A/42/PV.82 General Assembly

I call on the representative of Israel on a point of order. Mr. BEIN (Israel): The representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran has just made several references to my country, Israel, as a "Zionist entity". I wish to stress that I do not in any way oppose being called a Zionist; on the contrary, I am very proud of it. As representatives know, Zionism is the national liberation movement of the Jewish people; it is a positive movement striving only for constructive development. It is the legitimate national movement of my people and it is not directed against any other people or individual. f have in my hand a copy of a letter to the Secretary-General in document A/42/789 of 20 November 1987, signed by this same Said Rajaie-Khocassani, who represents Iran. The letter, inter alia, refers not to Israel, but to Iraq as "the Zionist regime of Iraq". I do not understand this expression, because, as I just explained, Zionism is the national liberation movement of the Jewish people, not the Iraais. What I do oppose, however, is that a State Member of the United Nations is being called a "Zionist entity" or "Zionist r8gime". We too could resort to calling the Islamic Republic of Iran a fundamentalist, dictatorial, aggressor, _’ terrorist and racist entity, but we would rather not. we would prefer that the General Assembly refrain from these repetitious name-callings, I repeat: States Members of the United Nations have names. I would suggest, even if only to avoid a misunderstanding, such as confusion between Israel and Iraq, that representatives be asked to use only these names , even when criticized or cciticizing, and that we all refrain from name-calling and dedicate ourselves to constructive deliberations only.

The comments of the representative of Israel will be included in the records of this meeting. f believe representatives know United Nations established practice with regard to the names of States and I would ask them to abide by it. In the interest of our basic discussion, I hope there will be no more interruptions of the debate. I call on the representative of Iran to continue his statement. Mr. RAJAIE-KBORASSANI (Islamic Republic of Iran]: To comment on the Wint Of order just made, I reiterate that I did not name any State at all. 1 referred only to the gang of Zionist people who have occupied Palestinian territories, I also continue to name that gang, particularly after f have heard that the Zionist movement is not something of which they ace ashamed. If they are proud of it, then let us all call them by a title of which they are proud. That is nothing hut a device for further betrayal of the Palestinian cause, which will be noted by the people of the region as such, and which further complicates the iSSUe. The land of Palestine is pact and parcel of the Islamic territories and the Moslems of the region will by no means forgive or forget its illegal occupation by the Zionist invaders. In this context, the passifying, formalistic decisions of this or any other international body will remain absolutely irrelevant. Such decisions will only expand the gap that already exists between the puppet reactionary regimes in the region and their own people,who find only further evidence in such decisions for the servility of the former to the foreign forces. For Palestine, only Muslim people of the region will decide, not those,r@imes that cannot survive without the support of foreign forces in their victimized countries. Therefore, what the international body does by prolonging the occupation of Palestine is simply to further defame and discredit itself in the eyes of the peoples of the world. The result for the region would be only more bloodshed, more homelessness and more revenge and counter-revenge. If there is any sincerity and honesty on the part of those Powers that exercise great influence not only in this body but on the Zionist forces occupying Palestine, they should force the Zionist agents to permit all the Palestinians to return to their homeland before it is too late, so that they can decide their own political destiny. The people of Palestine remember very well that the occupation of their holy Islamic land materialized only after secular nationalistic feelings were already dividing the Muslim world into impotent national entities, each a delicious prey for imperial Powers. The national entity of Palestine could then be hunted so easily by the terrorist agents of Zionism. It is therefore imperative to recognise that a national approach to the problem of Palestine will reinforce and strengthen that aspect which has been conducive to occupation. Therefore, any attempt to liberate the occupied land on a nationalistic basis would be counter-productive. Liberation of Palestine is an Islamic obligation incumbent upon the entire Muslim ummah; it must be carried out in accordance with their Islamic commitment. We also believe that the struggle of the Palestinian people in the context of an Islamic united front is the only reliable means for liberating Palestine. My Government strongly condemns the occupation of the Palestinian land by the Zionist usurpers and those policies and practices that have contributed to this illegal and inhumane occupation. The people and Government of the Islamic Republic of-Iran will spare no effort to ensure the liberation of Palestine and remain firmly at the side of the Muslim nation of Palestine. We consider the struggle of the Palestinian people our own struggle and we are prepared to mobilize all our political and material resources for the liheration of the occupied land of Palestine. We hope that the Palestine Liberation Organization will remain in the mainstream of Islam and enjoy the full support of the entire Muslim ununah in its holy struggle for the emancipation of the occupied land of Palestine. Muslims of the world believe that peace and stability can be restored to the Middle East only after the flag of Palestine is rehoisted over the entire land Of Palestine, which is now under the occupation of the Zionist non-entity. Mr. BENNOUNA (Morocco) (interpretation from French): The General Assembly is once again nearing the end of a debate on the auestion of Palestine, more than 40 years after that tragedy began, without any sign on the horizon of clear or specific prospects of peace and justice for a people that has endured suffering, destruction and humiliation that cannot be described in words and speeches. Yet, the determination and the courage of the Palestinian people remain unshaken, as does its conunitment fully to shoulder its responsibilities within the community of nations. The wanderings of an entire people deprived of its land and denied the fundamental human rights and fulfilment of its legitimate aspirations to dignity and it& own national life constitute an inadmissible challenge to the conscience of mankind and the most sacred values enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. Our Organisation has made tireless efforts throughout past decades, increasing the numbers of resolutions, decisions, reports and appeals of every kind. But all these gestures of goodwill , all these expressions of wisdom and political logic have, unfortunately, been met with the intransigence of Israel, which has pursued its policy of occupation, nurtured by outmoded expansionist designs. After the Arab summit meeting in Rabat in 1974 the Arab world opened the way ', to peace with honour, recognizing the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the sole, legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, with the corollary right to establish its own State on the territories which must, in accordance with Security Council resolution 242 (1967), be liberated. The Fez plan, adopted unanimously by the Arab countries in 1981, completed that initiative by recognizing the right of all peoples of the region to enjoy statehood as nations and recalling the inescapable reauirement of an independent national life for the Palestinian people in all the territories under Israeli occupation, including Al Quds Al Sharif - Jerusalem). The peace plan was endorsed by the entire international community, which has since come to regard it as the sole means of arriving at a just and lasting settlement of the Palestine auestion, in a spirit of respect for the fundamental principles of the United Nations. All that remained was to determine the most appropriate ways and means of implementing such a plan, through a peaceful settlement based on dialogue and common agreement. This procedural aspect of peace now exists, since Our Organization and the League of Arab States are urging the convening of an international conference, with the participation of all the parties concerned, in which all the permanent members of the Security Council would be directly involved as guarantors of respect for all the negotiated solutions ultimately adopted. The Kingdom of Morocco has consistently called for the implementation of the Fez Plan and the holding of the peace conference , which, we are convinced, would be the prelude to a new era of co-operation and prosperity for all the peoples of the region, whose creative genius has permanently enriched the civilisation and cultural heritage of mankind. Thus why does Israel obstinately block this peace process, at the risk of aggravating the threats and dangers to international peace and security which-the - 8 continued occupation of Palestinian lands and the oppression of the pOpulatlOn. " increasingly create? Appeals have been made for constructive and honest dialogue and hands extended in gestures of peace, so that this inadmissible carnage might at last end and we might finally save from distress and despair generations of Palestinians that are entitled to the normal realization of their potentials and t0 justice, as are all the children of the world. Nothing can justify this situation , certainly not the propaganda of various kinds that one encounters. Everyone knows that the Arab world has always been the first to express indignation about the sufferings and the treatment of the Jewish people in other circumstances, but that cannot in any case hide the inhuman deprivations and denial of justice faced by millions of innocent Palestinians. The successive reports submitted on the auestion of Palestine and on the Middle East bear witness to the deterioration of the situation in the occupied Arab and Palestinian territories. * The most recent report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied-Territories ' (A/42/650) states that the already tense atmosphere has worsened and that there has been an increase in the number and gravity of incidents, .. The report of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the -'- Palestinian People (A/42/35) indicates that the occupying authorities have not "> given up their "iron fist" policy, which is aimed at the repression of all ,: ',--,:-, expressions of opposition to Israeli policy or of support for the Palestine .' : '," Liberation Organization. .-:. Thus, to put an end to the violence that prevails in the occupied Arab and Palestinian territories, to put an end to the massive violations of human rights of the Arab populations, the international community should persevere in its efforts. It would thus he doing justice to the Palestinian people, ensuring the triumph of right over might and restoring peace , concord and co-operation in a region which from time immemorial has been the land of coexistence and mutual tolerance among all the sons of Abraham. MY delegation takes this opportunity to congratulate Ambassador Sarr& Of Senegal, who presided masterfully over the proceedings of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, thus making an invaluable contribution to the defence of human rights and the cause Of peace. I should like also to pay a tribute to the tireless efforts of the Secretary-General, Mr. Perez de Cuellar , who is unsparing of time and energy in his efforts to initiate a dialogue among all the interested parties, thus encouraging the holding of an international conference on the question of Palestine. It is high time we went beyond acrimony and short-term considerations and finally took a clear look at the future. It is time to restore the faith and hope of the Palestinian people and to open up new prospects of prosperity and tranquillity in that part of the world, so that it may continue its invaluable contributions to the spiritual progress of mankind. Mr. FARTAS (Libyan Arab Yamahiriya) (interpretation from Arabic): Once again we are meeting here to discuss the auestion of Palestine, which has been a recurring item on the agenda of the General Assembly for the past four decades - nJOre specifically, since the British delegation, in a letter addressed to the mdre specifically, since the British delegation, in a letter addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations on 2 April 1947, requested the inChSiCn of Secretary-General of the nnited Nations on 2 April 1947, requested the inclusion of the auestion of Palestine on the agenda of the second regular session Of the the question of Palestine on the agenda of the second regular session Of the General Assembly. General Assembly. Although OUT debates throughout those decades did not contribute and were not meant to contribute to the achievement of a settlement of the auestion of Palestine, they were not a completely futile exercise. They at least reminded Us and the rest of the world year after year that there was an item on one agenda entitled “The Question of Palestine”. It is a strange and sad paradox that the mere existence of that item on our agenda should be a source of jubilation to us, for were it not for that oblivion would have engulfed this ouestion thanks to the present Arab options and the indifference that characterizes the position of the international community - so much so that this annual review has become an integral part of those options. In the light of those Arab options, there remains nothing for us but to celebrate annually the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, on the understanding that that celebration is a symbol of the international community’s increasing conviction of the fairness of the Palestinian cause and the legitimacy of the struggle of the Palestinian people for their inalienable rights, particularly the right to self-determination and the establishment of an independent State on their own national soil. So, every year, we are content to discuss this ouestion in the United Nations General Assembly and celebrate the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, on the premise that both the debate and the expression of solidarity reflect the emotional and political commitment of the international community to supporting the Palestinian people’s struggle for survival in camps where their physical existence is at risk , and to defending their cause, which is threatened with liouidation in international forums. The Palestinian cause, its origins and developments are clear and well known to everyone; there is no need to expound the political, natfonal, regional and international dimensions of the problem. DO we really need to reaffirm at every session that no other auestion in the world has been made the target of such a campaign of distortion and indifference - and determination to bury in oblivion vis-&vis the international community - as has the cause of Palestine? IS there really any need for us to stress at every session that the auestion of Palestine is the cause of an entire people that has been displaced from its country by violence and terrorism, whose land has been usurped by force and oppression and whose rights have been usurped by coercion and deceit? Do we need to alert anyone that the people of Palestine, both in the occupied territories and in the Diaspora are the target of policies of mass murder, extermination, repression, exile and forced migration? DO we really need to remind ourselves at every session that the Arab people Of Palestine constituted 90 per cent of the inhabitants of Palestine and owned 97 per cent of the land? IS there any need for us to remind the international community every year Of the massacres which forced the Palestinan people to flee and abandon their homes and farms? DO we really need to remind anyone of the massacres of Deir Yassin, Kafr Qasim, As-Samu', Qibya, Nahalin, Qalailya and Al-Kazama, all of which had the aim of emptying Palestine of its original inhabitants? Who among us has not heard of the opinion of Menachem Begin in his 1965 book "Revolution", in which he said: "Israel's establishment would not have been possible without the incident of Deir Yassin, for whereas the Haqana wer making advances on every front, the Palestinians were running and fleeing, crying and lamenting 'Deir Yassin, Deir Yassin"'. The French thinker Roger Garaudy, on page 50 of his hook "The Case of Israel", described that massacre, as "an operation which was styled and executed on the Nazi model". Aharon Sizling confirmed Garaudy's view by declaring in an official meeting of the so-called Israeli Cabinet on 17 November 1948: "At any rate, and after reading this message, I was unable to sleep all night. I felt that the things that are unfolding are hurting my soul and hurting the souls of members of my family and the souls of those present here. I cannot imagine where we have come from and where we are heading. Usually I used to object when the word 'Nazi.' was used of the British, and I do not like using this word, although the British had committed Nazi crimes. But today the Jews have got their Nazi methods. My whole being was shaken. It is clear that we have to hide these acts from public opinion, and I agree we must not reveal our achievements in these acts, but we must investigate them anyway." Moshe Sharett, when he had the portfolio of what was called the Foreign Ministry, sent a telegram to Nahum Goldmann on June 15, 1948 wherein he described the massacre as: "the most magnificent event in the current history of Palestine'and what is more prominent than the establishment of the Jewish State is the depopulation of Palestine entirely of its Arab inhabitants." That is according to Tom Segev's book 1949: The First Israelis. The Zionist occupation of Palestine, at the outset, took the form of agricultural settlements, then it took the form of what was called "a national home for the Jews", which international Zionism pretended was no more than a limited cultural and religious grouping. Thereafter, in 1948, this grouping took another shape - that of a warrior entity - and, with assistance and support from other colonial Powers, it was able to take advantage of resolution 181 (II), adopted by the General Assembly on 29 November 1947, known as the partition resolution, by which the United Nations conferred legitimacy on one of the most striking manifestations of colonialism in the entire history of mankind. Thus was created a colonialist situation which compared with the attempts of Emperor Cyrus, Napoleon and Lord Palmerston: the situation initiated by Lord Balfour. At the beginning, the Zionist entity pretended to accept the partition resolution, but that was its way of gaining a foothold in Palestine and from that initial step which the international community had legitimized it intended to proceed to occupy and annex more of the Palestinian and neighbouring Arab territories. David Ben-Gurion was very frank in this respect. He wrote the following to his son Amos on 5 October 1937: "I am one of the enthusiastic advocates of the Jewish State, even though that means the partition of Palestine, because I work on the premise that a limited Jewish State would not be the end, but the beginning. For when we achieve 1,000 or 10,000 dunums we shall be happy, because acauiring land is important not only in itself but because through acquiring land we would be strengthening ourselves, and every increase of our power would help us usurp the whole land. Therefore, establishing a State, albeit a limited one, would be an increase in our strength that we can have today and will be a pivot and a strong pillar that we can rely on in our historic struggle to regain the entire land. And we shall bring to this State all the Jews we can absorb, and, we are confident of our ability to bring in more than 2 million people. We are confident that we shall be able to do that, and we shall establish a diversified Jewish State at the agricultural and industrial levels, and we shall start building a defence force, a first-class army. We have no doubt that our army will be the best in the world and therefore we shall he able to settle all the other parts of the country either by agreement and : understanding with our Arab neighbours or in any other way.” It is that “other way” to which Ben Gurion alluded more than four decades ago which the Israeli entity is now using against the Palestinian territories and the adjacent territories. The Zionist dogma is based on the premise that all the Jews *f the world must establish a national existence in the historic land of the twelve ‘tribes of Israel. This idea of the ingathering of the Jews is the UuinteSSenCe of Zionism. Hence there can never he an end to the temptation to expand. The Zionist entity, which was established in known circumstances of illegitimacy and terror, could not, even if it so desired, give up its search to entrench and expand itself, After it had acauired legitimacy, in 1947, it turned to expansion. so at the outset it occupied Um-al-Rashrash and then annexed a passage to the Gulf of Al-Aaahah, following which , in collusion with others, it invaded Egyptian territory to obtain concessions in the Red Sea. Then it launched its 1967 aggression, the third stage of Greater Israel. In 1967 it was able to wipe Palestine off the maPa giving the Palestinian territories Hebrew names such as Judea and Samaria. In addition to Palestine, its expansion has reached the Syrian Arab Golan Heights, southern Lebanon and the Egyptian area of Taba. Those are Arab territories it still occupies by using the "other way" referred to by David Ben-Gurion in his letter to his son Amos. In implementation of that expansionist strategy, the Zionist entity has always refused, and still refuses, to define any houndaries for itself. At an early stagL.i there was a dialogue between David Ben-Gurion and the then Minister of Justice, ” Rosen on the necessity of defining boundaries for the Zionist entity. Rosen said “This uuestion of boundaries is something that we Cannot ignore.” Ben-Gur ion replied “Everything is possible. If we decide here that there will be no reference to boundaries, then there will be no reference to boundaries. There is nothing here which is comp~lsory.~ Rosen said “It is not a ouestion Of obligation or compulsion; it is a legal question.” Ben-Gurion replied “The law is anything that people decide upon. ” The source of the above is the book entitled 1949 - The First Israelis, written by Tom Segev. In that book, the following statement is attributed to David Ben-Gur ion: “AS for delimiting the borders, this is a question that could be changed. In the Holy Book and in our history, there are all sorts of definitions of borders. Therefore there is no real geographical limit and there are no absolute borders.” And Moshe Dayan says: “If you have the Torah , and if you are the People of the Book, therefore YOU have the land of the Torah and on the basis of these principles, borders beCOme flexible. n Moshe Dayan says, in another cuotation: “The American Declaration of Independence, for example, does not refer to any specif Led borders, Therefore we too do not find it necessary to indicate any borders for ourselves.” In yet another cuotation, Moshe Dayan says: “For the past 100 years, our parents have been in the process of the establishment of our country and our people through expansion and by bringing in more Jews and more settlements in order to expand those borders. Therefore it is not possible for any Jewish person to say that this operation has CQm to an end and to say ‘we have achieved the end of the road’ .” The Zionist enemy was not content with usurping land and displacing the People. It resorted to the iron-fist policy in dealing with the Palestinian citizens who are languishing under occupation. It even pursues those who have escaped its brutality with raids from the air and the sea on their refugee camps. The Plan is to liquidate them physically and thus obliterate the symbol of their cause. Article 49 of the Geneva Convention on the Protection of Civilians in Time Of War, dated 12 August 1949, states clearly that: “Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motives.” Article 47 states that: “Proteoted persons who are in occupied territory shall not be deprived, in any case or in any manner whatsoever, of the benefits of the present Convention by any change introduced, as the result of the occupation of a territory, into the institutions or government of the said territory, nor by any agreement concluded between the authorities of the occupied territories and the Occupying Power, nor by any annexation by the latter of the whole or part of the occupied territory. n Despite straightforward provisions, despite all the resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly, especially Security Council resolution 465 (1980) and General Assembly resolution 194 (III), and notwithstanding the objections by the international community, we find that the rulers of the Israeli entity vie with each other in election campaigns in pledging more annexation of Arab lands and the building of more settlements for the Jewish immigrants. The reSUlt iS more displacement of Palestinian citizens in the West Bank and in Gaza, and the displacement of Syrian citizens in the Arab Syrian Golan. The Israeli occupation authorities no longer find any embarrassment in confiscating or transfering the ownership of Arab lands, and forcing their Palestinian owners, by overt or covert means, to leave their homes and their land. This policy is no longer a secret and the occupation authorities do not feel any compunction in making it public. Itzak Shamir has declared that: “Nothing will change the policy of the Israeli Government on the settlement of the Western land of Israel up tc the river Jordan. Settlement will continue in all parts of the land, and nothing will change it or reverse its direction.” In another statement, Itzak Shamir said: “The number of Jewish settlers in the West Sank will rise to double the current number of 50,000 within two or three years.” That statement was made two years ago. It is easy to guess the number of Jewish settlers who have settled now’the West Bank in line with the Plans of the occupation author i ties. Chaim Herzog has stated: “The Jews have the right to settle any part of the land of Israel”. The occupation authorities have imposed on the Palestinian citizens Of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip a reign of terror and violence in application of the “iron-fist” policy. It was with that purpose in view that the “Law of Return” was en acted. Under that law, only Jews can come to Palestine to live. The Pales tinian refugees, the real inhabitants and legitimate owners of the country, Cannot do so. Count Folke Bernadotte, in one of his reports as Personal Representative and an in terna tional mediator , said : “This is an act of aggression on the merest and simplest principles of justice if we deprive the victims of the conflict of the right to return to their land at a time when the Jewish immigrants are flawing into Palestine. That immigration in itself constitutes a grave threat aimed at the permanent and perennial expulsion of the Arab refugees who have their roots in these lands, who have had their roots there for yearsl for centuries”. (Mr. Fartas, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya) We all know the high price that Count Bernadotte paid for his impartial and courageous stance. The well-known Jewish thinker Erich Fromm said: “Since when is a person punished by the confiscation of his territory, by being prevented from returning to the land on which his parents and ‘his grandparents have lived for generations before?” Sir John Bagehot Glubb said in affirmation of the fact that the flight of the Palestinians was the result of the engineered panic and terror generated by the planned massacres perpetrated by the Irgun Zvai Leumi gang: “He who abandons his home by choice does not leave his land with only the clothes which he has on his back”. The occupation authorities have promulgated the “Law of Absentees”, concerning the property of absentee landlords. under that law, the property of the expelled Palestinian refugees have been confiscated under the pretext that they are absentee landlords or that they have left Palestine voluntarily. The occupation authorities have also brought out of the archives a number of the emergency regulations which were issued by the Rritish Mandate authorities in 1945 in occupied Palestine especially those laws which allow the occupation authorities to order administrative detention and expulsion. Then the occupation authorities issued Military Order 854, which stipulates that the military occupation authorities have the right to decide the school and University curricula with the aim of reducing the level of education and academic achievement in the Palestinian universities to the level of elementary and secondary schools. The media circulate news reports from the occupied Arab territories which tell of the violence and terrorism practised by the occupation authorities in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. That terrorism over the past three weeks alone has resulted in the death of five schoolchildren and two women, in addition to a large nUmber of wounded who have been taken to hospitals in critical condition. The occupation authorities have unleashed horrifying reprisals against citizens who Participated in a series of demonstrations, which began on Saturday, 10 October- Occupation troops in GaSa opened fire on students, workers, craftsmen, hoUSeWiveS and Schoolchildren who were protesting at the murder of four of their number at the hands of those troops. On the West Bank, occupation forces fired on demonstrators who were marching in solidarity with their bretheren in Gaza. The Israeli soldier, Rafik Halabi, says in his memoirs: “When I visited Al-Shaat refugee camp in 1975 I could see the fiery glances aimed at us. Insults were heaped upon us as we walked in the dark alleys. I believe that the memory of all the lives exacted by the Israelis continues to haunt our minds. ” As for .Ariel Sharan, he says: “We must strike them everywhere - in this country, in the Arab countries, across the seas. This can be done easily , and in this respect I have seen hopeless positions that have eventually been resolved. We must work against them after they hit us. We must strike them every day, everywhere. If we know that they are in some European oountry, we must strike them there, in spite of difficulties and obstacles, not in an all-out war, but by means whereby one will suddenly disappear , another will be found dead and a third will be discovered stabbed in one of the night clubs in Europe.” This is the tragedy of the inhabitants of Gaza and the West Rank. It is a extension of the plight of the Palestinian people, which has continued on for four B decades. I There is not a glimmer of hope on the horizon that they will ever return to their homes, exercise their right to self-determination or set up an independent State on their national soil, regardless of the fact that the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, international law and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provide for such rights and protect them. A group of Arabs, in the context of the options to which I referred at the / beginning of my statement, have accepted all United Nations resolutions, including those which refer to the Palestinian question as merely a refugee question, even though the refugee question is but one aspect of the Pales tinian question. They have accepted every initiative of the East, the West, the North or the South. They have even contributed a few initiatives of their Own. In spite of all this there has been absolutely no response from the Zionist side. The Zionist entity continues to reject all the relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions, especially General Assembly resolution 194 (III), which calls for the return of the Palestinian refugees to their homes. The Zionist entity continues to refuse to recognize the Palestine Liberation Organization (PI&) and the right of the Palestinian people t0 self-determination, and has rejected every initiative On the subject. We have even heard a call from this rostrum for an initiative, and then in the next session have heard a rejection Of such an initiative. Every initiative is rejected, regardless Of the source. If there is any merit t0 the Arab options - which we leave it to history to judge, although it is not difficult to foresee what that judgement will be - it is that they have exposed to world public Opinion and the international community the true face of the Israeli entity, as well as its expansionist settler nature. They have also-unmasked its recalcitrance, intolerance, extremism, racism and persistent *fiance of the United Nations and disdain for Charter and the principles Of international law, as well as its reneging on all agreements and international CUS~IIS and covenants. This has been possible because of the unlimited economic, financial, military and technolOgica1 support given to the Israeli entity by the United States. The strategic alliance between the Zionist entity and the United States has allowed the former t0 pursue its expansionist,,aggressive policy and to flout all relevant international decisions with impunity. Mr. Uf fe Ellemann-Jensen, t;he Foreign Minister of Denmark, in his statement to the General Assembly on behalf of the 12 member States of the European Community, psta ted the following : “The Twelve are increasingly concerned about the situation of human rights in the occupied territories. We renew our call on Israel t0 fulfil its ,’ obligations as the occupying power, pending its withdrawal, to lift restrictions on political and economic activities and I as we have reiterated recently in our declaration of 14 September, to put an end to the illegal policy of settlements.” (A/42/PV.6, PO 71, 72) These are, in brief, the developments in the Palestine question, which we discuss at every session. At the end of the debate a number of draft resolutions Will be adopted which will never be implemented, because the Israeli entity flouts General Assembly resolutions, disregards Security Council decisions and defies the Pr inciples of the Charter.

We have heard the last speaker in the debate on this i tern. The voting on the draft resolutions on this subject will take place at a later date, to be announced in the Journal. 1 Call now on representatives who wish to speak in exercise of the right of reply. 1 remind members that, in accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, statements in exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and to 5 minutes for the second and should be made bY delegations from their seats. Mr. NLSSIM-ISSACHAROFF (Israel): Now that we have come to the end of the debate, 1 feel obliged to react in par titular to the statement made yesterday by, the representative of Saudi Arabia. That statement contained so many fanciful distortions that it would be impossible in 10 minutes to lower oneself to the depths Of the falsehoods contained therein. Beyond this, the statement was one of the most racist and bigoted that we have heard in this entire General Assembly, and was made in a manner bordering on the surreal, 1 thought that no other representative would have delved into such racism until, of course, I heard the representative of the Islamic E&public of Iran. It seems that those two types of obscure regime have a lot more in common than I had thought, beyond their unconditional hostility to my country. In addition, in his statement yesterday the representative of Saudi Arabia stated that Israel had rejected the Pes plan which, in his words, was “a historic oPportunity" for peace. I should like to ask the representative of Saudi Arabia, I through you, or. President, where, in this historic opportunity for peace, is mention made of any negotiation, direct or otherwise, between the Arab States and Israel. I should also like to ask where in this plan is there mention of the attainment of peace treaties between Israel and its neighbours and the normalization of their relations, Indeed, the plan does not even admit to any mutual recognition between Israel and the Arab States. None of these basic and fundamental elements are even mentioned in this so-called peace planl and it is for this reason that Israel cannot regard it as serious effort to address the resolution of the conflict. f3y the way, I should also like to ask why there is talk of implementating the Fez plan now. The Arab States could have implemented the main thrust of the Plan concerning the Palestinians between 1948 and 1967, before the territories came under Israeli control. It is a strange end curious historical fact that the Arab States needed Israel in order to discover their new-found sensitivity to the rights of the Palestinians, which they trampled and ignored before 1967, In any event, those States not genuinely interested in fur thering the peace process continued to push the Fez plan and dress it up in United Nations language in the guise of General Assenrbly resolutions 38/58 C and 41/43 D. Regarding these resolutions, I would merely like to direct the attention of representatives to the Secretary-General’s report on the situation in the Middle East, in which we find the followings “The discussions with the parties and the Council reconfirrmed what had been reported by the Secretary-General in his report, namely, that sufficient agreement does not exist to permit the convening of the International Conference ae called for in resolution 41/43 D. There was no apparent change in the Fositions of those of the parties and the members of the E&cur ity Council who do not regard the guidelines contained in resolution 38/58 C as an acceptable basis for the convening of a oonference.” (A/42/714, para. 25) If this is so, why do we persist in discussing obsolete ideas which can in no W8y bring the peace process nearer) but, rather, do the exact opposite? There have been lately certain positive developments in the Atab world regarding peace in our area, and yet they are not reflected in this debate. A French statesman and thinker once said, w-n is not what he appears to, bet he iS what he hides.” BY analogy, the under lying aim of this debate is to Perpetuate the conflict, and not to solve it. This is what the Arab rbgimes, not interested in peace, hide. Worse still, this debate also conceals the desire of certain Arab States which generally have some disposition to make peace with Israel. Israel has never shirked the challenge of peace and will always do its utrnOSt to Pursue every possible avenue genuinely leading to the expansion of the Peace process. Thanks to the persistent efforts of certain countries - including, -1 might add, Israel - the peace process is today a reality in the Middle East I a realitY that will not be blurred or undermined by this debate. lmy progress which has been achieved in the peace process has been achieved in a manner COnSPiCUOUSlY mmnnected with General Assembly resolutions and debates such as these. Accordingly, the perpetuation of this antagonistic debate in the manner in which it has been conducted over the past three days is a pursuit of continued hostility and human misery, and a denial of reality. The reality will remain for Israel, and, we hope, for others, the attainment of peace. Mr. HOSSEINI (Islamic Wpublic of Iran): w delegation deeply regrets that Yesterday the representative of the defeated aggressor Iraqi regime once more tried to mislead and deceive the Assembly by introducing baseless allegations and notorious lies against my country. This is not the first time that the Iraqi ripresentative has introduced such extraneous issues to divert the attention of the Assembly from the crimes committed by the Zionist non-entity base of terror in Palestine. The logic behind the purpose of this mischevous behaviour is clear to all. They are helplessly trying to hide their awn war of aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran since 22 September 1980. The Iraqi conduct in the course of the imposed war has indeed been an open challenge to the raison d’6tre of the fundamental rules of law governing armed conflicts. The repeated use of chemical weapons by Iraq clearly illustrates the acts of lawlessness and the brutalities of the Iraqi rdgime. Sowever much we wish to expose the defeated criminal Iraqi regime, we think that the issue of Palestine is too important to be abused. My delegation thinks that agenda item 38, “The question of Palestine”, has to be devoted only to the important issue of containing Zionist aggression against Palestine and not to the Iraqi aggression of 22 September 1980 against the Islamic &public of Iran. We deeply regret that Iraq refers to my country as having distracted the focus of the deliberation from our common concern about the occupation of Palestine. Had it not been for his improper remark, my delegation would have kept strictly to the item under consideration. On the other hand, the representative of the Zionist non-entity base of terror occupying Palestine tried again this morning to hide his face of deception. Everyone here remembers that according to General Assembly resolution 3379 (XXX) I of 1975, Zionism is equal to racism. So Zionists are racists, and the Zionism of which the gentleman is so proud is, indeed, racism. It is the conviction of my delegation and of all the Moslem ummah and people t that the creation, existence and presence of the Zionist base of terror occupying Palestine is totally illegal. It has been created by force and terror. It is a terrorist, inhuman rdgime. The killing, bombing, torture, massacre of thousands of innocent Palestinian people clearly demonstrate the real nature of that blood-sucker re’gime. The Zionist aggressor rdgime invaded Lebanon and committed crimes. We can never forget what the Zionist entity did in Lebanon, in Sabra and shatila. I want to reiterate once more the position of the Islamic Republic of Iran and all the Moslem immah. We believe that the root of the present Conflict in th@ Middle East is the presence of the Zionist base of terror. In order to solve the Problem we have to annihilate that cancerous re'gime, that cancerous entity, and eliminate it from the Middle East. Mr. SHIHABI (Saudi Arabia): Yesterday, the Israeli representative stated the following: “But repetition of blatant lies and distortions does not turn them into truths. Facts cannot be rubbed off the pages of history." (A/42/PV.80, p. 62) IJE? certainly does not practise what he preached. He did not even practise it in the rest of his statement, which was full of blatant lies and distortions. However, today he chose to answer my statement of yesterday and to call it racist and anti-Israeli. We are not racist; the Arabs are known not to be racists. We are against Zionism and its intrigues, designs and plans3 we are not anti-Jewish. But he would be well advised to read the special report of the Special Committee against Apartheid (A/42/22/Add.l), of 26 Oqtober 1987, entitled 'Recent developments concerning relations between Israel and South Africa". That report shaws who are basically raoist , who are the Partners of racism, of whose eXiStenCe racism makes up a basic component. Zionism,is racism in its ugliest form. Re did not choose to respond to some facts and realities in the rest of my statement concerning their racist practices, arrogance and aggression. He did not choose to re~pmd to the uuotations I made from the report of the United Nations Special Committee concerning their practices. The repetition of blatant lies and distortions dces not transform lies into truths: that applies to him more than to anybody elee. Spudi Arabia and every other Arab State base themselves on facts when they speak of Israeli Zionist prmtices. Everybody in this Hall today knows who is against pedce. But they know that they will never have capitulation; the Fez plan was the hietcric opportunity for them. Every sensible person knows that; their best friends’know that. But they do not want to hear the truth, but the truth is knocking at the door. Mr. AL-RWBAIE (Iraq (interpretation from Arabic): It seems that the ..’ 4 ~+st$.a$,“g .,‘ ,f I;, , ).. ., ,’ a, representative of the Tehran rigime insists on his pretence of extreme hostility towards Israel. But it is very clear how much co-operation and co-ordination has ,I taken place between tboee two regimes in their conspiracy against the Arab world in general and the Palestinian people in particular. The continued waf of aggression against Iraq is a strategic objective of both s , the r&~lee of Tel Aviv and Tehran, and the continued inflicting of wounds on Lebanon is yet another of their conunon objectives. Therefore, while the Israeli Air FOtCe shella Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, gangs of Khomeini guards :r encircle and isolate those camps from the world, preventing food, medical supplies ad even drinking water ffom reaching the besieged camps. We have read detailed press UI?potta about the daily suffering of the inhabitants of those camps. Whet ia abo ludicrous is that Tehran’s rulers insist on their hostility towards Israe despite all that. They have launched a war against Irac using weapons supplied by Israel. Perhaps Iran's rulers have found and WtahliShed a new goal, namely, to liberate Jerusalem with ZiOniSt weaponryI Many senior staff members of the United States White House have resignail their poets because of the Iran gate scandal, and for a number of month8 llo~ the United States Congress has been occupied with the details of that iscandal, which eterted with an Israeli initiative to supply the Tehran regime with United States WwmL Perhaps the name of Colonel North has become better known than that Of 8W Hollywood actor . Documented information is availabie of the ccnsigwnti of artillery that left Israel for Tehran and we now know of the COntintrou~~brrrgainfW between the regimes of Tel ~viv and Tehran in all fields to divide the Ata6 kild between them. However, it seems that the representative of the Tehrsn r&ihas , not heard of all that, has not read of it, and has not participated 'in it. This fiction of hostility between Tel Aviv and Tehran has ptOV& to be one of the worst theatre plays - in its production, ,dlrection and acting. I offer free advice to the representative of Tehran: he should cLnnounce his real hostile objectives against the Arab world and its leader8 - objectives that are no different from those of the Tel Aviv rdgime. The PRBSIDENT: Before calling on the re&eeentatiVe :* of the Islamic *' ", a.- Republic of Iran, I wish to remind representatives that thk second eta*ement an ., exercie of the right of reply is limited to five ninutes. Mr. HOSSEINf (Islamic Republic of Iran): r did not want to ray we on the Iraqi allegations because, as I have said, we believe that agenda item 38 Concerns only the auestion of Palestine. Apparently, the’repreeentative of the defeated Iraai r&gime insists on diverting the Assembly fro@ that ilrportank ' Question. One fact is clear tc us all but the Iraqi representatives try to hide it - and facts cannot be hidden - namely, the Iraqi invasion of the Islamic Republic of Iran on 22 September 1980. That is a fact; let us not dispute about it. Our real objective, our strategic policy, is not to fight with our Arab brothers, our Muslim brothers; the objective and strategic policy is the removal of the Zionist entity from the region. In execution of that policy the Islamic Republic of Iran closed the embassy of the Zionist base of terror in Tehran end offered it to our Palestinian brothers, who now operate it. I think that the representative of the Iraqi re'gime did not elaborate on the Iraqi policy towards our Palestinian brothers and how they themselves have betrayed the Palestinians. It is known to us all that the Islamic l&public of Iran has always supported the cause of Palestine and the struggle of our Palestinian brothers against the Zionist usurpers. That is a fact that cannot be hidden. Mr. NISSIM-ISSACHAROFF (Israel): Far be it for me to interfere between two colleagues over there, but I should like to refer to the words of the Saudi Arabian representative. The Saudi Arabian representative was , of course, unable to answer the questions that I raised just now on the Fez plan and persisted in the hollow rhetoric which characterizes his statement and the historic opportunity he talked of yesterday. One thing is clear also. The Saudi representative totally rejects that the Jewish people are entitled to any homeland whatsoever. That position reveals a fundamental misconception of Zionism. Zionism is the Jewish people's answer to racism levelled against it in the Past and also the answer to the racism exemplified by the Saudi representative’s statements yesterday and today. Zionism is the defeat of racism and its caPlete antithesis. As for links with south Africa, perhaps the Saudi representative would like to inform us how much Arab Oil continues to fuel the apartheid regime in South Africa. Mr. AL-RUBAIE (Iraq) (interpretation from Arabic): I wish also to repeat, but in other words, that the continual convergence strategically between the two rigimes of Tehran and ml Aviv is not only evidenced by the co-operation between them in armaments, but also by the war of aggression they continue t0 Wage a9ainSt the Arab nation. While Israel continues its diversified warfare against Palestinians and Arabs, Iran ccntinues its war against Iraq and the Arabs. While Israel rejects implementation of United Nations resolutions and Security Council resolutions with a view to I: esolving the question of Pales tine, the rulers of Tehran do likewise in refusing to implement United Nations decisions and SecUr ie Council resolutions ti put an end to the aggressive war being waged against Iraq and Arab Gulf countries * While Israeli bombs fall upon the camps in Lebanon, !Pahranls bo&s fall upon Baghdad and other capitals in the Arab Gulf region, While Israel defies the world at large, shran’s rulers do the same. Finally, there is one thing that is indisputable, and it is the following question: Who benefits from the continuation of the Iran-Iraq war? Is it the cause of the Palestinian people and their just struggle for the liberation of their land? Does the continuation of this bloody war for over eight years help liberate Arab territories, including the Holy city of Jerusalem? Who is benefiting from the continuing war against Iraq? It is certainly Israel. There lies the link between \ what we are discussing today, the question of Palestine, under the item un consideration, and the question of the war between Iraq and Iran. Israel is the party that benefits from this war, This has been declared by the Zionists on each and every occasion. This is what they express all the time, thereby encouraging the rulers of l!?hran ti pursue their war and reject any peaceful solU&on, especially Security Council resoluti~ 598 (1987). The continuation of the war means occupying Iraq and the Arab world’ ‘\ and diverting their attention from the threat facing them fran Iran, and this is : indeed exploited by Israel, which strives TV perpetuate the situation. This i certainly harm the Palestinian resistance, as well as the Arab resistance against the Zionist menace. This was expressed in the Final Declaration adopted at the Extraordinary Arab Summit Conference, held in Amman in November. This is a fact well known to all. The PRlGSIDENT (interpretation from Russian): The Observer of the Palestine Liberation Organization (Pm) has asked to be allowed tc make a Statement in reply. I call upon him in accordance with General Assedly resolution 3237 (XXIX). Mr. TERZI (Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)): Shedding crocodile tears over their victims, the Israeli perpetrators of the crime against the Palestinian people are trying to sell something here that is not saleable. A great @ffort is being made by Israel to distort and misrepresent history and the ‘facts= Israel did not regain its independence3 Israel was created through atrocities, brutality and comuest, presumably OR the basis of resolution 181 (11) I adopted by this Assembly in 1947. The representative of Israel is better advised to read and studY the minutes *f Israeli cabinet meetings, the diaries of Ben-Gur,ion and Others. In 1948, the then Foreign Minister of Israel, Sharett, informed Nahum Goldmann, President of the World Zionist Congress, that “The most spectacular event in the contemporary history of Palestine, i.n a way more spectacular than the creation of the Jewish State, is the wholesale evacuation of its Arab populationW. In that same year, the head of the Jewish National Fund, Yosef Weitz, had even proPQX?d a series of measures that would drive the Palestinian refugees from the (Mr. Terzi, PLO) border area deep into the Arab hinterland and a so-called Transfer Committee was created. Despite the efforts of the United Nations and decisions taken here, Israel stuck to its stand: "What happened, happened and there is no bringing back the past". member of the Israeli Cabinet, But then, why did the Palestinians flee? A received information on reports Of Aharon Cizling, is on record stating that he had and suggested: atrocities committed in 1948 by the Israeli army from the public...", "Obviously we have to conceal these actions and he added: "Now Jews, too, have behaved like Nazis and my entire being has been shaken". But that same Cizling warned, when referring to the Palestinian refugees: "We still do not properly appreciate what kind of enemy we are now nurturing outside the borders of our State. Our enemies, the Arab States, are a mere nothing compared with those hundreds of thousands of Arabs who will be moved by hatred, hopelessness and infinite hostility to wage war on us, regardless of any agreement that might be reached." Cizling must have had the foreknowledge of what happens to people deprived Of all their rights, including the right to life. He did foresee the inevitable Palestinian fedayeen. NOW let us consider the Zionist-Nazi co-operation. It is a fact that the Irgvn Zvai Leumi, the party of Menachem Begin , who received a peace prize - world peace prize, whatever it is - the former Prime Minister of Israel, advocated in the 1930s that: "The co-operation of the Israeli liberation movement would be along the lines of the last speeches made by the German Reich Chancellor, Herr Hitler, and new order for Europe according to the German concept and the aspirations of the Jewish people being represented by the Irgun Zvai Leumi.” Here I wish to recall that honourable people like Albert Einstein publicly denounced Begin and his party, even in The New York Times, as being akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties and that Begin's party is a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine". so enough talk about Nazis and Nazi-collaboration. I Put then again, on the issue of refugees, why the racist approach? why should , Palestinian Arabs and Jews in different countries be compelled to exchange homes and be transferred when they can and should be enabled and helped to live in peace in their own homes, on their land in peace and harmony? The world must have come to an age of prudence, magnanimity and, more important, human relationships untarnished by racist ideologies and policies. We Palestinians insist that there is no place like home, and our home is Pales tine . Our struggle to return to our homes is an inalienable right. This is 4 what we believe in, this is the universal Declaration of Human Rights, and it is our duty to struggle by all means to attain and exercise this right. For me Jerusalem, where I was born and raised, is my home; and together with all Palestinians, we shall not rest until we return home to live in peace, enjoying all ' our political and social rights , including our right to self-determination without external interference. Finally, the United Nations is here to try to bridge differences and seek agreements on the basis of the purposes and principles of the united Nations Charter and relevant resolutions, not in a vacuum. I;et us all work for the achievement of the long-overdue peace in the land of peace@ Palestine. The commitment of the Palestine Liberation Organization to the best venue for the achievement of peace, namely, the United Nations, is in conformity with the relevant resolutions. Our commitment was clearly stated by the head of our ' Political department, Mr. Kaddoumi, in his statement here on 23 November. Let us give peace a chance and work together for it using the vehicle and the organs of the United Nations. ORGANIZATION OF WORK

I should like to propose that the li8t of speakers on item 40, entitled "Ulited Nations Conference for the Promotion of International Co-peration in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy", be closed on Friday, 27 November, at 11 a.m. It was so decided The PRJSIDID (interpretation from Russian): I request representatives who Wish to participate in the debate on this item to put their names on the list of speakers as soon as possible. The meeting rose at 1.50 p.m.