Rwanda’s decision to abstain from a crucial United Nations Security Council vote on the future of Palestine, including the latter’s bid for statehood, on Tuesday night, was down to a flawed process through which the resolution was put to a vote, Foreign Affairs minister Louise Mushikiwabo has said.

In a post on her Twitter handle on New Year's Eve, Mushikiwabo said Rwanda’s position was not out of opposition to a Palestinian statehood.

"Rwanda friendship to Israel doesn't stand in the way of our wish for Palestine state” she wrote in response to a post that suggested that the country’s close ties with Israel could have influenced Kigali’s decision to abstain which subsequently saw the resolution collapse after the ‘yes’ side fell short by just one vote to garner the required ‘nine’ votes – a result that could have triggered a US veto.

Africa’s representatives Rwanda and Nigeria were among the five countries that abstained along with Britain, Lithuania and the Republic of Korea, with the US and Australia voting against the Jordanian-drafted motion.

China, France, Russia, Argentina, Chad, Chile, Jordan and Luxembourg voted in favour of the draft resolution in what the Palestinian officials, while expressing regret at the outcome, said signified growing momentum in favour of their unilateral push for statehood and an end to Israeli occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, which dates back to 1967 – away from on-and-off US-brokered peace talks.

Earlier on, in a statement to the Security Council explaining Rwanda’s vote on the Draft Resolution S/2014/916 on the State of Palestine, the country’s Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, Olivier Nduhungirehe, also criticised the process that led to the vote, indicating that Council members had not been given a chance to discuss and possibly improve the draft resolution.

"It is regrettable that the fifteen members of the Security Council were not given a single opportunity to discuss, negotiate and improve this draft, which was drafted, negotiated and amended outside the Council,” Nduhungirehe said, adding that Kigali backed a negotiated approach to the longstanding Israel-Palestine issue as opposed to unilateral action by either side.

"All those reasons – lack of a consensual approach in the region, negative impact on the peace process and lack of an inclusive and transparent procedure in New York – explain the today’s abstention of Rwanda,” he explained.

The diplomat said Rwanda did not believe that "any unilateral action by either side could bring lasting peace in the region and a final and comprehensive settlement to this crisis.”

"We fully believe that only a negotiated settlement between the parties will result in the emergence of an independent, sovereign, and viable Palestinian State living side by side in peace and security with Israel,” he said on December 31, the last day of Rwanda’s two-year membership of the United Nations Security Council.

Nduhungirehe said that, "unilateral initiatives, well-intentioned as they may be, could jeopardise the current situation that is already very fragile. We believe that a Security Council resolution could help the parties in speeding up the conclusion of negotiations for the establishment of a Palestinian state, provided that this resolution is consensual, as it should be agreed on by the negotiating parties and supported by all major stakeholders.

"Rwanda believes that the proposed draft, which has not garnered consensus in the region and within this Council, could not help parties achieving this goal...Going forward, we would invite all Council members, in coordination with the negotiating parties, the Arab Group and other stakeholders to work together towards a more consensual draft resolution, which should give a new impetus to the peace process”.

"In this regard, the Security Council and other stakeholders should step up their efforts to ensure the resumption of direct negotiations for a just and lasting solution of the Israel–Palestinian conflict, building on previous agreed frameworks. Parties, on their part, should make serious commitments to address the underlying causes of this conflict and refrain from any provocative action that could undermine the prospect of a durable peace in the region,” he added.

"We firmly believe that, given the current and irreversible momentum for peace, the status quo will no longer be an option. There is a unique window for the international community and the negotiating parties to act decisively, if we wish to realize our common vision of two viable states for two vibrant peoples, living side by side in peace, security and mutual recognition of each other’s legitimate rights.

"And the Government of Rwanda will remain fully committed to this process and contribute, as much as it can, to the peaceful and lasting solution to this crisis that has been going on for too long.”

Meanwhile, it emerged that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu telephoned Rwandan President Paul Kagame ahead of the vote on the controversial motion.

Speaking in Jerusalem on Wednesday during his party’s electoral event, Netanyahu reportedly praised both Rwanda and Nigeria for not backing the motion, saying he had personally discussed the matter with President Kagame and his Nigerian counterpart Goodluck Jonathan.

"I want to express appreciation and gratitude to the United States and Australia, as well as special appreciation to the President of Rwanda, my friend Paul Kagame, and to the President of Nigeria, my friend Goodluck Jonathan,” Netanyahu is quoted as saying. "I spoke with both of them, they promised me personally that they would not support this decision, and they stood by their words. That is what tipped the scales.”

Nigeria is thought to have previously been in support of the motion.

And Mushikiwabo said it was normal for leaders to discuss such matters. "Leaders speaking in these circumstances is obvious, Rwanda position is consistent: it's never been WHAT, but HOW,” she tweeted.