A/43/PV.45 General Assembly

This afternoon we have before us for consideration the text of the draft resolution to which I have referred. The relevant report of the Secretary-General has been issued as document A/43/720-S/20230. The draft resolution on the subject has been issued as document A/43/L.20. The Secretary-General wishes to inform the General Assembly that the draft resolution has no direct programme budget implications. His proposals concerning the arrangements provided for under the Agreements on the Settlement of the Situation Relating to Afghanistan, along with the revised estimates, have been submitted to the Fifth Committee, which will report to the General Assembly in the course of this session. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to adopt this draft resolution? Draft resolution A/43/L.20 was adopted (resolution 43/20).

~he Assembly has thus concluded its consideration of agenda ite. 30. (The President) AGENDA IT~ 77 REPORT OF THE SiECIAL COMMI'l"1'EE TO INVESTIGATE ISRAELI PRACTICES AFFECTING THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF THE POPULATION OF THE OCCUPIED TERRO'rORIES: DRAFT RESOLUTION (A/43/t.2l)

Members will recall that the General Assembly decided on 26 OCtober 1988 that one special plenary ~eeting would be held, under agenda item 77, on th~ uprising in the occupied territories on the understanding that the Special Political Committee would remain seized of the item for its customary consideration. In this connection the Assembly has before it a draft resolution, contained in document A/43/L.21, which was circulated 1esterday afternoon. I now call on Mr. Day. Perera of S~i Lanka, Chairman of the Special C~ittee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the OCcupied Territories• . Mr. PERERA (Sri Lanka), Chairman of the Speciel Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Riqhts of the Population of the OCcupied Territo[ies: Twentyooone years have elapsed since the occupation of the Arab territories by Israel. Since the occupation the policy of the Government of Israel has been to adllinister the occupied territories as if they constituted a part of the State of Israel. That policy has led to the establishment of settlements, expropriation of property, the transfer of Israeli citizens to the occupied territo~ies, and direct and indirect steps to induce the Palestinian population to leave their homeland. In its report to the General Assembly last year the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the OCcupied Territories, of which I am the Chairman, warned that: -The persistent policy of annexation of the occupied territories, which fleets with fierce resistance on the part of the civilian population, and the cycle of t.n.ion and repression that the iaple.entation of such a policy involve., h.ve led to an explosive situation that ••••• bound to provoke yet ~r. dra..tic ev.nt. In the futur&.- (A/42/650, para. 216) Thi. warninq by the Special Coaaittee was not heeded by Israel and en incident in the Ga.a Strip in Dec••ber 1987 quickly spread to the entire occupied territories, cau.ing an uprising against the occupation. During the period of occupation the international co~unity hae seen a deterioration of the .ituation in the occupied territories, • situation which has been ..rked br a noticeable increaee in the frequency &nd intensity of daily incidents. The civilian population in the territories, particularly the young goner.tion born .na brought up under occupation rule, has been subjected to various a••~ur•• of h.r.....nt, hUMiliation, deportation and restriction of their ba.ic right. and freedoa8 bV the occupying power. Acts of .99r68sion comMitted by Ior••li .ettler. &gainut P.lestinians have contributed to a further deterioration in the cli..te of ten.ion and t.rror prevailing in the occupied territories. The continued .uffering and fru.tration of the ciVilian population in the occupied territories ha. cau.ed the. to react with deterMination to oppose the rule of the occupying Power and regain their inalienable rights. Brutal attempts to euppre•• the upri.in9 have only strengthened their resistance to the occupation. Tbe Dnited Nationa ha. eaphasized the principle of the illegality of the acqu181t!on of territory bv war. This require. Iarael to withdraw frOM the territories occu~ied aa a result of the war. The continued I.raeli occupation constitute•• viol.tion of the inalienable rights of the Arab popu1&tlon. Purther, the territor!Q8 have be.n ada1nietered by Israel with total disregard for the C~ittee to Inve.tig.te t.r.eil Practice. Affecting the Ruaan Ritht. of the Population of the OCcupIed Territorie.) provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which stipulates that ~ilit.ry occupation is to be considered aa a temporary de facto situation, giving no right whatsoever to the occupying power over the territorial integrity of the occupied territories. As in previous years, the Israeli Government did not perNit the Special Conaittee to Investigate Isra~1i Practices to visit the occupied territori~s and observe the position in situ. However, it did visit Amman, DaNasous and Cairo and heard the teatiROny of witnesses who were livinq in the occupied terrirories during the ~riod of the intifad~. These witnesses testified to the harsh conditions that existed and to the atrocities committed by the Israelis. A new phenomenon that had oNerged was the use of tear gas, which, according to the testimonies recorded, caused a large nu~ber of women to miscarry. Evidence was also recorded with regard to collective punishNents and to restrictions on fundamental freedoms. Detailed accounts of this evidence, as well as ..terial gleaned froN the Israeli press and the Arab press, have also been included in the report, which will be introduced in the Special Political Committee on 17 November. I take this opportunity to stress that the responsibility of the internstional community is more manifest than ever before and that urgent measures must be taken to prevent a further deterioration of the situation. The protection of the basic rights of the civilians in the occupied territories can only be ensured through the negotiation of a comprehensive, just and lasting settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict acceptable to all concerned. The Special Committee ie of the view that until a comprehensive settlement is achieved some interim measures could cOI.iribute to the full restoration of the rights of the civilians in the occupied territories. Such interim measures should include full application of provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention by Israel, co-operation of the Israeli authorities with the International Committee of the Red Cross, support by Member States of the activities of the International Committee of the Red Cross and the activities of the United Nations Relief and Works Aq~ncy for Palestine Refugees in the Near East in the occupied territories.

The next sp~aker is the Observer of the Palestine Liberation Organization. I call on him in accordance with resolution 3237 (XXIX) of 22 November 1974. "re AL-KIDWA (Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) (interpretation from Arabic): Mr. President, I should like to begin by con~ratulatinq you on your election to the presidency of the General Assembly at its forty-third session. I should also like to extend our thanks to you and to all Member States for the positive manner in which this plenary meeting has been convened to discuss the intifadah of the Palestinian people in the occupied Palestinian territory, the glorious uprising of the Palestinian people now approaching its twelfth month. It (!r. Perera, Chairman, Special Committee to Investigat~ lira.ll PractIce. Affecting the Human Rights of the population of the OccupIed TerrItories) has offered its Rartyrs, its wounded, and many additional sacrifices as a price for freedom and national independence. We Met t.:XIay under extraordinary circumstances, when in the occupied! Palestinian territory the passage of time means the loss of more of our men, women and children to the murderous Israeli war machine. Your awareness of the enormous gravity of the situation there, and of the need to shoulder your responsibilities 1n reaching solutions to ensure an end to the tragedy our people face and as a step toward the achievement of their inalienable rights, is undoubtedly what prompted the convening of this meeting, which should produce the positive results required. Our people look to you for those results. Twenty-one years ago our people in the Palestinian West Bank and the Gaza Strip experienced a new tragedy, in addition to the tragedy they were living through, along with other sectors of the Palestinian people in refugee camps, and the Diaspora following the catastrophe of 1948. As though their uprooting from the land, displacement, denlal of fundamental freedoms, denial of national rights and deprivation of a political entity were not enough, the occupation of the rest of Palestine was added to that list. The abhorrent Israeli occupation continues to this very day, c~using one of the most significant tragedies of our age, creating a major hotbed of tension and conflict f and posing a serious and permanent threat to peace and security in the Midelc East region, and even to international peace and security in general. There have been 21 years of Israeli occupation and aggression against our people and 21 years of Palestinian resistance against that occupation, resistance which has now culminated in the uprising. what is the cause of the new uprising of the Palestinian people? Why does a whole people revoll? Why do stone-throwing children confront the Israeli military (Mr. AI-Kidwa, PLO) aachine? Why are there so many sacrifice&? How can nails and teeth fight rifles and bull.ets? The answer can be given in one word: occupation. Occupation and its continuation cause resistance and confrontation. This is nothing new to most peoples of the world. It is also guaranteed in international covenants and conventions. But here we may add to this major cause many Israeli atrocities. To occupation we may add the Israeli attitude based on the denial of the very existence of the Palestinian people, or at least refuea! to recognize its legitimate national rights. This attitude is accompanied by claims of sovereignty over the oocupied Arab territories which found clear exprewsion in the illegal annexation of Arab Jerusalem as well as the Syrian Golan Heights. We may add to the occupation the confiscation of land under various pretextsl the establishment of illegal settlements to house colon1&1 settlers, and the arming of those settlers which created a direct threat to our p~ople. We may add to the occupation the economic pillage and exploitation of the population, which began with stealing and confiscating water resources, thus creating intolerable conditions, and which included exploitatio of Palestinian labour, the levying of unjust taxes, the exploitation of the local market, and the blocking of any serious economic development by hampering or preventing projects, even by United Nations organizations, if they involved any form of production or development. We may add to the occupation the striking at and impeding of health, education and cultural institutions, as well as the intensification of oppression against our people, starting with the application of the emergency regulations which involve the arrest and deportation of Palestinians only, and including the prevention of any form of democratic life, even municipal electicns, a limitation on the freedom of movement and travel, press censorship and repeated and systematic attacks on holy religious shrines. (~r. AI-Kidwa, PLO) We can add to occupation the failure to implement United Nations resolutions on persons displaced in 1967 and on the return of the Palestinian refugees of 1948 to their homes and properties or compensation for those refugees. In brief, we can add to occupation the miserable conditions in which our people live, nationally, politically, economically and socially, and the denial of all fundamental freedoms and human rights. This is the occupation and these are its characteristics. It is, of course, a matter that cannot be taken in isolation from Israel's relentless action against other sectors of our people, in particular in Lebanon, where it takes the form of repeated invasions, artillery and naval shelling and regular air raids, resulting in the loss of thousands of lives among Palestinians and Lebanese alike~ To all this must be added political sabotage and massive material losses. Our people ~ithin and outside the occupied territories are awaiting at least a minimum of justice, and for the international community to demonstrate its will, in particular, by ensuring implementation of United Nations resolutions. In this connection we remind the Assembly that between 1967 and 1986 the Security Council adopted 17 resolutions relating to the situation in the occupied territories alone. Israel has not complied with a single one of those 11 resolutions, notwithstanding the clear provisions of the Charter in this regard. Moreover, Israel has openly rejected and expressed hostility to scores of General Assemblv resolutions. In the field of international law, suffice it to refer to Israel's rejection of the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention, of 12 August 1949, to the OCcupied Palestinian territory and other occupied Arab territories, and its refusal to abide by the provisions of that Convention. Faced with this situation, in the absence of any hopeful regional or international initiatives, and in view of the Israeli occupation authorities' persistence in their bruta1 6 oppressive practices and their rejection of all (Mr. AI-Kidwa, PLO) attellPts tC' bring about pe~ce, our people had no recourse but to intensify its rejection ~f occupation and step up resistance to it, inspired by the whole history of Palestinian resistance, until the outbreak of the glorious uprising of 9 Dece.ber 1987. This uprising represents our people~s total rejection of occupation, its adherence to its independent national character and its faith~ and its determin~tion to regain ita ina',enable rights, including the right to establish its own independent State, with the Palestine Liberation Organization as its sole, legitimate representative. Against this we see the brutal Israeli position which ignores or denies the background of the situation, rejects the national dimension of the intifadah - the uprising - and its goals, and refuses to recognize the historical inevitability of the attainment of these goals, resorting to ever increasing force as an official policy and persec~ting our people without regard to law or morality. At this point I shall review some of these Israeli practices and their destructive consequences. First, Israel has deployed thousands of its soldiers, fully equipped with, among other things, armoured vehicles, who have opened he6Yy fire on defenceless Palestinian civilians, using a variety of ammunition, from live bullets to plastic bullets, resulting in hundreds of m~rtyrs and thousands of wound~d. Moreover, they have used toxic gases on a wide scale and thrown toxic ga9. bombs into enclosed areas, resulting in scores of deaths, hundreds of people suffocated, and approximately 500 miscarriages. In addition, of course, there are the invisible effects, as well as the severe beatings of persons under their control to break bones and inflict permanent disability. This is the official poliCiy of the Israeli army, according to statements by the Defence Minister. As a result there have been hundreds of cases of fractured skulls and concussion, laading to permanent or temporary disabilit1!. The fasoist practices have been steppelt) up to the point whefe peopl~ have been buried alive or burned by Israeli troops. There are (Mr. Al-Kidwap PUO) established and acknowledged cases. It is im~rtant here to ment~on the effective participation of set~ler vigilantes in all these killings and acts of terror. The outcome of all this, by 30 OCtober 1988, was the following: 411 martyrs, including. 60 women, 50 children and 25 babes-in-arms, 27) of whom were shot by the Israeli army, 37 shot by settler viqUantes, 36 killed by beatings and in suspicious circumstances and 6S killed by inhaling toxic gao, while another 45,000 were wounded. These figures have be~n confirmed by medical reports. Of those injured, 20 per cent were wounded by live, rubber or plastic bullets, 45 per cent were injured by beatings with various objects, including rifle butts, 35 per cent sutfered from inhaling toxic gas and 5 per cent were injured by other means, including torture and burying alive. Secondly, the Israelis have closed off entire areas and laid siege to them, preventi'~ the entry of food supplies and ,rovisions and imposing curfews on towns, villages and refugee camps for prolonged periods of up to several weeks. These measuras n~ve resulted in alarming food, health and social conditions. Houses have been demolishea on such pretexts as that a family member has thrown a stone, or the absence of a building permit: 115 houses were demolished on the pretext of security and another 143 because of the absence of permits, among them, for example, 26 houses in the village of Kisan, near Bethlemen, on 26 OCtober. Homes have been closed or raided and their contents destroyed, resulting in the displacement of a large number of Palestinian families - about 2,500 people in all. Thirdly, there have been mass arrests affectin9 30,000 Palestinians and the administrati...e detention, without trial arid without charges being lai.d against them, of 5,400 Palestinians. They have been held in military detention camps - the most inf~mous being Ansae 3 in the Negev, with 2,500 detainees, including writers, poets, physicians, lawyers, and so forth - in subhuman conditions in the desert. (Mr. Al-Kidwa, PLO) These detainees are, aoreOVt!r, subjected to acts of terrot, such as being fired upon - which has led to the death of two martyrs. In this reqard we would refer to the bull9tin of the International CaL.ittee of the Red Cross of Sep~ember last. Israel has repeatedly resoEted to what the whole world h~s, unanimoualy and categoric&lly, rejected, that is, the deportation of Paleatinian inhabitants into exile. Since the start of the intlfadah, 32 Palestinians have been ~~ported to soutb Lebanon in four groups, notwithstanding the protests of the Leb&nese authorities, and 27 deportation orders have been issued against other Palestinians. We would recall that 2,000 Palestinians have been depnLt~ since 1967. Fourthly, there is the permanent closing of schools, institutions and universities. The activities of a larqe number of humanitarian, social and cultural societies haye been shut down. Newspapers and numerous trade unions have been shut down. An in~~ne campaign was launched against popular committeea after they were bannea. Worne, there was obstruction of emergency aid and treatment by raids on hospitals, the rejection of applications for permits to import ambulances, the impeding of the movement of the few ambulances available, and the issuing of orders prohibiting the treatment of the wounded in government hospitals. Pifthly, there was an escalation of economic repression. This is represented bV the forcible levying of taxes, the ban on the bringing of money into the country, the illegal ~onfisc~tion of significant ameunts of money owned by Palestinians, the uprooting of thousands of olive trees and other oropa, and tha prohibition of the harvesting and exporting of main crops such as olives and grapes. Sixthly, there has been an ~ttempt to isolate the West Bank and the Gaza Strip from the outside world even by cutting telephone communications. These areas are considered to be off limits - with no entry, no exit. The mass media are (Mr. Al-Kidwa, PUO) restricted by numerous methods, such as the ban on entry into and movement in certain areas, especially for television crews. I have given only an overview of what Istael is doing against our people. We have specific detailso which we ahall present to the Special Political C~ittee. However, all those actions did not - dndwill not, God willing - stop the intifadah. Our people have been able to continue to resist, enjoying the highest degree of awareness and precise organization, setting A wonderful example of complete national unity, creating new methods of life and resistance against oppression and persecution, such as the strengthening of popular committees in all places and fields; promoting the domestic economy ~nd agricultural co-operation, pro.cting popular education in the face of the policy of obscurantism; organizing trade; promoting a boycott of enemy c~'Odities; end even developing and changing the pattern of social relations. All that is taking place within the framework of inter-action amonq the various sectors of our popUlation, including intellectuals and leaders, particularly the Palestine Liberation Organization-Unified National Leadership, with the acronym OAW~, meaning Nresist ft , which is a holy word in the vocabulary of our people. The intifadah has its causes, comprehensive national goals and demands, all of ~hich could bring to an end the current tragic situation and the blood-letting. We consider it the obligation of the international community to respond to those demands and to compel Israel, the occupying Power, to fulfil them. I would remind you here of Israel's total dis~eqard for the resolutions adopted by the Security Council since the beginning of the intifadah, namely, resolutions 605 (1987), 607 (1988) and 608 (1998). Allow me here to quote from Statement No. 27, issued by the Palestine Liberation Organization-Unified National Leadership in the occupied Palestinian territory on 19 October and directed, in essence, to the United Nations: (Mr. Al-Kidwa, PLO) l1The Unified Naticnal Leadership calls upon the Un:,t.ed N&tions on the anniversary of its establishment to shoulder its full responsibility in implementing its resolutions which guar.antee the right of our people to return, self-determination and the estal~ishment of an independent State under the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization. As the Unified National Leadership congratulates the Secretary-General of the United Nations on this occasion and all the people of the world who support our rights, it reaffirms the need to ensure the following legitimate demands: first, the withdrawal of the occupation forces from the Palestinian population areas; secondly, the abrogation of all mandatory and occupation covenants and emergency regulations in effect; thirdly, the cessation of the policy of settlement and the annexation and dismantling of existing settlements; fourthly, the release of the intifidahn detainess and the closure of the military detention camps; and fifthly, the securing of international protection for the defenceless masses of our people for a period not exceeding several months, in preparation for the creation by our people of an independent State, with Jerusalem as its capital." We consider that the realization of these demands may constitute a major step towards the achievement of a j~st and comprehensive peace in the Middle East. That is the peace the entire world longs for, the peace the Palestinian people aspires to more than anything else. The Palestine Liberation Organization has declared its readiness to participate seriously in the peaca process in the Middle East on the basis of international legality, which constitutes an integral whole from which no party can choose or reject elements as it pleases. We declare here, once again, that we accept the establishment of peace on the basis of all the United Nations reaolutions relevant to the question of Palestine and the situation in the Middle Bast, including Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), but not on the basis of those two resolutions alone. Frankly speaking, we cannot accept, or even understand, the attitude of certain parties which insist on considering the recolutions I have mentioned as the sole terms of reference for the achievement of peace. We cannot understand that attitude, not only in the light of the principled position of viewing international legality as an integral whole but also 1n the light of the fact that those parties have already voted 1n favour of other United Nations resolutions, such as General Assembly resolutions 181 (II) of 29 November 1947 and 194 (Ill) of 11 December 1948 as well as =everal Security Council resolutions, including resolutions 267 (1969), 298 (1971), 465 (1980) and 607 (1988). Therefore, insistence bv those parties on that position is, in our opinion, only an arbitrary insistence on refusing to determine the political basis, even in broad outlines, for a peaceful settlement, and on rejecting the rights of the Palestinian people, particularly the right to self-determination and to establish its own State. None the less, we believe that the conditions of international detente and the improved relations between the two super-Powers may constitute a catalyst for convening the international peace conference on the Middle East under the auspices of the United Nations, with the participation of the permanent members of the Security Council and the parties concerned, including, of course, the Palestine Liberation Organization and Israel. We view this conference as the only possible machinery for the achievement of peace in the region. In thlS connection, while we express our appreciation for the positive attitude of tho Soviet Union toward the cause of the Palestinian people, we hope that the United States administration will be able, especially ~fter the elections, to take a just position consistent with its role as a super-Power, one that would serve the cause of peace. Our people has been unable so far to separate what happened to it and what is now happening in the occupied land from the absolute United States support of Israel and its policies. In a few davs,the Palestine National Council, the highest leqislative authority of the Palestinian people, will hold its nineteenth extraordinary session in brotherly Algeria on 12 November 1988. That session w~ll be devoted to extending support to the intifadah in the occupied Palestinian territory. It will also review the significant political changes that have occurred in the preceding period, inclUding the announcement by the brotherly Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan that it was severing its legal and administrative links with the West Bank, as well as the numerous political moves made in an attempt to activate the process of achieving peace in the region. We can expect the Palestine National Council to adopt at its next session many important resolutions to ensure and guarantee the future of the Palestinian territory and the sovereignty of the Palestinian people over it, in the light of the decision by the Palestinian leadership that the Palestine Liberation Organization shoulder all its responsibilities towards the occupied Palestinian territory and towards our people there. The Palestine National Council will also discuss the promotion and development of Palestinian Arab relations, particularly Palestinian-Jordanian relations, which are of a special nature, as well as all actions for the achievement of peace in general. We hope to see - we even depend on - achieving the widest possible international support for the next steps we take based on our just position. We hope that all of us will, as a result, be able to move the peace process forward. We should like to express our thanks to all the States that have supported the intifadah of our people and its just goals. We also thank those States that stood opposed to the atrocious Israeli practices. We extend our thanks also to the United Nations and its Secretary-General as well as all its subsidiary bodies and specialized agencies. We also thank govetnmental and non-governmental organizations. We should like to thank the members of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the OCcupied Territories. Our people will continue its struggle. The intifadah of our people in the occupied Palestinian territory will continue as well as the struggle by other sectors of our people who are struggling to attain its inalienable rights, inclUding the right to establish its own State and to achieve a just peace in the region. The question is: How can the international community, how can the United Nations, achieve that goal with the least amount of suffering and the smallest number of victims on all sides?

I call on the representative of Jordan to introduce the draft resolution. Mr~ SALAH (Jordan) (interpretation from Arabic): Mr. President, I should like first to express my gratitude for the positive response to the request of the Arab Group to have the sUbject of the popular uprising in the occupied Palestinian territories discussed in the General Assembly. This .response constitutes constructive co-operation on the part of the presidency of tha General Assembly and reflects recognition by the international community of the importance of the subject. I should also like to point out that I am speaking on behalf of the group of States members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, since my c~untry had the hanour to preside over the Seventeenth Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers, called the "Session of Islamic Solidarity with the Uprising of the Palestinian People", and also on behalf of the Group of Arab States, of which my country is Chairman for this month. The General Assembly has over the years regularly discussed Israeli practices in the occupied Palestinian and Arab territories. However, discussion of this item during the present session will inevitably be of a special nature, as the occupied P~lestinian territories have, over the past 11 months, witnessed - and are continuing to witness - a growing popular revolution conducted by defenceless Palestinians in defiance of continued attempts of the Israeli military machine to suppress them and to stifle their revolution. The Palestinian Arab people hopes, as it suffers under the oppression of Israeli colonialism, that the discussion in the General Assembly of its plight will mark a turning-point in the way the subject is addressed, in order that the appropriate steps are taken whereby the United Nations can exercise its responsibilities, as provided for in the Charter, with respect to the peaceful settlement of disputes and the maintenance of international peace and security. The Palestinian people is looking forward to the deliberations taking place at this session - and at this meeting in particular - hoping that they will provide more than simply another occasion for offering expressions of sy~athy. For the uprising, or intifadah, represents a strategic development in the question of Palestine which can be dealt with only by putting an end to the Israeli occupation. The intifadah-revolution which the occupied Palestini~n territories are experiencing cannot be treated as one incident in isolation from the totality of the Palestinian people's struggle over the past decades for the restoration of its rights. It is an advanced form of that escalating str~ggle, a fresh expression of the Palestinian national identity and a heroic act on the part of a people whose aim is to put an end to the long-drawn-out suffering it has endured since it began to defend its national cause. The Palestinian people has succeeded, by means of this uprising, in bringing the whole world - and particularly Israeli society and Israel's supporters - face to face with it and its cause, in a manner which admits of no equivoc~tion or deception. This more-developed stage of the Palestinian people's sufferinqs and struggle, which have been intensifying since the inception of the Israeli occupation over 20 years ago, has in its duration, scope and objectives exceeded the previous successive limited situations in the occupied Palestinian and other Arab territories. This uprising-revolution has shown the whole world that the Palestinian Arab people, while subjected to the most abhorrent forms of colonialism, is determined - whatever the sacrifice - to attain its national independence and exercise its inalienable historical rights, foremost among which is the right to self-determination and the establishment of its own state on its national 8011. Israel has responded to the uprising in the same way that it has responded to all stages in the Palestinian people's cause - namely, by using force and violence and attempting to enforce the status quo as a means of achieving its political goals. The Israeli leadership has gone to furthor extremes, indUlging in repression, on the one hand, and endeavouring to justify itself and evade responsibility, on the other. In Israel's eyes, everyone in the world is responsible for the uprising except Israp.l itself. Since the beginning of the uprising, Israel has persistently attempted to establish "enternalR pretexts and motives for this development. At timeD it has accused foreign parties of provocation and at other times it alleged that the events were taking place because of the 9resence of journalists and television cameramen; and on many occasions it has declared that the very discussion by the United Nations of its oppression and violence serves only'to exacerbate the situation. Israel has placed itself at odds with everyone else on a major moral issue, whose existence and motives it subbornly refuses to recognize. For Israel's ruling circles, its colonial occupation of the Palestinian territories and the colonization of their population do not constitute a sufficient reason for the Palestinians' revolution. In the opinion of some of those circles, it is up to the Palestinians to accept that occupation or face extermination - as if they were locusts. The conditions in which the Palestinians live in the occupied terri.tories, and the politic&l, economic and psychological pressures to which they are subjected, defy description. The world is well aware that Israel bears full responsibility for the deteriotation of those conditions; indeed, they have deteriorated to such an extent that the Palestinians have despaired of attaining an honourable solution unless they take the situation into their own hands. It is therefore only natural that the Palestinians should revolt in order to express their categorical rejection of the Israeli occupation and to make it possible to wrest back their rights. Israel has over the past 20 years - and particularly during the past 11 months - tried all the policies and m.eans which it has deemed expedient in an attempt to dampen the fire of the Palestinian people's revolution. To cite but some of these, it has pursued the "iron-fist" policy, with the consequent beatingsi breaking of bones and burials alive; starvation; closure of the occ~pied territories and isolation of parts thereof; demolition of homes and villages, and political assassinations. Apart from some timid references by certain Israeli officials, the official position of the Israeli Government is still the rejection ef any political dealing with the uprising, because Israel believes that the intifadah is a security issue which can be add:essed through measures of repression. It appears to be unconvinced - despite the hundreds of Palestinians killed and the thousands injured or detained - that its policy has failed. Indeed, it is - with blatant obstinacy - stepping up those disgraceful practices. It is no longer deterred by the young age of the children it kills or by the advanced age of the old people it tortures, or by the condition of the pregnant women on whom it rains blows and kicks. Nor is it deterred by the sanctity of churches, mosques, hospitals or educational institutions. The Israeli Government provides the whole world every day with further practical manifestations of the collapse of all those spurious concepts and allegations with respect to its role as a fountainhead of higher values and an oasis of democracy which it has attempted to inculcate in international public opinion throughout the years of its existence as a State. This uprising, together with Israel's repressive practices, represent~ an important turning-point in the world's view of Iorael, in the relationship between the two, and in the world's understanding of the Arab-Israeli conflict and its background - in isolation from the campaigns of slander conduct~d over many years. The policy of Israeli settler colonialism - at a time when colonialism is being eliminated - is a phenomenon which is no less out of place than the policy of apartheid practised by the Government of South Africa in an era that is obviously characterized by the defence of human rights. Both phenomena go against the tido (Mr. Salah, Jordan) of history, and both are therefot, ~oomed to failure. I do not think there is any ne~ to provide examples of or proof for the comparison. The international caa.unity is fully aware of the nature of the racist and inhuman prac~ices pursued by both Israel and South Africa. The fact that the Israeli Government has followed 1n South Africavs footsteps by imposing censorship on press coverage has not stopped the escalation of the uprising and has not prevented world pUblic opinion from continuing to be 1nfcrmed of the suffering of the P~lestinian people. In our view, the international community's commemoration of the fortieth anniversary of the UnivGrsal Declaration of Human Rights should provide an occasion to aff.irm tha comprehensive nature of that De~laration and to forgo selectivity and dual standards in the application of its provisions. Man's right to individual freedca and dignity and the peoples' right to self-determination a~e ~rinciples that .ust be applied the world over, and not in certain parts alone. They represent an indivisible whole, and it is incumbent that we should make every human effort towards their full implementation. The events of recent months have not been sufficient to persuade. the Icraoli leadership to change its position. The leadership's problem is that it hus ao faith in the political 8~lution based on the exchange of land for pe~~e that is h~f"9 urgently called for by the world as a whole. Those in its influential circles do not consider withdr~wal from the occupied Palestinian territories to be an option worthy of consideration. Despite the momentum of the uprising and the increase in international condemnation and denunciation of Israelcs methods of dealing with it, Israel's settlement policies are being maintained. There can be no better evidence of that than the Israeli Prime Minister's inauguration of new settlements on the West Bank in the course of last week u This takes place at a time when the Israeli Government is still allowing residents of such settlements to arm themselves and, disgracefully, continuing to condone their terrorist practices against the legitimate owners of the land. This demonstrates the dual standards of th6 Israeli judicial system, which does not regard attacks on Palestinians as constituting a crime to be punished bv law, while all possible means of repression are used against any Palestinian who acts in self-defence. The Palestinian people living under occupation do not consider our discusaions simply to be another opportunity for the adoption of a resolution, to be added to previous resolutions, which have remained unimplemented. The Security Council has adopted a number of resolutions since the beginning of the intifadah. Israel has not only f~iled to comply with those [esolutions but has even refused to admit the Security Council's competence to discuss the subject. It has been alone in rejecting the international consensus that the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 is applicable to the occupied Palestinian territories. This rejection is consistent with Israel's long tradition of ignoring the international will and continually refusing to recognize the legitimacy of the Charter and of United Nations (~r. Sala~, Jordan) resolutions. Accordingly, this international Organizatio~~ _nd the Security Council in particular, is urged to shoulder the reaponsibilities entrusted to it under the Charter. It is essential, if the United Nations is to maintain its prestige, that the Organization ~oncentrate on ensuring the implementation of the many Security Council resolutions which affirm that the Fourth Geneva Convention dues apply to the occupied territories and that Israel must take immediate steps to give effect to it. With regard to the essence and basis of the conflict, whi~h can be ended only by termination of the Isr~eli occupation and the solution of the question of Palestine, the Arab States, through their leaders, have expressed at the last two summit conferences their commitment to the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace on the basis of relevant United Nations reSOlutions. The Arab summit conferences emphasized the need to convene the International Peace Conference on the Middle East, under the auspices of the United Nations and with the participation of the five permanent members of the Security Council and all the parties to the conflict, including the Palestine Liberation Organization, the sole, legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, on an equal footing with the other parties concerned. The summit conferences considered the Conference to be the only appropriate means of attaining a peacefUl, just and ~omprehensive settlement of the conflict that would ensure restoration of the occupied Palestinian and Arab territories, solv~ all aspects of the Palestinian question and guarantee the Palestinian people's inalienable national rights. This positive attitude on the part of the Arab States met with the support and encouragement of the overwhelming majority of the nations of the world. Jordan, together with the other Arab and Islamic States and all peace-loving forces in the world, hopes that the United Nations will at a very early date be able to arrange for the Conference to be convened, b~cause the continuance of the current situation in the Middle East region represents a grave and dangerous threat to international peace and security. Furthermore, failure to put an end to the tragedy of the Palestinian people will confront the international community with a moral dilemma which, if it continues, will endanger the effectiveness and credibility of the United Nations and its Charter. I should like now to introduce draft resolution A/43/L.2l, entitled "The uprising (intifadah) of the Palestinian people", on behalf of the following States, which are its sponsors: Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Comoros, CUba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Egypt, the Ge~lnan Democratic Republic, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mongolia, Morocco, Nicaragua, Niger, Oman, Pakistan, Poland, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, SUdan, the Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, Turkey, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Arab Emirates, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia and Zimbabwe. The articles of the draft resolution are clear and balanced and are drafted in such a way as to reflect the desire to build a consensus on this basis in order to exptess the General Assembly's feelings of sympat~y for the Palestinian people in their suffering in the occupied territories and because of their maltreatment and persecution at the hands of the occupying Power, Israel. The preamble consists of six paragraphs, which include an expression of deep concern at the alarming situation in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied by Israel and a reaffirmation that the Fourth Geneva Convention is applicable to the territories, including Jerusalem. They also include r~ferences to relev&nt General Assembly resolutions, to Security Council resolutions 60S (1987), 607 (1988) and 608 (1988) and to the need to resolve the underlYing problem, including the Palestinian problem in all its aspects. The draft resolution has eight operative paragraphs, the first of which condemns Is~aelos practices violating the human rights of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories, including Jerusalem. (Mr. Salah, Jordan) tn operative paragraph 2 the General Assembly strongly deplores the continuing disregard b¥ Israel, the occupying Power, of the relevant decisions of the Security Council, while in oparative paragraph 3 it reaffirms that the occupation by Israel of the Palestinian territories since 1967, including Jerusalem, in no way chang~s the legal status of those territoriesc In operative paragraph 4, the General Assembly demands that Israel, the occupying Power, abi~~ immediately and scrupulously by the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and desist forthwith from its policies and praotices that are in violation of the provisions of the Convention. In operative paragraph 5, it calls upon all the High Contracting Parties to the Convention to take appropriate measures to ensure respect by Israel, the occupying Power, for the Convention in all circumstances in conformity with their obligation under article 1 thereof. In operative paragraph 6, th~ General Assembly invites Member States, the organizations of the United ~~t10ns system, governmental, intergover~Taentaland non-governmental organizations, ond the mass communications media to continue and enhance their support for the Palestinian people. Operative paragraph 7 is a call to the Security Council to consider the current situation in the occupied Palestinian territories, taking into account the recommendations contained in the report of the Secretary-General, that is, document Finally, in operative paragraph 8, the General Assembly also requests the Secretary-General to examine the present situation in the occupied Palestinian territories by all means available to him and to submit periodic reports thereon, the first such report no later than 17 November 1988. On behalf of all the States sponsoring this draft resolution, I invite members of the General Assembly to vote in its favour, in the hope that the resolution, once adopted, will help reduce the Buffering of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories, as one step on the path towards a just, lasting and comprehensive solution of the question of Palestine.

I now call on the representative of Greece, who will speak on behalf of the States members of the European Community. Mr. ZEPOS (Greece): I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Twelve member States of the European Community. When the Special Political Committee considers agenda item 77, the Twelve will have the opportunity to express their views in greater detail. At this stage, we should like to make some remarks of a more general nature. As a matter of principle, the Twelve attach the greatest importance to all matters affecting the rights of the population of the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967. In the last 12 months we have followed with deep concern the situation in the West Bank and in the Gaza Strip, which has seriously deteriorated as a result of the continuing Israeli occupation. Civilian resistance to the occupation has grown, and has undoubtedly been further intensified by the excessive level of force employed by the occupation forces. It reflects the wholly understandable frustration and resentment at the length of the occupation and at the still uncertain prospects for an early solution. The civilian population of the territories, including in many cases women and children, has suffered tragically. The examples are too numerous to be given (Mr. Salah, Jordan) In operative paragraph 2 the General Assembly strongly deplor~s the continuing disregard by Israel, the occupying Power, of the relevant decisions of the Security Council, while in operative paragraph 3 it reaffirms that the occupation by Israel of the Palestinian territories since 1967, including Jerusalem, i~ no way changes the legal status of those territories. In operative paragraph 4, the General Assembly demands that Israel, the occupying Pow~r, abide immediately and scrupulously by the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Prot6ction of Civilian PeLsons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and desist forthwith from its policies and practices that are in violation of the provisions of the Convention. In operative paragraph 5, it calls upon all the High Contracting Parties to the Convention to take approp~late measures to ensure respect by Israel, the occupying Power, for the Conve~tion in all circumstances in conformity with their obligation under article 1 thereof. In operative paragraph 6, the General Assembly invites Member States, the organizations of the United Nations system, governmental, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, and the mass communications media to continue and enhance their support for the Palestinian people. Operative paragraph 7 is a call to the Security Council to consider the current situation in the occupied Palestinian territories, taking into account the recommendations contained in the report of the Secretary-General, that is, document S/19443. Finally, in operative paragraph 8, the General Assembly also requests the Secretary-General to examine the present situation in the occupied Palestinian territoriea bV all means available to him and to submit periodic reports thereon, the first such report no later than 17 November 1988. (Mr. Salah, Jordan) a settlement is set out in the Venice Declaration and subsequent statements, and is well known. All parties should clearly and unambiguously accept two principles: the right to existence and security of all States in the area, including Israel, and the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, with all that this implies. The support of the Twelve for an international peace conference under the auspices of the United Nations is also well known. Our long-standing contacts with all parties to the conflict is but one expression of our a.rdent desire to see pe~ce prevail in the Middle East. At this crucial juncture we appeal to all the parties concerned to redouble their efforts to reach a political solution, taking into account the legitimate interests and rights of all.

I now call on the representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, who will spea~ on beoalf of the Group of Eastern European States. Mr. BELONOGOV (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (interpretation from Russian): I am speaking as Chairman of the Group of Eastern European States. The fact that the question of the occupied territories has been singled out for urgent discussion in a plenary meeting of the General Assembly testifies to the mounting diaquiet of the international community over the situation developing in the West Bank and Gaza. "The violence and suffering in the occupied territories ••• continue unabated ... The continuing occupation of those territories is not acceptable to their inhabitants and will not become so." (A/43/69l, p. 8) Every day a steady succession of reports come in from the news agencies about clashes between the Israeli forces and the inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza, about the death and mutilation of Palestinians, including women, children and adolescents. The causes of the persistent tension in these areas are evident to the overwhelming majority of States Members of the United Nations. Those causes are the continui!'!.g occupation of the territorieu captured by Israel in 1967 and the fact that the rights of the Palestinian people, primarily their right to self-determination and to the establishment of their own State, have been trampled underfoot. The measures of violence used by the occupying Power constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention on the Protection of Civilian Populations in Time of War of 12 August 1949. In fact, "protection" is har~ly an appropriate word to use. at a time when the hospitals in the occupied territories are overflowing with Palestinians with broken arms, bullet wounds and tear-gas poisoning. One wonders what all their suffering was for. After ~ll, the only thing they want is an opportunity to ~xercise their right to self~determination, the right to live freely in the land of their forefathers, and the right to decide their own destiny. Tel Aviv's policy of terror, violence and repressio' ~gainst the Arab population of the occupied territoriea and its violation of the universally recognized no:ms of int~rnational law - primarily the United Nations Charter, the relevant resolutions of the Security Council and of the General Assembly, and the Geneva Convention - deserve to be condemned. Of course, any terrorist acts deserve to be condemned, no matter who carries them out, and whether the terrorism is perpetrated by a State or by individuals. The overwhelming majority of the Members of the United Nations urqently demand an immediate halt to the unlawful practices of tbe Israeli authorities on the West Bank and in Gaza. They also demand full compliance by the rsraeli authorities with the 1949 Geneva Convention. The actions of the ruling circles of Israel are complicating the efforts of the inte~national community to achieve a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, and this is happening at a time when the uprising of the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza has once again highlighted the pr~ssing need for such a peace to be attained as soon as possible. In order for movement towards peace to be started, there is a need, first and foremost, for a desire - a desire on the part of bOth sides - to beqin such a movement. The Arab countries have several times, inclUding quite recently at the summit in Algeria, confirmed their readiness to reach a settlement on the basis of the principles adopted in 1982 in Fez and within the framework of an international peace conference. Moreover, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) recently pUblished a statement emphasizing its commitment to a political solution of the Arab-Israeli conflict and its readiness to take part in negotiations within the framework of an international conference. That document reflects the desire of the PLO to achieve the establishment of peace in the Middle East, on the basis of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), and the recognition of the riqht of the Palestinian people to self-determination ~ithin the framework of an international conference under the auspices of the United Nations, with the participation of the five permanent members of the Security Council, as well as all parties involved, inclUding the PL~ and the Government of Israel. This approach to the framework of a settlement reflects the recent positive developments in the a response from the Israeli leaders. There is now a mounting understanding in the world of the fact that one cannot build one's own security except by taking into account the security of other peoples and their desire to decide their own fate entirely by themselves. Peace can be established in the Middle East r but On one essential condition: that one of the peoples living there must not understand the exercise of its own rights as meaning the suppression of the rights of others, and that the Israeli and Arab peoples, including, obviously, the Palestinians, must be able, to an equal degree, to exercise their right to life, freedom aod happiness. We are deeply convinced that the attainment, at an international confl~rence under United Nations auspices, of a just and comprehensive settlement, duly taking into account the legitimate interests of all parties to the conflict, will lead to the solution of the problems of the Middle East, including the crucial Palestinian problem. Mr. VRAALSEN (Norway): I have the honour to speak on behalf o~ the four Nordic countries - Denmark, Finland, Sweden and Norway. We have followed the seriously deteriorating situation in the occupied territories of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip over the last 11 months with deep concern. The unabated violence and sufferin; resulting from the continuing Israeli occupation is a persistent reminder of the urgent need for progress on the diplomatic front. More than 20 years of occupation has unavoidablY bred tension and violence. The main responsibility for the present situation thus rests with the occupying Power. Attempts to quell legitimatp. aspirations among Palestinians through the application of repressive measures have further enhanced the widespread bitterness with and resistance against the Israeli Occupation. All acts of terror and violence, from whatever quarter they may come, must be condemned. The spiral of violence has to be broken• The represssive Israeli measures entail violations of Israel's obligutions under international law and with regard to human rights. In the course of the uprising we have witnessed a variety of illegal and unacceptable Israeli policies and practices. Such acts as the opening of fire by the Israeli army against defenceless civilians~ beatings and the us~ of plastic bullets clearly represent excessive use of force. It is an indisputable fact that the effect of the use of such means as plastic bullets is often lethal. We also strongly deplore the imposition of various administrative and economic measures in the occupied territories to counter the uprising, such as the deportation of civilians, the demolishing of houses, collective punishment and detention without trial. We appeal to Israel to desist from these practices forthwith and to accord the inhabitants of the occupied territories the protection they are entitled to under international law. It is our firm conviction that the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, applies to the Territories occupied by Israel since 1967. We call upon Israel to accept the de jure applicability of the Convention and fully to comply with its obligations under that Convention. Both are necessary~ The obligations ensuing from the Fourth Geneva Convention cannot be met by a declaration of de facto acceptance or imperfect compliance. It should also be noted that, according to international law, the occupying Power is not entitled, as a general rule, to extend its own law or jurisdiction to an occupied area. The continuing occupation of the West Bank and the Gaz& Strip is unacceptable to the inhabitants of the territories and to the international community. The exacerbation of the situation resulting from the occupation has rendered a prolongation of the status quo intolerable. It is now, more than ever, incumbent on all concerned to ~ork for a political solution. Such a solution should satisfy both the legitimate right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, with all that that implies, and the right of Israel, like other States in the area, to live in peace within secure and recognized borders, free from threats or acts of force, on the basis of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). We firmly believe that the holding of an international peace conference on the Middle East under the auspices of the United Nations with the participation of all parties directly concerned represents the best way to achieve a negotiated settlement. To get the process going, it is of fundamental importance that Israel and the Palestinians recognize each other's rights. In this spirit we call upon the Palestinians to recognize Israel's right to exist within secure and recognized borders and we call upon Israel to recognize the Palestinians' right to self-determination.

I now call upon Mrs. Absa Claude Diall0, representative of Senegal and Chairman of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. Mrs. DIALLO (Senegal), Chairman of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (interpretation from French): On behalf of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, I should like to say how much we share the concerns that have led the States of the Arab Group to request the convening of this meeting devoted to the uprising in the occupied territories. On many occasions our Committee has urgently drawn the attention of the General Assembly and the Security Council to the tragic situation prevailing in the occupied Palestinian territories as a result of the policies and practices of Israel, the occupying Power, aimed at crushing the Palestinian uprising. Indeed, since December 1987, 16 letters on this subject have been addressed to the Secretary-General of our Organization and to the President of the Security Council to express the Committee's very daep concern over events in the occupied Palestinian territories, and to urge that measures be taken urgently to ensure the population's protection. At the same time, we have also asked for an intensification of efforts to find a comprehensive political soluti~n. Others have raised their voices with ours against repressive measures of all kinds taken by the Israeli military authorities in the occupied territories. Thus, the League of Arab States, the Organization of African Unity, the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the States members of the European Community, the Nordic States, the States Parties to the Warsaw Treaty, the States members of the Association of South-East Asian Nations, the Stotea members of the Caribbean Community and many Governments h&ve expressed their concern in decisions and statements and called on Israel, the occupying Power, to respect the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Simil.arly, participants in the non-governmental organizations Q seminars 4nd meetings sponsored in recent months by our Committee have been unanimous in expressing their disquiet over the continuous deterioration of the situation and their support for the Palestinian people in the heroic struggle it is waging to exercise its right to self-determination, independendence and sovereignty in accordance with the provisions of the Charter and the relevant United Nations resolutions. Among the members of non-governmental organizations and individuals who have taken part in those seminars, 'many have been from the occupied territories or have visited the region at various times since the beginning of the uprising. Alarming and overwhelming testimony has thus been given to the Committee that makes us better able to gauge the dimensions of the surfering endured by the population, a full account of which could not be gleaned from the information in certain media, which are restricted by military censorship and as a result of curfews. In the light of the information received, we know that there have been several hundreds of Palestinians killed, many young children among them, and also thousands of wounded. Need we now mention the measures taken by the occupying Power to brutalize and intimidate the Palestinian populations: mass ar.:asts and mistreatment, collective punishments, closure of schools and universities, expropriations, the demolition of houses and the de:!itruction of economic infrastructures? This is compounded by everything we have learned from the witnesses about what i~ going on out of sight of the television cameras and the accredited foreign correspondents. Frequent deadly gunfire, beatings not onl'/ of stone-throwing children but also of members of their families, food shortages created in areas subjected to lengthy curfews, taxation of food donations from abroad, the chemical contamination of crops grown in communal gardens and the existence of death squads are all practices at which the conscience re\7olts, that make the chances of establishing peace in that region more remote ana that violate the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949. The Committee over which I preside would like, through me, to recall here certain relevant articles of that Fourth Geneva Convention which apply particularly to the situation in the occupied Palestinian territories. Article 27 stipulates: "Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their person ••• They shall at all times be humanely treated, and shall be ?rotected especially against all acts of violence or threats thereof". In article 32 it is stated: "The High Contracting Parties specifically agree that each of them is prohibited from taking any measure of such a character as to cause the physical suffering or extermination of protected persons". This prohibition particularly applies to any "measures of brutality whether applied by civilian or military agents". In article 33 it is stated: "No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited". Article 49 stipulates: "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 motive". Israel claims that it is applying the Geneva Convention de facto while refusing to consider it applicable de jur~ in the occupied Palestinian territories, but the events of the past 10 months show that in fact Israel is violating the Convention and has been doing so since the beginning of the occupation. One of the principal reasons for the Palestinian up~ising is this constant violation. In the view of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Pale~tinian People, it is time that the High Contracting Parties fulfilled the obligation incumbent on them under article 1 of the Convention, which stipulates: "The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances". At several meetings of non-governmental organizations organized this year under the auspices of the Committee, the participants have by a large majority requested all Governments to declare categorically th&t their bilateral relations with Israel would be compromised by these violations of the Geneva Convention. In its recommendations to the General Assembly, our Committee has associated itself with these urgent appeals addressed to the High Contracting Parties. Likewise, in his report of 21 January the Secretary-General of the United Nations recommended measures that the High Contracting Parties should take and indicated in detail the various means of protection for the population of the occupied territories which could be ensured by the international community. Thus the Committee could not but welcome the statement made on 26 August 1988 by the President of the Security Council, on behalf of the members of the Council, calling on the High Contracting Parties to ensure respect for the provisions of the Convention. Our Committee has also been heartened by the many measures taken by non-governmental organizations, trade unions and individuals, as well as by the emergency relief assistance given by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East and other United Nations bodies. However, these efforts deserve to be expanded and supported. The United Nations system, which has an immense historical responsibility with regard to the Palestinian people, should spare no efforts in its quest for effective measures for the protection of that ppople. The Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People~ over which I have the privilege of presiding, is grateful to the Secretary-General for the constructive role he has played in this regard and at this time wishes to encourage him to continue to do everything in his power to ensure effective protection for the Palestinian population living in the occupied territories. The goal of our Committee is to defuse tension, to break the cycle of violence and thus to prepare the way for a comprehensive, just and lasting settlement of the Palestinian question on the basis of the exercise by the Palestinian people of its inalienable rights in accordance with the united Nations resolutions. In this regard, our Committee would like once again to reaffirm its conviction that the international community has the duty to convene the International Peace Conference on the Middle East. Promoti~g peace in the Middle East requires us first to work for the convening of that Conference, in which, together with all the other p~rties to the conflict, the Palestine Liberation Organization should participate, since the Palestinian people has chosen it to make its voice and its aspirations heard. Thus the Committee, for its part, wishes once again to make an appeal to the Security Council and to all concerned or interested parties as a matter of urgency to take measures that could assist in a reconciliation of views, so that that Conference, on which such hopes are pinned, could finally be held. Mr. BEIN (Israel): On 23 September the General Assembly allocated agenda item 77 to the Special Political Committee. Since then nothing has transpired to justify a reversal of that decision. Regrettably, this procedure demonstrates once again a very specific misuse of the General Assembly. It is not being used to promote peace, but rather, to the contrary, it is being misused to incite and instigate more violence ~.td more suffering among both Israelis and Palestinian Arabs. We are facing a period of rejuvenation of the United Nations. Countries around the world engaged in long-standing disputes have agreed to seek peace. They have agreed to enter direct negotiations; and they have sought the good offices of the United Nations to help them facilitate these arrangements. Undoubtedly, we are in the midst of taking meaningful strides towards making the world a safer place. Yet, as ~e have all witnessed, a number of Arab countries refuse to accept this spirit of peace. Instead, they hijack this Organization and use it as another arm in their battle against Israelo It is sad to note that while, on one hand, Arab leaders have recognized the new climate in international relations - one in which direct negotiations replace confrontation - on the other hand, some of them believe that this climate does not govern their conduct vis-a~vis Israel. These leaders simply wish to retain the option of waging wars. This kind of slanted debate does not help to restore tranquillity. It does not help the Palestinian Arabs, nor does it advance the fulfilment of their political aspirations. It does not promote peace. It certainly does not further a political dialogue or direct negotiations between Israel, its neighbouring countries and the Palestinian Arabs residing in the territories administered by Israel. On the contrary, this debate incites and encourages violence. It obstructs the path towards direct negotiations. It blocks agreements on peace. This is the real intent of the debate. The use of violence in any form and to any extent to impose conditions upon Israel will not work. Violence only complicates the situation in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. For as long as it continues Israel will exercise its right and do its duty under international law to restore order in the face of violent provocation. We will continue to do so with maximum restraint and in full compliance with the laws enacted not by Israel but by those that governed these areas for almost half a century well before Israel took control of them. The soldiers of Israel are trained to fight in the battlefield; they are not trained to confront civilians who have been incited and coerced by the PLO and fundamentalist instigators to hurl firebombs at them. We, like no other country I know, teach our soldiers to abide by the highest moral and ethical code. Yet, despite this, Israel's actions to restore a normal life to these areas have been depicted by some speakers as inhumane. I would say that to most of the world, the word "inhumane" has c,ther meanings: to be inhumane is to burn families alive by firebombs; to be inhumane is to plant bombs in civilian buses; to be inhumane is to throw grenades at sidewalk cafes, at toyshops full of children; to be inhumane is deliberately and systematically to kill or maim innocent civilians. At the same time, it is only human, and a human duty, to defend oneself, and to defend innocent, uninvol~ed civilians, both Jew and Arab. Indeed, according to international law - referred to abundantly in the Assembly - it is the hUm&n, civil and political obligation of the -administering Power-, it is our human, civil and political responsibility, to maintain public order. The common denominators of the factions of the PLO are extremism and violence. And the central theme of the PLO's covenant remains the destruction of Israel. The PLO does not accept Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), and by its obscure reservations and conditions attempts to drain these resolutions of any meaningful content. The PIn demonstrates again with its latest declarations and actions that it is incapable of adopting any concept of genuine peace and is unwilling to cease terrorism. Indeed, the draft resolution before us does nothing but encourage intransigence, incite hostility and promote even more violence. There is no call to the residents of the territories to eKercise any measure of restraint and refrain from violence. The draft resolution ignores completely the violent nature of the activities of the residents directed against both Jew and Arab, which have obliged Israel to take appropriate measures to restore calm and tranquillity. There is not even an allusion to the fact that only a political solution can solve this problem, and of course no mention oE the only commonly accepted basis for such a solution, namely Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). The essence of the draft resolution is to perpetuate the problem and distance the prospects of peace. It attempts to engage the Secretary-General and the United Nations in this dlsastrous course of action, rather than provide any hope for peace. To vote for such a draft resolution will be to vote against aspirations to peace in the Middle East, it will be to endorse further human misery on both sides. Israel reserves the right to revert to these matters in greater depth at the appropriate time and during the debates allocated in the original programme of work of the General Assembly. I wish, however, to conclude by stating that Israel wants to further the process of peace. We believe that true negotiated peace with all our neighbours is feasible, and that in the framework of these negotiations on peace and coexisten:e we can also reach a solution to the problems and aspirations of the Palestinian Arabs in the area. Mr. MUDEN~ (Zimbabwe): Sir, the Zimbabwe delegation at the highest level has already had occasion to congratulate you on your election to the presidency of the forty-third session of the General Assembly. I wish, however, to express my own great pleasure and that of the members of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries at seeing you, an admired leader of the Movement, in the Chair this afternoon. During the session we have heard much about detente and the outbreak of peace in the world. There is some justification for this. In general, for most of mankind, the world is & safer place today than it was last year at this time. But we should be mistaken if we concluded that this sense of hope is shared by all mankind. In Palestine this is not so. The people of occupied Palestine are locked in a bitter and painfUl stru~gle. They are being shot and killed; tn~tr limbs beaten and broken; their homes destroyed. They are refugees in their own land. Humiliated, despised, they are responding in desperation, but with great courage and determination. The intifada~ is their courageous appeal - nay, o:y - to the conscience of mankind. The international community should not sit idly by, watching this desperate modern human tragedy, without respondinq. (Mr. Bein, Israel) The Jewish people have known pain and tragedy in their long and eventful history. They have little to learn from others about suffering &nd tragedy and they are right when they refuse to be lectured. But having suffered pain and tragedy in one's history is no justifioation for meting out the same t~eatment to others. The fact that over 20 million Africans were lost during the period of the slave trade and about 11 million Red IncUans had to be decimated in order to bring "western Christian civilization" to the Americas has not earned for the Africans and the Red Indians immunity from criticism when they inflict suffering on other people. The same is true of Israeli practices in occupied Palestine. Fear should not be used as a justification for Israel's causing so much human pain and suffering to the Palestinian people. Israel, as an occupying Power, has clear obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 and the relevant Security Council resolutions to protect the Palestinian people. This is a legal obligation and the international community has a duty to ensure that Israel abides by it. We welcome the unprecedented action taken by the President of the Security Council for August when he called in the Ambassador of Israel to express concern at the manner in which the Israelis were treating the Palestinians, and demanded that such action cease. In his report (S/19443) following the mission to the Middle East, the Secretary-General made a number. of important suggestions as to how the international media could enhunce the protection of Palestinians in the occupied territories by reporting fully and regularly on what was happening there. At its recent meeting the Co-ordinating Bureau of the Movement of Non-Aliqned Countries issued an urgent communique, on 26 October, calling on the Security Council to consider the Secretary-General's report with a view to the implementation of ic~ recommendations. We also urge the media, including the United Nations Department of Public Information, and other agencies helping the Palestinian refugees to pUblicize actively and regularly the truth of what is happening to the Palestinian people. We appeal from this rostrum to the Security Council to ensure that the recommendations in the Secretary-Genera18 s report are fully implementedQ The General Assembly is therefore right to be dealing with this matter in this special manner at this juncture, when hope for the convening of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East has been further damaged by the results of the recent elections in Israel. All we hear now is talk of crushing the peaceful protest of the Palestinians by using the iron fist. Sabre-rattling is the order of the day. Knowing those who make these threats, we know that they are not empty threats. There is no doubt that, unless the international community raises its voice loudly and demands the immediate convening of the Middle East peace conference, under United Nations auspices much innocent blood will soon be flowing in Gaza, the West B~nk and other occupied Arab territories, including Jerusalem. Peace and a free, independent Palestine will surely come one day, but until that day we all have an obligation to fight for the protection of the people under occupation. N~ither deportation nor decimation should be allowed to succeed. It is for this reason that all who cherish peace and human rights should now stand up and be counted. The draft resolution before us today is consciously couched in restrained and measured tones. Its scope i.s limited. Its sponsors have gone out ef their way to accommodate as many viewpoints as possible. It is the hope of my delegation and that of the non-aligned countries that every member ef this Assembly will be able to vote for it. The representative ef Israel has called for direct negotiations and new political dialogue in the Middle East. This Assembly has time and again urged (Mr. Mudenge, Zimbabwe) Israel to carry out direct negotiations with the Palestinians, through their representative, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). We hope that this call by Israel marks a new and genuir.e change of heart.

I call now on the Observer of the League of Arab States, in accordance with resolution 477 (XV) of the General Assembly. Mr. MAKSOUD (League of Arab States) (interpretation from Arabic): The Palestinian intifadah in the occupied Arab territories is nearly a year old and becoming stronger and more determined in the face of the futile brutality of the Israeli response and the ferocity of the attempt to put an end to it. This new phemonenon, a natural response to the continued Israeli Occupation, has reopened the file on the Palestinian oause, which is the essence of the Arab-Israeli conflict and has brought the Zionist entity face to face with the necessity of making a decisive choice, thus forcing it out of the prevarication and evasiveness to which it has always resorted in its attempt to perpetuate its occupation. Thus the intifadah, after only one year, has dissipated many ambiguities and introduced new inputs to the Middle East equation. Such inputs cannot be erased or circumvented in dealing with the Middle East cr.isis. Foremost among those inputs is the affirmation of the issue of Palestinian natio,al independence, which has become both an impregnable and an irrevocable historical fact. The fact that the intifadah has withstood nearly a year all Israel's attempts to contain or abort it is positive proof of ~he inevitable collapse of the occupation, and the impossibility of erasing Palestinian rights from the equation of the Middle East conflict. (Mr. Mudenge, Zimbabwe) This great achievement of the intifadah cannot be belittled because it is still within the realm of possibility. Its real value stems from the new form of struggle it has introduced and the creative energy contained in that new form of struggle promises to translate the potential for Palestinian independence into established fact. It stands to reason that this new form of stru9gle is neither an isoJ~ted phenomenon nor a passing retaliatory reflex. On the contrary, it is ultimately the sum total of a long history of struggle rooted in the legacy of the Palestinian people and their great sacrifices in the past four decades of resistance to the zionist entity, its policies, its settler-colonialist designs and its uprooting of the Palestinian people. In the history of every national liberation movement resistance is the expression of rejection and, at the same time, of optimism. It is the categorical rejection of occupation and of the confiscation of every right and freedom by the occupying Power. It is also the optimism of belief in the inevitability of freedom and the restoration of the right to self-determination, and of absolute faith in ultimate victory. The Palestinian intifadah, being the form Palestinian resistance has taken in the interior, is both the rejection and the optimism of which I have spoken. In addition, it is a process of rectification and of setting the record straight. It corrects the much-touted impression that the Palestinians have acquiesced in the occupation, accepted it as unavoidable and abandoned the attempt to face up to it because of their impotence. It also corrects the erroneous notion that the Arabs in general and the Palestinians in particular fight for their riqhts only intermittently and lack stamina and steadfastness. Above all, it corrects the persistent distortion promoted by Zionism and nurtured by the Western media that categorizes Palestinian action as a form of individual adventurisiR of a terrorist nature. The uprising gave the lie to all this. It showed in its true light the confrontation with the Israeli occupation and, in deeds not words, demonstrated once for all the true nature of that confrontation as an ongoing all-embracing process in which all Palestinians, regardless of their political or social leaning, are totally involved. Thus things have become clear and disciplined, while the clouds of frustration and despair which lead to adventurism have been dispelled. Undoubtedly, this outcome of the struggle is proof of the profound maturity of the Palestinians. This maturity has expressed itself in the inner structure of the intifadah, which has adopted from its inception, and throughout the ongoing confrontation with ~~e occupying authorities, new forms of organization in all the areas of mobilization, political action and even day-to-d&y life, which have imbued it with the strength and immunity necessary to face up to the occupation. Various committees have been set up to meet the needs of the movem~nt and the inhabitants. Their tasks continue to be modified and developed in line with the escalation of the repressive terrorist measures of the occupying Power. Thus the committees have been enabled to function successfully in organizing the life of the inhabitants and providing them with the wherewithal to bear the harsh conditions of the Israeli occupation and step up the resistance. They have also succeeded in co-ordinating the day-to-day activities of the heroes of the intifadah. In short, those national committees have been transformed into a sort of establishment within the framework of the intifadah. They have become the solid foundation which provide the resistance with the means of continuity and development. (Mr. Maksoud, League of Arab States) That is w~~ all the measures of the occupying authorities and the violence of their repression have f~11ed to stop the intifadah in its tracks and subvert its inner structure. The people have turned to popular committees and, on the solid basis of thi~ all-embracing national cohesiveness, the effectiveness of the intifadah has been demonstrated on several levels and gains have continued to be made in many areas. At the Palestinian level, the most important achievement has been the consolidation of national unity by giving the highest priority to the aim of defeating the occupation and gaining national independence. This is also demonstrated in the reaffirmation of Palestinian cohesiveness around the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. The intifadah has crystallized a sort of collective Palestinian awareness of the need to deal with new variables by promoting national unity through the Palestinian National Council, which will meet in Algeria shortly. Undoubtedly, this awareness will open new and wide horizons before the intifadah and give momentum to its striving after Palestinian national independence. At the Arab level, the intifadah has helped to initiate elements of reform and stimulate the cycle of cohesive national Arab thought, thus acting as a catalyst in moving the Arab situation focward from acquiescing in the deteriorating fait accompli, and also promoting solidarity and the closing of ranks. It has also introduced into th~ political life of the Arabs the vitality of hope, with all that that entails. This has enhanced the climate of Arab detente, as reflected in the last Algerian summit. Detente is necessary to provide the intifadah with the required national support and steadfastness. In this context, we regard the intifadah, in ita totality and continuity and all that it reprosents, as a new method of non-?iolen~e in the struggle against the Iaraeli occupation. (Mr. Maksoud, League of Arab States) The intifadah has formulated the new Arab political language. It is the language of clerity that derives from a clear vision and the language of responsibility. Thus the happenings in the Palestinian arena have imparted a new perspective to the concept of non-violence in the struggle for peace. Violence is the style of the occupying authorities~ first and foremost. To the intifadah it is a last resort, not a plan of action, as is the Israeli occupation. Therefore, the international community must reward the adoption of non-violence in the service of peace and inalienable rights. This is not a negative attitude, as the leaders of the zionist entity claim. On the contrary, it is non-violence. It is the laying bare of the negative Israeli attitude towards peace and every draft er project that has to do with peace, especially the international conference. When this Israeli stance is laid bare the very nature ef the Zionist entity and its expansionist designs, which run counter to the cause of a just and comprehensive peace, is revealed. This doubly telling exposure of Israel's designs and practices has given the intifadah, the bastion of Palestinian rights, a rampart of credibility against which the bargaining and wheeling and dealing have floundered. No longer will it be possible to auction Palestinian rights. Through the intifad~, those rights have entered a historical phase. This new development has given the Arab side an opportu.litv to speak to the world public from a position of clarity, action and perseverance and, at the same time, of openness and responsibility in the interest of the achievement of real peace in the Middle East. The second input by the intifadah, to the political and intellectual map of the area is the political crisis it has generated inside the Zionist entity and the beginning of the drawing of lines between supporters and opponents in Jewish circles throughout the world. While the intifadah derives its vitality and viability from its comprehensive character and new form, it has been able to profit also from its ability to brinq out the contradictions in Israel, 7.ionism and Jewish communities throughout the world. It has achieved this through the continued Palestinian confrontation with Israeli occupation over the past year. That confrontation, while bringing to light the worst traits of the Zionist entity - that is, ferocity, repression and terrorism - has moved the conscience of broad sectors of Jews in Israel and throughout the world. Naturally, we have welcomed and continue to welcome this movement, this effort, in Jewish circles, which has beer. the source of petitions and protests against the practices of the occupying Power in the West Bank, Gaza and Jerusalem, the demonstrations by the peace movement within Israel and the refusal of some Israelis to do military service in Israel and the occupied territories. Those protests have given rise to debate within the Jewish circles between two schools of thought: the school that advocates the unleashinq of Zionist racism and that which upholds the human values which stem from Judaism and the Jewish legacy. However, the Zionist entity and its international extensions have hastened to stifle this trend, repress it and prevent its growth in the Jewish arena bv practising intellectual terrorism against those Jews who have started to have sacond thoughts about the Zionist legacy and practices. The disquiet displayed by such elements with regard to the aggressive Israeli policies in the occ~pied territories may turn into outright condemnation and a kind contain and obliterate it in its usual manner - that is to say with the bludgeon of anti-Semitism or "self-hatred". This is what Israel fears most, because it cannot easily accuse Jews who condemn its practices of being anti-Semitic. Hence, it cannot use its most effective weapon that it has perfected, the tragedy of the Holocaust, to silence those who criticize or dare to object. The time has come for the west to break loose from its guilt complex conc~rning that tragedy when dealing with the Middle East crisise The Zionist entity has exploited that guilt long enough in coveling up the tragedy of the Palestinian people. That quilt has been thoroughly exploited by Israel for blackmail and not forgiveness. Than the intifadah of the heroes of the stones set those sensitivities alight and intensified the debate between the two schools of thought to which I have referred. He[e the Zionist entity found itself faced by a double dilemma that involved a crisis of the entity itself and a crisis of Zionist legitimacy. It became apparent in the course of the election campaign that the political differences between the various I$raeli parties were nurtured mainly by that dilemma. The day before yesterday the Israeli elections renewed that political dilemma, which has now last~d for four years. In the face of this reality it seem9 that paralysis, at best, is the destiny awaiting the peace initiatives. It is even possible that those initiatives may collapse altogether and be completely wiped out by the intransigence of those who may come to power and rule for the next few years. All the indicators point in that. direction. The Likud is vehemently stressing the need to repeat the Camp David experiment, which was a thunderbolt that caused an explosion in Lebanon and the occupied territories. Thus it seems that what it has in store for the region is a new explosion, not a new option. It is now clear that the Likud, which is going to rule in partnership with its al~ies, will try to follow the Camp David pattern and insist on its repetition, in an attempt to hoodwink world public opinion, which may be gullible enough to believe what the forces of intransigence and ossification really want. The Camp David accords were in fact no more than a new licence for Israel to persist in its annexationist course and unleash its machine of aggression on the area. The results of this have been the building of more settlements and colonies in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the annexation of the Golan Heights and Jerusalem, and the announcement that Jerusalem is Israel's capital, followed by the invasion of Lebanon and the unleasing of the Zionist machine of repression and terrorism in the occupied Arab territories• These are the fruits of Camp navid. The Likud is trying to renew the licence and the method of singling out the States of the area and dictating conditions that can only subject them to Israeli hegemony. When the Likud raises the Canp David slogan anew we must remember that it is the Israeli party that categorically rejects, the idea of the international conference, as endorsed b¥ the General Assembly and of any withdrawal from the occupied territories. Bearing this in mind, we can deduce that today Camp David means only a preconceived attempt to evade the natural outcome of an international conference if, such a conference is convened. Any action based on international legitimacy, such as the complete Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem, the Gelan and southern Lebanon and the establishment of the Palestinian State, would wipe out the Camp David formula and its consequences. So the Likud wishes only to lure the Arab side into a labyrinth in which the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people may be lost. Camp David and its results are the antithesis of the international conference. Egypt, the partner at Camp David, was the first to realize the failure of that experiment~ Egypt suffe.ed a lot of embarrassment and bitterness when Israel let loose its schemes of annexations and acts of aggression in the area under the umbrella of the Camp David agreement, which shackled Egypt and temporarily pushed it out of the arena of the Arab-Israeli conflict. However, the Egyptian people, who realized this, are becoming more and more aware of the consequences of the agreement, which have indeed bee~ nefarious. We look forward to an Egypt freed from the Camp David bonds. It must focus its attention on the bitterness of the experience and the suffering and destructive results at both the Atab and the Egyptian level. Egypt is called upon at this point to expose the designs and attempts of the Likud as nothing but the use of the Camp David accords as a pretext for wiping out the national rights of the Palestinian people. The League of Arab States is strangely in favour of restoring to Egypt its leading Arab role. The League also believes that there is an opportunity today for Egypt to grapple with Israel's prevarications, because W~ are confident that the Egyptian people will not allow Israel's intransigence to establish a distorted translation of Camp David that oan result only in greater volatility in the area and the confiscation of Palestinian Arab rights. We realize the urgent need for the 'international community to act and to do whatever can be done, especially through the United States of America and the United Nations. The intifadah has generated an international climate more favourable to the Palestinian cause and has given that cause d balanced presence in any potential international dialogue. It has provided the conditions for an international conference, with a role for the United Nations. The Arab side has always upheld the role of the United Nations in solving international problems and has been a strong advocate of the promotion of this international Organization so thst it may fulfil its role to the best of its ability. Today we perceive that there are opportunities for the international Organization to reopen the file on the Middle East, especially that part relating to Palestine. The restoration today, after the phase of marqinali:ation. of the Organization's original authority and credibility through the establishment of the necessary principles for the solution of such regional problems as those concerning the cesp.ation of the Iraq-Iran war, Cyprus, Namibia and Angola, makes it possible for the United Nations to reopen that file. The Arab side therefore calls on the world Organization to translate its credibility in the arena of the Arab-IsrGeli conflict into an initiative imposing sanctions against Israel, that international outlaw. The Arab side looks forward to the performance by the United Nations of its unique role. It hopes and demands that the Middle East crisis will share in the benefits of this renewal of the credibility of the world Organization so that this crisis may not be left behind by the new tide because of the intransigence of Israel. It must be said, however, that this intransigence would not be able to stand up against international unanimity without Americavs support. American permissiveness towards Israel's policies and the diplomatic cover Washington extends to Israel are ~ehind Israel's persistent policy and its rejection of all resolutions adopted against it. This is well known. The United States of America is still ambiguous in its propos~ls for peace &nd its co~sideration of an international peace conference, as proposed by the Arab side and supported internationally. This ambiguity is reflected in the Shultz programme. It calls fo£ -land for peace Q , without being specific. It addresses the rights of the Palestinian people without being specific about the nature of those rights. It does not support negotiating on these issues in the framework of an international conference. It is regrettable that the candidates for the presidency of the United States - Bush and Oukakis - merely reiterate old positions, which is not a good augury. The United States has exhausted its ability at a time when the intifadah has been decisive about the inevitability of an independent State on Arab soil. These are inputs that are non-negotiable, otherwise the negotiations within the framework of an international conference ~ould result in the production of cosmetic changes, although there is unanimity throughout the world regarding Palestinian rights. However, the United States ls alone in embracing every Israeli argument, although those arguments are but contrived obstacles aimed at impeding a just peace in the area. In the light of all this entails of danger to world peace, we hope that the future Aaerican Administration will reconsider, perceive the dangers and formulate a new policy, taking into consideration the req~irements of a just peace rather than supporting the policies and intransigence of Israel, because that serves neither American interests in the area nor the cause of world peace and runs counter to the climate of detente now prevailing between the two super-Powers. The blessed Palestinian intifadah is today on the threshold today of its second year. It has deep roots and continues with steadfastness despite the overwhelming onslaught of the Israeli occupation forces. It has deprived the Zionist entity of its cherished feelings of superiority. Israel has become shaken and emotional, while the intifadah has re.ained active. All the efforts of the occupying Power have been vain. The intifadah has refused to respond in kind to the indiscriminate brutality of the occupation authorities. This has been a surprise to the Zionist entity and has led to a media explosion, especially in the West. It has awakened" large sectors of international public opinion, and focused that opinion on Palestinian rights and Israel's racism. Thus, the intifadah has demonstrated its renewed ability to achieve more gains for the Palestinian people. The Palestinian train, thanks to the intifadah, has left the station after a long delay. It will not stop before reaching the terminus of self-determination and independence.

I have to inform members that Gambia has become a sponsor of draft resolution A/43/L.21. Before the Assembly takes a decision on draft resolution A/43/L.2l, I shall call on those representatives who wish to explain their vote before the voting. I remind delegations that, in accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made ~ delegations from their seats. Mr. OKUN (United States of America): My Government will vote against the draft resolution presented here today, for we believe this measure hinders the search for peace in the region. It is an unbalanced documant v by which the Assembly would condemn one of the parties for its actions without taking into account acts of violence by the other side. The harsh rhetoric in this draft (Mr. Naksoud, League of Arab States) resolution and in this debate can only inflame an already embittered situation, making it more difficult to proceed towards a negotiated settlement. The adoption of a divisive draft resolution of this kind at this time can only impede the important political processes at work in the region. In this draft resolution the Assemblv urges the Security Council to act on the Secretary-General's report (S/19443), of 21 January 1988. That report calls for the convening of an international Middle East peace conference under United Nations auspices. The United States considers that the concept of a conference established by outside parties to impose solutions or veto agreements is mistaken and badly flawed. The United States believes that, while a conference may be necessary to facilitate bilateral face-to-face negotiations, it is only through such negotiations between the parties concerned that a solution can be found to the Middle East conflict. My Government's opposition to this draft resolution should not be construed as indifference to the plight of the Palestinian people and to the current situation in the occupied territories. On the contrary, the United States is gravely concerned over developments there and we remain actively engaged in efforts to reduce tensions in the region. We have condemned all acts of violence and have urged restraint by all parties. We grieve for the loss of life 0" both sides. Israel has a responsibility to maintain order in the occupied territories. At the same time, the United States is firmly on record as supporting the applicability to the occupied territories of the Fourth Geneva Convention and we have criticized actions that are inconsistent with the Convention. In our view, continuation of the status quo in the occupied territories can lead only to more violence. American policy is cle~r. Ultimately, the situation in the occupied territories can be resolved only in the context of a negotiated' settlement - a comprehensive, durable settlement reached thtough negotiations based (Mr. Okun, United States) on United Nations Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). This will require an exchange of territory for peace. The security of the State of Israel must be assured. At the same time, the legitimate political rights of the Palestinian people must be recognized. We believe direct negotiations between the parties, facilitated if necessary by a properly structured international conference, offer the only realistic basis for achieving such a settlement. The United States will continue to work towards that objective. In the coming weeks the General Assembly will devote its attention to numerous issues related to the Middle East. Members should reflect carefully on the importance of these questions and ask themselves whether a more constructive, less contentious approach can be achieved. Over the years the Assembly has adopted a long train of divisive, unhelpful resolutions on the Middle East, to no avail. In particular, we recall resolution 3379 (XXX), of over a decade ago, which asserted that Zionism is a form of racism and brought deserved shame upon this body. It is time to des·.st from strident rhetoric and one-sided resolutions. If the General Assembly wishes to promote efforts towards a negotiated settlement, it should urge reconciliation and dialogue between the parties. In so doing, this body would make a genuine contribution to the search for a just and lasting peace in the Middle East - that peace which is sought by all those who cherish the noble ideals of the Charter of the United Nations. Mr. ZAMANI (Islamic Republic of Iran): My delegation will vote in favour of draft resolution A/43/L.21. We have decided after painstaking thought not to become a sponsor of this draft resolution. Our decision has been a very difficult one. It is not because we do not support who1e-heartedly the uprising in Pa1estinel it is not because we ~o not hold that the Zionist regime occupying Palestine has consistently committed crimes of every sort against the Palestinian (Mr. Okun, United States) people; it is not because we do not condemn the Zionist regime's persistent and criminal policies and practices against the Palestinian people in the occupied territories. Our decision is mainly due to the fact that the draft resolution does not call for restoration of the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to establish their. own independent State in the homeland of Palestine, which has been occupied since 1948. The massive popular uprising of the Palestinian Muslims in the occupied territories and the increasing savagery of the Zionist agents and policy-makers bring glad tidings of inevitable victory and long overdue l.iberation. (Mr. Zamani, Islamic Republic of Iran)

The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/4J/L.2l. The voting process has begun. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, remocratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, ROlilania, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yeme~, Yugoslavia, Zambia, Zimbabwe Against: Israel, United States of America Abstaining: Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, Canada, Costa Rica, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Grenada, Iceland, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucla, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Zaire Draft resolution A/43/L.2l was adopted by 130 votes to 2, with 16 abstentions (resolution 43/21). The PRESIOBRr (interpretation from Spanish): r shall now call on those representatives who wish to make statements in explanation of vote. Sir Crisp!n TICKELL (United Kingdom): The views of my Government on Israali policies and practices towards the ir.habitants of the occupied territol..:.'~· are abundantly clear. Our position was set out during the debate by the Perm&n~.'c<~ ~~presentative of Greece, speaking on behalf of the twelve members of the European C~unity. The excessive and sometimes indiscriminate use of force, administrative detentions, deportations and collective punishments are among those actions by the occupyi~ forces which are totally unacceptable.~ Violence has bred violence. The innocent have suffered and C~fitinue to suffer. Last Sunday a mother and her three small children were burned to death in a ~errorist outrage in Jericho. Twelve days earlier a five-year-old child had been one of those ":illed by army bullets in Nablus. According to our: latest figures, some 327 civilians have died in _~e current violence, 322 of them Palestinian and rive of them Israeli. We call upon both sides to desist from violent methods, and we offer our sympathy to all the families afflicted. The present is a time of hope as well as tragedy. There are new opportuniti~s. It was for that reason that my delegation suggested to the authors of the draft resolution on which the Assembly has just voted that they include in it langu~ge expressing clearly the international community's rejection of atrocities and violen~e against civilians. Such a reference would, we believe, have help~d clear the way for the negotiations for which we must hope, and would have enabled all concerned to back away from acts of this kind. UnhapPU'l'1i O'Jl:' suggestion was not ~ccepted. In our view the resolution in the form in which it *Mr. Pejic (Yugoslavia), Vice-President, took the Chair. was adopted was deficient in that important respect. But we do not despair. We must look to the future in the hope that the deadlock may be broken, and that the men of violence, there as elsewhere, will be defeated. Mr. FORTIER (Canada): Today's resolution embodies an essential principle which the security Council has stated this year on three occasions and which our Secretary-General made a corner-stone of his report in January on the situation in the occupied territories. The Fourth Geneva Conven'ion relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War is a fundamental instrument of international law which must be applied in the West Bank and in the Gaza strip. There should be no doubt that the international community is unanimous in proclaiming this principle. Canada, for its part, subscribes to it without the slightest reservation. The Government of. Canada solemnly expresses here its jUdgement and conviction that violations of the Convention by Israeli occupation authorities, including human rights abuses and settlements, are unacceptable. They are contrary to international law and damagi"9 to the peace process and cannot continue. Apart from the precise expression of our vote today, Canada hopes that this afternoon's deliberations will be clearly understood by the Israeli authorities as a universal appeal for respect for the Convention. We ask Israel to apply the Convention and, by so doing, express its willingness to encouraqe a climate for peaceful neqotiations. It is in order to safeguard prospects for peace that Canada has distanced itself bv abstaining from a text that is not successful in shaking off partisan considerations. For example, the recent criminal attack aqainst the civilian passengers of a bus shows that violence can originate from either party and that its destructive effects are momentous, in its consequences both for human beings and for the political situation. Canada abhors such acts, whatever their origin. For the effectiveness of our Organization and to safeguard prospects for peace, which we all strive for, we must be vigilant not to break contact with either party. The international community's legitimate indignation at the violations of the human rights of the Palestinians must be expressed in a way that does not jeopardize all the efforts to encourage contacts and the beginning of negotiations in a framework enjoying the authoritative auspices of our Organization. Mr. COSTELLO (Australia): I am making this statement in explanation of vote on behalf of New Zealand and Australia. New Zealand and Australia voted in favour of the draft resolution on the uprising of the Palestinian people in order to express our deep concern at the continued unrest in th~ occupied territories and the increasing levels of violence, including loss of life, injury, destruction of property and arbitrary measures on the part of the occupying Power. We have strongy condemned certain practices, including the use of live ammunition against Palestinian demonstrators. We deeply regret the suffering of the Palestinian people. We are concerned at the clear threats to regional security that this continuing situation of unrest brings with it. Nor is the suffering confined to the Arab population. The recent tragic incident in Jericho which led to the death of a number of innocent civilians highlights the dangers of escalating violence for Jew and Arab alike. In this connection, we stress also that it is imperative that all parties renounce the use of t~rrorist tactics, and we particularly condemn the atrocities committed against innocent civilians. (Mr. Fattier, Canada) Australia and New Ze~land fi~mly believe that to ensure the s~fety and protection of the civilian population of the occupied territories Israel must accept the de j~re applicability of th~ Geneva Conv~ntion to the territories and apply its provisions in full. We therefore particularly welcome the fact that the resolution calls on Israel to abide t.aediately and scrupulously by the Fourth.Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civ1lian persons in time of v~r, of 12 August 1949, and to desist forthwith fra- its policies and practices that are in violation of the provisions of the Convention. We fUlly endorse this de-and, as the Security Council has done, and look to Ierael to refrain fraa measures wbicn are clearly causing growinq frustration and antagonisM. The extent and natur& of some of Israel's responses in the occupied territori~8, incluaing the deaths and beatings among the civilian population, have made even more difficult the task of achieving a just and lasting peace in the region. Our attitude to Israel's respon&3 to the unreat i& firm and critical. We stress that our commitaent to the State of Israel ls firm, but peace and justice fOI Israel will be found only when there is a180 peace and justice for the Palestinians. It is claar to us that the continuing violence in the occupied territories underlines the urgent need for a COMprehensive settlement of the Arab-Israeli dispute, based on Israel's right to exist within secure and recognized boundaries and the right of the Palestinian people to se1f-dstermination. Only courageous political leadership on the part of both the Israelis and the Palestinian leader.hip can bring this about. It ls only within the context of a coaprehensive 8ettle-ent that we can see pr08pects for an end to the violence and upheaval that has caus~ such t..ea8urable suffering and loas of 11fe in this pa~t of the "Orld. Mr. IAGANI (Japan): ~he d&teriorating situation in the occu~ied Arab territories has bGen the fOClU8 of our attQntion since last Deceaber. Despite our concerted efforts the cycle of violence in those territories shows no sign of abating. In fact there are almost daily reports of additional casualties aaong the civilian population in the ~reas, with which we are deeply concerned. Japan has been urging the partlee concerned to exerci.e restraint to avoid further casualties aMOng the peOPl~ living in the weat Bank ~~d the Gaza Strip. However, I8r~ ~ has continued to take excessive .e~sures against the Palestinians, including the deportation of Palestinian civilians, and has only aggravated the situation. Japan deplore8 in particular tarael's utter disregard of Security Council re.olutions 605 (1987), 607 (1988) and 608 (1988) and it. insistence that the fOurth Geneva Convention does not apply to the situation in the occupied territorie.. Japan calls upon Israe~ once again to accept the de jure applicability of the fOurth Geneva Convention in the occupied territories and to protect the civilian populetion there. Tho.e are the considerationa which have led us to vote in favour of draft ~~.olution A/43/L.21. At the S88. tiae I feel coapelled to aention the need for renewed efforts bv the international ~J..unity, particularly the United Nations, towards a political solution of the Palestinian preblea, because underlying the current situation is the tact that a just, 1.Btlng and coaprehensive peace ha. not be8n achieved In the Middle East. For far too long the Palestinian residents of the occupied territories have had to live under harsh political, econoaic and eocial conditions. Japan insiste that peace in tba area aust be re~lized as soon as possible through prompt and coaplete i~l...nlation of Socurity Council resolution. 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) and through the recognition of and respect for the legitl••te rights of the Paleetinian people, includinq their right to ••If-deteraination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. All too often tbe destiny of peopl.s ~.e=a to be deter_lned by violenca. Violence, h~ver, never settles prObl~s. Violence, particularly against civiliana,whether Palestinian or Israell, _uat be rejected if a coaprehencive peace in the area is ever to be attainQd. Mr. ~OLILLO (Uruguay) (interpretation fr~ Spani8h)~ My d&legatlon voted in favour of the draft resolution that has juat been adopted becau•• in our view the serious 81tuation prevailing in the Pal.st~nian territories should be the object of ~ decision by the GeftQral A~seably expressing the profound concern of the international coaMunity at the growing deterioration of that situation, while cond.aning acts of violence and violationa of human rights which bring 80 .uch suffering and lO8s of life a~)ng the clvil1&n populations in th~ r~ion. Rouever, ve regret that the r.~olution has omitted r~ferenc.8 to factors that undoubtedly are part of the ca.plex picture of the eituation in the occupied Pale.tinian territories. The circu~t8nc. i. such that in our view ea.. of t~e provision. of the re.olution lack the balance that would bave been th~re had all the ele.enta involved 1" the context within vhlch the uprising has taken plAce b••n inclUded. Moreover, the r@solution i. e.sentially condeanatory in nature and doe. not aake r.c~endation8or constructive appeala orpropo.al. daaling with the true c~use. of the probl.., which would encourage the p&rU.s to refrain froa resorting to violence and, on the other hand, would proQOto the establiahaent of aechani••s conducive to the negotiated, definitive settl..ent 02 this problem, which le so fe.rvently desired by all, on the baeis of resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973) and other relevant re.olutilons of the Security Council. Mr. RAMlKBR (Netherlands): Barlier in the debate the position of the Twelve with regard to BgGnda ito~ 77 was .et out bf the representative of Greece apeaking on behalf of the twelve ..abet State. of the Burope.n COIl.unity. Naturally, we fully subscribe to what he then said. The Netherlands delegation has, therefore, voted in favour of draft resolution A/43/L.21. I have a.ked to apeak, nevertheless, in order to place on record some obaervations o~ the te=t of the resolution just adopted. In the first place the Netherlands 1. of the opinion that this resolution does not deal in a balanced .anner with all the reievant aspects of the conflict. We fail, therefore, to see how this re.olution can contribute to the overall peace process. Furthermore, the Netherlands ha. always been of the opinion that the solution of th~ Middle East probl.. should be based on the principle of non-recourse to the use of force. Therefore, the Netherlands wants to make it clear that its vote in favour of the text just adopted can in no way be interpreted as an encouragement to or support for the use of violence. Finally, I wish to put on record that the mentioning of Jersulem in operative paragraph 1 of the resolution can only refer to the part of that city occupied by Israel since 1967, .s i8 clearly stated in the other relevant paragraphs of the resolution. Mr. CARETE (Paraguay) (interpretation frea Spanish): My deleg6tion voted in favour of the resolution just adopted by the General Ass.ably because in our view it reflects a disquieting reality regarding the occupied territories that Is an obstacle to the settle~ent of this question. KV delegation acta on the basis of principle, concerning the violation of the riqhts of the Palestinian people, but it takes into account alao the rights and interests of the State of Iarael. Mr. DANUS (Chile) (interpretation frOM Spanish): My delegation voted in favour of this resolution although we consider that operative paragraph 1 is not appropriately balanced. In fairness, my delegation would have preferred that this paragraph had condemned all the acts o~ viol~nce that have taken plac~ in the occupied territories, regardless of their origin, and appealed to all the parties involved to refrain froa resorting to such acts.

I call on the representative of Egypt, who has asked to speak in exercise of the right of reply. I remind hi. that, in accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, atatements in exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and to flve _inutes for the second and should be made bV delegations from their seats. Mr. BADAWI (Eqypt) (interpretation from Arabic): The General Asseablv has met today in order to consider the situation In the occupied territories of the West 8~nk and the Gaza Strip and has adopted b¥ an overwhelminq -.jority a resolution on the uprising. Egypt had the honour to be one of the sponsors of that resolution and, of course, voted in favour of it. So.e have spoken today on the aSBuaption that they ha~~ a riqht to speak on behalf of Egypt and ita p~ople. I regret to say that they are .iataken and have been for a nu.ber of years. The clear, fira position of Egypt Is th8 no8d to seek a settlenent In the Middle East .erlously and effectively and to look to the future, not to hang on to outlllOCled slO9ft.,. that are no use to anyone. Egypt call. for the convening of an international conference, Which should: first, lead to the restoration of the 1n.lienable, legiti..te rights of the Pale.tinian people, especially their right to self-deteralnatlon, eecondly, ensure the withdrawal of Isra~l frOM all occupied Arab terrltorie., whether In the West Bank, Gaza, Arab Jerusal•• or the Syrian Galan Beights, and, thirdly, guarantee the right of all peoples and nations in the Middle Baat to live In peace in accordance with the prinCiples of good-nalghbou:llne.s. '. Por the pmst 20 years Egypt has clearly condelloed Israeli.practices and actions in the occupied territories. Once again, we condemn all Israeli policies that iupede a settl...nt and do not help to defuse the Middle East crisia. The PRBSIDBNT: The Observer of the League of A~ab state. has asked to be allowed to uke a stateaent in reply. I call on hi. in accordance with General Anellbly reaolutlon 477 (V), of 1 NoveMber 1950. Mr. MAKSOUD (League of Arab Statos): I wish to ca.Bent on the statement of the representative of Israel. Be spoke of the us. of violence with a view tc l~.ing conditions on Israel. I have never before s.en such a reversal of role.~ P~r ~~e past 11 ~nth., those taking part in the Pal.stinian uprising have rofrained free violence of eny kind. The v.iolent coercion that tho occupying Power ha. e.ercised le the only violeRce that has been used.. It is ailQed at disfranchising Pal••tinian people for ever and pr~lblting the exercise of their right.. We have all s.en how the mainstreaM of the Palestine uprising, which has been iabued with non-violence throughout the entire 11 .anthe, has refrained frOM any violence as a natter of overriding principle, while Israel has to resort to violence day 1n and day out. Yet, when an incident - regrettable, unfortunate - occurred and its aray "as attacked as a legitiute target, a8 the arllY of an occupying Power, in south Lebanon, Israel's instant reflex was revenge, the wreaking of havoc on the Palestinian ca.ps and the imposition of curfews. That 18 why I said in my stato.ent that violence was inherent in the pattern of occupation, while violence was incidental and unfortunate in the Pa16stinian uprising. Therefore~ those in the Western world who abstained in the voting and tried to create a pa~allel between planned, deliberate violence by the occupying Power, which is a matter of policy, and the incidental, accidental, unfortunate and regrettable individual violence that has taken place, have, in effect, applied a double etandard. For 11 aonthe not a single planned, deliberate incident of violence has taken place in the course of the uprising. My other point concerne the allegation of iabalance in the resolution. Mr. Okun, the representative of the United States, stated: ·We believe direct negotiations ••• offer the only realistic basis for achieving such a [legitiute political] settle.ent.· '(supra, p. 88) If he wants direct negotiations as a means of solving probl~.s and settlinq conflicts, the Palestine Liberation Orga~ization (P~) is available to negotiate. But, A8 long as the PLO is cirCUMvented and excluded fro. exercising its right to par~ic!pat. and negotiate, it cannot accept any kind of negotiations under the dur••• of occupation, because that would _an accepting and ratifying the conque.ts of Israel. .e beli_ve in negotiations a. a .eane of echieving a legitimate outcoae, the Arab State. beUeve in negotiations, but we do not beUeve in being dictated to aa a consequence of the continued occupation of Israel. This is why we support the idea of an international confQrence sponsored by the United Nations. I agree with the Aaerican representative that it should be properly structurld. The PLO should reprement the Palestinian people and, as recognized by the United States and as Secretary Shultz sald in his speech on 12 September, such a conference should not rule out the right of the Palestinians to self-determination and to establish a Palestinian State. Those are the very political rights which are being targeted for destruction. The i.portant thing is for the Palestinians to exerciee their full national and political rights, 1n conditions of equality, in the Middle East region• ...,

The Asseably will resume consideration of this item when it takes up the report of the Special Political CoaMittee. ~. aeeting rose at 6.40 p.m. (Mr. Mak80ud, League of Arab States)