S/PV.1719 Security Council

I should like to inform members of the Security Council that, as President of the Council, I have received letters from the representatives of Guyana and Mauritania requesting that their delegations be invited to take part, without the right to vote, in consideration of the question before the Council at this meeting. In accordance with established practice and the provisional rules of procedure I propose to invite the representatives of Guyana and Mauritania to take pa& without the right to vote, in the Security Council’s examination of the situation in the Middle East. Adoption of the agenda The agenda was adopted. The situation in the Middle East : (a) Security Council resolution 331 (1973); (b) Report of the Secretary-General under Security Council resolution 331 (1973) (S/10929) 1. The PRESIDENT (translation from Russian}: I should Iike to draw the attention of members of the Security Council to the latest official documents of the Council, issued this morning, which have a direct bearing on the Council’s examination of the situation in the Middle East. The first document [S/l 09#2/ contains a message from His Majesty King Hassan II of Morocco addressed to Mr. Waldheim, Secretary-General. In addition to setting forth Morocco’s position on the substance of the situation in the Middle East, the message draws attention to the important role which the United Nations can and must play in settling the Middle East problem. At he invitation of the President, Mr. R. E. Jackson (Guyana) and Mr. M. El Hassen (Mauritania) took the places reserved for them at the side of the Council table.

The representative of the United Arab Emirates is first on the list of speakers for today’s meeting. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. President, first of all I should like to convey to you my congratulations and my warmest wishes for your success in your tenure as President of the Council, a duty which you are discharging with such responsibility. I should like also to thank you and the members of the Council for having allowed me to participate in this debate on a situation which continues to deteriorate. 2. The second document (S/10943] contains a resolution of the jubilee session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the Organization of African Unity (OAU). The resolution is entitled “The continued occupation by Israel of part of the territory of the Arab Republic of Egypt”. It was introduced at yesterday’s meeting of the Security Council by Mr. Arikpo, Commissioner for External Affairs of Nigeria. 7. If we thought it our duty to participate in this debate, it was because we are very much concerned about the crisis afflicting our Organization, the United Nations. This crisis 3. In accordance with the decisions taken by the Council at previous meetings I shall, with the consent of the “Our geographical position in the Gulf has given us a vital interest in the maintenance of peace and stability in that important . . . area of the world.“1 Those words were spoken by our Foreign Minister, Mr. Soweidi, to the General Assembly on 27 September 1972. I must add that we are attempting to bring up our new generation to believe in the United Nations, to love instead of to hate, to build instead of to destroy, to hope instead of to despair, to love all men whether they be white, black or yellow, whether they be Christians, Moslems, Jewish or anything else. But how do you expect us to succeed in this task when we are dealing with a generation which continues to see a portion of the Arab world, to which it belongs moreover, usurped by an occupier who makes a mockery of the United Nations and its resolutions? 8. We are witnessing a reraxation of tension throughout the world. This is a fact, a fact on which we congratulate ourselves. On the other hand, we are also witnessing the fact that this relaxation of tension-or rather this balance of terror-has enabled Israel to play with fire. 9. There is little purpose to be served in repeating this: the principal task of the United Nations is above all to bring order and peace to reign in international relations. However, the experiences we have had have shown that where you find colonialism, where you find peoples deprived of the right to self-determination, you have a source of disturbance of the peace. What is more, recent experience has demonstrated that in our international society when there is a people that is struggling for its self-determination other nations cannot stand by with their arms folded. The Palestine people is no exception to this rule. Moreover, the most recent debates in the Council, on the Israeli aggression of 10 April last against Lebanon, bear me out in what I say. The world is becoming increasingly convinced that as long as the Palestine people are deprived of their fundamental rights in their ancestral homeland there can be no settlement, no peace, in the Middle East. 10. I do not want to waste the Council’s time by repeating everything that has been said in the Council on this point, but what is disturbing is that the Zionist authorities continue to deny even the existence of this Palestine people. What is more, it is attempting to justify the expulsion of Arab inhabitants from the occupied territories by arguments that reffect the true face of zionism. 11, In July 1972 the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahuranath published an article by the Israeli journalist, Yeshayaou Ben 12. On 30 April last the Israeli Ambassador in Paris, Mr. Ben Natan, stated to four journalists in the course of a television interview on Channel Two that “the Palestinians are not interlocuters, because they have no State”. Then someone put to him the following delicate question: “Must the Palestinians be persecuted for 2000 years before you will recognize them? “. Here again you have a question which everyone, and above all the Jews, should think about and think about in great depth. 13. At the last session of the General Assembly we discussed a complicated problem of our times, namely, the problem of violence, or what some people wanted to call “international terrorism”. 14. In this connexion, on 21 November 1972 we said that violence was continuing to disturb the peace, not only in the Middle East but throughout the world. Nevertheless, we remain convinced that the final solution to this problem is to be found in the elimination of the deep-rooted causes of such violence. We also said-and we repeat-that the injustice which still reigns in our international society and the ineffectiveness of our Organization, the United Nations, in uprooting that injustice are at the very foundation of the continuation and aggravation of this problem. 15. That is where we find ourselves today. We now are witnessing a new phenomenon of terrorism: terrorism by a State, a State that is after all a Member of the United Nations, a State which engages in terrorism and does not even deny having engaged in it, but which, on the contrary, affirms its intention to go on doing so. 16. Lastly, I should like to say a few words about the report prepared by the Secretary-General pursuant to resolution 331 (1973), adopted by the Security Council on 20 April last. We do not want to say any more than he himself has said, and I prefer to quote his very words and to do so in English: ‘&. . . great efforts but little progress” [I 717th meeting, para. 16J. 17. We appreciate the efforts made by the Secretary-General, and we believe as he does that the tensions and the conflicts in the Middle East weigh heavily not o@ on the countries of the region but also on the international community as a whole. 18. The Government of the United Arab Emirates firmly believes that peace and stability cannot be restored to the 19, I should like to conclude this statement with an appeal-an appeal already made by our former colleague Sir Colin Crowe to this Council on 17 April last. He said: “Something must be done, and it must be done urgently. The danger to peace in the Middle East region is such that none of us can afford to allow the present deadlock to persist indefinitely.” (I 708th meeting, pnra. 14.1 2.5. Non-aligned countries have over the years pronounced themselves on this question. Yesterday we were given graphic and elucidating expositions by the Commissioner for External Affairs of Nigeria and the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the United Republic of Tanzania of the grave concern for this question by the Organization of African Unity and the strenuous and dedicated efforts made by that organization to find a just solution to the problems which exist in the Middle East. This is not the first time that this Organization has been made aware of that concern.

I now invite the representative of Guyana, the next speaker on the list of speakers for today’s meeting, to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. President, it is my first and pleasant duty to express the gratitude of my delegation to you and, through you, to the members of this Council for permitting me to participate in this debate. My second, and equally pleasant, duty is to congratulate you on your accession to the office of President of the Security Council for this month of June. You will, I am confident, bring to bear in the discharge of your onerous responsibilities the characteristics of wisdom and finely balanced judgement for which you have such a well-earned reputation, 26. From all these efforts-and indeed from others, some of which are bilateral in nature-certain principles have emerged, principles which are cardinal to the establishment in the Middle East of a regime of peace founded on justice, morality and the rule of law. 27. We cannot, in working towards the fulfilment of our hopes and aspirations for a just and peaceful world, negate respect for the purposes and principles of the Charter of this Organization, particularly when the commitment and behaviour required of us is adherence to the resolutions and decisions which flow from our collective resolve to implement those very purposes and principles. We cannot contemplate a resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict which is not premised on a solution to the central issue of the plight of the dispossessed Palestinian Arabs. And we cannot, in whatever is done in this unhappy situation, condone, even inferentially, the acquisition of territory by the threat or use of force in flagrant violation of international law. 22. The matter of which this Council is currently seized, the situation in the Middle East, is one which has engaged the attention of the Security Council, the General Assembly and other organs of the United Nations for many years-indeed, for nearly as long as the Organization itself has existed. It is a matter which has been debated comprehensively in its totality and also in several of its aspects. I venture to suggest that there is no absence of adequate guidelines in the numerous resolutions which can be found in the records of this Organization-guidelines which delineate the path towards the achievement of a just and lasting peace in the area. So far, however, those resolutions and decisions have remained principally of archival value; they are there for the scholar to read, but their essential quality suffers from the apparent lack of will on the part of this Organization to take the necessary and appropriate steps to secure their implementation. 28. Six years ago this Council considered the Middle East situation in all its aspects. During these six years we have waited, not passively, for some advancement towards genuine peace. But the goal of peace has continued to elude us. We stand today at the crossroads in the quest for a solution to the impasse in the Middle East. 23. This seeming ineffectuality is of particular concern to small countries like mine-countries which have affirmed, in the words of the Lusaka Declaration of 1970, “their deep conviction that the United Nations provides the most effective means to maintain and promote international peace and security, strengthen freedom, and harmonize relations between States,” We reject the concept of an international political system rooted in naked power and sustained by an arrogant and unyielding exercise of that power. Our faith in the United Nations is strengthened by the growing awareness that the interdependence of the States and peoples of this planet enjoins us to place more reliance on the inevitability of multilateral diplomatic activities. 29. A lack of decisive action by the Council now will, in the view of my delegation, face us with two possibilities, both equally dangerous. Failure to chart a way to durable peace at this time can lead to more embittered frustration than even now exists. Such a failure can exacerbate the situation and give further encouragement to the processes of confrontation leading to hostilities. The second possibility of the lack of movement forward at this juncture is the maintenance of the status quo. Such an eventuality will inevitably lead to the violation of the principIes which I outlined earlier, encompassing in its effects a cloak of legitimacy by acquiescence of acts of aggression and the institutionalization of illegality. 31. In the course of the deliberations of this Council due account will no doubt be taken of the views expressed in this chamber. In this regard the valuable report of the Secretary-General in document S/10929 should have an important bearing on the Council’s work, containing as it does a review and appraisal of the efforts made so far under the auspices of the United Nations to find a solution to this vexed question. But it is the hope of my delegation that the Council’s conclusions will be informed by opinions and considerations expressed outside this chamber, views representative and reflective of the grave concern, which is widespread, over the dangers inherent in the current situation. 32. It is in this context that I wish to draw to your attention the resolution on the Middle East adopted by the Conference of Foreign Ministers of Non-Aligned Countries held in Georgetown, Guyana, in August last year. That Conference authorized its Chairman, my Foreign Minister, Mr. Shridath Ramphal, to transmit its conclusions to the Secretary-General for distribution to Member States of this Organization. And that mandate has been discharged. The resolution expresses, inter alia, the solidarity of non-aligned countries with Egypt, Jordan and Syria in their legitimate struggle to recover by every means their territorial integrity; it calls for the full restoration of the rights of the Arab people of Palestine; it acknowledges unequivocally that the acquisition of territory through force is wholly impermissible, and records the intention of non-aligned countries to follow closely the evolution of the situation in the Middle East. 33. Having regard, Mr. President, to the particular importance of the subject under discussion during the current series of meetings of the Security Council, I would request you to circulate as an official document of this Council the text of that resolution, a copy of which will be made available immediately.

The resolution which the representative of Guyana referred to will be issued as a document of the Security Council.2 35. I call on the representative of Israel, to speak in exercise of his right of reply,

In at least one respect there seems to be some benefit in the fact that many Arab representatives have asked to participate in our deliberations. Indeed, there could be no better, no more convincing way to demonstrate the more sinister elements in the Arab attitude towards Israel and the gravity of the Arab designs on the Jewish people’s freedom and sovereignty than by reference to the statements delivered by Arab spokesmen. 2 Subsequently circulated in document S/10944. 38. The representative of the United Arab Emirates today only strengthened the realization that the Arab States continue to deny the Jewish people’s right to self-determination and independence. Some, like Syria and others, do it overtly and specifically; others, like Egypt, resort to terminology somewhat more veiled but still sufficiently clear. 39. Thus, surrounded by States which refuse to recognize the justice of the Jewish people’s rebirth in its historic homeland and aspire to Israel’s destruction, Israel would be fully entitled, morally and legally, to conclude that the Arab States have forfeited all their claims in relation to Israel. No principle and no rule can prejudice the right to self-preservation and defence. This, indeed, is the foundation of international law and of the United Nations Charter. 40. Instead, Israel says to the Arab States: “Let us negotiate peace, let us replace the cease-fire lines resulting from the Arab war of aggression waged against Israel since 1948 by secure, agreed, recognized boundaries.” In these circumstances the Arab refusal to negotiate has an ominous meaning. As the Foreign Minister of Israel stated in the General Assembly on 19 September 1969: “The emphasis that any Government places on negotiation is not an obsession with procedure. It is the heart and centre of the problem. For a refusal to ne otiate is fl inherently identical with a refusal to establis peace. How can a transition from prolonged belligerency to peaceful coexistence be carried out on the basis of diplomatic boycott and ostracism? Never, never in the history of our times have two States passed from a state of war to a state of peace on the basis of a refusal by one to meet the other.“3 Indeed, negotiation is the only way to peace, but in the Israel-Arab conflict negotiation has also become the test of a desire for peace. Agreement, and therefore negotiation, is the very essence of resolution 242 (1967). 41. The Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations who received the Nobel Prize for bringing about through negotiation the only agreements between Israel and the “Well, are you saying then that eventually Israel and the Arabs must somehow negotiate, and if so, how can they do it? ” 47. Now, there is a call for negotiations-call them talks through Jarring or any kind of negotiations, direct or indirect. The invitation is launched here, and, since we must use our logic and our minds, we must connect this with what was said yesterday. Those negotiations would have to be either as requested by or on the conditions of Israel, which is convinced that acquisition of territories by force is permissible, or they would have to take place on the basis of the principle that acquisition of territories is not permissible-the principle in which we believe and in which I hope the 15 members around this table believe. That would be then done against the will and against the unreadiness of Israel. And he answered: “Well, this is, of course, implicit in the whole formula from the beginning that Jarring’s role, which has not been defined as a mediator in the sense of advancing proposals and trial and error, but his role is to promote agreement amongst the parties. That is what the resolution calls for, you see ,” In fact, a year and a half earlier, Ambassador Jarring did try to initiate meetings between the parties. Egypt refused. 48. If we are going to proceed as Israel wants, I do not think we need the Council or the United Nations or anything, really. We nee< to go and reread the history of the world before the Charter. The victor dictates to the vanquished, the vanquished goes and harbours new intentions for launching a new war to get back what was taken from him by force. It is that simple. It does not warrant my presence here. 42. The Secretary for Foreign Affairs of the State which sponsored the text of resolution 242 (1967), Sir Alec Douglas-Home of the United Kingdom, declared in the General Assembly on 29 September 1971: ‘I , . . if war is to be avoided, those who are in confrontation must actively help to promote a dialogue. . . . unless a mechanism of dialogue can be established, sooner or later-and maybe sooner than later-the fighting will start again. . , . 49. If we take the second possibility, then what is going to oblige Israel to do anything contrary to its will expressed here plainly? I suggest that the Council has the power to get Israel to fall in line with international law and to be subject to international law which, incidentally, it obliged itself to respect by signing the Charter and by remaining a Member of the United Nations. How can the Council do that? The Charter gives the Council the right to impose sanctions. I did not even contemplate the possibility of the Council doing so-for the reasons I mentioned before that are known to all, Until we persuade every nation around this Council to be more faithfill to the Charter than to its own friendships and weaknesses, I am not going to speak about sanctions. “Confidence can only be established in this case through dialogue. . . When there is distrust between the parties of this depth and scope, it cannot be removed by long-distance correspondence, and the onus of adopting dialogue must rest with those who now confront each other in arms. It is for us to help them to find the way to do it-and I emphasize again that the time is short. This is a case where dialogue must supplant confrontation.“” 43. That is the question now facing the Security Council. Will it help the parties to a dialogue? Will it encourage the initiation of a process of negotiation? 50. So what is left for us is a resolution spelling out plainly and in basic language that territories cannot be acquired by force and that “withdrawal from the territories occupied” means withdrawal from the territories occu. pied-in French, in Spanish, in Russian, in Chinese and also in English. And that, boiled down, is our reason for coming to the Council: not to change resolution 242 (1967)-although we do not want even to mention that resolution, because if there exists a Council resolution partitioning Egypt, 1 do not want to hear about it-but to make sure that the Council never intended, does not intend and will never intend, without breaching the Charter, that territories of Egypt or Syria or Jordan could be annexed because there was a victory in June 1967. 44, The PRESIDENT (translation from Russian): 1 call on the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Arab Republic of J&w.

I have said before, and I repeat, that our effort is always going to remain within the United Nations, subject to the decisions of the Security Council and the General Assembly. 46. Mr. President, yesterday we took note, you took note, of the refusal of the Israeli representative-his unreadiness or unwillingness-to reaffirm that the State of Israel is 4 Ibid., Twenty-sixth Session, Plenary Meetings, 1944th meeting, paras. 97-98. 77te meeting rose at IISO a.m. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Nations 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 des Nations Unies sont en vente dans les librairies et les aimnces depositaires du monde entier. Informea-vous aupres de votre libraire ou adressea-vous R : Nations Unies. Section des ventes, New York ou Geneve. ICAKC KKOKY’KHTb H3AAFWffI OPI’AHII 3AQWi OE’IDEAUHEHHI>IX HAU;HH COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas estin en venta en librerias y casas distribuidoras en todas partes de1 mundo. Consulte a su librero o dirijase a: Naciones Unidas, Section de Ventas, Nueva York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations, New York Price: $lJ.S. 1.00 (or equivalent in other currencies) 82001-May 1979-2,200