S/37/PV.112 Security Council

This morning the Assembly will resume its consideration of agenda item 31 in order to proceed to the vote on draft resolution A/37/L.45/Rev.I, which was circulated on 17 De- cember. 2. I call on the representative of Senegal to introduce the revised draft resolution. 3. Mr. SARRE (Senegal) (intelp,etation from French): I shall be very brief. Two weeks ago, in sub- mitting to the Assembly draft resolution A/37/L.45, I stressed, on behalfofthe Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, certain pre-conditions which should be met ifwe really want to bring about a just, stable and lasting peace for all the States in the region. These pre-conditions are, essentially, the participation of all interested parties in negotiations, respect for international laws and conventions with regard to occupation, withdrawal by Israel from all the occupied Arab territories and, finally, the role of the Security Council in the process of the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the occupied Arab territories. 4. As I pointed out at the 84th meeting, when I had the honour of introducing the report of the Committee on its activities in 1982 [A/37/35] , the various ap- proaches and initiatives in 1982 relating to the question ofPalestine were taken into account in the preparation of the draft resolution. It was on the basis of all those approaches and initiatives, and also on the basis of the relevant resolutions of the United Nations, that the Committee believed that it should prepare draft resolu- tion A/37/L.45. S. Since its submission, there have been negotiations with various parties concerned in the matter, and in the light of the views expressed by them, and particularly in the light of the primary objective, which is the restoration of peace in the Middle East, we have revised the draft resolution. The revised text is now before the Assembly in document A/37/L.45/Rev.I, .which wi~l be voted upon shortly. * Resumed from the 99th meeting. 1909 A/37/PV.II2 NEW YORK 6. In comparison with the earlier text, there are not any great changes. The substance remains the same as regards the pre-conditions which have to be met and the appropriate and adequate process which would enable all the parties conc.~rned to restrain their emotions and settle their differences once and for all, and attempt, in a spirit of peace and co-operation, to make joint efforts to bring about a final settlement of this question. 7. In comparison with the earlier text, the few changes relate to paragraph 6, under which the General Assembly would urgently call for the achievement of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace, based on the resolutions of the United Nations and under its auspices, in which all parties concerned, including the Palestine Liberation Organization [PLO], the repre- sentative of the Palestinian people, would participate on an equal footing. 8. On all the other points, the provisions in the revised draft resolution remain the same. 9. I am convinced that, following the broad con- sultations held with "all the parties concerned, this text which we have presented-with, as I have said, the sole objective of restoring peace and stability in the Middle East-will be widely supported by the Assembly. 10. The PRESIDENT: I remind representatives that the debate on this item was concluded at the 89th ple- nary meeting, on 2 December. 11. I shall therefore now call upon those representa- tives who wish to explain their vote before the voting. 12. I should like to remind the Assembly that under rule 88 of the rules of procedure of the General As- sembly ""the President shall not permit the proposer of a proposal or of an amendment to explain his vote on his own proposal or amendment": I also remind the Assembly that statements in explanation of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by repre- sentatives from their seats. 13. Mr. H(?jJERSHOLT (Denmark): I speak on behalf of the 10 member States of the European Com- munity in explanauon of their vote on draft resolution A/37/L.45/Rev.I. 14. In their common explanation of vote on the resolutions already adopted under this item, the Ten once more set out the principles which, in their view, provide the basis for a comprehensive, just and lasting settlement of the Arab-Israeli dispute, and made clear that, in taking a position on the resolutions presented, . they were guided by these principles, to which they all adhere. 15. Draft resolution A/37/L.45/Rev.I, like' General Assembly resolution 37/86 D already adopted, addresses itself to different important aspects of the

My delegation will vote in favour of draft resolution A/37/L.45/Rev.1. How- ever, the fourth preambular paragraph refers to the Hright of all States in the region to existence within internationally recognized boundaries". Now, a State, in terms of international law, envisages sovereignty within certain limited and recognized boundaries. It does not apply te an entity bent upon constant expan- sion at the expense of the rights of the States and the peoples of the region. The Zionist entity has officially rejected the boundaries delineated and recognized by the United Nations for the Jewish State in Palestine-

I apologize to the representa- tive ofIraq for interrupting him, but the representative ofIsrael wishes to speak on a point oforder, and I now call on him.

Mr. President, I would request that you instruct the representative of Iraq to refer to States Members of the Organization by their official designation.

I would request the repre- sentative of Iraq kindly to take that request into consideration.

I should like to draw to the attention of the Israeli representative-the Zionist representative-that what he claims to be the State of Israel claims boundaries and claims a capital which have not been recognized by the Assembly. He cannot. expect to have such an entity imposed upon the United Nations. The boundaries and the capital that it claims for itself have not been recognized by the Assembly. I would be grateful if he would listen and let me continue to explain why this applies to that entity.

I again call on the representa- tive of Israel on a point of order.

I was under the impressiot: that we were at the stage of explanations of vote. The representative of Iraq is apparently making a political statement after the debate has been concluded, and I would appreciate it if you, Mr. President, would kindly remind him of this fact.

I am sure that the repre- sentative of Iraq will take into consideration that we are in the process of explanations of vote. He may continue his statement.

The Zionist entity has officially rejected the boundaries delineated and recognized by the United Nations for the Jewish State in Palestine. Furthermore, to this day the Zionist entity has refused to define its boundaries. The inter- national community cannot extend recognition to a State which demands carte blanche recognition\- 38. As far as the United Nations is concerned, the Zionist entity's status in all the territories which it has seized in excess of that allotted to it in General As- sembly resolution 181 (II)-regardless of the time of their seizure-is that of a belligerent occupant, and it is a settled principle of the law of nations that a belligerent occupant does not acquire sovereignty over territory by the mere fact of occupation. Neither does the lapse of time legitimize Israel's occupation and annexation of territories in excess of those recog- nized by the United Nations. 39. We wish to place on record that our vote in favour of the draft resolution is to be construed within the context of the Final Declaration adopted on 9 Sep- tember 1982 by'the Twelfth Arab Summit Conference, held at Fez [A/37/696, annex].

The delegation of the Syrian Arab Republic will vote in favour of draft resolution A/37/L.45/Rev.l as a whole. "But our delegation wishes to place on record its opposition to the fourth preambular paragraph. If a separate vote were taken on that paragraph, our delegation would have no choice but to vote against it, since it does not include the

My delegation will vote in favour of draft resolution A/37/L.45/Rev.l because it places primary stress on basic principles con- cerning the question of Palestine, which is the core of the Middle East conflict. Most important among these principles is the affirmation of the inalienable national rights of the Palestinian people, including its rights to return to its homeland, to self-determination and to the establishment of an independent national State on its national soil, under the leadership of the PLO, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. The draft resolution also emphasizes the need for Israeli withdrawal from all the occupied Palestinian territories and condemns all the Israeli policies and practices in the occupied Arab and Palestinian terri- tories. Regarding the fourth preambular paragraph, my delegation would like to state that our vote does not in any way imply an implicit recognition of Israel, which was established through terrorism and aggres- sion and which continues to exist on the basis of expansionism and racism at the expense of the rights of the Palestinian people and the other Arab peoples.

As I had occasion to point out in the Assembly on 10 December [99th meeting] in explaining Israel's vote on the other resolutions adopted under this agenda item, the purpose of their sponsors. is to sabotage the 'peaceful solution of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Nowhere does this objective emerge more clearly than in the draft resolution before us today, which, like its companion resolutions adopted 10 days ago, constitutes a transparent attempt at 57, Mr. ABADA (Algeria) (interpretation from French): The Algerian delegation will vote in favour of draft resolution A/37/L.45/Rev.l, which is a balanced and compromise text, But it is clear that certain provisions of the draft resolution cannot be understood by my delegation except within the context of the position which Algeria has always taken on the Palestinian question. We would particularly like to make clear that the fourth preambular paragraph can only be interpreted within the strict contextofthe Final Declaration of the Twelfth Arab Summit Conference, held at Fez. Furthermore, we consider that, among the principles accepted by the international community with a view to a just and lasting solution to the ques- tion of Palestine, there must necessarily be the total and unconditional withdrawal from the Arab and .

The delegation of Uruguay voted in favour of draft resolution A/37/L.45/Rev.l, as it did on draft resolution A/37/L.47, on the understanding that both undoubtedly imply recognition of the right of the State of Israel to exist, like other States in the region, within secure and recognized boundaries, in accordance with Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). My Government considers that these are indispensable elements for any just solu- tion to the question of Palestine. 63. As for the future of the Palestinian people, we consider that the draft resolutions confirm its right to self-determination, which implies, if that is its sovereign decision, the establishment of an inde- pendent State in Palestine. 64. With respectto the representation ofthe Palestin- ian people, we repeat what has been stated on previous occasions-namely, that such representation should be decided by the Palestinian people in the exercise of its right to self-determination. 65. With regard to the measures recommended in paragraphs 4 and 5 of draft resolutjon A/37/L.47, they safeguard the competence of the Security Council in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

The delegation of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya did not participate in the voting on draft resolution A/37/L.45/Rev.1. This position stems from our firm support for the inalien- able rights of the Palestinian people.· 67. We feel that the draft resolution does not ensure all the rights of the Palestinian people to regain their usurped land and their right to self-determination. The position of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya with regard to some of the resolutions referred to in the draft resolution is well known. The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya objects to General Assembly resolutions 181 (11) and 194 (Ill). It has already explained its position with regard to those resolutions on more than one occasion. 68. The fourth preambular paragraph of the draft resolution implies indirect recognition of a racist, aggressive entity based on terrorism and the policy of expansionism. In addition to its warlike usurpation of Palestine, that entity has annexed other Arab terri- tories and is still committing acts of aggression, flouting the will of the international community, which has condemned and denounced its policy of aggres- sion. We feel that the Zionist entity is a racist entity like the racist entity in South Africa and that it must not be accorded any legitimacy. Palest~ne-principlesthat were emphasized at the Arab Summit Conference at Fez. 78. The PRESIDENT: I shall now call on repre- sentatives who have asked to be allowed to speak in exercise of their right of reply. I would remind mem- bers that, in accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, statements made in exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats. 79. Mr. AL-ZAHAWI (Iraq): The representative of the United States, in h~s explanation of vote, referred to the intervention an~ outrageous abuse by the repre- sentative of Iraq of our right to explain our vote. 80. The resort to such language shows the total bank- ruptcy of the arguments put forth by the representa- tive of the United States and his inability to refute what my delegation said in its statement. My delega- tion simply stated the fact that the United Nations has refused to extend any recognition to the boundaries the Zionist entity claims to itself, as the United Nations has indeed refused to extend recognition to the capitai that this entity claims to itself in illegally occupied Jerusalem. 81. I challenge the representative of the United States to refute those facts. The statement of that representative has only betrayed the fact that the United States in fact approves the expansionist designs of the Zionist entity and that the peace process it advocates should be regarded within this context. 82. Mr. LICHENSTEIN (United States of America): I just want to correct the record. I did not challenge the right of the representative of Iraq to explain his vote. Indeed, I find his explanations of vote endlessly fascinating and instructive. 83. What I did regard as worthy of comment was what I clearly described as his outrageous abuse of the patience and good will of this body. 84. Mr. EL-FATTAL (Syrian Arab Republic) (inter- pretation from Arabic): The delegation of the United States has no right to impose its views on the General Assembly. That delegation claims that there has been an abuse of the Assembly. My delegation does not share that view. 85. The PRESIDENT: In accordance with. General Assembly resolution 3237 (XXIX), of 22 November 1974, I call on the Observer of the Palestine Liberation Organization. 86. Mr. TERZI (Palestine L2Deration Organization): Once again, the General Assembly has expressed very clearly its determination to pursue a process for the attainment of genuine peace in the Middle East based on the total and unconditional withdrawal of Israel 76. My delegation has reservations, furthermore, in relation to some formulations 'Jf the text, such as paragraph 3. It must be pointed out, moreover, that elemerts of paragra"hs 4, 5 and, in its new version, paragraph 6, tend to prejucge the ontcome of negotia- tions between.the parties concerned. 77. Mr. AL-QASIMI (United Arab Emirates) (inter- pretation from Arabic): Nly delegation voted in favour of draft resolution A/37/L.45/Rev.l because it contains basic elements, including the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the necessity of Israeli withdrawal from aU the occupied Palestinian

The Assembly is resuming its consideration of agenda item 34 in order to take a decision on draft resolution A/37/L.48 and on the amendment thereto, contained in document A/37/L.55. 93. The Assembly will recall that the debate on this item was concluded at the 96th meeting, on 8 Decem- ber, and that the draft resolutions on the item were introduced at the 108th plenary meeting, on 16 De- cember. 94. I now call on the representative of Cuba, who wishes to make a statement in connection with draft resolution A/37/L.48. 95. Mr. ROA KOURI (Cuba) (interpretation from Spanish): As the President has just recalled, I had the honour, at the 108th meeting, to submit on behalf of their sponsors the draft resolutions on the situation in the Middle East. * Resumed from the l08th meeting.

As happened last year with regard to General Assembly resolution 36/226 A, the text of which was practically identical to'draft resolution A/37/L.48, my delegation will vote in favour of that draft resolution because we understand it to contain some of the ef'.ntial elements for a solution to the problem of the Middle East, in particular,the following. 103. The first element is the reaffirmation that the acquisition of territory by force is inadmissible under the Charter of the United Nations and the principles ofinternational law and, accordingly, the requirement that Israel withdraw from all the Arab territories occupied since 1967. 104. The second element is the reaffirmation that the question of Palestine is the core of the conflict in the Middle East, that no comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the region will be achieved without the full exercise by the Palestinian people of its inalienable national rights, and that all the parties to 105. The third element is the reiterated statement that Israel's decision to annex Jerusalem and the imposition of its laws, jurisdiction and ad]Ilinistration on the occupied Syrian Golan Heights are null and void. Those measures, in addition to lacking any validity, constitute, together with the continuation of the policy of establishing Jewish settlements jn the occupied territories and the intensification of the repression of the Arab population in them, a serious obstacle to the achievement of the comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the M~ddle East to which I have referred. 106. However, our affirmative vote does not mean· that my delegation regards draft resolution A/37/L.48 as being completely satisfactory. First, we should have liked it to contain explicit mention of the right of all States in the region, including Israel, to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries. As is known, that is one of the essential principles for the solution of the problem of the Middle East contained in Security Council resolution 242 (1%7). That prin- ciple has the full support of the Spanish Government. Secondly, my delegation does not agree with some of the assertions in draft resolution A(37/L.48; specifi- cally, we should like to record our serious reservations concerning paragraphs 9 and 10.

The delegation of Mexico will vote in favour of draft resolution A/37/L.48 in spite of our reservations about paragraphs 5 and 9. If either paragraph were voted on separately, the Mexican delegation would abstain.

Venezuela will vote in favour of draft resolution A/37/L.48, as orally amended. However, my delegation wishes to express reservations about the contents of paragraph 10 and other paragraphs, as the way in which they have been submitted does not contribute to the efforts to achieve ajust and lasting peace in the region, with recognition of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people. 109. M~. GONZALEZ (Chile) (interpretation from Spanish): The Chilean delegation will vote in favour of draft resolution A/37/L.48 because, in general, it meets the essential concerns of my country with regard to the situation in the Middle East. However9 we should like to state our reservations about some of the paragraphs in it which do not make an effective contribution to the search for a comprehensive, just and lasting solution to the problem ofthe Middle East. Thus, Chile does not agree with paragraph 9, since it prejUdges t1Je scope and effects of an agree~ent 9!1 co-operation between two Statfes. 110. We also have serious reservations about para- graph 10, which refers to the application of sanctions against a State Member of the United Nations, a matter which. as is well known, is within the exclusive competence ofthe Security Council. Thus, the General Assembly la~ks the competence to recommend this kind of measure. 119. My delegation wonders why this specific paragraph is so clear about where the withdrawal is to be from but not about where it is to be to. We there- fore believe that that should be clearly specified. That is, this operative paragraph should contain words indicating that the Zionist usurpers must withdraw from the land of Palestine and go back to their coun- tries of origin. 120. The' Government and people of the Islamic Republic of Iran do not recognize any occupation and maintain that the sovereignty of the State of Palestine must be restored over the totality of the Islamic terri- tory that is now occupied by that forgery known as Israel. J 121. Mr. MONTEIR (Portugal)(interprelationfrom French): My delegation has already had occasion to stress that as long as: there is a hope that efforts 122. Mr..CARR (Jamaica): My deiegation will vote in favour of draft resolution A/37/L.48, in conformity with my Government's support for all initiatives designed to achieve ajust, durabie and comprehensive settlement consistent with all the relevant resolu- tions of the Organization. 123. We "would, however, wish it to be understood that we do not share the view that the arrangement referred to in paragraph 9 would necessarily have an adverse effect upon efforts to achieve a just, compre- hensive and lasting peace in the Middle East or would necessarily threaten the security of the region.

The delegatioI) of Peru ".,.'ill vote in favour ofdraft resolution A/37/L.48. However, we shou'd like to register our objection regarding the meaning that might be attributed to paragraph 5-even in its new version-and to paragraph 9. In view of the gravity and the continued deterioration ofthe situation in the Middle East, it is our understanding that neither of those paragraphs disregard the importance of any effort or initiative for peace in that region and that explicit references to reiations among various States are based strictly upon the question of Palestine being the core issue, respect for the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the need to r~ject any policies or acts that would run counter to efforts to find,a lasting political settlement in the Middle Ea~t. 125. Finally, my delegation would have preferred the draft resolution to contain a specific reference to Security CouncH resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) because my country believes that those resolutions continue to provide a just and acceptable basis that would lead the part;ies involved in the conflict to an agreement.

The delegation of Eq,uatorial Guinea will vote in fa' Jur of draft resolu- tion A/37/L.48. However, weL ~ere to be separate votes on paragr~,phs 9 and 10, W( W'ould abstain, since they contain c~"~ain criteria ~h~t will not help in the settlement of the Middle East pr~blem.

My deiegation will VOle in favour of draft resolutton A/37/L.48. However, we should like it .to be noted that we have serious reservations concerning some of the paragraphs of the draft resolution, in particular paragraphs 5, 9 and 10.

Just as what passes fer a debate on the situation ir~ the Middle East is merely a regurgitation 9f the Assembly's one-sided delibera- tions on the qU\~stion of the Palestinian Arabs, so draft resolution A/37/L.48 is merely a synopsis and pot- pourri of previous anti-peace resolutions which were adopted under the present agenda item as well as under agenda item 31. 130. The language of the draft resolution follows and exacerbates the formulations which have been advanced year after year on .this item. This only goes to prove that its drafters have fallen captive to their own obsessions and slogans. 131. In the tradition of previous resolutions on this item, the draft resolution contradicts Security Council resolution 242 (1967) and the foundations on which it rests. That resolution was and remains the only agreed basis for a negotiated settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It was and remains on~ of the few pos~tive contributions which the Organization has made to the cause of :pea~e in the Middle East. The sponsors of the draft reso~ution before us appear to begrudge the Organizat~on that contribution, and hence seek to Jndermine it. Consequently, not only is any reference te resolution 242 (1967) conspicuousiy abser~t from the draft resolution before us, but<, as is well known, attempts made to have such a reference included in ~he text of the draf!" resolution-which, in any event, would have been symbolic and devoid of any ,)racc tkal meaning in view of the op~rative ~aragraphs of that draft resolution-were brusquely rejected. As a result, the amendment contained in document "";371 L.55 has ¥~9t been put to the vote. Moreov~r it must De clear to anyone familiar with resolution 242 (1967) and with the overall i\~xicon ,')f the Ar-c1b-Israeli con- flict that the provisions conu!ned in draft resolution A/31/L.48 are patently incompatible witl~ resolu- tion 242 (1967) and are c!~aTly designed to undermine that resolution. 132. Another typical example of the anti-peace leit~ motif which pervades the ~rnft resolution is to be found in the welcome extendeo. in it to the so-called Arab peace plan. It is no secret tDat that extraordinary plan-for which the '~elm "peace plan" is clearly a misnomer-does not even mention Israel and do~s not tenvisage any negotiations with IsraeL Instead, it lays down once again the well-known Arab demands which in themselves are incompatible with resolution 242 (1967) .and which would, if accepted by Israel, con- stitute a step towards the destruction of my country. The attainment of that goal remains the avowed objective of many, if not most, of the participants in the Fez Conference, as was demonstrated so clearly by the representatives of some of the participants in that Conference in their explanations of vote both before and after the voting that took place here earlier today on draft resolution A/37/L.45/Rev.l. 133. Israel will vote against draft resolution A/37/L.48. .

Inasmuch as the &poQsor of the amendment contained in document A/37/L.5S does not insist that it be put to a vote, the Assembly will now proceed to take a decision cn draft resolution A/371 Pakistan~ Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, PoJand, Qatar, Romania, Rwan la, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Ar~bia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname:, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Sovi(~t Sncialist Republic, Union of Soviet SociaHst Republics, United Arab Emiratefj, United Re~ublic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Up\per Volta, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia, Zimbabwe. Aliainst: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Fmnce, Germany, Federal Re~puh~=c of, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Lt:xembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. Abstaining: Antigua and Barouda, Austria, Baha- mas, Barbados, Burma, Dominican Republic, Fiji, Finland, Haiti, Ivory Coast, Japan, Malawi, Sweden, Uruguay, Zaire. The draft resolution, as orally amended, was adopted by / /3 votes to /7, with /5 abstentions (reso- lution 37//23 F). 135. The PRESIDENT: I shaH now call on those representatives who have asked to be allowed to explain their vote. 136. Mr. LICHENSTEIN (United States of Amer- ica): The United States takes this occasion to reaffirm its commitment to a just, lasting and comprehensive peace in the Middle East, within the framework established iJy Security Council resolutions 242 (1967)and 338 (1973). Those resolutions are at the core of President Reagan's peace initiatives of 1 Septem- ber2• They recognize th~ prerequisites ofany enduring settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict-namely, the right of all countries in the region to live in peace and security among their neighbours, and the creation of a process of negotiation within which the legitimate needs and rights of the Palestinian people will be met. Those are the essential foundations. Upon them were built the major milestones of the Camp David accords and the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, with United States participation and with whole-hearted United States support. ciples~ one of the most important of which is the inviolabiiity of a State's territorial integrity. 142. However, the draft resolution which has just been adopted contains terms that run counter to inter- national courtesy and distort its underlying principles, which is particularly regrettable to the Bolivian delega- tion because of the implications those terms could have. Bolivia considers that the United Nations, in compliance with its paramount role of preserving peace and promoting understanding among peoples, should act with impartiality and exercise its natural ability to deal with issues bearing on the basic role of the Organization.

Sweden abstained in the voting or draft resolution A/37/L.48 and Add.l for the same reasons that caused us to abstain on its predecessor resolutions in previous years, to which it is very similar. 144. Our main objection to the draft resolution is its severe lack of balance. We have especially strong reservations about paragraphs 9 and 10. Those paragraphs have been taken from resolution 36/226 A, but in the case of paragraph lOan addition has been made that seems to aim at curtailing the right of individuals to move to a country that is willing to receive them. 145. My Government opposes any such attempt at limiting individual rights.

I wish to explain the vote of my dele&ation on drat\ resolution A/371 151. My delegation undc::rstands paragraph 5 to include all agreements, including piecemeal agree- ments and the Camp David accords. l.32. Mr. AL-ALFI (Democratic Yemen) (intelpreta- tion from Arabic): My delegation voted in favour of draft resolution A/37/L.48 and Add.1. My delegation would like to emphasize that our vote is based on our understanding that paragraph 5 means primarily the rejection of the separate Camp David accords and the partial agreements from which they stem, as emphasized in the statement issued by the Nin"" Arab Summit Conference, held in Baghdad in 19783 , and other Arab summit conferences held since then, and also the decisions of the Sixth Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries, held in Havana in 19794. The Camp David accords, and the l~ubsequent partial treaty, violate the inalienable national rights of the Palestinian people, including NOTES I The delegation of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines subse- quently informed the Secretariat that it had intended to vote in favour of the draft resolution. 2 See Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents (Wash- ington, Government Printing Office, 1982), voJ. 18, No. 35, p. 1081. 3 See A/33/400. 4 See A/34/542.