S/PV.1510 Security Council

I should also like to inform the members of the Council that I have received letters dated 11 and 12 September 1969 from the representatives of Ceylon [S/9442] and Malaysia [S/9444], in which they request the Council’s permission to participate in its discussion of the item before it. Therefore, if there is no objection, I propose, in accordance with the usual practice, to invite the representatives of Ceylon’ and Malaysia to participate in the discussion of this question without the right to vote. Since there are not enough places at the Council table, I should like to propose that they take the places reserved for them at the sides of the Council chamber. I shall invite each of them to the Council table when his turn comes to speak. Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/l5101 1. Adoption of the agenda. 2. The situation in the Middle East: Letter dated 28 August 1969 addressed to the President of the Security Council by the representatives of Afghanistan, Algeria, Guinea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, the Niger, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Southern Yemen, the Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, the United Arab Republic and Yemen (S/9421 and Add.1 and 2). Adoption of the agenda At the invitation of the President, Mr, 1% S. Amerasinghe (Ceylon) and Mr. S. A. L. M. Hashim (Malaysia) took the places reserved for them. The agenda was adopted, The situation in the Middle East 4. Lord CARADON (United Kingdom): Mr. President, I have already had an opportunity to express to the Ambassador of Spain the admiration we all feel for the skilful leadership with which he conducted the proceedings of the Council last month. Letter dated 28 August 1989 addressed to the President of the Security Council by the representatives of Afghanistan, Algeria, Guinea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, the Niger, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Southern Yemen, the Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, the United Arab Republic and Yemen (S/9421 and Add.1 and 2) 5. I am now glad to pay my respects to you, Sir. We know you very well as a familiar figure and force amongst us, powerful yet benign, always eager, so we are confident, to work with us with as much co-operation and consideration as your instructions permit,

In accordance with the Council’s previous decisions, I now propose, with the Council’s consent, to invite the representatives of Israel, the United Arab Republic and Indonesia to take the places reserved for them at the Council table so that they may participate in the discussion of the item on the agenda without the right to vote. 6. It is with warm respect and affectionate regard that we all pledge ourselves to support you in the search for agreement and concord which must always be our first and main purpose in this Council. 7. I have deliberately not spoken before, since the question of the Al Aqsa Mosque is a matter on which it was for representatives of Moslem countries and communities to speak first, 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 other decisions taken earlier by the Council, I shall now invite the representatives of India, Somalia, 8. For the same reason I shall deliberately speak as shortly as possible; for though this is a subject on which we all have 9. I wish to say that I believe that there are three propositions on which we could all readily agree. It is my contention that we state them and endorse them, and that we should do so unanimously in plain and forthright language. That would be to fulfil our proper function in this Council-not to argue over words and so to produce a result unsatisfactory to everyone, but to state strongly and clearly propositions on which we can all whole-heartedly agree. 10. If we can do that, our findings will have maximum effect. We shall have done something positive. Our debate will not have created new barriers. It will have made a contribution not to despair but to hope for the future. 11. What are those propositions on which we could all unite? They are very simple, First we should reaffirm and endorse resolution 252 (1968) of 21 May 1968 and also our resolution 267 (1969) of 3 July 1969 for which we all voted in this Council little over two months ago. That resolution was clear, it was strong, it was unanimous. We do not want or need to add to it. Certainly we do not wish to detract from it. If we tinker with it, it will come to bits. We should not destroy it. We should strongly and unanimously maintain it. 12. Let us say again that the future of the Holy City is a matter of the deepest concern to us all and that we do not accept, that we will not tolerate, any unilateral attempt to prejudice or prejudge it. That should come first. 13. The second proposition on which we all agree is this. Every one of us joins in deploring with the utmost sincerity the dreadful crime of attempting to burn the Mosque. It is a crime which we .all utterly condemn, No one of us hesitates to do so. Surely it would be well for this Council to voice in unequivocal terms the feelings which are shared by people of every religion and in every country. This is no time for unjustified conclusions based on inadequate evidence. I cannot believe that any government, any country, any community would plan or perpetrate such a revolting outrage. This is the time to state a clear conclusion, a strong condemnation of the evil act on behalf of every one of us here. 14. The third proposition I put to you is equally obvious but none the less compelling. We very well know that in the effort to give effect to the principles and purposes of our unanimous resolution of 22 November 1967 [242 (196’7)J we face formidable barriers and obstacles. Many of us are impatient and restless to press on in overcoming them. 15. However, on one issue at least there must surely be spontaneous agreement among us all. Whatever the general settlement, the Holy Places must be preserved. They must be protected. There must be free access to them for those of all religions. The control of the Holy Places must, 16. I trust that even at this stage in our debate we can avoid a result which would in the end pIease none of u;s. 17. We should be content to say in the clearest language conceivable, firstly, that all members of the Council stand on the firm ground we have already taken up on Jerusalem, secondly, that we utterly condemn the attempt to burn the sacred Mosque and, thirdly, that we wish to make what has happened not a reason to give up but a reason to pre;ss on, to press on with our search for the lasting peace which every day becomes more desperately urgent. We should be content with nothing else and nothing less. 18. May I make a further suggestion? We are conscious of the commitments which await us next week at the opening of the twenty-fourth session of the General Assembly. We are naturally anxious to bring our present debate to a conclusion. But what we do or fail to do on this issue will be of far-reaching importance. I very much hope that time will be allowed for further consultations. In the meantime f greatly hope that we can concentrate on the two main purposes on which we are, I believe, unanimously agreed: that is, to reaffirm our stand on Jerusalem and to conldemn the outrageous crime, 19. As for the future, we may pray that Jerusalem and th;!’ Holy Places will one day become not a cause of violence ,. and dissension and conflict but the centre and symbol of a just peace. That must be our overriding hope and our constant aim.

I thank the representative of the United Kingdom for the kind words he has addressed to me. 21. The next speaker on my list is the representative of Ceylon. I invite him to take a place at the Council table SO that he may make his statement.

Mr. President, I thank you and the members of the Council for affording the delegation of Ceylon an opportunity of participatirrg, without the right to vote, in the discussion on the question that has been brought before the Council by 25 Member States. It gives me great pleasure to exercise this privilege under your Presidency. The degree of experience and the measure of sagacity and prudence that you commalld should prove valuable assets to the Council in the orderly and businesslike dispatch of its work. 23. It is many years since the delegation of Ceylon took part in the debates of the Security Council, The last occasion was when we ourselves were members of the Council during the years 1960 and 1961, We have chosen to break our long silence because the question that is now engaging the attention of the Council is one of great moment for the entire world. 2.5. On 23 August the Prime Minister of Ceylon, Mr. Senanayake, in a statement that has been made public, observed: “That damage should have been caused to so historic a place of worship must rouse the deepest sorrow amongst everyone. The people of Ceylon share with their Moslem brethren this sense of deep unhappiness. “Whatever may be the cause of the incident it is essential for world peace that the matter should be investigated by an impartial tribunal and that full restoration and restitution should be made. I do not want at this stage, without a knowledge of the facts, to apportion blame but I cannot help making the comment that when a foreign country occupies by force land belonging to other countries a special onus rests on that country to ensure that places of historic veneration should receive the closest protection,” 1,’ 26. There are implications, both sacred and secular, in this .’ insane act of vandalism, But the delegation of Ceylon does not see this incident as a confrontation between Jew and Moslem or between a demented incendiary and a bewildered regime whose illegal presence serves to aggravate the situation. The feelings of shock, grief and indignation will be assuaged with time; but it is not with those feelings that the Council has to concern itself. As the organ of the United Nations entrusted by its membership with the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security-a responsibility delegated to it by the membership in the interests of prompt and effective action-it is the Council’s duty to examine the real circumstances that have made such a situation possible, and to find the remedy. 27. Surprise has been expressed in certain quarters that the burning of the Al Aqsa Mosque should be cited as an incident of exceptional gravity and one of international significance, It has been stated that there have been fires in other places held sacred by Moslems. To draw such a ’ comparison is to ignore, wittingly or unwittingly, the singular feature that distinguishes the Al Aqsa fire from other fires in Holy Places. This distinction provides the principal justification for the inclusion of the item in the agenda of the Security Council. It lies in the fact that at the time of the fire the’ territory on which the Al Aqsa Mosque stands was under foreign occupation, an occupation established by force of arms and maintained in breach of the principle repeatedly affirmed and emphasized unanimously by the Security Council and the General Assembly, that acquisition of territory by war is inadmissible. If that principle were not scrupulously observed, and if it were not 29. Official Israeli opinion has also been quoted to the effect that any attempt to exploit the fire for purposes of political and religious incitement merits the unqualified condemnation of all enlightened mankind. We are human enough to know, however, that sorrow and indignation often go together, especially when man’s deepest instinct is outraged. 30. In every community, in every society, there are elements that are actuated, on occasions such as this, initially by impulse and emotion. Cold reason and sober reflection are not the attributes of man in the aggregate. If appeals to passion and emotion are the immediate reaction of the aggrieved, they are at least understandable and can, with time and goodwill, be quenched. What cannot be undone is the act of desecration itself. The solution that has to be sought is one that would avert a similar risk in the future. One fact is incontestable, and if that is recognized the sohrtion is obvious. Had the area not been under foreign occupation, the situation which we are discussing could never have arisen. .31. Security Council resolution 242 (1967) provided and still remains the soundest basis for a just and peaceful settlement. We have ourselves expressed concern over Israel’s failure to abide by the Council’s resolution and have stressed the responsibility of the international community-and in particular the four major Powers-for bringing about a settlement in accordance with that resolution. Our position has always been that Israeli forces should withdraw unconditionally from Arab territory to the position they occupied prior to 5 June 1967. This is an indispensable condition for peace in the area. That is the lesson of the Al Aqsa fire. 32. Those who continue to waver on that issue would have failed to learn that lesson and would have added one more to history’s long and tragic list of lost opportunities. The fire that started in Al Aqsa must not be allowed to spread throughout the world. It must not be permitted to consume and destroy, but must be employed to cleanse and heal. It is neither through the punishment of the culprit nor through the restoration of the shrine, nor through the fervent expression of sympathy-the genuineness of which we have no reason to question-that Israel can redeem itself. 34. The portents are there for those who choose to heed them. Indifference could spell disaster. 35. The task before the Security Council is to find that special alchemy that can transmute this fire into a benediction, We wish the Council success in its efforts.

The next speaker on my list is the representative of Malaysia. I invite him to take a place at the Council table so that he may address the Council.

Mr. President, on behalf of my delegation I should like to thank you and, through you, the members of the Security Council, for giving us this opportunity to participate in the deliberations of the Council on a subject which is of grave concern not only to the Moslem world but also to men of all faiths. My delegation has no doubt that under your wise guidance the Council will discharge its heavy responsibilities with justice and fairness, which will go a long way in solving the Middle East question, and at the same time will alleviate the profound grief and sorrow of Moslems everywhere. 38. On 2 July 1969, when the Council was debating the question of the status of Jerusalem, the Malaysian delegation sought the indulgence of the Council members to hear the views of my Government on the subject (S/9302]. Today I come again before you to voice the profound horror and grief of my Government and my people at the burning of the Holy Al Aqsa Mosque. The City of Jerusalem and its holy shrines are subjects very close to the heart of the people in my country. It is because of this that Malaysia, together with 24 other Member States, addressed the joint letter to the President of the Security Council requesting an urgent meeting on an issue of grave consequence to international peace and security [S/9421 and Add. 1 and 21. 39. Statements have already been made by previous speakers on the importance of Jerusalem and its holy shrines, which the representative of Pakistan the other day referred to as “the unique symbol of the confluence of Islam with the sacred traditions of Abraham, Moses and Jesus (1507th meeting, para. 141”. Jerusalem, the Holy City par excellence of Judaism and Christianity, and, after Mecca and Medina, also the chief shrine of Islam, has in an unbroken span of 3,000 years been the centre and goal of religious devotion. Jerusalem is sacred to Islam because our Prophet originally enjoined his followers that prayer be directed towards it, and hence it became the frrst Qibla of 40. The date of 21 August 1969 will long be remembered as a day of tragedy in the annals of Islamic civilization, for on that very day the Holy Al Aqsa Mosque was severely damaged by fire. This act of vandalism has been condemned throughout the world, including my own country. ‘When the news of the fire reached Malaysia, there were wide. spread demonstrations to protest this sacrilegious act. On the following day, 22 August, the Malaysian delegation, together with those of 24 other Moslem countries, sent a joint cable to the Secretary-General and to the President of the Security Council, requesting that appropriate United Nations action be taken in connexion with the act of desecration perpetrated on the Holy Al Aqsa Mosque, For such appropriate action by the United Nations, we envisaged: “(a) an impartial investigation into the grave ‘event of 21 August 1969; (b) preventing the recurrence of any act of vandalism against, or profanation of, the Holy PIaces in Jerusalem; (c) enabling the representatives of the Governments of Islamic countries to assess the damage to the holy Al Aqsa Mosque and to prepare and execute plans for its repair”.1 My delegation still believes that the steps enumarated above are the most urgent and the most suitable to be taken under the auspices of the United Nations. 41. Mr. Tekoah told us the other day that a man, Michael Rohan, a visitor from Australia, had been arrested anil had confessed to his deeds, At the same time we also heard that this Michael Rohan had been living for some months in an Israeli kibbutz. This revelation becomes more significant when the representative of Algeria refers to the existence of fanatical religious sects, such as the “Church of God”, aiming at “the rebuilding of the Tabernacle of David” and “restoring the Kingdom of God to Israel” (1508th meeting, para. 181. My delegation is surprised to note that Such organizations professing religious fanaticism are allowed openly to hold meetings in Israel, since there is nothing to prevent such organizations from using fanatics to desecrate holy shrines. This possibility becomes more ominous whaa we also learn that a large sum of money was found en Michael Rohan at the time when he was arrested, especially when we know that he comes from a wool-shefaring community of humble means. Yesterday the representative of Jordan raised the questions of the delay in the arrival of fire brigades and the stoppage of the water-pumps at the crucial moment. 42. All these factors certainly merit a careful and impartjsl investigation to assess the circumstances leading to the 43. The representative of India echoed a similar sentiment when he said that: 6‘ . . . we cannot escape the conclusion that what happened in Jerusalem on 21 August is the direct consequence of the Israeli occupation of that city and its wanton neglect of the protection of Arab rights there. Israel thus cannot be absolved of responsibility, for this outrage”. (1508th meeting, para.37.1 He had referred earlier to the irony of a State, created by the United Nations, consistently flouting the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council-defiance which had resulted in incidents like the burning of the Al Aqsa. My colleague and friend, Mr. Abdulgani, the representative of Indonesia, also comes to the same conclusion in his statement. A few minutes ago the representative of Ceylon echoed the same sentiment. 44. This brings us back to Security Council resolutions 252 (1968) and 267 (1969), as well as the earlier General Assembly resolutions concerning measures and actions by Israel affecting the status of the City of Jerusalem. AI1 of the above-mentioned resolutions confirm that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel designed to alter the status of Jerusalem are invalid, and that the Council has censured such measures in the strongest terms and has urgently called upon Israel to rescind them forthwith. Yet, in spite of all that, Israel has continued to ignore and defy the United Nations, which created it as a State and gave it life and sustenance. Now it is up to you, Mr. President, and to the members of the Council to examine the agenda before us in this perspective and in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter for the maintenance of international peace and security. 45. My delegation has an abiding faith in the United Nations, and Malaysia is confident that on this occasion, Mr. President, under your guidance, the Security Council will finally be able to bring peace and hope to the Middle East, in spite of the fact that Mrs. Golda Meir has the audacity and temerity to censure this Council and accuse it of interfering in the internal affairs of Israel by discussing the present item on the agenda.

The next speaker on my list is the representative of Israel, who has expressed the desire to speak in exercise of his right of reply.

I have asked to speak in the exercise of the right of reply, as several representatives have 48. It is being asked why I stated that only one tenth of the Mosque was damaged, while some press agencies spoke of extensive damage. The damage caused by the fire was as described by me. Nine tenths of the Mosque remained untouched by the flames. Yet in one tenth, the roof over the southern wing and the pulpit-the Minbar-were almost totally destroyed. Of course, we respect the view that this is an extensive damage, especially in a building of such historic significance and deep spiritual value. 49. Another question is that of the duration of the fire. As already explained by me, the fire was noticed by the Moslem watchmen of the Mosque at approximately 7.20 a.m. It was mastered by 8.30. From then onwards the firemen were occupied with the embers. 50. Attention was also drawn to the fact that different accounts of the cause of the fire were circulating in Jerusalem, some of them originating from Mosque personnel and the firemen, during the first hours following the outbreak, when inquisitiveness and excitement were at their peak. Is this not natural? Is it a legitimate ground for criticism that later in the day, in the light of evidence and expert examinations of the traces of the fire in the building itself, new light was thrown on the circumstances, which the Government of Israel made public? 5 1. Some previous speakers had referred to certain comments by She&h Helmi Al-Muhtasib, in a press conference he held in Jerusalem, which were not among the Sheikh’s statements quoted by me. Indeed, I confined myself to those of the Sheikh’s statements which bore directly upon the fire. If the Sheikh decided to take the opportunity of his press conference to go beyond this subject and to express views, some of them not exactly laudatory of my Government, that only illustrates the freedom of expression enjoyed in Jerusalem. 52. Another point wl+ch has come up relates to alleged designs to rebuild the ancient Hebrew Temple. Quotations were made from some eccentric views uttered in Israel. The position of the Government of Israel, made public at a World Rabbinical Conference in Jerusalem on 12 August 1967 and repeated several times since, was expressed by the Minister of Religious Affairs as follows: “According to the Halacha”-basic Jewish religious concepts-“the Temple will be rebuilt when the Messiah will have come. It is therefore inconceivable that we ourselves should make any plans for the rebuilding of the Temple.” 53. The question on the agenda is the burning of the Al Aqsa. We all share in the feelings of sorrow and shock at this grievous occurrence. Let us not mar our common concern for the restoration of Al Aqsa to its full beauty by concluding our deliberations on a note of asperity and political controversy, [The speaker continued in Hebrew] “Remove all sorrow, hatred, strife Spread Thy Tabernacle of peace, 0 Lord O$er us, over the house of Israel and Over Jerusalem, we pray.”

The list of speakers is exhausted. As a result of consultations with the members of the Security Council, it appears that the majority, for various reasons, is in favour of having the next meeting of the Council to continue the discussion of this question on Monday morning. In order to conclude this matter, therefore, I should like to suggest that the next meeting of the Council be held on Monday, 15 September, at 10.30 a.m. If there are no other proposals and no objections regarding this matter, I shall take it that the proposal is accepted. It was so decided.

The representative of Pakistan has asked to make a statement. I now call on him,

Mr. President, in deference to your wish that my delegation introduce the draft resolution on the question before us in order to enable all Member States to have time to reflect on the text and to obtain instructions from their Governments, I shall present the text, which reflects the consensus of the 25 Member States that requested the Council to meet to consider the grievous situation caused by the event of 21 August 1969. The text reads as follows: The Security Council, “Grieved at the extensive damage caused by arson to tile Holy Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem on 21 August 1969 under the military occupation of Israel, “Mindful of the consequent loss to human culture, “Having heard the statements made before the Council reflecting the universal outrage caused by the act of sacrilege in one of the most venerated shrines of mankind, “‘Recalling its resolutions 252 (1968) of 21 May 1968 and 267 (1969) of 3 July 1969 and the earlier General Assembly resolutions 2253 (ES-V) and 2254 (ES-V) of 4 and 14 July 1967, respectively, concerning measures and actions by Israel affecting the status of the City of Jerusalem, “Reafjrming the established principle that acquisition of territory by military conquest is inadmissible, “1. Reaffirms its resolutions 252 (1968) and 267 (1969); “3. Determines that the execrable act of desecration and profanation of the Holy Al Aqsa Mosque emphasises the immediate necessity of Israel’s desisting from acting in violation of the aforesaid resolutions and rescinding forthwith all measures and actions taken by it desiglned to alter the status of Jerusalem; “4. Calls upon Israel scrupulously to observe the provisions of the Geneva Conventions* governing military occupation and to refrain from causing any hindrance to the discharge of the established functions of the Supreme Moslem Council of Jerusalem, including any co-operation that Council may desire from countries with prcdomi. nantly Moslem population and from Moslem communities in relation to its plans for the maintenance and repair of the Islamic Holy Places in Jerusalem; “5. Condemns the failure of Israel to comply tvith the aforementioned resolutions and calls upon it to implcment forthwith the provisions of these resolutions; “6. Reiterates the determination in operative paragraph 7 of resolution 267 (I 969) that, in the eveut of a negative response or no response, the Security Council shall convene without delay to consider what further action should bc taken in this matter; “7. Requests the Secretary-General to follow closely the implementation of the present resolution and to report thereon to the Security Council at the t:arliest possible date.” (S/.9445./ 58. I shall, I hope, have the occasion at the next meeting of the Council to recapitulate the salient points ‘of the debate and to show how this draft responds to them. Al this time I shall only stress the principal considerations behind the draft resolution that I have just read out. 59. First, the extensive damage caused by arson to the Holy Al Aqsa Mosque is a grievous event which represerlts a loss to human culture. I can say with certainty that this point has already been endorsed by world public opinioa. 60. Second, any act of destruction or profanation of the Holy Places, religious buildings and sites in Jerusalem has the potentiality of disrupting international peace and security. That point was never in dispute, but it has been powerfully brought home to us by the grave repercussleas of the incident of 21 August. These repercussions are limitless in their very nature. It is not necessary for file to cite evidence of the violent reaction of the entire Moslea~ world, The representative of Israel quoted yesterday tile remarks’of some individuals from Moslem populations and a string of quotations from certain sections of the world press. I could also, if I wished to do so, read hundredsof statements by the most reputable journalists and news. 2 Ecneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 (United Nntiow WQfJ Series, vol. 75 (1950), Nos. 970-973). .’ 61. Third, the Security Council has already called upon Israel to rescind forthwith all measures and actions taken by it designed to alter the status of Jerusalem. If the Council felt the need, as it did, to make this call when no grave event had yet taken place, how much more is the need emphasized by the occurrence of the grave and tragic event of 21 August? To say this is not to prejudge the issue of cl-iminal responsibility; it is only to state an obvious political fact. 67. I turn now to paragraph 3, which reads: 62. I do not need to comment elaborately on the text of the draft resolution which I have just read out. The preambular part does not call for any elucidation. Paragraph 1 merely reaffirms the previous Security Council resolutions on Jerusalem. In this particular paragraph we do not go beyond what has already been demanded in Security Council resolutions 252 (1968) and 267 (1969). I should like to make it clear that, in this paragraph that I have just read out, we allege no complicity by Israel in the act. To see a connexion between the act of arson and the direct complicity or otherwise of Israel in that regard is to give a meaning to our text which was not our intention to give. I state this as a clarification of paragraph 3 for the benefit of the members of the Council. 63. Paragraph 2 states a reality which has been brought home forcefully to all of us: “ . . . that any act of destruction or profanation of the Holy Places, religious buildings and sites in Jerusalem or any encouragement of, or connivance at, any such act may seriously endanger international peace and security”. 64. In this context let me state that the great Moslem community of the India-Pakistan subcontinent has had a historic concern with the fate of the Moslem Holy Places. It will be recalled that in 1914 when the Ottoman Empire was at war with the Government of the United Kingdom-which then ruled the subcontinent of India-the Indian-Moslem community, through its leaders, sent a memorial, a formal statement, to the British Government. It should be appreciated that this was sent in 1914, when independence movements had not taken birth. At that time even the idea of home rule for India was considered revdlutionary and the Indian peoples considered themselves to be loyal subjects of His Britannic Majesty. Yet at that time the leaders of the great Indian-Moslem community, under the leadership of Maulana Muhammad Ali, declared in a formal statement to the British Government that they found it an intolerable situation when their spiritual allegiance to the Caliph, who was the Ottoman ruler, the Sultan of Turkey, was in conflict with their loyalty to the King-Emperor, His Britannic Majesty; and since they were called upon to choose, they would opt for their spiritual loyalty and take the consequences. 68. I come now to paragraph 4; it is self-evident. The representative of Israel has referred to the Supreme Moslem Council, the high authority of the Moslems in Jerusalem, which is concerned with the restoration of the Holy Mosque. All we desire is that there should be no obstruo tion or hindrance in its efforts to restore the venerated shrine. 69, Paragraph 5 reads : Let me state that it does not make us happy to come here to call for the condemnation of Israel, But what choice does Israel leave us? The elimination of this paragraph is entirely in the hands of Israel. We wish that it could make some response to world opinion. If there were the elements of moderation in the attitude of Israel, the picture could be 66. Hence, we consider that any act of desecration, destruction or profanation of the Holy Places of Islam and the lack of decorum in the religious buildings and sites in Jerusalem are a matter of deep anguish and concern to us and may seriously endanger international peace. “Determines that the execrable act of desecration and profanation of the Holy Al Aqsa Mosque emphasizes the immediate necessity of Israel’s desisting from acting in violation of the aforesaid resolutions and rescinding forthwith all measures and actions taken by it designed to alter the status of Jerusalem”, “Condemns the failure of Israel to comply with the aforementioned resolutions and calls upon it to implee ment forthwith the provisions of these resolutions”. 70. Let us turn now to paragraph 6. It is a reiteration of a paragraph which is to be found in resolution 267 (1969). 7 1. Paragraph 7 requests the Secretary-General to follow closely the implementation of this resolution. 72. In my statement to the Security Council on 9 September, I pleaded that the Council should view the issue before it in the perspective of civilization. I stated then that “It was a basic confidence of our times that , . . war apart, vandalism against one people by another had become unthinkable” [1507th meeking, para. 9/. This confidence was shattered on 21 August 1969 when arson was committed in the Holy Al Aqsa Mosque, causing extensive damage to one of the holiest shrines of Islam. It is this confidence which needs to be restored, or else there can be little prospect of lasting peace in the world. It is to this goal that we must turn our sights and our efforts, because when 25 countries of the Moslem world acting together in unity and solidarity requested the convening of the Security Council, 73. I reserve the right of my delegation to elaborate more fully at a subsequent meeting of the Security Council on the grave matters before us.

I thank the representative of Pakistan and wish to express my appreciation to him for having met the wishes voicied by many members of the Security Council to have the draft resolution [S/9445/ on the question before us introduced at today’s meeting. This will give the members of the Council the opportunity to study that draft resolution in greater detail, while those members of the CounciI who will find it necessary to hold consultations and receive instructions from their Governments will have sufficient time to do so. 75. I should like to remind the Council once again that, as we have agreed, the next meeting will take place on Monday, 15 September, at lo:30 a.m., to continue the discussion of this question. In this regard, I should like to inform the members of the Council that in the course of today’s consultations many members expressed the wish to conclude our discussion of this question on Mond,ay, to express their views on the draft resolution, to discuss it and take a decision on it, The meeting rose at 5 p.m. . . HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Notions publications may be obtained from bookstores and distributors throughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write to: United Nations, Sales Section, New York or Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publications der Notions Unies rant en vente dons ler librairies et les agences d6positairer du monde entier. Informez-vow aupr& de votre librairie ou adresser-vous b: Nations Unies, Section des venter, New York ou Gen&ve. KAK flOflYClMTb MSAAHHFl OPrAHM3ALlMM 06bEAHHEHHblX HAL(HR Il:~~ill~lltl Oprar~~t:~a~~Ilu OGzcfinllcmras IIal~llir ~loitil10 IiyullTh n l~llIl~lilll~lS muuiwax II ill'CIIT~'TIi:IS 110 IWCS pN"lOllaX Wlpa. hnO~&lTC Ulp~llIilI 06 Il:l,$~llIlllX II IMlUCJI I~llllilillOY WtWl:lIlllC IlaM lIllUlllTC 110 UlNX'j-: O~Wlllll3tll(lIJl ~iiZC~IIIICIIlII,IS Ihl\llil. CCliltlI~l 110 upo~mc II:I~~II~~~, IIhdlopl~ am 3Cc1tena. COMO CONSEGLJIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Los publicacioner de Ias Naciones Unidos ertdn en venta en librerias y casas dirtribuidoras en todos portes del mundo. Consulte a su librero o dirfjase 0: Nociones Unidos, Secci6n de Vent-x, Nuevo York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations, New York Price: $U.S. 0.50 (or equivalent in other currencies) 82235-December 1972-2W