A/44/PV.23 General Assembly

As announced at the meeting yesterday afternoon, pursuant to a request contained in a letter from the Permanent Representative of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to the United Nations addressed to the President of the General Assembly on behalf of the States members of the League of Arab States (A/44/612), the Assembly will now consider the draft resolution circulated yesterday afternoon as document A/44/L.2, which has been revised and now bears the symbol I call on the representative of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya bo introduce the revised draft resolution on behalf of the States members of the LeElgue of Arab States. Mr. TREIKI (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya) (interpretation from Arabic): My delegation has already had the pleasure of congratulating the President, on behalf of my country, on his election. Hmever, owing to the close and lag-standing bonds of friendship between us, I cannot fail to seize this opportunity to express the Pride with which I and the Group of Arab States see him presiding over this important session of the General Assembly. On behalf of the Group of Arab States, of which my country is Chairman for this month, and of the sponsors, I have the honour to submit draft resolution A/44/L.2/Rev.l to the General Assembly for consideration. I urge all delegations to support it. * Mr. Vraalsen (Norway), Vice-President, took the Chair. (Mr. Treiki, Ktibyan Arab JamahiriyaE !lwo years have elapsed since the beginning of the intifadah of the Palestinian people, and hundreds of lives have been sacrificed by them during that time. They daily see the massacre of innocent children, defenceless women and old people, martyrs Whose Only crime is to reject occupation and aspire fm me free&m that is the right of all. The United Nations General Assetily has adopted a number of resolutions on this subject, as have the Security Council. , regional organizations ad other international organisations , all calling for an end to the occupation and respect for international agreements , in particular the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949. Draft resolution A/44/L.2/Rev.l is rrPderate and balanced. It recalls earlier resolutions adopted by the General Assembly and the Security Council and calls for k an end to bloodshed. It also calls for respect for international agreements and condems murder and genocide. The draft resolution deserves the Assembly's full support. Its purpose is not provocation or publicity. Rather, it is dictated by the tragic CircUmSt~ces of the Palestinian people under Israeli occupation. The Palestinian people have held out an olive branch. They express their desire for peace; they seek Peace. But that olive branch has been met by napalm and engines of destruction. The Palestinian child's hand extended with the olive branch of peace has been cut Off- (Mr. Treiki, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya) There is now an intensification of the practices of murder and genocide on the part of the occupation forces; there is also the violation of the sanctity of Palestinian homes, churches and mosques, confiscation of property and the systematic demolition of houses. All this should induce the international community represented by this international Organizaticn to take the necessary measures to put an end to those inhumane practices. In view of the urgency and gravity of the situaticn in the occupied Arab territories, the sponsors of this draft resolution - Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Cuba, Democratic ,Yemen, Djibouti, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania, Moroocc, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, United Arab Emirates, Yemen and Yugoslavia - call for its adoption without discussion and for it to be put to the vote imediately. Mr. BEIN (Israel): At the outset, I should like to congratulate , Ambassador Garba of Nigeria on his unanimous electian to the presidency of the General Assembly. We know of his leadership qualities both in his home country and at the United Nations. We are therefore confident of his success in the difficult and important task of steering this session of the Qneral Assembly. Ten days ago, as the Foreign Minister of Israel, Mr. Moshe Arens, rose to address this body, the representatives of every Arab State with the exception of Egypt demonstrated a collective show of belligerent contempt as they marched arrogantly out of this Hall. Had they remained, they would have heard, first-hand, Foreign Minister Arens call cn the 20 Arab States still in a state of war with Israel to meet with him and discuss hm we can move from belligerency to peace, (Mr. Bein, Israel) The following day, on 28 September , our mission telephoned the Permanent MiSSiOnS of the 20 Arab States mentioned by name , in an attempt to co-ordinate the meetings and initiate the dialogue called for. Not one of them - I repeat, not one - reciprocated. At the very same time that a scant minority of Middle Eastern nations is engaged in strenuous diplonmcy aimed at solving the problems of our region, regrettably, the overwhelming majority of Arab States has other ideas in mind. While they are all deeply implicated in the creation and perpetuation of this conflict, somehow they allow themselves the luxury of, at best, lethargically ignoring and, at worst, attempting to obstruct, the fragile diplomatic process. At international forums, however, Arab nations find the stamina to rush headlong into a somewhat different course of action: that of political warfare, against Israel and against the peace initiative of its Government. The timing of this ritualistic draft resolution is significant ad speaks for itself. There should be no mistake as to the intentions of its drafters. It is a flagrant exercise in public relations, the motivation of which is twofold. The first motive is to nip the peace process in the bud. The second, and more dangerous motive, is to instituticnalize the idea, to implan-t in the minds of all, that while a new climate of global co-operation indeed exists, this climate is irrelevant as far as the Arab conflict with Israel is concerned. AS they would have it, peace should reign the world over, but Israel and the Middle East peace process should enjoy no part in this global rejuvenation. Allow me to illustrate. In August, the Syrian Minister of Defence chose to declare: I, . . . we do want war with Israel, as it will do us good." (Al-Anba, 15 August 1989) (Mr. Bein, ISrad) Or, as a State-controlled Syrian newspaper so eloquently Put it: "On the threshold of the 21st century, such an . . . entity . . . should not continue to exist." (Al-Thawra, 1 August 1989) Meanwhile, the eminent statesman, Qaddafi, whose representative is the chief sponsor of the draft resolution before us today, goes even further in Various statements made by him in recent months: "we want destruction of the enemy." (E'BIS, 28 September 1989) "The Zionist entity must be removed." (The New York Times, 2 September 1989) "All of Palestine is for the Palestinians" (The New York Times, 2 September 1989) "We all must be extremist and choose violence against the Israelis to liberate Palestine." (EBIS, 26 September 1989) And finally, at the non-aligned Conference in Belgrade, Qaddafi outdid himself with the followinq statement: "If You do not want to give them Alsace and Lorraine, or the Baltic states . . . the Palestine people will continue to fight them and exterminate them. ‘I (5 September 1989) So spake Qaddafi. Only three days aqo, the Arab Group decided once again to challenge the credentials of the delegation of Israel when the report of the Credentials Committee comes up for approval in about 10 days. Ironically, the membership of Israel in this body dedicated to peace and coexistence is beinq challenqed by the very forces most opposed to peaceful aexistence. What is even more ironic is the demand for an international peace conference under the auspices of the united Nations which is made by the same forces that are seeking to expel 1srae1 from this Organization. i (Mr. E&in, Israel) t I The political warfare, exemplified by the challenge to Israel's credentials as i Well as by this draft resolution, is accompanied as always by escalating violence ' m the ground. The latest violence, however, has also been waged against the land i&elf and all that lives on it, the trees , wildlife and human beings. Cn Tbesday, 19 September, in one of the cruellest premeditated blows to the environment in recent years, the forests of Mount Carmel in Haifa, Israel's northern port, were turned into a charred, smouldering wasteland in a ferocious forest fire ignited by arson. Approximately 2,000 acres of the oldest and most beautiful forests, some 250,000 trees, were destroyed in the blaze. An Arab terrorist organization took credit for the arson, stating with glee that: "The fires in occupied Palestine were the worst in the history of the Jews." (Mr. Pein, Israel) That statement is of interest. It refers to Haifa - Haifa.' - as occupied Palestine and implies that the struggle is not only about Israel's borders but about its very existence, and not only against the Israelis but against the Jewish people. PI0 radio station broadcasts have long called for acts of arson inside Israel. They intensified their incitement in the two weeks preceding the blaze, calling on Palestinians to burn forests and fields, and including instructions on how to do it. "After the stcnes, the fire" was a slogan that appeared on the front cover of the official PIXI Fatah periodical, Falastin Al Thawra, on 26 June 1989. The cover page has a graphic colour photograph glorifying arson. The war ccnducted by the PLO is against the land itself, and is nothing but wild destruction for its own sake. These acts are all the more repulsive at a time of world-wide concern for the welfare of the environment. While Israel builds, they destroy; while Israel develops, they devastate; while Israel plants, they ignite fires; while Israel strives for peacer they strive to escalate violence. Pm terrorism waged against Israel continues. Since Arafat, on 14 December 1988, decided on a change of terminology, according to which, PLO acts of terrorism are not terrorism, Israel has withstood a wave of over 30 infiltration attempts by PLO squads. These attacks, including the launching of countless rounds of Wtyusha rockets, were aimed at our civilian communities. Some of the infiltration aand rocket attacks were instigated by Syria, in order to heat UP the Jordan-Israel border, Seventy-five Israelis have lost their lives in PKQ-instigated violence over the last two years. Meanwhile, Arafat's agents have dumped the mutilated bodies of more than 130 local Palestinians in the streets , mosques and schools in Judea, Samaria and (Mr. Bein, Israel) Gaza. These are the victims conveniently ignored by this draft resolution - those murdered for failing to toe the PLO line. The draft resolution before us calls for international protecticn for the Palestinian civilians. Protection from whom? Indeed, they need protection. Palestinians are being slain by PLO operatives in the most brutal ways, mnd on a daily basis. The nmjority of violent assaults in JUbar timaria and Gaza are committed by the PLO against Palestinians. International law places on Israel alone the responsibility to maintain public Order and safety in the administrated territories. This draft resolution ignores that reality and condemns Israel's attempts to quell the ViOlelCe. Yet it is a deeply biased condesmation. Conspicuously absent is any condermation whatsoever of the resort to violence by Palestinian extremists, let alone an appeal for mtual restraint or a call for dialogue. By attempting obsessively to censure Israel for every measure it takes, while continuing to ignore the intense violence that has necessitated these measures, this draft resolution anly distances peace. Despite the apathy cn the part of most Arab States, despite their POli tiCal warfare, which is intended to obstruct the peace process, and despite the escalating terror, Israel remains committed to the pursuit Of Pe3ce. Israel has launched a peace initiative comprising four interrelated pints. The initiative has served to revive the search for peace, as evidenced by the diplomatic Process that is in full swing. The four points call for: a common Israeli-Egyptian effort to build, CXJ the foundation of the Camp David Accords, a canprehensive peace for the Middle East) the 20 Arab States - all in a state of war with Israel - to Cease their hostility and begin a process of normalizing relations with Israeli an international effort to rehabilitate the Palestinian refugee camps in Judea, Samaria and Gaza; the Palestinians in the territories to cease the violence, ad (Mr. Rein, Israel) enter a process of free democratic elections to choose representatives to negotiate, with Israel, an interim agreement, to be followed by negotiations on a permanent settlement. The first point - Israeli-Egyptian efforts - is already being acted upon. The third - refugee rehabilitation - is widely recognised as crucial. The fourth - the concept of democratic elections - is strongly endorsed in the territories. mlY the second, which urges the participation of the Arab States, has remained out of reach. Yet an end to the state of belligerency is the linchpin of any peace process. Peace in our region ad an end to the suffering are clearly Cmtingmt upon the normalization of relations between Israel and its Arab neighbours. There is no alternative way to advance the Middle East peace process. Rejection of this initiative is tantamount to rejecting peace. This draft resolutictl, with all its vitriolic rhetoric, has absolutely nothing to contribute to the pursuit of peace in our region. On the contrary, it is intentionally harmful. It seems that some sponsors of the draft resolution would prefer to have the peace process destroyed like the charred forests of Mount Carmel.

The Assembly will naw consider the draft resolution contained in document A/44/L. Z/Rev .l.* * The President returned to the Chair. (The President) I remind delegations that, in accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats. The Asssembly will nm take a decision M draft resolution A/44/L.2/Rev.l. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, BeI.izer Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cameroon, Canada, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, costa Rica, C&e d'Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finlmd, France, Gabmr Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyanar Baitif Hmgary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaraguar Niger, Nigeria, Norway, man, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romaniar Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Ibme and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Lecne, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Tbgo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Wnion of Soviet Socialist Republics, hited Arab Emirates, united Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia, Zimbabwe Against% Israel, United States of America Abstaining: Antigua and Barbuda, El Salvador, Grenada, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Uruguay, Faire The draft resolution was a&pted by 140 votes to 2, with 6 abstentions. (resolution 44/2). The PREIDmT: f no& call on representatives who wish to explain their votes. Mr. TAKHTERAVANCHI (Islamic Republic of Iran): The Islamic Reublic of Iran voted in favour of the draft resolution to express its full support for the heroic uprising of the Palestinian people. We believe that the international community should make every effort to help the Palestinian people in their just cause in order to counter the oppressive measures of the ‘Zionist re’gime. Tc eradicate the root causes of the inhuman and brutal practices being imposed an the Palestinians international measures must be broadened in all Palestinian territories. The Islamic Republic of Iran does not recognize the Zionist entity and, since there are some connotations in the context of the resolution vis-h-vis that entity, my delegation wishes to state its reservations for the record. Mr. WATSON (United States of America) t The posi tion of the United States On the issues at stake here are well kncwn to all. We deplore all acts of violence ; from any quarter. We have repeatedly called for restraint by all parties, Israel and the Palestinians alike. We believe that Israel, as the occupying Power, has an obligaticn to comply wi tb the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention. We have criticized actions that are inconsistent with that Convention, while recognizing Israel’s responsibility to nmintain law and order in the occupied territories. We are aware of the difficult situation in Heit Sahour and the plight of its inhabi tan ts . We urge that the level of confrontation be lowered by all concerned and that the problems be resolved by non-violent means, including dialogue and negotiations. This resolution presents only a one-sided view of the difficult situation in the occupied territories. Like others adopted before by this body, the resolution includes sweeping condennation of Israeli policies and practices without regard to the complex political and security envircoment in the area or the Cycle of violence that has unfortunately taken so many Palestinian and Israeli lives. (Mr. Watson, United States) Resolutions incorporating one-sided and unbalanced rhetoric do not help to alleviate the conditions they purport to describe , nor do they make a practical contribution to resolving the underlying problems. Rather, such resolutions only deepen divisions, harden positions and pison the atmosphere. The united States and other interested parties are engaged in intensive efforts to Promote a process of dialogue between Israelis and Palestinians that could lead to elections in the occupied territories and a negotiated, comprehensive peace based on Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). This is what the General Assembly should be supporting , not unbalanced resolutions. The conflict and bloodshed in the occupied territories will not end as a result of continued military action , civilian violence or additional resolutions of this kind. Nor will such resolutions assure the legitimate political rights of the Palestinian people or the security of the State of Israel. This can be achieved only through dialogue leading to negotiated settlement agreed to by all the parties. Initiating and nurturing such a dialogue as a way to open negotiations between Palestinians and Israelis should remain the first priority Of all who are seriously interested in resolving this tragic conflict. For these reasons my Government has voted against the resolution considered today. Mr. FORTIER (Canada): My delegation voted this afternoon in favour of the draft resolution, which embodies a principle which the Government of Canada has fully and consistently supported. Canada believes that the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time Of War is a fundamental instrument of international law which must always be applied in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The continuing violations of the Convention by '&I@ Israeli occupation authorities and, in particular, the continuing violations of the (Mr. Fortier, Canada) human rights of the inhabitants of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are unacceptable and do not serve to enhance the prospects for peace. This said, however, my Goyernment regrets that the text of the resolution on which we have just voted contains certain other elements that are not helpful. In particular, the text fails to acknowledge that acts of provocation have taken place and that all the violence has not been one-sided. We also regret that the drafters, in several instances, chose to employ language that will not help to create the climate of goodwill needed to facilitate progress in the peace process. Mr. CISTERN&Z (Chile) (interpretation from Spanish): The delegation of Chile voted in favour of the draft resolution in document A/44/L.2/Revol, entitled "The uprising (intifadah) of the Palestinian people", in spite of the fact that we thought that this text did not preserve the necessary equity and balmce a resolution of this kind should eribody. Hence, the Chilean delegation wished to point out, as it did last year, that the text should have ccntained a genecalized condemnation of all acts of violence which have occurred in the territories that are the subject of the resolution, whatever the source of the violence, and should have appealed to all the parties concerned, without distinction, to refrain from recourse to violence in &fence of the principles, cbjectives 2nd interests they consider it their duty to preserve. Mr. GRSNDAL (Iceland): In explanation of Iceland's vote in favour of this resolution, we should like to refer to the statement cm the Arab-Israeli conflict made by the Foreign Minister of Iceland in his statement to the Assetily last Wednesday, 4 October. The Minister said that a comprehensive, just ad lasting solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict will. be found only if the parties manage to refrain from acts of violence and thus show their sincere Will to attain the goal of lasting peace. IsraelIs plan to hold elections in the occupied territories is an important step in the process of seeking a soluticn to the conflict. We welcome and support the lo-point plan presented recently by President Mubarak of Egypt to implement such elections. Egypt has ignited hope for a dialogue that might lift the Israeli-Palestinian conflict off the streets and onto the negotiating table. Mr. WILENSKI (Australia): Australia has voted in favour of the resolution on the uprisinq of the Palestinian people because it is consistent with the concern we have lonq expressed at the continued violence in the territories and the violation of human rights which have resulted from Israeli measures taken aqainst the intifadah. The Australian Foreign Minister, Senator Evans, in his address to this body yesterday said that Australia has consistently taken the position that the General Assembly, in the wordinq of its resolutions , should avoid provocative language which exacerbates differences and hinders peacemakinq rather than construCtiV@lY advancinq it, and there are aspects of this resolution which are less balanced than they miqht be in this respect. The situation in the occupied territories , especially in the liqht of current moves to a Middle East peace, requires an approach that seeks accomrrodation and an end to violence from all quarters. An understandinq of the situation in the occupied territories requires not only an appreciation of the leqitimite claims Of the Palestinian people to self-determination but also recognition of the historical situation in which Israel has found itself from its oriqinal establishment by decision of this Organization, of the pattern of conflict continuinq, over a period of 41 years and of the concern it has for its own security and survival so long as its riqht to exist within secure and recognized boundaries is not universally accepted. The great difficulty Israel faces in dealinq with the SitUatiOn in &f? occupied territories serves to reinforce the urqent need for a comprehensive settlement to the Arab-Israeli dispute, one which ensures Israel's right to exist within secure and recognized boundaries as well as the riqhts of the Palestinian people. We consider that such a settlement is best served by balanced and non-Provocative resolutions of this Assembly which reflect and constructively promote this objective. Mr. MONTtiO (Mexim) (interpretation from Spanish): My delegation voted in favour of the draft resolutiur, in keeping with the concern of my Gaternment over the need to protect human rights throughout the world. Our affirmative vote was based QI considerations of a humari tar ian nature. Mexico recognises the right of all the peoples of the region to live in peace within secure and recognized fran tiers , as established by Security Covlcil resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). There can be no denying that the question of Palestine is the essential compcnent of the Middle East ccnflict. A complete , just and lasting peace in the region can cnly be obtained through the complete exercise by the Palestinian people of their inalienable national rights.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote after the vote. Pursuant to resolution 3237 (XXIX) of 22 November 1974 and 43/177 of 15 December 1988, I now call cn the Head of the &server Delegation of Palestine. Mr . KADDO'LMI (Palestine) (interpretation from Arabic): I myself come from Jaffa. I lived there before Sharon and Begin came to Palestine from Polind, and I cannot forget how it was. We heard that Arens, the Foreign Minister of \ Israel, had invited the Arab countries to hold negotiations. Well, the r espcnse Of th e Arab coun tr ies was : The Foreign Minister of Palestine is here. HE! is the man directly concerned. Why was he - whom the issue principally concerns - not contacted directly by Israel? In fact, Israel has accustomed us to lies and pr evar ica ticn . It claims to be distressed about the trees which have been burned, but men are being murdered , children are being massacred, homes are being demolished, hundreds asd thousands of people are being sent bc prism. Does man exist for trees, or do trees exist for man? (Mr. Kaddoumi, Palestine) I extend my ccngratulations to Mr. Garba, a loyal son of Africa, on his el@CkiOtl to the presidency of the forty-fourth session of the General Assembly. We have long-stmding fraternal ad cultural bonds of friendship with Nigeria and its people. We are fully confident that, thanks to his wisdom and wide experience and his many other talents, the work of this session will be successful, md that the General Assembly will be able to attain the noble humanitarian objectives to which we all aspire. I take this opportunity to congratulate the General Assembly on the resolution it has adopted on'the intifadah, of our Palestinian people in our occupied territiries. This will undoubtedly strengthen the efforts of the international community to attain peace, end the occupation and eliminate injustice and oppression, so that all the peoples of the world can live in free&m, security and peace. (Mr. Kaddoumi, Palestine) Israeli practices against the Palestinian people over the many years since Israel came into being reaffirm the intentions of Israel , which wants to continue tiis occupation and expansion and refuses to countenance internaticnal efforts to establish a just peace. The Israeli entity owes its birth and its continuing existence to the Uhi ted Nations. 1t is astonishing that Israel today disavows this eganization and rejects its resolutions , although it was this very Organization that gave it birth and accepted it as a Member. fast: December the General Assembly unanimously endorsed the Palestinian peace ini tiative. That initiative was approved by the non-aligned Countries md supported by the European Community, the socialist countries, the Scandinavian countries and Japan in published statements. Israel md the thited States were the only two States not to respond to the international community's expression of its will. Those two countries had recourse to other methods with the purpose of diverting attention from the issue, disrupting the efforts of the international COWWnity to reach a balanced, just solution. Furthermore, the Uhited States, in its dialogue with the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), has avoided examination of the fundamental problems relating to the settlement of these matters, SO that Shamir's proposal for so-called elections to be held under occupation remains the only option. we have affirmed, as has the whole world, that a political settlement can be brought about only on the basis of United Nations resolutions and the principles Of international legitimacy. Free and democratic elections under neutral international supervisia could thus be held as a stage in a canprehensive integrated settlement that would include negotiations between the parties to the conflict, within the framework of an international peace conference in which the five permanent members of the Security Council would participate. (Mr. Kaddoumi, Palestine) However, Israel and the United States persist in ignoring these facts* The United States and Israel try to circumvent the PLO as the sole, legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. Hut there is no way to avoid negotiations with us. Israel is pursuing racist and Fascist practices against our people in the Palestinian occupied territories. These practices are designed to demoralize the people, put an end to the glorious intifadah and make their heinous occupation of our land permanent. Israel knows that it is quite incapable of achieving its aims, because the intifadah continues and has continued for more than 22 months. It has glorious achievements to its credit in spite of the toll of hundreds and hundreds of Palestinian martyrs, in spite of the incarceration of tens of thousands Of Palestinians in Nazi-style prisons and mass concentration camps, in spite of the thousands of wounded Israelis - not 75 in two years, as has been said - and in Spite of the imposition of lengthy blockades on towns, villages and camps. The intifadah continues in spite of the Israeli policy aimed at pillaging and reducing Palestinians to starvation as in the case of the practices of the occupation forces - as was recognized by the United States' representative - in Heit Sahour, which put up a great resistance. Only a few days ago the occupation authorities imposed a blockade on that town and pillaged citizens' homes, shops and factories, the 10s~ to the inhabitants being no less than S3 million. These practices cannot divert our people from their struggle, because it is aimed at throwing out the Israelis, putting an end to the occupation and exercizing their sovereignty over the territory of the independent Palestinian State, which is recognized by most of the States Members of this Organization. (Mr. Kaddoumi, Palestine) We are in favour of a just peace and of all the sincere wd well-intentioned efforts to bring about a peaceful settlement to the anflict in the Middle East, the core of which is the Palestinian cause. Rut we cannot tolerate prevarication, we cm-mot aCCePt manoeuvres so that the occupying authorities can gain time to pacify or quell the intifadah. Israel has but one choice; recognition of the national rights of the Palestinian people; recognition of the PLO, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, the organization that has every right to participate on an equal footing with all other parties to the conflict in all the stages Of any settlement. We have shown flexibility, but whoever thinks that our flexibility is weakness commits an error. We want to reaffirm confidently that our people is determined to COrItinue its struggle against the Israeli occupation until that occupation is eliminated. In this era of international de'tente we really want to respad sincerely to all attempts to find peaceful solutions to regional problems. We have affirmed that fact previously through our peaceful initiative adopted by the Palestine National Council in November 1988 in Algiers on the initiative that was announced by our brother Yasser Arafat in Geneva at the forty-third session of the General Assembly. In spite of Israeli prevarication and the procrastination of the Wited States, we are still completely ready to strengthen international efforts to bring about peace based on justice. In Conclusion, 'I reiterate, on behalf of the PLO, our most sincere thanks t0 all Member countries which voted in favour of draft resolution A/44/L*Wev.l! just adopted by the Assembly. Cur militant Palestinian people appreciates this manifestation of solidarity with it in its cause bid its just struggle* (Mr. Kaddoumi, Palestine) I take this opportunity also to convey my warmest thanks to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, for his continuing efforts to bring about justice md peace in the Middle East znd throughout the world.

We have heard the last speaker for this afternoon. I remind Members that, in accordance with General Assembly decision 34/4Olr statements in exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and 5 minutes for the second ad should be made by delegations from their seats. The Observer for the League of Arab States has requested to make a statement in reply. I call on him in accordance with General Assembly resolution 477 (WI of 1 Novetier 1950. I i Mr. MAKSOUD (League of Arab States): The League of Arab States had no intention of making a statement in reply because we consider that the 140 votes in favour of the resolution in themselves constitute a definitive reply to the Isra&li delegation. However, points have been introduced by the Israeli delegation which are not in any way germane to the content and substance of the resolution and the matters that motivated the sponsors in bringing it before the Assembly. First let me affirm that the Arab States are in a state of belligerency and that the gimmicks which the Israelis used in contacting the Permanent Missicns of the Arab States were employed on the assumption that the world comnunity does not mderstand the techniques of such acts , which are intended only to make points, as if the Israelis have a right to call the shots on hm to behave when its mn >ehaviour is in question. Especially when we see its marauders and mercenaries :hroughout the world and so much in evidence in Colombian drug trafficking, it annot give any lessons in civilized behaviour and attempted relationships. 1 Will put it very frankly: the Arab States are in a state of belligerency ith Israel because Israel remains an occupying Power in Arab territories, lcluding Palestinian territory. As long as that territory remains under xupation, and the Palestinian people are not able to exercise their right to slf-determination, including their right to structure and institutionalize their ~dependent State, the state of belligerency will continue= The object of this is to help to bring about a comprehensive, just peace. If ceased this state of belligerency while the rights of the Palestinians remained nied and the Arab territories in the Golan Heights and south Lebanon remained cupied we would be accepting negotiations as a form of dictatorship, because gotiations for peace under the duress of occupation constitute a violation of the sic national and human rights of the Palestinians and the sovereignty and rritctrial integrity of the Arab States. (Mr. Maksoud, League of Arab States) Therefore, the Israeli call to end belligerency was a trap and the fact that we did not fall into it constitutes, in Israeli opinion, a measure of continued belligerency and antagonism tc peace. A few days ago we discussed in the Arab Group, as we do every year, challenging the credentials of the Israeli delegation. This was not done to obstruct peace but to put on the historical record the fact that the credentials of the Israeli delegation emanate from occupied Jerusalem, whose occupation has repeatedly been declared null and void in a series of United Nations resolutions. Furthermore, for as long as Israel does not comply with the sum total of United Nations resolutions it behoves us to put on the historical record our objection to the credentials of the State of Israel in the Assembly. The Israeli representative started to say that although there is a global sense of co-operation we want to make the Arab-Israeli conflict an exception. I must answer very clearly that we have seen the growth of detente between the two super-Powers and we have seen hew many regional conflicts have been resolved in accordance with United Nations resolutions and through United Nations mechanisms. That is the reason for our insistence on using that atmosphere of global co-oJ?er ation to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict. That is what has led the Arab States and the great ruajority of States Members of the United Nations to call for the mechanism of an international conference to resolve all the issues arising from the Arab-Israeli conflict in accordance with United Nations resolutions. Our call for an international conference is our cormnitment to the global form of co-operation. Israel and South Africa alane defy United Nations resolutions, complain and introduce all sorts of gimmicks , such as the so-called elections that Mr. Shamir has proposed and that are intended exclusively to make a municipal matter of the (Mr. Maksoud, League of Arab States) recognised national rights of the Palestinian people. But we did not fal.1 into the trap of the so-Called elections I whereby the land of Palestine is not recognized as a land and the Palestinians as a nation , as a potential insti tu tionalized State. Israel, for the last 20 years and more, has not recognized that its presence in the West Bank, Gaza, Jerusalem and the Golan Heights constitutes occupation. The Israeli representative has said that under the Geneva Convention and international law the Israelis have the right to be exclusively repons ible for the so-called administered territories. Why does he not call them occupied territories when the Geneva Convention has clearly indicated that law and order and other measures Of security are to be administered in occupied territories? As long as Israel does not recognize that it is an occupying Power and maintains its right to annexation to ensure that it continues its hegemony in the region it is in total defiance of international law, the international Community md United Nations resolutions. In an attempt to be poetic the Israeli representative said that while Israel builds we, or the Palestinians, devastate. Of course Israel builds; it builds illegal settlements in the occupied territories to mutilate the national demographic culture of the Palestinian people. It destroys the homes of Palestinians, as it did in Beta and Beit Sahour only a few days ago. It plans settlementS in the occupied territories and ignites the fires of resistance to the occupation, Israel strives for peace, he says, It is a peace of the submission of the P@ople of Palestine, not a peace of equality and human dignity for the Palestinian people. His so-Called poetry should be applied in the jungles of the aicnist ideology that has maintained the exclusivist racist approach to the Palestinian people by not recognizing it. We hope that this statement in reply puts an end to the attempts at semantic acrobatics which Israel has been able to develop and maximize in order to divert the attention of the international community from its obvious violations of the human rights and territorial sovereignty of the Arab States.

I remind delegations that consideration of item 39 will be resumed at an appropriate time during this session. The meeting rose at 7.20 P.m.