahlot said. India, along with several developing nations, has previously voiced concerns that efforts to assign greater legal significance to the International Court of Justice opinion could subject national climate commitments and domestic policy decisions to international legal scrutiny beyond the framework of the negotiated UN climate process. India also raised objections over the omission of the term “climate finance” from the resolution. Calling it a “serious omission”, Petal Gahlot said the climate finance target agreed upon in 2024 is widely acknowledged to be insufficient for the requirements of developing nations and therefore warranted greater emphasis in a resolution dealing with states’ obligations on climate change. She further said India considers the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement to be balanced and internationally agreed frameworks for addressing climate challenges. Gahlot also underlined that sustainable development and poverty alleviation continue to be the foremost priorities for developing countries. "Any transition in energy systems must therefore be just, orderly, and equitable, taking into account the need for energy access, economic growth, and social development. The resolution does not adequately recognise these imperatives and constrains policy space for developing countries. "It is further a case of insult to injury that there is absolutely no reference to the necessity of developed countries continuing to take the lead in mitigation and providing adequate and predictable financing, technology transfer and capacity building to developing countries in order for them to undertake such transitions," Gahlot said.

The resolution urged all nations to take steps, consistent with the Paris Agreement and their respective national circumstances, to limit the increase in global average temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.&nbsp;

Why did India abstain from voting on the UN climate change resolution?

un-general-assembly-resolution

Un General Assembly Resolution, News on Un General Assembly Resolution, stories on Un General Assembly Resolution, articles on Un General Assembly Resolution, Un General Assembly Resolution stories at Wion, Un General Assembly Resolution news, Un General Assembly Resolution latest news

un general-assembly-resolution

US again denies visa to Palestinian president, officials to attend UN General Assembly

Why did India abstain from voting on the UN climate change resolution?