A/33/PV.72 General Assembly

I call on the representative of Sri Lanka to introduce the draft resolution submitted under this item in document A/33/ L12.

It is a tragic irony of fate that the Middle East, the cradle of three of the world's greatest religions, continues to be a region of attrition and conflict. Each year the United Nations approaches the agenda item "The situation in the Middle East" and each year delegations depart for their holidays with a solution no nearer. 3. Despite the confusion of issues and the involvement of interests from outside the region, the root-questions at issue in the Middle East are clear and straightforward. The Heads of State or Government of non-aligned countries who met in 1976 in Sri Lanka1 reaffirmed that a just and lasting peace in the Middle East cannot be attained'without Israel's withdrawal from all Arab territories occupied since 1967 and the Palestinian people's exercise of "their legitimate rights, particularly the right to return to their homeland and to recover their properties, in aCCfordance with the relevant resolution of the Unitea Nations, as well as their right to self-determination and to establish their own independent State. 7. In its operative parts the draft resolution does not depart from last year's resolution. Israel's continued oc- cupation of territory" in violation of the CJtarter of the United Nations is condemned and the draft resolution declares that peace is indivisible and that a just and lasting settlement of the Middle East problem must be based on a comprehensive solution, under the auspices of the United Nations, which takes into account all aspects of the Arab-Israeli conflict, in particular the attainment by the Palestinian people of their inalienable national rights and Israeli withdrawal from all occupied Palestinian and other Arab territories. Operative paragraph 4 deals with the need for the early convening of the Peace Conference on the Middle East under the auspices ofthe United Nations, while operative paragraph 5 urges the parties to the conflict and all other interested parties to work towards the achieve- 4. I do not intend to make a long statement, since many representatives before me have already reaffirmec these 1 Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries. held at Colomho from 16 to 19 August 1976. See document A/31/197. NEW Y·O.tK A/33/PV.72 8. The draft resolution before us is balanced and carefully worded and should command the widest accep~ance. 9. Mr, THlBMELB (Ivory Coast) (interpretation from Frellch): R~olution 181 (11) ofthe United Nations General Assembly not only proposed partition of Palestine under British Mandate by establishing two States that were to be bound together in an economic union, but unfortunately unleashed the biggest battle of our time, invohingnot only the countries concerned in the region, but the entire world community, so gra")'ely does this situation threaten interna- tional peace and security. 10. Our Organization cannot fail to be concerned about the situation in the Middle East because, after more than three decades, except for the presence of United Nati(\ns soldiers entrusted with monitoring precarious cease-fires, none of the many decisi.ons it had adopted have even ~gun to be implemented. The matter before us for co.nsideration today is too imp-octant and too closely bound up with the basic aims of our Organization and the fundamental rights of peop~s and States for us merely to consider the resolutio·.l.S adopte.d by the General Assembly or recite like a litany the elements of an ideal solution as we conceive it. 11. In the contemporary world nothing is permanent or definitive; somewhere there is-always something new. While everything that occurs does not bring us comfort-far from it, in.deed-we would none the less be wise not to overlook the tremulous glimmers of hope we see from time to time, which can keep us ftom suicidal discouragement. 12. Between 1947, the date of th~ adoption of the resolqtion on the partition ofPalestine, and the thirty-third - se.sslQO of the General A~mbly, the Middle East has been :iJl:Oarru~<l. by four le.thal wars, wiiliout counting an the more or 1~ markedly hostile act~ which have pitted, and conUn.u.~to pit.. the various States- ofthe region against one 3llQtMr. Afte.r each war our Organization had a.dopted d~~ons: mviUngthe States concerned to respect principles of inJe.~UQnal law accepted by an and to use peaceful m~:~ fOI: the solution of problems which faced them. SolJij;jime.& it ha$; even adapted me.as.ures to maintain th~ smtu~ quo, Unfortunately, this has never prevented the conflict from r~1dndlingand burning more fiercely. 13.. Th<t tes.Q1uJiau& of all kinds: that have been adopte.d ha.vc nQt p~venled waf.just as they have solvedneither the P{QQ~S: whi~ c~u~ itnor those: whichal:ise f(Om it. 14r Tbey haye nQt maae it. possible to restore the legiUma,te: rigbJ$ of the P~sUn~Jl Arabs~ including their . right to e$tAQli$h a.State entity, asi$ propel: for people who haye shQwn by their CQ\l~ aAd determination their a$,piFatiQIlS to n~tiomll existence in accordance with the nann$:ofOij[ tifilt}. 16. Finally, they have not made it possible for the Arab territories occupied for more than 30 years by the State of Ism"l to be recovered. That occupation IS clearly a consequence of the state of belligerency prevailing in the region and must not be judged outside its proper context. 17. Since tlte last Arab-Israeli war, in October 1973, what significant events have occured in the evolution of the conflict in the Middle East? 18. Except for the disengagement agreements that fol- lowed it and the ephemeral Geneva Peace Conference on the Middle East, only the salutary recognition by the international community of the inalienable rights of the Palesth1i:m people, which was assochied with the recog· nition of the PLO as the legitinlllte representative of that people, provides an encouraging element in a situation which seems to be deadlocked and doomed to lead to inevitable violence. The Soviet Union-United States state- ment of 1 October 1977, by pla~ing the Palestinian question at the very core ofthe problem of the Middle East and by advocating the establishment of a Palestinian State entity, was the culmination of this process of onc~ again giving the Arab people ofPalestine the rank of an interested party on an equal footing with the other belligerent States. 19. Faced with such a situation, the United Nations took the initiative in bringing all the interested parties to the negotiating table. From the out~t it was confronted with pl'ocedural problem~ which hampered the effective initia· tion ofthe negotiating process. 20_ Moreover, fnr their part, the great Powe.'S-and partic- ularly the two major Powers, which for various reasons, hold the key to the problem-were unable to shed their mutual suspicion and allow real progress to be made towards a solution in accordance with principles accepted by the international community. 21. It was in that climate, which at the very least presaged anew war. that the President of the Arab Republic ofEgypt surprised the entire world by his historic initiative on 19 November 1977, which took him to Jerusalem, where he extended the hand of peace to the Israeli leaders. For the Ivory Coast, that gesture of true dialogue not only has broken: down the wall of distrust which existed between those enemies. but has ,offered realistic and responsible opportunity to fmd a solution to the problem, bringing the two principal parties to the confrontation face to face elsewhere than on th~ battlefield. Indeed, it is only this direct dialogue, untarnished by any demagogic stance designed"J<;if domestic consumption in each participating country, that can make possible- a thorough and tranquil consideration of all the aspects of the problem that is undermining the Middle East, a region dear to our hearts, the cradle of the, great civilizations and the great relig!nns familiar to our world for many centuries. 22. That initiative, the responsible vature of which will not escape the judgement ofhistory. led to the signature of "To be sure, those agreements are only a framework for peace that still has to be filled in and that leaves open or orl~y touches upon liome of'the crucial questions. Some of the aspects of the Palestine question in particular which are at the heart of the conmbt, have not been resolved. But it appears to us that the Camp David agreements have created the necessary conditions for the continuance of the dialogue and for a just and lasting settlement of the tragic Middle East problem. In our opinion they are an important step alung the difficult road th&t should lead to peace." [25th meeting, para. 116./ 24. Basically, however, what exists in these Camp David ~greements, which have been described as "insufficient agreements", "separate agreements", and so on, without a sing!e passage being quoted? 25. The framework agreem~nt for peace in the Middle East the first document of Camp David, deals with general pi inciples and some specific points which will inspire and serve as guidelines in the search' for a global peace by th-: parties concerned. We would mention the following: tile need for a peaceful settlement taking into account the provisions of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973); respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of each of the States in the region and for their right to live in peace within secure and recognized borders; and respect for the provisions of the United Nations Charter and the standards of international law concerning relations among States. 26. It is also recognized that in order to ensure !asting peace all those most gravely affected by the conflict must be parties to the settlement. Consequently that frametvork agreement was designed as a foundation on which to build not only peace between Egypt and Israel but also peace between Israel and each ofits neighbours. 27. Mnreover, it foresees that Egypt, Israel. Jordan and the representatives of the Palestinian people will participate in negotiations on the solution of die PaIe::rtinian problem in all its aspects, inc1u1ing recognitio~ ofthe legitimate ,rights ofthe Palestiniar. people and their just needs.. 28. Is it not prudent that the fmal solution ofthe problem in which so many contradictory political and psychological reactions are intermingled be spread over a period of time long enough to make it passibl': for the most deep-rooted hatred to be extirpated and for all the material and human de~ructionto be forgotten'? 29. The United Nations would be associated in the conclusion of the various ~ce treaties provided fol' in the first agreement. 2 A Framework for Peace in the Middle East, Agreed at Camp David, and Framew9rk for the Conclusion of a Peace Treaty between Egyl'tand Jsmel, signed at Washington on 17 September 1978. For the texts, see Weekly Compillltiorl of Presidential Documents (Washington, D.e., Government Printing Office, 1978), vol. 14, No. 38, pp. 1523-1528. 31. As the name indicates, these agreements are merely a framework for the settlement of all the aspects of the Mid41e East problem. It is therefore paradoxical to state that th3y do not take into account some of the problems. The questions which as yet have not been settled will be, either in bilateral agreements between the States or by means of the fmal solution of the Palestinian problem, particularly in the West Bank and Gaza. 32. If these agreements do not immediately bring lasting and global peace to the region, it is because they are less ambitious in their aim. 33. Indeed, the-se agreements are directed basically to- wards the peaceful and orderly settlement of the conflict, once the idealists on each side have given way to realists who wish to conduct true negotiations. What has occurrea in the case of Egypt should not be an exceptional case, as experience gained over the last 10 years in the Middle East has demonstrated. Moreover, all the countries directly involved in the conflict have stated frequently that they are ready to conclude a peace agreement through the restitu- tion of territories and the solution of the Palestinian problem. 34. Just as during the wars which periodic-ally have shaken the Middle East, one of the front-line countries has had to take the initiative each time to respond or to a'i.~ackrin the battle for peare it is necessary for someone to sacrifice himself by committing himself resolutely so as to ensure a break-through. 35. Egypt and President EI-Sadat, as during the war of October 1973, responded to the appeal so that a new era might be opened in the region. 36. The principles have long been established by our Organization on which the negotiated solution of the problem of the Middle East should be based, In particular, these are embodied in Security Council resolutions 242 (19-61) and 338 (1973) and General Assembly resolution 3236 (XXIX). Our Organization must move beyond sterile proclamations and condemnations and must appeal sol- emnly to the interested parties, despite the difficulties that now exist, so that the positive evolution we are now 'witnessing may indeed lead to true and final peace. 37. For its part, the delegation of the Ivory Coast would like to reiterate from this rostrum its support for the basic provisions of the resolutions I have mentioned and for the principle of the non-acquisition of territory by force. Reaff1I111ing the need to guarantee the security ofall States of the region within secure and recognized borders, the Ivory Coast also hopes tfuit the Palestinian peuple will participate fully in the negotiations directed towards the 38. In human history there have been lOO-year wars, 30·year wars and other wars as well. But the contempOrfl}' world, with the tremendous means available to it, must not embark on lengthy, disastrous conflicts, particularly when these conflicts are taking place in one of the areas most revered by mankind. 47. Pea.:e in the Middle East is too important to all humanity to pennit the search for it to be obstrucred by empty"slogans and one-sided condemnations, or by those who through lack of foresight feel compelled to seek short-term advantages at the expense of a long-term peace. 39. My delegation hopes that the General Assembly of the United Nations will exercise its authority so as to ensure the speedy restoration of peace to the Middle East in an atmosphere of security, justice and honour.

The ques- tion of peace in the Middle East has been before the United Nations almost since its foundation. Four wars and count- less deaths over th~ intervening ~O years J:tave brought the problem no closer to resolution. 41. The debate in which we are engaged today is only the latest addition to a long record of earnest statements made in this forum by concerned and committed Members. Through no fault of its own, the United Nations has been repeatedly frustrated in its search for a practical and effective approach to this problem. 42. There is a peace effort makjng progress today, however. The Camp David framework agreements represent an unprecedented opportunity fOi the people ofthe Middle East to reach a just, lasting and comprehensive settlement of this long and tragic conflict. 43. The Camp David agreements are firmly rooted in guidelines established by Security Council resolutions 242 (19,57) and 338 (1973), which point the w~y to peace but do not in themselves provide a means to achieve it. The Camp David accords build il~r. this sturdy foundation, laying out in more detail the prit:lciples and procedures that will govern the next negotiating steps. ' 44. The accords reached at Camp David offer a practical means ofachieving the legitimate goals ofall !!le parties. To the Arab States, they offer the opportunity to regain territory through negotiations on the basis of principles universally recognized as honourable and fair. To the Palestinians, they offer a solution which recognizes their legitimate rights and just require"~ ,1nts, an4 also gives.them an opportunity to participate in t}le determination of their future through negotiations aimed at resolving the' Pales- tinian problem in all its aspects. To the IsraeliS, they offer recognition and 's~curity. To all, they offer peace. 45. The Camp David fmmework agreements exclude no one. They invite and encourage the full participation ofall those who accept as the object of these negotiations security, recognition and peace among neighbours. A great deal of progress has already beenmad~ in tpe negotiations nuw under way between Egypt and Israel, and when they are concluded they will brdlg us another step cJoser to a Middle East peace. But there will stili be a great deal of work to be done before a truiy just, lasting and compre- hensive peace is achieved. 48. The United States remains fully committed to fmding the just, Jaeting and comprehensive peace to which the United Nations Charter binds all of us, and we call upon our fellow Members and men and women of goodwill everywhere to lend their full and unselfish support singly and in concert here in the world body, which laid the groundwork for this effort, to those engaged in this crucial search.

The problems of the Middle East are among the most difficult the world has faced during this century. They are certainly among those which have caused the most anxieties and frustrations for our Organization. Vear after year we have discussed lhem, but so f!,~-despite all the efforts, despite all the imagination and energy exerted by the United Nations and by the political leaders of the world-they continue to be a major threat to international peace and securit.y. 50. It is therefore our ~luty to'~continue relentlessly to search for a solution that would be able to bring to the peoples of the Middle El'," the peace they so much need and deseNe. Obviously, no mircles can be expected on at issue which deeply involves so many divergent interests, emotional attitudes and conflicting ideologies, but we keep hoping that the Governments or'the countries of the area, as well as oiber political leaders of tJIe region"":'who all know so well the suffenngs of exile and war and have feit the absence 'of fundamental rights and the value of the struggle (or dignity and indeperidence in their homeland- will realize that no peace 'Will ever be 'reached in the Middle East without a permanent, patient and constructive spirit of conciliation and dialogue. ' 51. My Government's position is well known and has already been expressed !J.ere on !pany occasions.. It is based on respect f()r Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), which iri ourview prcvide the guidelines and principles for any comPrehensive settlement of the prob- lems of the area; the inadmissibility of.the acqujsition of territory by force; the need for Israel to withdraw its forces from the oc~upie4 territe ry;- the end of the state' of belligerency between the forces concerned and recognition of the sovereignty, national independence and territorial integrity of all the States 'of the area, including Israel; the right of all P10se States to live in peace witJrlri secure' an4 recognized bor4ers; and, within the context, the recogni- tion of the" legitimate riglits of the Pallistinian People to self·detennination and to the creation of a national homeland 53. We welcome, however, all the steps and initiatives taken in the direction ofa juridical and political framework that might open the way to peace. Even if we fear that these steps may prove limited in their scope, we de not want to put them aside and forgo that possible result. Even if those negotiations do not at the ~resent stage include all the interested parties, even if we would prefer them to ta~e place under me umbrella of our Organization, even if we were forced to conclude that the results achieved were far from being what we had wished them to be-even under those circumstances, I repeat, we would still consider them valid and worthy. 54. We hope that the p~esent negotiations and develop- ments that have evolved since the Camp David accords will soon result in a peace treaty between Egypt and Israel, which would constitute a fIrst and very important step towards the comprehensive and lasting solution of the Middle East problem in all its aspects. But we do not believe that that solution will ever be found so long as the Palestinian question remains to be tackled not only from a humanitarian point of view but within a political context. 55. For peace will be achieved only when Israel recognizes the right ofthe Palestinian Arabs to self-determination and, by the same token, only when the Palestinian people accept and recognize Israel's right to exist.

For many years now the dangerous peace-threatening situation in the Middle East has been reminiscent of an open and bleeding wound. For more than 11 years Israel has continued to occupy the territory of its Arub neighbours that it seized in the aggressive war of 1967. 57. Drawing support from the influential forces of impe- rialism and zionism, the governing circles of Israel continue their reckless adventurist policy in disregard ofthe opinion of the w~JrId community. A year ago, at its thirty-second session, the United Nations General Assembly adopted resolution 32/20, which, in paragraph 2, inter alia, reaf- fIrmed that "•.. a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, in which all countries and peoples in the region can live in peace and security within recognized and secure boundaries, cannot be achieved without Israel's withdrawal from all Arab territories occupied since 5 June 1967 and the attainment by the Palestinian people of their inalienable national rights". The resolution called anew in paragraph 3: "... for the early convening of the Peace Conference on the Middle East, under the auspices of the United Nations and the co-chairmanship of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United States of America, with the "•.. to work towards the achievement of a comprehen- sive settlement covering all aspects of the problems and worked out with the participation of all parties concerned within the framework of the United Nations". 58. The governing circles oi Israel have totally disregarded the appeals of the world community for the elimination frpm the Middle East of the hotbed of tensions, the "powder keg"> that so gravely threatens world peace. 59. Instead of seeking a political settlement, the Israeli military machine continues to complicate the situation in the region. 60. The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR concurs with the conclusions contained in the many documents members have on this subject-namely, that the situation in that region continues to be extremely Fiave as a result of the continued occupation of the Arab territories, the establish- ment of Israeli law in the occupied territories and the establishment of settlements on the West Bank of the Jordan and in the Gaza region. Only today we have learned of the establishment of three new settlements. Israel pursues the qUixotic aim of undermining the national liberation struggle of the Arab peoples and particularly the Palestinian resist~ce movement, which is in the vanguard of the national liberation movement of the Arabs as a whole. 61. In assessing the situation from the standpoint of itil historical ramifications our delegation concurs with the view that Israeli leaders are today doing a disservice to their own people and taking a reckless stand based on expan· sionist designs against neighbouring countries. The expla- nation for the fact that it has thus far not been possible to settle the Middle East problem is tl).e policy of the Israeli governing circles themselves and the various manoeuvres engaged in by the influential forces of imperialism, which, acting in the interests of the major monopolies, are striving to dominate the region and its people and to control their natura! and human resources. 62. It is now becoming even more evident that in order to divide the Arabs and pit them against each other and in order to impose conditions that are in the aggressor's interests, Israel, together with the other reactionary forces, has embarked on the path of partial deals and separate agreements. This takes us away from a comprehensive settlement. This manoeuvre has been condemned by the majority of States and by all of progressive world opinion, .as is obvious from the debate in the General Assembly. The participants in the Baghdad Conference of Arab Heads of State and Government have condemned the agreements, concluded at Camp David bet'veen Israel and Egypt with the active participation of the United States, because they were concluded behind the back of the Arab people, run counter to their interests and are essentially anti-Arab. 63. In our view, it is high time for us to draw the appropriate conclusion that separate agreements and ar- 64. Our delegation is firmly convinced that separate secret deals not only do not facilitate but make more remote and complicated the establishment ofpeace in the region. 65. The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR continues to believe that an acceptable way to settle the Middle East sItuation is proposed in the relevant resolutions of the General As~mbly and the Security Council. 66. Such a settlement requires collective efforts by all interested sides, including the PLO, as the genuine and legitimate representative of the Arab people ofPalestine. 67. Speaking in the General Assembly on 1 December, as Chairman of the group of non-aligned States and on behalf of those States, the representative of Sri Lanka, Mr. Fer- nando, said: "... I wish to express our grave concern that no just solution to this problem"-that is, the problem of Palestine-"has yet been achieved. This problem con- tinues to aggravate the Middle East conflict, of which it certainly is the core, and also to endanger international peace and security. "I would add that the solutions to the problem of Palestine and that of the Middle East are indivisible and that the solution of one of those problems cannot be achieved without the solution of the other. A just solution to these problems cannot be achieved except on the basis of the attainment of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations." [68th meenng, paras. 42-43.J 68. As we have already said, the Byelorussian SSR has supported and continues to support the just struggle waged by the Arab people of Palestine for the attainment of their . inalienable national rights, including their incontrovertible right to establish their own State. We believe also that the PLO is the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, both inside and outside the occupied territories. 69. The position of principle taken by the socialist countries in connexion with the achievement of a ju..st and lasting peace in the Middle East is well known. I would recall that it is made clear once again in the Declaration of the States Partbs to the Warsaw Treaty adopted at the meeting of the Political Consultative 06mmittee held in Moscow on 23 November 1978. That Declaration states the following, interalia: " [The participants in the meeting] reaffIrm their position of principle in favour of the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East and a compre- hensive political settlement of the Middle East problem which must include: the withdrawal of Israeli troops from all the Arab territories occupied in 1967; the exercise of the inalienable right of the Arab people of Palestine to self-determination, Including the setting up of their own 70. In conclusion we should like to stress that the Byelorussian SSR, like all other countries in the socialist community, will continue to stand at the side of those progressive peoples and forces which offer decisive, compre- hensive assistance and SUP:lllrt to the Arab peoples in strengthening their national independence, sovereignty, progress and international co-operation.

Any debate on the situation in the Middle East inevitably reflects the anxiety felt over a conflict which has provoked four tragic wars in a time-span of 30 years, and a conflict which still constitutes the most serious danger for peace and security in the region as well as in the world. The Middle East problem should certainly not be considered simply as a regional problem; the tension in the Middle East could easily spill over beyond the confmes of the Middle East and thus turn a regional conflict into a major international catastrophe. To promote a convergence of efforts towards a just and lasting comprehensive solution to the Middle East problem, in conformity with the principles laid down in the basic United Nations resolutions as well as the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, should 'therefore be the task of this Assembly. 72. As a country situated in the area, Turkey is deeply concerned about the peace and tranquillity of the Middle East. My Government's position regarding the elements of a just and lasting solution and the procedure for negotiations, as has been stated on several previous occasions in several different organs of this Organization, remains unchanged. Turkey has always been strongly opposed to the acquisition of territory by force, and in our view the evacuation by Israel of all the territories it has occupied since 1967 is a fundamental prerequisite. 73. In 'this connexion, we strongly reject the continued unilateral measures taken by Israel on occupied territories with a view to expanding its settlements. In fact, in a statement made on· 30 October. the Turkish Government expressed regret at reported Israeli intentions on the expansion of Israeli settlements on the West ijank, as well as its reported plan to transfer essential government offices, such as those of the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister, to the eastern section of Jerusalem, at present under Israeli occupation. The reports we have heard today on the establishment of more Israeli settlements in the' occupied territories are an added source of concern to my delegation. We certainly believe Jhat such unilateral meas- ures constitute major obstacles to the search for a just and equitable settlement of the Middle East question. 74. On the other hand, we have always stressed the view that the Palestinian problem is the core of the Middle East question. The Turkish delegation expressed in detail its well-known views on the Palestine question as recently as 75. Finally, it has been our constaat belief that an over-all solution to the problem ofthe Middle East should be based on respect for ths sovereignty. territorial integrity and independence of all States in the region, including Israel, and for their right to Iil'e in peace within secure borders. Peace and coexistence among all the countries of the Middle East would undoubtedly contribute more effec- tively than anything else to the security and well·being of their peoples. 76. The Turkish Government's view regarding the princi· pies and fundamentals of a just and lasting solution to the Middle East problem was most r~cently expressed by my Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Ok~iin, in his statement at the 19th plenary meeting of the present session of the General Assembly. I should like, if I may, to repeat those principles, once again. 77. A jt;st and lasting comprehensive settlement in the Mi'ldle East should be based upon the principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force. It must end the occupation of all Arab territories, including Jerusalem, which Israel has maintained since 1967. It must take into account the legitimate and inalienable national rights of the Palestinians, including their right t\ establish a State of their own. It must safeguard the independence, sovereignty and security of the recognized frontiers of all the countries in the region. Finally, the PLO, the only legitimate representative of the people of Palestine, must participate on an equal footing with the other parties concerned in any negotiations for a just and lasting settlement in the Middle East. 78. In ~his c; )ntext, w~ have been following with interest the Camp David agreements and negotiations thereafter and we certainly hope that they will constitute a step towards finding a just and durable comprehensive solution to the Middle East problem, in conformfty with the principles I have mentioned. Turkey will contmue to support and will welcome any peace initiative that is based on the funda- mentals which underlie its well-known attitude on the Middle East question.

Once again our Assembly must meet to consider the question of the Middle East. Once again the interM- tional community is considering the matter with the deepest concern because peace in that region-even interna- tional peace and security-continues to be constantly imperilled. 80. The fundamental causes that have turned the Middle East into a hotbed of tension remain unchanged despite an the efforts of various United Nations bodies to fmd a just and lasting Face. It is unnecessary to describe. the background of the problem, since representatives are extremely familiar with it. In short, Israel continues to act on its own, with the full support of the United States and 82. Over the years the situation in the Middle East has been presented to us in an apparently different guise, which the sponsors of the Israeli State have been lavishly propagandizing. Recent diplomatic acrobatics that began at Leeds Castle and ended at Camp David are being sold to us as flfSt-ClaSS merchandise. The efforts of these new "apos- tles" of this pax americana remind us ofthe fanfare that in the old traveIJing circuses preceded the acts of illusionists and magicians. 83. The Government~ of Israel. after years of stron~arm tactics and policies of force, now plans to cleanse itself in the Jordan don religious garb and perform diplomatic genuflexion;. It does all this, of course, without ever having for a moment put aside the implements of war and aggression. 84. The Camp David acrobatics would be nothing more than a grotesque joke, if they did not have dramatic implications. What the communications media under im- perialist rule are trying to sell as an historical landmark on the path towards peace is in fact nothing but a landmark on the path of repeateclly denying to the valiant Arab people ofPalestine and other peoples of the region their rights. 85. What happened at Camp David has been received with revulsion by the progressive world. It is sufficient to recall that at the most recent meeting of the Arab States-the Baghdad Summit Conference, the so-caIled Camp David agreements were condemned by all of the Arab States and leaders present. 86. The question of the Middle East must be considered a:lew in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council and the General ~sembly. which lay down the bases on which to approach this thorny problem. The United Nations must therefore serve as the appropriate framework within which to seek a just, lasting and valid agreement, in the negotiation of which all interested parties must take part .and which must take account of the interests ofall peoples of the region. 87. Rec:ent resolutions on the Middle East leave no room for doubt as to what have been and what continue to be the roles played by each of the protaganists in the drama and th~y serve as a certain guide in the search for true solutions. 88. My delegation believes that it is useful to repeat what my Government believes should be the foundation for the achievement ofthat true peace which we all seek. 89. First, the Israeli State must withdraw unconditionally from all the Arab territories it occupied in 1967 and the return of an Palestinian Arab refugees who left their land when the Zionist acts of aggression began must be guaranteed. 92. However, far from dealing with these three prerequi- sites laid down by various United Nations bodies, the Israeli State is continuing to ignore them and is stubbomly resorting to force so 3S to impose its will upon the Arabs. It is incorporating or annexing illegally occupied territories and is continuing its unbridled arms race. 93. The stepping up of the arms race on the part oflsrael is not in consonance with any serious or responsible attempt to achieve peace in the region. The military and logistic support that Israel is receiving from the United States and from other Powers that are its allies has been denounced at the international level, as was noted by the last ministerial meeting of the foreign ministers of non- aligned countries.3 94. But it is no longer merely a question of an aggressive and expansionist State that is receiving arms from its a:isociates. The present risk is even greater, because Israel has also become an active factor in the production, export and transfer ofarms. . 95. One does not need to look very hard to see where the Israeli arms exports go. The hated racist regimes of southern Africa bfmefit from those means of destruction in stamping out .~.Le legitimate uprisings of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe. And iri Latin America the corrupt regime of Somoza is filling its arsenals with weapons from . Israel in order to continue its genocidal destruction of the people ofNicaragua. 96. The present situation in the Middle East, to which many preceding speakers have referred, leaves no room for separate or partial solutions. The dangers that weigh over the region will merely grow if those types of solutiops are carried out, circumventing the national interests of the Arab people of Palestine and of the Arab States of the region. 97. The prospects for peace can be fulfilled only if the unacceptable restricted procedure of conducting separate negotiations is ended and there is a return to other forums, which, like the Geneva Conference for example, take place with the participation of all the interested parties. 98. The heroic Arab people of Palestine, under the guidance of their representative, the PLO, fu:ye said that 3 Conference of Ministers for Foreign Mfairs of Non-Aligned Countries, held at Belgrade from 25 to 30 July 1978. 99. My delegation would also like to state that it wishes to become a sponsor of the draft resolution that was sub- mitted today by the Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka [A/33/L.12J.

The agenda item on the situation in the Middle East is one of the most important that the United Nations has discussed for a very long time. It is also one of the most complex. Since the implantation of the Zionist racist entity in the region some 30 years ago, our Organization has adopted numerous resolutions con- demning the aggressive and expansionist nature of Israel and its defIance of the unanimous will of the international community. It was the racism of Israel that caused the expulsion of the Palestinian people from their homeland. 101. Israel even went beyond that limit and launched numerous aggressive wars against the Arab people, which led to the occupation of large areas of their land. 102. Israeli expansion has been encouraged by interna- tional imperialism, which supplies it with money and weapons to enable it to continue its aggression against the Arab peoples and to play the role of watchman over the interests of the imperialists in the Middle East. Those imperialist interests are based on the exploitation of the wealth of the region and keeping that region open as a market for their products. Through Israel, international imperialism is trying to take advtlltage of the strategic importance of that region and to use it as a spring-board to combat the struggle of peoples and national liberation movements in Asia and Africa. . Mr. Jamal (Qatar), Vic~·President, took the Chair. 103. Despite the arguments produced by the imperialists and Zionist forces to j~stify their policy in the Middle East, world public opinion is fully aware of the threat which those policies pose to international peace and security. 104. Israel has committed many crimes against the rights of the Arab people. It has resorted to rnassaore, murder, oppression, imprisonment and torture. It still pursues those practices against the valiant Palestinian people, despite the numerous resolutions adopted by this Organization and in other international forums condemning the aggressive acts committed by Israel with the support and encouragement of internatfonal imperialism. These resolutions showed the aggressive and racist nature of Israel, wl'Jch has become 11 well-known fact to the international community. That community understands its dangers and its consequences. In spite of the continued consideration of the Middle East problem by the United Nations, there are no indications that progress has been made in this respect. The position of Israel is still the same, a position based on an aggressive and expansionist policy, which is the means whereby its nature 105. The recent developments in the Middle East have attracted widespread attention. Zionism and world impe- rialism have used the mass media at their disposal in order to portray these developments as moves toward the achievement of a just peace in the Near East. But what sort of peace is it? Paragraph 58 of the Declaration issued by the Conference of the Foreign Ministers of the Non-Aligned Countries, which was held in Belgrade, described the real peace that we all aspire to in the Middle East {see A/33/206, annex /1. It is n~t synonymous with the peace which the United States and Israel want to impose on the region. A genuine peace should be based rather on the complete withdrawal of Israel from all the Palestinian lands and from the occupied Arab territories; the restoration of the legitimate national and inalienable rights of the Pales- tinian people; and the exercise by that people of all those rights, including the right to return to their homes, the right to self-determination and to the establishment of an independent State in Palestine, and their right to participate on an equal footing, through the PLO, its sovereign repmsentative, in all the conferences, activities and intema- tional forums concerned with the Palestinian problem; and the provision of all forms of support to the PW and the Arab States in their struggle to put an end to Israeli occupation of the Palestinian and Arab lands. 106. All these aspects were dealt with by the Conference at Belgrade, which met in July last, especially in the paragraphs of the Imal declaration which deal with the question of Palestine and the Middle East problem in all their aspects. 107. A few weeks after that Conference, the Camp David accords were proclaimed. The consequences of those accords are prejudic1a1 to Arab solidarity based on opposi- tion to zionism and support for the struggle of the Palestinian people. Those accords also run cO\lnter to the decisions adopted by the Arab Summit Conferences, especially the Conferences of Rabat and Algiers. 108. Democratic Yemen has been working within the framework of the Front for Steadfastness and Confron- tation against this aggressive policy encouraged by the United S'iates to prejudice the security and stability of the region and to affect the sovereignty'of the people in our region. The meetings of the Front for Steadfastness and Confrontation, held in Tripoli, Algiers and Damascus exposed the dangers implicit in these policies and suggested ways to confront them. Also, a meeting was recently held in Baghdad, as an expression of Arab unanimity, a.nd at that conference there was a condemnation and rejection of the accords reached at Camp David. 109. Democratic Yemen is interested in the establishment of a just peace in the Middle East, for this is the aspiration of all the peoples in the region. However, ,there are indicators that show that those accords are fat from achieving this objective, for they disregard the legitimate and inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and try to 110. These accords, which run counter to the objectives of the charter of the league of Arab States, have brought about division in the Arab world, a fact which has enabled world imperialism to strengthen its influence in the region, to harm the interests of the Arab people, to damage their resources, and to threaten their security and stability. These accords help the conclusion of a Zionist reactionary pact in the region to serve this purpose. 111. The Arab Governments revealed the dangers of this policy, as embodied in the consequences of the "Camp David agreements", during the last Arab Conference in Baghdad, in which the progressive Arab States played a very active role. We are confident that the General Assembly of the United Nations, during this session, will deal with the situation in the Middle East in the same responsible spirit which is expressed in its previous resolutions, especially resolution 3236 (XXIX), in 'which Israel's policy, which runs counter to these resolutions, was condemned. We are also confident that the experience and struggle of the Arab people will be able to frustrate all the conspiracies of imperialism and zionism, which aim at harming the rights of the Arab people, infringing the sovereignty of tlwir lands and exploiting their resources.

In the words of our Secretary-General, Mr. Kurt Waldheim: "The situation in southern Mrica, the Middle East and Cyprus are serious in themselves and also have very special implications for international peace and secu- rity."4 113. My delegation has already had an opportunity during the current session of the General Assembly to express its views on the question of my country, regarding which the General Assembly has recently adopted an important resolution-resolution 33/15. Similarly, we have elaborated on our position on the problems of southern Africa and that of Palestine, which, as is widely recognized, lies at the heart of the Middle East question. . 114. Like the situation in Cyprus and southern Africa, the crisis in the Middle East involves problems created and aggravated as a result of unrestrained aggression, continuing rnilitr.ry occupation, the forcible expulsion of the indige- nous population from their ancestral homes and lands, colonization and other gross infringements of fundamental human rights in sheer violation of international law and of specific unanimous or near unanimous resolutions of the 'General Assembly and of the Security CouneR. 115. It is therefore understandable that the problems I have just mentioned are considered the most serious confronting the world today and as such are a matter of grave concern to this Organization and the international community in general. 117. The participation of the PLOt which is the legitimate representative of the Palestinian peoplet in the negotiations is indispensable for any progress towards a comprehensive solution of the problem within the framework of the relevant United Nations resolutions. In this connexion I wish to state that my delegation concurs in the hope expressed by the Secretary.General of our Orgmtization in his comprehensive report that "... urgent efforts will be pursued by all concerned until a comprehensive, just and durable peace settlement covering all aspects of the Middle East problem can be fully achieved.u [A/33/31l-S/12896, para. 99./ 118. The fifth principle of our position is that all states of belligerency must be terminated and that the sovereigntyt territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and its right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries must be respected and acknow- leged. 119. The false premise is sometimes put forward thatt allegedlyt there is an inherent incompatibility between the national rights of the Palestinian peQple to self-deter- mination and to a State oftheir own and the right of Israel to exist as an independent and sovereign State. It is our firm belief that no such incompatibility exists and that both the Israelis and the Palestinians have the undisputable right to peaceful coexistence within secure and recognized boundaries. " 125. The principles and considerations which I have just mentioned will guide the position of my. delegation dUring the present debate. - ·126. Mr. SUWONDO (Indonesia): As we move through the fmal debates of this session of the General Assembly, we are alSo.approaching the end of one phase of a difficult period in the Middle Eas~. I am .referring to the situation in Lebanon, and I hope that the long travail of the people of Lebanon is coming to an end. We further hope that all those involved will, in- response to the appeal in Security Council resolution 436 (1978), work towards national reconciliation based on the preserv;;.tion of Lebanese unity, territorial integrity and I!atiopal incependence. 120. At the risk of sounding monotonous, my delegation wishes to emphasize once again-this time in connexion with the debate on the Middle East-the imperative need for effective action by the United Nationst and more particularly by the Security Council, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter, to bring about the long-overdue implementation of the United Nations resQlu- tions on the Middle East, as weD as on all situations endangering internati~nal peace and security, be they in Cyprus, southern Africa or elsewhere. 121. It is only through such appropriate and determined action by the Security Council that our resolutions will acquire substance and meaning and that international peace and security will be tangibly advanced. My delegation is heartened to note that ail increasing number of speakers have likewise stressed this need during the discussion of this and previous agenda items.

The Greek delegation has always participated in the discussion of the problem of the Middle East and has supported a just and peaceful 123. My Government has on repeated occasions indicated its views on this item, which I should l;ke to sum up as follows: "fIrst, that the acquisition of territories by the use of military force is inadmissible; secondly, that Israel must withdraw from all the Arab territories occupied in June 1967; thirdly, that the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all States in the region, including Israel, as well as their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries must be recognized; fourthly, that the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, in- cluding their right to self-determination and a national homeland must also be recognized; and, fIfthly, that all ~fforts aimed at opening negotiations to bring about a just and durable solution in the Middle East should be sup- ported. i 124. We are certainly aware of the important develop- ments which are taking place as a result of the agreements of the Camp David meetings. In this connexion I wish to refer to the statement made before the current session of the General Assembly by the Minister for Foreign Affairs ot' Greece on 27 September 1978: "The Camp David meetings and the agreements reached there may be a step in the right direction, in so far as they seek to apply the principles that [we] have just men- tioned. But we must not lose sight of the fact that our aim is a comprehensive solutiont a settlemeni: which, in order to secure the agreement of all concerned, must be seen as just and equitable by all-the parties concerned, including the Arab people of Palestine." [11th meeting, para. 275./ 127. Indonesia has, however, continued to note with concern certain developments in the Middle East which are not conducive to a peaceful solution of the problem. As mentioned in-the reports brought to the United Nations, the continued illegal occupation of Arab territories by force - of arms and Israeli policies therein clearly constitute obstacles on the path towards peace. These include policies of establishing settleme.nts in the occupied territories, of denying the legitimate rights of the people of those territories, and of refusing to withdraw from them. Such policies are incompatible with the establishment of a just peace in the region. 129. Another aspect of the problem is the question of the status of the holy city of Jerusalem. In my delegation's view, it is most important that Jerusalem be restored to its rightful owners, in the spirit of the relevant United Nations resolutions. 130. As regards the problem of Palestinian refugees, it is necessary to recall various General Assembly resolutions which recognized that the problem arose from the denial of -.v rights of the Palestinian people and that full respect for those rights was indispensable for the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. Consequently, it recognized the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and reaffirmed their right to national independence and sovereignty. Indonesia has always maintained that these rights are at the heart of the M;ddle East conflict and inseparable from the elimination of injustices inflicted upon that people. Therefore, one of the essential requirements for the success of efforts at a !Jeaceful solution is the recognition of the rights ofthe Palestinian people. 131. Finally, the principles of a just settlement have already been established by the international community. They have been reiterated in different international forums on numerous occasions. They reaffirm the inadmissibility of territorial acquisition by the use of force, recognize the rights of Palestinians to a national home and acknowledge the right of all States in the region within recognized boundaries. However, the implementation of these princi- ples remains elusive. The longer they continue to remain unimplemented, the closer we are ~rought to the fearful reality of a renewed conflict. It is therefore essential that in the fmal solution of the Middle East problem those principles laid down by the international community and embodied in the relevant United Nations resolutions be the essential guic1elines. The urgency of a permanent solution is seif-evident.

Once again the General Assembly is about to consider one of the most difficult and long-lasting conflicts of our century. Indeed, 31 years after the-- General Assembly decision calling for the partition of Palestine, despite the cpposition of its inhabitants, the question of the Middle East continues not orJy to be on its agenda, but also to th:eaten international peace and security. Today that threat is more real than ever before. 133. Tension, armed aggression, the occupation of the territory of others, guerrilla warfare, the danger ofa general conflagration-these have never been so real as today in the Middle East. The situation can only cause greater concern to the international community every day. 134. The United Nations has already adopted over 200 resolutions on the question of the Middle East. Most have 135. The prospects for peace were blocked for a number of years either because the efforts undertaken bypassed the heart of the issue, which is the question of Palestine, or because certain parties, feeling themselves to be in a position of strength, endeavoured to impose a settlement which would be in their interest. 136. Today the aspect which attracts our closest attention in. the Middle East conflict is the profusion of attempts to find a p.eaceful settlement. 137. The Government ofSenegal has always supported the principle of a peaceful settlement of the Middle East question, provided it is based on all the relevant resolutions of the United Natipns. Such a settlement, my country believes, must be based on the following pdnciples: fmt, the withdrawal by Israel from all the occupied Arab territories in accordance with Security Council resolution 242 (1967); secondly, the exerdse of the inalienable rights of the people of Palestine as defined in General Assembly resolution 3236 (XXIX); and, last but not least, the right of all countries in the region to live in peace within recognized and secure borders. 138. We have always based ourselves on this fundamental position in evaluating any efforts aimed at peace in the Middle East. 139. Unfortunately it must be noted that the principal obstacle to such a settlement is Israel's denial of the inalienable national rights of th~ people of Palestine. That denial of the rights of a whole pe,.>ple has been expressed mainly by Israel's efforts to decide itself who the represen- tatives ofthe Palestinian people should be. Suchan attitude has in the past prevented the reconvening of the Geneva Conference and has considerably delayed every attempt at a peaceful settlement of the Middle East crisis. 140. Today, this attitude appears even more negative and unrealistic since the Palestinians, in the occupied territories and el~where, have reaffimed their unshakeable supportfor the PLO as their legitimate represen\:litive. But Israel persists in proclaiming its will to make peace without the Palestinians, refusing "even to discuss the matter with the PLO, which represents all the Palestinians, even though the Charter of our Organization, to say nothing of international law, recognizes every people's sovereign right to designate their own representatives. 141. In actual fact, the pretexts that Israel put forward to sustain t~at position are only designed to dissimulate its 'true intentions with regard to the national rights of the Palestinian people. The "terrorism" which it alleges serves primarily as a justification for blocking any process that would lead to peace through the restoration ofthe rights of the Palestinian people. 142. We believe that this is a very harmful attitude and that if Israel wants to live in peace in the Middle East it must accept the fact that the Palestinian people are also a people having the same rights as the Jewish people. That is 143. A settlement based solely on Security Council resolution 242 (1967) would not adequately take into account the rights of the Palestinian people in all their aspects. It is necessary that any peace effort in the Middle East should take sufficiently into account the rights of all peoples in the region, particularly those of the Palestinians. 144. The problem of Jerusalem is a subject of grave concern for my country, 95 per cent of the population of which is made up of Moslems and Christians. 145. Here, too, the Israeli Government continues to defy the international community and endeavours to Judaize that holy city. The rights of millions of Moslems and Christians throughout the world, the centuries of the history of the cultural and "religious heritage which have made Jerusalem a city venerated by Islam, Christianity and Judaism, have been ignored by Israel, which arrogates to itself exclusive rights over that sacred city. And as if to flaunt its total scorn for the advice of its own friends, Israel is in the process of transferring important ministeries to the eastern sector of the holy city occupied after the war of June 1967. The international community must fi:mly condemn such practices and tenaciously oppose any at- tempt to alter the universal nature of ll).e holy city of Jerusalem. 146. On the subject of the Arab territories which Israel has occupied for more than 10 years, th~ Government of Senegal has on numerous occasions reaffirmed its support for the principle of the non-acquisition of territory by force. We believe that Israel should renO\ia~ce its claims to Arab territories, speedily withdraw its armed forces, cease the pursuit of its policies of implanting Jewi~h colonies, annexation, Judaization and changing the historical, archae- ological, cultural and demographic environment in the occupied Arab territories. 147. We believe that it is at the least a contradiction to seek peace and at the same time to continue to occupy territories by force. The question of security invoked' by Israel must not involve expropriation or colonization of the territories of others. On that point the Government of Israel has recently made some concessions. But we believe them to be insufficient and that Israel must withdraw its forces from the territories occupied after 5 June 1967 in the West Bank of the Jordan, the Gaza Strip and the Golan Heights. Only in this way can Israel hope to gain security and to live in peace with its neighbours. 148. The invasion, last April, of southern Lebanon by Israel met with the same condemnation by the international community as a whole. That invasion considerably increased tensions in the region and threatened inter- national peace and security. Its basic purpose was to break 149. That unjustified invasion of southern Lebanon resulted' in an increased military presence by the United Nations in the Middle East. Israel reluctantly withdrew from southern Lebanon and did everything possible to under- mine the efforts of UNIFIL, which was sent to the area to restore the authority of the Lebanese Government in that part of the country. Thus Israel arms and protects roving bands whose main task is to take from the Israeli military occupation in southern Lebanon. This will only make it more difficult for UNIFIL to carry out its mandate and will perpetuate a state of constant tension in the country. 150. In conclusion, may I reiterate the profound convic- tion of my delegation that the United Nations must continue to play an active role in settling peacefully the Middle East conflict. Indeed, our Organization has dis- charged its paramount responsibility and its essential role in the conflict by extending this year its peace-keeping activities to the rp,gion. But, if those activities are to be as profitable as possible, they must be part and parcel of a global and comprehensive settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and not disorderly, fragmentary unco-ordinated efforts. They should not serve to perpetuate the status quo but should open the way to a dynamic search for peace. My delegation believes that just an,d lasting settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict should be achieved under United Nations auspices. That is the only way to achieve not only the implementation of the decisions of our Organization, but also the guarantee of the rights of all the peoples and States in the region.

I call on the representative of the PLO, who will take part in the debate in accordance with General Assembly resolution 3237 (XXIX) of 22 November 1974. 152. Mr. ABU MAYZER (palestine Liberation Organiza- tion) (interpretation from Arabicj: One of the recognized facts of international politics is that the Palestinian ques- tion is the core of the Middle East problem. The two issues are indivisible, in both their consideration and their solution. The relationship between the Middle East problem and the question of Palestine is a causal one, for, if the land and people of Palestine had not been subjected to injustice and aggression since 1948,.if the Palestinian question had not remained without a just solution, there would have been no Middle East problem, a problem which has created one of the most dangerous hotbeds of tension threatening international peace and security.. 153. Having explained its position before this Assembly when the question of Palestine was under discussion a few days ago [59th meeting], the delegation of the PLO wishes today, on the occasion of the discussion of the Middle East problem, to emphasize some basic facts which cannot be ignored or disregarded if we want to achieve a just solution to the Middle East problem. 155. In 1974 the PLO took a positive and constructive initiative when it requested the inclusion of the question of Palestine once again as a separate item on the agenda of the General Assembly of the United Nations. It did that in order to correct the wrong and misleading perspective in which the Middle East problem was viewed and dealt with, and in order to enable the international community to grasp the essence of the conflict in that sensitive area of the world. 156. In dealing with the Middle East problem in a comprehensive manner, covering both the causes and the results, it has become clear that the question of Palestine is in its essence and nature a political question. It is the cause of a people and a land which have inalienable rights, yet they have been deprived of those rights. Those rights are recognized in the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. 157. It is not only a question of refugees, as it has always been portrayed in the past. Therefore the United Nations General Assembly offered its conception of how this question could be solved in its resolution 3236 (XXIX), in which it affirmed the rights of the Palestinian people in their Palestinian homeland: their right to return, their right to self-determination without external interference, and their right to national independence and sovereignty through the establishment of an independent State. 158. Any attempt to settle the Middle East crisis not aimed at enabling the Palestinian people to exercise thetr inalienable national rights will fail. Any attempt of that sort will only exacerbate the already tense and explosive situation in the Middle East. 159. The second fact is that the PLO is the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people and the only expression of their national will. It is the only spokesman of that people. 160. This fact emanates from the will of the Palestinian people, which they constantly affirm both inside and outside their occupied homeland. This' fact has also been emphasized in the resolutions adopted by the Arab and Islamic summit conferences, by the non-aligned movement, by the Organization of African Unity and by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its resolution 3237 (XXIX). In addition, it is recognized by world public opinion on the widest scale. 161. Here it must be emphasized that the PW is not only a political and military organization but also the embodi- ment of the very existence of the Palestinian people, an embodiment of their unity in the occupied land and in the Diaspora, an embodiment of the unity of their representa- tion as well as of the continuity of the just cause of Palestine. 163. Therefore we want to tell those who base their policy on disregard of that fact, and especially the Government of the United States of America, that a just solution to the Middle East problem requires recognition of the PLO. Continued denial of that objective fact reveals a hostile attitude towards the Palestinian people and its legitimate and jUst struggle to restore its inalienable national rights. It is·hostile towards the basic aspects of the Arab question, which is the question of Palestine. Those who adopt such an attitude offer no proof of their sincerity concerning the cause of peace based on justice and the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and its resolutions. 164. The third fact ·is that a just and durable peace in the Middle East cannot be achieved outside the framework of the United Nations or by means of partial solutions or bilateral agreements. 165. Some circles try to project the Camp David agree- ments as offering a valid framework for the achievement of peace in the Middle East. During the discussion of the question of Palestine our delegation stated its views on those agreements. Once again we wish to reaffmn that the PLO rejects the Camp David agreements in terms of their form, ccmtent and consequences. It also considers the accords a violation of international law and resolutions. They do not provide a valid legal basis for the achievement of a just peace in the Middle East. 166. These agreements are but an inequitable and bilateral solution achieved at the expense of Arab sovereignty. The ninth Arab Summit Conference in Baghdad evaluated the agreements as having been reached without regard for collective Arab responsibility and as running counter to the decisions of Arab summit conferences held in Algiers and Rabat, to the Charter of the League'of Arab States and to the resolutions of the United Nations on the Palestinian question [see A/33/400, annex]. Nor will the agreements lead to the just peace desired by the Arab nation. Therefore the ninth Arab Summit Conference, held in Baghdad, decided to reject those agreements and their political, economic, legal and other consequences. At the Baghdad Summit Conference the Arab States emphasized that the question of Palestine is the basic issue for all the Arabs and that no Arab party may relinquish its commitment. The Arab States once again emphasized the inalienable national rights of the Palestinian people and the need to support their struggle under the leadership of the PLO, which is the only legitimate representative of that people both inside ,and outside the occupied territory. 167. During the Arab Summit Conference at Baghdad, the Arab States emphasized once again that th~y support the Palestinian people, under the leadership of the PLO, in this rejection of self-rule and all other colonial schemes that can lead only to the strengthening of the Zionist occupation of Palestinian and occupied Arab territories. 168. The Arab Summit Conference held in Baghdad, in which the PLO played a prominent part, was an expression 169. As we have said before, we and our Arab brothers are not alone in rejecting the Camp David agreements. Another important international Power expressed its rejection and condemnation of those agreements ami their form, their content and their consequences. It i.~ a mistake to think that that international Power can be kept apart from the peace-making process in the Middle Easl>. 170. During the General Assembly's discussion of the question of Palestine, the delegation of the United States of America stated [65th meeting} that Security Council resolution 242 (1967) did not deal with the political aspect of the Palestinian problem. 171. That acknowledgement by the United States Govern- ment demonstrates the validity of the stand of the PLO, a stand based on rejection of that resolution. In accordance with that stand also, we call upon the United States to recognize the inalienable na~ional rights of the Pal~stinian people, rights which have been reaftmned by the United Nations General Assembly, for the political aspect of the Palestinian question is the core of the Middle East conflict. The continued United States policy of hostility towards the national rights of the Palestinian: Arab people and their only legitimate representative, the PLO, does not serve the genuine interests of the American people-quite the co.ntruy; nor does it contribute to the establishment of a just peace in the Middle East and the world. 172. The policy of the racist Israeli entity is a major obstacle on the path to peace in the Middle East. The continued occupation by force of the Palestinian and Arab lands by the Israeli'racist Zionist forces, their continued aggression against southern Lebanon, their intervention in the- internal affairsofthat part ofthe world, their aggressive practices and eXpUtsionDt policy, their violations of human rights, their terrorist practices, their use of the most horrible forms of racial discrimination against our people and the other Arab peoples; all this seriously contributes to the: escalation of tension in the Middle East and threatens peace in that area. The Israeli occupation authorities are annexing land by force, establishing settlements, destroying houses and imposing collective punishment. They are trying to change the historic character of Palestine. They are imprisoning thousands of persons and subjecting them to the most terrible torture. They are expelling our people from their own lands. The United Nations and world public opinion have condemne,d these inhuman~ racist practices and have called for an immediate end to them. The Israeli occupation authorities, however, persist in their defiance of the- will. of the international community and of United Nations. resolutions. All that shows that zionism, a doctrine that gave birth to the State of Israel, isan enemy ofpeace, justice, human rights: and intemationallegitimacy. 174. In conclusion, I wish to reaffirm that the PLO, guided by its deep awareness of its national and inter- national responsibilities and proceeding on the basis of its faithful adherence to the principles of the United Nations Charter, emphasizes that a just and comprehensive solution to the Middle East problem cannot be achieved if the basic objective facts of the conflict, especially the Palestinian situation in terms of its cause, its land, its people and !'':S rights, is disregarded. 175. We believe also that this Organization provides the proper framework for solving the Middle East problem; therefore we call upon the General Assembly and the Security Council to assume their respective responsibilities in order to lay the proper foundation for th.; solution of the Middle East problem and to take effective measures to that end. Such a foundation must include recognition of the inalienable national rights of the Palestinian Arab people, for there will be no peace in the Middle East as long as the Israeli occupatio.l of Arab and Palestinian lands continues; there will be no peace i.'1 the Middle East as long as our people remain homeless; there will be no peace in the Middle East as long as our people are deprived of their right to return to their homeland in Palestine; there will be no peace in the Middle East as long as our people remain deprived of the exercise of their right to self-determination and the establishment of their own independent State in their national homeland.

I shall now ~all upon those representatives who have asked to speak in exercise of thei~ right of reply.

In his statement b:l~re the General Assembly this morning [7Ist meeting], ..3 well as in his previous statements, the Israeli representatiy'e proferred a series of falsifications that impress no one. We all, in this Assembly and outside it, have come to know the real nature of the Zionist entity in the Middle East. We also know very well the Zionist practices which have led to the creation of this very serious situation in the Middle East. I shall be adding nothing new if I quote from the two Zionist stat~ments on which the State ofIsrael was founded. 178. To the fifth Zionist Congress, which met in 1901, Max Nordau, Herzl's deputy and assistant, declared: "Our adversaries claim that Palestine is not capable of absorbing the Jews. I answer them and say that Palestine is capable of accommodating between 12 and 15 million "When we occupy the land"-that is to say Palestine- "and its neighbouring areas we shall take the land from its owners and we shall try to expel the poorer inhabitants, push them out of the country. As to the remainder of the population, we shall use them in certain infested areas." 180. I think zionism has always been faithful to its own ideals. We all know what happened to Palestine and the Arab people of Palestine. [The speak~r continued in English.J 181. This racist expansionist ideology, zionism, is the crux of the tension in the Middle East. It is the basic reason why the area has neither felt nor witnessed peace for the last three decades. Faced with and becoming time and again the victims of an expansionist racist State and ideology, the Arab peoples are determined to withstand the challenge of occupation and expansionism, however much it may cost, until they achieve a genuine, just, lasting and compre- hensive peace in accordance with Uni~ed Nations resolu- tions and negotiated within the United Nations framework. 182. The Israeli representative seems to be rewriting historr, no matter how false and distorted that history may turn out to be. This morning he informed the General Assembly that: "The territorial situation"-in the Middle East of course-"... is a direct function of four wars of aggres- sion launched by the Arab States against Israel." [71st meeting, para. BB.} So it was Egypt which launched the war in 1956 against the United Kingdom, France and Israel-or was it? It was Egypt~s air force that was destroyed on the ground in two houlS of air blitzkrieg by Israel on 5 June 1967-or was it? It was Egypt which launched that war against Israel, starting with the destruction of Egypt's own air force-or was it? 183. Earlier in his statement the representative of Israel said: "All subsequent problems,"-in the"area-"including the problem of refugees,both Jewish and Arab- ... and the problems of borders are the result.of the ... conflict, not its cause." [Ibid., par. 75.J 184. The Israeli representative added a remark which did not appear in his prepared statement, to the effect that half of the Jewish population of Israel were Jew~sh refugees from Arab countries. Well, one is inclined to ask, what about the other half of the population? Are they also Jewish l~fugees, from Asia, Africa, America and Europe-or 5 Theador Herz~ Excerpts from Henl's Diluies (New Yark, Scapus Publishing Co., 1941).

In the light of the many distortions u+"ered in the course of the debate on the item before us, coupled with conscious attempts to subvert the ongoing peace process, I am left with no alternative but to exercise my right of reply. 186. To address myse!f to all the charges a."ld slanders which have been made by the enemies of peace in this debate would be a futile and laborious undertaking. I shall therefore confme myself to the positions adopted by those who seem to have set for themselves the target of demolishing by whatever means the progress towards peace which has so painstakingly been made over the last year.. 187. The statement made by the Soviet representative [69th meetingJ is sc.arcely cause for surprise, even if it is cause for regret, (;Oming as it does from a Power which might be expected to act with grflater responsibility. However, the "pp-ace recon/' of the Soviet Union in the Middle East over the last quarter of a century has been dismal, to say th~ least. That country played a key role in every outbreak of violence in the region during that period. As Egyptian Pre.sident Nasser indicated in his resignation speech of 9 June 1967, it was Soviet intrigue that had led Egypt into the war in that year. Determined to destroy the peace process, the Soviet Union has consciously worked at destabilizing the Middle East, as indeed it has attempted in recent years to destabilize other regions of the world. As proof-positive of his country's overt role designed to torpedo the current peace efforts, the Soviet representative gave full voice to Soviet support for, and encouragement of, the so-called PLO, whose spokesmen make no bones about not only that organization's implacable opposition to the Camp David accords, but also its intention to frustrate them by every possible means, with all that thrt implies. 188. Moreover, in his attempt to subvert the peace process in the Middle East .and the spirit of Camp David, the Soviet representative has seen fit to rail against the Israeli-Egyptian peace talks, which constitute the first step tQwards a peace settlement in the entire Middle East. Does his constant fIXation on what he terms "a separate peace" stem perhaps from the fact that the Soviet Union started its own political record with a separate peace treaty with Germany at Brest-Iitovsk in 1918? The Soviet reprez;entative would indeed seem to be skating on thin ice. 189. According to figures released by the International Institute pf Strategic Studies in London and the Stockholm . International Peace Research Institute,the Soviet Union over the last year has increased its already considerable arms supplies to Libya, Iraq and Syria, which head the so-called rejection front in the Arab world. The Soviet Union is constantly augmenting the already vast arsenals of that rejectionist troika by huge quantities of the most sophisticated Soviet weapons, including thousands of T-62 and T-72 tanks and hundreds of MIG-23 fighter aircraft, as well as Sukhoi fighters "~ud" surface-to-surface missile launchers and Komar and Osa missile boats. 196. The representative of Israel has said that we should proceed to a dialogue. But who impedes such a dialogue? Why do the Israelis not wish to come to one conference table with all the Arab countries concerned and with the representatives of the PLO? The Palestinians have been scattered all over the world and they are deprived of a national homeland. If the Israelis wish for a dialogue, no one is standing in the way. Let them proceed to such a dialogue. 191. Immediately after the historic talks between Presi- dent EI-Sadat and Prime Minister Begin in Jerusalem a year ago those countries convened in Tripoli what they pro- claimed as the "summit of'resistam:e and confrontation". Immediately after the achievement of the CaIIJP David accords, they hastened to Damascus and established what they called the "Front for Steadfastness", whose negative aims are well known. Paralleling the peace negotiations in Washington, they met again in Baghdad about a month ago and reaffIrmed the goals of that unholy alliance. The represent:itives of that troika and their supporters have amply voiced their belligerent intentions in the course of this debate. 197. Why are they seeking to divide the Palestinians, to seize their land piecemeal? If they seek a dialogue, then they should address the representatives of the 'PLO and reach an agreement with them and their neighbours as to how they can live together securely in the future. 198. That is the road to a dialogue and the road to an. over-all peaceful settlement. 192. As for Syria more specifically, we. are all familiar with the long-standing Syrian design for as-Suria al-Kubra -Greater Syria. In pursuit of that plan, which would ultimately embrace both Israel and Jordan, Syria is 199. As far as the Soviet Union is concerned, no one here, except the Israeli representative, would say what he said. We have always striven and continue to strive for a settlement in the Middle East that would meet the vital interests of the Arab peoples and the people of Palestine. We are seeking the creation of conditions that would enable all who are there who live in conditions of peace and security on one condition: that the people of Palestine receive the right to national self-determination including the creation of their own independent State. I think these are facts that no one can deny and no reply by the Israeli representative can alter those facts. de~~rmined to destroy' the peace process initiated in November of last year and has openly vowed to do so. If, in President AI·Assad's own words,! '.'Syria and Jordan are one nation, one homeland, one army" and "Palestine is south- ern Syria", then Syria clearly has no interest in a genuine peace settlement mthe Middle East. The present Syrian leadership must be disabused of such outdated expansionist notions and should be encouraged to participate in negotia- tiom. towards a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. 200. M~. BAGHLI (Algeria) (interpretation from French): I should lik.-: to record the fact that Algeria is part of the Front for Steadfastnt.ss mentioned by the.representative of -Israel and that Algeria is proud of this. It was an attempt to sow division that the Israeli delegation made, and the Algerian delegation wished to recall- what the truth was. 193. But whether or not it is to the liking of the rejectionist troika and their supporters, peace will win out. This Ass~mbly therefore has the choice of associating itself with the peace process, or going along with the forces of evil. If this Assembly cannot actively encourage the peace process, let it at least allow that process to move forward without obstruction. Let us waste no more time on recriminations and accusations. Let us, rather, engage in dialogue and negotiations. Let: us forge ahead in the spirit of Camp David-and give peace a chance.

The representative of the racist Zionist entity spoke this evening, uttering a lot of fabrications which are known to all, in a desperate attempt to hide arrogant zionism. We see the representative of the Zionist entity moving from one Committee to another, stating lies and interpreting matters according to his own thinking.

Of course, I did not have time to mobilize all my staff and prepare a speech in advance, as the representative of Israel did, a reply which he believes to be adequate for the deliberations which we witnessed here. So I am constrained to answer simply. 202. We all know that this year was a year full .f events and movement for the Arab cause, fur during this year several Arab Sw:nmit Conferences- were held, including the summit conferences of Tripoli, AJgiers, Damascus and - Baghdad. The representative of the Zionist entity, in spite of the fact that the mass media offered full coverage of them, characterized tile Conferences of Tripoli, Algiers and Damascus, as a tripartite axis. 195. I ask the representative of Israel to answer this. Did the people of Palestine occupy Israel's territory or was it Israel which expelled the people of Palestine from the territory which they inhabited for so long? Does the Soviet Union supply Arab countries with offensive weap- onry, or with weapons that help them to protect 203. As the representative of Algiers indicated before me, the Front of Rejection-that is to say, the Arab States 204. The allegations and fabrications by the representative of the racist Zionist entity are plain to everybody. The peace which he is talking about is a false peace, for the international community has painted a picture of ajust and lasting peace, the sort of peace that should be established in the Arab area. Just a few minutes before him, the representative of the PLO stated his views very clearly about the nature of a durable and a just peace in the area. . 205. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): I now call on the representative of the PW who wishes to make a statement.

We hear about peace. Maybe we can afford the luxury here to talk about peace. But there are more than 3 million Palestinians who reaily struggle for peace. They want to live in peace. This Assembly has mapped out a road, a constructive road, towards a comprehensive peace in the Middle East, a peace for the Palestinians who have been denied peace for the last 30 years, and a peace of mind. It can offer them the chance to return home and live in peace, and think constructively and build constructively towards the future. The General Assembly was told last year about the joint statement of 1 October 1977 by the two Co-Chairmen of the Peace Conference. We saw in that statement indications that we were drawing nearer and nearer to peace; we really thought that peace was around the corner. But a few hours after that historic statement the hope for peace became just a mirage. Who converted the peace prospects into a mirage: ttle United States and its ally, Israel. 207. So peace will not come simply through a bilateral approach; it must be a comprehensive peace. 208. We cannot conceive of peace through a peace formula imposed by the victor on the vanqUished. Peace should come through people sitting down at the negotiating table on an equal footing and considering peace, as this Assembly has decided should be done. 209. We Palestinians, under the leadership of the PLO, have rallied to some Arab States known as the confronta- tion States. That situation was imposed upon us. We knew what would have been our fate, what would have become of us, had we not taken action. I do not have to recall the words of Henl, the founder of modern zionism, who said that the inhabitants of Palestine have to be spirited away. We are confronted with genocideJand we are still con- fronted with genocide, but we shall not allow ourselves to become sitting targets, to be slaughtered to the last man. 210. In a Committee we were told in the same context that Arab armies had invaded western Palestine. That was in reference to the Palestine under the British Mandate, namely, the Palestine between the River Jordan and the 211. Who is really obstructing peace? It is not the occupation forces around Jerusalem and Nablus, which are determined to establish more and more Israeli settlements in the territories which the Assembly says are illegally occupied? As recently as this morning we were told that the building of four new settlements had been authorized.. Is it not the Israeli'troops, using Fascist methods, i;l- prisoning our students, demolishing our houses? That is not the constructive road to peace. The road to peace has been very properly defmed by this Assembly. 212. It is those who reject the resolutions of the General Assembly that are responsible for the explosive situation. They are responsible because they are obstructing the peace efforts of the United Nations.

Before adjourning the meeting, I should like to recall that, in connexion with agenda item 32, the General Assembly, at its 5th plenary meeting, held on 22 September 1978, decided that organizations having a special interest in the question should be permitted to be heard in the Special Political Committee. In this connexion I should like to inform the Assembly that the following organizations have asked to be heard on the question: ACro-Asian Peoples' Solidarity Organization; American Committee on Africa; National Anti-Imperialist Movement in Solidarity with African Liberation; World Conference against Racism,' Apartheid and Colonization in Southern Africa; and the World Peace Council. 214. Therefore, I should like to suggest that the General Assembly invite the Special Political Committee to meet tomorrow, Thursday, 7 December, in the afternoon for the purpose of hearing those organizations. May I consider that the Assembly agrees to that suggestion'! . The meetingrose at 6.15 p.m * Resumed from the 60th meeting.