S/PV.1509 Security Council

In accordance with the Council’s previous decisions, and with the consent of the members, I now propose to invite the representatives of Israel, the United Arab Republic and Indonesia to take places at the Council table in order to participate in the discussion of the question before the CounciI without the right to vote. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Y. Tekoah (Israel), Mr. A. El-Erian (United Arab Republic) and Mr. H. R. Abdulgani (Indonesia) took places at the Council table.

In accordance with the decision taken by the Council at its last meeting, the representatives of India and Somalia are also invited to participate in the debate on this item. I invite them to take the places reserved for them at the sides of the Council chamber since, as was already pointed out yesterday, there are unfortunately too few seats at the CounciI table to accommodate them there. At the invitation of the President, Mr. M. H. El-Farra (Jordan) took the place reserved for him.

The Security Council wilI now continue its consideration of the item before it, The first speaker on my list is the representative of Somalia, who has asked to speak in exercise of his right of reply. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to address the Council.

My delegation would have intervened yesterday to reply to the observations of the representative of Israel on my statement, but could not do so because of a procedural misunderstanding on the part of the Conference Services. 6. At the 1508th meeting, the representative of Israel referred to statements made by Sheikh Hilmi Al-Muhtasib, the leader of the Supreme Moslem Council, the body responsible for religious affairs and institutions in Jerusalem, The representative of Israel said he had already repo&d the principal points of the Sheikh’s statements in his intervention before the Council the previous day. Let us examine what the Israeli representative chose to cite from the statements of the Sheikh and what he chose to omit. 7. The Israeli representative selected from the many points raised in the Sheikh’s statements the fact that the She&h had declared that the fire at the Mosque had been caused by arson, and that a young man, whose nationality was not Palestinian, had been seen leaving the Mosque just before the fire broke out. The second point was that the Committee of which Sheikh Hihni is the Chairman had 8. I said that since the Israeli representative had found it convenient to cite from the statements of that distinguished religious leader, and since the Israeli delegation attached such importance and credibility to the statements of that eminent religious leader, we could perhaps compare and study some of the points that were contained in those statements. I shall now take some of the points which the Israeli representative considered it prudent to omit and contrast them with the information which the Israeli representative has given to the Council. 9. On the question of the fire, the Israeli representative claimed that it had been relatively small and that it had been extinguished within an hour. The statement of the Sheikh speaks about the ineffectiveness and slowness of the Israeli firemen in extinguishing the fire, and of the Israeli police preventing the population from helping in quelling the fire. 10. According to the statement of 30 August issued by the same distinguished religious leader, the municipality did not discharge its duties adequately or effectively in extinguishing the fire. According to the She&h, the fire was finally extinguished by Arab firemen brought all the way from Ramallah and Al Khalil. 11. With iespect to the question of excavations, in my statement yesterday I said that when excavations, whether for archaeological or religious purposes, are undertaken at the expense of desecrating the holy shrine of another faith, a situation of ominous proportions is created. 12. The representative of Israel stated that no archaeological excavations whatsoever had taken place in the Mosque compound and that the only excavations in the vicinity were works proceeding to the south of the area in accordance with projects basically approved by the Jordanian authorities and commenced before 1967. No doubt the representative of Jordan will be in a position to speak on that particular aspect. The duty of my delegation is to bring to the attention of the Council the views and feelings of the Moslem community in the Holy City as represented by the Supreme Moslem Council. 13. In his two statements on 21 and 30 August, 3heikh Hilmi, the Council’s President, declared to the press that the Israeli authorities were violating international law by permitting excavations beside the Al Aqsa Mosque and in Moslem properties, Furthermore that same Moslem Council demanded the cessation of all excavations around the precinct of the Al Haram Ash Sharif and demanded permission for members of the Arab Committee of Architects to investigate the excavations being carried out beneath the Silsileh Gate. Yesterday the Israeli representative denied this. 14. The Christian Science Monitor of 25 August 1969 has this to say: “Controversy over the supposed existence of the Jewish Temple of Solomon under the two mosques of Al Aqsa “In January 1968, the Ministry said it was carrying ou.t further digging in the cellar of the Mahkama or Moslem religious tribunal building, just north of the Wailing Wall, Moslem religious authorities have repeatedly protesteNd these excavations and the Israeli seizure and destructiollr of houses and other Moslem premises nearby.” 15. References to those excavations proceeding under the southern wall are contained in the following extract from The Jerusalem Post of 7 June 1968. Further mention of those excavations are also contained in reports published im The New York Times of 11 July and 15 August 1968. 1 shall just read one brief passage to show exactIy the kind of tension which is being created in the area as a result of those excavations, tension which cannot be ignored at th’e peril of peace. The report on excavations under thle southern wall carried out by Professor Mazar reads: “The main entrance to the temple, according to Josephus, was through a double gate in the centre of th’e southern wall. Professor Mazar hopes to expose this gstls as well, but if he does, he is likely to encounter resistam from the Moslem religious authorities in Jerusalem. They have already made a protest to the United Nations over his work at the western edge of the southern wall charging that it is Moslem property. “The double gate is an even more sensitive issue:, however, since it is beneath the silver-domed Al Aqsa Mosque, which is one of the most sacred mosques in Islam .” 16. What measures, one may ask, did the Israeli Government take to stop such excavations and allow the Arab Committee of Architects to investigate them? If these and other questions remain unanswered, then the responsibility of the Israeli Government is clear, 17. Mr. Tekoah also spoke of the desecration of the Holy Places and referred to the desecration of the Western Wall or the Wailing Wall. Mr. Tekoah seems to forget that thl: Western Wall is part of the Al Haram Ash Sharif and cannot therefore be desecrated by Moslems, It is the property of the Moslem Waqf. The Jewish community in Palestine did not claim any proprietorship to the wall or even to the pavement in front of it. This was very well documented in December 1930 in the report entitled “Report of the Commission appointed by His Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, with the approval of the Council of the League of Nations, to determine the rights and claims of Moslems and Jews irl connexion with the Western or Wailing Wall at Jerusalem”.i 1 London, His Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1931. [The report of the Commission was circulated in English only under the symbolI S/842l/Add.l dated 23 February 1968.1 19. The Council considered the whole area of the Al Haram Ash Sharif a closed precinct for everyone except Moslems at the times of prayers, only until further notice. Have the Israeli occupying forces complied with that request by the only legitimate body in Jerusalem? The Supreme Moslem Council has demanded the closure of the Maghrabi Gate and the delivery of its key to the Waqf Committee immediately. My delegation has the following questions in this respect: (1) Why, to begin with, did the Israeli authorities confiscate the key to one of the gates of the Al Aqsa Mosque? (2) By what legal right or moral code did the Israeli occupying authorities justify that conflscation? (3) In what “spirit”, to use the word of the Israeli representative, did the Israelis retain the key and for what purposes? 20. With respect to the desecration of Holy Places, in my statement yesterday I pointed out that Moslem holy shrines in Jerusalem were the concern not only of the Moslem inhabitants of that city, but of Moslem people throughout the world. This, in fact, is one of the main reasons why my delegation has been participating in the Council’s debate, The Israeli representative has attempted to convince the Council that his Government has taken all the necessary precautions to see that the Holy Shrines are protected from offensive or sacrilegious acts. Yet the Supreme Moslem Council of Jerusalem protested, in the press statement released by Sheikh Hilmi on 21 August, that the Israeli authorities have “desecrated our Holy Places many times most recently when a group of Israeli youths had led what was called a military parade inside the mosque zone”. 21. In my statement yesterday I said that the question of Al Aqsa was one which concerned Moslems throughout the world. The questions that I have directed to the representative of Israel require answers because the actions and attitudes adopted by the Israeli occupation authorities concerning Moslem shrines and the Moslem inhabitants of the occupied territories continue to cause grave concern to Moslems everywhere. The statements which the Israeli authorities have made with regard to the Al Aqsa fire and to the aims and objectives of Israel vis-h-vis the Mosque conflict with what has been reported in the intemationa1 press and with the statements made by that distinguished body most intimately concerned with the protection and preservation of Moslem shrines in the Holy City-the Supreme Moslem Council of Jerusalem. There are grave doubts in the minds of all Moslems, and only an impartial investigation as suggested by the Supreme Moslem Council will remove those doubts. 24. It is also a pleasant duty to pay a special tribute to your predecessor, Ambassador Pin&, the Permanent Representative of Spain. 25. Just before I came to this Council, I received a cable. I thought it contained instructions from my Government but I discovered that the contents were different. The cable is signed by “The Jewish Defence League”; it contains the following words: “Hold you directly responsible for any anti-Jewish terror acts. In the event of such acts, consider you legitimate target for deserved punishment.” 26. The same Jewish Defence League has appeared on television in New York. The group appeared in uniform with their leader on 4 September. It is surprising to receive threats by telegram, a communication medium. Previously we have received letters from a group called the “Minutemen”, Telephone calls are received in our offices, and my office in particular, every morning and every afternoon. 27. If I refer to this abnormal situation facing members of the United Nations here, it is not only to remind the Council of the life we are living here, not only to mention the atmosphere in which we are living, but also to remind every single person around this table of our people within the occupied areas; of the captives of the Israelis, whether in Gaza or in the West Bank or in the Golan heights or in Sinai. 28. At a time when Jordan has been deeply concerned and worried about the ever-increasing dangers in our area resulting from the Israeli occupation and Israel’s continued refusal to comply with the Security Council’s resolutions on JerusaIem, the Israelis have revealed more of their motives and aggressive designs. Time and again we have spoken of Israeli expansion. We have explained the steps taken by Israel to bring about the complete annexation of Jerusalem and thus change the face and character of the Holy City. 29. Today, my delegation joins the 24 other members, representing 750 million adherents of the Moslem faith, which requested a meeting to consider another, more serious tragedy, namely, that of the Al Aqsa Mosque, and the fire which severely destroyed that historic Holy Place on the morning of 21 August 1969. 30. I, myself, was in the Middle East area. I was in Jordan when that horrible arson was committed. I have witnessed the horror and dismay of the Arab Qeoples, Christians and Moslems alike. I have also read the communique of the 31. The Israelis attempted to decry the gravity of the’ matter at the time, when they not only delayed in reaching the burning Mosque but prevented local inhabitants from helping to put out the fire. They later imposed a curfew on the Old City of Jerusalem, so that no one could either help or witness the extent of Israeli efficiency, or rather inefficiency, in extinguishing the fire. 32. The Israeli ,authorities introduced more than one explanation for the start of the fire .and at last charged an Australian with the arson. According to news that originated from Israeli sources, the Australian suspect is a friend of Israel who was brought by the Jewish Agency to work for Israel. The Jewish Agency arranged for this Australian to work in a Kibbutz for some months, so that he could learn the Hebrew language and acquire more of the Zionist teachings. The report published in The Jerusalem Post-an Israeli semi-official newspaper-of 25 August 1969 concerning the life of this Australian in the Kibbutz and his dreams of building Solomon’s Tempie casts doubts on the case and adds to the fears and worries of the Moslems about their holy shrines; it also throws light on who is the criminal and who is the accomplice. 33. We have not forgotten statements in the early days of the 5 June 1967 Israeli occupation about the future of Jerusalem, nor have we forgotten the report of Menahem Borsh, which was published in Yadihote Ahronote of 18 August 1969, only three days before the burning of the Mosque, emphasizing that the Temple would be built anew in the same spot that “strangers tried to seize”, The desecration of this holy Mosque by a group of the Bitar members only three days before the arson is a living example of Israeli motives and designs. 34. What happened on 21 August 1969 was not only a premeditated burning of a sacred monument but also an open defiance of our people’s feelings and heritage and a cause of deep concern to all peace-loving States. As a result of that criminal act, tension has been escalated in our area, outrage has reached its peak, and there is a situation seriously endangering international peace and security. As I shall now show, the responsibility for the act of arson lies squarely with the Israeli occupiers, who are intoxicated by their military victory and are adamantly proceeding with their illegal plans of expansion, in complete disregard of the will of the international community. 3.5. Let us see what did and what did not happen on Thursday, 21 August 1969. In the early hours of that morning fire broke out in the Al Aqsa Mosque. Moslems praying in the Mosque and others rushed to the scene to remove some of the valuables in the Mosque and extinguish the fire. The Jordanian fire brigade in Jerusalem was called. Moslem religious leaders as well as Jordanian officials within the Israeli-occupied area came to the scene. 36. To the outside world news of the fire came in Arabic from Radio Israel at 8.30 a.m., that is, one hour and ten 37. That same afternoon the commander of the fire brigades told the journalists that the pumping of water was working swiftly and in an orderly manner at the beginning but that eight minutes later something happened-the pumping of the water was interrupted and could not work as before, This is something for every member to ponder. The commander of the tire brigades reported that it had not been indicated whether that was due to a technical mishap or to a premeditated act. It must be remembered, however, that after the Israeli occupation the water system in the city was connected tc the western part so thal Ihe Israelis would be in full control of the water system, This, among other things, elicited sharp criticism and apprehension from Arab Mayor Rouhi ElKhatib and the former President of the Moslem Council, Abdul Hamid Es-Sayeh, both of whom were expelled from Jerusalem to the East Bank of Jordan. 38. What explanations did the Israelis give for the fire? The first version came from Abraham Libermann, the commander of the Israeli brigade, who thought that the fire was caused by “a spark from a welding machine”. That was the first allegation, the first attempt. Later, having discovered the unfeasibility of such an explanation, Israeli officials and Radio Israel unequivocally declared that the fire had broken out because of an electrical contact. That Is picture number two. The Government of Israel endo:rsed and adhered to that second version and took it, as appemd then, as the final version. As some of the truth began to unfold, and as the Supreme Moslem Council, with the help of individual eye-witnesses who were present in the Mosque, began to pronounce their observations and findings to the world, the Israeli Government had to abandon its second version of the cause of the fire and pass to the third. 39. Israel by then had no choice but to assume a different role altogether. It appeared under the guise of protector cf the Holy Places. Therefore, a certain Dennis Rohan had to 41. Question number one: why did the Israeli officials and Radio Israel, before any on-the-spot investigation was carried out and immediately after the fire broke out, attribute the act of arson to an electrical contact? 42. Question number two: where were the Israeli fire brigades when the fire continued to spread, while the Jordanian fire brigades, which had come a long way, were at the scene? Were the Israeli fire brigades of Jerusalem deliberately delayed, or notified too late? 43. Question number three: why was the pumped water suddenly interrupted? Was that a coincidence, or a prearranged and premeditated act by the authority controlling the water units? 44. Question number four: why does Israel insist on keeping the key to one of the main gateways of Al Aqsa; ’ and what part did that key play in the events? What was the role of that key-in the hands of the Israelis-the key to one of the main gateways to the holy Al Aqsa? An honest answer-if we get an honest answer from the Israelis-may be the key to the whole problem. 45. Question number five: when and why did Israel abandon its first and second versions of the events and instead put on the cloak of protector of the Holy Places? 46. And my last question: who is Dennis Rohan; and was he acting on his own initiative? d 47. It is not a secret that the Israeli Government, as well as different Zionist organizations and bodies, have been changing the character and status of Jerusalem, against the wishes and will of its people, in open defiance of the United Nations and in clear disregard of the two decisions [resolutions 252 (1968) and 267 (196911 unanimousIy adopted by this most important body. Time and again, my delegation has warned against such plans, and time and again the Security Council, as well as the General Assembly, has taken a firm stand against such Israeli measures. However, Israel, undeterred, goes on with its plans. 48. The Aqsa event cannot and should not be viewed hy itself or as an isolated act, The Al Mosque is a part of the Old City that has been the subject of demolition and bulldozing, and its inhabitants forcibly evicted, to make room for a plaza where Israelis could pray. According to an interview with his foster-parent-an Israeli in Kibbutz Mishmar Hasharon-published in The Jerusalem Post of Monday, 25 August 1969, four days after that act, Dennis 49. The question arises: was Rohan strange or eccentric? It depends. If we are to judge his thinking within the context of Zionist teachings and indoctrinations that draw on fanciful biblical interpretations-and he lived in the kibbutz for over two and a half months-then Rohan is as normal as any other Zionist in Israel. For, have not the Zionists and the Zionist movement exploited religion for political and secular goals? Was not the creation of the State of Israel in Palestine and the very idea of a Jewish State there based on religious and Messianic interpreta. tions? Have they not continued to foster such religious fanaticism, be it in Al Khalil (Hebron), and to promote the creation of new Israeli settlements on our lands or in other parts of the occupied territories, especially in Jerusalem? Al Aqsa is only a part-though a very venerated part-of P rusalem; and Jerusalem is only a part of the occupied erritories. 50. Was Rohan, after all, acting on his own initiative? Was he not brought to Israel and sponsored by the Jewish Agency? Where did he get all the money which he offered to the guards of Al Aqsa on the morning of the fire and which the guards declined to take? According to The Times of London, of 12 September 1969: “On Rohan’s way out he offered each $110 sterling but they declined, Mr. Hilwani said.” The She&h, thinking there must be something wrong, then entered into the Mosque and rushed out crying: “They have burnt the pulpit”, According to the same semi-official Israeli newspaper, The Jerusalem Post of 25 August 1969, Rohan’s foster-parents in the kibbutz said: “He never appeared to be short of money to us.” 51. It is not only what happened to the Al Aqsa Mosque and what has been going on in Jerusalem that arouse the fears and apprehension of 750 million Moslems and other peace-loving peoples in the world, but what the future holds for Jerusalem and other areas under Israeli occupation. Only one conclusion can be reached: the only insurance for the safety and integrity of the Holy Places, as well as for other places, is Israeli withdrawal. 52. I now come to what I consider the most serious aspect of Mr. Tekoah’s statement. Mr. Tekoah told us that the criminal had been arrested, that a tribunal had been constituted, that Rohan would soon be tried and if convicted would be punished in accordance with the law. But the question arises, which law is he referring to? It is the same Israeli law which you around this table, all of YOU, without exception, have declared invalid. The law on which the charges are based and the law creating the so-called investigations committee are laws which this important body has repeatedly declared invalid. The Supreme Moslem Council in Jerusalem has also rejected such laws and committees. They are the laws you called upon Israel to rescind. In the words of the Security Council: “in the event 0f.a negative response or no response . . . the Security 54. The Israeli representative should not be permitted to create this confusion. He is telling you: “Everything is taken care of; there is now a court, a commission and a fair trial.” But once more I beg you to ponder one thing: which laws is he referring to? Not the laws a military occupier under the Geneva Convention is requested to enforce. Definitely not the laws of Jordan. I must re-emphasize here that the Israelis are invoking the very same laws you declared null and void, the very same regulations and laws you rescinded. Israel said openly that the charge sheet now being prepared against Rohan is based on sections 317 to 322 of the Criminal Law Ordinance. The Israelis further stressed that the Commission of Inquiry investigating the cause of the fire at Al Aqsa was the first commission to have been established under the 30 December 1968 Inquiry Commission Law, Both are Israeli, both were declared invalid by the Security Council, both are illegal and now Israel comes in this sneaky way, through the window, to have the Security Council validate what the Council has expressly declared to be invalid. 55. With all due respect, I suggest that Mr. Tekoah is putting forth his argument in a very misleading way, I would say that it is a malicious way, because while he knows that these laws were declared illegal he tHes, through the back door, to have the Council validate them, 56. All of the foregoing evidence, together with Israeli behaviour, throws much light on the question. This emphasizes the need for firm action to put an end to the tragic situation in Jerusalem. Palliative measures will not remedy the situation. They will not put an end to the bitter feelings aroused in the Moslem world and, indeed, all over the world. 57. Mr. President, you and the members of the Council have heard Mr. Tekoah speak about how the Jews and Arabs strove side by side to overcome and extinguish the fire and about the spirit of co-operation among them. But I have already shown what part the Israelis played in extinguishing the fire and the kind of co-operation they rendered. Be that as it may, honest and genuine co-operation is based on things which Mr. Tekoah has failed to see. 58. Why should not peace and justice be the basis for co-operation? Why should not the Charter of the United Nations and the resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly be the foundations for such co-operation? Israel should not expect the United Nations to endorse crime as a legitimate means of co-operation between Arab and Israeli. Otherwise more crimes will be committed by Israel. Bloodshed will not open the way to peace in the land of peace. The Israelis are in a position to 59. We offer our full co-operation to implement all Security Council resolutions, all General Assembly resolutions and all United Nations resolutions. Let Israel show th: same desire by deeds, not words. That would bring genuine peace. 60. This is the first time that I have spoken from this side of the Council table. Mr. Tekoah is not sitting far from here. He is near, but he does not hear.

I thank the representative of Jordan for the kind words he ha;s addressed to me. 62. In connexion with the reference made by the representative of Jordan in his statement today to terrorist threatls against the representatives of Member States of the United Nations, I consider it necessary, in my capacity as Presiden,t of the Security Council, to state that the question raised by the representative of Jordan affects the common interests of all Member States. 63. I consider it necessary to draw the attention of the Secretary-General to this matter and to ask him to study it together with the representative of the United States so that the necessary measures can be taken. 64. In conclusion, in view of the name of the next speaker on my list, if the representative of Jordan considers ii: advisable to remain at the Council table, he may do so. 65. The next speaker on my list is the representative of Israel. I now call on him,

I should like to reassure the representative of Jordan that not only have I listened to and heard what he said, but that I was reminded, while: listening to his statement, of an old Jewish rabbinical saying: “When Falsehood saw he had no legs to stand on, he made himself wings,” It seems that the wings the representative of Jordan made for the falsehoods he chose to incorporate in his statement today are somewhat like the wings of Egyptian airplanes; they rarely stay aloft for long, 67. For example, the representative of Jordan found ilt necessary and appropriate, to refer to the cause of the fire. Several hours after the outbreak of the fire on 21 August, the Jordanian Governmental television and radio informed the Arab world that the Israeli Cabinet had met in a special session, had deliberated and had decided on the burning of the Mosque. Now that the entire world has become fully cognizant of the facts and it is difficult for even the; representative of Jordan to deny that it was with the assistance of the Moslem authorities in Jerusalem that al suspect has been arrested and charged with arson, the representative of Jordan comes before the Security Council 69. The Jordanian representative has also voiced the slanderous libel that the Israeli authorities were slow in fighting the blaze, whereas, unlike the fire at the Holy Sepulchre in 1949, which it took the Jordanian authorities 24 hours to extinguish, this time the fire at Al Aqsa was extinguished after one hour and the firemen were busy thereafter only with the embers. He went so far as to assert that the Israeli authorities cut the water pipes. I do not think allegations of this kind even deserve a reply. 70. I shall confine myself to quoting from the Catholic weekly The Tablet of 30 August: “It is ominous that before any evidence was produced, the first reaction of some Arabs was to lay the blame on the Israeli authorities. Even now, when these fantastic accusations have been abandoned, the Arabs are still accusing the Israeli authorities of incompetence in their fire-fighting, although since Arabs themselves cut the pipes rather than allow infidels into the Holy Place, it is not easy to make much sense of such an accusation. It merely proves the sad and self-evident truth that when tempers are inflamed, any accusation will be believed and issues that in a calmer atmosphere could be easily resolved become insoluble.” The credibility of the other allegations by the Jordanian representative is not much greater. 71. I deem it appropriate at this stage to convey to the Council the principal charges laid against the accused, Michael Rohan, suspected of having committed the arson at Al Aqsa on 21 August. The indictment is in two parts, one dealing with an attempted arson on 11 August 1969, and the other with the arson of 21 August. It points out that Rohan acted out of extreme religious impulses. Both parts of the indictment describe in detail the meticulous planning, the acquisition of the equipment and materials for purposes of arson, and the preliminary reconnaissances that he made in the Al Aqsa Mosque. 72. After his unsuccessful first attempt, Rohan executed detailed reconnaissances almost every day in order to find the most vulnerable part of the Mosque, and then he decided to set fire to the steps of the wooden pulpit, the minbar. 73. The indictment mentions that on the first occasion traces of the attempted arson were left, but the case was 74. The case being now sub judice, I will say nothing more about it. 7.5. I wish to reiterate that my Government would have no objection to the attendance at the trial, or to the visit to the Mosque, of anyone wishing to form Iris own first-hand impressions. 76. At the 1507th meeting of the Council, the representative of Pakistan quoted from the Hebrew Bible. “Pray for the peace of Jerusalem”, says the Book of Psalms. From time immemorial, day after day, three times a day and in grace after every meal, Jews the world over pray for Jerusalem and for the peace of Jerusalem. It is the peace of Jerusalem that is uppermost in our minds today. 77. It was not of peace, unfortunately, that the bellicose statements we heard today spoke. They were echoing the calls to war that have been voiced in ever-growing intensity in the Arab capitals since 21 August. They were echoing President Nasser’s pronouncement of 23 August: “Our eyes are on Al Aqsa. . . . The next war will not be a war of liberation but a war of purification.” A war of purification-such as the Mongolian massacres promised by the Arab League when its member States invaded Israel in 1948; purification of the land from Jews, as in Hitler’s macabre slogan Judenrein-purified of Jews. 78. We shall not give up hope, however. We still pray that the sacredness and serenity of Jerusalem and its Holy Places will not be disturbed by the generation of a controversial atmosphere on a matter which should unite all men of sincere faith and goodwill. I shall leave it, therefore, to world opinion to pronounce judgement on the deplorable incitement and absurd accusations directed against Israel. 79. Rarely has ‘world opinion been more united and more outspoken. The Committee for Human Rights of neutral Switzerland issued a statement on 24 August in which it declared, inter alia: “A short while ago, two representatives of this Committee visited Holy Places in East Jerusalem, particularly the Mosques Omar and Al Aqsa. They personally witnessed the care of the Israeli authorities to assure free access to Holy Places for people of all religions. The testimony Of “The Arab accusation has no foundation in fact. It was voiced before the cause of the fire had been investigated. These accusations serve as evidence of the fact that Arab leaders systematically incite their people in a campaign of hatred of Israel and do not hesitate to exploit religious emotions for political ends. This kind of exploitation runs counter to the very spirit of religion and principles of human rights. The true spirit of religion would never utilize false evidence in order to undermine understanding amongst peoples in accordance with the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” 80. Mr. Chabi Mama, Dahomey’s Minister for Education and a prominent Moslem leader, declared on 28 August: “Jerusalem can no longer be divided into two cities. It should remain united, I say this not only because I am in favour of unity and against anything that is divisive, but also because cutting a city in half is stupid and inhuman. As for the Mosque, I have seen it, and it does not seem that it has suffered much; and the damage is, at first sight, easily reparable. As for the culprit, Michael Rohan, he has been arrested and has admitted his guilt. Israel bears no responsibility for this act, and world as well as African opinion judges on the basis of facts as they are being revealed in the inquiries presently in course and in the trial that will take place.” 81. Al-Haj Garba-Jahumpa, another Moslem statesman and Gambia’s Minister of Education, Health and,Social Welfare, declared to the press on 27 August, following a visit to Al Aqsa: “I firmly reject any claim that Israel and the Jewish people as such had anything to do with the fire in the Mosque. The current campaign against Israel is rooted either in ignorance or propaganda opportunism. It has nothing to do with any religious motives. I waa in Jerusalem last Thursday and had the opportunity to watch the fire brigade go about putting out the fire. They worked very hard and did a marvellous job in saving the dome of Al Aqsa. “I am fully convinced that Al Aqsa was saved from far greater damage through the good work done by the firemen. I have full confidence in the inquiry commission and am looking forward to its findings,” 82. The Chad Minister of Public Affairs, Mahamat Rahama Saleh, stated at a press interview in Jerusalem on 8 September: “Israel did everything she could to contain the fire at Al Aqsa. . , . I do not believe charges that Israel is respon- 83. The outcry against exploitation of the fire for pur. poses of warlike incitement has been even stronger. 84. The Supreme Pontiff himself found it necessary to voice a public plea and warning. Pope Paul made a statement on 3 1 August in which he deplored the fire at Al Aqsa and expressed understanding for the religious feeliags of the Moslems. He added, however: “We understand their bitterness but we hope it will not worsen conditions in the Middle East, already JO tense and fragile, and we hope that the situation ,will not degenerate into further violence or more fierce hatreds which would prejudice even more the higher ansd impel+ ling cause of justice and peace.” 85. On 26 August, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Brazil declared in a press conference: “Brazil is very mucr concerned about the conflict in the Middle East lest ii become transformed into a holy war, capable of provokiin~ genocide .” 86. From all continents of the world came similar expres sions of comem by statesmen, spiritual leaders and laymen. Even in Tunis voices were heard against enflaming passions. The Tunisian daily El-Amzl wrote on 26 August: “The calls for a jihad against Israel were unwarranted.” On the following day the Tunisian daily L’Action, the organ of the Socialist Destour, protested against the incitement to war by certain Arab leaders. It stated: “How can one f;lil tose? the most inopportune and clumsy nature of these calls for a holy war launched openly by certain Arab leaders.” 87. On 30 August, the International Buddhist Association Maha Sangha, with headquarters in Cofombo, sent a telegram to the Secretary-General stating inter alia: “With all our respect for followers of Islam at lsrgc, we request them not to use this fire incident in Jerusalem Mosque for political purposes and for inciting millions of followers of Islam for a holy war as this may bring untold suffering and misery for humanity.” 88. International editorial opinion has been no less critical of the exploitation of the fire for political incitement thas public figures and organizations. I shall mention only a few characteristic comments. The daily, El Espew’odor @f Bogota, on 24 August stated: “The unfortunate incident of the Mosque Al AVs 11 Jerusalem serves as an excellent pretext to inflame a hoi! war of Moslems; it is a windfall for the political llsadcrs tc keep up the flame of fanaticism and to conceal their chl errors. “As in all criminal investigations one should ask wlreir the one that stands to gain? In novels of Crime, wlu%eiPr a murder occurs it is elementary to aSCert,ain *ho 95. The prominent Madrid daily, Ya, wrote on 28 August: “In this difficult situation, the Government of Israel and its people have nc other defence but that of enlightened public opinion and common sense which precludes even the remotest possibility of their being responsible for this crime. And with all this, we should bear in mind that, during the Arab occupation of Jerusalem, Jewish Holy Places and cemeteries were deliberately desecrated, a small detail which those that call for a holy war will undoubtedly forget now.” 96. The Da@ Telegraph of London wrote on 27 August, under the heading “Nasser fans the flames”: 89. Le Figaro of Paris commented on 29 August: “The Arab States have opted for a case that must fail in any test of logic. Nor must Israel be blamed for negligence, because the Arabs themselves guarded the Mosque and no police can prevent a crime of a madman or a pro vocateur. ” 90. In an editorial entitled “Blindness of Passions”, Le Monde of 22 August admonished: 97. The Economist of 30 August 1969 commented: ‘$An old Roman saying states that the author of a crime is the one who gains from it. It is evident that the fire of Al Aqsa Mosque does not benefit Israel at all. It is fatal, in the climate of over-excitement that prevaiIs in the Middle East since the Six Days War, that the notion should spread of a new crime by Zionists.” 91. The daily, Bangkok World, observed in its editorial of 25 August: “The fire is a transparent attempt on the part of Arab leaders to make use of religious feelings for political purposes.” 92. The political commentator of the Radio Malagasy broadcast on 2.5 August: “The Arab Governments have exploited the incident that must under no circumstances be blamed on Israel, for political calumny, In many of its aspects this fire is reminiscent of another, the fire of the Reichstag. 98. The New York Times of 28 August admonished: 93. The Rising Nepal, published in Katmandu, wrote in an editorial on 25 August: “From what can be made out of the whole affair, from this distance, and as the matter now stands, it is that while the occurrence is naturalIy a most regrettable blow to all Moslems, it does not follow that the Israelis themselves had a hand in it. . . , The Israelis as a God-fearing people and as hard-boiled pragmatists have never interfered in matters of religion and the fact that Arab and not Israeli guards were on duty at the Mosque when the fire broke out not only lends credence to this view but also suggests that the Arab charges have little evidence, so far, to go by. In U Thant’s reply message to the call made by the twenty-four Moslem countries, too, the implication of Israeli complicity in the affair is very conspicuous and significant in its absence.” 99. One of the most thoughtful comments comes from a country which is a neighbour of both Israel and the Arab States. The Cvprus Mail of 31 August declared in an editorial: “The world has rarely been witness to such unprincipled and fanatical political and religious exploitation of events as the Arabs have been pursuing following the fire, despite the fact that prompt police action “It seems to be exaggerated that the fire in the Mosque should have given rise to another complaint in the Security Council. “It is precisely Israel that is most interested in not giving a motive to religious resentment of Moslems in this warlike period.” “The Arab cause in the outside world will suffer from the latest blood bath in Iraq, the bomb outrage in London and the reckless eagerness with which the fire in the Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem has been exploited to whip up a ‘Holy War’ frenzy against Israel.” “At first it seemed tha,; last week’s fire in the third holy shrine of Islam had given the Arabs a political bonus. It won them much sympathy. . , . Yet, just as in May and June 1967, the Arabs are forfeiting this sympathy. The charge made by the Arab Foreign Ministers in Cairo that Israel has ‘plans against Moslem and Christian shrines’ is as irresponsible as much of the vindictive nonsense that has poured out of Arab radios. It is remarkably difficult to believe the apparent Arab claim that the fire in the Mosque was an act of deliberate Israeli policy, or that the Mosque was more vulnerable to a firebug, or accident, under Israeli administration than Arab. “It may be that, at least in Jerusalem, the trial in September of the young Australian who has been charged with the fire-raising will dispose of the wild stories and mitigate Arab bitterness. The Moslem religious authorities were helpful in securing his arrest.” “The real danger, however, is that the Arab Govemments will be carried past the point of no return on a floodtide of Arab rhetoric and emotion, even as President Nasser at the showdown was forced by his own zealots into the 1967 war.” 100. Referring to the complaint submitted to the Security CounciI by the Arab delegations, the newspaper observed: “They feel with very good reason that they have the United Nations Security Council completely in the hollow of their hands and can persuade it to take sides with them against Israel whenever they wish. This was again demonstrated by the Council resolution [270 (1969/j on the recent incident in Lebanon. , . . It is now clear that the Al Aqsa incident is to be brought before the Security Council within the next few days. If it is handled in the same prejudiced fashion that has been characteristic of all recent debates on the Mid-East, it will do untold harm to prospects of averting a new Arab- Israeli war and will make utter nonsense of its own much-quoted resolution [2#2 (1967)J of November 1967.” 101. The real question which confronts the Security Council today in this debate is how to deal with the exploitation of the fire at Al ‘Aqsa for political purposes and how to prevent the vindication of incitement to belligerency. 102. The Chief Rabbi of Israel issued on 22 August, the day after the fire at Al Aqsa, a statement expressing his feelings of participation in the sorrow of all the faithful of Islam and of their religious leaders. Emphasizing that it is inconceivable that a Jewish hand should have caused the fire, the Chief Rabbi declared: “Let US hope that the truth will soon be established and that all distortion and incitement will vanish like smoke and that in their stead will prevail brotherhood which is the essence of all the great religions in the world.” 103. Will the Security Council of the United Nations contribute to this brotherhood?

Before calling on the next speaker on my list, the representative of Hungary, I wish to inform the members of the Council that a letter addressed to the President of the Security Council (9443J has just been received from the representative of Saudi Arabia requesting permission to participate in the debate on the item before the Council. 105. If there is no objection, I propose to invite the representative of Saudi Arabia to take part in the discussion of this item without the right to vote. In view of the limited space at the Council table, I shall ask the representative of Saudi Arabia to take the place renerved for him at the side of the Council chamber. At the invitation of the President, Mr. J, M. Baroody (Saudi Arabia) took the pluce reserved for him,

Comrade President, before stating the views of my delegation on the subject under 107. The Security Council is forced again to considler a serious incident which took place in Jerusalem and which shocked the whole civilized world. Al Aqsa Mosque is a valuable monument of the cuhural inheritance of mankind; it has a priceless historic value and is a sacred place folr the religious, spiritual life of several hundred million persons, The Hungarian Government-although Hungary is a secular State-fully understands how deeply shocked were the Governments which requested the convening of the Securi. ty Council by the barbarous attempt to destroy the Al ,4qsa by arson. 108. The representative of Israel put a false complexion on this question by interpreting the circumstances of the arson as if it were an event connected only with the sphere of religion. He even tried to make us believe that the event brought Arab and Jew nearer to each other. He declared: “It is not what separates us that Israel and the Arab States must search for, but that which unites us. No matter how complex the political controversy, no matter how grave the military confrontation, there is kinship between Jew and Arab in their civilization. If Et is the vision of ultimate peace that guides us, we must nurture it with care and reverence.” f 1507th meeting, para, 12rS.j Those are very fine words; they were taiIored for this event. I should be happy to welcome that statement by the representative of Israel as a change of policy, since not long ago, in justifying the Israelis’ military adventure, he boasted that they taught their neighbours a lesson. However, I think such a welcome would be over-hasty. 109. Had Mr. Tekoah analysed the arson in the proper context, it would have been unnecessary for him to a!!sure the Council that the Israeli authorities had done and would be ready to do everything to preserve the Holy Placlcs in Jerusalem. The basic question in this incident is not how the Holy Places were or are to be safeguarded but why fIta Israelis are the ones who want to undertake the safeguard. ing. It is very difficult to deny that it was the Israeli occupation that nurtured the development of a climate in which the arson seemed to be natural and desirable. To prevent a repetition of such grave violence, the first step should be the liquidation of the climate favourable Lo it. Therefore the first step should be the withdrawal of the Israeli occupation forces from tire Arab territories, from the area of the Holy Places of Jerusalem. Then tension would ease in the whole region. If the Israeli GovernmlEnt’s concept of “ultimate peace” is not connected with the life beyond the grave, if they wish to live in peace with their neighbours, they should show their goodwill; and it WouId not be too complicated to indicate some signs of it. 110. The resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council on Jerusalem adopted during the PSI 111. My delegation considers that the question of the Al Aqsa Mosque is an integral part of the whole situation in the Middle East and cannot be separated from it. The Israeli Government must bear the responsibility for the arson and for the tense climate in which it occurred. The basic problem is not how to repair the damage, although it should be done, but how to ease the tension in the region, a tension that endangers world peace and security. The solution is the implementation of Security Council resolution 242 (1967): a withdrawal of the Israeli troops from the occupied territories. The Council should force Israel to abandon the aggressor’s “vision of ultimate peace”, its present impudent attitude towards the United Nations. My delegation is ready to vote for a forceful resolution on this issue.

1 thank the representative of Hungary for the kind words he has addressed to me as President of the Security Council. 113. The next speaker on my list is the representative of Jordan, on whom I now call in exercise of his right of reply.

In comparing Mr. Telcoah’s earlier statement to the Council with the one he made today, one can see this: Mr, Tekoah has not abandoned his style as he apparently tried hard to do two days ago. He has come with the same charges, with the same accusations, imputing falsehoods to the delegation of Jordan. All my quotations were from sources other than Arab sources. I quoted Radio Israel. I quoted 1728 Jerusalem Post, which is here for anyone to read, I quoted sources which have no relationship of any kind to Arab sources. Yet Mr. Tekoah chose not to rebut the issues raised, not to answer a single one of my six questions. He found it more convenient to shout in his usual manner, throwing out lies so that some might stick and become acceptable to those listening to him-and, when I say that, I%lave in mind those invited by Mr. Tekoah who are sitting over there in the gallery. I have not come with empty charges. I am introducing evidence. To determine what happened one must look at the motives. Whataare the motives? L;t us go to the time of the Israeli occupation of Jerusalem, on 5 June 1967. 115. Here is what an Israeli said on 30 June 1967, 25 days after the occupation. Dr. Israel Eldad, a well-known Israeli historian, said, according to Time Magazine of 30 June 1968: “We are at the stage where David was when he liberated Jerusalem. From that time until the construction of the 116. Fifteen days later, that is, on 15 July 1967, what did that same historian say, according to an article in the De-Of magazine on 15 July 1967, six weeks after the occupation: “I always say that one of the deepest of our hopes, and the most expressive, is the hope that salvation will be attained with the construction of the sacred Temple. It is obvious that we are not going to build this Temple in the Maghrabi quarter.” Remember that the Maghrabi quarter was bulldozed by the Israelis, and that they made a plaza adjacent to the wall. He is saying here: “It is obvious that we are not going to build this Temple in the Maghrabi quarter, but we shall build it on the Mountain of the House. That is why it is obvious that the mosque on this mountain must disappear.” 117. Those are the words of Israel, not my words. Those are facts. “The mosque must disappear” one of these days, in one way or another, It was for this reason, and being aware of everything that had been going on-the bulldozing of the Maghrabi, followed by excavations, then approaches towards the mosque-that I came before this Council on 30 June 1969 and warned that it was my duty to tell the Council: “What will happen, may I ask, when cracks are discovered there too-as doubtless, if permitted, they will be? Will this unique mosque, Al Aqsa, the third holiest in all Islam, be condemned and demolished as well? Where will the line be drawn? Or will Israel be left to continue unhampered its ‘excavations’, its looting and wanton destruction, its desecration of holy places and its gross disregard for the rights of others? Only the members around this table can answer these questions. And time. . , is running short.” [1482nd meeting, pcra. 33.1 Time is of the essence. 118. Then Mr, Tekoah spoke about the cause of the fire. We know that Roha.n did not appear in the picture in the beginning; there was a claim that welding was the cause of burning. Then there was another fabrication-and the Israelis are gifted in fabrication-that it was a contact of the wires up in the roof. Then when our people-the guards and the She&h, that is, the people in charge-came with the evidence and the world found out, and Reuters conveyed information here and there, it was Radio Israel which said many things about the delay; it was not Jordan. And I have it right here; I have a book-1 do not want to take the time of the Council-showing what Radio Israel said. These are the facts; I put them before the Council. 119. When the Israelis announced the news at 8.30, no mention was given that the fire was put out, although it was one hour and ten minutes later. Later on, at 10.30, there _ I20. What I am stating here are facts, I challenge the Israelis to answer my question and to say that Radio Israel did not convey this information; it is as simple as that. 121, Then came the question of learning Hebrew. It is always a pleasure to know foreign languages-Hebrew, English, Russian, French, Spanish, Chinese; it is a privilege and a pleasure. But was this Rohan sent by the Jewish agency-and I challenge Mr. Tekoah to say this man was not sent by the Jewish agency, because I am quoting his semi-official newspaper, The Jerusalem Post-was he sent by the Jewish agency to live in a kibbutz, to work for Israel, only to learn Hebrew? He could have gone to Berlitz in New York, or Australia to learn Hebrew-they have Berlitz, too. But he came to Israel for a purpose: he came for a mission; he came tempted by many means of temptation-and there are many in Israel-to do what he did; and all circumstantial evidence leads to this result. There was a fire; fire brigades were delayed; water was interrupted-and again this was reported on Radio Israel; this was said by the man from the fire brigade. He said that the water was running normally for eight minutes, then it was interrupted. Why? It had been normal for two years. Why should it be interrupted that last minute, at the time of the fire? 122. The delay in extinguishing the fire is admitted by the Israelis. In fact, they have tried to show excuses, pretexts, justifications. But the question of delay is admitted by Israel. I want to emphasize that because it is very important. ‘It is not admitted by Mr. Tekoah, but by his authorities. 123. He referred to a statement in a Catholic weekly. I do not know what the statement was, nor its text, nor the magazine-I only know that he referred to it. But I do not have to go to gentile material. I gave him Jewish material- Israeli material, Radio Israel. Can this be a thing which is falsehood? 124. Then came the question of the investigation: he saw there is a committee. I know the Council agrees with me that all the findings of that committee are illegal; they are based on laws which the Council rescinded, which you declared invalid, which you called on Israel to rescind. So we wiI1 be discussing things in a vacuum, because they are based on something which is null and void, on laws made to accommodate Israeli designs; and I am certain the Security Council is not here to endorse what Israel has enacted and what the Council has annulled and declared invalid, Neither the Committee’s report, nor the t%-&.ngs nor the evidence to be introduced by that Power are valid, Israel cannot be 125. Then Mr. Tekoah referred to Maha Sangha. He staid that our Secretary-General had received a cablegram from Maha Sangha of India supporting Israeli points of view. This is very interesting, because I a30 tried to find out the reaction of world public opinion to this crime. I discovered that over 100 communications, either cablegrams or letters, had been received from responsible institutions, organizations, individuals and leading figures in the world by the Office of the Secretary-General and the President of 1:he Security Council. Other communications came in about what had happened in Jerusalem. I do not have the exact number of communications here; I have it in my office. Elut I know there were over 100 of them and they had the following to say. 126. First, they emphasized their outrage, shock and dismay at this horrible crime. Second, they said that Israel cannot be absolved of its responsibility for the tragic fire at the Mosque of Al Aqsa, caused by arson. Third, they said that Israeli violations in Jerusalem had led to such acts and that Israel should abide by the resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly. Fourth, they said thlat the solution to preventing such acts could be achieved by the complete withdrawal of the forces of occupation from Jerusalem and the other Arab territories. Fifth, all deman.ded strong and effective United Nations action in this regard. 127. I could go on citing these communications. I have them here. One comes from Japan and says: “The Moslem community in Japan strongly protests the burning and damaging of the Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem and urges the responsibility of the Israeli authorities for this action.” 128. Here is one from Colombo: “The burning of the AI Aqsa Mosque is an unpardonable assault on the spiritual domain of man. Pie trust that immediate and effective measures will be taken for the safety of valued institutions of Moslem and othler religions from unscrupulous forces and also to ensure that people are not pushed forward towards the abyss of world chaos.” 129. This came from Sierra Leone, in Africa: “Africa’s Moslems are greatly shocked by the Israeli crime of the burning of the Al Aqsa Mosque. They strongly condemn the barbaric action. They are appealing to the United Nations to take the necessary measures for the implementation of its resolutions.” 130. This came from Manchester, England: “The Moslems of Manchester saddened by fire in Al Aqsa Mosque. Request action restore Jerusalem guardianship to Moslems.” 132. Other communications came from Singapore, Burma and India. I have them here, and with the permission of the President I may have to request their circulation if we think that would be helpful to the Council. I have a volume of letters deploring and condemning and seeking and requesting urgent action by the Security Council. 133. Mr. Tekoah ended his intervention by saying that the real question is how to deal with the exploitation of Al Aqsa. Are we exploiting Al Aqsa? Have we tried to exploit any case when we call for a remedy by the Security Council? There is nothing to exploit. You exploit when you have no cause and no reason to come to the Council; but when you have right on your side you have nothing to exploit, you need no exploitation. This question was not brought to the Council because Jordan wanted to come before the Council. We joined our other Moslem brothers who felt that the question should be brought to the Council, and in their wisdom they thought it would be the right thing because this is the organ created to consider situations threatening international peace and security. We went along, although we will be coming to the Council soon on other aspects of the question of Jerusalem. We want to ask the Council what it wishes to do about its past resolutions. We have come to the Council to remind it of its definite and clear commitment to convene a meeting for action against Israel if its resolutions continue to be ignored and defied by Israel. We have come to the Council to ask it what it is going to do about this promise for effective action. We shall again come to request action against Israel when we receive definite and final information that Israel is continuing to ignore and defy the will of this world body. 137. Did the representative of Israel deem it fit to reply to that question? Some might have entertained ,the hope that he would have stated before the Council that he would also offer his co-operation to implement the resolutions of the General Assembly and of the Security Council on the rights of the people of Palestine, to implement Security Council resolution 242 (1967) on the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the occupied Arab territories, which would pave the way to peaceful settlement and, as the representative of Jordan put it, to genuine peace in the area. Did he address himself to any of those pertinent, relevant and constructive questions? He did not. We all regret that he did not. 138. When the representative of lsrael spoke this afternoon, some might have entertained the hope that he would continue the exceptionally moderate tone which was reflected in his two statements at the 1507th and 1508th meetings, statements which included an appeal to understanding and brotherhood and were ostensibly devoid of his usual pattern of abuse, arrogance and defiance. We did not, I must confess, entertain that hope. His statement this afternoon bore us out; he decided to revert to his usual pattern.

I call on the representative of the United Arab Republic to speak in exercise of his right of reply, 139. With your permission, Mr, President, may I take up a few points which were included in the statement of the representative of Israel. This is not an attempt to reply to him; there is no need to reply to his abuse. But I wish to put the record straight on questions which have a bearing on the authority of this body and on the responsibility of the United Nations for international peace. The representative of Israel did not hesitate, here in the Security Council, the organ which has the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, to address the gallery and to boast about the wings of Israeli planes, to boast about the instruments of destruction, to boast that these instruments of destruction are effective, and to reflect on wings of other planes. In the defence of legitimate rights, the wings of some planes may fal1, but the determination to uphold rights and to stand fast in the face of aggression will not fall. It is the hope of all who yearn for the restoration of peace that the Security Council will clip the wings of the planes of destruction.

When the representative of Israel took the floor this afternoon, some might have thought that he would address himself to the pertinent questions put to him by the representatives of Somalia and Jordan, Those questions related to facts bearing on the question before the Council, facts relating to the circumstances of the crime of arson committed against the Holy Al Aqsa Mosque. They covered a wide range. They related to his allegations that one tenth of the Mosque had been damaged. A question was put to him by the representative of Somalia, to the effect that reports indicated that considerable damage and considerable destruction had been caused to the Holy Al Aqsa Mosque. The question of the duration of the fire was another pertinent question put to him. He alleged that the fire had been completely put out after an hour. Corroborative evidence was submitted by the representatives of both Somal#a and Jordan to prove that this was not the case. 140. The representative of Israel protested against statements by some Arab leaders that this will be the year of liberation. The representative of Israel wants this third year following the Israeli aggression on 5 June 1967 to continue to be the year of occupation and of aggression. He resents 136. The questions also covered statements of the President of the Supreme Moslem Council, Sheikb Hilmi 141. The world knows by now who introduced to the Middle East the Nazi techniques and the Nazi ideas, and who continues to practise these Nazi techniques and these Nazi ideas. The world knows by now, and the world has long known, the record of tolerance of the Arab people. And history is there. Whatever the representative of Israel may say here will not change history-and neither will his Prime Minister, Mrs. Gold Meir, when she says that Palestine never existed. As reported by The Times of London on 19 June 1969, she said: “It was not as though there was a Palestinian people in Palestine, considering itself as Palestinian, and we came and threw them out and took their country away from them. They did not exist.” That is the pattern of historic facts as represented by the Prime Minister of Israel. No wonder that the representative of Israel today accuses the Arab people of racial and Nazi concepts. 142. The representative of Israel spoke of and quoted from some human rights committees. It would be more pertinent if he were to come and quote the resolution of the Human Rights Commission to establish a committee to investigate violations of human rights.2 Why did Israel choose not to co-operate with that Committee? It would be more pertinent if he quoted the reports, and later the evidence that will be submitted by such committees, 143. Now I come to a point of great importance. Today again the representative of Israel spoke of the Security Council as being in the hands of the Arab countries, and this time he chose to hide behind certain quotations. He did not do this before. Is this not the representative who, after the Council unanimously adopted a resolution, stated before the Council that the Council is corrupt politically, legally and morally ? Is he not the representative who, a few weeks ago, in a statement to the Council at its 1504th meeting on 26 August 1969, stated that the unanimously adopted resolutions of the Council “must be regarded as being primarily a refiection of the arithmetical vagaries of the vote, always dominated by the fact that of fifteen members of the Council no less than six have no diplomatic relations with Israel”? [1504th meeting, para. 77.1 2 Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories. “The General Assembly shall, elect ten other Members of the United Nations to be non-permanent members of the Security Council, due regard being specially paid, in the first instance, to the contribution of Members of the United Nations to the maintenance of international peace and security and to the other purposes of the Orgmization, and also to equitable geographical distribution.” 145. The members of the Security Council have been elected on the basis of this criterion, not on the basis of the criterion of their countries’ relationship with Israel. Mem. bers of the Security Council have been elected by a twosthirds majority of the General Assembly, and with practical unanimity. But what I have quoted is the representative of Israel’s concept of this highest of organs, 146. I wish here to recall a solemn reminder which was voiced, Mr. President, by your predecessor as President of the Council, Ambassador de Pini& of Spain, when he stated on 14 August 1969, in his capacity as President of the Council: “I should like to point out that, in my capacity as President of this body, I definitely cannot allow direct or indirect attacks to be levelled against its authority aad dignity. This is one of the principal organs of the United Nations, on which Member States have conferred primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security; moreover, they have agreed that in carrying out its duties, the Security Council acts on their behalf,” /lSOOth meeting, para. 2. J

The next speaker on my list is the representative of Saudi Arabia. I invite him to take a place at the Council table <and call on him to address the Council.

Mr. President, it augurs well that you have assumed the Presidency while this item is under consideration. It is a religious item, ‘and people at large-and more so in the Moslem world-consider religion not only as a conglomeration of articles of faith but also, as in the case of Islam, as a way of life. Islam defines spiritual and moral values in the Koran, its Holy Book; but it also sets forth the law which regulates the life of the individual in relation to his God and his fellow men. Religions preceded political ideologies in motivating, if not directing, the attitude of the individual to his Creator, this in the form of worship, and his conduct vi&vis the community in which he lives, Inasmuch as ideology has been considered as transcending ethnology in inanY conntries of the world, to the Moslem his religion supersedes ideology and personal interests, or even national interests. To the Moslem, his religion is the most precious thing on earth, 149. I said, Mr, President, that it augurs well that You are in the Chair because your great Revolution was motivated 150. Having said that, I must refer to the threats that are being received by some delegations. I have not yet received any; I have just come back from a fact-finding trip, But I did receive quite a number of threats in the past. Mr. President, you did well to request the host country, as well as our beloved Secretary-General, to look into this matter, because the essence of the United Nations is freedom of speech. It so happens that there are certain people amongst us who may be sensitive and who may react subconsciously in such a way as not to be able to express themselves freely when they receive threats of the nature that our colleague from Jordan mentioned this afternoon. 151. I do not think that this City of New York is the right place for the Security Council. I mentioned that a few years ago. I have been with the United Nations for 23 years and I know how the United Nations is subjected to pressures from every direction; there are lobbyists and propagandists everywhere. Just because the host country contributes a large sum to the United Nations should we be here at the risk of our lives? Let the Council function in a neutral country, neither big nor small, but a neutral country so that freedom of speech can really be enjoyed. 1.52. We must serve notice through you, as the President of the Council, and through our illustrious Secretary- General,’ that such threats will not be tolerated in the future. If pornography and obscene literature are masquerading under freedom of expression, that is another matter. There is enough demoralization in society, But to curb the freedom of speech, which is the essence and the life of the United Nations, I submit, is inadmissible from whatever quarter it comes. 153. I was away but I had the opportunity to read the provisional verbatim records of the meetings of the Council. I must salute the representatives of Pakistan, India and Indonesia, because, after all, they represent one half of the population of the Moslem world. But it is not a question of numbers, it is a question of principIe. 154. Before this incident of the Al Aqsa Mosque, I happened to be in Saudi Arabia and, of course, had occasion to discuss the question of Palestine with His Majesty the King. I can assure you that the King, although he is a man of few words, has assured me that he and his sons and his brothers, and many Moslems who have declared their intention during the pilgrimage, will, when the time comes, be prepared to martyrize themselves in order to defend Islam and defend the Holy Places of Islam. I believe that his Majesty the Ring had mentioned the question of Jerusalem time and again since 1967, when the usurpers occupied all Jerusalem and parts of Jordan, Syria and the United Arab Republic. But he reiterated in unmistakable terms that Jerusalem is as holy to Islam as are Mecca and Medina. I do not think I would be repeating 155. The item before us is the question of Jerusalem, some might say, because after all Jerusalem is the heart of Palestine, Although it is revered by Jews, it is none the less revered by Christians and Moslems. And what do we find happening in Jerusalem. 7 There are plans to change the character of that Holy City, It is a paradox that people and Governments in the West try to preserve monuments, leaving aside holy shrines. But these Zionists from Western Europe, because they had fared badly at the hands of Hitler, are made to flock into the Holy Land of Palestine and desecrate it, by all kinds of modern concepts of reconstruction, with their scholars digging the earth to find where the temple of Jerusalem had been built, as if the town belonged to those Khazars from Eastern Europe. 156. “Well”, they say, ‘(this is an Australian, a Christian, who was a fanatic, who thought that by burning the Al Aqsa Mosque and by rebuilding the Temple of Solomon”- which, incidentally, Solomon himself did not build, but which the Canaanites of Lebanon built-“there will be a new era”-Christ may come again into this world, or something of that sort. I do not know what his philosophy is. 157. Now, I am reminded of van der Lubbe-you are of my age, Sir; you remember 1933, do you not, when van der Lubbe, that poor Dutch half-witted person was used as a medium to burn the Reichstag. That served as an excuse for a pogrom by Hitler against Communists and Jews, You remember’ the name Georgi Dimitrov; he was a Bulgarian. I am saying this as a monarchist. Dimitrov was a Communist. Poor Dimitrov was accused. Van der Lubbe was the medium and Georgi Dimitrov was considered the arch-fiend by Hitler, who initiated those pogroms against Communists and Jews. There is a sort of parallel here. 158. I do not go into the question of why this Australian should come to the Holy Land of Palestine. We know from certain statements made in Israel itself that he resembles, in a way, van der Lubbe-so that the Zionists may achieve their end by destroying the Al Aqsa Mosque in order to rebuild the Temple. 160. To go back to Lord Melchet, who said in 1922: “The day on which the Jewish Temple will be rebuilt has become near. I shall dedicate the rest of my life for the reconstruction of Solomon’s Temple on the site of the Aqsa Mosque.” 161. Who reacted to that statement? None other than my good friend whom I saw recently in Beirut, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, He reacted to that statement in 1922. He wrote to the British High Commissioner-I do not know whether Lord Caradon was a magistrate at that time, in 1922. For the benefit of Lord Caradon I recall that the Grand Mufti wrote to the British High Commissioner. And then he received the following letter in 1922 from the Secretary of the British Mandatory Government of Palestine : “His Eminence the Grand Mufti of Palestine, Sayed Mohammad Amin El-Hussein& “Your Eminence, “With reference to the conversation which your Eminence had with I-Iis Excellency the High Commissioner in which you protested against the statement of Sir Alfred Mond openly demanding the reconstruction of the Jewish Temple on the site of the Aqsa, I wish to inform your Eminence that His Excellency referred the matter to the proper authorities in London and received the following answer. “ ‘Reference your number 248 dated the first of July, the statement by Sir Alfred Mond was as follows: “He believes that Palestine can again give the world religious inspiration; furthermore, Sir Alfred Mond was very careful about this subject. He stated that it is his fervent hope to construct a new huge Jewish Temple on the site, and instead of the Aqsa Mosque”.’ ” Very confusing-“a new . . a Jewish Temple on the site, and instead of the Aqsa Mosque”. I can produce that letter any time the Council wishes me to do so, It is in the archives of the Mufti. The Mufti is well guarded in Beirut, so that no one can pilfer his archives, But this is not all. 162. Our colleague Mr. Tekoah speaks here of brotherhood when it suits his purpose. He could not hide his 163. I mentioned advisedly that before the fire broke out in the Al Aqsa Mosque not only His Majesty King Feisal but other Moslems had vowed that they would see to it that all Jerusalem would one day return to the indigenous people of Palestine. 164. Mr. Tekoah spoke of the ecumenical spirit:. Thir ecumenical spirit began when the late Pope J&n XX[I -may his soul rest in peace-said that the Jews were not responsible for the crucifixion of Christ. Of course the Jews of today were not responsible for the crucifixion of ~Christ, and, happily, Mr. Tekoah’s ancestors and Mr, Abba Eban’s ancestors and Mr. Ben-Gurion’s ancestors and Mrs, Golda Meir’s ancestors were innocent because they never came from the area; they came from the northern tier of Asia, tribes that moved from near Mongolia-and he referred to Mongolia; I will come back to that-westward, and :settled where southern Russia is today. 16.5. Of course, the Jews of Europe did not crucify Christ. Christ was a reformer. We in Islam do not believe even that Christ was crucified. But that is not the question. The question is one of trying to exploit the ecumenical spirit that Pope John XXIII tried to initiate among all religions. The Israelis exploit the ecumenical spirit for their owrr advantage. The representative of Israel-and I was shocksd by this-called the Moslems his brethren. It reminds me of Abel and Cain. They were brothers too. One killled the other. For the benefit of the Council, I must repeat what Mr, Tekoah said: “The torment and bloodshed inflicted upon us on account of our religion are ever present in our minds.” But the Christian tormented one another. They are not the only people who were tormented for their religion. Religious intolerance has been world-wide: the Inqui!sition, Catholics and Protestants, Protestants and Catholics, after the Inquisition. In Islam itself various sects fought against one another, No doubt among the Hindus and the Buddhists there were some sects that thought others were wrong. Mr. Tekoah is always wailing, on behalf of thosr? Khazars of Eastern Europe, that the Jews were persecuted on account of their religion. So were others persecuted on account of their religion. That is a misleading statement. 166. I could go on quoting chapter and verse, but ofi* thing he said bears repetition here: “All attempts, however, whether in the area itseilfor in the Security Council, to seize on the fire as a weapon fer intensifying belligerency towards Israel and asisal@ Israel’s rights and standing are unworthy and unac. ceptable.” [1507th meeting, para. 125.1 The emphasis is on Israel’s rights and standing. By what right is Israel in Jerusalem or in Palestine? By the religious argument: because Judaism flourished in Palestine, P&stine should therefore be Jewish? So did ChtWaGtY flourish in Palestine. On the basis of the demographic 167. On what grounds is Israel in Jerusalem, or in the Holy Land of Palestine for that matter? It is because of a dream of Herzl that was no longer valid when Jews after the French Revolution and later, after the Dreyfus affair, were accepted in most Western countries on an equal footing without discrimination. The dream is no longer valid. Those architects of Zionism are secular, and I feel sorry for the Jews on whose sentiments they played-not only in Central and Eastern Europe but prosperous Jews here in the United States, who can wield such power as to tip the balance in elections, who could persuade the Government of a mighty Power to send aircraft to destroy the Arab people. 168. But the Arab people are indestructible, I can assure you-100 million of them, and they procreate fast. There will be 150 million, There is space for them. We are not afraid of the population explosion, Poor, tiny Israel is there. Why should we begrudge it that area among us? I have said time and again that if they want to come and stay with us as Jews they are our brothers in humanity as well as in religron. But if they are going to come to exploit us, which they will do if we let them-of course, we the Arab people are not going to stand for that. 169. Now, I will bolster my argument by quoting from none other than Jewish leaders. “The Al Aqsa Mosque is situated on the Sanctuary of Sanctuaries, in the TempIe, and it belongs to the Jews,” That is a statement from none other than Mr. Klausner, whom, no doubt, Mr. Tekoah knows. He is the President of the Society for the Defence of the Wailing Wall, He wrote that in the Palestine WeekZ~ of 6 August 1929,40 years ago. 170. Then Dr, Schlesinger-I do not know if it is a German name or a Germanized name-said: “I see in the presence of the Mosque of Qmar on the Mountain of the House a grave tragedy. I want to destroy it, for I possess the power, and I am not sure that I do not have the power to do that.” 171. When we come to economic exploitation, Western Asia is still virgin territory, in so far as markets are concerned. The standard of living is moving up, and in the Western world taxes have been on the rise. The pressures Of 172, Where were they in 1940, when he fled to join the illustrious General de Gaulle and organize in France, on French soil, the Resistance Movement? Those were the heroes. Why? Because they are Europeans. They must be heroes. Terrorists who are Europeans are heroes. In my terminology, I call them nationalists; I would not call the French Underground “terrorist”. But it suits M, Cassin, whom I have known, and who is still writing and active in those circles which bolster Israel and its tyranny over the Arab world. And he calls the nationalists of Palestine “terrorists”. 173. This is a preview of what I have to say. I have some exhibits here on the Mosque of the Rock, and also other exhibits about the Al Aqsa Mosque, embroidered with Hebrew slogans about the Temple of Solomon that should be rebuilt. I have articles from various Western newspapers, recent and old. I recited some old passages which unmask the motives of Israel. 174. The tone of Mr, Tekoah at this meeting, I noticed, was mellifluous, except that he gave himself away when he talked about the “perverted methods”--1 am paraphrasing-for rousing religious feelings against that little tiny Israel, an oasis of democracy in the Middle East. What kind of democracy is it? Perverted democracy? The perverted democracy of the voting machine, or the democracy of the heart or the spirit? A democracy that has its principles as humanism, or the democracy that believes in napalm and the weapons of destruction? What kind of democracy is that which is bolstered by some great democracies that have become corrupt in their own lands-where their youth is rebelling against them because of their lies and rationalizations? Is this democracy, when they talk of humanism and sell engines of destruction to wipe us out? And those who abet in the crime are criminals themselves. 17.5. Mr. Tekoah mentioned something about the Mongolian hordes that committed genocide. Who committed genocide in Palestine, except those Zionists who came to our region like a cyclone from Central and Eastern Europe, devastating the land, driving the people from their homes in “Joshua killed all, even their animals, in the same way that David did, and this is what the Torah orders us, and what the Arabs would have done with us if they had been victorious.” The Arabs are defending themselves, The Arabs protected the Jew; the Arabs never persecuted the Jew when he lived amongst us, because he was one of us, not like those Khazar Jews from Eastern and Central Europe. These are European Jews, ethnologically European and culturally European. They simply have Judaism as their religion just as a Scotsman is a Christian. That does not make him a Semite. Incidentally, Semitism is not something of the blood. It is a conglomeration of culture, language, customs, tradition. Do you consider these people coming from Europe, those usurping Zionists, as neo-colonialists? You honour them if you call them neo-colonialists; they are usurpers. They are the ones that swept over the land, chasing the people of Palestine from their homeland. 177. The account of the symposium continues: “A voice interrupting: or as we did in Deir Yassin , . .” he is referring to what Dr. Eldad said; Dr. Eldad replied-“Yes, the same as Deir Yassin, for had it not been for Deir Yassin, a half million Arabs would have remained in Israel and this means that Israel would never have been created,” This is not fabricated by the mass media of information in the Arab world or in any other place. I am not going to read all of it. These excerpts appeared in the De-Ot magazine on 15 July 1967 and then were repeated in Ha-ohm Ha-zeh on 27 August 1969. 178. That is the spirit of European Zionism, not the Zion of the spirit, but the Zion of destruction. 179. What are you going to do here in the Council? That is the question. Pass another resolution, no doubt, with the European Zionists laughing up their sleeves. The first instalment has arrived. How many are there, 25 or 50 Phantoms, raining destruction over our region? I have just come from Europe and I have learned something that the Council should know. An Eastern European country is being sold certain planes as destructive as the Phantoms. To use against whom? I am not going to embarrass the country and name it. Against your country, Sir? Russia is not to be fooled with. Against whom are they going to use them? They are going to be sent to Israel. Who told me? One who did not get his full commission on the deal. I hope that the deal will not go through. Was it fabrication when we were told in I965 that certain great Powers would not send arms to Israel? Mr. Ben-Gurion came and saw the West Germans. The West Germans sold those arms that were shipped from that big country which promised never to send arms to Israel. That was a scandal. It was glorified 180. Whom do they think they are fooling, those Central European Zionists and Eastern European Zionists? Them selves. Because sooner or later the Arab people will see to it that in defending their rights-and Islam will see to it that in defending its holy places-Israel will be curbed, 181. Jews thrown into the sea? Who wants to throw Israel into the sea? Stay there if you want, as Jews, But Israel from Europe dominating us, the headquarters for our exploitation: No. Jerusalem is the heart of the problem and it is only by insisting through those who exercise power that Israel be restrained-and not only by passing resolu, tions but by sending ultimatums to Israel that if it d,oes not obey certain resolutions adopted since 1947 with regard to the partition of Palestine and with regard to the refugees and their return, if they so wish, to their homelan.d, then Israel will be punished-that the Council will really become effective. Otherwise it will be an academic forum for debating questions as if it were a court of justice, with the difference that no justice is rendered. 182. The Times of London two days ago referred to wh; some Western countries-in order to sing the song c Israel-call guerrillas, the Palestinian fighters. In an editon’; referring to the incident of the hijacked plane and otht similar matters, The Times of London stated: “No dout they feel that, having been deprived of their lancls, the cannot be expected to respect international law or convex tions.” They are referring to the Palestinian fighters, It goe on to say: “But the one certain consequence of th terrorism they threaten is that it will promote sympathy fc their opponents”-as if they do not have enough syn pathy-“and not for them, and that the most determine’ action will be taken to stop them,” 183. I have warned the Council since 1966 tillat th question of Palestine has gone out of the hands of Arsl Governments. Even some of my colleagues thought that was dramatizing the situation. It came to pass. Th Palestinian people are resolved. I have come now from tha part of the world-not only from Saudi Arabia, but fron certain other Arab countries-and it is heartbreaking to E( that the psychosis of retrieving one’s homeland has taker hold even of boys and girls, not only in their teens bul younger than that. They will not rest until Jerusalem ii restored, They will die by placing their lives in the palm 01 their hands and throwing away their lives for the cause. 184. What are we going to do here in the Council? Adopt resolutions with no teeth in them? Even sanctions arc not working-the sanctions of the Council. If you do not believe what I say you only have to read’ in toda:y’s N!r~~ Street Journal an article by Ray Vicker entitled “Rhodesia: Booming Despite Sanctions”-the sanctions of the Council. 185. I shall take the floor again, but I should like to conclude this statement by appealing to the representatil;a of the major Powers to see that our voice is heard by their 186. I warn you, my brothers sitting around this table, that it is possible for the Zionists, who are suffering from a psychosis, pitted as they are against 100 million Arabs, to draw in the big Powers which have interests in the area and cause a conflict that will burn us all, following the legendary mentality of Samson when, allegedly, he brought down the Temple over his head and the heads of his enemies. 187. With all the lethal weapons lying around and with interests blinding the eyes of wisdom in men, if this Council fails to heed such warnings as those I am voicing it may come to pass that there will be no voice left to say: “We wish we had acted with justice instead of with expediency.” 188. It is high time that we set our house in order. We, as diplomats here, receive instructions from our respective Governments; but I think it is our duty, not only as messengers of our respective Governments but as human beings in our own right as well, to make those responsible in our Governments see that the time is getting late, and that, judging by past history, miscalculation may very well plunge us into the chasm. 189. Why do I say this time and again? Because time and again I have been assured that the Palestinians are inflexible in their determination, and that no Arab Government dares stop them because they would destroy it. They are as dangerous to the Arab Governments as they are to Israel 190. Let us hope that those responsible for the policies of the big Powers will heed the words of someone who has witnessed two world wars, lest, as I said, the United Nations end up like the League of Nations before it. Thank you, Mr. President, for your kindness, and with your permission, and after I hear what Mr. Tekoah has to say, I will take the floor again.

I wish to thank the representative of Saudi Arabia for the kind words he has addressed to me. 192. The list of speakers is now exhausted. As a result of consultations among the members of the Security Council concerning the next meeting, it has been agreed that the next meeting of the Council, to continue its consideration of this question, will be convened tomorrow, 12 September, at 3 p.m. If there are no other comments or objections, I shall take it that the proposal is accepted. The meeting rose at 7:1.5 p.m. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Notions publications may be obtained fr?m bookstores ond distributors throughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write to: United Notions, dales Section, New York or Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publications der Notions Unies aont en vente dons les librairies et les agences dbporitaires du monde entier. Informer-vous auprbs de votre libroirie ou adresser-vour 6: Nations Unies, Section der ventes, New York ou Gen(rve. COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLlCACtONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Los publicocioner de Ias Nociones Unidas ert6n en venta en tibrerios y cosas distribuidoror en todos partes del mundo. Conrulte a su librero o dirljase al Nacioner Unidar, Secci6n de Ventar, Nueva York o Ginebra.