"It is crystal clear to me that if Arabs put down a draft resolution blaming Israel for the recent earthquake in Iran it would probably have a majority, the U.S. would veto it and Britain and France would abstain"

Amos Oz's quote is a sardonic commentary on the complex and often controversial characteristics of worldwide politics, especially with regard to the Middle East and the Israel-Palestine dispute. It uses hyperbolic images to highlight the ingrained biases and predictable patterns that identify voting behaviors in global bodies like the United Nations.

The quote suggests that there is a pervasive tendency amongst Arab states to jointly oppose Israel in international forums, often to the extent of irrationality. By proposing an envisioned circumstance where a natural catastrophe, such as an earthquake, is blamed on Israel, Oz underscores what he views as an automated antagonism towards Israel from particular federal governments. This exaggeration serves to criticize what he sees as a lack of fair-mindedness or factor in their diplomatic positions.

The mention of the U.S. veto indicates the steadfast assistance that Israel generally receives from the United States. This is indicative of the strong diplomatic ties and tactical alliance in between the 2 nations. The U.S. veto in such a situation signifies its consistent role in shielding Israel from resolutions perceived as unjust or excessive.

Additionally, the reference to Britain and France staying away recommends their more ambivalent stance on Middle Eastern matters. This indicates that, while these European powers might not totally line up with either side, they prefer to prevent direct conflict or commitment, reflecting a diplomatic cautiousness that aims to maintain broader local relationships.

In general, Oz's statement reviews the predictability and inefficacy within international diplomacy concerning Israel. It highlights a cycle of blame and defense that results in deadlock rather than resolution. The exaggerated situation serves to illuminate the deep-seated divisions and obligations that perpetuate the enduring intricacies of Middle Eastern geopolitics, calling into question the effectiveness and fairness of international interventions or resolutions.