S/PV.1652 Security Council

SimilarlY, in accordance with the previous decision of the Council, and with the consent of the Council, rpropt~se to invite fie representatives of Afghanistan, Mauritania and Morocco to take places at the side of the Council chamber, On the understanding that they will be invited to take Places at the Council table when they wish to make statements. present; The rePresentatives of the following &l&S: Argefltlna, Belgium, China, Pranciz, &rim!% India, Italy, Japan, Panama, Somalia, Sudan, Union of Soviet Socialist Repub]ja, United Kingdom of C;reat BfitCliIl and Northern Ireland, United States of America and ~ugclrshvia. At the invitation of the President, Mr. M. H. Aryubi l4$anistml, Mr. M. El Hassen (Mauritania) and Mr. M. Mb Zentar (MOWCO) took the places reserved for them. Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/ X652) 1, Adoption of the ii@lldil. 2, Tile situation in the Middle EUSI: [a) Letter dated 5 July lo7: from fllc Permanent Representative of the Sy?rian Arab Republic to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/107.X1 j; (b) Letter dated S July 1072 from the Charge d’affaircs

The Council has before it the draft resolution contained irr document S/10742, dated 20 July 1972, which has been distributed in the respective working languages. 4. The first speaker is the representative of Somalia, on whom I now call. ad inter& of the I’crnun~cnt hiissinn of Lebanon to the United Nations addrcsscd to the President of the Security Council (S/ 1073 1).

On behalf of the delegations of Guinea, Sudan, Yugoslavia and my own delegation I have the honour to introduce the draft resolution contained in document S/10742. The meeting was called to order of 5, I II p.m. Adoption of the agenda 6. We are now concluding a debate on a matter of which the Security Council was first seized almost three weeks ago-to be correct on 23 June, It will be recalled that, at the time, the discussion took three days and on the conclusion of that first part of the debate, on 26 June, the Council adopted resolution 316 (1972) by a significant vote of 13 votes in favour with just 2 abstentions. It is not the intention of my delegation to go into or reopen that debate, But it is important that we should now recall resolution 316 (1972) in so far as it relates to a request submitted by the delegations of the Syrian Arab Republic and Lebanon relating to the abduction of a number of Syrian and Lebanese military and security personnel from l&anon by Israeli armed forces. The agenda was adopted, The situation in the Middle I&t: k4 Letter dated 5 July 1972 from the Permanent Rcpre. sentative of the Syrkm Ammb Republic to the United Nations addressed to the Prtztie~~t of the Security Council (S/10730); C) Letter dated 5 July 1972 from the ChwgrS d’nffakesti interim of the Pernwrnt Mision of Lebanon to the U&i Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/ 1073 X ) 1, ‘fhe PRESIDENT lirrrer/,rtrrrrriort jl~tn A’pmlisltj: In accordance with the Previous decision of the Council 11651~ meetingJ, I propose, with the Council’s cansent, to lrrvite the relxesentatives of the Syrian Arab Republic and Lebanon to t&c places at the Council table in order to participate, without vote, in the Council’s discussion of this item, 7. Paragraphs 3 and 4 of resolution 3 16 (1972) are quite explicit on this particular aspect of the problem. In paragraph 3 the Council: “Expresses the strong desire that appropriate steps will lead, as an immediate consequence, to the release in the shortest possible time of all Syrian and Lebanese military and security personnel abducted by Israeli armed forces on 21 June 1972 on Lebanese territory;“. At the invitation of the Pre&ent, Mr, G. J. Tomeh @‘hi Arab Republic) and Mr, E+ (‘;&ma (Lcbantm j took Ph’s at the Council tab/e. 8. It will be recalled that on 5 July the Council was seized of two communications submitted to it by the delegations of Lebanon [S/10731/ and the Syrian Arab Republic [s/~oz?o] recahing paragraphs 3 and 4 of resolution 316 (1972) and inquiring, quite rightly, what action the Council proposes to take. As a result of suggestions by well-meaning delegations and Governments concerned in the matter, and indeed also by the Secretary-General, certain efforts were made outside of the Council chamber in an effort to obtain redress. The delegations of the Syrian Arab Republic and Lebanon were prevailed upon not to press for a Council meeting so that the wheels of quiet diplomacy might be able to function and perhaps achieve some measure of success. We know that, unfortunately, this has not been the case. 9. Two days ago, Mr. President, you relayed to this Council a message from the Secretary-General /see 1651st meeting, para. 1421 on the results of his own efforts to secure the release of these personnel, and in that message the Secretary-General pointed out that, unfortunately, his efforts had not met with success. However, he did say that he would pursue his efforts with all parties concerned in this matter by any means available to him. Furthermore, we know that you yourself, Sir, both as President of the Security Council and In your capacity as the representative of Argentina, have also attempted to exercise your good offices in the question but, like the Secretary-General, you also have not had much success. However, since diplomacy always hinges upon the need to keep on trying when failure occurs, it does appear to the sponsors of this draft resolution that further efforts should be made in order to secure the release of these personnel without delay. 10. The draft resolution which I am introducing is straightforward. Operative paragraph 1 reaffirms resolution 316 (1972). ‘Paragraph 2 deplores the fact-and this quite rightly-that efforts have not yet been able to secure the release of the Syrian and Lebanese military and security personnel who have been abducted. Paragraph 3 “Calls upon Israel for the return of the above-mentioned personnel without delay”, Paragraph 4 requests that the President of the Council and the Secretary-General “make renewed efforts to secure the implementation of the present resolution”, Il. As I said earlier, it is not my intention to reopen the debate. We feel that here we should concern ourselves primarily with the release of these kidnapped or abducted persons and that we should try to ensure that the decisions of the Council are respected; that the rule of international law must prevail; that no Member State of this Organization can expect to enjoy a privileged position whereby when it suits its purpose it can turn to the Council and when that is against its interests it can turn its back on the Council. We are an assembly of equalsand we are all tied and bound to 13. I trust that it will be possible for the Council to express itself urgently on the draft resolution before it.

Since this is the first time I am speaking this month before the Council on a substantive question, I should Iike to congratulate you most cordial&, Mr. President, on your accession to the Presidency of the Council, The dynamism and skill with which you have been discharging your many responsibilities as President habc already earned our admiration. We are confident that the work of the Council will benefit from your direction, aod my delegation would like to assure you of our full support in aarrying it out. 15. It was only recently, on 23 June 1972, that the Council had to meet to consider once again another aggravation of the situation in West Asia. I indicated dutig that debate [1649th meeting], the general principles and the comprehensive approach which inform the Government of India’s policy towards this problem. 16. Today, however, we are not meeting for a general discussion. Today we are concerned with a clearsut situation expressed in the letters addressed to the President of the Security Council on 5 July by Syria and Lebanon. It relates simply to the full implementation of the 1st resolution adopted by the Council. After resolution 316 (1972) was adopted on 26 June 1972, I said: “ 1.. we most earnestly hope that the resolution witt k fully implemented so that the present difficulties can be overcome. Such implementation will help the renewal of the Jarring mission for the application of resolution 242 (1967), which alone can contribute effectively towards a permanent solution of the problem of West Asia.” [ 1650th meeting, para. 1 OSJ 17. Despite the efforts of both the President of the Security Council and the Secretary-General, as well as many others in the paat days, paragraph 3 of that resolution has not yet been implemented by Israel. The representatives cf Syria and Lebanon requested the Council to deal with this urgent and pressing question nearly two weeks ago. The patience and forbearance which they have shown in the 18. It is in the context of the need for present action and he past record of Israel’s persistent non-compliance with resolutions of the Council that we must view the straightforward issue of the return of the Syrian and Lebanese personnel abducted by Israel. No attempts should be permitted to confuse this issue with the other issue of the return of combatants captured by the different sides in the course of war. No amount of sophisticated and unnecessarily complicated argument can change such kidnapping to something else, We are, therefore, opposed to attempts to obscure this matter by linking it with issues which are not relevant to it. 23. On 26 June the Council adopted resolution 316 (1972) condemning Israel for its aggression against Lebanon and demanding the release in the shortest possible time of all Syrian and Lebanese military and security personnel abducted by Israeli armed forces on Lebanese territory. This resolution obtained the support of the overwhelming majority of the States members of the Council. Immediately upcn the adoption of that resolution by the Council, the Israeli representative slanderously described it as “immoral”. Since then, the Israeli authorities have refused to implement it and refused to release the abducted personnel. The facts show that the Israeli Zionists had no desire at all to implement resolutiort 316 (1972). From the very beginning of the abduction, they have been propagating a so-called “general exchange of prisoners of war” in an attempt to use the abducted Syrian and Lebanese personnel as prisoners of war in exchange for the Israeli prisoners of war now in the hands of Syria, Egypt and other countries. This is a sheer arrogant and baseless demand with ulterior motives. 19. We hope that this question will be faced squarely within the clearly defined parameters of the relevant provisions of resolution 316 (1972): that is, the noncompliance of Israel and the need for further action as specified in those provisions. It is on this basis that my delegation will support the draft resolution [S/10742] submitted by the representative of Somalia on behalf of his delegation as well as of the delegations of Guinea, the Sudan and Yugoslavia. Indeed, there are elements in this draft resolution which we would have liked to be strengthened, but we realize that the present wording has been arrived at as a result of negotiations, We would have indeed been ready to co-sponsor the draft resolution, but it is nearly 5.30 in the morning in New Delhi now and there simply has not been time to obtain formal approval of my Government for such co-sponsoring. 24. As is known to all, the Israeli troops’ invasion of Lebanese territory and abduction of Syrian and Lebanese personnel are outright crimes of aggression and acts of piracy. The illegally abducted personnel are not prisoners of war at all. In paragraph 3 of its resolution 316 (1972), the Council has in effect confirmed that the Syrian and Lebanese personnel were abducted by Israeli invading forces on Lebanese territory, and has thus rejected the unreasonable demand of the Israeli authorities that they be exchanged as “prisoners of war”. 20, May I conclude with a general observation. Even a cursory examination of the many statements of the representative of Israel-absent today-shows quite clearly that Israel has developed an acute persecution complex. Given the experience and achievement of the Jewish race over the years, this is understandable, but it seems to us that these are the very reasons why we can expect them, aad the Israelis in particular, to demonstrate sympathy for and understanding and acceptance of the difficulties which the Arab countries face because of the Israeli action in 1967. Once Israel realizes that it has to live in peace and cooperation with the Arab world, this will make it possible for IsraeI, even at this late stage, to participate fully in the efforts of Mr. Jarring for the full implementation of resolution 242 (1967), including full withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Arab countries, This and this alone will reduce tension and bring about conditions in which they can all come to live in peace. Meanwhile, time is against us and we must do all we can to remove such temporary irritants as the abduction of Syrian and Lebanese officers and men-not officers only-from Lebanon on 21 June. The next step will then be the revival of the Jarring mission and, through this machinery, all the elements of resolution 242 (1967) can be negotiated and settled. 25. In using the abducted personnel as “prisoners of war” for exchange, the Israeli authorities want the Security Council to accept their acts of piracy and to recognize them as lawful. The Chinese delegation maintains that the Council should uphold principle and categorically reject the arrogant claim of the Israeli representative. For it is quite obvious that the acceptance of Israel’s claim would be tantamount to submitting to the Israeli authorities’ international blackmail by means of abduction and to recognizing resolution 316 (1972) as “immoral”; it would be tantamount to recognizing that the Israeli Zionists are entitled to trample upon the principles of the United Nations Charter at will and to refuse to implement that resolution, That would be abetting and conniving at aggression, which no justice-upholding country can possibly permit, 26. The Chinese delegation holds that the Security Council must severely condemn the Israeli authorities for their refusal to implement the resolution of the Council and must firmly reject their using abduction as a means for blackmail; the Council must ask the Israeli authorities to return immediately and unconditionally the abducted Syrian and Lebanese personnel. Should the Israeli authorities continue their obdurate refusal to implement the

I wish to thank the representative of India for the very kind words he addressed to me.

Mr. President, it gives mY delegation great pleasure to see you presiding over the deliberations of the Security Council. YOUr qualities as an experienced diplomat have been amply demonstrated in the wisdom and patience with which you have so far guided the deliberations of the Council. We are sure that your guidance will enhance the prestige of the Council and bring its efforts success. 29. The Security Council is once again called upon to deal with another facet of the saga of Israeli aggression and intransigence. The Council, less than four weeks ago, adopted a resolution by an overwhelming majority calling for the immediate release of the abducted Syrian and Lebanese security and military personnel. We pointed out at that time, and we reiterate, that the Israeli action of 21 June was an act carried out in contravention of all norms of international law and decent behaviour of civilized people. The Israeli act stands legally invalid and morally condemned. It is a culmination of a position publicly declared at the beginning of June, following the incident at Lad airport. It was then stated by Israeli officials that retaliation would definitely follow, but they needed time for premeditation. It was then pointed out to the President of the Security Council and to the Secretary-General that Israel was making those threats contrary to the Charter of the United Nations; but, has Israel ever respected the Charter of the Organization to which it owes its own existence? We submit-and the Council is aware-that Israel boasts of trampling on it. 30. In an unabashed manner Israel tries to invoke the I949 Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War in regard to a situation which Israel engineered and created. Is it not an irony that Israel, which has recently been condemned by the Commission on Human Rights in its resolution 3 (XXVIII) of 22 March 1972,l for committing crimes of war contrary to the Geneva Convention, is trying to invoke this Convention here? Are we to be treated to the customary Israeli manner of selecting what suits it, even if that is out of context, and discar&ng the rest? Where does Israel stand in regard to the Geneva COnVentiOns when every day it demolishes the houses and deports the inhabitants of the territories it occupies? 31. What is at stake today is not the release of the abducted Syrian and Lebanese personnel. What is at stake is the prestige and authority of the United Nations reprcsented by the Security Council. 32. Time-worn traditions teach us a significant lesson which should be heeded in our day: that what brought an end to the prosperity and civilization of the Sabeans was 33. Israel called it, on a past occasion, morally and I bankrupt. On that occasion Israel, in the paper distri by it immediately after its refusal to come befare tk Council, on 18 July, describing Council resolu&& 316 (1972), had this to say: “The resolution bro reproof and censure from public opinion media in all pa of the world.” What public opinion media and what p,nr of the world? It is a calculated, deliberate policy as” slandering the Council which has never failed to un& Israel’s Nazi-like expansionism and arrogance of powa before the whole world. The same paper from Mr. T&o& continued in the same disdainful strain: “Now Syria and Lebanon complain that this ill-concei~d document has not earned Xsrael’s respect, , . . Syria ZQ Lebanon are undoubtedly aware that one-sided re&&- tions disregarding Israel’s rights under the Charter of t&e United Nations have never proved effective, whetbr adopted by the Security Council or by the Ge Assembly. The arithmetic of vote in itself is not en to cloak a resolution in the mantle of judiciousness. resolutions have always remained powerless to weakrn Israel’s defence of its legitimate position,” Furthermore, the same paper stated the following about &e terminology this important Council had correctly chosen te use: “Reference to the Syrian and Lebanese milira~ personnel taken prisoner on 21 June as ‘abducted’ is a~ absurdity in fact and in law .” 34. One may justifiably inquire what this august bo& & going to do with this incorrigible defiant outlaw of ~PL;P time: give him more freedom of speech to display contempt and defiance; lavish him with the tha tolerance of a spoiled mischievous child-the same in&& gence bestowed in a similar historical context on t’i)e conceited conqueror of Ethiopia or on the conqueror 0’; Czechoslovakia and Poland; or just allow him to go ow gnawing his way like that rat which started it once upon 2 time in the dike of Mariaba? 36, The implementation of IllilKly a resoluticin of the council is IOII~ overdtiet and rrsolution 3 1 h (lY77) is the last in a long series. It is up to this Ctluncil to restore its credjbility and scIf-respect and act significantly and rcsolutely now, before it is to0 late. 37a The PRESIDENT (i~lti~r~rrt~t~~tiirr~ firm @utliadl): 1 thank the represcntativc of the Sudan for the friendly words be so kindly addressed to me. 38, 1 have no more flamcS 011 my IiSt 0f st”eakcrs, for the the being. ‘J’Jle repreSc?~ltiltiVC of Somalia, 0n hchaIf tsf the sponsors of the draft resolution [&V/I 07421 ,-~namely the d&gStionS of Guinea a Somalia, the %lhJl and Yugoslat&-has requested that the We 011 that draft hc taken at tjis afternoon’s meeting. UlllCSS thcrc arc any ohjcctions, we shall proceed to the vote and thcrt cxIllanations of vote will be heard after the vote. 44. That is why I should like to appeal to you, Sir, as President of the Council, to be kind enough to ask the COUI~ to accede to my request for adjournment, taking into account particularly that because of our national holiday today it has been impossible for me to get in touch with my Foreign Minister. If the Council does not find it possible to accede to this request, I shall be obliged to make a motion on the basis of rule 33, paragraph3, of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, which relates to the adjournment of a meeting, until tomorrow morning at 10.30 or I1 o’clock, for example. 39, Mr, RIOS [Panama) /itI tqKwWNkm j~om $wtislr): I $ould like to make a hricf statcmcnt which could, at the same time, be an explanation of vote. 4, The matters being dealt with by the Security (‘ouncil are, In fact, very important. Every word uttered here, whether approved of or not, must IX the result of mature reflection and of consultations with our foreign ministries. We have just received a draft rcsoluticrn which was introduced by the representative r,f Somalia with arguments that are worthy of full respect. N~~rthcle~~, my delegation deeply regrets that it is not able trr vote cm this draft, since we must consult with our Foreign Ministry. That being so, may I respectfully request that, if po&blc, wc do not prop teed to the vote this afternoon, Should thcrc bc a vote today, my delegation would have to abstain. It is a fact that the draft now before us reaffirms wsolu tion 3 16 (I 972) and, as everybody knows, Panama abstaFnad when that resolution was voted on, for reasons explained by Ambassador Royd at the time, A vote in favour or a vote against at this time would mean a change in the vote WC cast on 26 June, which is mnethhlg that cannot be dune without authizntion from our Foreign Ministry,

For mote or less the same reasons, two delegations, those of Panama and Belgium, have requested the Council to accede to their appeal that the Council adjourn-until tomorrow morning, in the case of one of them-so as to enable them to get in touch with their respective Governments and request the relcvafl,t instructions. I should like to consult the sponsors of the draft resolution as to whether they would have any objection to following the procedure requested by the delegations of Panama and Belgium. 46. Mr, FARAH (Somalia): My delegation had, in company with the other sponsors of the draft resolution, anticipated that one or two delegations here would not find it possible to vote openly in favour of the draft this afternoon, awing to Jack of instructions, and that they might wish to seek an adjournment until tomorrow. 47. Now, if the sponsors were assured that a delay of 24 hours would also bring about, say, in the case of Panama, a change of attitude-since Panama abstained on resoIution 316 (11)72)-we would find no difficulty in adjourning discussion of the matter until tomorrow. But since we have not had any indication to that effect from Panama, it certainly would not alter the situation if we adjourned for 24 or 48 hours, since the pOSitiOn of Panama, if it is

I call ca the representative of Belgium, who wishes to speak on a point of order. 4% Mr, VZUI USSEL (Belgium) (intetprerution from fieflchl: I a190 would take the liberty, like the rcprcscntndve of Panama, of requesting the Council to be kind eac%h to adjourn this meeting until, for example, tomorrow morning at 10,30. In point of fact, I find myself in a @Cd sbitiOn as this is the national holiday of Belgium andj for understandable reasons, It is difficult for me to get in touch with my Foreign Minister or with the Director- General of the Political Department. I think 1 may ressonably appeal to the kindness and courtesy of all the predicated on resolution 316 (1972), is already known. 48, Wjth regard to the request of the representative of Belgium, my delegation appreciates that there is a national holiday in Belgium and would have hoped that he would have awaited the response of the sponsors before jumping 49. However, as I have said, this is a matter on which the four sponsors would have to consult, and I would ask that the meeting be suspended for a few minutes so as to enable consuftations to take place, because what is uppermost in our minds is the release of these personnel. They have been held unjustly, illegally and against all norms of international law, for over 24 days. The Council must act.

First of all, I think it is in order for me on behalf of the Council to transmit to the representative of Belgium our congratulations on the national holiday his country is celebrating. 51. Secondly, as regards the suspension for a few minutes requested by the representative of Somdia, I think it might be very useful for the sponsors to consult in regard to the requests of the delegations of Panama and Belgium. I hope that perhaps 1.5 minutes will be enough, and unless I hear any objections the meeting will be suspended for fifteen minutes. The meeting was suspended at 5.55 p.m. and resumed at 6.IOp.m,

I believe that the consultations agong the sponsors have now ended, and I call on the representative of Somalia to report on the results.

The sponsors have met, and in view of the two requests made to them for a postponement of the voting until tomorrow, they have agreed to such a postponement. They feel that this is a matter on which they would like to get the full support of all delegations, and if a delay is likely to bring about a greater number of votes in favour of the draft resolution, then certainly they do not wish to do anything to impede such a development. At Litho In United Nations, New York Price: $IJ.S. 1.00 (or equivalent in other currencies) 54. Before concluding, I should like to extend to the delegation of Belgium the rather belated expression of the congratulations of my delegation on this their National day.

1 thank the sponsors of the draft resolution for their kind co-operation with regard to the request submitted by the delegations of Panama and Belgium. At the same time, taking note of the second part of the representative of Somalia’s statement, I should like to associate myself witi what he said, and that is that we might save time if any delegation wishing to speak now with regard to the draft resolution were to do so, so that when we meet tomorrow we can proceed directly to the vote.

IN the first place, I should like to tell our good friend, Ambassador Farah of Somalia, how grateful we are for the kind manner in which the sponsors have acceded to our request. At the same time I wish to make it perfectly clear that of course I, as the representative of my Government here, will not venture to prejudge what decision will be adopted when I proceed to my consultations,

Doa any representative wish to speak on the agenda item or to explain his vote before the vote? If not, we shall meet tomorrow at 10.30 a.m. to continue consideration of the item on the agenda. The first order of business, unless there is any objection, will be the vote on the draft resolution contained in document S/10742 and, as is customary always, that will be followed by the explanations of vote of delegations wishing to give such explanations after the vote.

Mr. President, I should simply like to express my very deep gratitude for the particularly kind words which you yourself, as well as a number of members of the Council, have uttered in connexion with the tuitional holiday of Belgium. I was also very touched by the display of courtesy which was shown by the sponsors in granting this amount of time for our delegation to seek instructions from Brussels in connexion with this draft resolution. The meeting rose at 6.15 p.m.