A/37/PV.70 General Assembly

The General Assembly has before it a note by the Secretary-Gen.eral, document A/37/468. May I take it that the General Assembly takes note of that document? It was so decided (decision 37/410).

We shall proceed first to the election of 15 members of the Industrial Develop- ment Board to replace those members whose term of office expires on 31 December 1982. The 15 outgoing members are the following: Argentina, Austria, Bel- gium, the _Central African Republic, Czechoslovakia, Gabon, Indonesia, ItalY, Kenya, Madagascar, Mo- rocco, Sweden, Switzerland, Trinidad and Tobago and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Those members are eligible for immediate re-election. 3. I should like to remind the Assembly that after 1 January 1983 the following States will still be mem- bers of the Industrial Development Board: Australia, Brazil, China, Denmark, Ecuador, France, the German Democratic Republic, the Federal Republic of Germany, Guinea, India, Iraq, Japan, Lesotho, .Liberia, Malaysia, Mexico, Mongolia, the Nether- lands, Pakistan, Panama, Romania, Sierra Leone, Spain, Sri Lanka, Turkey, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United States of America, Venezuela and Zambia. Therefore those 30 States are not eligible for election. 4. Under rule 92 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, all elections must be held by NEW YORK secret ballot., and there shall be no nominations. I would, however, recall paragraph 16 of General Assembly decision 34/401, which has been reproduced as annex VI of the rules of procedure, whereby "the practice of dispensing with the secret ballot for elec- tions to subsidiary organs when the number of can- ~idates corresponds to the number of seats to be filled should become standard, ... unless a delegation spe- cifically requests a vote on a given election". In the absence of such a request, may I take it that the As- sembly decides to proceed to the election of 15 mem- bers of the Industrial Development Board on that basis? It was so decided. 5. The PRESIDENT: I shall now read out the names of the candidates nominated by each group. For six seats from list A: Chad, Indonesia, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Rwanda, Sudan and Uganda; for five seats from list B: Austria, Belgium, Finland, Italy and Switzerland; for two seats from list C: Chile and Peru; and for two seats from list D: Bulgaria and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. 6. 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 Industrial Development Board for a three-year term beginning on 1 January 1983. Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Chad, Chile, Finland, Indonesia, Italy, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Peru, Rwanda, the Sudan, SWitzerland, Uganda and the Union ofSoviet Socialist Republics were elected mem- bers ofthe Industrial Development Board for a three- year term beginning on 1 January 1983 (decision 37/311). 7. The PRESIDENT: I congratulate the countries that have been elected members of the Industrial Develnnment Board. 8. The General Assembly will now proceed to the election of 19 members of the Governing Council of UNEP to replace those members whose term ofoffice expires on 31 December 1982. 9. The 19 outgoing members are: Argentina, Bang- ladesh, Belgium, Bulgaria, Chile, China, Ethiopia, France, Gabon, Indonesia, Mauritania, New Zealand, Peru, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, the Sudan, Sweden, the United Arab Emirates and Yugoslavia. Those members are eligible for immediate re-election. 10. I should like to remind members that after 1 January 19~.3 the following States will still be members of the Governing Council: Afghanistan, Botswana, Brazil, Burundi, the ByelorussiaP Soviet Socialist Republic, Canada, Colombia, Egypt, the Federal Republic ofGermany, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Haiti, Iceland, India, Jamaica, Japan. Kenya, the 11. Under rule 92 of the rules of procedure, all elections must be held by secret ballot, and there shall be no nominations. However, I would recall paragraph 16 of General Assembly decision 34/401, which has been reproduced as annex VI to the rules of procedure, whereby "the practice of dispensing with the secret ballot for elections to subsidiary organs when the number of candidates corresponds to the number of seats to be filled should become standard, ... unless a delegation specifically requests a vote on a given election". In the absence of such a request, may I take it that the Assembly decides to proceed to the election of the 19 members of the Governing Council of UNEP on that basis? 18. In accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, may I take it that the Assembly wishes to declare those States elected members of the World Food Council for a three-year term beginning on 1 January 1983? Australia, Bangladesh, Ecuador, Ethiopia,' the Federal Republic of Germany, the German Demo- cratic Republic, Ghana, Nicaragua, Nigeria, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Arab Emirates and Venezuela were elected members ofthe World Food Councilfor a three-year term beginning on / January /983 (decision 37/3/3).

I should like to announce that the chairmen of the regional groups have in- formed me of the following candidatures: for the five seats from African States: the Ivory Coast, Lesotho, Nigeria, Uganda and the United Republic of Cameroon; for the five seats from Asian States: China, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines and Saudi Arabia; for the two seats from Eastern Euro- pean States: Hungary and Yugoslavia; for the three seats from Latin American States: Argentina, Chile and Peru; and for the four seats from Western European and other States: Australia, Finland, France and Italy.

I congratulate the coun- tries which have been elected members of the World Food Council. 20. We shall now turn to subitem (d) of agenda item 16, concerning the election of seven members of the Committee for Programme and Co-ordination. 21. In this connection, the Assembly has before it a note by the Secretary-General [A/37/229] which con- tains the nominations by the Economic and Social Council to fill the vacancies resulting from the expira- tion of the terms of office of the following States: Argentina, Costa Rica, France, the Sudan, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Republic of Tanzania and the United States of America. 13. 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 UNEP for a three-year term beginning on 1 January 1983. 22. The following States have been nominated: for the tv/o seats from African States: Ethiopia and Nigeria; for the two seats from Latin American States: Argen- tina and Chile; for the seat from Eastern European States: the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics; for the two seats from Western European and Other States: France and the United States of America. . 23. In accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, I take it that the Assembly wishes to declare those States elected members of the Committee for Programme and Co-ordination for a three-year term beginning on 1 January 1983. Argentina, Australia. Chile, China, Finland, France, Hungary, Indonesia, Italy, the Ivory Coast. Lesotho. Nigeria. Papua New Guinea. Peru, the Philippines. Saudi Arabia. Uganda. the United Republic ofCame- roon and Yugoslavia were elected members of the Governing Council of the United Nations Environ- ment Programme for a three-year term beginning on / January 1983 (decision 37/312)..

I wish to congratulate the countries which have been elected members of the Governing Council of UNEP. 15. The Assembly will now consider subitem (c) I of agenda item 16 concerning the election of twelve· members of the World Food Council. In this connec- tion, the Assembly has before it a note by the Sec- retary-General [A/37/608] which contains the nominations by the Economic and Social Council. Argentina, Chile, Ethiopia, France, Nigeria, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United States ofAmerica were elected members ofthe Com- mittee for Programme and Co-ordination for a three- year term beginning on / January /983 (decision 37/314). 16. The 12 retiring members are the following: Australia, Bangladesh, Barbados, the Federal Republic of Germany, Ghana, Honduras, Nicaragua, the

I congratulate the countries which have been elected members of the Committee for Programme and Co-ordination.

The A~sembly has before it draft resolution A/37/L.16 and an amendment thereto contained in document A/37/L.31. I call on the rep- resentative of Morocco, who will introduce the draft resolution.

As recognized by the members of the General Assembly, co-operation between the United Nations and the League of Arab States is not the result of some passing desire, but is rooted in the conviction of both those organ-izations that they must make renewed efforts at the regional and international levels to lay the foundations of a new world in which law and justice will prevail, and where there will be a greater wish for dialogu~ and consultation between States with a view to removing the obstacles which block the road to prosperity and progress. Since the bases for co-operation between the two organizations were established in General Assembly resolution 477 (V), both have tried to ~xtend that co-operation into various areas. Since that time the League of Arab States has attached ever-increasing importance to the various ~essions of the General Assembly and ofits organs, and the resolutions ofthe United Nations and its specialized agencies are more closely reflected in the resolutions and in the work of the League of Arab States and its agencies. 27. The General Assembly has expressed apprecia- tion of that co-operation in a number of resolu- tions, including resolution 36/24 adopted last year by the General Assembly, in which the Assembly expressed its deep appreciation of the increasing participation of the League of Arab States in the work of the United Nations and the specialized agencies and its constructive contribution to that work. Co-operation between the two organizations has recently acquired new dimensions in the political, economic and social fields. 28. In the political field the Twelfth Arab Summit Conference, held at Fez in November 1981 and in September 1982, reaffirmed the Arab nation's attach- ment to the resolutions and the principles and pur- poses of the Charter of the United Nations and its determination to continue its efforts so that the inter- national community can realize its aims of ending colonialism, ensuring the exercise of the right of self- determination, fighting against apartheid and racial discrimination and establishing trust among the peo- ples and nations of the world. 29. The visit to the United Nations of King Hassan 11 ofMorocco, who was the President ofthe Twelfth Arab Summit Conference, and his address to the General Assembly on 26 October 1982 [44th meeting], clearly show the determination of the League of Arab States to strengthen its co-operation with the United Nations, and the League's determination that the two Orga- nizations should work together to remove the obstacles sta!1ding in the way of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. 32. The League of Arab States would like to see closer co-operation between Arab experts and United Nations experts with a view to the achievement of many joint regional and international economic goals, including the application of the principles of the new international economic order, in accordance with the decisions adopted at the Eleventh Arab Summit Con- ference, held at Amman in Novembe~ 1980. 33. The draft resolution [A/37/L.16] that I have the honour to submit to the Assembly on behalf of the Arab group is both clear and self-explanatory, and consequently I shall refer only to certain paragraphs. 34. In operative paragraph 1the Assembly takes note with satisfaction ofthe report ofthe Secretary-General [A/37/536], prepared in accordance with General As- sembly resolution 36/24. In operative paragraph 2' the Assembly expresses appreciation to the Secretary- General for the efforts he has made to strengthen and expand co-operation between the two orga- nizations. In accordance with operative paragraphs 8 and 10,. a meeting will be convened between the representatives of the organizations of the United Nations system and the representatives of the General Secretariat of the League of Arab States and its specialized organizations, before the th;rty-eighth ses- sion of the General Assembly, in order to provide an appropriate forum for consideration of proposals of an international character that could be studied on a multilateral basis and that could also be implemented on such a basis. 35. We also invite the General Assembly to sup- port the idea of the proposed meeting, which could serve as a body to define areas where there could be close and fruitful co-operation between the two organizations. 36. We hope that the Assembly will adopt this draft resolution by consensus, as it has done in previous cases. I wish to reaffirm the determination of the League of Arab States to intensify the co-operation between the two organizations, in keeping with the noble principles on which they are both based and in order to achieve the noble aims to which they both aspire, so that we can ensure the dawn of a new H Authorizes the Secretary-General to implement the activities approved under the present resolution only to the extent that they can be financed without exceeding the level of resources approved in the programme budget for the biennium 1982-1983 (General Assembly resolution 36/240 A)." 39. As we pointed out this morning, the assessed budget ofthe United Nations is growing at an alarming rate-81 per cent over the past five years alone. The cost of operating the United Nations today is four times what it was 10 years ago. It is beginning to impose an unreasonable burden on some Member States. We believe it is time to draw the line and to put strict controls on United Nations spending. 40. In introducing the amendment, we wish to make three simple, forceful points. First, as always, the United States supports co-operation between regional organizations and the United Nations. The benefits of this co-operation are multiple; we believe it should be fostered. 41. Secondly, the United States is deeply and seriously disturbed by escalating costs and by fiscal practices that add expenditures without any thought having been given to their financing. 42. Thirdly, we believe that a much more serious and systematic effort to establish control ofthe United Nations budget must be undertaken. The world changes, problems change, new needs arise. Clearly, new programmes must be undertaken. Just as clearly, however, old programmes become shopworn, inef- ficient and superannuated and should be reduced or eliminated. 43. V~gilance, sound priorities and a sense of rele- vance are required so as to enable the United Nations Secretariat to phase out programmes that are no' longer needed and to eliminate duplication and waste' at the same time that we undertake any new efforts. None ofthe means employed thus far to achieve these ends has succeeded. 44. In the coming weeks, we will be discussing with other nations and with the Secretariat new means of achieving greater fiscal responsibility and efficiency. The Government of the United States is firmly com- mitted to finding such means. 54. In accordance with the resolutions of the Twelfth Arab Summit Conference, held at Fez in September 1982, the Security Council, which is responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security, must maintain peace among all States of the region, including the independent Palestinian State. This means that the Security Council, in view of the com- mitment of its permanent members, must take the necessary measures to guarantee the implementation ofthe principles and essential provisions ofthe Charter. 55. The League of Arab States, since its creation, has always tried to co-operate with existing interna- tional organizations and will do the same for those which may be created in the future, as provided for in article 3 of its Charter. Those who drafted the Charter of the League of Arab States were aware of the importance of international co-operation. Fol- lowing the creation of the United Nations, the League ofArab States was the first regional organization whose secretary-general was invited to attend the meetings of the General Assembly as a permanent observer, in accordance with resolution 477 (V). Immediately fol- lowing the adoption of that resolution, its implemen- tation took the form of greater co-operation and co- ordination in many fields in an official and practical way, not only between the United Nations and the ~eague of Arab States, but also with all other bodies connected with them. Following that co-operation and co-ordination, relations between the secretariats ofour organization and of the United Nations have been marked by increasingly fruitful consultation between the secretaries-general and their representatives. The different bodies in our organizations have participated in planning and implementing certainjoint programmes in various areas of the Arab nation, programr;es in the success ofwhich the United Nations will be interested. We have made every effort to ensure that the results were commensurate with the noble goals we set for ourselves. 64. We should like to express our appreciation of the efforts made by the Secretariat of the United Nations and by the Secretary-General in the drafting of the report which has been submitted, entitled "Co- operation between the United Nations and the League 56. The importance of this co-operation between our of Arab States" [AI371536];' which was drafted in two organizations is all the more obvious since the accordance with General Assembly resolution 36/24. joint economic Arab action referred to by the rep- It contains detailed information about the background resentative of Morocco has reached the national of the historic co-operation which has existed since planning stage, requiring the preparation of plans 1950 between our two organizations, when the General for joint Arab programmes and projects which Assembly invited the ~ecretary-G~neralof the League strengthen the aims of integration, security and of Arab States, in accordance hTith resolution 477 (V), national development. In order to bridge the gap be- to participate in the Jessions of the General Assembly. tween the views of the Arab family, we hope to The report contains proposals by the two orga- have closer, more fruitful co-operation with the nizations to strengthen co-operation between them. organizations of the United Nations system in the The most important paragraph of draft resolution choice of integration projects which create organic A/37/L.16 is the one in which the Secretary-General, ties among the various Arab countries. We are hoping in consultation with the League of Arub States, is for greater co..operation between Arab and United asked to hold a meeting in which bodies and spe- Nations experts to achieve the economic objectives of cialized agencies of the two organizations would our regional and international projects, in particular to participate, thus creating an appropriate forum to 61. Fifthly, co-ordination of the position of Arab States regarding basic international economic issues so as to protect Arab interests and the requirements of establishing the new international economic order. 62. Sixthly, better co-ordination between the central Arab banks with a view to strengthening their posi- tion and their ability to deal with international monetary centres. 63. Seventhly, a strengthening of the Arab Monetary Fund by increasing its capital and improving its loan system, so that trade can be encouraged among Arab States and thus strengthen their balance of payments. 66. We in the League of Arab States are determined that through our national presence at the United Nations we will contribute -to the implementation of the :esolutions of the General Assembly and the provisions of the Charter. We wish to work to close the gap which separates it-as a world institution- from the world whose aspirations and objectives it wishes to serve. 67. In confirming the determination of the Arab nation to strengthen the United Nations we must confront an negative, ag-,gTessive, racist factors and trends which ~!!dangerthe~effectivf.mess, the legitimacy and the credibility of our world Orgai1!zatioD, whether by disregarding its resolutions, preventing the solu- tion of existing problems, or raising the law of tl)e jungle abov,e the international legitimacy represen:ed by the Chart~r and the resolutions of the General Assembly. 68. We call upon the Assembly and the Member States to adopt this draft resolution on co-operation between the United Nations and the League of Arab States, so that our aspkations to development and a just and comprehensive peace may be realized, and so that the role of the United Nations in responding to the hopes of the peopl\es of the world m~y be strength- ened. In that way the United Nations will be ful- filling its mission in the service of mankind. 69. The PRESIDENT: The Assembly will now proce~d to Lake a decision on the amendment in document A/371L31 and on draft resolution A137! L.16. The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of the draft resolution appears in. document AI37/614. In accor- dance with rule 90 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, I shall first put to the vote the amendment in document A/37/L.31. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: United States of Amf~rica. Against: Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Aus- tria, B~rain, Bangladesh, Barbaldos, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Burma, Burundi, Cape Verde, Central Mrican R~ptJblic,Chile, China, Colom- bia, Comoros, Congo, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic . Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, Fin- land, France, Gabon, Gamb;a, Ghana, Greece, Grenada. Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, 77. By its very definition, the word "co-operation" implies joint action for mutual benefit or advan.tage. Genuine co-operation between two parties also pre- supposes that each side will scrupulously respect the interests of the other. This, in our view, constitutes the sine qua non of any genuine co-operation. If either side fails to fulfil these conditions in good faith, the relationship will be anything but one of genuine co-operation. 78. All of us recognize that respect for the sover- eignty and territorial integrity of States and non- interferencf~ in their internal affairs are peremptory rules of international law. Thf.Y also constitute car- dinal principles of the Charter of the United Nations, OAU and, possibly, the League of Arab States, as well as basic tenets of the non-aligned movement. 79. Regrettably, however, a number of member States of the Arab League and high officials of its secretariat have repeatedly, and too often, chosen to interfere in the internal affairs of my country in clear violation of their obligations under international law and the basic principles and decisions of the United Nations, as well as of other international and regional organizations. 80. Not only have those unjustified actions been opposed by a number of member States of the Arab League but Ethiopia has also repeatedly made strong representations to the League secretariat. In view of co-operative arrangements between OAU and the League of Arab States, Ethiopia has also registered its protests with the OAU. 81. In paragraph 3 of the resolution just adopted, the Assembly "Commends the League of Arab States for its efforts and the co-oper~tion it has extended to the United Nations in furtherance of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations ...". This expression is, in our view, grossly at variance with some activities of the Arab League. In the absence of a firm and clear assurance by the Arab League that it will refrain from its gross interference in the interne.! affairs of my country, a founding Mem- ber of the United Nations, adoption of the paragraph cited above is tantamount to endorsing the under- mining of the Charter of the United Nations as a legitimate act. 83. In view of the foregoing, the Ethiopian dele- gation would have voted against the fifth pream- bular paragraph and paragraph 3 and would have abstained on the resolution as a whole had these been put to a vote. -84. Mr. MAKITALO (Finland): The five Nordic countries-Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Finland-joined the consensus on draft resolution A/37/L.16, which has just been adopted, on the understanding that the new elements included in the fourth and fifth preambular paragraphs with political implications are not relevant to the issue at hand and obviously cannot prejudge the position of the Nordic countries on the substantive matterreferred to in them.

The 10 member States of the European Community joined in the con- sensus on the resolution which has just been adopted. 86. However, we wish to take this opportunity to make a few remarks of a general nature. These remarks are not addressed in particular to that reso- lution. 87. Over the past few years the General Assembly has been faced with a growing number of resolutions of increasing complexity on co-operation between the United Nations and various organizations with observer status. The Ten are well aware ofthe benefits of such co-operation and have been happy to join in unanimous expressions of support and encourage- ment for the further development of such co-operation within the framework of the United Nations Charter. 88. The members of the Community consider that it is best for resolutions of this kind to address themselves to the question of co-operation in terms which avoid the introduction of divisive elements. Such resolutions should also avoid placing further burdens on the United Nations budget. Such an approach would appear advisable in order to maintain the status of these resolutions, which depends very much on the unanimous support of the international community as a whole.

I wish to state that, had a vote been taken on the resolution just adopted by consensus, my delegation would have voted against it. We would have done so mainly because of the provi- sions contained in paragraph 3, which reads: "Com- mends the League of Arab States for its efforts and the co-operation it has extended to the United Nations in furtherance of t~~ purposes and principles of tJie Charter of the United Nations ...". We believe that statement to be incorrect and untrue and we believe, furthermore, that the League of Arab States has engaged in gross violations ofthe Charter ofthe United Nations.

The Assembly will now resume the debate on this item. There are still two delegations inscribed on the list of speakers. In this connection, I should like to inform the Assembly that the representative of Jordan has also asked to be allowed to participate in the debate. Inasmuch as the list of speakers was closed on Friday, 29 October, may I ask the Assembly whether there is any objec- tion to the inclusion of Jordan in the list of speakers? Since I see no objection, Jordan is therefore included in the list. 91+ Mr. SALLAM (Yemen) (interpretation from Arabic): In Article 2, paragraph 4, of the Charter of the United Nations, Member States are invited to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or po- litical independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. 92. Many delegations have spoken before me on the despicable armed Israeli attack against the Iraqi nuclear installations on 7 June 1981. They have con- de~ned Israel for its barbaric acts of aggression agamst neighbouring Arab front-line States and other Arab States since its creation. They have also con- demned Israeli aggression agairiLst Iraqi territory, the primary purpose of which was to destroy the nuclear reacto; built by Iraq in exercise of the inalienable right of all members of IAEA to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes in order to develop their scien- tific, technological and economic capacity. 93. As a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons [resolution 2373 (XXII), annex], Iraq accepted the safeguards and guarantees applicable to all peaceful nuclear activities under the supervision of the Agency. It committed itself not to receive, manufacture or acquire in any way nuclear weapons or devices. 94. It is clear to the whole world that Israel, by its continuing acts of aggression against Arab countries, is not a peace-loving country. It practises aggression and expansion. Its attack against the Iraqi nuclear reactor is not an isolated instance. Israel has already invaded all Palestinian lands, expelled the Palestinian people from them, seized their property and denied them their rights. Israel annexed the Syrian Golan Heights and engaged in a barbaric invasionofLebanon resulting in the deaths of thousands of innocent ' persons-:.-women, children and the elderly. Villages and towns have been demolished. Israel has flouted the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Secu- rity Council, including Security Council resolution 487 (1981), the resolution adopted on 26 September 1981 by the General Conference of IAEA at it~ twenty-fIfth regular session,2 and General Assembly resolution ~ional agency whose authority in the field of nuclear energy is recognized. 100. The state of war argument that Israel uses to justify its aggression against Iraq should also be ofcon- cern to the other Arab countries which do not recog- nize it. Hence, there is no reason to believe that in the future, facilities similar to the Iraqi installation will not be bombed by Israel under the pretext of self-defence, or some other spurious excuse. 108. Apart from these considerations, the Israeli armed aggression against the Iraqi nuclear installa- tions was a serious violation of the Charter of Eco- nomic Rights and Duties of States [resolution 3281 (XXIX)] and the Declaration on the Use of Scientific and Technological Progress in the Interests of Peace andfor the Benefit ofMankind [resolution 3384 (XXX)]. 109. By attacking those installa~ions, Israel con- firmed its selfish designs in the Middle East region and its determination to thwart the legitimat~ aspirations

The draft resolution does not begin to do justice to the issues involved in the matter before us, for it is merely the squalid out- growth of_deliberations based on an item consciously ~Drmulated in a hostile, one-sided and biased manner. 131. . During the course of the thirty-sixth session of the General Assembly, a not inconsiderable amount of time and energy of the Organization was devoted to the discussion of this item. Not surprisingly, and in keeping with last year's practice, the formulation of item 24-formerly item 13O-is again patently designed to prejudge the outcome of the debate in the General Assembly. 132. It is sad that we should once again be required to discuss this question and reach the usual foregone distorted conclllC)ions. The item has been dealt with ad absurdum and ad llauseam in this forum, in the Security Council and in IAEA. Nothing tangible can come out of additional resolutions of ~he General Assembly. The voting here should be determined not on any basis of any supposed "moderation" in the draft, but in the light of the misuse of the United Nations rostrum for repetitious dis~ussions. Such discussions stand in the way ofconslructive initiatives leading to consensus on the issue ofa nuClear-weapon- free zone in the Middle East. Iraq is now acting 134. I shall not repeat Israel's position at length. I would, however, refer representatives to my state- ments in the Security Council on 12 June and 19 June 198P and in the General Assembly at the 52nd meeting on 11 November 1981, and to the detailed document of the Israeli Government entitled "The Iraqi nuclear threat-why Israel had to act", communicated to the Secretary-General by my letter of 19 October 1981. 135. Iraq, which for over 30 years has been in a state of war with Israel, has never disguised its bellicose intentions towards Israel and has consistently violated the prohibitions on the use of force and the threat of force enshrined in the Charter. Iraq has openly rejected Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) and has been prominent in every Arab attempt to destroy Israel. 136. The draft resolution before us hampers any attempt to understand and grapple with the essential issues involved. The Middle East is .an area of deep political differences; it i§ a region characterized by conflict and tension, with many sources of upheaval and unrest; it is an area whose States both enjoy great riches and suffer deep poverty and deprivation; it is an area which, at least as much as any other, has great need for peace and co-operation and wise, humane policies of government. Yet even though its various member States have not yet solved their internal dif- ferences, their peoples surely deserve not to be con- demned to the constant threat of destruction. 137. The debate concerning the establishment of a nUclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East was turned by Iraq into an object of politicization and partisanship. The consensus attained at the General Assembly in 1980 on this matter was wrecked lar' year by Iraq. We nevertheless hope that it can b~ restored. Israel continues to believe that the most effective way to prevent the spread ofnuclear weapons to the Middle East is through the creation ofa nuclear- weapon-free zone in the region, modelled on the Treaty ofTlatelolco,4 which is based'on the initiative ofLatin American States and is a direct result of the negotia- tions amDng them. 138. The latest initiative found its expression in the statement mad~ by the Prime Minister of Israel, Mr. Menachem Begin, in his address at the 18th meeting, on 18 June 1982 during the twelfth special session of the General Assembly. In that address, Mr. Begin stated that "Israel is prepared to negotiate and sign such a treaty with all its neigh~urs in the Middle East. H Foreign Minister Shamir made a similar statement at th~ nth meeting of the current session of the Assembly in the cour5e of the general debate. To Israel's regret, these prGposals have been consistently rejected by a number of'Arab States, most significantly by Iraq. 154. My delegation also has reservations on the wording of the text of the resolution just adopted. This applies in particular to paragraphs 2 and 3. 155. Mr. von STUDNITZ (Federal Republic of Germany): My delegation has voted in favour of the resolution just adopted. We have done so because we consider that the consequences of the attack on the Tamuz reactor on 7 June 1981, and in particular the Israeli threat to repeat such attacks, remain a matter of legitimate concern to the international community. Our positive vote should be seen as an expression of this concern. 156. We have cast a positive vote in spite of a num- ber of objections and reservations we have about the text ofthis resolution. Generally speaking, we consider the approach taken in the resolution just adopted as too complex to lead to constructive and useful work, and we believe that other forums ofthe United Nations and its specialized agencies could provide a more appropriate framework for discussions concerning the attack on the Tamuz reactor and its consequences. 157. In particular, my delegation does not believe that repeated condemnations of Israel are likely to promote conditions in which the problems resulting from the attack on Tamuz could eventually be solved. We do not see the need for constant repetition of these condemnations, which refer back to an event that took place one and a half years ago. 158. My delegation would like to make it clear that we will not le'nd any future support in the General Assembly to resolutions on the question of the Tamuz reactor which aim at perpetuating the elements I have just described.

My Gov- ernment continues to regard the Israeli military attack of June 1981 on Iraq's nuclear installations as a grave violation of international law having serious implica- tions for international relations, including on nuclear matters. For this reason, and because we support its general thrust, we voted in favour of the resolution just adopted. We have certain reservations, however, on the wording of that resolution and wish to state, in particular with regard to paragraph 7, that we do not regard this paragraph as either prejudicing the issue of whether further legal measures to prohibit armed attacks against nuclear facilities are needed or pre- judging the forum in which discussion of the subject should take place. 160. Furthermore, we consider that this item on the Israeli military attack is far too serious to be allowed to become just another subject of ritual debate on the General Assembly's annual agenda. ~n the absence of further important developments, we would like to see the item removed from the agenda lest it become

During the vote at the last session on the draft resolution on this subject, the delegation of Chile said [56th meeting] that there could be no inter- national peace and security if nations did not strictly refrain from the use offorce in their bilateral relations. We also said that we would be seriously concerned over any violation of the territorial integrity or sover- eignty of States, which violated clear and imperative principles of international law. 164. While stating that firm conviction, we also said that we were strongly in favour of an effective and universal system of safeguards for the use of nuclear technology, because we consider that this is the only guarantee against the risks involved in any State's developing nuclear energy for non-peaceful purposes in an uncontrolled way. 165. On the basis of those considerations, Chile deplored the Israeli armed attack against the Iraqi nuclear facility, and supported determined action by the Security Council, through its resolution 487 (1981), in response to this situation. 166. However, my delegation had to abstain in the vote on the draft resolution just adopted, although we find ourselves in agreement with many of the prin- ciples set forth therein, for we consider that a number of the paragraphs go beyond the topic under consid- eration and condemn alleged intentions without providing sufficient evidence of them. In addition, we feel that it is up to the Security Council to de- termine whether further action is warranted, and we do not believe that it would help resolve the substance of the matter to keep this item on the agenda of the General Assembly indefinitely.

My delegation fully agrees with the general thrust of the resolution that has just been adopted by the Assembly. The Israeli bombardment in June 1981 of Iraqi installations for peaceful nuclear research and Israel's subsequent refusal to comply with Security Council resolution 487 (1981) constitute serious violations ofinternational law and a destructive blow aimed at the safeguards system of IAEA and the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. 168. While Sweden has therefore voted in favour of the resolution, I wish to point out that my delegation cannot fully support all of the proposals put forward, or the very general and sweeping character of some of the formulations. 173. This being said, I also find it necessary to state for the record that my Government has strong reservations about the wording of several paragraphs of the resolution just adopted. My delegation ques- tions the usefulness of studies and reports on the consequences of the Israeli. attack, as requested in paragraph 8. My delegation also has strong res- ' ervations about paragraph 10, providing for the in- clusion of this item in the agenda of the next session of the General Assembly.

Canada's position of strongly condemning the Israeli attack on Iraqi nuclear facilities in June 1981 is well known. Furthermore, Canada fully endorses the provisions of the unani- mously adopted Security Council resolution 487 (1981). With respect to the resolution just adopted, "First, the military action which the Council is considering is an act of aggression under the terms of General Assembly resolution 3314 (XXIX)" -which embodies the Definition of Aggression. " ... The illegality of this act is compounded by the violation of the airspace of two States Member of the United Nations . . . " "Fifthly, the absence of formal relations between States in no way justifies acts of aggression . . . Invoking a supposed ~tate of war to conceal such actions does not constitute a valid legal argument either ... ..Sixthly, Israel's attack ... is not an isolated act; it should be seen as the climax of escalating viola- tions of international law . . . and it includes the annexation ofterritofY by conquest, persistence in an illegal occupation, the denial of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, and frequent acts of aggression and harassment against neighbouring States. ..Seventhly, the [Israeli] act of aggression . . . is evidence of a rejection of peaceful means for the solution of the conflicts in the Middle East ... " "Tenthly, the warlike initiative [by Israel] under- mines the foundations of the disarmament process and it challenges the non-proliferation regime which has been so .carefully built up by the international community . . . [While Israel is not a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty] it takes the liberty of attacking [Iraq], which has submitted scrupulously to the existing safeguards regime. ••Eleventhly, the [Israeli] action entails . . . con- tempt for the authority of IAEA ... By casting aspersions on the effectiveness of the competent institution, the Government of Israel has proved its contempt for the United Nations system. It attacks not only the security of a State, but the very prin- ciple of international security. " "Fifteenthly, the view of the international com- munity is unanimous, as is its conviction that the Security Council must act unequivocally to live up to its responsibility as a guarantor of peace. " NOTES 1 The delegations of the Lao People's Democratic Republic, Samoa and the United Arab Emirates subsequently infonned the Secretariat that they had intended to vote against the amendment. 2 See International Atomic Energy Agency, Resolutions and Other Decisions of the General Conference, Twenty-fifth Regular Session, 21-26 September /98/, resolution GC(XXV)/RES/381. 4 Treaty for the Prohibition of· Nuclear Weapons in Latin America, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 634, No. 9068, p. 283. S The delegations of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the {Jnitc:d A!ab Emirates subsequently infonned the Secretariat that they had intended to vote in favour of the draft resolution. 7 Ibid., 2286th meeting. S Ibid., 2288th meeting.