S/PV.2213 Security Council

In accordance with the decision taken at the 2212th meeting, I invite the representative of Lebanon to take a place at the Council table. At the invitation (zf the President, Mr. Ta&i (Leh- ~~?on) took a place at the Council tuble.

I wish to inform the members of the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Israel, Jordan and the Netherlands in which they request to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on the agenda. In accordance with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite those representatives to participate in the discussion, without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant Provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the provisional rules of procedure. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Blurn (Israel), Mr. Nuseibeh (Jordan) and Mr. van Buuren (Netherlands) took the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber.

I should like to inform the members of the Council that I have received a letter dated 13 April from the representative of Tunisia [s/13889] which reads as follows: “I have the honour to request that the Security Council extend an invitation to the representative of the Palestine Liberation Organization to participate in the consideration of the agenda item ‘The situation in the Middle East’, in accordance with the Council’s usual practice.” 4. The proposal of the representative of Tunisia is not made under rule 37 or rule 39 of the provisional rules of procedure but, if approved by the Council, the invitation to participate in the debate would confer on the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) the same rights of participation as those conferred on a Member State when it was invited to participate under rule 37. 5. Does any member of the Council wish to speak on this proposal? 6. Mr. vanden HEUVEL (United States of America): The United States delegation has repeatedly made clear our view that it is inappropriate for the Council to couch an invitation to the Palestine Liberation Organisation to participate in the debate in terms that some seek to interpret as conferring rights of participation as if the PLO were a Member State. For this reason, we will once again vote against the manner in which this invitation is phrased.

As no other member of the Council wishes to speak I will now put to the vote the proposal of the representative of Tunisia. A vote was taken by show of hands. Against: United States of America Abstaining: France, Norway, Portugal, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland The proposal was adopted by 10 votes to I, MJith 4 abstentions. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Terzi (Palesfine Liberation Orgarzization) took the place reserved for him at the side of tha Council chamber.

I now wish to inform the members of the Council that I have received another letter dated 13 April, from the representative of Tunisia [S/13890], which reads as fo1Iows: “I have the honour to request the Security Council to extend an invitation to Mr. Clovis Maksoud, Permanent Observer of the League of Arab States to the United Nations, to participate in the consideration of the item entitled ‘The situation in the Middle East’, in accordance with rule 39 of the provisional rules of procedure.” Unless I hear any objection, I shall take it that the Council decides to accede to this request. It was so decided.

The Secretary-General wishes to make a statement, and I now call on him.

It may be useful to the members of the Council if I give a brief account of developments since its meeting yesterday 112212th meeting], 11. I have this morning been officially informed by the Permanent Mission of Israel on behalf of its Government that all Israeli troops have now withdrawn from southern Lebanon. However, the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) has been unable to confirm the extent of the withdrawal, as its freedom of movement in the encfave is still severely restricted. This situation illustrates once again how essential it is for UNIFIL to have complete and unrestricted freedom of movement in its entire area of operation. 12. In the UNIFIL area the situation is quiet, but still tense, as efforts to defuse the situation continue. There will be a further meeting to this end with all the parties concerned on Wednesday 16 April in Nazareth. In the mean time, however, UNIFIL’s situation remains extremely difficult. As a result of the 13. I am continuing my efforts at all levels to remedy this extremely grave situation, and I shall keep the Council informed of further developments.

The first speaker is the representative of Lebanon. I now call tIpon him. 15. Mr. TUI?NI (Lebanon): Before beginning my statement, I should like to inform the Council of an important development. The Commander-in-chief of the Lebanese Army, Genera1 Victor Khoury, yesterday evening addressed to General Emmanuel Erskine, Commander of UNIFIL, a message proposing that the Lebanese detachment of the UNIFIL area of operations be moved to At-Tiri to share in the responsibilities of peace-keeping. 16. I felt that this was a major development of which I had to inform the Council, not only because of its symbolic value as yet another step towards enabling Lebanon to recover its sovereignty, but also because the Lebanese Army, thus acquiring a new dimension as a peace-keeping force, will stand side by side with soldiers who have come from countries as far away as Fiji and Ireland, to mention only those, for the defence of the cause of peace and international law and order. 17. Two years ago we met in this very chamber to debate, as we are doing today, an Israeli invasion of my country. We then created-25 months ago-what we thought would be an interim peace-keeping force, a very interim force indeed, some of us thought. We thought and hoped that Israel would comply with the unanimous, unequivocal and very determined resolution adopted by the Council on 19 March 1978 [resolution 42.5 (1978)]. By that resolution, the Council called for “strict respect for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries” and called upon Israel “immediately to cease its military action against Lebanese territorial integrity and withdraw forthwith its forces from all Lebanese territory”. 18. Since then, the Council has held innumerable debates on the continued Israeli aggression against 24. My second conclusion is the following. The socalled Lebanese de facto forces, whatever the context within which they were deveIoped, have become nothing but an accessory of Israel’s occupation. Their acts are not only shameful, irresponsible and inadmissible, they are, in Lebanon’s judgement, a dangerous form of treason, dangerous to the unity and integrity of Lebanon and dangerous to the safety and security of the peace-keeping forces. From a reading of the news from Israel and some United Nations reports from the field, one is even tempted to believe that Major Haddad has become dangerous to himself, to the people he claims to represent and, last but not least, to his Israeli supporters. If he has not yet become a danger to Israel, he has certainly ceased to be an asset and may have become a useless embarrassment. 19, Mr. President, this is your first debate on Lebanon ;ince your election to the Council. It is reassuring for 1s that you should be in the Chair, as it has become :ustomary to expect from the President, while the zouncil is debating peace-keeping in Lebanon, great Batience, an acute sensitivity about human rights, ~tl unfaltering concern for international justice and, Lbove all, an unparalleled dedication to the ideals of Beace, liberty and national dignity and independence. fou have displayed all these qualities, which are nherent in your country’s political culture. The -ebanese who, for almost a century now, have found L haven in Mexico are a living testimony of our respect br your heritage and our sense of the community of he Mexican and Lebanese peoples’ aspirations. therefore hope that you will hear our case today kom that point of view. 25. In the interests of peace and in compliance with the resolutions of the Council, an end must be put to the very existence of the so-called defrrcfo forces. All the parties concerned must unconditionally co-operate with the Secretary-General and UNIFIL in the dismantling of every possible obstacle that may prevent the total deployment of UNIFIL, the safety and freedom of action of the Force and the full implementation of the Council’s resolutions, for nothing short of that can be conducive to the objective conditions that will guarantee security in the area and prevent any further menace to international peace in the Middle East. ‘0. We have read with the greatest interest the ‘pecial report submitted to the Council by the Secreary-General on 11 April [S/13888]. The Council has 11so heard Mr. Waldheim during the consultations on “riday and yesterday. We have also heard him this clorning, as we heard him yesterday in his statement opening the present debate. In those statements, the Secretary-General conveyed to us in precise and lucid anguage the indisputable facts of the peace-keeping ragedy as well as the miseries of a land-my homeand-which has been raped and destroyed. He also nvited the Council to address itself to the very fundanental question of the future of peace-keeping and LOW we can enable UNIFIL to carry out the peace- :eeping responsibilities entrusted to it by the Council. 26. My third conclusion is the following. The cowardly and foolish attacks against the positions and men of the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) are now acquiring a most dangerous dimension. The very validity of Lebanon’s international borders is being questioned through the rejection of the Armistice Agreement and the Armistice Line, which is nothing else in Lebanon’s case but its internationally recognized boundaries. We expect all those-friends and foes afike-who claim to seek peace in the area on the basis of mutual recognition of sovereignty and the inalienable right to selfdetermination and secure borders, not to tamper with but rather to defend the one frontier which has never yet been questioned in the Middle East, the frontier of the most peace-loving country, which has been a casualty of both tiar and peace. :I* My delegation has nothing to add to the reports before us, so let me be very brief and merely submit vhat we believe to be the logical, and hence unavoid- .ble, conclusions, in the light of Council resolutions, barticularly resolutions 425 (1978), 426 (1978) and 459 1979). .2. First, Israel has not, as it claimed on 13 June 1978 s’/12736], withdrawn from Lebanon. It: has always ,een there and has now returned in force, claiming he right to conduct military action within our interlationally recognized boundaries, on the fallacious .nd inadmissible pretext of acting in self-defence and Dr its own protection. This violation of international aw must be condemned, and every relevant provision 27. In this context, we want once more to reassert the total solidarity of the League of Arab States, including the Palestine Liberation Organization, with 28. Allow me now to conclude by stating what we specifically request from this Council. 29. In its resolution 459 (1979), the Council once more expressed its feeling that my Government, in consultation with the Secretary-General, should draw up a joint programme of action to implement UNIFIL’s mandate. Such a programme was drawn up and submitted to the Secretary-General on 26 January. 30. We had hoped that it would be possible to build on what had been so painstakingly achieved by UNIFIL in four long, yet all interim, mandates. Today we are back at the very beginning, in a situation which is, I dare say, worse than what we were in on I9 March 1978, because not only has Lebanon been invaded again but the peace-keepers have themselves been attacked and abused, have had their credibility challenged and their very safety threatened beyond all tolerable limits. 3 1. While paying a tribute to UNIFIL for its valiant action, we, and they, have the right to expect from the Council a resolution clearly leading to the following: -First, an immediate cessation of all acts of hostility against UNIFIL; -Secondly, a free, unhindered and total deployment of UNIFIL up to the internationally recognized boundaries; -Thirdly, a specific and clear injunction to all concerned to enable UNIFIL to use all its powers not only to protect its own security, which is paramount, but also to oppose all those who use force against peacekeeping; indeed, UNIFIL must be given the means to shoulder the mandate that it was given by this Council; -Fourthly, a condemnation of Israel’s aggression, the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all Israeli army units, and the dismantling and disarming of its surrogate "de facto forces”; -Fifthly, a reactivation of the General Armistice Agreement, with its appropriate structures and provisions, particularly UNTSO, as the only valid framework for the security of all on the Israeli-Lebanese

We have met today to consider the particularly disturbing situation prevailing in southern Lebanon. The reports which the Secretary-General has made to us, in particular that of yesterday and the one he has just made to the Council, leave no doubt about the attacks on UNIFIL or the seriousness of the damage caused by the harassment on 12 April, particularly to the Force’s headquarters in Naqoura, which is UNIFIL’s centre of operations. 34. We deplore the intervention of Israeli forces in southern Lebanon. This is an inadmissible infringement of Lebanon’s territorial integrity and sovereignty; it constitutes a violation of the United Nations Charter and particularly of the United Nations resolutions on UNIFIL. Of course, we take note of the information given today to the Secretary-General by the Permanent Mission of Israel with regard to the total withdrawal of Israeli forces. But, as we have just learned, the Secretary-General is not yet in a position to confirm that withdrawal, because of UNIFIL’s lack of freedom of movement in the area allocated to it under its mandate, It is extremely important, therefore, for the Force to be able to enjoy complete freedom of movement in its area of operation. 35. We also condemn the operations launched against UNIFIL over the last few days by the clefacto forces. We may wonder about the supposed advantage to be derived from such activities by these elements which, thanks to their substantial equipment, have been able to engage in murderous operations against a force whose peace-keeping mission restricts its ability to respond. We shall not attempt to describe these feats of arms so cheaply performed at the expense of the soldiers of peace. 36. These various actions introduce an additional element of complication into a region that is already seriously disturbed. They also seriously interfere with the role of UNIFIL as laid down in resolution 425 (1978)-and thus, the prestige and credibility of the United Nations. This role, which is more indispensable than ever, not only to prevent a general resumP tion of fighting but also to reduce incidents, must be preserved at all costs. In the interest of effectiveness, we might even contemplate a stricter application of the terms of UNIFIL’s mandate relating to cases of legiti- 37. We should like to take this opportunity to pay a tribute to the spirit of sacrifice and the discipline displayed by all the officers and men of UNIFIL in particularly difficult circumstances in the performance of their mission. We express our admiration for the way in which the Irish contingent faced up to a harassing situation. I should also like to convey my condolences to the representative of Fiji on the loss of a soldier from his country’s contingent in the course of the clashes on 12 April, 44. Israel has expressed these sentiments more than once, and they constitute the foundation of its policy towards Lebanon. Regrettably, scant notice has been taken of Israel’s neighbourly goodwill. The cancerous presence, in Lebanon generally and in the south of the country in particular, of the terrorist PLO, and internecine violence, as well as the massive presence of the Syrian occupation forces, have reduced Lebanese sovereignty to a shambles. The high hopes entertained by many that the deployment of UNIFIL would, in the language of resolution 425 (1978), help in “restoring international peace and security and assisting the Government of Lebanon in ensuring the return of its effective authority in the area” have not. been fulfilled, notwithstanding the courage and patience almost invariably displayed by the officers and men of UNIFIL. There is a continuing, indeed a growing, presence of PLO agents and operatives in UNIFIL’s area of operation. These terrorists harass the villagers in the small area between UNIFIL’s area of operation and the border of Israel, whose defence is in the hands of the local Lebanese forces under the command of Major Haddad. We are fully aware that at times there is regrettable and perhaps even unnecessary and avoidable friction between these local forces and UNIFIL, but we cannot help wondering whether the capacity of some to acquiesce in the presence of PLO terrorists and their provocations against the local villagers is not considerably greater than their understanding of and empathy with the reactions to these sinister PLO designs on the part of their intended victims. 38. As it has stated repeatedly, the French Government has always condemned all acts of violence and terrorism, particularly the taking of children as hostages at the Misgav Am Kibbutz, an act whose odious nature no consideration can mitigate. My Government once again recalled its position on this point very recently, on 11 April, in the French National Assembly. Such acts serve only to underscore the need for and the urgency of a negotiated and balanced settlement in the region. 39. We fully approve of the positions taken by the Lebanese Government with regard to UNIFIL in the letter which the representative of Lebanon addressed to the President of the Council on 10 April [s/13885]. In this connection, France wishes to recall the importance it attaches to respect for the territorial ivtegrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its borders. We cannot, therefore, allow those principles to be periodically threatened, and we are determined to make every effort to see that they are recognized by everyone.

The next speaker is the representative of Israel, on whom I now call. 45. As on previous occasions, attempts are being made to gloss over the real issues relating to UNIFIL’s mandate. Let me remind the members of the Council that UNIFIL was established not only for the purpose of confirming the withdrawal of Israel from Lebanon -which was in fact completed and confirmed by the UNIFIL Commander on 13 June 1978-but also for the twin purposes of “restoring international peace and security and assisting the Government of Lebanon in ensuring the return of its effective authority in the area”. In order to achieve those purposes, UNIFIL was ordered to prevent the infiltration of armed personnel into the areas under its control, an instruction aimed at preventing the PLO from returning to the region, which was free of their presence at the time of UNIFIL’s establishment, this being a necessary condition for the establishment of international peace and security. 4 I. Mr. BLUM (Israel): Since this is the first time that I have addressed the Council this month, Mr. President, let me take this opportunity of conveying to you my felicitations on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the month of April. You represent a country with which mine has the friendliest and most cordial of relations and you personally have exhibited qualities of diplomacy and statesmanship which augur well, not only for your conduct of the Council’s business this month, but also for the two years during which Mexico will serve on the Council and will, I am confident, contribute positively to its work. 42. Let me also take this opportunity of expressing my compliments to the representative of Jamaica, who conducted the Council’s business last month in an exemplary fashion, with all his customary aplomb. 46. Council members are well aware that, unfortunately, UNIFIL has been unable to achieve its 43. The Government of Israel deeply deplores the current tension in the south of Lebanon. It does SO no 47. According to information in the possession of the Government of Israel, the PLO and its associates have established themselves in about 40 locations within UNIFIL’s area of operation, and they are several hundred strong. There may be discrepancies between Israel’s count and that of UNIFIL, but there is no difference of opinion about the fact that that presence has grown over the last 12 months, let alone since the time of UNIFIL’s arrival in 1978, when it was zero-as observed by the Commander of UNIFIL, Ma;jor General Erskine, in the interview he gave, published in The Ti’nzes of London, on 11 March last. 48. The several hundred PLO terrorists located throughout UNIFIL’s area of operation are to be found in small pockets, larger encampments, and even in private houses in villages. They carry out various activities in the area of operation, including patrols, and enter villages to pressure, blackmail and intimidate the local population-not to mention the obvious, namely to harass the United Nations forces. 49. The large terrorist presence in UNIFIL’s area of operation and the increasing frequency of the terrorists’ attempts to infiltrate that area not only demonstrate how serious the terrorist activity is, they also point to the fact that many terrorist infiltrators have escaped UNIFIL’s notice. In addition, they suggest that even those who have been caught are likely to succeed in infiltrating the area the next time around. 50. Members of the Council will readily understand that we are talking here of a considerable threat by the PLO to three tangible targets: to the citizens of Israel, particularly in the north of the country; to the villagers in southern Lebanon; and to the men of 51. The hundreds of PLO terrorists within UNIFIL’s area of operation are, of course, additional to the 1,500 PLO terrorists under arms in the “Tyre pocket” south of the Litani river, reaching to within eight miles of Israel’s northern border. 52. This is by no means the end of the story, because directly north of the Litani river, in Nabatiye and in the region of Sidon, not to speak of Beirut and Tripoli, another 10,000 to 12,000 PLO terrorists are to be found. This, then, is the true measure of the problem. Until it is faced, no real improvement in the situation can be expected. 53. It should be borne in mind that virtually all of the UNIFIL soldiers who lost their lives as a result of hostile action in recent months were killed, directly or indirectly, by PLO activities, as has been the case with regard to the overwhelming majority of the fatalities which UNIFIL has suffered in the line of duty since its inception in March 1978. 54. In this connection, Israel would like to extend its deepest condolences to the families of the men of UNIFIL who made the ultimate sacrifice in southern Lebanon in recent months. We also wish to express our wishes for a full and speedy recovery to those officers and men who were wounded in the clashes. 55. The PLO’s tactics are well known. As has been their deliberate practice in the past, they hide behind refugees and Lebanese villagers. They do so for the transparent purpose of shielding themselves and making it all the more difficult to root them out. Moreover, in southern Lebanon there is an additional element in the PLO’s tactics. There they are also hiding behind the shield of the United Nations peacekeeping forces. This surely is totally inadmissible and must be regarded for what it is: the total abuse of international peace-keeping. 56. As has been acknowledged by the Secretary General in several of his reports concerning UNIFIL the situation in the south of Lebanon cannot be detached from the situation in the country as a whole, Attempts to detach it will not enhance the cause of international peace and security and in fact are bound to fail. 57. Not only do Syria and the PLO continue to exploit the agony and turmoil of Lebanon, but other Arab States also continue to see in the crisis of Lebanon a means of advancing their own partisan aims within the well-known web of inter-Arab rivalries, This tragic phenomenon came out into the open at the “the Lebanese Government must be able to dictate where Palestinian commando forces are based; the commandos must stop military operations against Israel from south Lebanon”. 63. But to return to Misgav Am, the Kibbutz guards quickly gained control of one of the nursery buildings and freed the children and several mothers inside, Later, an Israel army unit, which was rushed to the scene, engaged the terrorists at the second nursery building. By 10 o’clock in the morning the children and other hostages there had been freed and the five terrorists had been killed. 58. I should also like to draw the attention of the Council to remarks made last December by the Prime Minister of Lebanon with regard to the PLO terrorist presence in the south of his country. In an interview in the Lebanese newspaper Monday Morning of 10 December, Mr. Al-Hoss said that the terrorist presence in UNIFIL’s area of operation violated Security Council resolutions. He continued by saying that his country would try to bring about the thinning down or the total withdrawal of the terrorists in that area. Not only have the PLO terrorists not withdrawn from UNIFIL’s area of operation in the intervening period but their numbers have even increased since. 64. All of us saw on television, in horrifically vivid colours, the gruesome acts carried out by the terrorists against innocent babes and toddlers. All of us have seen the horror pictures published in the press, pictures of children’s cribs and play-rooms riddled with bullets, stained with blood. 6.5. Here at the United Nations attempts are being made to manipulate the Security Council, as well as other organs of the Organization, to suit the whims and wishes of the terrorist PLO. This travesty has reached such proportions that, in the meetings of the Council held last week, at the instigation of the PLO, no speaker-not one speaker-saw fit even to mention the atrocity perpetrated by PLO thugs at Misgav Am, let alone condemn it. Incidentally, the PLO boasted that criminals of various nationalities from Syria to Pakistan participated in this outrage. I am sure all those countries must be exceedingly proud of this contribution to humanity. 59. Shortly after midnight on the night of 6 to 7 April, five PLO criminals penetrated into Israel from UNIFIL’s area of operation in southern Lebanon. They entered Kibbutz Misgav Am, about half a mile from the border with Lebanon, and seized two nursery buildings in which innocent children, all less than three years old, were sleeping, together with some nursing mothers. 60. The terrorists’ aim was to take the infants hostage and hold them to ransom in an attempt to gain the release of 50 PLO criminals sentenced by Israel courts to various terms of imprisonment. Beyond that, the PLO timed their attack, in the same way as the Council’s deliberations were staged in the last fortnight, with the obvious purpose of trying to disrupt the current talks between the leaders of Israel, Egypt and the United States further to promote the peace process in the Middle East. 66, Once again, at Misgav Am, the true face of the PLO was revealed. Israel was in no need of such an ugly reminder, for the violent images of their savagery are burnt deep into our consciousness. We are entitled to expect that the correct lesson will be drawn also by those statesmen and politicians who still entertain illusions about the PLO’s professed moderation. 67. It is not simply that these terrorist thugs set out on their murder mission on the last day of the Passover festival in order to turn what is otherwise a joyous occasion into a tragedy of unspeakable human grief. It is not just that these PLO thugs stoop so low in their cowardice and in their total lack of human feeling as to take hostage babes in arms. Children have for years now been a prime target of PLO terror. Thus, for example, in May 1970 a school bus from Avivim was viciously attacked near Bar-Am, close to the border with Lebanon and not far from Kibbutz Misgav Am. That horrendous act resulted in the death of nine children and three adults, as well as the wounding of 19 small children, most of whom were still in primary school. 61. A terrorist group which belongs to the PLO, calling itself the “Arab Liberation Front” and operating under the direction of PLO headquarters at Sidon in southern Lebanon, immediately took responsibility for this outrage, which resulted in the deaths of a toddler and a valiant civilian, as well as the wounding of four toddlers, together with the death of an Israel Defence Forces soldier and the injury of 11 other soldiers in the actions taken to free the little hostages. 62. AS is well known, the PLO is nothing but an instrument in the hands of the Arab States which created it, The particular terrorist group which Perpetrated the outrage at Misgav Am has close connections with Iraq, and in their announcement taking 69. Last Monday’s outrage at Misgav Am was not the first time that the PLO had used UNIFIL’s area of operation and set about its criminal acts through UNIFIL’s lines. Thus, for instance, on 13 January 1979, in the attempt at the guest-house at Ma’alot, reported in my letter circulated as document S/13028, it was clear that the three PLO terrorists involved had crossed through UNIFIL’s lines on the way to Israel. The same holds true for a group of six PLO terrorists encountered and eliminated on 16 April 1979 by the Israel Defence Forces near the village of Zar’it close to the northern border of Israel, as reported in my letter circulated as document S/13261. 70. The background to the PLO terrorist attack on Kibbutz Manara on the border with Lebanon on 9 May 1979, reported in document S/13312, was and is equaliy disquieting. In that incident an Israel Defence Forces patrol wounded and captured one terrorist. He disclosed that the group had set out from Tyre. They entered UNIFIL’s area of operation from the north and proceeded through UNIFIL’s lines to the village of Shaqra, which is well within UNIFIL’s area of operation. At the village they received weapons and instructions about their operation before crossing the border into Israel. Their orders were to carry out indiscriminate murder of Israeli civilians. After an exchange of fire with the Israel Defence Forces patrol, the terrorists who were not wounded fled to Lebanon in the direction of Mis-Al-Jebel and from there they backtracked to Shaqra. 71. Another attempt at indiscriminate murder was made on the night of 6 to 7 February last, when a group of PLO terrorists crossed the border into Israel from Lebanese territory, west of Kibbutz Eilon, as reported in my letter circulated as document S/13785. The group, which was on a murder mission against civilians in Israel, was encountered by a patrol of the Israel Defence Forces. After throwing hand grenades at the patrol, the group turned around and fled. It was pursued by the patrol, but it escaped into the area controlled by UNIFIL. 72. A State’s right to take the measures necessary to halt and to foil terroristic activities emanating from across its boundaries is a principle well recognized by the doctrine and the practice of international law alike. The Government of Israel, like any other government, has the right, indeed the duty, to take all the measures necessary to protect the lives and safety of its citizens. In so doing, the Government of Israel is in fact exercising the inherent right of self-defence enjoyed by every sovereign State-a right that is also recognized under Article 51 of the Charter. 74. I should point out that in the course of the last year Israel has foiled at least 10 such attempts by the PLO to cross the border from UNIFIL’s area of operation with murderous intent. 75. As is well known, it was not the Government of Israel that called for the establishment of UNIFIL. Indeed, given the parliamentary constellation prevailing in this Organization, had Israel made such a suggestion it would never have even got off the ground and UNIFIL would never have been established, Nevertheless, both the Secretariat and the offkers and men of UNIFIL are well aware of the help which Israel renders through its good offices in trying to resolve difficulties which arise from time to time between UNIFIL and the local Lebanese forces in the south. We will go on doing what we can. 76. Let us never lose sight of the fact that the Lebanese villagers in the south have genuine reason to fear for their lives. In view of their previous experiences and in the light of what has happened in the north of Lebanon, those villagers know that their own Government does not at the moment possess the means to guarantee their security. Their fears have been exacerbated by the penetration of hundreds of PLO terrorists into UNIFIL’s area of operation and in the light of their experience that where UNIFIL goes, the PLO follows. For the present, the local Lebanese forces defending the villagers and villages in the south represent their only protection. No credible alternative to those local forces has yet been presented. Whosaever wishes to suggest that the villager’s fears are out of place is taking on a grave responsibility, There is nothing in the recent record of the area which should lead those villagers to expect otherwise. Certainly, no one can seriously advise the villagers in the south not to regard the threats to their existence seriously so long as the Lebanese Government is unable to reassert its sovereignty in the south. While Israel has made it clear that it cannot be indifferent to the fate of the villagers in the south, it cannot assume responsibility for their actions. They act in accordance with what they judge to be a matter of their own survival, 77. We sincerely hope that such clashes as have occurred in the last few days do not recur. But we are firmly convinced that their prevention is more easily attained by patient talks on the ground than by inflammatory debates in the Security Council. 78. Over and beyond that, we are convinced that there will not be any long-term improvement in the situation until the fundamental problem plaguiflg The meeting rose at 1.10 p.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 sent en vente dans les librairies et les agences dCpositaircs du monde entier. Informez-vous auprts de votre libraire ou adressez-vous g : Nations Unies, Section des ventes. New York ou Genive. COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas estln en venta en librerias y casas distribuidoras en todas partes del mundo. Consulte a su librero o dirljase a: Naciones Unidas, Secci6n de Ventas, Nueva York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations, New York 00300 83-61462-August 1986-X