"If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions"

Abba Eban’s quip is a wry commentary on the dynamics of international voting, particularly within the United Nations, and the geopolitical attitudes toward Israel. By invoking an obviously absurd hypothetical, a resolution asserting not only that the earth is flat but also that Israel is somehow responsible for flattening it, Eban emphasizes the extent of what he sees as automatic, uncritical opposition to Israel among many countries. The imagery is intentionally exaggerated to highlight the possibility that, irrespective of the merit or logic of a motion, large blocs of nations would support any proposal casting Israel in a negative light.

Eban references Algeria, a nation historically aligned with the Non-Aligned Movement and often a critic of Israel, to illustrate how political alliances shape international opinion. In his estimation, certain member states are predisposed to support resolutions against Israel, not on principle or the specifics at hand, but because of entrenched political and ideological alignments. The numbers he supplies, 164 voting for, 13 against, 26 abstentions, mirror actual margins of votes in past UN General Assembly sessions related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, where overwhelming majorities have regularly condemned Israel.

Behind the humor lies a sobering assessment of the limits of impartial debate in international forums. Eban suggests that, for many countries, voting patterns have become perfunctory, rendering the UN an arena where blocs vote out of loyalty or pressure rather than objective engagement with the substance of each resolution. Conflating the fantastical (the earth is flat) with the real accusations faced by Israel underscores Eban’s skepticism that many nations are more interested in expressing their opposition than evaluating the truth of the matter.

Ultimately, the statement mourns a decline in meaningful dialogue and the rise of partisanship on the world stage, where the search for consensus and balanced judgment is overshadowed by pre-existing enmities and alliances.