A/31/PV.101 General Assembly

I shall now call on those represen- tatives who wish to explain their votes before the vote on any or all of the draft resolutions recommended by the Special Political Committee in paragraph 23 of document A/31/399. S. Mr. HERZOG (Israel): In rising to express my delega- tion's opposition to the draft resolutions now before the General Assembly, I wish again to reiterate our view that no useful purpose can be achieved by this continuous barrage of attacks against Israel. On the contrary, I am convinced that this ceaseless diatribe to which we arc subjected only tends to create an atmosphere which is irreconcilable with the conceptof a process of negotiations. 6. A conflict cannot be solved by adopting resolutions which are so blatantly one-sided, It must surely be obvious to members of this General Assembly that nothing can be solved except by a process of face-to-face negotiations. 7. Great play has. as usual. been made "bout the failure of Israel to collaborate with the special investigating Com- mittee. For those whoarc not aware of the facts. I canonly reiterate that Israel was ready, in principle, to co-operate with the Committee on condition that the invcstitation would relate not only to Israeli practices in the Israel- administered areas but also to the status und conditions (If 9. Mucn of the contents of the report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices is based this year on statements made by a member of the Israeli bar, a Mrs. Felicia Langer. 10. Has anyone here given any thought to the proposition: in how many of the States which have spoken scathingly about the conduct of Israel in the administered areas would a lawyerlike Mrs. Langer have been free to do and say what she has been doing and saying, to travel abroad and lecture against her country, to write and publish articles and a book, and to slander and defame the country of which she isa citizen'! 11. As a matter of fact, Mrs. Langer, who is a memberof the Politburo of the Communist Party in Israel and whose hostile remarks about her own country have been given such play by the Committee and its sponsors,and above all by the Arab delegations, would not be allowed to enter most of the Arab countries that have espoused her cause and her words with such enthusiasm, not only because she is Jewish, but also because she isa Communist. This woman would be a candidate for gaol in 1110st of the Arab countries today because of her race and because of her political affiliation. 12. Indeed, the only country in the Middle East in which Mrs. Langer is entirely free to propagate her hostile views about the Government of Israel is Israel itself, because it is a country of freedom. As such it is unique in the Middle East. It is, indeed, touching to see how this woman's remarks have become the corner-stone of the so-called "evidence" adduced by hostile Arab countries not to mention other countries which have given vcnt to their hostility in these deliberations. 13. B "ere are no United Nations comnussions of investigauon to inquire as to what is going on inside the countries that criticizc Israel or inside the territories occupiedby them. 14, In the selective, distorted process that hasbecome the norm in the crooked looking-glass of the United Nations, no majority can be mustered to set up an inquiry as to what goes on behind the curtains of those critics of my country. But here in this glass palace they presume to throw stones at us. 15. Thus we are criticized on the subject of the settle- ments that we have established in the administered areas since 1967, 16. It is, however, conveniently forgotten that the Arab States maintain that a state of war exists with Israel. Nevertheless, whcn we take steps such as these to ensure 17. The Jewish population of those settlements consti- tutes less than one half of 1 per cent of the total Arab population of 1,140,000 in the administered territories- less than one half of 1 per cent. This is not much, is it, for a policy of would-be annexationist settlement over a period of nearly 10 years that is supposed to have changed the demographic and physical situation in the areas'? These facts and these figures give the lie to all these allegations made against us of annexationist policies. 18. Israel rejects the thesis that the establishment of settlements is an obstacle to peace. We reject it out of hand. The obstacle to peace is not what Israel is doing after having waited for peace for well-nigh three decades. The obstacle to peace is the Arab refusal to recognize the Jewish people's right to sovereignty 111 its ancient homeland. The obstacle to peace is an implacable Arab refusal to recognize Israel, to negotiate with Israel, or to make peace with Israel. The obstacle to peace is the refusal of the Arab States to sit down face to face at the negotiating table with Israel. The obstacle to peace is the immature and puerile refusal of the Arab uelegations here even to talk to the representative of Israel. The obstacle to peace is the constant outflow of barren diatribe which we hear here from the Arab represen- tatives. The obstacle to peace is evident daily for members to see and listen to in this chamber. The obstacle to peace is a basic Arab attitude, and until that attitude is changed there cannot. I regret, be any advance towards peace. 19. Another subject on which those who have no respect whatsoever for human rights like to wax eloquent is the fourth Geneva Convention.' Much lip service has been paid to the applicability of that Convention in the administered areas. That Convention, adopted in 1949, has not been applied in any of the numerous armed conflicts that have erupted around the globe since it came into force. But of course, as far as Israel is ccncerned, the cry goes up that it is applicable and must be applied in the areas administered by us. 20. As members will recall, my delegation, in our state- ment in the Special Political Committee of 12 November 1976,2 made our position quite dear on the question of the applicability of the Convention in the areas and also that as a matter of fact we regard it as standard in our practice. Actually, in a number of instances wego even further than the standards set by the Convention, so that thc population of the areas in fact enjoyshuman rights over and above the provisions of the Convention. I Convcntlon relative tu thl.' Protection of Civillun Persons in Time of War, signed at Geneva on 12 August 1949. 2 See OJJ1C'ial Records of the Ueneral Assetnbl», Thirtv-Iirn Sesston, Special Po/iti"al Commtttec, 19th meetine, paras. 12·44. 22. Much has been made of the destruction in the town of Quneitra. Quneitra, situated as it is on the front line, was destroyed in the course of six years of warfare. This fact has been abundantly documented and is beyond any challenge, despite Syrian efforts to claim otherwise. 23. I am not going to go into details on the baseless Syrian allegations. 24. Suffice it to recall, as an indication of the blind bias and onc-sidedness of the sponsors, that they initially put words in the mouth of the Swiss expert which are not to be found in his report /A/31/218, annex 111/, and only at the last moment deleted the third preambular paragraph from draft resolution D. At no point in the expert's. report is the allegation made that ls.ael is guilty of the destruction which he found in Quneitra. 25. Everybody knows that Quneitra had been a front-line town for almost six years. Two wars were fought over it in that period. not to mention one war of attrition in between. Heavy damage was caused to town and villages on both sides. 26. Let us not forget that many Israeli towns and villages incurred damage as a result of Syrian operations and shelling. Israel repaired the damage so that life could proceed normally. Syria has. for its part, preferred to let the citizens of Quneitra continue to live as refugees and to retain the city in its state of destruction for propaganda purposes the same policy as that applied in respect of the Arab refugees. 27. There have been many wars in the world in which many cities have been destroyed. This is the only occasion on which a draft resolution has been submitted on the subject of one area of destruction out of many. This draft resolution bears no relation whatsoever to the issue at stake. It is but a futile effort on the part of the Syrian Arab Republic to score propaganda points and in so doing to cxacerba te relations, perpetuate hostility and engage in the interminable puerile Syrian policy of going to cry on other people's shoulders instead of repairing the damage as all other countries have done and permitting Jife to proceed normally. 28. I reject out of hand all the condemnations appearing in draft resolution C. 29. I do not wish to reply in detail. This we have done in the past, both here and in the Special PoliticalCommittee. and I do not believe that the Assembly is over-anxious to 31. Year after year. resolutions are adopted on the issueof the Arab-Israeli conflict without the slightest regard for the facts, the truth, the merits of the matter, The resolutions only serve to prolong the dispute instead of resolving it. and obscure the truth instead of highlighting it. 32. The truth is that in the administered areas. with all the problems that are involved, we have created the founda- tions from which to advance further towards the solution of the Palestine Arab problem on a basis of growing understanding between the two peoples. 33. Of late we have been regaled daily in some of the leading newspapers by stories about the so-called modera- tion of various elements in the Uiddle East, including the Palestine Liberation Organization / PLO/. The PLO and its friends who have been reporting are engaging in an exercise of semantic acrobatics. We are told that we can infer indications of a move towards moderation from this situation or that situation, from certain juxtapositions in resolutions or from statements allegedly made, and that we can infer a willingness to move towards the establishment of a State, and so forth. Nobody calls a spade a spade. Everything issupposed to be implied. 34. Let me make it again quite clear: the so-called I>LO. which does not. in our view. represent the bulk of the Palestinian Arabs· RO per cent of whom live in Jordan, Israel and the lsraell-administered territories- is committed by the Palestine Covenant to the destruction of the State of Israel. I have drawn your attention to details of that Covenant on many occasions. That Covenant calls for the destruction of Israel and rejects outright any form of compromise on the Palestine issue. 35. It must be obvious to any self-respecting country that the Government of Israel will have nothing to do with a grouping committed to such a policy. whatever soothing statements and semantic acrobatics they may engage in. 36. We have made our position clear on many occasions. It must be obvious to all that progress lies in face-to-face negotiations for peace between the countries concerned. 37. The very existence of a nation and its security can never be the subject of compromise. That iswhat guides us in our quest for peace. 3R Our hand is outstretched for peace. but we want real pe., 'ictwcen countries, peace as it is understood by the ordinary man in the street whose opinion issolicited. 39. These draft resolutions before us now will not bring us nearer to peace. On the contrary. they move the area away

My delegation will vote in favour of draft resolutions A, B, C and 0 contained in document A/3] 1399 because they contain a description of the policy followed by the Israeli forces of occupation in the occupied Arab territories, not only since the Israeli aggression of June 1967, but long before that: since Israel's creation in the heart of Palestine and the Arab territories. 42. Israel is an alien, invader, racist regime whichcame to a peaceful land. uprooted the legitimate inhabitants of that land, and, in order to perpetuate its usurpation of that land, resorted to a complete changing of its physical, cultural and demographic nature. That is what distinguishes the Israeli form of colonization from any other classic form of colonization in any other part of the world. 43. Every other nation which has been subjected to colonization and alien occupation and which has suffered for a long time under colonial rule has always kept the hope that one day, sooner o. later, it would gain its freedom and independence-whether thanks to the heroic resistance of its own population, to international circumstances. or to the outcome of international conflicts and wars. But in Palestine the Zionist colonization is unique: it is a colonization that aims at usurping finally and for ever the territory of others. To achieve the goal of that colonial settler form of usurpation, first of all the annexation of the territory is necessary. To annex the territory one has to get rid of the obstacle to that annexation -the indigenous population. That is why Israel, from its creation in the heart of the Arab land, started to uproot the indigenous population and establish settlements in the heart of the Arab territory--racist, Jewish settlements where non-Jews have no right whateverto live. 44. The four draft resolutions deal with aspects of Israeli practices in the occupied Arab territories. Three of them deal with present practices and the fourth deals with war crimes committed by Israel. Fortunately, lsra. I now has no further authority in that part of the territory, but the evidence of its barbarous crimes is there to show the nature of the Israeli entity. 45. Draft resolution A deals with the settlements. Once again this morning we heard the Israeli representative defy, not only the overwhelming majority of the UnitedNations, but even Israel's friends, by refusing yet again to admit that the establishment of Israeli Jewish settlements in the Arab territories is an obstacle to peace. The establishment of Jewish settlements was portrayed to us by the represen- tative of Israel as a security necessity. The Israeli represen- tative said: "What do you want us to do'! You are refusing to come to agreement with us and so we are obliged to protect ourselves." How? By establishing ever more settle- ments. 47. Draft resolution B before us also deals with the Geneva Conventions and we have been told that Israel will abstain in the vote on that draft resolution. That is understandable because Israel is a party to the fourth Geneva Convention. But although Israel has signed that Convention, it has refused to apply it in the occupied Arab territories. Israel claims that those Conventions, in particu- lar the fourth Geneva Convention, were not applied in the Middle East, in Arab territories or in the areas of conflict during previous wars. But who refused to apply them'? We need only ask the International Committee of the Red Cross /ICRC/ .. we need only recall previous experiences with Israel. I shall refer only to the last of those incidents. 48. At the beginning of the October 1973 war. ICRC addressed an urgent appeal to all the parties to the conflict-Syria, Egypt and Israel to respect not only the fourth Geneva Convention but also voluntarily to under- take to respect the two additional protocols that were being prepared to the fourth Geneva Convention. 49. What were the replies of the parties involved? Syria accepted 48 hours after the ICRe appeal, saying, "We are ready to accept not only the application of the fourth Geneva Convention but also the two additional protocols." Egypt accepted 72 hours after that appeal and informed ICRC: "We are ready to accept and apply the fourth Geneva Convention, together with the two additional protocols.' Israel, which at the time was involved in bombarding the civilian quarters of the city of Damascus and the cities of Latakieh, Horns and Aleppo and whichat the time was attacking villages with napalm, Phantom aircraft and rockets, delayed its answer to the ICRC appeal for some 10 to IS days. When it did reply to leRC the answer was, "We are sorry, we cannot accept; we cannot commit ourselves right now to the application of the two additional protocols of the fourth Geneva Convention because we cannot commit ourselves to somethingwhich is not already an instrument of international law." That negative answer by Israel was the subject of an official communique of ICRC issued in October 1973. 51. Draft resolution 0, as I said, deals not with a present practice of Israel, but with a war crime committed by Israel and with the consequences of that warcrime, which remain for everybody to see. The Israeli-Zionist representative, instead of L.ing ashamed of that war crime committed by his regime, said that Syria refused to permit the inhabitants of Quneitra, 60,000 human beings, to return to live in Quncitra and that Syria preferred to leave those 60,000 human beings as refugees. The members of this august body can only smile at this mockery and at this insult to their intelligence. Where should those 60,000 human beings return to-to the ruins of the completely destroyed city of Quneitra? 52. The members of the Special Political Committee saw for themselves the films showing what remains of Quneitra. Nothing remains of Quneitra, not even one house. Ninety- nine per cent of the city of Quneitra was destroyed by Israel just before its withdrawal from that city in 1974. That was not only seen by those who visited Quneitra, by members of the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force, by foreign correspondents,by visitors and by people from every corner of the world, but it was also docu- mented, certified and affirmed in an official scientific report of a neutral Swiss expert who went to Quneitra at the request of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices, pursuant to General Assembly resolution 3240 C (XXIX). That Swiss expert prepared a full, detailed and documented report {see A/31/218, annex 111/ to the United Nations, to the Special Political Committee, in which he certified that 99 per cent of the city of Quneitra had been intentionaIly and deliberately destroyed before the Israeli withdrawal. 53. Now the Israeli-Zionist representative said that the Swiss expert did not state that it was Israel that had destroyed the city of Quneitra. That is ridiculous. First of ;-.11, the city of Quneitra could have been destroyed only by one of two parties, one of the two sides-either by the Syrians themselves or by the Israelis. During the time between 1967 and 1974 Quneitra was under Israeli occupa- tion. The only possible way that Quneitra could have been destroyed by Syria would have been for Syria to have held Ouneltra between 1967 and 1974. Syria was not there at that time. Quneitra was under Israeli occupation. The Swiss expert said that Quneitra was not destroyed by an act of 54. The Swiss expert was definite in his report, which is in the documents before the members of the General Assem- bly. He said that 99 per cent of the city of Quneitra had been intentionaIly destroyed, not by acts of war, but by bulldozers and dynamite. Therefore the Israeli represen- tative cannot justify the war crimes committed by his regime merely by saying that the Swiss expert had not stated who wasthe perpetrator of that crime. SS. Moreover, the Israeli representative said that many cities had been destroyed in recent history, but why single out Quneitra with a resolution? It is true that many'cities have been destroyed in wars. but not many cities have been destroyed by the intentional action of war criminals. The only incidents involving the intentional destruction of cities, to my knowledge, occurred during the Second World War. That was done by the Nazis, and the Nazi criminals paid with their lives for those crlmes: and at that time the Zionists themselves were the party that was calling for the severe punishment of those war criminals. 56. Israel has always claimed that it wants peace: however, only a few days ago the General Assembly was able to realize just how sincere Israel is in its claim that it wants peace. Israel's first draft resolution {A/31//,,24/ --and maybe its last-vsubrnittcd to the General Assembly was one which called for the reconvening of the Geneva Conference but which at the same time also called for the exclusion of the party most directly involved in the Middle East conflict. Israel wanted to make peace,but peace in the absence of its first and most important victim- the Palestinian people. And when the General Assembly attempted to remedy this lack and this injustice in the Israeli draft resolution, Israel reverted to its true nature and withdrew the draft resolu- tion which it had introduced, because Israel in fact does not want peace. It wants peace only on its own conditions, a peace which would mean the surrender of the Arab people to Israeli occupation and aggression, a peace dictated by the weight of Israeli occupation, a peacewith the acceptance of the colonization of Arab territories and the implantation in the heart of these territories of racist and purely Jewish settlements. 57. The Arab side did not accept, and it will never accept, this sort of peace. The peace which the Arabs are advocating and requesting and for which they are working and appealing is peace based on justice, peace based on the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. We want peace with justice for all peoples and countries of our region. We want peace based not on surrender but on the principle of self-detertuination. which brings justice, to be enjoyed by every people and every party to the Middle East conflict.

Needless to say, we shall vote in favour of the draft resolutions before us, not on the basis of solidarity, but because my delegation is known for scrutinizing all draft resolutions before casting its vote. 60. At random, I should like to draw the attention of the Israeli representative, Mr. Herzog, as well as of all the other representatives in this hall, to the following paragraphs in draft resolution C and ask him to refute them if they arc wrong: "Condemns . . . "(a) The annexation of parts of the occupied terri- tories;"--is this correct or false'? " "(e) The destruction and demolition of Arab houses;"-is this true or untrue'? " "(h) The pillaging of archaeological and cultural prop- erty;"···is that on record or is it not'! 61. I could go on citing other paragraphs and subpara- graphs from this draft resolution, but we are drawing to the end of this session and I promise you, Mr. President, that I shall be as brief as humanly possible. 62. The occupation of Palestine by the Zionists is not a classical form of colonialism. What is it then'? It is expropriation of the land of Palestine on a premise-which happens to be fundamentally religious-that God gave Palestine to the Jews. I would say that we have no proof of this and, after all, there are Jews who do not believe in God just as there are Christians, Moslems and atheists every- where. Despite all the scientific discoveries, no one has been able to communicate with what is considered the tradi- tional God. 63. The Creator of the Universe is a concept. When the idea of a single God was propagated in our region, it was to make him understood to the tribal societies that existed there 2,000 years ago. After centuries of discoveries in the realm of science, no one can subscribe to the traditional tribal God, who had to be made understandable by attributing human qualities to him. Who can describe God, the creator of the universe, the author of this world'! No one can-vneither in time nor in space. 65. Yes, the Jews were associated with Palestine-but not those Khazars who were the authors of zionism and who were converted to Judaism in the eighth century A.D. No English Christians, no French Christians, indeed no Chris- tians of any nationality can claim Palestine. Jesus, the son of Mary, was born in Bethlehem and grew up in the area. 66. Similar attempts to use religion for economic and political ends were made in 1087 A.D., during the Crusades. And what happened'? Remnants of the descendants of these people are tribes in the Arabian peninsula. They were assimilated. I am not saying this in anger; I am saying it in a historical perspective. Perhaps the Zionists will learn the lesson that a small minority cannot lord it over a majority, regardless of right or wrong. 67. As I have said time and again, I am sure that the Palestinians would have received with open arms any Zionists who came there out of genuinely religious senti- ments. But it was a different matter to go there as they did and expropriate the land by war. The Zionists have ensured the continuance of the conflict by playing on the policies of the major Powers. They want to make Palestine useful to the major Powers, since it lies at the cross-roads of three continent. . We have had enough of these ideas of balance of power and spheres of influence. We have had enough of power politics. Had it not been for the deterrent of nuclear weapons and other systems of mass destruction and annihilation, there would already have been a third world war because of, inter alia, the establishment of an alien people in the midst of the Arab world. 68. The dream of the Zionists, the Khazars-vplaying, as they have done since the days of the late Theodor Herzl,on the sentiments of their corehglonists-has been to establish Palestine as a nucleus and spread out from there. We know from their writers that they want a land from the Nile to the Euphrates--ur from the Euphrates to the Nile, wherever one of the ancient patriarchs had trodden. Of course, Abraham is the traditional ancestor of all the Semites in the area. The Zionists, for political and economic reasons, want to establish their suzerainty. 69. Who would accept such occupation'? This is not colonialism;it is expropriation. 70. Mr. Herzog seems to use words calculated to deride the Arabs. He spoke of "semantic acrobatics". What semantic acrobatics'! He is playing with words, and doing so cynically. We are gathered together here to find a solution that will bring peace. We are not here to engage in what Mr. Herzog calls "semantic acrobatics". He cannot, with such rhetoric, dismiss the justice of the Palestinian cause. 71. Mr. Herzog said today. for perhaps the tenth time, that Israel will not recognize the PLO. But why should the 72. The vicissitudes of circumstances and international action have taught us that only the Creator of the Universe is eternal-again, I do not want to use the word "God" in the traditional sense. We are all ephemeral; we are here today, but tomorrow we will be gone. Where are the empires of yore? Gone--and rightly so, because they got drunk with wealth and power. 73. I should like to ask the Israelis this question; Why do you not allow the Palestinlans-whether or not they belong to the PLO-to return to what you now call Israel, to return to their homes? Why do you not let them regain their identity? After all, they were placed under Mandate at Versailles, just like the Lebanese, the Iraqis and the Syrians, who are free today. The victors had no right at Versailles, after the First World War, to place these peoples under Mandate. That was just colonialism in disguise. The fact is that our British friends were losing the war and the Zionists railroaded the United States, our present host country, into the First World War. The price was the Balfour Declaration. What business did the British of the past and the Americans in the days of Mr. Truman have to create this problem, which has since bedevilled us all? 74. I say to the Israelis, recognize the Palestinians, under the label of the PLO or any other label. Let them go back and have their own identity in their own land. I do not wish to brag, but I must say that my voice is cogent in the Arab world. I was one of the first to declare that we should be one nation, from Morocco to the Gulf. If the Israelis were to let the Palestinians go back to their land, to the occupied territories, to their homes, I for one- and I am sure that there are many others like me would do my very best to persuade them to recognize the Israelis. 75. It is the other way around. Let the Israelis seek acceptance; let them adjust and adapt themselves, if they want to survive. Otherwise, the future is grim,and I would feel sorry for them, because, after all, they are human. We are all brothers under the skin, regardless of our religions or ideologies. But it would be they who would sacrifice the Jews, and mostly our Jews, in Palestlne-vthose Jews who 77. Therefore, let them not repeat that argument that God gave them Palestine. They will be allowed to live in peace among us, and when I say "us" I mean us Arabs. Because, after all, one day national barriers will fall, and we hope that in a couple of decadesthe world will be one.

The Assembly will now proceed to take a decision on draft resolutions A to D recommended by the Special Political Committee in paragraph 23 of its report IA/31/399/ and grouped under the heading"Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories". The Fifth Committee's report on the administrative and financial implications of draft resolu- tions Cand D iscontained in document A/31/446. 79. We shall turn first to draft resolution A. A recorded vote has been requested. In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barba- dos, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Cuba, Cyprus, Czecho- slovakia, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Dominican Re- public, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia. German Demo- cratic Republic, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hungary. Iceland. India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic. Lebanon, Lesotho. Libyan Arab Republic, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius. Mexico, Mongolia. Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway. Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay. Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Oatar, Romania, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Surinam, Swazlland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thai- land, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago,Tunisia,Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republlc, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Carneroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: Haiti, Israel, United States of America.

The Assembly will now vote upon draft resolution B. A recordedvote has been requested.

The General Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution C. A recorded vote has been requested.

The Assembly will now vote on draft resolution D. A recordedvote has been requested.

I shall now call upon the represen- tative of Gabon who wishes to explain her votes after the vote. 84 Miss ISSEMBE (Gabon) (interpretation front French}: Gabon firmly condemns Israeli practices affecting human rights in the occupied Arab territories. My country strongly deplores Israel's disregard of the fact that the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 applies also to all the territories occupied by Israel since the 1967 war, including Jerusalem. 85. All the destruction and demolition of Arab houses, all the mass arrests, all the administrative detentions and all the ill-treatment inflicted on Palestinian detainees, all the pillaging of the archeological and cultural heritage, all the interference in all the freedoms recognized by our Organi- zation all these actions truly flout the values advocated by the United Nations. 86. That is why my delegation voted in favour of the draft resolutions that we have just adopted. Our vote in favour is in keeping with the consistent policy of my Government on the Palestinian problem. Indeed, Gabon has always actively supported and has never failed the Palestinian cause or the PLO, which is the sole authentic representative of the Palestinian people. 87. My delegation was absent for reasons beyond its control during the votes on draft resolutions A/31/L.26 and A/31/L.27, with regard to agenda item 29, entitled "The situation in the Middle East". We should like to take this opportunity to say that we would have voted in favour of those draft resolutions had we been present.

We shall now take up the report of the Second Committee on agenda item 58f A/3J/36Jt. Wc shall now take a decision on the draft resolution entitled "United Nations Institute for Training and Research" recommended by the Second Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. The Second Committee adopted that draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We shall now consider the report of the Second Committee on agenda item 60 f A/3J/415/. 96. The positions of delegations in respect of the various draft resolutions and draft decisions recommended by the Committee to the Assembly have already been expressed in the Second Committee, and those positionsare reflected in the relevant summary records of the Second Committee. I shall now call on those representatives who wish to explain their votes before the vote on any or all of the nine draft resolutions and on the two draft decisions recommended by the Second Committee in paragraphs 55 and 56 of its report. respectively. Representatives will also have an opportunity to explain their votes after all the votes have been taken.

The position of my delegation on draft resolution Ill. on Iivlng conditions of the Pales- tinians in the occupied territories. is reflected in our

We shall now take a decision on the nine draft resolutions recommended by the Second Com- mittee in paragraph 55 of its report / A/3J/415/. 99. Draft resolution I is entitled "United Nations Con- ference on Desertification". In his introduction to the report of the Second Committee. the Rapporteur of that Committee informed the General Assembly of the under- standing on the basis of which this draft resolution was adopted in the Second Committee namely, that if a Member State should offer to act as host to the Conference. the Secretary-General would be empowered to make the necessary arrangements to deal with the change of venue, always provided that this would not give rise to any additional costs under the regular budget. The Secretary- General will of course, if he considers it necessary, consult with the Committee on Conferences on this matter. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to proceed on the basis of the same understanding with regard to this draft resolution?

The Second Committee adopted draft resolution I without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Draft resolution 11, entitled "Habitat: United Nations Conference on Human Settle- ments", was adopted by the Second Committee without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Draft resolution III is entitled "Living conditions of the Palestinian people". A recorded vote has been requested. 103. The PRESlDENT: Draft resolution IV, entitled "Report of the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Programme". was adopted by the Second Committee without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do the same? 104. The PRESlDENT: Draft resolution V,entitled "Insti- tutional arrangements for international environmental eo- operation", was adopted by the Second Committee without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do the same'!

Draft resolution VI. entitled "Specific measures to meet the need for a decent living environment for the most vulnerable groups of society". was adopted by the Second Committee without a vote. May I takc it that the General Assembly wishes to do the same" 7 Th~' ddq'aliol1 of I ruadur ~lIh~I'lflh'l1lh' intormcd thl' Sl'tH" tarint that il \•. ishvd I" !law Jt~ vote recorded <I'> h,IViIW been ill favour of the draft rcsolutiuu.

Draft resolution VIII, entitled "United Nations audio-visual information centre on human settlements", was adopted by the Second Committee without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do the same? Draftresolution VIIIwas adopted(resolution 31/115).

Draft resolution IX, entitled "Institutional arrangements for international co-operation in the field of human settlements", was adopted by the Second Committee without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do the same'?

I now invite representatives to turn to the two draft decisions recommended by the Second Committee in paragraph 56 of its report IA/31/ 415/. The Second Committee adopted them without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do the same?

I call on the representative of Israel, who wishes to explain his vote after the voting. II I. Mr. LADOR (Israel): My explanations of vote relate to agenda item 60. 112. With reference to draft resolution I entitled "United Nations Conference on Desertlflcatlon". my delegation's views on the participation of the representatives of the so-called PLO in whatever capacity in United Nations conferences have been made abundantly clear and I shall not take up the time of the Assembly in repeating them. My delegation wishes to place on record its strong objection to PLO participation in the United Nations Conference on Desertlflcation as cnvisagcd in that resolution. 113. With regard to draft resolution JJ entitled "Habitat: United Nations Conference on Human Settlements". while joining in the consensus on that text. which has just been adopted, my delegation wishes to main tain its position on the report of Habitat as stated at the 37th meeting of the Second Committee.

We shall now take up the report of the Second Committee on agenda itern (l2 IA/3J/3r, 7/. The Second Committee's recommendation nppcars ill para- graph 6 of that document. The Second Committee adopted the rccommendatlon without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do the same?

We come now to the report of the Second Committee on agenda item 63{A/31/412/. Dele- gations have already expressed their positions in the Second Committee with regard to the two draft resolutions recommended by that Committee to the Assembly and those positions are reflected in the relevant summary records of that Committee. We shall now take a decision on the two draft resolutions recommended by the Second Committee in paragraph IQ 'Of its report. 117. Draft resolution I is entitled "United Nations Uni- versity". The Second Committee adopted that draft reso- lution without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do the same?

Draft resolution 11 is entitled "Chair on non-alignment within the United Nations Uni- versity". The Second Committee also adopted that draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do the same?

We come now to the report of the Second Committee on agenda item 67 fA/31/428/. In the Second Committee the positions of delegations were al- ready expressed with respect to the draft resolution recom- mended by the Committee to the Assembly and those positions are reflected in the relevant summary record of the Second Committee. We shall now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Second Committee in paragraph 9 of its report. The Second Committee adopted that draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do the same.

We shall now consider the report of the Second Committee on agenda item 61 {A/.U/443/. In the Second Committee, the positions of delegations were already expressed with respect to the three draft resolutions and the draft decision recommended by the Committee to the Assembly' and those positions arc reflected in the relevant summary records of the Second Committee. 12I. f call on the represen tative of Ethiopia, who wishes to explain his vote before the vote.

With regard to the draft decision in paragraph 2'i which was originally sponsored by Norway and Venezuela, my delegation would like to make a briefstatement on its vote. 123. hthiopia, as an agricultural country, welcomes the coming into bclng of the International Fund for Agrlcul- 124. My country is also one of thosethat have been taking part in the motivation behind the creation of the future IFAD. We look forward, therefore, with hope that it will be operational and successful and that it will meet the expectations of all the developing countries. 125. My delegation also wishes to put on record that Ethiopia has excellent relations with Norway and Vene- zuela. We recognize that Norway is one of the most generous countries, whose practical help has been shown in the past to all the developing countrles-thc least developed among the developing countries as well as the most seriously affected countries-and we hope that it will continue in this spirit of aid to the developing countries. Norway, a Nordic country, is one of the few countries which has always been in accord with the Group of 77 in ideas as well asin practice. 126. We also have the greatest admiration for Venezuela, as a sister country in the Group of 77. There has not been a case in which Venezuela has not been in the forefront in promoting the aims, objectives and goals of the developing countries, both in the elaboration of ideas and in practical contributions to the developing countries, including the least developed and the most seriously affected countries. 127. However, the draft decision before the Assembly has created difficulties for us at level of principle. We feel that when a country makes a donation for certain aims and objectives clearly indicated in the statute or resolution that created the agency, such as the United Nations Special Fund, that donation legally becomes the property of the United Nations. We find it difficult to accept the idea that once such a donation is made, the country can continue to claim, even for a good purpose and even for purposes and objectives that we ourselves support, the right to withdraw that amount. That principle is very difficult for us to accept. 128. Wc also fecI that once what is, as far as we can recall a new concept in the life of the United Nations is introduced, we do not know where it might stop. We feel that once we make an exception for these friendly, generous and dynamic countries, whose intentions we all admire, we may not know where to stop. How shall wc be able to prevent other countries from doing the same thing with respect to the United Nations Development Pro- gramme and other United Nations agencies'! How can United Nations agencies engage in the developmental effort, give aid in the field of agriculture or other crisis areas and make long-term plans or adopt long-term programmes, if they can no longer be sure that the donorcountries will not withdraw the funds, for whatever good reason? Such a practice would create insecurity for those agencies as weJJ as for the recipients, who have placed great hopes ill those 129. For this reason. we find the draft decision submitted by Norway and Venezuela very difficult to support, as it violates principles; it is unprecedented: and it will open up a can of worms. The developing countries will no longer be sure whetheror not they will begettinganything. 130. My delegation is very sad to find itself in a position of having to take a very regrettable decision, but it is based on principle. Moreover, we should like to draw the Assembly's attention to the fact that, out of the total of the most seriously affected countries, approximately ZB are. African, my country included. Many of these countries have great hopes that the United Nations Special Fund will meet some of their difficulties. They still have that hope. It would be very difficult for us, on the eve of the possible favourable consideration of their demands, that money should be withdrawn. We should not like to take part in that. We should not like to be one of those that would prevent the possibility of theirgettinghelp from the Special Fund. 131. Moreover, if IFAD were to be made operational, we could not accept that the United Nations Special Fund should be the agency to besacrificed. We feel that there are other agencies and other donor countries.and that we have not exhausted every possible alternative ('If getting the additional little amount of money -below SIO million- needed to arrive at the target. 132. In view of aJJ these considerations mydelegation will vote against the draft decision, even though we are one of the promoters of IFAD and intend to contribute to it to the extent of our possibilities, and even though we have great hopes that we might be able to resolve some of our problems through IFAD. But the principle isfor usa major one, and we simply cannot take part in obstructing a principle which we ourselves took part in establishing.

We shall now take a decision on the three draft resolutions recommended by the Second Committee in paragraph 24of its reportIAI31/443l 134. Draft resolution I, entitled "Secretartat of the World Food Council", was adopted by the Second Committee without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise"

Draft resolution If. entitled "Report of the World Food Council", was adopted bv the Second Committee without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Draft resolution Ill, entitled "International Fund for Agricu:tural Development", was

We now turn to the draft decision entitled "Jnternatlonal Fund for Agricultural Develop- ment" recommended by the Second Committee in para- graph 25 of its report IA/31/443/. A recorded vote has been requested.

The General Assembly will now proceed to the election of 19 members of the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Programme to replace those members whose term of office expires on 31 Decembe, 1976. The 19 outgoing members are: Argen- tina, Canada, China, Czechoslovakia, France, Gabon. Ghana, Guatemala, Indonesia, Ivory Coast. Jamaica, Lebanon, Morocco. Philippines, Sierra Leone, Spain,Syrian 140. Under rule 92 of the rules of procedure, all elec- tions must be held by secret ballot and there shall be no nominations. May I, however, recall the recommendation ·of the General Committee, adopter] by the General Assembly at its 4th plenary meeting, on 24 September 1976. to the effect that "the General Assembly should, whenever it deems it appropriate, dispense with the time-consuming baJloting procedure in the case of uncontested elections to subsidiary organs" [see A/31/250, para. 16/. Furthermore, I should like to recall that at the thirtieth session last year that procedure was waived for the election of members of the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Programme. 141. In order to save the time of the Assembly, I would suggest that members dispense with the secret ballot once again in the present election if the number of candidates endorsed by a particular regional group corresponds to the number of seats be be filled in that group. In such cases, those candidates would be decJared elected. If I hear no objections, may I take it that the Assembly decides to proceed to the election on that basis?

I shouldlike to announce that the Chairmen of the regional groups have informed me that the following 19candidatrvs have been put forward-flve from Africa: Chad, Ghat le Ivory Coast, Senegal and the United Republic of Tanzania; five from Asia: Bangladesh, China, Indonesia, the Philippines and the Syrian Arab Republic; two from Eastern Europe: Bulgaria and Yugo- slavia; three from Latin America: Argentina, Guatemala and Jamaica; and four from Western European and other States: Canada, France, Norway and Spain. 143. Since the number of candidates endorsed by each group corresponds to the number of seats to be filled in that group, I declare those candidates elected members of the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Programme for a three-year period beginning I January 1977.

We shall now proceed to the election of 12 members of the Board of Governors of the United Nations Special Fund, to replace those members whose termof office expires on 31 December 1976.The 12 outgoing members are: Australia. Brazil. Chad, Iran, Kuwait, Madagascar, the Netherlands. Swazlland, the Syrian Arab Republic, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Uruguay and Yugoslavia. Those members areeligible for immediate re-election. 145. I should like to remind members of the Assembly that after 1 January 1977 the following States will still be members of the Board of Governors: Algeria. Argentina. Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia. France. Guyana, India, Japan. Nepal, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan. Paraguay, Phlllppines, Somalia. Sri Lanka, Sudan, Sweden, Turkey, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Upper Volta, Venezuela and Zaire. Therefore, those States are not eligible for election. 146. The Chairman of the groupof Wcs« rn European and other States has informed us that his tJOU{) is not in a position to nominate its third candidate f shall revert to thismatter in a few minutes. 147. Under rule 9:! of the rules of procedure, allelections must be held by secret baJJot and there shall be no nominations. May I, however, recall the recommendation of the General Committee, adopted by the General Assembly at its 4th plenary meeting, on :24 September 1976, to the effect that "the General Assembly should, whenever it deems it appropriate, dispense with the time-consuming balloting procedure in the case of uncontested elections to subsidiary organs" / A/31/250, para. 16/. Furthermore, I I should like to recalJ that at the thirtieth session of the Assembly, last year, the ballotl-ig procedure was waived for the election of members of the Board of Governors of the United Nations Special Fund. 148. In order to save the Assembly's time, I shouldlike to inquire if it is the wish of members to dispense with the secret ballot once again in the present election if the number of candidates endorsed by a particular regional group corresponds to the number of seats to be filled in that group. In such cases, those candidates would be decJared elected. If there isno objection. I shall take it that. as in the preceding case, the Assembly agrees to proceed to theelection on that basis.

I should like to announce that the chairmen of four of the regional groups have informed me that the following 9 candidatures have been presented- three from Africa: Madagascar, Mali, and the United Republic of Camc.oon: three from Asia: Fiji, Iran and the Ecuador, Fiji, Grenada, Iran, Madagascar, Mali, the Netherlands, the Syrian Arab Republic, the United King- dom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United Republic of Cameroon 'and Yugoslavia were elected members of the Board of Governors of the United Nations Special Fund for a three-year term beginning on 1 January 1977(decision 31/313t It was sodecided (decision 31/313).