A/39/PV.101 General Assembly

The Assembly has before it the draft resolutions contained in documents AJ39/L.19 and Corr.I and Add.I, L.20 and Corr.I and Add.I and L.21 and CorLI and Add.l , I shall now call on those representatives who wish to explain their vote before the vote on any or all of the three draft resolutions. Representatives will also have an opportunity to explain their vote after all the votes have been taken. I should like to remind the Assem- bly that, under rule 88 of the rules of procedure: "The President shall not permit the proposer of a proposal or of an amendment to explain his vote on his own proposal or amendment." 131. Mr. FARRELL (Ireland): I wish to make a statement on the draft resolutions on behalf of the 10 member States of the European Community. The views of the Ten on the principles necessary to secure peace in the Middle East are well known and were s~t out in our address to the General Assembly on this item [74th meeting]. 132. It will be clear that the -r:en have serious reservations on those draft resolutions that address themselves to important aspects of the ques~lO!l of a comprehensive settlement of the Arab-Israeli dispute and that are not in accordance WIth their com~on position regarding principles for a comprehensive peace settlement. Consequently, the Ten have repeat- edly stressed the need for such draft resolutions to adopt a balanced approach. Also, the Ten cannot accept formulations criticizing a permanent member of the Security Council for exercismg Its right under the Charter of the United Nations: In connection with draft resolution A/39/L,21, WhICh the Ten WIll support, they recall the .importance they attach to Security Council resolution 478 (1980). "Resumed from the 77th meeting. sove~elgn rights of third countnes having diplomatic certain measures, but have discriminatory implica- relations With Israel. However, we .support all efforts tions or juridical implications that would make more a.lI~ed at restonng the legitimate nghts of the Pales- difficult the dialogue on which, in our view, a !lnIan pe~ple and a return to a Just and durable peace peaceful solution to the Middle East problem should m the Middle East. be based. • r f f r I i possible, more unfair, more unbalanced, more preju- 163. Secondly, paragraph 4 0 dra t eso ut on dicial, more dysfunctional than the four resolutions A/39/L.19 ISnot acceptable to us. Therefore, v.:e also which the Assembly considered on Tuesday, against declare our reserv:atlOl"': on that paragraph, WhICh we which we spoke then. At that time we stated how rega~d as a continuation or version of. the Camp utterly inconsistent and unproductive it was to David accord-or, rather, the Camp David conspira- accuse a State of being non-peace-loving and then, in cy.. , . virtually the same breath, to urge that State to attend 164. Our solution to the problem of Palestme and an international conference devoted to the search for the Middle East is simply the united Islamic front. peace, as though that country, already branded a non- 165. Mr. ARTACHO (Spain) (interpretation from peace-loving State, might expect fair play from such a Spanish): At the end of our consideration of the conference. question of Palestine last Tuesday [95th meeting],.my 172. We also stated that this context, this prejudi- delegation took the .0pportUnIty to sta!e Spain's cial preparation for a conference, this judgement in poslt~on on that subject .and on the Middle East advance-this prior judgement-could not possibly conflict. Today I want simply to repeat .the well- lead to good-faith negotiations, and we suggested that known POSltI~:m ofthe Spanish delegation WIth regard negotiations lacking good faith were not negotiations to that conflict, at all in any meaningful sense of that term. Such so- 166. A final solution, and with it the establishment called negotiations would instead simply serve as a of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, should propaganda forum, a propaganda exercise, which be based on Israel's withdrawal from all the Arab would certainly make the attainment of peace more territories occupied since 1967, on the right of all difficult, rather than contribute to the achievement States in the area, including Israel, to live in peace of that desirable goal. within secll.rt? and recognized borders, a~~ on respect 173. The United States opposes such a Middle East for th~ legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, conference, but we also note that any positive including the right to self-determination, possibility such a conference might conceivably have 167. In accordance with that position of principle, is undermined by resolutions of this type. my dele~ation will vote in favour of draft resolution 174. The United States also strenuously objected to AJ39JL. 1. the unfair treatment and disrespect shown in those 168. My delegation supports the essential elements draft resolutions on the question of Palestine to the for a solution to the Middle East problem set out in sovereignty of a State Member of the United Na- draft resolution A/39/L.19. We regard as acceptable tions, One of those draft resolutions, A/39/L.40, paragraphs 4, 6 and 13, in that the Arab peace plan regretted the negative response of two Governments embodied in the Final Declarations adopted on 9 towards such a conference. I mention that reference September 1982 at the Twelfth Arab Summit Confer- because one of the draft resolutions before the pO~ICy.. Once agam, there is an unwarranted and unjustified interference in the internal affairs and decision-making of the United States. Once again, I should remind the General Assembly that the Char- ter of the United Nations does not give it jurisdiction over the foreign policy of the United States. 175.. Paragraph 10 of draft resolution A/39/L.19 considers that the co-operative agreements between the United States and Israel "would encourage Israel to purs~e Its aggressive and expansionist policies". The United States considers this a false and offensive s~atement. We also consider it misleading as to the likely consequences of our policies. 176. Last night [99th meeting], the General Assem- bly undertook to correct an abusive practice which has prevailed In the Assembly for some time. It took note of the practic.e. o,f singling out particular coun- tr.les for special criticism and, more important, last night we all took ~ step In the direction of correcting that abuse. As this body IS aware selective name- calling is almost entirely reserved for the United Stat~s and. Israel. It is very selective indeed. The Soviet Union ~oes unnamed in the resolution on Afghanistan; Viet Nam goes unnamed in the resolu- t~on on Kampuchea. I~ both of those cases, aggres- sive, expansionist InVaSIOnS, mdeed, and occupations are under way; yet no names are named. In the draft resolutions before us there is fear that some policy might lead to an aggressive, expansionist policy; yet names are named. 177. Last night, however, the General Assembly took the wise and courageous step of removing four derogatory references to the United States. That was done in the interest of fairness and justice and in the mterest of the ability of the United Nations to play a constructive role in the future. We hope that the General Assembly will do no less today. That is why my delegation has asked for a separate recorded vote on paragraph 10 of draft resolution A/39/L.19. We would hope that this needed corrective action would continue. 178. But we are faced today with another draft re~0Iution-Al39/L.20-Which, through its slightly veiled reference to a permanent member of the Security Council "which prevented the Council" from adopting sanctions against Israel, would con- tinue this obnoxious practice of selective name-call- ing. 179. Those are my country's strong objections to the singularly offensive treatment of the United States in these draft resolutions, and indeed too often in this debate. They alone constitute ample reason for voting against the two draft resolutions, but there is more, and that goes to the thrust and overall purpose of the draft resolutions. They speak repeat- edly of "aggression", of "threats to international peace and security" and "the maintenance ofinterna- tional peace", of Israel as not being a peace-loving Member State and of wide-ranging sanctions in the military, diplomatic, economic, technological and cultural fields. They "condemn", "strongly con- demn", "reject", "deplore", "strongly deplore" and so forth. 180. The people of the Middle East-all the people of the Middle East, Arabs, Israelis and all other peoples of that region-desire peace. They need ~ L H J d (" rtr ') Irl ,~'l. graph 10 speaks of th~. ";IlJ$,fC'S-SIvc and expansIOnist 2~~: Mr. SA.A (~r an) llIlaprf/,£lllC!' U 1,' r~ policies and pract!l~eS which "would have adverse bl~). I should like to cOffi!1;cnt on the ~I~t o.f.or.de,r efTt.'C!5 on efforts for the establishment (If a compre_ raised by the represent~tne of the ~Jnlled.S!at,~:a hensive..iu51 and 1.\Slmg peace In the MIddle Eastand morne~t a~o. The General Assembf .,ha~?lst:ussed. would threaten the SC'ClJmy of the region", Paragraph ever since US mcepnon, a great man) resolutions-« 12 refers tu the danger (If nuclear blackmail and man)' of them have been adl1Pt.t:d-u.nd~~ the",. '. .' . ' . .' . " Items entitled "The situation In the MIddle East and ..3.., 1 also 1l01~ Ihat the dr~ln resoluuon relers- the "Question of Palestine". Among the most impor- 2.n, The PRESIDENT, t call on the representative tant ol' these is resolution 181 (Il) of 29 November (lf Democrauc Yemen on <Cl J"()lI1t of order. 1917, by which the UnitedNations established Israel. 2.N, Mr AL·!\SHTAI (Dcruocranc Yemen): I ThIS was adopted by a slml?le rnajoruy-e-no more thmk the Legal Counsel has started to speak on the than ~ few votes. ~ should like to ask whether t~he substance of the drall resolunon. My quesnon was as questron of the United ,States repr~fentatl\'capplies follows: for ,14 yeus the (icneral As!</Cmbly has met retroactively to resolution ISl (11). and for 39 }'cars snere have been rcsoluticns on the 224, The PRESIDENT: 1can on the representative question of the Mu.hUe I:J!,,$! Not once has this been of Democratic Yemen on a point of order, considered under Article 18. plu:a~r:aph 2, of the 225. Mr. AL-ASHTAL (Democratic Yemen); Mr. Charter ()f the Unued Natlml~ flow IS 11 that no,w President I heard YOU say that vou have asked the this quesuon can b<.~ considered ,IS mandatory In Legal Co~nsel to givean opinion cm the nature of the terms.. of Ar11l:1e lit p~uasrilph ~'l That is my question posed by the United States representative. 1 QUCSIHnI. beg 10 disagree with you. Sir. because it was I who :H5. Mr. FLl:1SCHHAl'ER, L(.~I Counsel: 1 was asked for the legal opinion and the question Iwant to cornmg in a minute W "hat has jU'\Ih,'cen stated by ask the Legal Counsel IS whether. on the baSIS (.If the renrescntauve of Democrauc \ ernen. I was precedent, Article IS, paragraph 2. of the Charter S-ilying Ihat I also note Ihillt the draft resolution should appty to the question of the Middle- East and referred to 1I matter which IS under aCfI\C rC\!ICW by whether It should therefore be regarded as an impor- the Security Council. !'if)"". Ih(~ p<mll has. been made tant question. that the General AS5.Cmbh had Jl()t at past sessions 226, The PRESIDENT: I shall now ask the Legal considered resolnuons '/,,)( Ilm kmd to Ml under Counsel to come and provide us with an opinion on Article IK.• pltr~~raph 2,. f wtluldslate that the the subject, as requested by the representative or pracnce 01 the (,tncfa$, A\Socmbl). 1fI thl:!! n:spt'1:t has Democratic Yemen. oc.-erl varIed. Man} ()f the f('!\,o!ullons fchumg to 227: Mr. FLElSCHHAUER, Legal Counsel: My q~~511?nS pc~~al~iflg 1(;lhCSthUil~C1~m the t-<!iddle advlc:e hasbeen requested with regard to the quesllOn East hin c rCl,;cncd.a t"l).-tfurds 11H(1)(,nt~. SI,) that tile w~ether ~ra~ resolution A/39/L.19 requires it 'tW(}- ~ue5~1:)n uf ,whetber ~r flOllh:>, \~ere taken ~~der tbIrds majonl¥ for adoption b)' the General Assem- A~!lclc 18. ~arag~lJph:.: hllS. ~OI,U Is,cn. hHlt:~cn;a~es, bly. under ArtIcle 18, paragraph 2. or the Charter of (kcl!mmshn\c been taken Ihal mOl\idna,1 rC!;,I;l!UHons the United Nations and rule: U of the rules of cam.e under Arltde 18, paril~uiAph ~. procedure of the General Assembly. D6. t n.:fer In thtS n:sp(,'Il.':t t(l ~, d(.'ClslOn taken by the 228. Article /8 paragraph 2. of ihc Charter prtr- Gen,eral A\'Oscmbl)' in t)ec,cmber 1961. at Its sIxteenlh vides" . session! 108611: mt't'lUl,d. on 1lI draO resolutIOnr'Clat w ,~ .. . . itlg (t1 the lJolted Nlllh:m:s. Candllal1(ln CommIssion DecJSlo~s of the General As.sembly (Ht Jm~r-. for Pa,le,s,'tmc. wh"k,h. w,'a5.h~"h;,J (() req\lirc a two-th.irds tan,l questions shall be m~~c by ~ ~w(}-thl~(ts majoflt; tor auopttcln, A!!iO. 1 rt~rcr to a decision majopty of the m~mbers present and \Ot!I18,. The,sc taken In December 1971t llltlhe thimHtmd seSSIon of questions shaH l!1cl~de: recoJ.nmenda.ltons With the General As..sembh' {84th m("(·tirr~J. In c<mneelion respect to, the mal~.tenance of IIItematlOnul peace withagclld,a item i 25. concerning mililary and and secUrity, . . . nuclea.r c(lHahc1ratic:m wilh hraeL and then a number of other ptlints are mentioned. 231. In addition. I would like h> rder 10 the IC'ga1 229. ,It has heen slated by ~he United States repre~situati()nunder which these pf()Ccduf<11 <k"Cisions are sentatlve that draft resolutmn ..V39IL.19 contaill5 takeR. The¥ :arc taken individuullv hv the General elemenls which make it a recommendation wHh /,sscmblvat each $($$lon on an ad '/«11{' ha~j!'i and they respect to, the l!1a~ntenance of !fltemation~1 peace arc not 'binding on tht~ A,!4scmbl) al stlbll-Cquent and secunt,' within the meanmg ()f Artll:le 18, SC!iSilJllS, paragraph ~. . 238. The point hillS been madl ~hal the draft 230.. L:ooklT!& at draft resolutIon Al.39JL.19. I note r~s-oluliun is no! .1 s{)CCllk rC'>olutIlJn rderrins. to that In liS thIrd pream,oular par~graph it, rders Et) a maintenance of ptace and SC'C\ll'lt). hut ra~her a great number of Securtty CounCil resolutIOns, 1 alst) general :.;tatemcm and general exhortallon. It IS true non-poh.tlcal-~ass~re. my colleagues in this Assem- bly-pomt of VIew, It IS very interesting to note that the Legal Counsel, in dealing with the past practice of the General Assembly, quoted two examples to us, one relating to the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine from the Assembly's six- teenth seSSIOn and the other dealing with nuclear and military collaboration with Israel from the thirty- third session. Yet, he did not tell us whether the two- thirds majority vote undertaken at those two sessions with respect to the two resolutions mentioned by him was undertaken on the basis of a specific request to do so. For if the two-thirds modality of voting on those two resolutions was made on the basis of a specific request, then, to my mind, one cannot take these two precedents as having fallen within what my colleague from the United States called the mandato- ry character of the language of Article 18, paragraph 2, of the Charter of the United Nations and rule 83 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly. For a provision of a mandatory character has to be applied in law without any specific request being made to that end. 241. That is point one and I require clarification from the Legal Counsel. 242. The second point, which is non-political, is again a legal point. The Legal Counsel, as I under- stood it, stated that each General Assembly decides individually, for its specific duration, the modality of voting on the nature of the issue before us. If this is so, how can we then employ the argument made by the United States representative to the effect that the proposal is based on Article 18, paragraph 2, of the Charter, being of a mandatory nature, for "mandato- ry nature", again, does not apply to an individual Assembly; in other words, it is not of an elective nature but of a durative nature applicable throughout in relation to all General Assemblies and to all items that have a connotation of "recommendations with respect to the maintenance of international peace and security". 243. The third legal point is this. A few days ago, on 11 December [95th meeting], we voted on a series of draft resolutions relating to the question of Palestine which included language akin to the language men- tioned in the draft resolutions before us. If Article 18, paragraph 2 of the Charter is of a mandatory character, what is the status of the resolutions that were voted upon and adopted a few days ago? Indeed from a legal point of view, what is the legal nature'of the resolutions that were adopted during this session on the question of Afghanistan and a Score of other resolutions that were adopted WIth language akin to the language in the draft resolutions before us? 244. I have one final remark which is not legal C!r political but is a factual remark. I am sure that, had It ces~lty of establishing a comp~~hensl.ve, Just and bers present and voting. lasting peace m the region, . " that IS the expres- . f h U' d sion of an aspiration. When we say, in the tenth 258. I call o~ the representative 0 t e nite preambular paragraph, "Gravely concerned . . . at States on a point of order. . the continuing Israeli actions involving the escalation ~59. Mr~. KIR~A"rRICK(United States of Amer- and expansion of the conflict ... "and so on, that ica): If this question IS to be submitted to a vote by is the expression of an opinion. the General Assembly, to determine whether the ... . dati draft resolutions constitute recommendations with 252., When It IS said that there IS. a rec0IT;lmen at IOn respect to the maintenance of international peace relating t? the maintenance of international peace and security, the United States would like to inquire and security, I reply that we are. not calhng for pea~e- what the sponsors of the draft resolutions concerned keeping operations, nor expending money, nor decid- mean when they speak of "international peace and mg upon ~ q~e~tlOn that h~~ been referred to ,us security". If they do not indeed mean to refer to under the Uniting for peace resolution (resolutIOn international peace and security, what do their words 377 (~]. I know precisely what I am talking about. mean? Surely we require a new translation of those That IS why we should note the conclusion of the . , Legal Counsel's opinion. He deems it to be appropri- draft resolutions, . ate. That is the expression of an opinion, but the ~60. Mr. AL-ASHTA~ (Democratic Yemen): I be- opinion is consultative and non-binding. lieve these draft resolutions are wntten m the English . language and Mrs. Kirkpatrick reads English, being a 253. I can see no other way to resolve the ~u~stlOn professor. I do not think she should ask us to whether draft resolution A(39/L.19 comes within the translate for her what these words mean. mandatory language of Article 18, paragraph 2, of the . . . Charter than by a procedural vote. In other words, we 2,61.. Mr. SHIHABI (Saudi Arabia): I think the should not be deciding upon the additional catego- situation before the Assembly IS clear; asking .for a ries; we are not adding an additional category. I want vote on whether this needs a two-thuds majority or to make this precisely clear to my good friends from only a half IS very clear. the United States. I am not relying on Article 18, 262. We support a vote and we support very paragraph 3. I am basing myself on a motion whether strongly this Assembly's voting in favour of voting on the mandatory language of paragraph 2-"recom- it as a normal, simple draft resolution, because if we mendations with respect to the maintenance of are going to take every draft resolution to be a very international peace and security"-applies to the important resolution the functioning of this body will language of draft resolution A/39/L.19. We must be handicapped in the long run and we shall be decide that by a vote, in order to pass judgement on setting a very wrong precedent. I think we should the legal opinion we have received from the Legal keep to the procedures that have been followed so Counsel. That is the only democratic way to settle the far. question. 263. Mr. LEVIN (Israel): I must agree with the 254. The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative representative of Saudi Arabia. We think the situa- of the United States on a point of order. tion is very clear. A very simple, clear question is la~ll Panama, ~apu~ New Gumea, Paraguay, Peru, threats or acts of force, in conformity with Security Philippines, Samt V~ncent and the Grenadines, Sa- Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). moa, Singapore, Spam, Thailand, Trinidad and To- , . . bago Uruguay Venezuela. 304. , We,also remain of the view that resolutions on , '. the situation m the Middle East, m order that they .Thedraft resolution wasaqopted by 88 votes to 22, may contribute positively to the peace efforts, should with 32 abstentions (resolution 39/146 B), be balanced in substance and should not prejudice 301. The PRESIDENT: We turn now to draft the sovereign right of States to conduct their own resolution A/39/L.21 and Corr.1 and Add.I. A international affairs in the way they see fit. recorded vote has been requested. 305, In the light of the foregoing, my delegation was A recorded vote was taken. constrained to abstain on draft resolution A/39/L,20. In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, By the same token, while my delegation voted in Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, favour of draft resolution A/39/~.19, we ,h~ve reser- Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhu- vations on the way certain of ItS provisions were tan Bolivia Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, formulated. Bulgaria, B~rkina Faso, Burma, Burundi, Byelorus- 306. Mr. LEHNE (Austria): Austria's position on sian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cameroon, Canada, the item under discussion is well known and has been Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, consistent over the years. It has found clear expres- China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Cuba, Cyprus, sion in our contribution to the debate on this agenda Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democrat- item. It should therefore be evident to all that we ic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Domini- fully share the concern expressed in the draft resolu- can Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, tions relating to the situation in the Middle East, and Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, we agree with most of their elements. Germa~ Democratic Republic; Germany, Federal 307. There are however a number of provisions in Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Gumea, Guinea-Bissau, these texts which we cannot support. In particular, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indone- Austria does not believe that breaking relations with sia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Israel would bring us any closer to a solution of the Jamaica, Japan: Jordan, .Kenya, Kuwait, Lao P~o- Middle East problem. We also consistently oppose ple's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Lib- the singling out for criticism in General Assembly yan Arab Jam~h1flya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, resolutions of particular countries, a practice which Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Maunta- does not serve to promote the cause of peace in the nia, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mo- Middle East zan;biqu~, Nepal? Netherlands, New Zealand, ~icar- 308. Nor c~n we support any formulation which agua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, could be interpreted as impinging on the principle of Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, universality of membership in the United Nations Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, ,. . Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, 309. While Austna whole-heartedly supported draft Seychelles, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, resolution A/39/~.21, m the ~Ig~t of these consider- Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, ations !t felt obliged to abstain m the vote on draft Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, resolutions A/39/L,19 and L.20. Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Repub- 310. Let me add a few words explaining our lie, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab position on the procedural motion regarding the Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and application of Article 18, paragraph 2, of the Charter Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, of the United Nations in the vote on draft resolutions Uruguay, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia, A/39/L.19 and L,20. My delegation is concerned Zimbabwe. about the recent trend at this session of the General ~n support oft.he struggle ofArab peoples against the 321. Mr. HERRERA CACERES (Honduras) (inter. imperialist, Zionist aggression, . pretation from Spanish): My delegation concurs with 313. The Albanian delegation expressed once agam the Secretary-General's statement, with regard to the the viewpoints of its Government 111 the. statement conflict between the Arab countries and Israel, that made dunng the debate on this agenda Ite~ [75th "a comprehensive settlement will have to be reached, meeting]. Nevertheless, we have our reservations; we at least in its final stage, if not earlier, through a have made them known in the past and we shall not process of negotiation in which all the parties con- repeat them now. They deal WIth some paragraphs, cerned will participate" [A/39/600, para. 39]; that such as paragraph 13 of draft resolution A/39/L,.19, "none of the parties to this historic and tragic conflict as well as with the documents and resolutions can hope to attain its maximum demands if there is adopted in the past which are now mentioned in the to be a state of real peace in the region" iibid., para. draft resolutions just adopted. 43]; and that 3.14. Mr. SHEHAT~ (Egypt]: The principled posi- "a comprehensive settlement in the Middle East non of Egypt regarding the illegality of .the Israeh will have to meet the following conditions: the occupation and annexation of the Syrian Golan withdrawal of the Israeli forces from occupied Heights is reflected in no uncertain terms in our territories' respect of and acknowledgement of the sponsoring of draft resolution A/S!,C/39/L.27, adopt- sovereignty, territorial integrity and political i~de- ed by the Special Political Committee on 29 Novem- pendence of every State In the area and their r.lght ber and endorsed today by the General Assembly to live in peace within secure and recognized [resolution 39/95F]. It is equally reflected 111 ~ur boundaries, free from threats or actsof' force; and, affirmative vote on draft resolution JY39/L.19 Just lastly, a just settlement of the Palestinian p.roblem adopted particularly paragraph 9, which focuses on based on the recognition of the legitimate rights of the Syri~n Golan Heights. the Palestinian people, including self-determina- 315. During the ninth emergency special session of tion. In this context, .the questlO~,oftJusalem ~~o] the General Assembly the delegation of Egypt, on 5 remains of pnmary Importance. [1 I .. para. . February 1982, stated' fully its position on the issue 322. In previous years, Honduras cast an affirma- of the Golan Heights [l2th meeting], and I need not tive vote on the draft resolutions that today cor~e- quote from that statement. spond to draft resolution A/39/L.21. ,Weha.ve contin- 316. As to draft resolution A/39/L.20, just adopted, ued to ,follow the sam~ policy durmg this session. it includes in our view both in its preambular and Regarding draft resolutions A/39/L.I.9 an? L.20, 11?-Y operative ' ara raphs positive elements and estab- delegation finds positive and negative e em~~ts m lished prin~iple~ to which Egypt fully subscribes, The them, and we have already expressed the position of 343 M d 1 . t d i c. f d ft 1 that will impede any lasting solution, . y e cgation vo e m ravour 0 ra reso u- . , . tion N39/L.21, concerning Jerusalem. Norway does 3~2. The convenmg of an international conference, not recognize Israel's annexation of Jerusalem, and With the participation of all the interested parties and we do not recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. under. the auspices of the United Nations, could be of .. . great importance for peace, so long as, from the very 344. Mr.. CAPPAGLI (Argentina) (l~terpretatl~n stage of its preparation, the true political will to find from Spanish): The deleg~tlOn of Argentina voted l!l satisfactory compromise formulas existed. favour of draft r~solut.19n AI39/L.19. because It 353. Mexico voted in favour of draft resolutions reflects my coun.try s pO~ltlOn and the will of the vast A/39/L.19, L.20 and L,21, thereby demonstrating majority of the international community, and of the once again its real commitment to United Nations members of .the Movement of Non-Aligned Coun- resolutions, despite its reservations on paragraphs 12, tnes III particular, that there. bea comp!"ehenslve, 13 and 14 of draft resolution A/39JL.20. Finally, had just. peaceful and lasting solution ~n the Middle East there been a separate vote on paragraph 6 of draft that will meet the. legitimate aspirations of all the resolution A/39JL.19, my delegation would have peoples of the region. abstained. 345. At the same time, my delegation would like to 354. Mr. DOJE (Bhutan): I wish to explain my reaffirm its belief t~at the, situation in the Middle delegation's vote ~:m draft resolution A/39JL.20..My East, an area of persistent instability, requires a Just delegation voted m favour of that draft resolution, and equitable solution based on the purP9ses and but we have reservations on the use of certam principles of the Charter of the United Nations and phrases and on certain deterrninations made in the the releva.nt resolutions of the. General Assembly and eighth preambular paragraph and m paragraph 12. the Secunty Council, 10 particular Security Council 355 Mr ADJOYI (Togo) (interpretation from resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (197 3). FJ'e~ch): The Government of Togo has always been 346. Notwithstanding that, the delegation of Argen- very much concerned over the situation In the tina wishes to state that it does have some re~erva- Middle East and has always Wished. peace to be tions with regard to some of. the 'paragraph~ m the restored to that part of the world, which for almost draft resolution and the possible interpretation that 40 years has never known that peace so greatly might be given them, in particular, paragraph 10, aspired to by all the peoples of the region. That IS upon which a separate vote was taken, and para- why my delegation voted In favour of draft resolu- graphs 6 and 11, because they contain statements tions A/39/L.19, L,20 and 1.21. critical of efforts made to achieve peace III the region. 356. The Government of Toga has always support- 347 The Argentine delegation abstained in the vote ed various actions designed to restore peace. to the on draft resolution A/39/L.20 because some of its region, by m~a!1s, of course, of the self-determination paragraphs contain judgements and recornmenda- of the Palestinian people. However, the Governkent tions that would not, 111 our opinion, lead to a of Togo refuses, as It has the right to do, to ta e a NOTES