A/43/PV.69 General Assembly

In order to assist delegations in planning their work I should like to inform members of the programme of the Assenbly for this week. This afternoon, the Assembly will continue its consideration of agenda item 40, "The si tuation in the Middle East". 'Ibmrrow, 6 Decenber, in the IIIOrning, the Assembly will continue its consideration of agenda item 40, on the situation in the Middle East, and will take up reports of the Second Committee on agenda item 148, "Conservation of climate as part of the common heritage of mankind" and sub-item (b) of agenda item 86, on special programmes of economic assiatance. In the afternoon, the Assembly will consider all reports of the Special Political Committee. On Wednesday, 7 December, in the morning, the Assembly will hear an address by the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. It will also consider agenda item 49, on the review of the efficiency of the administration and financial functioning of the United Nations. In the afternoon, the Assembly will consider all reports of the First Committee. On Thursday, 8 December, in the morning, the Assembly will consider agenda item 38, on the fortieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. That afternoon, it will consider all reports of the Third Committee. On the morning of Friday, 9 December, the Assenbly will consider reports of the Sixth and the Second Committees. In addition, the President intends to take up all pending items as appropriate during the course of the week, with the possible exception of those assigned to the Fi fth Commi t tee.

I should like to remind representatives that, in accordance wi th the decisiat taken this morning, the list of speakers in the deba te on t.llis item will be closed t.oday at 4 p.m. I therefore request those representatives wishing to participate in the debate to inscribe their names on the list as soon ns possible. Hr;,' BADAiU (Egypt) (interpretation from Arabic>: Once again the General AssenDly is considering the situation in the Middle East, that regiOn of the world rich in history and reSQUC8S, but fraught with conflicts and contradictions. Although the world has succeeded, in recent years, since the establishment of the United Nations, in avoiding thl:i threat of global oonftontation, the international community has failed to put an end to the sequence of violence and bloodshed in that region, which gave the world man's first steps towards the codification of systems and values. The region's geographic location at the crossroads of civilization is probably responsiblel for the extent of its contr ibution to var ious stages of history, just as it accounts for its instability at other times, especially in recent decades. The accullUlation of scientific and technological know-how and capi tal in the world and in that region, together wi th the persistence of the Arab-Israeli conflict, which exposes the Middle East to various forms of military confrontation, make it necessary for the world to realize that it must give top priority to the threat posed by the continuation Of that conflict and the instability prevailing in that region. The military arsenals in that region may bring about unprecedented destruction. This means that present or future conflicts are likely to spread and seriously harm areas outf:'.ide the region, or draw them into the whirlwind of conflict. Eqypt soon realized what the situation was) we have therefore participated in the international community's effortll to put an end to such developments an~ work for a s~lution to the main problems in the region, in keeping with the principles and values recognized by the world. We have also relentlessly endeavoured to relax tension. The initiative taken by Bjypt in the 1')70s with a view to decler ing the Middle East a n~~lear-weapon";free zone was ,8 step in that direction. Egypt then put forward its peace initiative in 1977, which was a second, giant step in the same direction. • The dangers threatenlng the Middle East can go beyond the region and threaten peace and security in the Mediterranean region as well. The stability established in &1rope since the Second World War would be consolidated if it could encompass the eastern part of the Mediterranean and the western part of Asia. We are living in times when nuclear bonbs and offensive systems have no respect for the border9 of States and do not distiilguish between the national!ties or colours of their victims. The deployment of nuclear weapons in the region would jeopardize stability and escalate conflict. Egypt therefore acceded to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has accepted the pr inciple of international control over its peaceful nuclear activities. we express the wish that all the countries in the region, including Israel, will adhere to that treaty and abide by that principle, a11O\11ing their nuclear installations to be supervised by the representatives of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). In the same context, we are gratified to see that the First Committee of the Gen~ral Assenbly, on 15 November, aCbpted by a consensus a draft resolution submi tted by 8;lypt on the declaration of the Middle East as :1 nucl911r-weapon-free zone. We hope that that resulution, as well as the others aCbpted on that subject since my country took its initiative in 1974, will be applied and supported by the intert~ational community, providing the legislative framework and the required material basis for achieving that end. In August this year, the Iraq-Iran conflict came to an end. That was perhaps the only positive development in the region this year. The war had taken thousands of lives and caused widespread destruction in the two countries, costing them billions of dollars. The conflagration spilled over into other countries of the region. The parties, in accepting security Council resolution 598 (1987) and the initiation of direct talks between representatives of Iran and Iraq in Geneva, marked a new era in the region, which, we hope, will lead to good-neighbourly relations between the two countr lea, enabling them to devote their mater ial and economic resources to development and reconstructi,on. Thus Iraq has qui te clearly shown that it has the necessary will to accept the choice of peace, just as it proved its courage in defending its territory. Those years of armed conflict have left behind many complex problems which require patience, flexibility and persev$rance on the part of all the parties concerned in order to reach a lasting solution, with the active participation of the Uni t.ed Nations and the iriternationa1 community. On behalf of the GoVernment of E);Jypt I wish to convey our deepest grati tude to the 5ecretary-General for his efforts in this and other areas. His efforts have made such progress possible, and we hope that he will keep up his efforts until our objectives have been achieved. Developments in the Iraq-Ir an conflict have shown that the in terna tiona1 community is able to resolve conflict if we display the necessary political will. In particular we wish to refer to the responsibili ties of the permanent members of the Security Council. The role played by the United Nations with regard to progress in this area and in other regions of the world has rekindled our hopes in the Organization. It has also increased its credibility and its prestige. We hope that this trend will continue. More than four deC5des of armed conflict in the Middle East have prcved that the question of Palestine is at the very core of the problem. There we find the roots of many other conflicts. Important events have taken plaC! there in the last few mnths, encompassing various aspects of the problem and offering greater possibili ties than ever before of achieving a negotiated settlement of the conflict. The Palestinian national uprising in the occupied territories was indeed proof of the fact that the Palestinian PeOple rejects the vicious circle created by the illegal Israeli occupation and the resort to brutal force to maintain that oceupatiQ') • Then came the decision by Jordan towards the end of July to cut its legislative and administrative ties with the West Bank in order to emphasize the representative nature of the PLO and the Movement of Arab Parties, and the Aqaba meeting towards the end of OCtober between President Mubarak, King Russein and Yasser Arafat of the PLO. That meeting denonstrated that the Palestinian party respects international legality and that the strategic choice of the palestinian and Jordanian peoples is to establish futl!Jr.e relationships on a confederate basis. The Palestinian party has cQ')tinued to work towards bringing aboot conaitions conducive to a negotia ted settlement of the problem• . In pursui t of that programme, resolutions were adopted by the Palestine National Council in AlCiJeria last month. Those resolutions were adopted on the basis of democratic practices and showed beyond question the willingness of the Palestinian people to work for the success of the peace initiatives and efforts. The declaration of the Palestinian State and the poli Heal communique in which it is contained represent two enornous steps along the way to the establishment of lasting peace in keeping wi th the principles recognized by the international collllll1ni ty. Egypt is totally convinced that the ~itad Hl!Uons bears a special responsibility in that area. Aa is evident fre. the 'al••tinian declaration and co_unique, resolution 181 (II) en the partition of palestine, adopted by the General Assellbly in 1947, continues to prOl7ide the fra.work of international legaUty guu&nteeing to the Palestinian people its right to independence an~ to co-exist with Israel within the 1967 borders, in keeping with resolutions of the General Assenbly and of the security Council. Palestinian decisions have clearly shown that the Palestin.ian party rejects terrorism in mU its forlllS and th~t the PLO rQ8peets the cmtents of the 1985 cairo declaration, while respecting the rights of tha Palestinian people, in conformity with all laws, to resist the occupatim of its territory. It has also affirned the colllllitment of the Palestinian State to the principles of the United Nations and the International Declalration of RUIIan Rights, as well as to. policy of non-al19f\Ment, freedom of beliefs, and a democratic parliaMntary aysteJl based on freedom of beliefs and the creation of political parties under an independent judicial system. we continue .to hope that now thllt the Palestinian party has dellOnstrat:ed the air.cerity of i tu peaceful orientation, all the other parties will meet it half way, if only by establishing contacts with its 1egitill8te representatives in order to work towards a lasting solution, instead of breaking off cantacts and shutting doors. That is an atU tude which could only lead to the encourage_nt of extremist trends and violence by both parties, and it would damage the credibility and neutrality of those of whom we expect a positive role in keeping with their avowed principles. The explicit acceptance by the Palestine National Council of resolutions ef the Security Council concerning the Palestinian question, in particular Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) aild 338 (1973), can help encourage the holdil1g of an internaUma! peace conference on the M1dcUe Rut lI1der the aegis of the O\i tcd Nations, with the participation ·of all the parties concerned. we fael that such a conference would prcvi... the best aeans of reaching a 1a11ting and total settlf!ll8nt guaranteeing the fralleWork of negotiations between the p.rtielJ cancerned, including the representatives of the Palestinian people, who are indispensable for the restQl'ation of the si tuaticn in the region. My country believes that the super-PoAers bear a responsibility for the holding of the conference. Here, we note! wi th satisfaction the state_nt cCXltained in paragraph 33 of the report of the Secretary-General (A/43/867) concerning the conviction of all mel'llbers of the security Council of the need to convene an international peace conference and their invitation to the secretary-General to cCXltinue his efforts and consultations in that. regllrd. Ne should also like to refer to paragraph 35, which lllentions the need for the Security Council to co.-it itself to a review of the situation with a view to adopting a p.tagmatic approach to that end. Bgypt appeals to the two super-Powers to shoulder their responsibil ities in this field. We also believe that the European group, wtUch reacted positively to the declaration of the Palestinian State, could help strengthen the dialogue and contact wi th the repre6entatives of the Palestinian people, especially in the light of the histor iea1 and cultural Unks between aJrope and the eastern part of the Mediterranean regiCXl and b9tween Burope and the Arab wodd as a whole. DJypt believes that it would be wrong for Israel or for any other party to ignore this development which may leed to peace, since the only alternative would be to reduce the chances for the peace th& Middle East so greatly needs. Today Israel llIust face its children, the internatiooa1 coJlJllunity and the c"nacienat of hUMnity and show its CJCOd intentions with regard to the estaolishJlent of a jUBt and lasting peace by wi thdrawll1 from the occupied territories, because by pur.uing its policy of illegal occupation and usurpation of Dlr. Badawi, Bilypt) the territories of othets it is prolonging the sUffering of peo~les and the destabilization of the situation in the Middle East~ The ~i ted Nations Charter and Security Council resolution 242 (1967) prohibit the acquisition of territory by force. That principle applies to all the Arab territories occupied since 1967. (Mr. Badawi, !1ypt) This pr incip1e applies to the Syr tan Go1an Heights because its continued occupation by Israel, tlnder the pre~xt of security, is in flagrant violation of internatima1 norms. we call upon Israel to withdraw from all Arab territories and renounce its pretexts, which have prO'led futUe and have been rejected by the international community. The situation in Leba."lOfl continues to be a source of grave ooncern for the people and Government of my COlD'ltry. It is regrettable that the situation continues to deterior&te and that the Iebanese p-... ji)le havs not been able to elect a President of the Republic within the legally established time-frame since the outbrea,k of hostilities in the 1970s. While tbere are many internal factors inherent in the conflict, we should not forget the policy of gaining sPleres of influence and the inter.ference in the internal oonflict by other parties. Such an approach cannot lead to national reconciliation in Lebanon. Bjypt appeals to the international coltlTlunity to put an end to foreign interference Md bring about conditions that wU1 permit the Lebanese to arrive at a settlement guaranteeing the in&"~ndence and territorial integrity of Iebanon. The canplex situation in the Middle East requires those in the world that enjoy freedom to take the initiative in their own societies in bringing about ~ canprehensive settlement of the problems of the region. Neither the constantly changing situation nor the sometimes conflicting interests should lead us to forget that the destiny of mankind is indivisible and that right and justice are the only founda tions for peace and secur i ty. Egypt, as usual, will continue to work for a comprehensive settlement of the Middle East problem, in keeping with int..i:irnational law and, in particular, with the right of peoples to self-determination and to respect for human rights and the right of all the peoples of the region to 1 ive wi thin recognized boundaries. We the Middle But a 1101'S s.cure region in which peoples and States will co-operate to ensure ~01Iperity for all and guarantee international peace and security. Mr. PITARlCA (Albania), The iaportant event.. that have taken place in the Middle East since the lat sH.ion of the General AIIsellbly have had, and continue to have, their illpact on the latest political develoPllents in the region. For alllOst one year now the occupied territories of the west Bank and Gaza have haen seething with the Palestinians' IllUsive revolt. The young men and women that at Pl'esent cluh with the Israeli occupiers in Ra_llab, Nablus and elsewhere belong to that Palestinian generation that was born and brought up in conditions of Zionist occupation and dollination. This fact alone proves that the Palestinian people are deter.ined to _ke every sacrifice for the realization of their lofty national aspiration to li"e free in their he_land. In the aoothern part of the region, the fratricidal Iraq-Iran war, which caused heavy hUMn lCl8S8S and inealculable .ter~8l da_ge to both sides, has lately taken a new course owing to the established cease-fire. This complies not only with the aspirations of the Iranian and Iraqi peoples but also with th'lt aspirations of the entire regicn to p.c~ Md "ecurity. The ending of the Iraq-Iran war also contribute" to the relaxation of tension in the entire Middle But area. At the sa. ttlle, it la a development that is not welcomed by Israel, because that way served as a focus that distracted attention Md energies from the zicnist and illiperialist aggression that goes on in the reCJion. Nor can one leave out of the overall picture of events the super-Powers' interference in the internlll affairs of the Middle BalJt countries and their rivalry and oollabor:atiO'J1, which ~re .nifested in their feveriah diplomatic and military activities allegedly for the solution of the Middle But questicn, th~ preservation of peace, the safety of navigAtion in the Persian Gulf, and so forth. (Mr. Badawi, Bnpt) The Middle East crisi. cannot be usessed and judged detadled frOll the background of present""ay int:6rnational cJevelopllents. The peoples c struggle for freedoll and independence and their independent and 1l000erftigll rights has coMpelled ~he big ·protectors· to review tt.eir tactics and perfect co-ordination betw~en them in order tD preserve dordnaticn in their respective zones of influence. This is also one of the fO;l2l topics of the institutionalized United States/Soviet dialogue, discussion and decisicn on regional conflicts. Although in various parts of the wacld there is actually a tendency to put an end to regional conflicts, as the Iran-Iraq case shCVIJ, this does not apply to the whole Middle East orisie. Various and lIultifarious are the causes that keep this crisis alive. It should not escape attention that for IIlOre than four decades now at the core of the Middle East cr:isis has lain the Palestinian question, in all its graveness. A whole nation is being subjected to a syatflMtic polioy of genooide designed to liquidate it physically, to say nothing of the denial of the national right of the Palestinians to live free in their hometand. Another important dimension of the Middle Past orisis is the Arab-Israeli conflict, which is given practical expressioo in repeated Israeli aota of aggressim against the Arab countries, resulting in the oocupation by Israel of entire Arab territories. To thls IlUst be added the orisis in Lebanon, whioh has been oontinuing for la year8. Besides oollll:1tting acts of a99ression and frequent bOl\t)ardftlentB, Israel keeps the southern part of the oountry under oocupatim. MoreOl'er, Lebanon is suffering the oonsequences of a oivil war between political factions Md ethnic and religious groupings wicb must be consitiered one of the most 8er ious wounds in the whole oomplexity of the Middle East crisis. This overall grave sItuation in the Middle BaDt develops against the baokgromd of the rivalry an~, in&Ct~, collabos:ation between the two super-powers 1 (~. Pitarka, Albania) the Uti ted Statee and the SOITiet U1 i~. There is no doabt that t:h is r 1valry and oollaboration further complicates the situation in the reg~on, which is serious enough as it la. OVer the years the super-Powers, el/ch al the basis of its own interests, hav caltinued to make plans for the alleged settlement of the Middle East problem and the restoration of peace and tranquillity in that neuralgic region. Yet the fever:'ish diplomtic activity that has taken place in the period since the previ.ous session, wins our attention because of its intensit.y and complexity. It is certainly not their concern to put an end to the sufferin\, and misery of the Arab countr ies and peoples that propels the super-Powers into r;;.~ch undertakings, much though they proclaim that they stand for the settlement of the Middle East question. On the contrary, it is the struggle of the Arab peoples, notably the massive revolt of the Palestinian population in the occupied ter.ritories, that repudiates and makes null and void the pan-imperialist consensus on wneither war nor peace-. It is the unflinching determination of the martyred Palestinian people to gain their natimal rights, and the assistance that the other Arab peoples render to their struggle, coupled with the supportive solidarity of world public opinion, that canpel the super-Powers, willingly ex unwillingly, to count the Palestinian factor as essential to the solution of the Middle East problem. It is these very e).:aments that have shattered the foundations of the existing statu~-quo imposed by the super-PcMers and Zionism, forcing them to conceive and co-ordinate new tactics so that they do not lose cmtrol of events. The unprecedented escalation of violence and terror by the Israeli occupiers and the intensification of WashingtonOs activity in connection with the. so-called peaceful settlement of the whole Middle East question are instances of the familiar "carrot and stick" tactics, which serve one and the !}ame unchanging imperialist policy - the perpetuation of Zionist domination in the occupied Arab lands. Neither Zionist genocide nor United States schemes, under a wide var iety of labels, which ingnore the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to an independent and sovereign homeland and do not recognize the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the Palestinians' sole, legitimate representative, can bring ~bout a settlement, and both are doomed to failure. In these hard times for Israel and the United States, the Soviets are trying not to fall behind, and they avail themselves of every opportunity that looks favourable and suits them to be part of the plans and settlements that are being charted on the Middle East question. Nevertheless, the massive revolt of the Palestinians and the world-wide support it enjoys are ruining the game of the sUller-Powers, which, despite their frequent meetings and consultations, are failing to shape the settlement of the complicated Middle East problem after the IIDdels set in the bargains previously struck on other regional problems. It is not Witil0ut significance that the current United States Administration is passing on the Middle East question to the Administration-elect for solution. Just as in the past, the new United States initiatives cb not aim at providing a sol~tion to the Middle East crisis, for Washington is concerned only with justifYing its intervention, and per~tuating the occupation regime and the wno war, no peace" situatia1, which ensures the flow of profits from arms sales and the pr ivileges of its presence in this oil-rich basin. The international conference on peace in the Middle E&~t oontinues to be presented, primarily by Soviet diplomacy, as a forum that could take upon itself the responsibility for solving the Middle East problem. The Albanian delegation maintains the view that no conference or forum will be able to bring about a useful result, much less solve the Middle East problem, unless the Palestinian Liberation Organization participates in it with full and equal rights as the sole, legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, and without the solution, first, of the key problem of the Middle East issue, the Palestinian question. It is understandable that the United Nations should be empowered to assist in assessing and solving regional conflicts, the Middle East included, in conformity with its Charter and in accordance with the aspirations of peoples to preserve peace and security in the world. Proceeding from sincere goodwill, the delegation of the People's Socialist Republic of Albania is of the opinion that in exercising this function the Organization should keep in mind the fact that the main put muat be played by the parties directly involved in a conflict and primarily intere$ted in solving it. The super-Powers should be given no chance to use the United Nations as a cOler-up and to turn international law into a labyrinth of pseudo-jur isprudenca to conceal and just! fy their imper iaUst intr igues and plots. The heroic str~9gle of the Pal~stinian people is an expression of their growing awareness and national consciousness, as well as vivid proof of their determination to gain their homeland. Moreover, it is evidence of the colossal potential that the Arab peoples can put in IIDtion to stop th03e who endeavour to speculate wi th the it sacred aspirations to freedom and independence by offering them solutions that carry the seed of future conflicts. As in the put, the People's Socialist Republic of Albania and the Albanian people will unreservedly support the legi tiraate struggle of the Palestinian and other Arab peoples to put an end to imperialist and zionist aggression and the occupation of Arab lands and fully to restore the lawful nationul right of the Palestinian people to a free and independent homeland. Consistent with its suppoa:t for the just cause of the Palestinian people and their right to their independent State, the Government of the People's Socialist Republic of Albania has recognized t.Jle Palestinian State proclaimed by the Palestine National Council. We will give our determined support to evety legitimate endeavour of the Palestinian and other Arab peoples to ensure the restoration of their lawful national rights and achieve genuine peace and security in the Middle East region. Mr. RANA (Nepal): The si tuation in the Middle East has been the foremost concern of the United Nations ever since the Organization came into being. Five major wars have been fought in the r'29ion. They have all been as destructive as they have been indecisive. The United Nations has been instrum~ntal in arranging a cease-fire after each war. Scores of resolutioM on various aspects of the problem and the deployment of peace-keeping forces in di fferent sectors under line the inter~ational community's concern for and interest in a just and durable peace in the Middle East. It has been established beyond doubt that the involvement and efforts of the United Nations can be effective only when the parties concerned display the necessary political will and a spir it of co-operation and accommdaHen • The cease-fire in the QJlf war is an example. This prolonged and tragic conflict contained the seeds of wider conflagration, threatening international peace and security. The cease-fire is the result of the confidence that both Iran and Iraq have placed in the united Nations to prol'lOte a just and lasting solution to their differences - a negotiated political settlement that will ensure peace, progress and prosperity for both countries. My delegation welcomes the cessation of hostilities between these two countries, both of which are friends of Nepal, (Hr. Pitarka, Albania) and rei ~erates its full support for the Secretary-General in his laudable efforts to ensure the implementation of Security Council resolution 598 (1987). The c«:Intinuing and deepening tragedy of Lebanon, <Xl the other hand, clearly reveals the dangers inherent in allowing the status quo in the Middle East to cmtinue. The si tuation there is a matter of deep concern to us all. we firmly believe th~t the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Lebanon must be respected by all. Sl'I¥)Oth and full implementation of the constitutional process, without outside interference, is the first necessity in Lebanon today. Our commitment to the independence and territorial integrity of Lebanon is reflected in our continued participation in the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon. In the troubled history of the region, the past year has marked yet another climax in the cycle of violence Md human suffering. The continuing Paleatinian . uprising in the Territories occupied by Israel since 1967 has highlighted as never before the urgent necessity of serious negotiations. (Mr. Rana, NeE!!) The uprising symbolizes the spontaneous rejection by the Palestinian people of 1 He under continued foreign occupation. The reaction of Israel, the occ::upying Power, to the civilian protest has been a source of deep concern to the international oomnunity. That concern spr in9s from the repressive measures and nethods adopted by the Israeli security forces and from the Israeli Gcvernment's policy of such collective punishment as the delOOlition of houses, deportations in open defiance of relevant security Council resolutions and arbi trary economic measures designed to harm and harass the Palestinian people. Nepal joins in cCl'lderilling such policies, \Mich are not only inhuman but also contrary to recognized international conventions. Strict observance of the Fburth Geneva Convention of 1949, however, will not in itself bring peace to the region; the problem will ccntinue so long as the fundamental issues are evaded. There is now broad agreement that the underlying prOblem of the Middle East can be resolved only through a comprehens ive, just and lasting settlement based fundamentally on Secur ity Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). The settlement would have to include the withdrawal of Israel from territories occupied since 1967 and unqualified respect for the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, including their right to a State of their own. Equally important, the settlement has to ensure Israel's right to live in peace within recognized boundaries, free from threats or acts of force. In the Middle East, the status quo has clearly become untenable and the int~rnational community must exert every effort to proJrote the peace process. The Security Council bears a special responsibility in this endeavour. Like the overwhelming majority of the Members of the United Nations, Nepal believes that an international oonferenoe, under the auspices of the United Nations and with the participation of all the parties concerned, including the Palestine Liberation Organization, the sole and legi timate representative of the Palestinian people, and (Hr. Rana, Nepal) the permanent IMllOers of the Security Council, offers the best hope for beginning meaningful negotiations on a 03mprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. Years of war and oonfl ict have left a terr ible legacy of mistrust and hatred in the Middle East region. Bold and imaginative statesmanship is required to break the vicious circle. In this 03ntext, my delegation believes that the recent declaration by the Palestine Natiooal Council in Algiers const! tutes a posi tive step in this direction. The Palestine National Council has rejected the threat or use of force, violence and terrorism against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. It has called for a peaceful solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict and for arrangements to ensure security and peace for all States of the region. 'l'he hiator ic declaration offer s an unprecedented incentive for the convening of an international conference. Nepal welcomes the historic declaration and hopes that it will pave the way for meaningfUl negotiations to resolve the conflict on the basis of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). The international 03mmunity must seize the opportunity and give peace a chance in the Middle East. Merml regrets the circul'IBtances that have led to the General Assenbly decision to shift consideration of the questioo of Palestine at the forty-third session from Headquarters in New York to Geneva. While we respect the inherent right of the United States, or any State, for that matter, to protect its legitimate interests, the decision to deny an entry visa to Chairman Yasser Arafat was a clear violation of the hoot country Agreement. M1at made the decision even more unfortunate was that it came Cl t a time when there was a real prospect of break ing the stalemate in the Middle East. Such actions can only delay or damage the prospects for the peaceful settlement of the issues in the Middle East. Nepal earnestly hopes that the parties concerned will not allow this unfortunate episode to dampen the renewed hope for a meaningful mO'lement towards a nec;JOtiated and just settlement of the Middle Fast conflict. Nr. PAKIDURY (Lebanon) (interpretation from A~abic); The basic link between agenda items 31 and 40 is the questicn of Palestine and the Palestinian people, half of whom live under Israeli occupation while the other half live in diaspora GS refugees in other Arab countries. Israel's inhuman practices in quelUng the upr ising in the occupied Palestinian terri toties cannot be cmdmed l.a1der any law, norm or agreement. The uprising alone proves that the occupation is not accepted, even if Israel tries to camouflage that occupatim to give it the false appearance of a paradise. This year has seen substantive progress towards the resolution of a numer of regimal conflicts. The 0\1ted Nations, through the efforts of its Secretary-General, has regained its credibility, vitality and freedom of movement. This has given rise to the hope that similar efforts will be IIIIlde to deal with conf~.icts in the Middle East, particularly with regard to the Palestinian and southern Lebanoo causes. Lebanon has its cause too. Although it began as an offshoot of the Palestinian cause, it has now become a serious independent issue, which, thanks to Israel's continued policy of aggression and its anbition to acquire I\I)re land and water resources, is now an urgent problem calling for a radical solutim. It is to be feared that, in the absence of a determined deterrent stand by the internatimal community, represented in our Organization and its organs, particularly the Security Council, the situation in the region in gen3r,,1 Md in southern tebanm in particular may deter iorate to the point of explosicn. rire, which at a distance .y be perceptlble only by the glow of its flames, may' suddenly spread in every direction and burst into a cmflagration that could engulf inter national peace and seour 1ty • Only then will the world feel the burning heat and become aware of the destruction and the bloodshed. The secretary-General has foreseen all this. Hence his report on the Middle East warns of that danger and calls for action to avoid the calaMity. In my statement to the General Assembly in the general debate I dealt with the demands of Lebanon, which are well known to everyone here. However, I have to state here that so long as Israel remains in occupation of part of southern Lebanon, and so long as it continu~s to pursue its practices and acts of aggression, peace in Lebanon will remain threatened and normalization of the life of Lebanon will continue to be out of reach. The cris is which has swept over the country from the south can be solved only from the south, through full and unconditional Israeli wi thdrawal. That solution is wi thin the power of the Security Council, and is the responsibility of the Security Council. The security Council is responsibleJ the Security Council has the power to act. We call upon it to take a collective stand and adopt a strong binding resolution in the interest of international peace and security, the sovereignty, independence and territorial integr ity of Lebanon and the preservation of the lives, property and dignity of the people of Lebanon. Some descr ibe the Lebanese national resistance in a way that sometimes may brand it as terrorist or put it on the same footing as the Israeli aggressors. But the right of every people to resist occupation is legitimate and legal. We cannot believe that in the time that has elapsed since the Second World War some countries have forgotten their own resistance to nazi occupation or that others have forgott1m the human and material support and information provided by them, to the resistance mvements landed. Havling said this, we must point out that national resistance is the right of every occupied people wherever it may b(!. We in Lebanon take pride in our resistance to Israel's occupation. Time will never cause us to forget the saga of that resistance~ we have wr itten it in the blood of our mar tyrs and the tears of our widows and orphans. I should like to pay a tr ibute to the positive role played by the Urlited Nations Interim Fo~ce in Lebanon (UNIFIL). That role is badcally part of the task entrusted to the Force under Security Council resolutions 425 (1978) and 426 (1978). let the record show Lebanon's gratitude to the Secretary-General and the Assistant Secretary-General with direct responsibility for the Force, as well as to the Force itself, its leadership, command and personnel, and to the troop-contributing countries. Lebanoo reaffirms its support for the Force and the need to enable it to fulfil its task - a task that Israel is still impeding, as it has Q)ntinued to do for more than 10 years. Hr. AL-MI\SR! (Syr ian Arab Republic) (interpretation from Arabic); Today the General Asseri)ly begins its consideration of the grave si tuation in the Middle Fast, at a time when the revolutionary uprising of the Palestinian people against the Israeli occupatioo is entering its secood year. That revolutionary uprising has demonstrated unequivocally the determination of the Arab Palestinian people to liberate their homeland, Palestine, from Israeli occupation. It has also proved that the will of the Arab Palestinian people is much stronger than the fascist, repress lve practices of Israel. It has also prOl/ed that the Pales tin ian people's strong determination to liberate their occupied land can never be crushed, however great the challenge. This reoJolutionary upr ising, together wi th the heroic resistance in southern Lebanon and the Syr ian Arab Colan Heights, both occupied by Israel, has exposed the annexationist objectives and racist, aggressive character of Israel. Israel came into being as a result of a racist movement within the framew«k of settler colooialism. It wae built on the imperative of settling in Palestine and expelling its Arab people. The Zionist leaders, have realized throughout that to enable ziooism to realize the dream of establishing Greater Israel the land must be cleared of its owners and original inhabitants. This was expol.l1ded by the Bri tish Zionist wri ter Zingwell in a speech he made in New York in 1904, in which he said~ "We must be prepared to ex~l the Arabs from Palestine by the force of the sword. • That is exactly what has been done over !:he past 40 years through a ser iee of fascist m,llli'sacres, operations Cif deportation and expulsion and the creation of an atmosphere of panic, to force the Arabs to nee from their lands and their homes. That is exactly what is being done in a heightened form in the occupied Arab territories. Strangely enough, there are those that choose not to see all this, and speak of the possibility of living in peace in the region with the gUindchildren of Hertzl, Jabotinsky, Zingwell and Ben-Gur ion. Colon1aUst allOi tions in our Middle Eas t reg ion and greed foe its weal th and unique strategic position have been the pr:ime motives in the conspiracy to establish a settler-eolQ1ialist ZiQ1ist entity in Arab Palestine, so that that entity may create a situation of perpetual tension in the regior and expsnd whenever circumstances allow in'order to safeguard the interests of the ~olQ1ialist Powers in this sensitive region. (Mr. At-Masri, Syrian A~ab Republic) Isrsel's intentions and annexationist and aggressive aims have never l~cked proof. Originally, Israel was an expansionist settler-colonialist enterprise that had its founda tions in aggress ion and expansion at the expense of the Arabs' land and the Arab people. Its expansionist pol icy became clear when it annexed Arab Jerusalem and the Arab Syrian Golan and went on building hmc:Jreds of settlements in those territor ies, as well as on the west Bank and in Gaza and removing the inhabitants of those occupied la-lds. This proves beyond any doubt that peace is not what Israel wants. Israel wants land, expansion, and the building of more settlements. It is for this reUal that Israel refuses to recognize the inalienable national rights of the Palestinian Arab people ~nd resorts to many terrorist and nazi practices in repressing the Palestinian people in the occupied Palestinian lands, to force them to leave, exactly as it does in the Syrian Arab Golan and southern Lebanon. Haw, then, can there be talk of peace? Thoee that weave the illusion of solutions that lII!ly be rooched, while Palestini&n land rem ins under occupation and the Palestinian people are denied their national rights, including the right to return to their homeland, Palestine, to self-determination and to establish their own independent State on their own soil, have not learnt the lessons of the past, and do not realize that a just peace in the r~gion cannot be achieved under occupation, EBttlement and expansion. The situation in the occupied Arab territories is extremely grave and is progressively becoming more so owing to the repressive and barbaric practices of the Israeli forces of occupation against the inhabitants of those territories, in blatant violation of the norms of international law ctndthe Fourt.h Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of war. Thus every avenue that might lead to a solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict and the establishment: of a comprehensive and just peace is blocked and international peace and security ale seriously endangered. '1'0 Israel, peace is the peace of occupation, expansion and the acquisition of land by force. T'lis, of couue, runs counter to any real concept of peace built on the ending of occupation and the full and uncondi tional restoration of the inalienable rights of the inhabitants of the occupied territories. So long as this contradiction between real peace and the Israeli concept of peace persists, the achievement of peace will remain a renote dream and the Arab struggle will cQ1tinue lJntil the Arabs liberate their land and regain their rights. My country has repeatedly made it clear that peace has certain elements. The moot important of those elements are justice and equity, the ending of occupation and the restoration of usurped rights. There is no peace under occupation. There will be no peace unless and until the Arabs regain all their lands and all their rights. It is sophistry and a grave mistake for some PeOple to believe that peace can be achieved in this L'egion without total, unconditional Israeli withdrawal from all the occupied Palestinian and other Arab terri toties and wi thOllt giving the Arab Palestinian people the opportunity to enjoy their inalienable national rights. Those who speak of peace and ignore its requirements and conditions make a serious error of judgment. Israel does not want peace in the region. This is a fact that it does not need great acumen to appreciate. Israel simply wants the Arabs to knuckle under and accept its expansionist ambitions. It is for this reason that Israel rejects the international conference and insists on direct negotiations, because in this way it can achieve the aims which it works for, as it did in the case of the Camp David agreements. However, history does not repeat itself, and what happened at Camp David will never happen again, because Camp David, with all its agreements and its approach to the issue, has brought nothing to the region but a cootinuing threat to its peace and security. Suffice it to recall that those agreements enabled Icrael to achieve more expansion and put IT'~re obstacles in the way of peace. It annexed Arab Jerusalem and the Arab Syrian Golan~ i.t invaded IA!banon, destroyed its capital, Beirut, and occupied its southern part~ and it stepped up its repression of the inhabitants of the occupied Arab territories and reinforced its settler policies there by building more settlements. All of this strongly refutes the claims of those that would have the world believe that Israel wants peace. At the same time, it shows Israel to be an aggressor, a racist settler-colonialist entity and an active force ag~inst peace and security in the Middle East and the world as a whole. Having realized this fact, the General Assembly adopted, on 10 November 1975, ita resolution determining that Zionism is a form of racism. On 5 February 1982, after the application of Israeli laws to the Arab Syrian Golan, tbe General Assemly declared that Israelis recozd and actions confirmed that it was not a peace-10l7ing Member State and that it had not carried out its obligations under General Assembly resolution 273 (Ill) of 11 May 1949. The loog terror ist history of Israel i occupation of the Arab Syr ian Golan, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and southern Lebanon calls to mind the barbaric acts of the racist: regime of Preter ia "ga inst the South Afr ican people and the people of Namibia and the Nazi crimes against civilians in Europe during the second World War. (~=Maari, Sfr ian Arab Repur ...c) Since it occupied the Syrian Arab Galan Heights in 1967, Israel has continued to impose measures aimed at annexation of the territory and encout'sgement of its settlement by Israelis. That is why, on 1 December 1981, Israel took a decision to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the Syrian Golan Heights and Israeli identity on its Syrian Arab inhabitants. Those who refused to accept that identity were harassed and treated very harshly. The Israeli occupation au thorities confiscated the lcmds of the Syr lan Ar ab inhabitants and converted those lands into military sites and settlement areas. They also took over the natural water sources and prevented the Syrian Arab inhabitants from moving and working freely in the terr itory. The situation in the Syrian Arab Golan Heights, as in other occupied Arab territories, is deteriorating further. Every day the Syrian Arab inhabitants face very brutal treatment at the hands of the Israeli occupation forces. Their basic human rights are systematically violated. Since Israel occupied the Galan Heights in 1967, it has pursued the well-known Israeli strategy of aggression against the inhabitants of the territory. Its objective has been to Judaize the Syrian Galan Heights, eradicate the national identity of its inhabitants, destroy its economic infrastructure, take over its water resources and change its social and cultural character, in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and General Assembly and Security Council resolutions, particul~rly Security Council resolution 497 (1981), adopted unanimously on 17 December 1981, and General Assembly resolution ES-9/l, adopted on 5 February 1982, at the ninth emergency special session, and reaffirmed at every session of the General Assembly since then. It is no secret that the tragic situation in southern Lebanon is the result of the Israeli occupation of that part of Lebanon and of Israel's use of armed mercenaries and puppets to commit acts of terrorism and violence against the Lebanese populace. Israel rejected Security Council resolution 425 (1978) and subsequent resolutions call ing for the full and uncmdi tional wi thdrawal of its forces from all Lebanese territory and the deployment of United Nations forces in the area .00 carry out its functions. The Israeli occupation forces have turned whole towns and villages in southern Lebanon into quasi-eoncentration camps. Life there is hell. The Israeli occupation forces carry out acts of repression, murder and destruction from air, sea and land. It is a mistake for anyone to believe that conoossions by the Arab Palestinian people can help establish peace in the Middle East. It must have become quite clear that making one set of concessions after another only serves Igrael's settler-colonialist and expansionist designs and makes possible great gains for Israel, especially in the direction of war and aggression. Those concessions have not moved us one step towards peace. Syria is aware of the nature and reality of the Arab-Israeli conflict and therefore has always called for focusing on a national Palestinian entity, in the face of' Zionist claims. Syria has always struggled for the attainment by the Arab Palestinian people of their national rights, including the right to return, self-determination and the establishment of their independent and sOlTere!gn State on their national ~oil. Syria has !llways taken a principled stand based on the ':'inkage between the restoration to Syr ia of the Golan Heights, the restoration to the Arab Palestinian people of their occupied land, the guaranteeing of that people's national rights and the liberation of all the other occupied Arab terri tories. Syria has constantly called on public opinion to support our just struggle for Palestinian rights and to express that support by recognizing the inalienable rights of the Arab Palestinian people, especially their right to establish an independent State. Such a positiCX1 is in conformity with the decisions of the Arab summi t conferences and international law. Through their heroic uprising, the Arab Palestinian people have rejected the Israeli occupatioo and demonstrated their determination to regain their national rights. Syr ia feels that the unification of the Palestinians on strong militant grounds, support for the uprising by the people, and Arab resistance against Israeli occupation are the right things to 00 if the territory is to be liberated and the Arab Palestinian people are to regain their rights. That is why Syria has strongly supported the establishment of an independent Palestinian State. That is entirely in keeping wi th our policy n The road to a just:. peace is a one-way road that passes through an internatiCX1a1 conference under the auspices of the United Nations and with the participation of all the parties concerned, inclUding the Palestine Liberation Organization (POO) # the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, and the per manent menner s of the Secur i ty Council. In essence, peace means justice) it means returning ;d.'7Itts to those who have been denied them and putting an end to aggression and occupation. That is the kind of peace for which we struggle. The peace we desire follows the road of the implementation of United Nations resolutions relevant to this question, including those pertaining to the holding of the international conference. unless Israel withdraws from all the occupied Arab territories, unless the question of Palestine is solved in a way that guarantees the rights of the Palestinian people, there will be no peace in that region. Fbr, if there is no just peace, aggression and occupation will cCX1tinue and, consequently, resistance to occupation and aggression will continue, in the Syrian Arab Golan Heights, in the Arab Palestinian land and in southern Lebanon. That resistance is the natural result of cootinued occupation. Mr. BEIONOOOV (tl'lion of Soviet Socialist Republica) (interpretation from Russian): The discussion of the situation in the Middle East at this session of the General Assembly is taking place at a time when the process of improvement in world affairs and the widespread realization by the international community of the need for active dialogue and for foster ing an atmosphere of trust have opened up new prospects for prollDting in teraction. In its turn another extremely important aspect of the interrelatedness of the contemporary world has come into play, namely, the correlation between regional conflicts and the general state of international affairs. A noticeable departure from old stereotypes and the logic of confrontation, a readiness for constructive dialogue and a more prominent role for the United Nations have made it possible to achieve a breakthrough in the matter of settling the situation around Afghanistan and for there to be practical movement towards resolving the Iran~Iraq conflict. settlements are indeed tak 1ng shape in many other hot spots of the contemporary world. Unfortunately, however, Middle East developnents have proved to be among those lagging furthest behind. The Arab-Israeli conflict continues to remain unresolved. Israel, which is continuing to occupy the West Bank and Gaza, the Golan Heights and southern Lebanon, is stubbornly attempting to suppress by force the uprising of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories. The unrestrained growth of the arms race in the Middle East is beginning to cause particular concern. The fact is that that area has become saturated with the most up-to-date forms of weaponry. Apart from the grave economic consequences of the arms race for the peoples of the region, further militarization may well bring the Middle East up to a new level, of e)Cplosive cmfrontation with unforeseeable consequences that represent a ser ious threat to the region and to the international situation as a whole. Nevertheless, even here factOl's have emerged that will help to facilitate movement towards a political settlement. On the positive side of the picture is the attitude taken by the Arab countries f&vouring a settlement by political means through the convening of an international conference on the Middle East as well as the constructive and realistic attitude towards this matter adopted by the Palestine Liberation Organization (P.UO). A very important step in this oonnection are the resolutiow3 adopted at the extraordinary session of the Palestine National Council, which was held in Algiers. The Soviet Union has constantly supported the Palestinian people in its desire to enjoy its inalienable national rights, inclUding the riCZht to establish its own , . independent State. Our people understand the feelings of political zeal and enthusiasm the Palestinians and their brother Arabs are expressing in connection with the resolutions adopted at the Algiers session of the Palestine National Council. The Soviet Union, in keeping wi th the fundamental principle of freedom of choice, recognized the ptoclamation of the Palestinian State, since it is our understanding that to achieve a comprehensive settle11M':'l1t will also in fact lead to the ptactical culmination of the histor ic significance of the process of creating that State. In the Soviet Union these resolutions of the Palestine National Council have been greeted wi th interest and apprcwal. As emphasized in the statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Soviet Union on 18 Novenber this year, "Since they are imbued with a deep sense of realism and responsibility, as evinced by the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization, these resolutions in the aggregate represent a major contribution to the process of achieVing a just political settlement in the Middle East." As a result we now have a situation where the parties directly involved in the conflict have acknowledged that the way to achieve peace and peaceful coexistence between the Arabs and Israel is to be sought through talks based on security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1913). In his report of 28 NOI7enber this year, the Secretary-General correctly states that the Algiers session of the Palestine National Council "has generated a new nomentum in the diplomatic process and ••• offers fresh opportunities for progress towards peace which shoula be seized". (A/43/861, para. 31) It is precisely in this way that these resolutions were welcomed by a~ overwhelming IIBjority of States Merrbers of the United Nations. Against this background a particularly negative tone was set by the decision of the United States State Department to refuse to issue an entry visa to the Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), Mr. Yasser Arafat, to speak before the General Assembly. In Moscow this decision was regarded as both unconstrucUve and unlawful. It was taken at Cl time when the Palestine Liberation Organization has clearly shown itself to be both responsible and Cl necessary partner at peace talks to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict. We must note wi th some regret that in the Middle East region as well not everyone has grasped the imperatives of our times. Israel is still trying to evade any resolution of the fundamental aspects of a Middle East settlement at an international conference, and continues adopting palliatives and depriving the Palestinian people of an opportunity to determine their om future. The process of achieving a Middle East settlement, as we have seen, is influenced by various positive and negative factors. Nevertheless, at the present juncture we do have a political foundation for launching the process for a for a settlement. The presence of such a foundation Pl'ovides us even now wi th an opportunity to start preparatory work to convene a conference and get down to purposeful bilateral and multilateral contacts in order to discuss the fundamental aspects of a settlement and work out mutually acceptabh agreements on concrete ways and means of achieving it. The point of departure for this coule1 be consultations among the five permanent members of the Security Counci~, as well as efforts by all the memers of the Council. ' (Mr. Belonogov, USSR) An international conference, as a universal tool for resolving the Arab-Israeli confl ict, could realize the pr inciple of a balance of interests by enabling the Palestinian people to exercise its right of self-determination in a fashion equal to that guaranteed the people of Israel, by returning the occupied terri tories to the Arabs nn the basis of security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), and by guaranteeing all peoples and States of the Middle East an opportunity to live in peace and security. Participants in the conference should include representatives of all the parties involved in the conflict, including the Arab people of Palestine, whose sole legi tinate representative is the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), and the five permanent members of the security council. To be sure, the complexity and gravity of the problems might require the adoption of interim steps, but these should ba cor.sidered and implemented in the context of a conference, and as a part of a comprehensive settlement. The range of problems afflicting the Middle East is not confined to the Arab-Israeli conflict itself; we cannot ignore the growing militarization, the economic problems or the serious humanitarian issues. It is time to consider what the United Nations can do to solve these problems. We must examine carefully the question of preventing the prol! feration of nuclear and chemical weapons in the Middle East and creating a non-nuclear zone there. Within the United Nations and its Security Council there is general understanding of the urgent steps that need to be taken to br ing about a comprehensive, just and lasting settlement in the Middle East. As the 30 September 1988 report of the Secretary-General puts it, (Mr. Belonogov D t5SR) "It is necessary ••• to find a poli tical solution which will satisfy both the legitimate political rights of the Palestinian people and the right of Israel, like other States in the area, to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats of acts of force". (A/43/691, pazoa. 6) The means to that end may be found in an international conference, the conven ing of which, as stated in the letter dated 21 September 1988 from the President of the security Council addressed to the secretary-General, "all the menDers of the Security COuncil believe ... desirable" (para • .2) We are convinced that we now have a unique opportunity $ which it would be unf.orgivable to let slip. The Soviet Union appeals to all oountr ies to seize this opportunity an1 begin preparations for an international conference on the Middle East. Hr. AK~!t! (Turkey); Of all the regional disputes considered by the Ganeral Assembly, the question of the Middle East is the most intractable. OVer the past 40 years the question of Palestine and the Arab-Israeli conflict have been at the core of the troubles in that region, and have been the direct cause of endless human sUffering and a number of major wars. Over the years Turkish Governments have been steadfast in pursuing consistent policies in that volatile and unstable region. We have a direct and natural interest in the Middle East and in the fate of its peoples living adjacent to our borders. We therefore welcome this opportunity to set out once again before the General Assenbly our views on the Middle East question, which awaits a just and lasting settlement. (Mr. Belonogov, USSR) Since last year's debate on this item in the General Assembly we have wi tnessed a number of er ueial developnents. The upr is ing in the occupied territories, which erupted last December, continues to gain intensity. Jordan severed the administrative and legal ties between itself and the west Bank. The Palestine National Council declared an independent Palestinian State at its recent meeting in Algiers. It is evident that these major events, which occurred during the past few months, catl for careful consideration by the international oonununity. At a time when there are positi-le signs in the global political environment, the Middle East stands out as the only area of regional conflict where there has yet to be any breakthrough. In the course of the debate on the situation in the Middle Fast last year, we pointed out in the General Assembly that "The post-war world has lived with the Middle Fast conflict since the inception of the United Nations. A whole generation has experienced the frustrations of an intractable problem that intermittently leads to explosions of violence and constantly threatens international peace and security. Yet the will to act to resolve the problem, which emerges after every military conflict, quickly evaporates when the sense of crisis recedes 'leading to) an atmosphere of despondency and resignation. We believe that the explicit or implicit abandonment of the search for a just solution only postpones a far greater upheaval. We cannot forget that the Middle East conflict has many dimensions, that its continuation not only can provoke at any time a new confrontation between the antagonists but also undermines the stability of an extremely sensitive region and nurtures the ingredients of a future catastrophe the magnitude of which we cannot even conceive". (A/42/PV.86, pp~ ·39-40) Therefore, it came as no great surprise to us when in December last year the situation in the Arab territori~~ ~der Israeli occupation deteriorated drastically and the Palestinian civilian population rose in protest against the Israeli occupation. The uprising was oonf~onted with extremely harsh and violent measures. Since then we have been following wi th anguish and apprehension the developments in the occupied Palestinian territories. The Secretary-General's recent report (A/43/806) and the report of the Commissioner-General of the united Nations Relief and WOrks Agency drew our attention to the miserable conditions in which the Palestinians live and to their growing despair. In the reports and their: annexes we read that more than 200 Palestinians were killed and thousands injured by the Israel! authorities during the first eight months of the uprising. In view of the tragic loss of life and the human suffering, th~ Government of Turkey has repeatedly denounced the arbitrary Israeli measures and practices that gravely violate the human rights of the Palestinian people living in the west Bank and the Gaza StriPr and has called on Israel to refraln from all acts of violence against the civilian population. The 8ecretary-General's report (A/43/559) dated 26 August 1988 contains substantive information given by Turkey on this issue in accordance with General Assembly resolution 42/160 F. As stressed in security Council resolution 60S (1987), adopted last year, and also in the statement of the President. of the Council issued on 26 August 1988, the policies of Israel, and in particular the killing and wounding of defenceless Palestinian civilians, are bound to have grave consequences for the endeavours to achieve a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. The dfJportation of Palestinian civilians from the occupied territories by Israel, which was the sUbject of security Council resolutions 607 (1988) and 608 (1988), acbpt:ed early this year, and the shocking practice of breaking into Palestinian homes and beating up civilians, the curfews imposed on the refugee camps in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the desecration of holy places, the prevention of the distribution of food and various other economic and political measures mentioned in United Nations documents cannot be tolerCBted" whatever the pretext. These are arbitrary measures of desperation, and they constitute a violation of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. It is evident that such measures have contr ibuted to the escalation of tension in the occupied territories. We have reminded the Israeli author ities of this fact. My Government has stated on various occasions that it sees a close link between the sufferings of the Palestinians and the political settlement of the Middle East problem. In this connection, it is useful to recall the Secretary-General's report, 5/19443, submitted to the security Council. In studying the report, one cannot but agree with the views expressed to United Nations officials by the Palestinians living in the west Bank and Gaza Strip who have rejected the Israeli occupation and insisted that the plight of the Palestinians is a political problem requiring a political solution. Priority, they have said, has to be given to the negotiation of such a settlement, and measures to alleviate the SUffering of the civilian population should not be allowed to become a SUbstitute for an urgent solution of the underlying political problems. The political nature of the Middle East question is also stressed in paragraph 9 of the Secretary-General's report A/43/806, dated 21 November 1988. As underlined in paragraphs 32 and 34 of the Secretary-General's most recent report, A/43/867, dated 28 November 1988, the .!:n!!!~~ is a direct result of the stalemate in the search for a peaceful settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It should be viewed not only in the context of Palestinians and Israelis, but as a broader political dispute with many complex and interrelated aspects. The proclamation of an independent Palestinian state by the Palestine National Council, meeting in Algiers last month, constitutes a historic milestone in the efforts to find a just and lasting solution to the Middle East question. It has been the conviction of Turkey that a lasting and equitable solution in the region depends on the withdrawal of Israel from the Arab territories it has occupied since 1967, recognition of the rights to self-determination of Palestinians ana recognition of the right of all states in the region, including Israel, to live within secure and internationally recognized boundaries. In keeping with its consistent policy regarding the Middle East, my Government has welcomed the decisions taken by the Palestine National Council as realistic and constructive steps towards achieving peace in this er itical region, and, with this understanding, it has recognized the newly established State of Palestine. This decision of the Government has been fully endorsed by all the Turkish political parties. The lack of a proper negotiating process has been one of the major impediments to addressing the substantive questions of the Middle East in a meaningful manner. A lasting political settlement in the region can emerge only from comprehensive negotiations between all the parties concerned. The current uprising has highlighted once again the urgent need to devise an effective negotiating process so that the parties concerned can OITercome their deep-rooted suspicions. In this connection, the endorsement of an international peace conference on the Middle East at the highest level by the Arab countries in the Amman summit last year Was M important development. We witnessed the same positive approach at the Extraordinary Arab Summit Conference held at Algiers in J~ne this year. Most Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library recently, the realism which prevailed at the Palestine National Council meeting held in Algiers was yet another encouraging development for the peace process. In this respect, we should like to underline the views expressed by the Secretary-General in his report on this item. He rightly points out; "The recent session of the Palestine National Council has generated a new momen~qm in the diplomatic process and ••• it offers fresh opportunities for progress towards peace which should be seized." (A/43/867, para. 37) It is evident that the Declaration adopted by the Palestine National Council contains constructive elements whim deserve thoughtful responses. The mderate tone of the Declaration is most encouraging. We hope and believe that the decisions; taken in Algiers will contribute to the achievement of peace in the Middle East, where all States will be able to live side by side in secure and internationally recognized borderG. It is our earnest desire that these constructive steps taken by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) will be assessed positively by all the interested parties and will be reciprocated in the same spirit, so that the peace process may go ahead. With this understanding, we should have preferred to see Mr. Arafat, the Chairman of the EKecuthe Comnittee of the PLO address the General Assembly in this Hall and participate in the debate on the Palestine question. It is our view that it would have been more appropriate if the granting of a visa to Mr. Arafat had been handled in conformity with the Hoadquarters Agreement rather than with political considerations in mind. The positive attitude displayed by the Palestine National Council at its last meeting must be encouraged if we are to further the Middle East peace process.* *Mr. Easy (Cote d'Ivoire), Vice-President, took the Chair. I should like to conclude my stat~ment by referring briefly to the situation in Lebanon and the Iran-Iraq peace talks. As regards Lebanon, we have been closely following the tragic developments in that country for the past 13 years. We attach great importance to the maintenance of Lebanon's territorial integrity, independence and sovereignty. The solution to the problems facing the country should be found by the Lebanese themselves. The cease-fire announced between Iran and Iraq last August came as a great relief, not only to the countries in the Middle East but also b" the world at large. We fu:'ly support the untiring efforts of the Secretary-General for the implementation of Security Council resolution 598 (1987) to restore peace between Iran and Iraq, countries with which we have friendly relations. Turkey attaches importance to the creation of an environrrent of mutual trust and confidence anong the countries in the region so that the occurrence of similar conflicts can be prevented. In line with this, my Governrrent has taken the initiative in taking practical steps to secure this aim. Mr. ENDREFFY (Hungary) ~ This year has in general been a good one as regards regional crises and hot-beds of tensionll with the active involvement of the United Nations, of our secretary-General, most of them seem to be on the way to a solution. In striking contrast to this favourable picture, the situation in the Middle East remains a cause of sel' ious concern. The problem at the core of the Arab-Israeli conflict, the question of Palestine, remains unsolved) the Israeli occupation of Palestinian and other Arab territories cootinues. The purported annexation of East Jerusalem and ~f. the Syrian Galan and the continued violation of Lebanon's t~rritorial integrity d~e a constant source of tension, necessitating the continuous stationing of large-scale United Nations peace-keeping forces - the uni ted Nations Disengage~nt Observer Force (UNDOF) and the Uni ted Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) - in the area. While we express our appreciation to the soldiers serving the cause of peace, I should also like to express our suplX)rt for these Peace-keeping activities. TUrning our attention now to the question of the occupied Palestinian territories, we have to state that the situation there he/G dramatically worsened. The unwillingness of the Palestinian people to live under occupation found a new, powerful form of expression in the intifadah. This unarmed resistance brought upon the Palestinian IX)pulation especially harsh and cruel forms of Israeli repression. The General Assenbly, in resolu tion 43/21, adopted on 3 November 1988, rightly condemned Israel's persistent policies and. practices violating the human rights of the Palestinian people and, in particular, such acts as the firing by the Israeli army and settlers that resulted in the killing and wounding of defenceless Palestinian civilians, the beating and breaking of bones, the deportations, the demolition of houses, and collective punishments. These Israeli policies and practices constitute serious violations of international law and can only aggravate the tension already prevailing in the area. This si tu~tion is unacceptable and cries out for a speedy solution, the conditions of which have long been recognized by the international community. First, Israel must withdraw from the territories occupied since 1967~ secondly, the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, inclUding their right to self-determination, should be reco9nized~ and, thirdly, the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of all States in the region, including Israel, should be respected. It is our conviction that the best way to reach a comprehensive, just and lasting solution of the Middle East situation would be by the convening of an international conference under the auspices of the United Nations, witl'\ the participation of all the parties to the conflict, including the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the sole, legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, as well as the five permanent members of the security Council. The recent session of the Palestine National Council in Algiers has offered fresh opportunities for progress towards peace in general and for the convening of the international conference in particular. The reaffirmation of the determination of the PLO to reach a comprehens ive poll Hcal settlement, the acceptance by the Palestine National Council of security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1978), with all that that implies, and its repeated rejection of terrorism in all its forms have been widely welcomed and supported. We appeal to all parties ooncerned to seize this opportunity, contribute to overcoming the stalemate and engage in a peace process that takes into account the concerns and satisfies the security interests of all the parties. Mr. ZAQlMANN (German Democratic Republic); Yet again the problems of the Middle East region are on the agenda of the General Assenbly. Nlat has already become apparent in the general debate, dur ing consideration of agenda items concerning Israeli practices and the united Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), and, not least, in the discussion on matters of international security is the sheer number of the different questions, ideas, proposals - and also contradictions - that relate to. this set of problems, and, more significantly, the gravity of the concern felt by the majority of States in the face of the threats emanating from the Middle East conflict. That is also confirmed in the report submitted by the Secretary-General on the si tua.tion in the Middle East. Although r.o solution has yet been found for that tormented region, one can rightly say that an impact has been made by the decade-long efforts exerted by various States and international organizations, notably the United Nations, as well as by the MO'Iement of Non-Aligned Countries, the Arab League, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and socialist countr ies. The analysis of the Middle East conflict in all its aspects has led to a deeper understanding of the problems involved and to a growing awareness of thenee~ for a political solution. The call for a comprehensive, just and lasting settlement of the cooflict raised time and again during all those years and decades has not remained unheeded. Negotiations, a matter-of-fact dialogue conducted by equals - that is, a common endeavour towards a collectively assured future for all states and peoples in the region - should be points of departure in seeking a settlement of the Middle East conflict, with the question of Palestine at its core. The call for a11 international Middle East conference under the auspices of the United Nations is therefore more topical than ever before. In the aforementioned report, the Secretary-General states: lilt is true that all the members of the Security Council believe that it is desirable to convene an international conference and it is at least possible to identify in the replies of the parties agreement that there should be an international framework for the negotiation of a just and lasting settlement. But the familiar and deep differences remain about the nature of that framework, about its powers, about the basis on which it would be convened and about who should take part in it." (A/43/691, para. 5) Peace, security and stability are pressing needs for the Middle East. They are the prerequisites for enabling a region that has done so mch to develop human civilization and culture and is of such importance economically to break the vicious circle of war and absence of war and make an effective contr ibution to the advancement of humanity and the solution of III1jor global problems. The potential for that does indeed exist and oould well be used for the benefi t of the region and the world a t large. Responsibility for the continued existence of the Middle East conflict, wit.1t tile unresolved question of Palestine at its core, lies wi th those who keep placing their stakes on violence and terror, in disregard of international law and the decisions adopted by this forum. What can generally be said about the destiny of man in the cmditions of the nuclear and space age, namely, that we can only per ish or survive together, is particularly true of the Middle East: either we face up to the problems jointly and resolve them in the interest of all, or we put humanity '8 very existence at risk. The German DelYOcratic Republic noted with satisfaction the call fo~ comnon action on behalf of peace in the Middle East IIBde at the summit meeting of Arab States last June. My country hag also welcomed the decisions taken by the Palestine National Council at its most recent session - decisions that give a f~esh i.tus to the search for a comprehensive and just settlement of the Middle East conflict - and it has recognized under international law the Palestinion State established in conformity with the United Nations Charter. In a message of greetings conveyed on the occasion of the International Day of Solidari.ty with the Palestinian people, Erich Honecker, General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Socialist unity Party .of Germany and Chairman of the German Democratic Republic Council of State, said: "In view of the aggravated situation in the occupied Palestinian territories it becomes ever more obvious that without the recognition and implementation of the inalienabla rights of the Palestinian people, including the right to the establishment of an independent State, no solution can be found which will take into account the interests of all States and peoples in the region. In the view of the German Democratic Re!Qblic, an international conference under the auspices of the United Nations will be the proper way to achieve this objective." No State should remain indifferent to what is happening in the Middle East, still less a State such as the German DellOcratic Republic, whose ex.lstence was virtually founded on the ruins and lessons of a bitter world war. It is therefore easy to understand why we side with those who are working towards a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. My country's position has been set forth repeatedly here in the united Nations and has been reflected in its bilateral and mUltilateral activities. It is based on the realization that any conflict, in whatever region and between whatever States or peoples it arises, must be resolved by exclusively peaceful means and in conformity with the generally recognized norms of international law and in conformity with the purposes and principles set forth in the United Nations Charter. There is no alternative to that and it ia indeed the only way in which to contribute to the atrengthening of international peace and secur ity. On this premise, the German Democratic Rep-oJLUc has approved and supported the call for convening the International Peace Conference a1 the Middle East under the auspices of the United Nations and with the participation of all interested parties, including the Palestine Liberation Organization, Israel and the five permanent menbers of the Security COUncil, just as it has supported the many FF resolutions adopted by the General Assembly on this subject and the principles set forth in them in regard to a settlement. It has also suppor~d the call for the implementation of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of Israel from the Palestinian territory it has occupied since U67, and for guaranteed rights to independence and secure borders for all States in the re9ion. It would really be timely for the United Nations Security Council, and in particular its five permanent members, to take practical steps in preparation for the Middle East Conference. As it is easy to foresee hOil oompl icated and time-consuming the process of preparing and implementing an appropriate negotiating mechanism will be, any further delay should be avoided at all costs. When it adopted resolution 598 (1987) with a view to settling the conflict between Iran and Iraq, the security Council proved that it was capable of united and coherent action. If the same degree of commitment was applied to the solu tion of the conflict in the Middle East, this would certainly serve to enhance the authority of the Council and that of the United Nations as a whole. More than ever before, the States and peoples expect positive moves to result from this General Assembly session as far as the Middle East is concerned. The General Assembly is called upon to take decisions that will help br ing us closer to the solution of one of the most complex and protracted conflicts of our time. The more nearly unanimous the vote of States will be, the better are the prospects of success. It would no doubt be most effective if the security Council adopted a decision that would facilitate at least preparatory steps for the convening of the International Peace Conference Q'1 the Middle East. We are in favour of encouraging the Secretary-General of the United Nations to 9Qnt,inue the efforts envisaged in his report • The United Nations may rest assured that the German DellDcra tic ~public will continue, to the best of its ability, to seek to make a contribution towards progress on the path to a poli tical settlement of the conflict in the Middle East. Mr. BAG3aJI'AOEITO NZFJ~GEYA (Zaire) (interpretation from Frenchh r-Dre than ever before the situation in the Middle East has brought the attention of the international community, in particular that of the United Nations, into focus at a time when efforts are being made to br ing about a peaceful settlement of regional conflicts. Hatred, reprisal, recourse to force, collective punishment, violations of the law of nations and harassment of all types are the daily lot of the people in the Middle East. The popular uprising in the occupied territories that began early in December 1987 against the ongoing occupation and the progressive annexation of occupied Palestinian territories, and also against certain repressive practices, has brought to 248 the number of Palestinians killed by Israeli armed forces as of 27 September 1988, as stated in the report of the Conmittee on the Elcercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (A/43/35). That report also states that 126 more died as a result of blCMs they had sustained, the inhalation of tear gas and other causes related to the action of the Israeli armed forces and settlers. That Committee was alarmed at the large number of youth and children among the victims and it was also troubled by reports pUblished by humanitarian aid organizations that had visited the region. According to those reports, medical personnel was refused access to the camps and villages, which had been closed down by the militarYJ hospitals had been attacked, equipment destroyed, patients beaten ~pulli.£) and arrested, and members of the medical staff brutally attacked. The health situation in the occupied territories has become disastrQus and is of concern according to the Special Committee of ~perts of the World Health Organization. The Committee notes elsewhere in its report that the Israeli authorities placed an estimated 5,500 Palestinians in preventive detention without charges or tr ial. Mention was also made of several cases of expulsion, in violation of Security Council resolutions and of provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Not to dwell further on these facts, I will merely say that the situation in the occupied Palestinian territories has deteriorated greatly as a result of the repressive policy and practices of Israel, the occupying Power, in response to the Palestinian uprising, the intifadah, which be,gan in December 1997 against Israeli occupation. In abstaining on draft resolution A/43/L021 on the uprising of the Palestinian people, adopted by the General Assembly at its 45th plenary meeting on 3 November 1998, zaire wished to make the two parties in question understand that it was in their interests to enter into a dialogue to resolve the differences between them instead of engaging in armed attackso It should be added that despi te repeated appeals, the Secur i ty Council has failed to follow up the recommendations proposed to it that it adopt a constructive position, opening up possibilities for reaching a QOmprehensive, just and lasting f'Jettlement of the IsrcaeH-Arab conflict in the Middle East, at the core of which is the question of Palestine o My delegation will return to this question in Geneva in order to highlight the shor.tcomings we have observed in the report of the security Council in document ~/43/2 of 9 November 19880 Nevertheless, we wish to dwell on the other aspect of the Middle East conflict which has exacerbated an already tense situationo I am referring to the deterioration of the situation in southern Lebanon as a result of repeated attacks by Israel and all other measures and practices directed against the civilian populatiM there 0 If there is one State which has suffered the consequences of the Middle East war to the point of jeopardizing its independence, its territorial integrity and its freedom, that State is Le,banono IA:!ss than 12 years ago, that country was a true oasis of peace, especially the tourist city of Beirut and its surroundings which were well known by holiday makers from all over the worldo Unfortunately, it has now become a country torn apart and threatened, where security, public order and unity are no lmger guaranteedo It has become a battlefield and an arena of coofron tation for: all par ties 0 (Mr 0 Bagbeni Meito Nzengeya, zaire) Dur ing the per iod from 16 JlD1e 1987 to 15 June 1988, the securi ty Council met many times to consider the complaints brought by the representative of Lebanon, the special reports of the Secretary-General and the letters of the Chairman of the Committee on the EXercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. The Security Council has also had before it draft resolution 8/19434 (1988), which calls on Israel to put an end to all territor ial encroachment, road-building and closings of the borders, as well as any attempts to occupy Lebl~ese territory, nodify its status or impede the return of the effective author ity of the Lebanese Government in sovereign Lebanese territory. The United Nations, which has military staff and peace-keeping forces in that area in keeping wi th Security Council resolution 339 (1973), has been asked to ensure strict respect for the sovereignty of Lebanon, its independence, its unity and its territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders. The time has come, under Security Council tesolutions 425 (1978), 426 (1978) and 509 (1982), to demand that Israel uncoodi tionally and immediately wi thdraw all of its military forces to the internationally recognized borders. At the outcome of the 2,8l5th meeting of the security Council on 31 May last, and after the adoption of resolution 613 (1988) calling on the interested parties immediately to implement Security Council resolution 338 (1973), and renewing the mandate of the united Nations Disengagement Observer Force, the President of the Council made the following statement; "As is known, the report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (8/19895) states, in paragraph 24; 'Despite the present quiet in the Israel-8yr ia sector, the situation in the Middle East as a whole cootinues to be potentially dangerous and is likely to remain so, unless and until a comprehensive settlement covering all aspects of the Middle East problem can be reached.' That statement of the Secretary-General reflects the view of the Security Council." (S/19912) As can be seen, the concern of the Secretary-General is thus shared by all the members of the Security Council and should be shared by all delegations, given the many armed confrontations which have taken a toll of human life and property and which are kindled by impassioned feelings, misunderstanding and lack of dialogue. The very concept of peaceful coexistence in the context of a lasting peace, which should progressively be taking hold in the States of the region on account of the effor. a of the United Nations, is practically non-existent. In our view, peace in the Middle East presuppoEles the following: respect for law, that is to say respect for the principles of international law governinC] friendly relations and co-operation among States~ recognition of the sovereignty of all States) respect for the territorial integrity and political independence of all states of the region, and the right to live in peace wi thin secure and recognized boundaries, inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force or through wan and the guarantee of a just settlement of the problem of refugees. Considering those principles, it is therefore up to the United Nations and the Security Council in particular to ensure that law and justice prevail in the Middle East, replacing the spir it of war, confrontatior. and hatred by that of concertation and constructive dialogue. The standard-setting work of our Organization is part of our legacy of international law. It would therefore be fitting for it to succeed in giving the Palestinians a Palestinian-Arab State, as it was able to establish a State for the Jews. Of course, the basis for the settlement of that conflict is security Council resolution 2~2 (1967), which calls for the withdrawal of all Israeli armed f.orces from the occupied territories and respect for, and acknowledgement of, the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area, and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized bounda~ies free from threats or acts of force. The State of Israel is a fact. It was created.bY the United Nations in 1949 by resolution 181 (n), arid on 11 May 1949 it was admitted to membership of this Organization. The time has come for the United Nations to refer back to the same resolution and establish a Palestinian Arab State. The many peace plans, which have been prepared by the Arab States at the 'tWelfth Ar.ab SUmmit Conference held in Fez in September 1982, by the President of the United States on 1 september 1982 u and by the Union of Soviet Socialist ~publics on 15 septeJTber 1982 and 29 July 1984, should be updated to take account / of new developments, namely, the declaration by King Hussein of Jordan on 31 July 1988 at Amman on the administration of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and the historic proclamation of the Stat_ of Palestine by the Palestine National Council in Algiers on 17 November 1988. Furthermore, all the elements of a comprehensive, just and lasting settlement of the question of the Middle East are to be found in the many resolutions of the Organization. Indeed, if taken together, and with all the peace plans known to this date, those resolutions wi thout question provide our Organization wi th a consistent and well-integrated basis for ending the conflict which it inherited f.rom the League of Nat' -ns. Since 1947 war has failed to prOllide the parties to the conflict wi th a settlement. No other strategy based on force, or, for that matter, the denial of a visa to the leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization will lead to a so1l!tion of {~.he thorny problem of the Middle East. The Republic of zaire, which has diplomatic relations with the two main parties to the Middle East conflict, cannot but encourage the emergence of a climate of co-operation and friendship in the region so that lasting peace and security may prevail. It is in that context that we welcome the statement made in Amman on 31 July 1988 by King Hussein at the status of the west Bank and the Gaza Strip, and in Algiers on 17 November 1989 on the proclamation of the State of Palestine, which offer our Organization a unique opportunity to play a role in the convening of an inte~national peace conference on the Middle East, bringing together all parties to the conflict, and wi th the participation of the permanent members of the security Council, leading to a definitive and comprehensive settlement of the Middle East conflict. Mr.SUTRESNA (Indonezia): Despite the new climate of conciliation and nutual accoml1DdatiQ1 that appears to be taking hold throughout the world, the situation in the Middle East continues to r.eflect a dangerous escalation of an already extreme.ly 1!olatile situation. Indeed, the crisis that has gripped the Middle East for over four decades is the result of Israel's unrelenting pursuit of a policy of aggression and expansion against its neighbours and strategic domination O'/er the region as a whole. Israel has time and again brought the world to the brink of conflagration through its reI iance on force, including the violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of S~ates near and far, the illegal occ:upation and annexation of Palestinian and Arab lands, and the denial to the Palestinian people of their legitimate rights and aspirations, which is and always has been at the core of the conflict 0 It is a truism that the region has undergone a drastic deterioration over the course of the past year, owing to Israel's resort to wanton brutality and violence unleashed against the Palestinian people's revolt i~ the territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem. Yet, despi i:e the indeser ibable repression, the valiant Palestinians have conclusively demonstrated that there is nothing episodic to the intifadah - their sustainCld popular uprising - which has now gone on for a year, and that there can be no return to the status quo of the previous two decades. For through their heroic resistance, the Palestinians have shattered Israel's delusions that it can any longer bludgeon them into submission by force of arms. This undeniable reality has nOl4 permeated the consciousness of the international community as a whole, which today is united as never before on the urgent need for progress on the diplomatic front. This determination has been spurred by the bold new initiative launched by the meeting of the Palestine National Council (PNC), held at Algiers last month, which proclaimed an independent Palestinian State. Thus the Palestinian people themselves have taken the historic decision to exercise their right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over their territory. Significantly they have done so by also committing themselves in the proclamation to the purposes and pr inciples of the Charter of the United Nations, while at the same time accepting all relevant united Nations resolutions on the question of Palestine. It is a matter of deep satisfaction to my delegation that the international community has OIlerwhelmingly welcomed these nomentous decislons, thereby denonstrating its firm support for Palestinian independence. In this regard as well, I should like to quote in part from the statement issued on 16 I~O'lenber by the Department of Foreign Affairs of Indonesia according recognition to the Palestinian State: "The decision of the Government of the Republic of Indonesia recognizing the independent Palestinian State is fully in line with In~onesia's consistent support for the struggle of the Palestinian people to achieve their inalienable right to self-determination and to sovereign and independent statehood in Palestine. "This support of the Indonesian Government is in accordance with the noble ideals enshrined in the Preant>le of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, which states that independence is the right of every nation and therefore colonialism must be abolished in the world. "The Q)vernment and people of the Republic of Indonesia are convinced that this development will make a concrete contribut'~on to the achievement of peace in the region of West Asia and in the world as a whole". (A/43/823, annex i .p•. 2) Indonesia, within its means and abilities, will continue to render all possible assistance to the Palestinian people's struggle, under the leadership e, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), their sole, legitimate representattl~, and to all efforts by the international community in the realization of their legitimate aspirations. ~ GOvernment's unyielding support for the PLO, is further reflected in the decision of the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Indonesia to attend the meeting of the General Assembly on the "Question of Palestine" to take place in Geneva later this month. In this regard, my delegation believes that the unjustifiable decision by the United States Administration to deny Mr. Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the PLO, a visa to attend the Assenbly at Uni ted Nations Headquarters in New York, in violation of its treaty obligations under the Headquarters Agreement, should not divert our attention from the need to build upon the new prospects for a political settlement generated by the Algiers meeting of the mc. To this end, the Indones ian delegation will at the Geneva meeting elaborate its firm position on the need for increased political and diplomatic pressures to convince Israel and its friends of the urgent necessity to demonstrate the same political will and constructive spirit of the PNC by recognizing the right of the Palestinian people to their own independent and sovereign State. At this juncture, therefore, my delegation would like only to emphasize that both the intifaC!!!l, which bas become the dominating factor in the Middle East, and the proclamation of the independent Palestinian State have irreversibly transformed the political dimension of the conflict. In these changed circumstances, the onus of reponsibility for any further deterioration of the situation will fall squarely on Israel, whose policies and actions have always been the root cause of the exacerbated tensions and conflicts in the region. While the attention of the international community has been ri9htly riveted on the acute crisis in the occupied Palestinian territory, we should not lnse sight of the other aspects of the situation in the Middle East. As the events of the past year show, Israel's aggressive and expansionist designs on the region are furtrter manifest in its illegal occupation of sovereign Lebanese territory, in utter defiance of numerous resolutions of the General Assembly and the security Council, which demand its unconditional withdrawal to internationally rec09nized boundaries. It is imperative that Israel be compelled to cease its repeated military strikes against Lebanese terd tory, and all other measures and practices designed to make life unbearable for the Lebanese citizens and Palestinian refugees wi th a view to forcing them out of the area along the so-called security zone in southern Lebanon. In this regard, it is to be recalled that the Security Council met in January and May this year to address these FOlicies, with the latter meeting devoted to the large-scale invasion of southern Lebanon by Israeli forces. On both those occasions draft resolutions could not be adopted owing to the negative vote of one permanent member. My delegation deeply regrets that the veto prevented the Council from discharging its duty, especially as this cannot but put at greater risk the already dangerous situation facing the United Nations Interim FOrce in Lebanon (UNIFIL). Indeed, it is unconscionable to mandate UNIFIL to undertake the task of assisting the Lebanese Government in re-establishing its effective authority in the area and then to thwart all efforts to have the Security Council adopt measures that are fundamental to securing that objective. It is essential that the authority of the Lebanese Government be upheld and UNIFIL enabled to fulfil its mission. Israel's occupation and annexationist policies are further confirmed by the fact that it has continued to pursue unabated the infannus settlements policy in the West Bank and Gaza. Moreover, the further colonization and Judaization of Jerusalem and the Syrian Arab Galan, which Israel annexed illegally, has rendered the resolution of the conflict immeasurably more difficult. Israel has thus rendered any hope for the initiation of meaningful negotiations exceedingly remote. Yet the stakes are so high, and the iJlD'Dinent threat to international peace and security so great that Indonesia has always been acutely aware of the need for all of us to per severe on the only sensible path towards a peaceful and comprehensive settlelRent, which is through oS process of negotiation involving the international machinery that we have collectively created and designed for this very purpose ~ the Uni ted Nations. In this regard the international comnunity established, at the 1983 International Conference on the Question of Palestine, clear and concrete terms of reference for such negotiations. These are~ the attainment by the Palestinian people of its legitimate, inalienable rights, including the right to return, the right to self-determination and the right to establish its own independent State in Palestine) recognition of the right of the PLO to participate on an equal footing with other parties in all efforts to settle the Middle East conflict) recognition of the need to secure Israeli wi thdrawal from the terri toties occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem) rejection of de facto situations created by Israel, such as its settlements policy in the occupied territories and its policy deaigned to alter the character and status of Jerusalem) recognition of the right of all States in the region to existence wi thin secure and internationally recognized boundaries) and the convening of an international oonference on peace in the Middle East under - the auspicies of the United Nations. All subsequent sessions of the General Assembly have affirmed by overwhelming majorities these reasoned and balancea provisions. The International Peace Conference on the Middle East represents the only viable means of bringing peace and justice to the region, and immediate progress should be made on convening it, for the intifadah is the direct result of the stalemate that has persisted for so many tragic years, and it cannot be divorced from the broader Arab-Israeli oonflict. Furthermre, my delegation fully concurs wi th the following observation of the secretary-General in his report on the situation in the Middle East~ "The recent session of the Palestine National Council in Algiers has generated a new rromentum in the diplomatic process and I believe it offers fresh opportunities for progress towards peace which should be seized. Every gesture towards peace should be nurtured if we are to overcome the mistrust that is so deeply felt on all sides." (A/43/867, para. 37) Thus have the Palestinians responded positively in the interests of peace by advancing new and bold political initiatives. It is therefore imperative that Israel finally realize that the situation brooks no further delay. The Org~nization, especially the ~~curity Council, must not shirk its responsibility~ it must move forward decisiv(!ly in a concerted effort to rell\OV'e all the obstacles in the way of the oommGn"lcmnant of genuine negotiations leading to a oomprehensive, / ju~t and peaceful settlement in the Middle East. !;:1r. KAcw.tI (Japan): Since ancient times the Middle East has been one of the centres of world civilization. In addition to its rich cultural heritage, it is blessed with natural resources which make the region a focus of global economic activity. We believe, therefore, that it has a unique capacity to play a stabilizing role in the world. Is it not all the more unfortunate, then, that when we consider the Middle East today it is the region's profound and seemingly intractable problems that demand our attention? I feel compelled to begin my statement on this item by addressing the question of Palestine briefly, although my delegation intends to speak at length on this agenda item next week in the debate which, owing to an unfortunate chain of deve10pments, will be held in Geneva. To say that the Palestinian question is the core of the Middle East peace problem has become something of a cliche. What must also be understood, however, is the core of the Palestinian question, which in our view is the issue of Israeli-Palestinian coexistence on the basis of Israel's right to exist and the Palestinian people's right to self-determination, including the right to establish an independent State. My approach that ignores the real nature of the question is an exercise in futility. The uprising of the Palestinians in the occupied territories throughout the past year indicates clea~ly the need to take a closer look at this central issue. It was from this point of view that Japan followed with great interest the events leading up to the convening of the nineteenth session of the Palestine National Council in Algiers last month and the debate held there. The outcome of that meeting is an important landmark that mer! ts our serious consideration. The Government of Japan has long maintained the position that in order to achieve a just, lasting and comprehensive solution of the Middle East peace problem Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) must be fully and promptly implemented, and the Palestinian people's right to self-determination, including the right to establish an independent State, and Israel's right to exist should be recognized and respected. Moreover 6 in the belief that these aims should be achieved through negotiation, the Government of Japan has been appealing to the parties concerned to convene an international conference at an early date. The Government of Japan therefore welcomed as an important step forward the Palestine National Council's statement that such an international conference should be held ori the basis of those Secur ity Council resolutions, among others. The Government of Japan also considers that the declaration of an independent St,lte by the Palestine National Council is of great significance as an expression of Palestinians' long-cherished national desire. Further, my Government noted with great interest the reference in the statement to the rejection of terrorism, as this will cootribute to the creation of a suitable environment for starting peace negotiations. We flJ11y share the view expressed bf Secretary-Genaral Perez de Cuellar that, as a result of the Palestine ~tional Council declaration, fresh opportunities now exist for progress towards peace, and that all coneerned should seize the opportunity to make a new and determined effort to achieve a just and lasting solution of the conflict in the Middle Eat. Particularly in these new circumstances, we believe that it would have been extremely useful for the Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), Mr. Yasser Arafat, to address the General Assembly here: in New York and, if possible, to exchange views with various parties cor,cerneel. The Government of Japan is of the view that it is regrettable that such an important opportunity was missed, but hopes that, despite all the difficulties, every effort will be made to take full advantage of the new situation resulting from Mr. Arafa t 's initia tive. Another aspect of the situation in the Middle I;.';st about which the Governnent of Japan is deeply concerned is the unrest in Lebanon. Lebanon's sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity are all at stake now. The apparent impasse in the preparations for the presidential election m,lst be overcome as a first step towards national reconciliation, which is long OVerd\le. In that regard, the Government of Japan takes note of the ongoing efforts the Lebanese people themselves are making and wishes them success in realizing their important objective. The Volatile situation in southern Lebanon continues to be a source of particular concern. It is therefore imperative that we pursue more vigorously implementation of Security Council resolution 425 (1978), which calls for the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Lebanese territory, the restoration of international peace and seour ity and the re-establishment of the Iebanese Government's effective authority in the area. I wish to take this opportunity to express my Government's profound gratitude to all Uni ted Nations peace-keeping operations in the Middle East for the indispensable role they are playing in ensuring a degree of stability in the region. The awarding of the Habel Peace Prize is clear testimony of the high regard which the international co1imunity has for the United Nations peace-keeping operations. Japan pays par tl.cular tr ibute to the soldier s of the Un i ted Na tions Inter im , I.i'orce in Lebanon (UNIFIL) ~ilo often face great personal danger in carrying out their responsibilities. We were reminded of that fact again this year as we learned.the tragic news that several soldiers had lost their lives and that scores had been injured. I must also mention the ordeal of Lieutenant-Colonel William Richard Higgins, a United States officer serving as Chief of the Military Cbservers of the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization in Palestine assigned to assist UNIFIL, who was kidnapped in February this year and has not yet been released. I join the choruB of voices appealing for his immediate release. In that connection, I wish to touch upon terrorist acts in the region. During the past year, we have again witnessed a series of terrorist incidents, including the taking of hostages, among whom, as I have mentioned, are United Nations personnel. The Government of Japan condemns those er iminal and cowardly acts against innocent people and calls upon all parties concerned to do their utmost to prevent them. We demand that all the hostages in Lebanon be released unharmed and wi thout delay. Japan believes it to be the fundamental obligation of Member States to work towards the elimination of terrorism. At the same time, we must unite to rectify the conditions that incite terrorist activities. The cease-fira between Iran and Iraq achieved last summer after eight years of killing and destruction demonstrates that the United Nations can play a constructive role in the realization of peace in the Middle East. On behalf of the Government of Japan, I wish to reiterate my appreciation for Secretary-General Perez de Cuellar's tireless efforts that resulted in that achievement. We are all aware, however, of the precarious nature of the present cease-fire. The need to secure the implementation of Security Council resolution 598 (1987) in its entirety cannot be overemphasized. There will be no just, lasting and comprehensive peace between the two countries until that resolution is fully implemented and strictly observed. The Secretary-General's ongoing efforts towards that end deserve our active support. While pledging its assistance in every possible way, the Government of Japan appeals once again to both countries to extend to him their full co~peration. In conclusion I wish to express my sincere hope that the Secretary-Generalis efforts on the Iran-Iraq conflict will be met wi th success, for I cannot help bu t believe that this would in turn lead to significant progress in efforts to solve other problems in the region and, finally, to the restoration of peace throughout the Middle East. Mr. lDHENFELLNER (Allstr la) l When we considered the agenda item "The situation in the Middle East" last year, we stated that the region, a cradle of civilization, was once again a hotbed of tension that continued to endanger international peace and security. ltlile the basic situation has not changed in the course df the last 12 months, imp:>rtant events have none the less taken place that highlight the urgency of finding a just and lasting political solution to the complex problem of the Middle East. Decenber 1987 saw the start of the .!ntlfadah, the uprising of the Palestinian p:>pulation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The intifadah has shown that even 20 years of occupation cannot destroy the aspirations of a people. In the sulllt\er of 1988, Jordan severed its legal and administrative ties with the West Bank. On 15 Novenber 1988, the Palestine National Congress (!'Ne) in Algiers proclaimed the creation of a Palestinian State. Forty years after the creation of the Je-dsh State prOlTided for in General Assenbly resolution 181 (II), the Palestinian people has finally taken its fate into its own hands by proclaiming the Palestinian State in the aforementioned territories presently occupied by Israel. as is resu1 t of the 1967 war. Austria co"siders the Algiers Political Communi~ue and Declaration of Independence - which must also be seen in the light of the now one-year-old intifada.!!. - as a positive step in the search for a solution to the conflicc< references to General Assembly resolution 181 (I1) and to Security Council resolutions 242 (:1967) and 338 (1973), which recognize Israel's right to eX~"lt~ "r.;. renunciation of terrorism and the declared intention to organize the Palestinian State as a parliamentary democracy are important contributions to a peaceful solution. The decisions of Algiers constitute proof of the responsible attitude of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). It is to be hop~~ that the positive elelllents in the PNC's decisions will meet with an encouraging response from the other parties to the Middle East conflict, in order to seize this opportunity to initiate a peace process. My ~";legat1on would hav~ deemed it natural to hear the Chairman of the PLOt an organizatim that enjoys observer status with the United Nations, in the debate on the question of Palestine here 11'1 New York. My country, Austr ia, itself a host country of the United Nationsg regrets that the Chairman of the PLO was barred from addrassing the General Aasembly from this rostrum through a decision that is cl_arly not in conformity with existing obligations under international law. Austria has conaistently raised its voice against the way in which Israel is adainisterin9 the occupied territories and the way the Israeli Army is reacting to Pale~tin18n dellOndtr ation~. We believe that the Israeli authorities are obliged under international law to ensure the application of the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Cawention of 1949 relative to the Protection of Civilians in Time of War. Austria considers t.'le extension of Israeli legislation, jurisdiction and administration to occupied territories as contrary to the temporary character of a military occupation, and thus invalid. Austria has also on numerous occasions rejected the Israeli settlement policy in the occupied territories as a major obstacle to a negotiated political solution. The year of the intifadah has been marked not only by a climate of increasing tension in the occupied territories but also by an increase in violence committed against the civilian population. The united Nations Special Committee to investigate Israeli practices in the occupied territories has recently reported a dramatic deteriotation of the human rights situation. ~ to now IOOre than 300 Palestinians have been killed and thousands have suffered injuries as a result of the deliberate infliction of fractures, the use of rubber and plastic bullets and exposure to strong concentrations of tear. gas. Collective plmishments, such as the demolition of houses, administrative detention and the deportation of individuals, have become day-ta-day routine. Almost 6,000 Palestinians have - according to a report of the International Committee of the Red Cross - been detained since the beginning of the uprising, often under particularly severe candi tiorAs. We have also noted with o::mcern the enforced closure of all educational insti tutions on the West Bank. The Austrian Government has on numerous occasions raised its voice in protest against these practices of the occupying Power and called upon Israel to comply with the provisions of international and especially humanitarian law. We also call upon the international community to increase its efforts to that end and to provide humanitarian aid and assistance to refugees and civilians under occupation. Mlen commenting on the situation in the Middle East one should not OI7erlook the extensive involvement of the United Nations in dealing with var ious aspects of this problem. The situation in the Middle East and the question of Palestine have for the last four decades been a focal point of United Nations acti"ities. The tl1ited Nations Relief and Wcxks lIgency for Palestine Befugees in the N~ar East (UNRWA) and its thousands of employees have since 1949 been working to imprOl7e the situation of the Palestinians in the refugee camps. UNIWA, for which Austria is proud to be currently prOl7iding headr:luarters in Vienna, is carrying out its noble task efficiently, even in difficult times. As the United Nations will at the end of this week receive the Nobel Peace Pr ize for its peace-keeping forces, we should not ewerlook the con tr ibu tion of the thousands of brave soldiers, among them many Austrians, who have served and are still serving with the united Nations Truce SUpervision Organization (UNTSO), the United Nations Emergency FOrce (UNEF), the United Nations Disengagelll2nt Q)server Force (UNDOF) and the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), thus contributing to a stabilization of the volatile situation in the Middle East. When speaking of the situation in the Middle East in general and the occupied territories in particular we have be mention war-torn and internally divided Lebanon. More than a dozen years of civil war, (!xternal in terference, armed invasion and foreign occupation of parts of its territory have ser iously threatened the very existence of that once prosperous State. How can we find a way out of the present dangerous spiral of violence and repression in the occupied territories? In our view peace cannot be based on unilateral measures but must be based on respect for international law and Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). Wf: therefore consider the reference to those resolutions in the political conmunique of Algiers, which, inter dia, recognize the right of all States, including Israel, to exist within secure and internationally recognized boundaries, as an important step towards a peaceful solution of the conflict. Resolution 338 (1973), unmlimously adopted by the security Council in 1973, also shows how a just and lasting peace should be established. The resolution calls for the starting of negotiations between the parties concerned under appropriate auspices for the establishment ofa just and durable peace. What was deemed to be good 15 years ago should also be considered good in 1988. There are, however, two significant changes tha t: have intervened dur ing those years: the recognition of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the representative of the Palestinian people by the United Nations and the recent proclamation of a Palestinian State. The "parties concerned" of Security Council resolution 338 (1973) include, in the view of my COWltry, the PLO. The si tuation will have to be reviewed if and when a Palestinian Government in exile, which would act on behalf of the Arab population of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, is established. Austria has consistently advoc,ted the holding of an international peace conference on the Middle East under united Nations auspices, with the participation of the five permanent members of the security Council and all other parties concerned. Austria continues to believe that such a conference is the only way that would lead to a ,just and peaceful solution for one of the most enduring and tragic conflicts of our time. In view of the recent progress made by the united Nations inbringinq about political solutions to a number of regional conflicts, all parties to the Middle East conflict should soon entrust the United Nations wi th the ot'ganization of such a conference. O'le of the noblest goals of the United. Nations, under its Charter, is the ma::ntenance of international peace and security. That goal reaches beyond the present peace-keeping efforts of the United Nations in the region. let us therefore give the United Nations, through an international conference on the Middle East, the chance to move from peace-keeping to peace-making, thus contributing a just and lasting peace to the area. Mr. DOS SANTOS (Mozanbique): Once again, the General Assembly i.; seized of another issue on our agenda which ranks among those situations of major concern to the international community, due to the magnitude of the threat it entails to international peace and security. In the midst of the uncertl inty, violence, destruction and bloodshed which still characterize the Middle East, some signs of hope are discernible. The cease-fire agreement between Iran and Iraq is entering its fourth month. Happily, it brought to an end a senseless and bloody war that had claimed thousands of lives and the destruction of an immeasurable amount of resources of the warring parties. Just recently an exchange of prisoners of war has t;:"lcen place. This positive act constitutes a major step in the right direction. My delegation wishes to take this opportunity to pay a tribute to both cOlJnt...~ies for this achievement and to commend tha 5ecretary-General, Hr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, for the importan t role which he has played and continues to play. I hope that his mediation on the Cyprus issue will be crOtlned with success and bring an end to the division and occupcition in that troubled country. While mentioning these positive trends in the Iran-Iraq war, I also note, with horror, the situation resulting from Israel's continued aggression, which remains the single major source of the ever deteriorating situation in the Middle East. In spi te of all the energy spent, and resources deployed, by the General Assenbly in its efforts U, find Cl lasting solution to this question, the situation is tending to deteriorate still further owing to Israel's intransigence, arrogance a~d disregard for the most elementary principles of international law governing relations among states and to its defiance of relevant united Nations resolutions and decisions. Indaed, many resolutions have been adopted by both the General Asserrbly and the Security Council calling upon Israel to respect the provisions of the tbited Nations Charter and international law. Several units of the United Nations peace-keeping operations have been dispatched to the region and their duty renewed seve~al times. None of these efforts have yet born the desired fruit. In fact, Israel is continuing its policy of occupation and annexation of Palestinian and Arab territories which it conquered by force more than 20 years ago and its acts of aggression against neighbouring cOWltries. It continues to perpetrate acts of brutality against Palestinians in the occupied lands. Israel continues to deny the Palestinian people their birthright to self-determination and independence. This is the underlying cause of the question of the Middle East. There can be no genuine peace anYl-itere in the world if the policy is that of occupation and dep:ivation of the people's inalienable rights to self-deteriUnation. In 1967, Israel, in total disregard of the most basic principles of international law, unleaah~~ the war of aggression and occupation against Palestinian and Ard> territOties. Those who fostered this policy hastily looked for a justification of such acts before world public opinion, because they recognized that in the era following' the secend World WBr the policy of corquering territories by force was over arid outdated o They were aware that self-determination was the current theme all alTer the world. The world therefore heard from the Israeli regime the fabricated argument that the occupation of such territories was temporary in nature and necessary only in order to provide buffer zones to prevent attacks and safeguard its security. However, what is taking place today in Palestine and the Arab occupied territories is quite the opposite 0 Today the truth is coming to light. ktivities and measures are being undertaken aimed at annexing those territories. The process of Judaization is already at a very advanced stage. More settlements are being established in the occupied territories) the Palestinian people are being turned into refugees in their atn fatherland) Israeli jurisdiction is being extended to cover the occupied territories, Israeli identification cards are being issued and distributed among Palestinians, and attempts to impose the teaching of Hebrew are under way in certain schools in these tord tor ies. In short, the demographic, geographical and legal status of these territories is being changed. Moreover, within Israeli circles, these territories are no longer called west Bank and Syrian Golan Heights but Israeli districts of Judea and Samar la. Yet Israel tmlks about its commitment to peace Md, ironically, claims to be the victim of the Palestinian ~ople. One wenders whether, when the annexation process is completed, more bu fEer zones will not be needed to safeguard tht:' security of these new Israeli territories. The military occupation of southern Lebanon by Israel corroborates this scepticism. These annexationist undertak in9s are accompanied by other steps to force Palestinians to nee their fatherland. Persecution, repression and torture are carr led out against those resisting subjugation. People accused CIl trumped-up charges are penalized by having their homes razed by bulldozers. The dispossessed, struggling PeOple of Palestine, deprived of their basic rights, including the right to own a home, found themselves faced with no choice but to revolt and resist the occupationists. Fearlessly, with bare hands or armed only with sticks and stones 1 they staged a solid resistance to the Israeli army. This IIIOnth the !nti£adah will be a year old. The extraordinary Israeli m~chinery of repression has failed w crush it. It is time that Israel learned that no amount of fOrce can crush a people 's dr~m of self~deterrdnation and independence. Israel should learn from history that, no matter how many people you massacre, you can never annihilate a whole nation. Hitler massacred six million Jews, but was not able to kill all the Jews. The existence of Israel itself is living testimcny to this fact. Likewise, the Palestinian people will endure until their dream is completely fulfilled. The people's uprising in the occupied territories is a clear message to the occupationists that, for Israel, the only choice is negotiation, and not bullets) heeding the voice of peace and not war. The Israelis answered this u(ileaval with escalating brutality and repression perpetrated ag&inst chlldr4tn, the elderly and women and with the burying of people alive. The death toll since the intifadah began is in the hundreds. These acts of genocide have created a world-wide uproar and condennation and attracted sympathy for the victims from every quarter, including Jewish personalities, around the world. Israel, availing itself of its powerful propaganda machinery, adopted the strategy of branding the PLO, the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, a terrorist organization and every Palestinian who associated himself or herself with it a terrorist as well. This was done in the belief that it would help pave the way for Israel to legitimize, in the eyes of its allies, its POlicies and practices of aggression against Arab States. It was also done to legitimize the massacre and genocide perpetrated against Palestinians wherever they seek shelter. It is ironic that Israel, a State of the survivors of the holocaust of the 5eCQ1d World War in which Hitler persecuted millions of Jews, dares to adopt such methods against Palestinians. The killings and massacres in Shabra and.Shatilla, Sidon and Tyre remind us of the sad days in human history when Hit"ler persecuted the Jews. Recent events in Israel and elsewhere are not conducive to a negotiated settlement of the question of Palestine. Attempts to prevent Chairman Arafat from addressing the General Assembly cannot be construed as a step designed to promote the peace process. There are, however, grounds for optimism. The Algiers Declaration, adopted recently by the Palestine National Council, opens a new era of opportunities for genuine peace in the Middl~ East. Therefore, Israel should take advantage of this opportunity by displaying goodwill. The Declaration, which proclaimed the independanoe of Palestine, is truly a display of political realism by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Palestinian people. It is the fulfilment of the hopes long held by the dispossessed people of Palestine. It is indeed well-deserved compensatiat for the martyred people of the occupied terri tories, who with bare hands have heroically resisted the Israeli military occupation. The Declaration constitutes an invitation to Israel to lay down its arms and go to the table of negotiations for peace. Isra~l once again has shown its allergy to any word or action aimed at peace in the Middle East. It has not only rejected the offer but also labelled it an act of propaganda by the PLO. My delegation believes that the resort to military power will hinder the efforts towards a lasting peace in titf! Middle East. We strongly believe that the international conference on peace in the Middle East called for by the United Nations, with the participation of all parties concerned, inclUding the PLO, would be a JlBjor step in that regard. Israel seems to be running against all efforts undertaken in f~vour of peace. It rejects the conference by imposing one-sided conditions. Coming from a countr.y with an extensive common border with racist South Africa, my delegation is particularly concerned at the existing co-operation between Israel and apartheid South Africa, especially in the field of military and nuclear technology, which poses a grave threat to the region and to international peace and security. This co-operation was born out of similarities between the two regimes. Both are the only bloodthirsty regimes subjugating the major ities in their respective territories. In the Middle East Israel subjugates the Palestinian people, while in South Afr lca the apartheid regime ruthlessly dominates the black majority. The two regimes derive their political philosophies from religious beliefs. Israel is believed to be the promised land, and in South Afr ica the racist regime believes that the justification of apartheid is consecrated in the Bible. Both are apologists of brute force. Racist South Afr ica convicts innocent: people Q'l the basis of common purpose, and Israel destroys inert objects on the basis of their association with its foes. They are the only regimes in the world that destabilize entire regiona, using ei ther puppets or reg']lar forces to wreak havoc and destruction. They are both re~imes isolated in the international arena because of their abominable policies, and their survival depends on common allies. The alliance between zionism and apartheid is grounded in the identity of their pattern of behaviour • ..?eace in the Middle East requires that Israel withdraw its forces from all Palestinian and occupied Arab territories, recognize the Palestinian people's right to self-determination and independence, put an end to its occupation of southern Lebanon and respect the sOI1ereignty, territorial integrity and independence of States in the region eiS well as their right to live in peace and freedom~ Finally, my delegation takes this opportunity to roiterate its support for the PLO and the Palestinian people for the resolute and courageous manner in which they have been struggling for their IIDtherland. We wish also to take this opportunity to salute the newly born State of Palestine. A Iuta Cmtinua. Mr. VACEK (Czechoslovakia): In spite of all the f?fforts exerted by the international community for many long years, it has not been possible thus far to solve the basic problems that for lOOre than 40 years have been a source of the volatil~ situation in the Middle East, which remains a grave threat to peace and security in the whole world. None the less, we believe that the new way of political thinking that is finding an expressi~i in international relations - a victory of reason and humanism - will work its way also into the solution of the complicated Middle East crisis that still persists. We see the key to the settlement of that er isis in a just solution to the question of Palestine. The massive uprising of the Palestinian PeOple - which has now lasted a whole year - in the West Bank of the Jordan, in the Gaza Str ip and in Ea~tern Jerusalem, against the Israeli occupation, confirms the special and critical urgency of finding a just solution for the tragic destiny of the five and a half million Palestinian people. If they are net allowed to exercise their right to self-determination - conceded to them, in fact, as long ago as 1947 in General Assembly resolution 181 (11) as well as by a number of other resolutions - it will not be possible to lay the realistic groundwork for lasting peace and security in all the countries and among all the peoples of the Middle East. The Israeli author ities have found out recently for themselves that evading a solution to this question does not guarantee a normal life even for Israel and that it is impossible in the long run to maintain the unacceptable status quo. Continued occupation of the Arab lands, the trampling under foot of the fundamental human rights of the Palestinians, brutality and terror are not the path toward a settlement of the Middle East situation or toward peace for Israel. It is a sad fact that, owing to Israel's expansionist policy, a trend towards military confroncation and approaching problems from a position of strength has been characteristic of the Middle East region for decades. During its entire existence Israel has launched a number of acts of aggression against the neighbouring Arab countries. Israeli raids on Lebanon have been repeated this year also. That kind of policy is directly contrary to the efforts to resolve the Middle East crisis. The Czechoslovak Socialist Republic regards it as imperative that Israel cease to be a threat to the neighbouring Arab countries. It will not be easy to surmount the heritage of the decades of animosity, injustice and mutual mistrust in the Middle East as well as the images and prejudices deeply rooted in the consciousness of the people as a result of the abnormal situation. However, objective reality shows absolutely clearly that there is no way to eliminate the basic Middle East problems by military means and on the basis of strength. The only possible way out of this situation lies in a peaceful solution by negotiation on the basis of mutually acceptable compromises and with due respect for the legitimate rights of all the parties directly involved. Czechoslovakia highly appreciates the results of the s~cial session of the Palestine National Council. :rt ,demonstrated ,both the firm determination of the Palestinian people to stru9gie for the realization of their inalienable rights and a sense of political reality. The proclamation of the Sta te of Palestin,e is in full conformity with General Assenbly resolution 181 (II), which provides for the establishment of two States - Jewish and Palestinian. Czechoslovakia has welcomed and recogn ized the proclama tion of the state of Pales tine. After the important and constructive session of the Palestine Natirn"lal Council, it :ls inconceivable and inexcusable that the host country of the United Nations denied an entry visa to the Chairman of the Executive Conmittee of the Palestine Liberation OrganizaUcn, l.Jr. Yasser Arafat. A transfer of consideration c..,f agenda item 37, "Question of Palestine", to GenE:va has been a necessary step in the present circumstances in order to make it possible for Mr. Yasser Arafat to bring his message to the attention of this General Assembly session. We evaluate posi tively the activi ties of the Uni ted Na tions, its Secretary-General and the large nunber of countr ies that have been engaged in the search for a 1Il1tually acceptable solution of the Middle East situation. The need for a just settlement in that region is understood by the overwhelming majority of the States of the worId today. An almost general in terna Honal consens us has been reached on the convening of a substantive international Middle East conference, which appears to je the only way to a solution of this prolonged regional conflict. The course of the discussions held thus far is SUfficiently convincing. It is, however, inevitable tha t a tr ansi tion be made from declara tions to a practical solution of all problems barring the way to the convening of an internatiooal Middle East conference. First of all, it must be clear that the Arab-Israeli oonfl iet can be resolved only on the basis of the pdnciples of the Charter and the rules of internaticnal law. &1ch a settlement must be aimed at reinstating legality and law in the Middle Fast. The Czechoslovakia Socialist Republic is of the opinioo that the only possible basis for a solution is constituted by Sacurity Council r~solution 242 (1967) and by reco~ition of the inalienable na tiooal rights of the people of Palestine, without whidl it will not be possible to meet the seC"Jrity concerns of all States 1n the regiCln l1 including those of Israel. Isr:ael's arguments that its secudty ,:.annot be pr:OIIided for within its pre-1967 bor.d?!rs and is incompatible with the existence of an independent Palestinian State are unwarranted. We are convinced that with the good political will of all the Pftrties concerned it would be possible, on the basis of a just settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict and of its core, the question of Palestine, to find and set up an effective internation,al SysteM of securi ty guarantees for ISfael, Palestine and other neighbour in9 Arah States. The Czechoslovak Socialist Republic fully supports, and has supported on a lCf\9-terll baais, internatiooal efforts to resolve the Middle East conflict through the convening of an international Middle East conference with the participation of all parti8 cCll'lc0rned. It prO'lides full moral and material support for the cause of the Palestinian ~00ple. In concludon, I would like to state that a group of representatives of CxeiChoslcwak public and scientific ~irclet;o has decided to hald a mdel international kiddle East conference in Pr",gue, which will be opened tomorr~l1, 6 D!cellbctr. It ~ill be attended by prominent personalities from comtries potential participants in a substantive international Middle East conference as well as by officials from international organizations. We believe that this forum In PrllgUe vUl help to identify the real possibilities of resoJ.ving the crucial pcobleM of the Middle East crisis and wiU ~e a positive c.ontribution to its solution. The Secretary-General's message dispatched to prague today is sure to be received with great attention, and it represents significant support for this model international conference on peace in the Middle East. Mr.·OUDOVENKO (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) (interpretation from Russian): The distJussion on the situation in the Middle Eut is taking place in circumtances that are fundamentally different from those that existed a year ago. The positive changes in internaticnal relations that have resulted from the implementation in practice of the principles of the new ~litical thinking have enabled States, through their joint efforts, to make significant progress in resolving a nunber of regional conflicts. The conclusion of the Geneva Ilccords on Afghanistan, the cease-fire on the Iran-Iraq front and the start ofl:he negotiations between the two countries on the basis of Security Council resolution 598 (1987), the negotiations to resolve the Namibian problem and the achiwement of some progress in seeking mutually acceptable solutions to other confl icts cannot but be encourag'.ng. The mewe away from ccnfrmtatim towards a political settlement of these various complicated problems, with the active participation of the united Nations, can and should be a significant fmture of the late 1980s. However, it must be pointed out that a nunDer of regional conflicts have not ente~9d the stage of practical solution and continue to be a ser ious threat to international peace and secur ity. The situation in the Middle East is of particular concern. As was stated in MikhaU Gorbachev's message to the President of Alger i~, Mr. Bendjedid, on the occasion of the convening of the Arab Sumnit Conference "The Arab-Israeli conflict has entered a phase at which its rapid solution has become an urgent imperative of our: time. The continuance of the tense· situation in the Middle East contrasts with the changes for the better that we are wii:nessing in intl.)rnaticnal relations." In the opinion of my delegation, the favoUi.'able climate emerging in the world should be used to speed up the procestl of bringing about a just, comprehensive settlement in the Middle East on the basis of the principles of internatiooal law and the thited Nations Charter and decisions, balancing the interests of all parties. The major pre-eondi tion of such a settlement is the wi thdrawal of Israeli troops from territories occupied since 1967, namely, the west Bank, the Gaza Strip, the Syr.ian Golan Heights and southern Lebanon, while the Palestinian people should be giv~n the right to self-determination, and all States and peoples CJ~ 'he region, including Israel, should enjoy a secure existence in conditions of peaceful developnent. The emergence of a qualitatively new situation in the search for a solution to the Ara~Israeli conflict has been brought about not merely by changing external factors in the international climate, but, of particular significance, the radical changes in the situa tion in the ocwpied terri tories. On 21 January this year the Secretary-General submitted to the Security Council a report that fUlly confirmed the fact that at the beginning of this year the mass demonstrations by Palestinians in the occupied west Bank and the Gaza strip - the intlfadah - were assuming proportions of widespread popular unrest. The Secretary-General's report, containing information on victimized civilians, mass arrests, deportations and other massive violations of fundamental human rights in the occupied territoties, illustrates the tragic plight of the Palestinians. Israelis actions in the occupied territori@s are a shocking violation of the united Nations Charter and the numerous decisions of the Security Council and the General Assembly) they also directly violate the provisions of the FOurth Geneva Convention of 1949 and othel: basic instruments of international law. Official statements by Israeli leaders leave no cbubt that they intend to continue thair policy of annexation and colonization and to rule the occupied territories with an iron fist. The popular uprising by Palestinians in the Mest Bank has shown how untenable that policy is. The Arab people of Palestine is showing the world its indomitable determination to decide on its future for itself. The Palestinian upr ising is having a major impact 00 the entire international view of the Middle East situation, including the positions of the parties directly concerned. As noted in the report of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (A/43/35), a fundamentally new element has been added with the decision by the Government of Jordan to terminate its legal and administrative relationship with the Mest Bank and the stated willingness of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) to assu_ full responsibility for such matters as the administration of the occupied Palestinian territor!es. Given those facts, it is a matter of grave concern that Israel's tuUng circles are obstinately refusing to learr~ a lesson from the 1009, inglorious history of occupation and agree to a political settlement of the Palestinian problem, whim is at the core of the Middle East conflict ~ (Mr. ()Jdovenko, Ukrainian SSR) We agree with the conclusions of the Secretary-General, as stated in his report on this item. I shall quote a rather lengthy passage from that report, which truly describes the present situation in the region. -The intifadah in the occupied Palestinian territories, which began on 9 Dec~mber 1987, has for nearly a year been a domina ting factor in the political agenda in the Middle Past. It was the focus of the Arab Su1lltlit Conference in Algiers last April and the inspiration behind the recent session of the Palestine National Council in Algiers. It has also generated an intense debate among Israelis about the peace process and about their role in the occupied territories. Born of the frlJsta:ation and despair of a population that has lived under occupation for more tha.n 20 years, the intifad&h is a direct resul t of the stalemate in the search for a peaceful settlement of the Arab-Israeli conf~ict-. (A/43/867, para. 32) A step towards breaking the stalemate was taken by the Palestine National Council when it proclaimed the establishment of a peace-loving Palestinian State and its recognition of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) as the basis for the convening of an international peace cooference.· In that way the Palestine National Council demonstrated realism, political will and readiness for businesslike, open negotiations with the Israeli party, within the framework of the United Nations, and on the basis of the relevant resolutions of the security COuncil and the General Aasenbly. The declaration of independence issued at the Palestine National Council's session has won wide endorsement from the international community, which wishes to conveneu under United Nations auspices, an international peace conference on the Middle East in conformity with the provisions of resolution 38/58 C.' We are convinced that such a conference is the only fcrWll that could bring about a radical change in the Middle Fast settlement process. The conference should include the participation of all interested parties, including the Arab people of Palestine as repr~sented by its sole, leg1 timate representative, the PLO, and the permanent mellbers of the Security Council. It is obviOus that the idea of such & oonference has won widespread international support at all lwels and has become an importa'lt factor vi th an impact on a whole range of problems relating to a settlement. Thore is a growing international consensus in favour of the early convening of an intetnational conference on the Middle East, this has, in fact, become the unanilOOus position of Member states on this issue. The ~ernment of Israel is virtually alone in opposing the convening of such a conference. The new situation in the region requires a shift to practical steps to set in IIDtion the machinery of a conference. A concrete strategy must be devised wi thin ~he United Nations framework, along with plans for assisting conference participants to establish a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. The United Nations has both the author ity and the necessary facilities to accomplish this. The permanent members of the secur ity Council ha:ve an exceptionally important role to play in this process. We believe the Council could begin consultations on related issues. My del"'tgation believes that a conference on the Middle East should truly turn out to be a powerful, viable, flexible machinery that can formulate IlIUtually acceptable solutions on the whole ranga of problems involved in the Arab-Israeli conflict. It is important that the format of its workings not impinge on the rights or interests of any party, and that it facilitate compliance with the p:inciple of strict respect for sovereignty and independence and for the right of all peoples to self-determination and the choice of their own path of independent development. We feel particular attention should be given to the question of Palestinian representatiCi1, as the Palestinian question is at the core of the Middle East conflict. Of course, the PLO should participate in the confei:'ence on an equal footing. That organization has authority among the Palestinians, which guarantees the acceptability to the Arab people of Palestine of agreements reached with the participation of the PLO. Past experience and the present si tuation in the Arab territories occupied by Israel show that any decision that does not take into account the view of the PID - and hence that of the Palestinians, who are represented by th~t organization - is doomed to failure. Any attempt to, excll!de the PLO from a Middle East settlement would be inappropriate and inadmisdble. Yet we note with regret that such attempts continue. Everyone in this Hall will remembei:' the efforts of the General Assenbly, the Sec.retary-General and the International Court of Justice to stop the United States from closing the Permanent Observer Mission of the PLO in New York. Only a few days ago, notwithstanding protests from the entire international community, the united States unjustifiably denied an entry visa to the Chair"an of the Executive Commi ttee of the PLO, Hr. Yaaser Arafat. "':,at decision has placed new obstacles in the path of a comprehensive settlement, and has harmed the relevant UnHed Nations efforts nCM under way. By rejecting the idea of an international conference, under var 10us far-fetched pretexts, Israel, too, is continuing to block a Middle East settlement. Rtaliance by the ruling circles of that country on confrootation and the tmposition of their own will, which is the essence of their prese~t policy and practices against the Palestinian people, is ~nhumari and futile. Arrog&nce towards the decisions and pea~~aking ~achinery of our Organization, political short-sightedness by Israel with regard to the question being discussed and ~nwillingness to adopt a constructive compromise have become a fea ture of its pasi tion a t the unl ted Hadons. I should like to take this opportunity once again to appeal to the Cbvernment of Israel to reconsider its position, ta join in the broad international consensus in favour of a conference and join in the collective e~fort!3 to.find lasting, just peace in the Middle East, which would be in the interests of all the States of the region - inclUding, we ar.e convinced, the people of Israel itself. We feel that collective discussion of the situation that has now emerged in the Arab-Israeli conflict should lead to a comprehensive settlement in the Middle East. At pre~ent ' there are a number of problems that, by their nature, cannot be resolved r bilaterally. I wish to dwell on another aspect of the present situation in the Middle East, which wi th every pass Ing year is becoming increasingly prominent and. aC:1Jte. Under the non-proliferation Treaty, which has been in operation for al~st 20 years,: States that do not possess nuclear weapons undertake not to acquire such weapons of mass destruction. The Treaty, which came into force in 1970, soon enjoyed broad international recognit-ion. Now a signlficant majority of States have become parties to it. Therefore, one is particul.arly concerned that one of tbe parties to the Arab-Israeli confU I';t, Israel, is obstinately refusing to accede to that Treaty , • I I, • and fully to accept: In ternational Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) mani toring of its nuclear activities. That fact is noted in resolution 487 adopted by the General Confer~nce of the IAEA on 23 september this year. The resolution decisively condemns Israel's unwillingness to renounce the possession of nuclear weapons as well as its refusal to stop collaborating with South Africa in developing nuclear weapons and delivery systems. Israel's policy in that regard has an extremely negative impact on both the international non-proliferation regime worked out on the basis of the Treaty and the secur:ity of the region of the eastern Mediterranean and the Near and Middle East. The danger of that policy to international peace and secur ity, given the constant tension in the Arab-Israeli conflict, is quite clear. t Success in resolving the Middle East conflict and other complex regional problems will be determined by the level of political maturity shown by the States Members of this Organization, and it will'be a yardstick of the United Nations effectiveness as political machinery. The emblem of our Organization is a globe framad by olive branches. Farmers knCJ,l1 the hard work needed for a shoot growing out of an olive pit to produce the first fruit. Time waits for no man. If we want the olive trees planted at the day of the establishment of peace in th~ Middle East to produce fruit in this century, the concrete practical steps towarcis achieving that peace must be taken today. Mr.' RAZALI (Malaysiah The situation in the Middle East has been at the forefront of our agenda for over four decades now, and, despite the efforts of the United Nati,ons and other initiatives, the Arab-Israeli conflict remains as intractabie as ever. Recent trends which have brought promising developments to other conflicts have not had their impact on the problems of the Middle East. As the Secretary-General stated in his report (A/43/69l), "Recent months have seen tangible progress towards the settlement of many of the major conflicts which beset. the world... These beneficent winds of change have not yet reached the Arab-I.srael conflict, which remains one of the most tragic and threatening in the world." (A/43/69l, para. 7) The responsibility for continuing deterioration in the situation in the Middle East must rest with the intransigence and expansionist policies of Israel. Bclsing itself on its burgeoning mill tary strength, Israel has spurned every opportunity for a comprehensive and durable peace in the rAgion. It has been able to 00 so owing to the support of certain Powers, which have evinced a clear inability or unwillingness to act in the larger interests of all States in the region. A Middle East policy anchored on the basis of Israel's superior armed strength cannot, from the geo-politicai point of ·,iew, be sustained. It is a mistake to believe that such a policy can serve the latg-term interests of any PCMer or by any CalC!llation prOJiOte peace and stability in the region. Israel has exploited its armed strength to pe~petrate aggressioo and the occupation of Palestinian and other Arab territories. It has justified its illegal occupation by its security requirements in order to mask its objective of aggression and expansion into Palestinian and Arab lands. The international community has repeatedly condelll'led Israel and called for total and uncondi timesl withdrawal from all territories. The annexation of East Jerusalem and the Cblan Heights has been declared null and void, just as IsraE4l's attempts to change the religious, cultural and socio-economic character of the occupied territories have been universally condemned. The central aim of Israel's policies is the continued denial of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to self-determinatLJ' and to an independent. State. For oyer 21 years the Israeli illegal occupation of Palestinian land has been accompanied by policies and practices that seek to crush Palestinian aspirations and to liquidate the Palestinian identity. The Israeli strategy for peace in the Middle East is premised Upat the total subjugation and emasculation of the Palestinian nation, thus removing the core of the Middle East conflict~ the question of Palestinian rights. Yet, despite 20 years of iron-fist policies, the Palestinian people have not succunbed. They have demonstrated their indomitable spirit and resilience by their sustained uprising, the intifadah, whi.:::h will oommemrate its first anniversary in a few days' time. The Palestinians have borne the brunt of arrests, deportation, expulsions, loss of lives, loss of property and the establishment of illegal settlements by the Israelis. Malaysia joins the international community in condemning the brutal policies of the Israeli occupying authorities, which are flagrant violations of fundamental human values and of the Fourth Geneva Convention The .!!ltifadah has demonstrated to the world the rejection by Palestinians of Israeli occupation ani! their willingness to pay the pr ice for their legitimate rights to self-determination and an independent homeland. As the secretary-General stated in his report: "The intifadah in the occupied Palestinian territories, which began on 9 Decenber 1987, has for nearly a year been a dominating factor in the political agenda in the Middle East. It was the focus of the Arab SUllJllit Conference in Algiers last April and the inspiration behind the recent session of the Palestine Na tional Council in Algiers." (A/43/867, para. 32) The declaration of an independent Palestinian state and the acceptance of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967)' and 338 (1973) by the Palestine National Council on 15 NOI1emer 1988 have received the overwhelming support of the international oornmunity. Malaysia is proud to be among the first to reC()gnize the independent Palestinian State. That event tlas a historic development, lauded not only by Palestinians but by all oountr ies that seek peace and justice. My delegation also fully concurs with the 5ecretary··General's conclusions with regard to the Palestine National Council meeting p when he stated in his report: "The recent session of the Palestine National Council in Algiers has generated a new JI'Omentum in the diplomatic process and I believe it offers fresh opportuni ties for progress towards peace whi ch should be seized." (ibid., para. 37) Unfortunately, those fresh opportunities have been spurned. Even the opportunity to address the Assenbly was denied tL Chairman Yasser Arafat, the leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). That decision has been deplored by an overwhelming majority of the Menbers of the united Nations, who have also decided to accord Chairman Yasser Arafat the hmour of addressing the Assenb1y at the United Nations in Geneva. What is being denied in New York will be rectified in full at Geneva. The Palestinian cause must have its just hearing. The acceptance by the Palestine National Council of resolutions 242 (1967) and JJ8 (197J) enhance the prospects for the convening of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East, as envisaged in General AsseJlt)ly resolutions 38/58 C and 42/66 D. Malaysia fully supports the convening of that Conferenc~ under the auspices of the Secretary-General and with the participation of all parties concerned, including the Palestine LiberaHon Organ ization, on an equal footing. we believe that only through the convening of such a conference could a comprehens ive, just and duI' able settlement of the problem be achieved and the Palestinian people be accorded their inalienable rights to self-determination and a national homeland. Malaysia fully supports the efforts of the Secretary-General to convene such a conference, which has been overwhelmingly endorsed by the international community. It is regrettable to note in another of the Secretary-Genera1's reports that "familiar and deep differences remain about the nature of that framework, about its powers, about the basis on which it would be convened, and about who should take part in it." (A/43/691, para. 5) Malaysia calls upon Israel and those in support of its prevarication to lend full support to the Secretary-General to make possible the early convening of the International Conference. Lebanon, an independent and sovereign nation, has also fallen prey to Israel's expansionist thirst for territory. Since 1982 Israel has maintained aBo-called security zone in south Lebanon under its total control. Lebanese citizens have been arrested, abducted, deported, tried and sentenced under Israeli laws. Scores of Palestinians from the occupied territories have also been deported to Lebanon by the Israeli occupying authorities. Iron-fist policies of repression of all opposition to Israeli occupation have continued with undiminished feraei ty, in violation of international laws and of the Fourth Geneva Convention, of 1949. Israel's intervention in Lebanon's internal affairs has inflamed the factional conflicts within Lebanon's body politic in order to serve its own expansionist interest in annexing south Lebanon permanently as part of greater Israel. This year has witnessed repeated Israeli invasion and aerial bombardment of Lebanon, resulting in the lass of lives and in the destruction ot homes and property. Such wanton acts of aggression against a sovereign State violate the Charter, inte:national laws and United Nations Security Council resolutions 425 (1978), 508 (1982) and 509 (1982), which demand a full, immediate and unconditional withdrawal by Israel from all Lebanese territory, airspace and territorial waters and the immediate cessation of aggression and other practices directed against Lebanese territory. Malaysia would like to reaffirm its solidarity with the Governroont and people of Lebanon and to join the international community in calling for full respect for the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Lebanon, free from foreign intervention and interference. Dame Ann BERQJS (New Zealand) ~ The report of the Secretary-General on the situation in the Middle East makes sober reading. As the Secretary-General notes, it has riot yet proved possible to launch a negotiating process acceptable to all the parties to the conflict. Accordingly, the stalemate in the peace process continues, with its attendant dangers. Violence is endemic. Israeli continues to occupy Arab territories acquired in 1967 and to conduct itself there in ways the entire international community considers to be contrary to international law. The Secretary-General rightly notes the impact of the uprising in the occupied Palestinian territories as a dominating factor in the political agenda in the Middle East. The Secretary-Generalis comments provide a frank reminder of the situation. He notes that the intifadah was born of the difficulties and despair experienced by a population that has lived under occupation for more than 20 years and that it is a direct result of the stalemate in the Arab-Israeli conflict. Like many other countries, New Zealand is deeply concerned about policies and practices that violate the human ~ights of the inhabitants of the occupied territories, and we join those who have called upon Israel to abandon those practices and to abide immediately and scrupulously by its international legal obligations. The Secretary-General's observations are a timely reminder of the fnJstrations and despair of the Palestinian population. Accordingly, it is to be regretted that there is not ye·; sufficient agreement to allow the search for a durable settlement to proceed. We have noted his remarks in regard to the International Peace Conference on the Middle East. Despite the difficulties he foresees, we welcome the Secretary-Genera1's intention to cmtinue his efforts in accordance wi th the invitation given to him by the security Council to pu~sue his consultations. It would be highly desirable if the evidence of progress towards settlement in other conflicts - and the generally more positive international climate - were able to be translated into moyement on this most intractable of issues. My GOvernment was heartened by the outcome of the Palestine National Council in Algiers. In our view the outcome of. that meeting needs to be carefully assessed, but it is movement in a positive direction - a significant gesture of reconciliation by the Palestine National Council. We would like to have had the opportunity to hear the Chairman of the PLO here in New York. We therefore will be looking forward with interest to this Assembly taking up the issue of Palestine in Geneva. Ii'l the mean time, we welcome in particular the indication of the: Council's positive atti tude concerning the pr inciples on which a comprehensive peace settlement should be based. Those pr inciples have been the corner-stone of the international community's search for a settlement. To reach understanding 00 the pr inciples which will underpin a settlement is crucial. We also look for agr.eement on the procedures to be followed in order to bring about this settlement. The Secretary-General rightly sounds a note of concern in his report at the absence of a generally accepted and effective negotiating process which, as he says, is of fundamental importance. As a diatant observer of developvtents in the Middle East, but one which takes a principled interest in the si tua tioo there and recognizes the vital importance of the region for global stability, New Zealand shares these concerns. My GovernJ1lent is very conscious of the dangers alluded to by the secretary-General. We regret that neither regional initiatives nor g!eat-Power involvement has pointed 3 way out of the current impasse. Each year that goes by without a solution adds to the intractability of the ~oblem. For its part the united Nations has played a useful and constructive role over the years, seeking to ereate the conditions in which the problems of the region may be resolved. The peace-keeping operations and the activity of the Secretary-General himself all bear witness to the constant and patient efforts of the Oti ted Nadons to th is end. New Zealand will Caltinue to give active support to those effC)rts • In New Zealand's view the basis for a comprehensive settlement in the Middle East is provided by Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). The pr incip1es laid down in the former resolution are clear and just. It should be implemented in all its parts. That resolution emphasizes the inadmissibility of aCXjuiring territory by war. Accordingly, Israel must withdraw from all the territories occupied in 1967. We regret that it has shown no inclination to do so and that many of its actions point in a contrary direction. New 7ea1and does not, for example, recognize the validity of Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem, nor the establishment of new settlements in the occupied territory. In New Zealand's view, any settlement must take account of the rights and aspirations of the Arab people of Palestine. Palestinian refugees are entitled to be repatriated or compensated. My Government has lalg held that their rights include the.right of self-determination. New Zealand welcomes the initiatives taken by the Palestine National Council, but expects final status of the occupied territories will be determined in the context of an overall peace settlement. New Zealand recognizes and supports the right of Israel, as an independent and sovereign State, to 1i,,~ in peace vithin secure and recognized boundaries, free from threats or acts of force. We have regretted the reluctance among Israel's neighbours and tbe Palestine Liberation Organization to accept unequivocally that Israel has this right. That reluctance will need to be overcome clearly and unequivocally if there is to be a durable settlement. A negotiated peace calls not ally for flexibility and compromise but for recognition of the rights of all parties. Without a willingness to con~ider reciprocal conces~ions, the secretary-General's gloomy assessment of the prospects for the establishment of a viable negotiating process in the foreseeable future seems likely to be borne out. New zealand supports the convening of a Conference under United Nations auspices in which all parties concerned could cooduct direct negotiations. Those parUes include Israel, the Palestinians and the neighbouring Arab States. Who should represent the Palestinians is a matter for they themselves to decide. No settlement will be lasting if it is not negotiated by representatives acceptable to the Palestinian people. The success of an international conference will rest in large measure on a prior demonstration of readiness to resolve the long-standing and complex dispu te by peaceful means and a determination all1Dng the parties to achieve agreements that will secure a just and durable peace. We encourage those involved to press on wi th their efforts and welcome the commitments of the United Nations Secretary-Genera1 in that regard. The plight of the people of Palestine requires that further anil substantial endeavour s be made to secure a future for them. Only in that way will stability and peace for the people of Israel also be secured. Hr. RAMIR!!, (Calomia) (interpretation from Spanish) ~ The Middle East, the cradle of civilization and the fountainhead of numerous cultures, is today strife-torn, with fighting on many fronts. This long-standing situation marked by conflict has been of great concern to the international community, and through our Organization it has tr ied to create an atmosphere of peace in which the peoples of the Middle East, with their rich traditions and ~ultures, may experience a rebirth. Colonial intervention, there as elsewhere, brought in elements alien to local cultures, thereby creating a desire for indapendence. In the process the differences and similarities of the minorities that have lived for centuries on the same territory became particularly marked. We welcome the frui ts of the present relaxation of tension, and we also welcome the actions of the SecretarY-General. This has led to the beginning of an understanding in the conflict between Iran and Iraq. We hope that the peace nnvement there will continue and lead toa lasting peace and secure boundaries. The present situation in Lebanon and the violence experienced there for many. years cQltinue deeply to C<X'lcern the international community. We hope. there will be a speedy understanding between the nationals of the two countries and that Lebanon will soon resume the outstanding position it occupied in the region as a centre for developnent and an example of harl1Dny and progress. My country continues to observe with concern the crisis in the Mic::.ldle East, where recently there have been serious signs of turbulence. We believe that peace in the area should be sought through the United Nations and should be based on global soluti~s in keeping with the spirit of the resclution9 repeatedly adopted by the Security Council. These solutions will lead to progress only if they fully acknowledge the right of the Palestinian people to have a sovereign territory. That situation bears a striking resenblance to the one in which Israel found itself in 1947. The situation in the Middle Fast, which has been so threatening ~ would be mob more promising if there were a return to the spirit and letter of resolution 242 (1967) adopted by the Secur ity Council on 22 November 1967. The contents of that resolution even today cCXltinue to be the basis for peace in the area. Ever since the creatiol'i of the United Nations Colombia has taken a balanced and fair position on the Middle East. The elements in the resolution I have just mentiCXled involve recognition of the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and recognition of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of terr1tory through the use of foree, withdrawal of Israel i troops from all occupied terri tories, and the terminatiM of all belligerent si tuations and respec~ for the soyereignty, territorial integrity and political independance of all States in the area and respect for their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundar iee, free from any act of force or threa t of the use of force. We firmly support the convening of an Intel:ilational Peace Conference on the Middle East under the auspices of the United Nations and with the participation of the permanent members of the Security Council and all parties to the conflict, including the Palestine Liberation Organization. The relationship between the various conflicts in the area further complicates the geo-political balance there, creting a very complex situation. Negotiations will h~ve enormous repercussions not only CXl parties to the conflict but on the region 38 a whole. Por this reason we should prollOte any peace initiative capable of leading both to bilateral solutions and to regional negotiations, which in turn !light lead to a just peace on a basis of equity. !!. MUDmGB (Zimbabwe); We should like to express our gratitude to the Secretary-General, Javier Perez de Cuellar, for the very lucid and inforlUltive reports on the item before us today contained in docullents A/43/272 of 31 March 1988, A/43/683 of 11 Octobt'r 1988, and A/43/69l of 30 September 1988. Yollowing the adoption of resolution 41/43 D (1986) by this Assembly two years 2890, on 7 May 1987 the Secretary-General presented a report on the bas is of intensive consultations regarding the ponsibility of coavening the International Peace Conference on the Middle East (A/42/277). That report brought the pleasant news that in recent months there had been indicat~on8 ol 9reater flexibility in attitudes towards the negotiating process, and that this had to be encouraged. The Movement of Non-Al igned CoUnt~ies, through its COIUftlittee of Nine on Palestine, made ai1 effort to encourage that new posi tive trend and to support the efforts of the Secretary-General. • When this Assembly last considered the item on the Middle Fast on 11 Decembez:' last year, in its resolution 42/209A (1987) it reaffirmed that the convening of the Internai:ional Peace Conference on the Middle East under the aU9pices of the Uni ted Nations was the appropr !ate way to find a peaceful, comprehensive and just solution to the Middle East problem. The Assel'llbly therofore requeated the Secretary-Genf!ral to continue his efforts, in consultation vi th the Security Council, with a view to convening the Conference. The report cmtained in document A/f3/272 indicates that in March thifJ year the Secretary-General made contacts and connunicated with the ;nenbers of the Security Council as well as wi th all the parties directly involved in the Middle Elist conflict. The Secretary-General Infor_d us that his contacts indicated that sufficient Agreelllent did not exist either amng the parties directly concerned or within the Security Council to permit the convening of the International Peace Conference • Docuntent A/43/69l indicates that yet another effort was lUde by the Secretary-General as recently as two months agor in pursuance of his mandate contained in this Assembly's resolution 42/209 A (1907). That effort did not yield any positive result either. We were infofi'llOd that deep differences remained about the nature of the international framework for the negotiation of a just and lasting eettlententJ about its powers) about the basis on which it would be cOiWened) and about the participants. The: Secretary-General made the important observation that ·positions will have to change if an international negotiating process acc:ept.lble to all is to be established.· (A/43/691, para. 5) We had hoped that at thia time, when we are wi tnessing real progress towards . the resolution of many of the major region&l OJnflicts, the Middle East problem, which has been on the agenda of this Assermly longer than any other issue, would also benefit from the new winds of change in international relations. But today the manace of an impasse hovers over the efforts "0 convene the International Peace Conference. The opportunity offered by the growing international sentiment in favour of the peace conference following the adoption of resolutions 38/58 (1983) and 4.1/43 D (1986) was wasted. The Secretary-(",eneral's report contained in document A/43/691 indicates that at a time when the entire international oomJTIunity was calling for the early convening of the international conference under the auspices of the Uni ted Ha tions one important member of the SE=cur ity Council waa pursuing its Qrln unilateral initiative. We were to learn that the inl tiaUve was based on the so-called three steps: first, a vaguely defined international conferen~0~ secondly, direct talks between Israel and a Jordanian-Palestinian delegation on a transitional period of self-rule for the occu~ied territories, and thirdly, talks between Israel and a Jordanian-Palestinian delegation on the final status of the west Bank and Gaza. Other conditions were also rrede. We were told tha t the ga ther ing would be open only to par ties which accepted United Nations Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) and renounced terrorism. we in the MoYement of Non-Aligned Caun tr iea welcome any efforts aimed at bringing peaceful solutions to international conflicts. We have actively encouraged the peace initiatives undertaken in the various regions, inclUding Central America, South-East Asia, the Persian Gulf and the Middle East itself. However, we find it deeply disturbing that when there i~ a universally endorsed mUltilateral effort under way, within the framework of the United Nations, an important member of the Security Council should come up wi th a rival initiative the goals of which are not consistent with those envisaged by the United Nations effort. A United States contribution to Middle East peace efforts is welcome, indeed indispensable. But we cannot help questioning the sinceri~J of an effort which deliberately seeks to disregard the core of the Middle East problem~ the question of Palestine. 'lb disregard the right to self-determin..:-,"ion of the Palestinian people, including the right to establish a Palestinian State, and to exclude the participation, on an equal and independent footing, of the Palestine ~ibetation Organization (PlO), the authentic representative of the Palestinian people, amounts to ignoring the fact that the question of Palestine lies at the heart of the Middle East problem. A few weeks ago we witnessed Cl histar tu event Which brou9ht new hopes for the Middle East peace process. The Palestine Liberation Organization, meeting in Algiers during its intifidah session, proclaimed the establishment of the State of Palestine on Palestinian territory on the basis of General Assembly resolution 181 (II), and endorsed security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 339 (1973), as the basis for the International Peace Conference on the Middle East, thus meeting one of the conditions insiated upon by the United states. This decision of the Palestine National Council (~C) has cr(!ated a fresh atmosphere for the revival of the stalled peace process. We should not alla" this new opportunity to be wasted once again. The Chairman of the PLO, Mr. Yasser Arafat himself, called for the resuscitation of the peace process immediately after the me session. Already, there are disturbing signs that some wish to slam thin recently opened door for peace. Israel, which since the beginning haD been the l18jor obstac],e to the convening of the International Peace Conference under United Nations auspices, is moving more and more in an extremist direction and had rejected bl advance the important decis ions taken by the ~C. The United States, which had in its recent initiative insisted that participants in the negotiations must accept Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), now appears to be groping for other excuses. The recent refusal by the United States to give a visa to Chairman Arafat is a major blow to the cause of peace in the Middle East. It diminishes the prestige of the united states and strengthens the posi tion of the hard-liners in Israel. A morally weakened United States cannot be a force for the pronotion of peace in the Middle East and that is of no benefit: to anybody: not to the United States, not to the Palestinian cause, and certainly not to Israel. The vast majority within the United Nations family is ready to seize the historic opportunity offered by the mc decision to initiate the peace process. In a statement issued on 17 November, the Chairman of the McNement of Non-Aligned Countries called upon Israel and its allies to show diplomatic flexibility in these changed circumstar:-ces, by agreeing to the early convening of the International Peace Conference at which the PLO, as the authentic representative of the Palestinian people, would pattlcipate on an equal footing with other parties. The . ~ States members of the European Community, in a declaratlon issued in Brussels on 21 November 1988, reacting to the results of ~he PNC meeting, pointed out that the PNC decisions included positive steps towards tn::! peaceful settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict and appealed to all parties concerned to take this opportunity and contribute to thE peace process in a positive way. The Scwi~t Union and the whnle socialist frat'.:£'nity share similar positive sentiments about the Algiers decisions. The intifldah, the popular uprising of the Palestinian peoples, and the recent Algiers session of the PNe, have redefined the realities in the Middle East. The time has now come for Israel to adjust its position to the new realities and to heed the call of the Sec:retary-General, the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries and the Q1ropean COJml1nity to change their position. This is the only way that the progress towards peace that is being experienced in other regions can also be extended to the Middle East. The reality on the ground nCM calls for bold st&tesmanship and not prevarication. The situation regarding other areas in and around the Middle East region has not improved. This year has witnessad an escalation of Israeli threats and aggression against the Arab front-line States. Last August, Israel launched a new terrorist assault on the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Tunisia, as a tesul t of which Mr. Khalil Al-Wazir, Deputy ColtlRll!nder-in-Chief of the J.I'orces of the PLO,. was assassinated, together with other Tunisian nationals~ Lebanon also oontinues b) face a dangerous situaticn. Israel has continued its occupation of parts of southern Lebanon and launched terrorist attacks ~gainst Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon. We call upon the Secur ity Council to ensure full implementation of its resolutions 425 (1978) and 426 (1978), and its resolutio~s 508 (1982) and 509 (1982), calling for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal III of I sraeli forces from all Lebanese terr i tory up to the in ternationally recognized borders of Lebanon. In conclusion, we wish to express our satisfaction at the manner in which the sister nor.-aligned countries of Iran and Iraq have cattinued to co-operate wi th the SecretarY-General in his efforts to COmplete the negotiations under way in Geneva. ~. MAHALLA!! (Islamic Republic of Iran) (interpretation from Arabic): "Tb those against whom War is made, permission Is given (to fight), because They are wronged,--and verily, God is Most Power ful For their aid ,-- (They are) those who have Been expelled fr.om their homes In defiance of r ight,-- (For no cause) except That they say, "Our Lord I s God". Did not God Check one set of people By means of another, There would surely have been Pulled down monasteries, churches, Synagogues, and mosques, in which The name of God is commemorated In abundant measure. God will Certainly aid those who Aid His (cause)J--for verily God is Full of Strength, Exalted in Might, (Able to enforce His will)." (The Holy KOran, XXII:39,40) (Mr. Mudenge, Zb~abwe) (continued in £ngl ish) The core of the Middle East problem dur ing the past 4(' years has been the Zionist occupation of Palestine. eetween 1947 and 1987 the Zionist base was the cause of five ferocious wars, and it has been the home of pe.:manent oonbat between these dispossessed of their homeland and the zionist forces of occupation ever expanding the extent of their usurpation of Palestine. The occupation of Palestine, which has seriously disturbed the peace and security of the region and has led to the present plight and gr ievances of the Palestinian PeOple, is a major concern of the international community. Since the usurpation of Pale6tine by Zionist immigrants, Palestinians have been subjected to unspeakable violence, terrer and appalling cr1rnes. The blame for this historic cr tile ...st be placed on those arrogant Powers that were the dr iving-force behind the conspiracies leading to the creation of the Zionist base, thus turning that part of the world into flI centre of conflict, confrontation, war and bloodshed. By setting up an artificial State in Palestine, they not only Bent millions of Palestinian people into homelessness but also destroyed peace and tranquillity in the Middle EaSt • . Unfortunately, the United Nations too, owing to the permanent presel'1ce of the arrogarlt Powers wi th colonial1st ambi tions, was invovlved in the actual crea tion and official registration of the Zionist occupation of Palestine. Hence it is even partially responsible for the victimization of the Palestinian people. The adoption, by the General Asselllbly in 1947, of resolution 181 (I1) on the partition of the land of Palestine and the establishment of the Zionist entity was itself in violation of provisions of the United Nations Charter, as well as of the rules of international law. '!he 1nd..er!b~le suffedng of Palestinians unde£' zionist occupation is one of the met tragic chapters of recent history. 101' _ny years the regime occupying Qud. has been expelling l'ale..tiniaM f;::QI their lllld. Badly, hewever, the inte~nati()i)a1 co-.nity ha re_ined undecided and hu It-itad itself to mere expressions of coneerlll. urtder such cire:.t_tance., Palestinians ck iven from their hOMland o~ living under occupation and subjugation by the zionist rcgille had no moic," but to rise 1116 deaand their own legiti_te d~bte. lIlenever the Palestinisn people have intensifi.d their struggle to free themselves from the oppression of occupiers and to liberate their no_land the occupying regime has enacted the llOet op~..siv. and aav&ge aeasures to soppress them. The reaction of the Zionist regiMe to ta"le recent updsing wu no excepticn to this rule. The systeaatic us. of t&rl'or and violence has becoae the daily practice of the Zionist cri.inals. Since the inception of the glorious uprising last year hundreds of our Palestinian brother., who always felt duty-bound to defend their usurped rights, bwe been aartyrec2, injw:ed, detained Md expelled by the forces of occupation. This Zionist intransigence on the policy of 8uppression of Palestinians and ita perel.tence in ~e usurpation of Palestine stell from and are, indeed, IBde possible by the unU_ited econOllic, financial, !lUitary and political support offered by the United State. and certain otheJ: Powers. These ardent supporters of the artificial State of Zioni81i aust bear the pr!. responsibility for its survival, which is a factor working against regional and international peace and .ecurlty. The continued occupation of Paleatine Gnd sections of other Islamic and Arab lande, the cri•• perpetrated by the Zionist regi_ in the West Bank and the Gaza Strlp, ita repeatea aggre.sion against southern Leb&non, bOlllbardlllent of Palestinian caaps and aas.acre of innocent civilians _d Palestinian refugees prove that the crisis in the MicSdle "st will not be resolved dBless the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to self-6ttemination Md to the establishment of their own independent State in the entire land of Pale.tine are restored .. There are, of cours., two upacta of the question of Pelestine. On the one hand, it is the hOll8lad of Palestinian poopl., who have I!very right to this hO_land and IIWIt therefore M Gllowed to raturn to it. Thia lIust, without any hesitation, be the concern of the Internations], ooJalnity. On the other hand, Palestine is an Islalll1e territory that Camlot be given a"ay to the zionist usurpers under any conditions. It ie the holy land which ellbraces the second""llOst-important Muslim sanc:tuarioJ it Is forbidden·to surrender these sMctuarlea or the11' land to a Zionist bue. It is the duty of every ItAsUa to strive and struggle for the liberation of the Boly land. ~y decision cannicting wt th the I8la..ic duties of ...s11111 nations of the world will h... no legal validity and will only increase turbulence and blocd8hacJ in the zoegicn. Tbe people and the Q)"el'nMent of the Ielamiet Republic of Iran, together with hW!dreda of flillions of MuDli. of the world, strongly candelll\ the occupation of Paleatine by the Zionist occuple&'s.. we also condemn those policies and practices that have contributed to tIli. illegal ocwpationo The Isla.ic RapubUc of Iran supports the holy struggle of Palestinians and will spare no effort to .naute the elUftcipetton of the entire land of Palestine. In pursuit of this policy, we concur with the announce_nt concerning the eatablisblHnt of a Palestinian state. This constitutes the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to their cwn independent State for the illplfJllentation of the cause of Palestineo Nwerthele••, we _ph.be that any recognition of the zionist base and negotiations vi th that non-entity, which is tant&lIIOunt to the abandonment of the holy struggle, is not. acceptable to the ~slim tJmraah. In this connection, it is to be stressed that the tl'lited Nations should utilize all its resources to end thl!! occupation of Palestine and the Arab lands .snd give effect to th~ 1nalienab1e rights of Palestinian people to return to their homeland and establi9h a Palestinian State. The United Nations is constitutionally obliged to stop the bloodshed and bring meaningful peace to the region. Hr. ZBPOS (Greeceh I have the honour of speaking on behalf of the 12 Statea Members of the European Community. The Ttlelve have important political, historical, economic and cultural ties with the countries and peoples of the Middle East. They cannot be passive about or indifferent to the serious problems affecting a region so close to them, problems that have serious repercussions for internatima1 peace and stability. The 'lWe1v-a have on several cceasions expressed themselves in declarations on the Arab-Israeli conflict p the conflict between Iran and Iraq, and the situation in Lebanon. AlthougH so_ pesi tive developments have given rise to hope, other problems of the region re_in unresolved ~nd have even been aggravated in so_ cases. The '!\relve are greatly concerned at the suffer1n'j of whic::h the peoples in lIany parts of the Nidale East continue to be the victims as a result of regional tensions and ar_d ccnfrontations in the area. The lcng-standing position of the '!\Ielve is that there is l.il urgent need for negotiated solutions to those problell8. The aim must be to bring about a just, global and lasting peace in the region and good relations between neighbours, and to allow economic, social and cultural development, which in SOIle cases has been adversely affected for too loogo The views of the TWelve on the question of Palestine will be exp~essed more fully in the debate on agenda i tern 37. This year's debate co~~s shortly after the decisions adopted by the Palestine National Council in Al~1iers on 15 NOI1ember 1988. The '!\Iel"e attach particl!lar illPOrtance to those decisions, which reflect the will of the Palestinian people to assert their national identity and which include poettive steps towards the peaceful settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict. The prolongation of that conflict endangers peace and security in the region. The Twelve have repeatedly made clear the pr inciples for the establishment of a just, luting and comprehensive peace in the Near East, set cut in the Venice Declaration of 13 June 1980 and in their subsequent statelllents on the issue. Those principles must be respecta~ by all the parties concerned, inclUding the Palestinian people and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which will have to be associated wi th the negotiations. In that context, the '!\relve welcomed the acceptance by the Palestine National Council on 21 Novellber 1988 of security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) as a basis for an international (NI. zepos, Greece) conference, which iapUe. acceptance of the right to exiat.ce and security of all States oC the region,inclucUnq Israel. Respsct for that principle goes together with that of justice for the peoples of thQ region and in particular: with the right of self-determination of the Paleetinian people, with all that that iaplies. The ..sence of a settlellent lIust be a full" just ana lasUng ac~daUon between Israel and the Palestinian people, 80 that they can Uve toCJ(tther in peace and security. The resolution of the proble. between Israel and its neighbours should be based on the Charter principles of non-recourse to the use of ferce and of the inadmissibility of the acquisition .of territory by war. Iaraal ..et put aii end to the territorial occupation it has _intained since .l967an4 give up its illegal policy of settl_entB. we reaffirM our position that any change in the status .,d demographic structure of the o~cupied territories is illegal under international law and constitutes a serious obstacle to peace efforts. Military occupation can enly be regarded as a tellporeiry situation and deea not confer upon the occupying Power r ights of annexation or: dlQposal or: the l' ight to extend its law, jur isdiction or adnlinistraticn to the occupied area. The Twelve reiterata that Israel! policy concerning East Jerusalelll an~ the Q)lsn helghta is contrary to international 1&w. Therefore, all _asuree taken within the frallMlork of that SSOlicy are to be considered null and void. In the debate on agenda itea 77, the '1\Ie1"e had occa.f.on to s~t out in detail their deep concern, in particular ewer the put twelve IIOftths, at a nullber: of Israeli actions and policies affectiliq the hu_n rights and living conditione of the population of the occupied territories. In this debate, we shall confine ourselves to reiterating our call upon I ereel , •• the occupying Power, pending i t8 withdrawal to fulfil its obligations under the relev8lt Hague ad Geneva Conventions, to ensure i_aiate Pl=otection of the population In ClOIIP1iance with international law and human-rights cbligations and to lift restrictions on political and econOBdc activities. Galee again we stress the urgency of reaching la political solution. In a statement made on 21 November 1988, the POceign Ministers of the 1Welye called on all the parties concerned, while abstaining froa any acts of violence and any action that could furtheragCJfayate the tense situation in the Near But, to seize tho new opportunities and oontribute to the peace Pl'oces. in a positive way with a view to a just, global and lasUng solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict. That solution can only be achieved through an international peace oonference under the auspices of the United Nations, ""ich represents the suitllble fraaework for the necessary negotiations between the parties directly concerned. The Twelye are profoundly conce~ned that a br:eakthrough in the efforts to reach agreement on an international peace conference has not yet been _cb. In h15 re~t to the General Asseably, in accordance with General A8se~ly resolution 42/209 A on the question of convening an international peace conference, the Secretary-Gener~l assessed that the Ilec••ary agre.JHnt doe. not exist for the convening of the conference, because of deep differences re.ining with regard to a buis acceptable to all. tie haYe alao taken note of the secretary-General's report, submitted in accordance with General AssMbly resolution 42/209 B, in which attention is drawn to the need for new and deter_ined efforts to be _de to bring about a peaoaful settlelMnt to the con~llI.ct. The '1\re1ve fully support the Secretary-General in his efforte and they fully lIbare hi. view on the urgent need to establiah a procesa acceptable to .11 for the negotiation of • just, lasting and comprehensive settleaent in tM Middle But. The Twe1ye will, for their part, continue their aloe., contacts with all the partlee concerned and wtll do "«11 in their power to play their role fully in the search for such .. settleMftt. (Ma:. zepos, Greece) In Lebanon, after 13 years of war and suffering, it is vital that a political solution be found. A worsening cycle of violence is bound to lead to a further deterioration of the situation. ""ether as a result of acts of resistance against foreign occupation, intercollllrllnal str ife, actions in southern Lebanon by the Israeli forces end their associatas or attacks of one kind or another by who_oever across the international border, there will always be innocent victims. This year again we have wi tnessed a very ser i()us si tuation in and around some of the Palestinian camps in Lebanon, together with a continuation of violence, hostage taking and killings in different parts of Lebanon. Once again, we express our great concern for the fate of all hostages, including a nuJllber of our own citizens, held in Lebanon and appeal strongly on humanitarian grounds for their release aB soon as possible. In their statement on 21 Nove1llber 1988, the Twelve expressed the hope that that fr iend!y country should soon be able to cwercome the acute er IsIs it is currently experiencing. The peoper functioning and strengthening of Lebanon's constitutional bodies is a pre-eondition for a political solution. We regret that the mandate of President Gemayel expired withoot a new President being elected. we stronglyapped to all parties to prOllDte the election, in all freedom and without external pressures or interferences, of a President able to carry out the tetsk of national reconciliation, and to safeguard the unity, independence, territorial integr ity and sOI7ereignty of Lebanon. The Pbropean Council convening in Rhodes on 3 December 1988 reaffirmed those pr inciples and expressed the view that the O'ai ted Nations Should in particular contr ibute to the satisf&ctory holding of the Presidential election, if that would be useful. A solution also requiE'es total Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon. The so-called security zone and the continued presence of Israeli forces in south Lebanon, contrary to security Council resolutions, can only hinder the restoration of stability to the area. Bearing this in mind, the Twelve firmly support the United ~tions Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) and urge th.mt it be enabled to fulfil its mandate in th~ best possible security conditions fot its members, three of which belong to the Twelve. We reaffirm once more the obligation of all Member States to meet their financial Clbligations so that a solution of the sel ious financial difficulties of UNIFIL may soan be found. We apl?eal to all parties to co-operate with the Force in its efforts to carry out its mandate and its task of maintaining stable conditions and protecting the civilian p'pu1ation in its area of operation. The 'lWelve welcomed the announcement of a cease-fire by the Secretary-General and its observance by the Governments of Iran and Iraq, followed by direct talks under the auspices of the United Nations Secretary-General. The success of the secretary-General's efforts contributes to the prestige of the United Nations and [)aves the way for an increasing role by the Organization in maintaining international peace and security. The 'l'welve express their satisfaction at the observance of the CEase-fire and at the estabUshment of the united Nations Iran-Iraq Military Observer Group (UNIIMOG) to supervise the implementation of paragraph 1 of resolution 598 (1987). However, secul'ity Council resolution 598 (1987) should be swiftly and fully implemented in all its parts. In this connection the Twelve continue to support the Secretary-General's efforts to secure the implementation of the resolution and urge both parties to co-operate closely with him in order rapidly to achieve a comprehensive, just, honourable and durable settlement of the conflict, in full compliance with ~c:urity Council resolution 598 (1987), so that peace and security may be restored in the region. ) The Twelve will follow developments 'in the Middle E.ast with great attention and concern. Peace in the region ia of vital importance to the Middle East itself, to Europe ~d indeed to international peace cmd security at la1'ge. The Twelve will, aD in the past, continue to support all efforts designed to br iog about Cl peaceful and lasting settlement of the problems of the Middle East. ,r' J1e PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): I call en the representative of Israol, who wishes to speak in exerqisG of the right of reply. I remind him that, in aCCGrdance with General Assembly decision 34/401, statements in exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes and should bil! made by del~gations from their seats. Mr. NISS!M-ISSACHAROPF (Israel), Notwitra9tanding the lateness of the hour, I feel compelled to make some brief ooJlllents regarding the statement made this morning by the representative of the United Arab mnirates on behalf of the Arab Group. 1 shall not refer to all the points he raised, as for the most part they lack any substance cnd to do so would lend those assertions a dignity they, frankly, do not possess. My delegaUon was particularly astonished that the representatto/e of the united Arab Ibirates chose to include in his verbal attack on Israel an inappropr late reference to naz ism. In so doing he revealed cs stark ignorance of the history of the Second World War and the horr.endous Nazi atrocities and genocide which 'wiped out a third of the Jewish people. Moreover, his statement also revealed a fundamental misunderatanding of Zionism and the ardent determination of the Jewish people to establish and maintain Its ho_land on the basis of the tt_less sense of morality '11 th which the Jewish people is iJlt)ued. (Mr. ZepoSf Greece) The true ene.y of un and the 90urce of conflict is not _rely ~~tility but rather ignorance and the distortion of 8OI.'al reality. The representative of the United Arab _iratee demonstrated this aorning his evident capability on both counts. My re.rks would also be appropriate in relation to the representative of MOsa~ique, who spoke this aftornoon in a similar surrealistic vein•