S/35/PV.76 Security Council

Draft resolution 11, entitled "Financing of the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force", consists of parts A and B. 13. We shall first vote on draft resolution 11 A. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Bhutan, Bolivia, Brazil, Burma, Burundi, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Comoros, Denmark, Egypt, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gambia, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Saudi Ara- bia, 'Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of I The delegations of Ecuador, Equatorial Guinea, Malawi, Mali. Sri Lanka and Trinidad and Tobago subsequently informed the Secretariat that they wished to have their votes recorded as havinc been in favour of the draft resolution. 2 The delegation of Democratic Yemen subsequently informed the Secretariat that it wished to have its vote recorded as an abstention. 3 The delegations of Ecuador, Equatorial Guinea. Malawi and Malisubsequently informed the Secretariat that they wishedto have their votes recorded as having been in favour of the draft reso- lution. ..The delegation of Angola subsequently informed the Secre- tariat that it wished to have its vote recorded as an abstention. Question of Palestine: report of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People(continued)

During the two last sessions of the General Assembly, my delegation was right in affirming unequivocally that the Camp David agreements would lead to an impasse because they were based on the denial of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to its country and its homeland, on pressure on Arab sover- eignty, and on contempt for the international com- munity and its laws and organizations. 19. It is plain for all to see today that the Camp David path has led us to an impasse because the Arab- Zionist conflict has not been resolved and the rights of the Palestinian people have not been guaranteed. On the contrary, the struggle in the Middle East has become more complex and tense than it ever has been in the past as a result of the consolidation ofthe expan- sionist aggressive tendency of the Zionists, who con- sider those agreements as a recognition of and support for that expansionist aggressive tendency. 20. The fact that President Sadat of Egypt should have committed himself by signing the two agree- ments with the United States and the Zionist entity, has turned aside international and regional efforts to achieve genuine peace and restore to the Palestinian people its soil and its homeland. The question of Palestine has thus been relegated to the background. This is tantamount to a denial of the existence of a Palestinian people and the fact that the Palestine Liberation Organization [PLO] is the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. That has also led to the annexation of Arab Jerusalem by the Zionist entity and to an increase in the number of settlements in the occupied Arab territories. The Zionist entity has resorted to terrorizing and assassinating Palestinian citizens and their legitimate representatives in the occupied Arab territories, as was the case with mayors of the West Bank. 21. We had expected that reaction and we had affirmed that that would be the natural consequence of the Camp David agreements. At that time, it was normal to expect those two agreements to lead us to an impasse, for this alleged treatment has become a venom poisoning the wounds. 22. We wish to note here that President Carter of the United States, who planned these agreements and worked for their signature, was trying to achieve certain goals, including his own re-election. We now see that he himself has reached an impasse since the American people have refused to re-elect him. Al- though we do not wish here to speak about the internal "the declaration by the State of Israel that it 'un- resetvedly accepts the obligations of the United Nations Charter and undertakes to honour them from the day when it becomes a Member of the United Nations' ". The Assembly recalled "its.resolutions of 29 November 1947 and 11 De- cember 1948and taking note of the declarations and explanations made by the representative of the Government of Israel before the ad hoc Poiitical Committee in respect of the implementation of the said resolutions" . The two resolutions mentioned are resolutions 181 (II), on the plan to partition Palestine and the inter- nationalization of Jerusalem, and resolution 194 (Ill), on the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes. The declaration by the representative of Israel referred to the undertaking by Israel to im- plement those resolutions. 33. It is clear that, before considering and putting into effect the relevant Security Council recom- mendation, the General Assembly wanted to be sure that Israel would take a positive attitude towards the implementation of United Nations resolutions. 34. In view of the circumstances at the time when the Zionist entity was established and the position it has taken towards the Palestinian territories and the Palestinian people, as well as its position towards Jerusalem, which is not in accordance with the relevant United Nations resolutions, the General Assembly has the right, even the duty, to reconsider resolution 2'73 (Ill), since the Zionist entity has net honoured its commitments to the General Assembly. Under Articles to and 14 of the Charter, the General As- sembly must shoulder that responsibility. 35. Resolution ES-7/2 regarding the Palestinian cause proves without any doubt that the Palestinian people has general support. For, by that resolution, the Assembly reaffirmed that people's inalienable rights, including its right to self-determination and the establishment of an independent State. It is re- grettable that the delegations of the Western countries felt that they should abstain in the vote on that reso- lution, justifying that abstention by stating that the resolution did not mention recognition of the Zionist entity nor that entity's security. 36. I would remind representatives that we are gathered together here to assist a people that has been the victim of racist Zionist aggression to recover its rights; we are gathered together here to defend a people that has been expelled from its land and pre- vented from exercising its fundamental rights. 37. In resolution ES-7/3 the General Assembly requested the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People to study the reasons for the refusal to comply with the United Nations resolutions on the rights of the Palestinian people; the resolution is based on an initiative by the 48. In the view of the Community, renunciation of violence is a prerequisite for any constructive negotia- tion. We therefore appeal to the goodwillof all parties concerned to create the climate of confidence and understanding that is essential to the search for a just and equitable solution of the conflict. 49. This settlement clearly presupposes the support and contribution of all parties concerned. The prin- ciples that I have just enumerated apply to each of those parties without exception. Therefore, they

It is my distinct privilege, in this debate on the question of Palestine, to pay the highest tribute to the Chairman, Mr. Falilou Kane, Ambassador of Senegal, and to the other members of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People whose in- defatigable exertions and dedication towards the ful- filment of those natural rights have greatly heightened the awareness, and even the resolve, of the com- munity of nations to see that justice is done, notwith- standing seemingly insurmountable odds posed by those supportive ofone of the most galling and fraudu- lent conspiracies of all time. 53. I should like, at the same time, to express our deep appreciation to the Secretary-General, for placing the available resources of the relevant United Nations organs in the service of disseminating the truth about the Palestinian tragedy. 54. It is fitting that under the auspices of the Com- mittee, members of the community of nations should have observed the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, on Friday, 28 November. The occasion symbolized the consentient conscience of humanity, which in the long run will be far more lethal than all the weapons of destruction and the treachery, intrigue, falsehoods and bestial deeds which have been and continue to be committed against a Palestinian people who have long been left to fend for themselves against the mighty forces of darkness and inhumanity-but now no longer, because of an awakened humanity. 55. Why, since 1947,has 29 November been observed as the Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian people? That was a day of perfidy which will for ever be remembered as having triggered the catastrophe which befell the Palestinian people. It mayhave seemed then the most opportune moment to commit the crime and to do away with the victim, unlamented and un- mourned, through a massive barrage of distortions, fabrications, extraneous factors and brain-washing. The victim, although almost lethally wounded, stunned, staggering and in deep agony, survived the attempted murder and is struggling today, with the invaluable sup-port of the Assembly, to redeem his right to life in his homeland, undaunted by adversities which would have killed off weaker breeds. 56. Even though the Palestinian people, regardless of race or creed, had been pledged full independence in 1939 in the British White Paper, to take effect im- mediately after the war, they found themselves all of a sudden rushed to a then pro-Zionist, misguided and 57. Furthermore, the now universally accepted principle of self-determination, particularly em- phasized by President Woodrow Wilson, and the stress on the fundamental importance of the consent ofthe governed were totally discarded on 29 November 1947. Even the unauthorized author of the Balfour Declaration conceded: "So far as Palestine is con- cerned, the allied Powers have made no statement of fact which is not admittedly wrong". I need hardly add that the Arab world was then a partner in that allied bloc. Notwithstanding Israeli claims to legiti- macy on the basis of the secret Balfour Declaration of 1917, Britain itself acknowledged in 1939, as an authority stated that the most significant and incon- trovertible fact is, however, that by itself the Declara- tion was legally impotent, for Great Britain had no sovereign rights over Palestine, it had no proprietory interest, it had no authority to dispose of the land; the Declaration was merely a statement of British inten- tions and no more. 58. To cover up the legal and moral delinquency and to spur Zionist immigration, the myth was spread to an unknowing world that Pale~··n~ was "a land without a people, for a people w' a land"--this in spite of the fact that the would- ..migrants were happy citizens of many lands and that there were 800,000 Palestinian inhabitants in Palestine, a sub- stantial population for a small country three quarters of a century ago. 59. Many may have read Professor Arnold Toynbee, one of the greatest and wisest historians of all time. He wrote: "All through those 30 years, Britain admitted into Palestine, year by year, a quota of Jewish im- migrants that varied according to the strength of the respective pressures of the Arabs and Jews at the time. These immigrants could not have come in if they had not been shielded by British power. If Palestine had remained under Ottoman rule, or if it had become an independent Arab State in 1918, Jewish immigrants would never have been admitted into Palestine, in large enough numbers to enable them to overwhelm the Palestinian Arabs, in their own country. I said in large enough numbers be- cause on other grounds, even during the nineteenth century, the Palestinians always accepted any belonging to the Judaic faith who wished to live in Palestine. The reason why the State of Israel exists today, and why today 1,500,000 Palestinian Arabs are refugees"-they have since, ofcourse, increased to over 1,8oo,000-"is that for 30 years, Jewish "The second plan: action against the interference of the Syrians with fishing in Lake Tiberias. The third: if, owing to internal problems in Syria, Iraq intervened, we should advance militarily and realize a series of faits accomplis. The interesting conclu- sion from all this regards the direction in which the new Chief of Staff is thinking. I am very worried." These are the words of the late Mr. Moshe Sharett. They are not my words. 70. As for Lebanon, the catastrophe which has been afflicting this sister State had been planned in earnest as far back as 1954. We must have been living in a world of illusion. Ben-Gurion, at a meeting with Sharett, Lavon and Dayan, considered the dismem- berment of Lebanon as one of the central duties of their foreign policy, if not the central duty. In Ben- Gurion's words this meant that time, energy and means had to be invested in it and that it was neces- 71. The diary further states that according to Dayan, the only thing that was necessary was to find an officer, evenjust a major. I am sure that they could not have been thinking of Major Said Haddad because he was too young in 1954. It continues: "The plan was to hire a Lebanese officer who would agree to serve as a puppet so that the Israeli army would appear as responding to his appeal to liberate Lebanon from what it terms 'its Muslim oppressors' ." 72. The random examples which I have just cited straight from the horse's mouth show beyond any shadow of doubt who has been planning and perpe- trating aggression, subversion, destabilization and other fiendish deeds all the way from 1947-1948, and though the 1950s, and who is responsible for the avowed aggression which took place again in 1967, against three Arab countries, and which started with the destruction of the Egyptian air force. This aggres- sion against three States Members of the United Nations, was a deliberate instrument of policy and not, as they deceitfully claim, for reasons of so-called security. The Israelis went to the extent of com- mitting acts of sabotage in Egypt in 1955-there was the famous Lavon affair, for example-to frighten the United States, their benefactor, into not having any dealings with the Arab world. , 73. How is one to explain such mad behaviour:-and the word "mad" was used by the late Moshe Sharett. Perhaps a conversation between Ben-Gurion and Nahum Goldmann, head of the World Jewish Orga- nization, sheds some light. Excerpts from the con- versation were published in a Zionist magazine in the United States called Moment. I am grateful to my colleague Mr. Sayegh for bringing it to my attention. In its issue of September 1977, Volume 2, number 9, the magazine related Goldmann's interview with Ben-Gurion shortly before the latter's death. Gold- mann stated, inter alia, that he was once sitting with him until 3.00 in the morning; Ben-Gurrvi insisted on a heart-to-heart talk and insisted that not even his wife be present. Ben-Gurion is quoted as telling him: "If you ask me why I want arms and strength, it is simple. Why should the Arabs make peace with us? Are they crazy? If I were an Arab would I accept Israel?" Ben-Gurion added to Goldmann; "We came and stoletheircountry. Whyshouldthey make peace?" Goldmann said that he was shuddering, and asked Ben-Gurion how he saw the situation? Ben-Gurion replied. "In two or three months I will be 70. If you ask me if I will die and be buried in a Jewish State -I will live 10 more years, maybe 15-1 think yes. My son Amos will be 50 in October. If you ask me if he will die and be buried in a Jewish cemetery, he has at least a 50 per cent chance." Goldmann said he would never forget it. He then said to Ben-Gurion "How do you sleep at night, being the Prime Minister, with this prospect?'.' and Ben-Gurion replied "Who told you I sleep at night?" 81. Those peoples generated their own spiritual experiences and settled on Islam, Christianity and Judaism. They all lived side by side in complete amity as one people, regardless of ethnic origin or creed. Even during the short-lived Israeli hegemony some 3,000 years ago, the Israelis never achieved a mono- lithic or exclusive presence, but lived side by side and integrated with their neighbours. The present-day Zionists evidently have different ideas about co- existence. 82. What has been the fate of those Palestinian people over the past 30 years? I have told the Assembly who the Palestinian people are. Now what has been their fate? What the Palestinian people are being confronted with is a singularly unique and incom- parable combination of calamities inflicted concur- rently against their very existence as a people in their ancestral homeland. Conquest, occupation, brutal oppresion, colonialism, colonization, uprooting, confiscation, alienation, a devouring of their land, properties and resources and not least, a self-pro- claimed, self-confessed determination by their Zionist tormentors to pursue a ruthless and calculated process designed to achieve Palestinian national obliteration. This is no longer a well-kept conspiracy; it is an avowed objective, systematically implemented day in day out without apology or remorse. 83. In the face of such incredible illegality and inhu- manity, resolutions have proved to be of no avail. It is only if the community of nations acts in concert and with firmness that the Palestinian people will at long last be redeemed. Jordan, which unconditionally supports the just cause of the Palestinian people and is faithful to the Charter and to the cause of just and lasting peace, expresses once more its hope and its prayer that the United Nations will take whatever decisive action it deems necessary to bring this long agony to an end. I do not have to remind the Assem- bly what Articles of the Charter should be applied.

Our debate on the question of Palestine is taking place in the midst of a complex international situation and a grave situation now prevailing in the Middle East. Without any doubt the Palestinian problem is at the heart of the conflict in that region. The responsibility of the international community, represented by the United Nations, with regard to this problem is a responsibility that has been confirmed from the outset. Egypt has asked "Our brothers the Palestinian people have expe- rienced something that no other people in modem history has experienced-that is, its fundamental political rights have been denied. Some have gone so far as to deny the very existence of that people. The injustice done to the Palestinian people has been the cause of the wars and other tragedies that have devastated the Middle East region for more than 30 years, which have taken tens of thousands of lives and have destroyed enormous material resources that could have been used for the develop- ment and well-being of the peoples of the region. "The Palestinian cause has been foremost among the concerns ofthe people and Government ofEgypt ever since the Palestinian people was expelled from its homeland and deprived of its legitimate national rights. Egypt has been in the forefront of the Arab struggle to help the Palestinian people regain its inalienable rights, and above all its right to self- determination and to return to its homeland." 87. Egypt has discharged its national responsibilities towards our brothers the people of Palestine since its expulsion in 1948. It has led the struggle for the re- covery of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people. For more than 30 years Egypt has been the first in all international forums to ask that the Pa- lestinian people be allowed to exercise its legitimate inalienable rights, so that a just and lasting peace can be established in the Middle East, a peace that would preserve the right of all the peoples of the region to live in peace and security within their home- land free from any threat of aggression. It is within that framework that the policital initiatives of Egypt's diplomacy have been taken. Egypt has not hesitated for a moment to use its legitimate right of self-defence to break the plot designed to impose a fait accompli in order to prevent the Palestinian people from re- covering its rights. with~t~w ~srael's military government an~ c.ivil administration from the occupied Arab terntones; fourthly, to accept the establishment of an autonomous Palestinian national authority in the West Bank and in the Gaza Strip within the framework of provisional interim agreements, leading to the exercise by the Palestinian people of its legitimate and inalienable rights. 96. Egypt would never have taken that course of action without bearing in mind the following facts. First, the question of Palestine is at the very core of the Middle East conflict. Secondly, the question of Palestine is a complex one and has many ramifica- tions, and it is thus necessary that we take every opportunity that presents itself. Thirdly, there is a need for interim agreements to prepare the way for a final solution and put an end to the suffering of our Palestinian brothers in the occupied lands. Fourthly, Egypt does not speak on behalf of the Palestinian people, because it is not the role of Egypt or any other party to speak on behalf of that people, which must decide for itself on its destiny and its representatives. Fifthly, the last word must bespoken by the Palestinian people as regards both the form and the substance of its problems. 97. In his statement to the General Assembly at this session the Foreign Minister and Vice-Prime Minister of Egypt made our position clear as regards the efforts to be made towards a peaceful solution. He said: B First, the legitimate and inalienable right of the Palestinian people to exercise their right to self-deter- mination without external interference; in addition, the recognition of the right of the Palestinian people to establish their own independent State in Palestine as an undisputed right, equal to that of all peoples, to independence; secondly, any settlement should provide for the implementation of all the principles embodied in Security Council resolutions, and in particular resolution 242 (1967), which stipulates the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force and respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all States in the region; thirdly, the right and the obligation of the Palestinian people to participate in all the stages of negotiations leading to a just settlement; fourthly, the rejection of all the Israeli measures which are contrary to international law, the Charter and relevant resolutions of the United Nations and the binding international conventions, in particular those measures relative to the building of settle- ments in occupied territories; fifthly, the secur'ty of the area is indivisible and therefore does not relate to Israel alone; genuine security cannot be realized for one party at the expense of the security and rights of the others; and sixthly, the necessity that Israel immediately undertake certain confldence-building measures to bring about a climate of understanding and coexistence between the Palestinian and Israeli peoples, a climate that would, on the basis of inter- national legitimacy, pave the way towards friendly bet~een the Palestinian and Israeli .peoples qr- the basis of mutual respect and co-operation. . 99. Egypt vigorously condemns the measures,taken by Israel against the Palestinian people in the oc- cupied Palestinian territories, such as the creation of settlements and repression of freedom of expres- sion through barbarous means of expelling elected representatives of the Palestinian people. It goes without saying that such measures create obstacles to peace and the settlement of the problem. Such measures have repeatedly brought the peace negotia- tions to an impasse. 100. From this rostrum Egypt requests Israel to put an end to its illegaland inhumane practices, which in no way guarantee its security. 101. With regard to the question of Jerusalem-a city which occupies a special place in the three re- vealed religions-s-I should like once again very clearly and precisely to express Egypt's position on the matter. Arab Jerusalem is an integral part of the occupied West Bank. Arab Jerusalem must be restored to Arab sovereignty. In this connexion United Nations resolutions must be implemented. Any unilateral attempt by Israel aimed at changing the status of Jerusalem is rejected in substance and in form. Hence Egypt supports Security Council resolution 478 (1980) concerning Jerusalem, which represents inter- national unanimity. 102. Egypt supports the actions of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the. Pa- lestinian People. At the 75th meeting the Chairman of the Committee reviewed the efforts made by that Committee to preserve and strengthen the rights of the Palestinian people. Here I shall not go into the details of the Committee's report, but we do wish to stress the need to face up to the attempts of a minority which refuses peace and which attempts to divert the Committee from the course it has set for itself. That is why the Egyptian delegation has strong reservations on certain paragraphs of the report. 103. The question of Palestine is a highly important one for every citizen of Egypt. Egypt will not accept any alternative to the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, because that isa right recognized to all peoples and, hence, it cannot be denied to the Palestinian people. After all the sacrifices of the Egyptian people, it cannot accept any violation of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. Egypt has chosen the path of peace and will never change that decision. We shall pursue our efforts together with peace-loving countries to lay the foundations for a just and lasting peace in the Middle East for the benefitof the peoples of the region and the entire world. That peace can be established only if the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people are recognized and if that people recovers its freedom and independence. 104. Mr. NISIBORI (Japan): Only last July, at the seventh emergency special session, the international 108. In accordance with the basic position of the Government of Japan as I have just outlined it, Japan considers that the PLO represents the Palestinian people. Thus, in order to advance the cause of peace in the Middle East, Japan believes it essential that Israel and the PLO recognize each other's position and that the PLO participate in the peace process in the future. 109. In this connexion, I should like to point out that Japan is acutely aware of the importance of the Pa- lestine question, and has consistently maintained the position of recognizing the legitimate rights of the Pa- lestinian people. It has been making efforts to find ways of how best to contribute to the achievement of peace in the Middle East. These have included efforts to make known its fundamental position to the parties - involved and to deepen mutual understanding through dialogues with the PLO. 110. Moreover, as a concrete means to an early solution of the Palestine question, Japan believes it is important that momentum be maintained and that the search for ajust and lasting solution be continued. Thus, it is of the utmost importance that both Israel and the Palestinian people make further efforts to dispel mutual distrust and to foster a genuine will to coexist. Ill. Recognizing the need to create an atmosphere conducive to solving the question of Palestine, Japan is profoundly concerned about the recent examples of deterioration of the situation. The Knesset-the 132.. Thus, the General Assembly in resolution 34/65 B quite rightly rejected as devoid of validity the agreements and arrangements purporting to determine the future of the Palestinian people without the partici- pation of its legitimate representative, namely, PLO, agreements and arrangements that "ignore, infringe, violate or deny the inalienable rights of the Pales- tinian people... and which envisage and condone continued Israeli occupation". 133. In the last paragraph of the recommendations contained in its report at the present session, the Committee for the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People expresses the opinion that a wider understanding of thejust cause ofthe Palestinian people would be a major contribution towards a just solution of the question of Palestine [see A/35/35, para. 48]. As a member of the Committee, my delega- tion has no need to add that it subscribe" fully t~ that opinion, as well as to the other recommendations of the Committee approved and reaffirmed by the As- sembly every year since its thirty-first session, which we are still asking to see implemented. 134. In essence, those recommendations are' based on the notion that there can be no just and lasting peace in the Middle East so long as no solution has been found to the problem of Palestine, a solution based on the attainment of the Palestinian people's inalienable rights, including its right of return and its right to national independence and sovereignty in Palestine in conformity with the Charter. Those recommendations imply the integral and unconditional withdrawal of the Israeli occupation forces. 135. As to form, we insist that the PLO, the repre- sentative of the Palestinian people, be invited to participate in all efforts and all deliberations and conferences concerning the Middle East held under United Nations auspices on an equal footing with other parties. 136. In spite of the efforts of Israel and its allies to water down and contest the recommendations of the Committee, the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people are being ever more widely recognized within the international community, a support that consti- tutes a rejection of specific steps being taken towards any goalsother than the fullrecognition ofa sovereign, independent and distinct Palestinian nation. An almost universal consensus exists that could serve as a basis for a just and lasting solution to the question of Pa- lestine but a minority is preventing it from being translated into reality. 137. This minority introduces into the Organization an unjustified confrontation, opposing its diktat to the democratic will of the majority and blocking the normal functioning of the competent United Nations th~ collective conscience of humanity, exercises all its influence to stop the Security Council from being used for partisan political aims, and to enable that body fully to discharge its role as the ultimate guarantor of the observance of the Charter and of the implemen- tation of United Nations decisions. 140. It is not too early for the Council to show its determination to maintain the authority of this inter- national Organization towards countries such as Israel, which treat the United Nations with derision and simply pay no attention to appeals, recommenda- tions and injunctions directed to them. 141. The moment has come, it seems to us, to en- visage the proclamation, under Chapter VII, of sanc- tions against that country whose implementation of resolutions 465 (1980) and 478 (1980) adopted by the Security Council we are still awaiting. We cannot remain hesitant and indecisive, because if the United Nations is to collapse under the: weight of its own ineffectiveness and repeated failures, the Palestinian people, which are already the victim of injustice, will not be the only victim. In the future, all humanity will have to confront insecurity, disorder and injustice, which are the very negation of the principles that bring us together in this hall. 142. We wish once again to assure our brothers in Palestine of our solidarity with them and our con- tinued readiness to lend our modest support to the struggle that they are waging against foreign occupa- tion, oppression and injustice. Their fight is our fight, and it will end only with recovery of the rights of which they are now deprived. . 143. To Mr. Falilou Kane, who presided over the deliberations of the Committee for a year that was particularly fertile in events and who then brilliantly .directed certain initiatives of the Committee in the Security, Council and before the General Assembly as well, I should like to pay a tribute that has been more than deserved. Under his firm and courteous direction, the Committee broadened and deepened the support enjoyed by the Palestinian people at the international level, and we want to indicate our rec- ognition of that fact. 144. " Mr. MUNTASSER (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya) (interpretation from Arabic): It is a pleasure for me, at the outset, as we, discuss the report of the Com- ISZ. The General Assembly reaffirmed the inalien- able right of the Palestinian people to return to its homeland and to recover its goods in Palestine. It demanded its return'and reconfirmed the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in its resolution. That includes its right to self-determination without any foreign interference and its right to independence and national sovereignty. It again recognized the PLO as the sole representative of the Palestinian people and its right to participate on an equal footing in all efforts, discussions and conferences dealing with the question of Palestine and the Middle East, in the framework of the United Nations. 153. But what about the implementation of that resolution? It met tile same fate as other resolutions adopted by the United Nations concerning the rights of the Palestinian people. The Zionist entity com- pletely ignored the resolution, as confirmed by the reply of the Zionist entity to the Secretary-General in a report dated 1I November 1980 [A/35/6/8- S/14250). In the face of the Zionist entity's defiance of that resolution, the United Nations must assume its responsibilities and take a position consistent with the Charter, failing which, the Organization will open the way for its own break-up. 154. The United Nations, which has recognized the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, and has recognized the PLO as the legitimate represen- tative of that people, has an historical responsibility to redress its wrongs towards the Palestinian people following the Second World War, in circumstances with which we are all familiar. 155. The Zionist entity has not contented itself with disregarding the numerous resolutions of the 156. The Zionist entity could never have taken such a stand towards United Nations resolutions if it were not encouraged by certain imperialist Powers, headed by the United States. The alignment of the United States with the Zionist entity needs no further proof. Everyone knows that the United States gives total support and increasing assistance to the Zionist entity in all fields. The United States offers the most modem of weapons to the Zionist entity to be used against Arab peoples. Financial assistance granted by the United States Government to the Zionist entity has exceeded $10 billion during the past three years. That was confirmed by President Carter himself in an interview given on 25 February 1980. The United States Government did not content itself with giving vast financial support to the Zionist entity. It also opposes the right of the Palestinian people and refuses to recognize the PLO as the sole legitimate represen- tative of the Palestinian people, despite the fact that 110 States have extended that recognition. 157. The Security Council has examined the question of the exercise by the Palestinian people of its legiti- mate rights four times: in 1976, 1977, 1979 and in March and April 1980. Everyone knows that the Council has not been able to adopt the most minor draft resolution because of the use by the United States of its right of veto. The United States has on every occasion used its right of veto against draft resolutions concerning the rights of the Palestinian people, stating that those draft resolutions were not balanced. This is a startling position on the part of a permanent member of the Security Council which claims to be in favour of the strengthening of human rights throughout the world. That contradiction needs no comment. The position of the United States once again confirms the feeling of frustration of the third world because of the veto right which is used in the Security Council. It is high time for the majority of the third world States to raise their voices to demand that the voting system and the right of veto be changed. Otherwise, the international community will never be able to have the provisions of the Charter respected. 158. The United States does not confine itself to opposing all draft resolutions that are in favour of the rights of the Palestinian people. Through its officials the United States declares that it will oppose any draft resolution submitted in the Security Council that recognizes Palestinian rights. That was confirmed by President Carter on television in January 1980 when he said in the United Nations the United States had opposed any attempt to violate the sacred nature of Security Council resolution 242 (t967) or aimed at changing its present formulation, and that it could use the right ofveto to oppose any attempt to sabotage the Camp David agreements. He said that he would not hesitate to use the right of veto if necessary. 168. The Security Council has discussed various aspects of the Middle East question on many occa- sions, including this year, and has adopted resolutions condemning oppression and crimes on the part of the Israeli authorities against the Arab people of Palestine and its leaders and demanding that Israel liquidate its settlements in the occupied Arab territories and respect the historical character and status of Jeru- salem. Those resolutions confirm the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem. In particular, by its resolution 478 (1980) of 20 August 1980, the Security Council condemned Israel's adoption of legislative and administrative measures designed to change the status of Jerusalem. 169. Some months ago, in this very hall, the General Assembly adopted resolution ES-7/2 in which it demanded that Israel "withdraw completely and 172. Yes, limitlesspatronage and generous assistance is given by the United States to Israel, the ultimate aim of whose leaders in governing circles is the satis- faction of its unquenchable thirst for territorial expan- sion and whose method of achieving this is the con- tinued escalation of aggression. On the political'map of the world, as is well known, Israel has been in existence for just over three decades, and throughout all that time, in a planned and methodical way, it has been gnawing away bits of land from its Arab neigh- bours; and with each mouthful of Arab land it has become increasingly hungry and its appetite has thus become increasingly unappeasable. That aggressive course has lead Israel to the edge not only of political but even of financial bankruptcy. It is in fact livingon injections of dollars which are regularly administered fromoverseas at the expense ofthe Americantaxpayer. 173. According to official Israeli data mentioned by The New York Times on.12 October of this year, the gross national product of Israel is $15 billion per year, whereas its external debt in $19.2 billion. But all these enormous debts are willingly paid by the United States, and that enables Israel to make ends meet somehow or other to maintain a military machine which is very powerful for such a small country and thus to persist in its aggressive and expansionist policy against its Arab neighbours and continue to hold the Arab lands that were seized in 1967. 174. Some months ago Tel Aviv, here also following the course of escalation, sent Washington a record request for military assistance to the amount of $3 bil- lion for the current financial year. According to information in The New York Times on 21 November 176. At the same time the United States does every- thing to prevent the United Nations from adopting effective measures aimed at ending this unending tragedy of the Palestinian people. Starting in 1976, the United States has three times vetoed decisions con- firming the inalienable rights of the Arab people of Palestine, the latest occasion being on 30 April of this year. In the General Assembly, whenever questions of ensuring those rights come up, the American representatives refuse to support decisions aimed at that, describing General Assembly resolutions as one-sided, unrealistic and so on. At the present session of the General Assembly, in the Special Political Committee, when the question of UNRWA [item 53] and the report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories [item 57] have been discussed, the United' States, together with Israel, has generally voted against draft resolutions or has abstained. They cannot bring themselves even to recognize the right of the 4 million Palestinians to self-determination which, by the way, most of their NATO allies have felt compelled to do. 177. The fact that the Palestinianquestion and other elements of a Middle East settlement remain un- resolved in itself represents an explosive situation.