A/38/PV.79 General Assembly

I shall first call upon those representatives who wish to explain their vote before the vote on any or all of the draft resolutions A to E contained in the report of the United Nations Council for Namibia fA/38/24]. Representatives will also have an opportunity to explain their vote after all the votes have been taken. 13. Mr. MANOLATOS (Greece): I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Community and its ~ion against Angola has disappeared, the withdrawal of foreign troops from that State would increase regional security. 27. Indeed, there seems to be some merit in the view that the parties concerned might wish to reach a common understanding on this and other issues relevant to the stability of the region as a whole in the situation prevailing after Namibia's attainment of independence. I repeat, Conferenc~. 29. Furthermore, we see no need for the United Nations Council for Namibia to hold a series of plenary meetings in Asia during 1984 when more than adequate conference services are available at United Nations Headquarters in New York. We also question the need to ensure for the United Nations Council for Namibia the same rights and privileges in international organizations as are reserved for States. 30. Finally, we strongly object to operative paragraph 4 of draft resolution D, on dissemination of information. It must be feared that if the entire effort of the United Nations Council for Namibia in the field of information is harnessed to a campaign of defamation directed against certain Member States, the ability of the Council to con- tribute to Namibia's early and peaceful attainment of independence will inevitably suffer. 31. Mr. SUCHARIPA (Austria): In the course of the general debate [14th meeting], the Austrian delegation had the opportunity to reaffirm its position with regard to Namibia's independence and the endeavours of the United Nations to achieve it. From the outset, Austria has fully supported the United Nations plan for Namibia's peaceful negotiated transition to independence. Although we do understand the impatience and disappointment of the Namibian people in view of the protracted negotiating process, we remain convinced that, in the light of the principles and purposes of the Charter of th~ United Nations, it is not up to the General Assembly to endorse the resort to armed struggle, nor should it encourage military support for such struggle. Furthermore, Austria has strong reservations about the attempt to prejudge and influence the independent work of the Security Council, an attempt which is in contradiction of the relevant pro- visions of the Charter. 32. Austria is fully aware of the significant and impor- tant role assumed by SWAPO in the fight of.the Namib- ian people for their independence as well as in the nego- tiating process, a role which undoubtedly will continue in the political future of the Territory. The final endorse- ment of that role will be given by the Namibian people themselves, in free and fair elections. The General Assem- bly must not prejudge this free and democratic expression of political will by the population of Namibia. Also, Aus- tria does not believe that the arbitrary singling out of certain States for condemnation is justified or that it in any way advances the legitimate interests of the Namibian people. 33. As the Austrian delegation pointed out in its state- ment during the debate on the item under consideration, there should be no further delay in the final decision to launch the United Nations plan for the independence of Namibia. Elements which, in our view, have no direct relevance to the independence of Namibia should, there- fore, not be linked to the United Nations plan. Last year, we were glad to be in the position to support a draft resolution presented to the Assembly which embodied denials by my Government. BrazIl has tIme and agam expressed, as reflected in many official documents ?f.t~e United Nations, that it has never thought of the pOSSIbIlIty of discussing the creation of-let alone participating in- any kind of South Atlantic alliance, pact or arrange~ent whatsoever involving the racist regime of South Afnca. We hope that in the future, should the Council wish to continue to give any kind of credence to unfounded rumours, it will at least take into account and ~ake stock of the official position of Member States, mstead of simply ignoring them as it has done this year with regard to my country. 49. Mr. McDONAGH (Ireland): I should like to explain Ireland's proposed voting positions on the draft resolu- tions before us relating to Namibia. 151. Secondly, owing to the strict adherence of the Nordic countries to the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, we must generally reserve our position with regard to formulations which fail to take into account that only the Security Council can adopt deci- sions binding on Member States. 152. Thirdly, the Nordic countries deplore the inappro- priate and arbitrary singling-out of individual countries and groups of countries. We believe that this procedure, which is becoming increasingly common, is both unfair and unwise. It makes it more difficult than before to maintain the international consensus on the question of Namibia. 153. Fourthly, all political parties enjoying popular support in Namibia must be allowed to participate in a political process through free and fair elections. SWAPO is such a party and must be part of any solution in Namibia. However, we have reservations concerning for- mulations which prejudice the outcome of free elections. 154. Fifthly, we have hesitations about some paragraphs containing sweeping financial implications, as well as vaguely defined meeting proposals which might not always serve the purpose of promoting the early inde- pendence of Namibia, to which our countries are strongly committed. 155. Mr. IWATANI (Japan): My delegation abstained in the voting on resolutions A, Band D, mainly for the following reasons. 156. Japan has consistently supported efforts to ensure the early independence of Namibia through peaceful means. But, as my delegation has made clear on many occasions, we do not support armed struggle, even in the search for a settlement of the vexing Namibian question. Further, while we recognize the significant role being played by SWAPO in the movement for Namibian inde- pendence, Japan maintains the position that the repre- sentation of the Namibian people should ultimately be determined by the Namibian people themselves, through free and fair elections. 157. Moreover, these resolutions contain many para- graphs which refer to and criticize by name particular Member States. My delegation does not believe that this name-calling will contribute to a solution of the problem. Further, in the present circumstances, my delegation doubts whether comprehensive mandatory sanctions against South Africa would in fact be the most effective and expeditious means of achieving the desired end.

The Secretary-Gene;al proposes in his note [A/38/614] the extension of the appointment of Mr. Brajesh Chandra Mishra as United Nations Commissioner for Namibia for a one-year term beginning on 1 January 1984. May I take it that the General Assembly approves this proposal? It was so decided (decision 38/312). 181. The PRESIDENT (interpretationfrom Spanish): On behalf of the General Assembly, I am very happy to congratulate Mr. Brajesh Chandra Mishra on the exten- sion of his term as United Nations Commissioner for Namibia. Commissioner Mishra has a brilliant term of service behind him, and the decision of the General Assembly today is a demonstration of the confidence and trust inspired by Hlie dedicated way in which he has carried out the task entrusted to him. We should like to convey to Mr. Mishra every good wish for success in carrying out his important task.

Although the ques- tion of Palestine appeared as such on the agenda of the Assembly in 1974, Palestine itself has been before this body since 1947. Because of the human tragedy surround- ing this issue, emotion and passion have tended to obfus- cate the real issue whenever the question of Palestine is being discussed. Others, in the mean time, have found refuge in this obfuscation and continue to deny the Pales- tinian people their inalienable right to self-determination, including the right to a homeland. 183. Today, the Sierra Leone delegation wishes, without going into an historical analysis of the matter, to remind the Assembly what the Palestinian question is about, why it should not be impossible of solution and why the United Nations bears a special responsibility to the Pal- estinian people in their efforts to realize their inalienable right to self-determination and a homeland. Mrs. Coronel de Rodrfguez (Venezuela), Vice-Presi- dent, took the Chair. 184. There are some basic and immutable facts about the question of Palestine which need restating. The first is tIle fact that until 1948 there was a territorial entity in the Middle East known as Palestine and inhabited by about 2 million Palestinians. A second fact is that on 29 November 1947 this Assembly auopted a Plan which called for the partition of Palestine into a Palestinian Arab State and a Jewish State and a corpus separatum status for Jerusalem. It was on the basis of resolution 181 (11) that Israel came into existence on 14 May 1948. Fol- lowing the proclamation of Israel, armed hostility broke out between Israel and a number of Arab States, during which most of the territory of Palestine designated by the United Nations for the establishment of a Palestinian Arab State was occupied and annexed by Israel. 185. It is as a result of this annexation that General Assembly resolution 181 (11), on the establishment of two States in Palestine, one of which was to be an Arab State, has not yet been fully implemented. In addition, almost 1 million Palestinians were expelled from the annexed territories or forced into exile and, as a result, over 70 per cent of the Arab population of Palestine lost their homes and today live in exile. 186. This stubborn refusal by Israel to implement reso- lution 181 (11) and carry out the United Nations 1948 decision on the return of the Palestinians to their home- land has been and continues to be the core of the Arab- Israeli conflict and the tragedy of the Palestinian people. 187. Another basic fact is that, after the 1967 war, which Israel launched against a number of Arab States, Israel further occupied the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, inhabited by Palestinians. Following that war, the Secu- rity Council adopted resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), calling for the withdrawal by Israel from the recently occupied territories and for the restoration of peace and secure boundaries between all States in the region. 188. Alas, instead of complying with those resolutions and withdrawing from the occupied territories, Israel has ignored the resolutions and continued its policy of settle- ments, or so-called irreversible changes, to make them virtually part of Israel itself. 189. Thus, the Palestine question has eluded solution .because of Israel's stubborn refusal to comply with the pertinent resolutions of the Assembly, beginning with resolution 181 (11) on the matter. It is therefore the responsibility of the Organization to ensure that Israel 36 years now, the Palestiman people have been demed the possibility of returning to their homeland. 191. Secondly, Israel must withdraw from the West Bank and Gaza, to enable the Palestinian people t~ exer- cise their right of self-determination and to establIsh an independent State of their own in those territories. 192. We have tried, as I indicated at the outset, to state the basic facts today, without any emotion or rancour or passion and with the hope that the issues involved will be seen for what they are, and to help the Assembly, and, indeed the international community, realize tlIe just cause ~f the Palestinian people and also why it ref!l~ins the responsibility of the Organization to correct the mJus- tice that was inflicted on the Palestinian people, through no fault of their own, some 36 years ago. 193. Since 1969, the General Assembly has reaffirm~d the inalienable rightf. of the people of Palestme an~, m ,aragraph 1 of its resolution 2672 C.(XXV), n.cogl!'Ized "that the people of Palestine are entItled to equal ngh~s and self-determination, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations". This, in essence, is what the Geneva Declaration on Palestine 8 is all about. The Sierra Leone delegation fully supports both that Declaration and the Programme of Action for the .Achievemen~ of Pales- tinian Rights 8 and calls for the ImplementatIOn of the relevant United Nations resolutions concerning the ques- tion of Palestine and the attainment of the legitimate, inalienable rights of the Palestinian I?eople, including.the right to self-determination and the ng~t to the ~stablIs~­ ment of its own independent State m Palestme. ThIS should also be based on the provision by the Security Council of guarantees for the peace and security of ~ll States in the region, including the independent Palestm- ian State, within secure and recognized boundaries..My delegation shares the view that the role o~ the. Umted Nations in the achievement of a comprehensIve, Just and lasting peace in the Middle East is essential and para- mount if the people of Palestine are to realize their ina- lienable right to self-determination and independence. 194. What remains to be done is for the Organization to persuade Israel to realize that an historic wrong has been done to the Palestinian people and that, in the name of our common humanity and justice, that wrong must be put right without further delay, by allowing the Pales- tinian people to realize their inaliena~le right to self- determination and independence. In thIS way, not only would we be instrumental in ending the cycle of violence and strife that has engulfed the Middle East since Israel was created. but the tragedy and agony that have been the lot of the Palestinian people for too long would then be brought to an end. 195. Israel and the Organization have that responsibility to the Palestinian people. 196. Ms. HEPTULLA (India): The year 1983 will be remembered by posterity as a significant year i~ ~he chequered history of the struggle of the brave ~alestmIan people for national independence. The InternatIOnal Con- ference on the Question of Palestine, held at Geneva from 29 August to 7 September 1983, and preceded by rive regional preparatory meetings, was perhaps the hIgh- . 'om 29 August to 7 September this year. 2.02. On 18 November 1983, the Chairman of the ~.Jfl)ve­ ment of Non-Aligned Countries convened a further a::.;et- ing of the C(1Immittee of Eight, at ministerial level, to address itseH 'l.O efforts th...! could be made in the light of the rapidly deteriorating situation in the region. Refer- ring to the Palestine Liberation Organization [PLOJ, the meeting recalled that the PLO had been recognized as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people at the Fourth Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries, held at Algiers from 5 to 9 Sep- tember 1973 It was also recalled that in February 1983 the PaleLtl",le National Council, meeting at Algiers, adopted ~, '1olitical programme and elected the Execu- tive Comrr' 'ttee of the PLO under the chairmanship of Mr. Yasser Arafat. 203. With a view to discharging its mandate, particularly at this critical juncture, it was decided at this meeting that a ministerial group consisting of India, Cuba, Yugoslavia and Senegal, led by the Minister for External Affairs of India, Mr. P. V. Narasimha Rao, should visit some Arab capitals. The group visited those capitals and reaffirmed to all the personalities it met the stand of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries in upholding the unity of the PLO and the struggle of the Palestinian people to realize their inalienable rights. The group contributed to the establishment of a cease-fire in North Lebanon. 204. If I have gone into the activh~es of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries in support of the Palestinian cause at some length, it is to emphasize that our support for, and solidarity with, our Palestinian brothers has been a fundamental feature of the Movement. 205. India's own sympathy for the people of Palestine, and our support for the establishment of a Palestinian state, are rooted in our awareness of the historical, ter- ritorial and national identity of the Palestinians. Even during the days of our own struggle for national inde- pendence, our leaders identified themselves with the Palestinian cause and raised their voices in support of the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. The continuing struggle of the brave Palestinians evoke.. sym- pathy and understanding among the people of India to this day. The decision to partition Palestine was taken in the same year that India became independent. India secured its independence, but the people of Palestine were banished from their own lands. Many countries since then have also become free and are the masters of their own destinies. However, the Palestinians not only remain homeless, but even more of their lands have since been occupied. 200. India has consistently advocated that a just and comprehensive solution to the problems of west Asia Palestip~. "Indispensable prerequisites for this are the complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from all Arab territories occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, recog- nition of the legitimate rights of the Arab people of Palestine, including its right to establish an independent State of its own, and assurance of the right of all States of the region to secure an independent existence and development. "The people of the German Democratic Republic is deeply concerned about the escalation of tensions in the Middle East region which are endangering peace. The hegemonistic designs of the Israeli aggressor, backed by the most reactionary imperialist circles of the United States, are aimed at carrying another war into the Arab States. That dangerous course, posing an extremely grave threat to world peace, is most strongly condemned by the German Democratic Repub- lic. It is urgent to oppose those actions in contravention of international law, decisively and through the voice of the United Nations. It becomes more and more imperative consistently to implement the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council." 356. Mr. ALATAS (Indonesia): While the international community is faced with a number of conflicts that threaten world peace, none has generated such a sense of outrage and frustration as the protracted efforts to resolve the question of Palestine. As a result, the United Nations continues to be seized of the totally unacceptable situation of continuing aggression, occupation and expan- sionism by Israel and the increased repression of the Palestinian Arabs in the occupied territories. My delega- tion, therefore, deems it impu.'tant that at this session g·eater urgency should be given to addressing this critical problem and the challenge it has posed to all of us for over three decades. 357. The alarming deterioration of the situation in the Middle East is fully reflected in the fact that since Novem- ber 1982 the Security Council has devoted no less than 10 series of meetings to confronting a resurgence of oppressive and illegal Israeli activities and policies. Over and above these deliberations, 1983 marked the convening of the historic International Conference on the Question of Palestine. The unprecedented international gathering of high-level representatives of almost 140 States was conclusive evidence of world-wide support for the struggle of the Palestinic.i. ,eople to realize their inalienable rights and the international community's determination to seek more effective ways and means to achieve that goal. 358. Hence, to my delegation, it would be only natural for this thirty-eighth session of the General Assembly to build further on the Geneva Declaration on Palestine 8 and the Programme of Action for the Achievement of Palestinian Rights 8 adopted at the International Confer- ence. Those documents represent an approach that is as The meeting rose at 9.25 p.m. NOTES