S/PV.2236 Security Council

I should like to inform members of the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Malaysia, Turkey, Yemen and Yugoslavia 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 conformity with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the provisional rules of procedure. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Halim (Malaysia), Mr. Eralp (Turkey), Mr. Alaini (Yemen) and Mr. MujezinoviC (Yugoslavia) took the places reservedfor them at the side of the Council chamber.

I should like to inform members of the Council that I have received a letter dated 24 June from the Rapporteur of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, which reads as follows: “I have the honour to request that I be allowed to participate in the consideration of the item ‘The situation in the Middle East’, in accordance with rule 39 of the provisional rules of procedure of the Security Council, in my capacity as Rapporteur of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People.” 4. On previous occasions, the Council has extended invitations to representatives of other United Nations bodies in connection with the consideration of matters on its agenda. In accordance with past practice in this matter, I propose that the Council extend an invitation under rule 39 of its provisional rules of procedure to the Rapporteur of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. It was so decided.

In placing before the Council today the question of Al-Quds Al-Sharif (Jerusalem), the Organization of the Islamic Conference, through its Chairman, Pakistan, has restated in its broadest sense the essential problem which will determine peace and’peaceful 6. The Council is in a good position to assess the true problem of Jerusalem, in terms of its nature and development, by means of the resolutions which have marked the development of the crisis in the Middle East ever since it began. To keep within the confines of the current crisis, we would recall; first, that the United Nations has never sanctioned the annexation of Jerusalem by Israel. Quite the contrary, it has constantly stated that Israel, as the occupying authority, must evacuate the whole of the occupied territory, including Jerusalem. We would also recall that the General Assembly, as well as the .Security Council, has condemned attempts to alter the City of Jerusalem in its physical, demographic and spiritual aspects and has affirmed the total applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of. Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949,’ to the occupied City. We shall see, too, that there has never been any demonstration of the least willingness on the part of the population of the occupied territories, and certainly not of that of Jerusalem, to accept or to resign itself to Israeli occupation. Indeed? acts of resistance to the occupation have constantly harassed the Israeli authorities and have kept the City in a state of tension, if not of permanent warfare. 7. On this basis, the United Nations has affirmed a constant policy, either through the General Assembly, in particular in resolutions 2253 (ES-V) and 2254 (ES-V), or through the Security Council; in particular in resolutions 252 (1968), 267 (1%9), 298 (1971) and 465 (1980). Without ever having endorsed the principle of occupation, the Council has condemned, in particular, in substance the improvements in the occupation system which were aimed at gradually establishing a system of annexation. The international community, in this regard, has been unanimous in considering null and void any unilateral measures taken by the occupation authorities with the aim of transforming a de facto situation into a de.jure one. 8. The need for this further debate on the question of Jerusalem has arisen because of a combination of factors the gravity and urgency of which require urgent and responsible action. What we are faced with, in fact, is the putting into effect of a ‘major decision. The occupation authorities have thus embarked upon a unilateral procedure of legalization to make occupied Jerusalem the capital of Israel, and therefore have begun the transfer of the seat of the$ire,vemment. 3,: 9. We believe that’the Conncil~~cannot remain inactive, indifferent or silent in the face of such an act of provocation, which tomorrow may,very well in its turn become the heart of a specific problem if the Council 10. We are also witnessing the rise of a terrorist system which, in addition to resorting to intimidation and murder, has the clear-cut aim of rendering the civilian population leaderless in the occupied territory. All forms of colonialism, when the colonialists have had their backs to the wall, have for a time spawned this inhumane practice, and today no one is safe from that death-dealing machine in the occupied territories and Jerusalem. This most recent manoeuvre, added to the expulsions and expropriations that have already been carried out on a broad scale, is aimed at provoking an exodus of the population and paving the way to appropriation of the land. 11. We should like most vigorously to state that neither manoeuvres nor subterfuges, nor yet terrorism can possibly constitute the foundation of any right of ownership for Israel, either in Jerusalem or in any part of the occupied territories. 12. We also observe that the Israeli occupation authorities do not feel bound by any international commitment with regard to the City of Jerusalem inasmuch as they have through their representative at the United Nations constantly proclaimed their rejection of the relevant resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly. 13. In this context, we cannot through abstention sanction the regime of absolute unilateral right which the occupying authority has claimed for itself with regard to the occupied territory. The Council must, at the very time that Israel is attempting to legalize its annexation, be able to establish that the very claim is null and void. It is, indeed, not enough to call occupation “occupation” in order to take care of the matter. We must in fact directly and formally pronounce an act null and void when we believe it to be legally and formally null and void. 14. If the Security Council has frequently-reminded Israel of its obligations as an occupying Power, it has certainly not done so on the basis merely of its intentions but also of its acts. The most recent report of the Council Commission established under resolution 446 (1979) [s/13679] made that very clear, and the Council did not fail to refer to that in’ its resolution 465 (1980). Today it is equally true that we are not picking a spurious quarrel with Israel. What we are doing is noting and deploring fully identifiable acts that have actually been committed. 23. I should like to pay a tribute to your predecessor, Ambassador Oumarou of the Niger, for the admirable way in which he conducted the Council’s meetings during the month of May. 16. Furthermore, it is apparent to us that, in its very substance, the question of Jerusalem will not be properly dealt with unless there is an overall solution to the problem of the Middle East, which will obviously be linked with the restoration to the Palestinian people of its rights and the evacuation by Israel of all the occupied territories, including Jerusalem. 24.. The issue being debated here is.one of the most important aspectsofthe Palestine question and one that continues to threaten the political and human rights of the Palestinian people and the religious interests of one third of the population of the world. Israel’s intransigence has defied the countless resolutions and decisions adopted by the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Trusteeship Council and the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine, as well as by other important United Nations bodies. 17. However, we do feel that the inherent legitimacy of the rights of the Palestinian people, as well as the legitimacy of those of all peoples devoted to the legal, historical and spiritual integrity of Jerusalem, makes it the duty of the Council, responding to the d&mar&e of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, to act in full responsibility in order to prevent an irreparable act taking place, to safeguard law and to set legal limits to the claims of the occupation authorities. 25. Even though Israel’s very existence was based on aggression, the Zionist State has never considered its political dream accomplished. It begrudged its inability to occupy and annex Al-Quds Al-Sharif in 1948, and considered this as a temporary setback to be remedied at a more opportune moment when it could set the stage for a more successful invasion. The blueprint was there and was never abandoned. It was only delayed a few years, for hardly had Israel accomplished the occupation of the West Bank in 1967 than it declared the annexation of Al-Quds Al-Sharif under the sinister guise of “unification”. 18. A firm and responsible resolution based upon justice and right would be an essential and perhaps decisive contribution to the attainment of overall peace. But even if such a resolution were to constitute only a holding action, provided it were properly respected, it would still constitute a valuable milestone on the road towards peace. 26. At its special emergency session held in 1967, the General Assembly wasted no time in expressing world, disapproval of that illegal action. In its resolutions 2253 (ES-V) and 2254 (ES-V) the General Assembly stated, inter alia, that it considered those measures invalid, called upon Israel to rescind all measures already taken and to desist forthwith from taking any action that would alter the status of the city of Al-Quds. The Security Council, in turn, adopted several resolutions censuring Israel and calling for the rescission of measures taken that affected the status of the City. 19. We are profoundly concerned about the integrity of the Holy City of Jerusalem-which, in the final analysis, means its actual destiny-and it is in our view by no means a peripheral problem ancillary to the overall Palestinian problem, but part of the same whole, and even the fundamental heart of the problem, which may have an effect on the future of all the peoples of the region and an even greater impact on the destiny of the Palestinian people and on the hopes for peace of all the countries of the region, if not of the whole world. 20. With utmost conviction we reaffirm that the key to peace lies in the restoration to the Palestinian people of their inalienable rights and in Israel’s evacuation of Al-Quds Al-Sharif and indeed of all the occupied territories. 27. What ,was Israel’s response to those resolutions? It took immediate, calculated and -systematic steps to defeat those resolutions and.to implement its blueprint of irreversible.annexation by expropriating Arab lands within and beyond the boundaries of the city of Al-Quds Al-Sharifand constructing houses and fortress apartment buildings designed to encircle the Arab city and to isolate it from the rest of the West Bank Arab cities and towns.

The next speaker is the representative of Saudi Arabia. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make a statement.

Mr. President, at the outset I should like to thank you and the other members of the Council for giving me the opportunity to express my Government’s views on the highly important issue on the agenda. May I also most warmly congratulate you, Mr. President, on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the current month. 28. The latest of these resolutions was resolution 465 (1980), in which the Council affirmed once more that the fourth Geneva Convention of 1949’ was applicable to the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Al-Quds. The Council determined that all measures taken by Israel to change the physical character, deinographic composition, institutional structure 29. The Commission, which was appointed by the Council in accordance with resolution 446 (1979) to investigate and report upon the situation in the occupied territories, found conclusive evidence that Israel was engaged in a wilful, systematic and largescale establishment of settlements in the occupied territories in complete disregard of the decisions and resolutions adopted by various organs of the United Nations. Furthermore, the Commission considered that the pattern of Israeli settlement policies, as a consequence, was causing profound and irreversible changes in the geographical and demographic nature of those territories, including Al-Quds. Thus, it was reported that since 1967 the Arab population has been reduced by 32 per cent in Al-Quds and the West Bank. 30. The burning of the Al-Aqsa Mosque on 21 August 1969 leads one to believe that the event was but another link in the series of Israeli-Zionist plans to destroy that holy Muslim shrine and the nearby Dome of the Rock, and to ‘rebuild on their site the Temple of Solomon, presenting the world with afuit accompli. In the background to the act of arson against the Al-Aqsa Mosque, one notes the following declarations made and measures taken by the Israeli occupation authorities: statements made by Jewish religious leaders urging Israel to confiscate Al-Haram Al-Sharif and all it contains; expropriation and demolition of <Arab property in the vicinity of the Al-Aqsa Mosque; occupation of Al-Magaribah Gate, one of the gates of Al-Haram Al-Sharif leading to the Al-Aqsa Mosque; holding of prayers in the courtyards of the Al-Aqsa Mosque by members of the Israeli army, by rabbis and later by Jewish organizations; and excavation around the Al- Aqsa Mosque which seriously has imperilled and weakened the foundations and structure of those holy shrines. 31. When Israel was admitted to the United Nations, it implicitly agreed to abide by the Charter and the resolutions concerning Palestine and the city of Al- Quds-an agreement which it then proceeded to ignore. The problem is that some of the big Powers have handled and continue to handle Israel with velvet gloves, thus encouraging it to disregard completely all United Nations resolutions. 32. No sooner was the seizure of the whole of Al- Quds by the Israelis accomplished than the worst fears of the Arab population and the Arab and Muslim worlds were realized. Within days, the demolition of historic buildings and the expropriation of religious and private properties began in order to create avulgar piazza on Islamic property so that jubilant Jews might dance and chant in front of the Wailing Wall. The most sacred places of Islam, the Mosques -of, Omar and 34. Israel’s actions since June 1967 ,have followed such a scheme and the pattern of colonization has become very clear: military’ conquest, the forced mass exodus of the Arab population, the bulldozing and dynamiting of Arab houses and quarters within’the city, duress through either imprisonment.orexpulsion, the confiscation of land and private -properties, the construction of purely Jewish settlements and the ingathering of new waves of immigrants. 35. That the Zionist master plan .was to occupy the whole of Al-Quds and to settle it is related in some of the writings of the Zionist leaders and Israeli militarists. To mention only one example, Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun terrorist organization and the hero of the Deir Yassin massacre, wrote that A:$ “at the end of January 1948, at a’meeting of the Command of the Irgun in which the planning section participated, we outlined four strategic objectives: (1) Jerusalem, (2) Jaffa, (3) the Lydda-Ramleh plain, and (4) the Triangle”. ~ :- Thus Al-Quds was the first target to be occupied. The massacre of Deir Yassin was one ‘step towards the occupation. 1 ..; ‘. 36. The situation in the occupied‘ Arab territories, including Al-Quds Al-Sharif, has deteriorated. as the Israeli authorities have executed one carefully~planned measure after another such as the desecration of Islamic Holy Places, the imposition of Israeli civil law and regulations and school curricula, the application of the Absentees* Property Law which authorizes the seizure of all the property of so-called absentee Arabs, the refusal to permit Arabs to go back to their homes in the city of Al-Quds, the~expulsion-of ‘many Arabdignitaries, and the ,building of new Jewish settlements on expropriated land belongingentirely to Arabs with the purpose of separating the ‘Arabs of 42. The tragedy of Al-Quds is part and parcel of the whole tragedy of Palestine. It is the tragedy of a colonial-settler conquest which has suppressed and continues to suppress undisputed and indivisible Arab rights through the blunt use of Israeli Zionist power and tyranny which is condoned by world power politics. The resolution adopted on 15 March 1971 by the Human Rights Commission, the highest intemational authority in the defence of human rights, stated that this “is a right the denial of which by Israel constitutes an affront to humanity and agrave violation of international law”.* It should therefore be remem-. bered that the Palestinians are facing in Al-Quds, as indeed in all of Palestine, a uniquely savage conquest which challenges morality in all its categories. 38. Apart from the illegality of the Israeli actions, it is clear that the development of the city should be left to its rightful inhabitants. Neither now nor in the past has Israel shown any appreciation of the culture of Palestine. The Arabs, who have owned the land from time immemorial and have developed its culture, alone have the right and the responsibility to develop, it. 39. I wish to express my Government’s grave concern at and total rejection of this latest evidence of Israel’s determination to strengthen its illegal presence in the occupied Arab territories and of the steps being taken to have Al-Quds recognized as Israel’s capital. Those illegal and aggressive acts constitute a flagrant’ violation of international law and of the Charter and resolutions of the United Nations, and disregard of world public opinion. My Government strongly believes that urgent action should be taken to arrest those developments and to secure the immediate and total withdrawal of Israel from all occupied Arab territories, especially Al-Quds. The continuation of those Israeli policies will only intensifytension in the area and endanger international peace and security. 43. The Security Council, as the main organ for the maintenance of international peace and security, is in duty bound to take the required decisions in accordance with its power under the Charter in order to put an end to the Israeli policy of the creeping annexation of Arab territories, including Al-Quds. My delegation believes that the Council must resolutely condemn the latest measures taken by Israel in Al-Quds and re-. affirm that Israel’s policy of establishing settlements and changing the demographic and physical status of : the Arab territories occupied since June 1967 is illegal and an obstacle to the attainment of a comprehensive, lasting and just peace in the Middle East. The Council must fully assume its responsibilities pursuant to the relevant provisions of the Charter. It is to be hoped that in the face of the persistent and flagrant defiance of this body by Israel, the Council will be able to take effective measures to find a way out of this explosive and dangerous situation. 40. My Government forcefully denounces the continuing Israeli measures of annexation and Judaization undertaken in Al-Quds, as well as the repeated profanation of the Holy Mosques of Al-Aqsa and Al-Haram Al-Ibrahimiin Al-Khalil and the other Holy Places in Palestine. The meeting of Foreign Ministers of the Islamic Conference held at Islamabad last month, at. which more than 800 million Muslims in the world were represented, condemned those criminal acts and strongly rejected all illegal and aggressive measures taken by Israel in the Holy City of Al-Quds, the latest of which was. the bill before Israel’s legislative body formalizing the declaration of Al-Quds as the capital of Israel. -I,, ,:

The next speaker is the Rapporteur of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, Mr. Gauci. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

The Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, at its meeting last Monday, asked me, as its Rapporteur, to make a statement on this sensitive question of the Holy City of Jerusalem. ,. 41. At this ‘critical stage the attention of the intemational Organization should be focused exclusively, relentlessly..‘and unmistakably on Israel’s violation of the inherent rights of the Palestinian people, on its rejection of United Nations decisions and on its refusal 46. On my own behalf and on behalf of the Committee, permit me first to express to you, Mr. Presi- 47. When the first report of the Committee3 was prepared in 1976, containing recommendations on the implementation of the rights of the Palestinian people, we made no specific recommendations on Jerusalem, but inevitably of course we referred to it in the report., In that report, in a separate chapter on the status of Jerusalem, the Committee, faithful to its obligations to respect previous decisions of the United Nations, simply recalled the most pertinent resolutions of the General Assembly and of the Security Council which were adopted unanimously. Subsequently, the Special Unit on Palestinian Rights compiled several studies, some of which dealt with the history of Jerusalem and its legal status. I respectfully draw the attention of members of the Council to those studies. 48. The debate so far has already amply illustrated the extreme sensitivity of this question and the consequent need for an objective and serious analysis of the central issues involved. The Council would do well not to be distracted-from the sensitive political aspects of this question by discussion of a maze of controverted details. 49. Without going into too much detail therefore, let me only recall that, from those studies I have referred to it emerges that, when the question of Palestine was first taken up by the United Nations in 1947, the country already was ravaged by conflict. Jerusalem became a particular centre of convergence of that confrontation. Population changes and influxes were taking place. Nevertheless, the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine at the time unanimously recommended that the sanctity of the Holy Places be guaranteed by special provisions and that “existing rights” in Palestine be preserved. As members of the Council are also aware,- that Committee included among its recommendations the territorial intemationalization of Jerusalem as an international enclave in the proposed Arab State in Palestine. Those recommendations were approved by the General Assembly in its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947. They envisaged a demilitarized Jerusalem as a corpus separatum under the aegis of the Trusteeship Council. The principle of upholding “existing rights” in the Holy Places was again maintained in the partition resolution. The conflict in Palestine, however, prevented the implementation of that resolution. In fact, the unfortunate reality was that Palestine’s fate was being determined by conflict and not by international agreement. 50. Even in those tragic circumstances, however, by 1950 certain features of the Palestine question directly 51. Regrettably, as the division of Jerusalem was protracted, its two parts became progressively more integrated into hostile camps and political barriers were thereby consolidated. This unsatisfactory status quo of the divided City was further compromised by the israeli occupation of East Jerusalem in June 1967. With West Jerusalem already declared by Israel as its capital, Israeli actions following the 1967 war tended to show that Israel had unilateral ambitions over the Holy City. 52. The Security Council was therefore often involved. As has already been mentioned, the Council has pronounced itself on previous occasions when measures have been taken by Israel that tended to affect the status of Jerusalem. The provisions of the resolutions unanimously adopted are familiar to all. I need only mention that each implicitly maintain+s the validity of the status of Jerusalem as an intemationalized corpus sepurutum defined by the partition resolution and each declares Israeli action and legislation in respect of Jerusalem totally invalid. That was considered sufficient reason for the Committee not to make specific recommendations on Jerusalem in 1976, because we were convinced that the combined strength of legal opinion and of the unanimous decisions of the Council was sufficiently evident to deter any possibIe unilateral changes. 53. Furthermore, even the then Prime Minister and Minister of Defence, David Ben Gurion, of Israel recognized that Jerusalem was occupied territory, as far back as 1948, in an edict issued by him on 2 August of that year and published in the Israeli official Government Gazette No. 12. On the same day another official proclamation appointed Mr. Dov Joseph as Military Governor of the occupied area of Jerusalem. United Nations diplomats at the time addressed Mr. Joseph as “the Military Governor of Israeli-occupied Jeru- Salem”. 54. As a result of subsequent controversy, the General Assembly, in paragraph 1 of its resolution 303 (IV), of 9 December 1949, as if to make assurance doubly sure, restated “its intention that Jerusalem should be placed under a permanent international regime and that the City of Jerusalem shall be established as a corpus separatum”. 55. It therefore seems that the evidence is overwhelming that the area of Jerusalem has been an area under military occupation since 1948, that itis occupied territory and that the fourth Geneva Convention of 56. The recent bill introduced in the Knesset declaring Jerusalem the eternal capital of Israel has now added a new and unfortunate dimension to Israel’s illegal occupation of the city. Following that move, Prime Minister Begin has decided to transfer his office and that of his Cabinet to East Jerusalem as soon as possible. These actions have shocked the conscience of religious people throughout the world. They are bound to exacerbate even further the tension in the area. Because, even if the Middle East were to be considered a model region for friendly co-operation among its people and even had the proposed legislation been motivated by the highest interests of promoting good-neighbourly solidarity, a legal enactment of such world-wide scope and sensitivity would at the very least have required extensive previous consultations and subsequent study and negotiations with all concerned.

The next speaker is the representative of Turkey. I invite him to take a seat at the Council table and to make his statement. 62. Mr. ERALP (Turkevl: On biddine farewell to the Council on 13 June, I &id that, barriig unforeseen circumstances, that would be my last appearance before the Council. I apologize for having requested the privilege of addressing the Council one more time during the course of this month, but those circumstances have occurred. 63. The question of Jerusalem is one with which the Government and people of Turkey have been throughout the centuries, and are at present, deeply associated and concerned. For centuries, Turkey was part of a large “commonwealth”, which included the whole of the Middle East, even before the word commonwealth was in general use. Furthermore, our membership in the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine, our membership in the Islamic Conference and our membership in the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People constitute additional reasons for our not being able to remain silent over the fate of Al-Quds. 57. As far as we know, neither the situation on the spot nor the procedure adopted comply with that scenario. On the contrary, with the Middle East in general and the occupied territories’ in particular seething with resentment and prone to violence, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that the proposed legislation is, to put it mildly, ill-timed and ill-advised. It is in fact extremely difficult to reconcile the proposed legislation with Israel’s oft-declared policy of seeking to live in peace with its neighbours. Furthermore, when this intended legislation is seen within the . broader perspective of other actions illegally taken by Israel in the occupied territories, then the concern of the international community for the prospects of peace in the area-in which all of us have a stake-inevitably becomes even more pronounced than it has been in the past. 64. The legal, historical and politicalaspects-and the dire consequences--of any attempt to change the status and alter the Arab character of the Holy City have been eloquently expressed by..Mr. Agha Shahi, the Foreign Minister of Pakistan [2233rd meeting], and other speakers. Before I go into the substance of the subject-matter before us, I should like, with the permission of the Council, to start my comments by relating a reminiscence which may throw further light on the historical aspects. 58. The members of the Committee were shocked when the proposed legislation was brought to their attention, and on this occasion at this latest indication of Israel’s insensitivity they wish to strike a note of alarm-as, unfortunately, we have had to do on too many occasions since the Committee was established. 65. I believe it was during the second session of the General Assembly in 1947, at a meeting of the First Committee, that the then Permanent Representative of Syria, Mr. El-Khouri, referred to the following authentic incident. During the reign of Sultan Abdulhamid, the Ottoman Empire was having financial difficulties. The Sultan was approached by the wealthy Zionists of Europe who offered to pay off the outstanding debts of the Empire, if only the Sultan would deliver to the Israelites the province of Palestine, then a part of the Ottoman Empire. The reply of the Sultan was quite simple: “Palestine belongs to the Arabs; how can I ever give something that does not belong to me?” 59. I say this only with regret and certainly with no desire to incite. On the contrary, our objective is to have recourse to reason, to urge restraint and that wiser counsel may prevail. We applaud the inspired words of His Holiness the Pope on this question and on the related question of Palestine. We recognize that we all have a responsibility to advance rather than to imperil the striving and the search for a just solution to the overall Middle East crisis, which has been a running sore in the body politic of international relations for so many decades. “._ . 60. Jerusalem is indelibly engraved in the hearts of women and men throughout the world as the eternal 66. In this connection, I should like to mention one more little-known fact which illustrates the tolerant and denominations of Christians which were often at The recent bill introduced in the Knesset declaring loggerheads with one another. To avoid conflicts, a Al-Quds Al-Sharif Israel’s capital, which has, in fact, so-called~srurus quo agreement was signed under the prompted the convening of the Council at this parauspices of the local Ottoman authorities, in which the titular time, has really been the culmination of the rights of each denomination were clearly specified. numerous previous unilateral measures taken by The keys to the Holy Sepulchre were entrusted for Israel in Jerusalem itself as well as other occupied generations to an Ottoman Muslim who would open- Arab territories. According to the information availthe church in the morning and lock it up at night. able to us, the bill has been referred to a Committee During the negotiations of the United Nations Concilfor eventual adoption as a basic law. This move iation Commission for Palestine with the Christian juridically to alter the status of Al-Quds Al Sharif dignitaries in Jerusalem, the Committee on Jerusalem has been followed by the most provocative decision of the Israeli authorities to shift the office of the of the Commission was always beseeched not to tamper Prime Minister and the Cabinet to East Jerusalem. with the specifications of this status quo agreement. In short, throughout the 13 centuries of Muslim rule 71. over Palestine, Islamic sovereignty over Jerusalem was The earlier examples of the sacrilege committed carried as a sacred trust. The history of Muslim soveragainst the Al-Aqsa Mosque, the desecration of Al- Khalil and several other measures to demolish the eignty over Jerusalem exemplifies in an excellent Holy Places of Islam in Palestine cannot be seen as manner Islam’s true spirit as a religion of peace, understanding, tolerance and respect for other religions and isolated incidents but constitute an integral part of places of worship. the Israeli plan permanently to occupy Al-Quds. In fact, since June 1967, after the occupation by Israel of the eastern part of Jerusalem, the numerous state- 67. By its resolution 194 (III) of 11 December.1948, ments and declarations of Israeli officials to the effect the General Assembly established the United Nations that Jerusalem is finally united, will remain united Conciliation Commission for Palestine consisting of and will be the capital of the State of Israel have conthe representatives of France, Turkey and the United tinuously and systematically been supplemented and States, which was instructed complemented by their deeds in this regard, in spite of all the relevant Security Council and General ‘.‘to present to the fourth regular session of the Assembly resolutions to the contrary. General Assembly detailed proposals for a permanent international regime for the Jerusalem area 72. The United Nations has adopted a number of which will provide for the maximum local autonomy resolutions on Jerusalem. General Assembly resolufor distinctive groups .consistent with the special tions 2253 (ES-Vjand 2254 (ES-V) and Security Couninternational status of the Jerusalem area.‘:’ cil resolutions 252 (1%8), 267 (1%9), 271 (i969) and ,. :, ‘, , 298 (1971) specifically address. themselves to Jerusa- I 68. While the Commission was engaged in negotialem. These resolutions, as well as Council resolutions tions with all the parties concerned in the area to carry 242 (1%7), 446 (1979), 465 (1980) and 471(1980), have out that mandate, the Government of Israel had already unequivocally affirmed the principle of the inadmisstarted the process of consolidating its position in the sibility of the acquisition of territory by military conwestern part of Jerusalem and making it the capital quest and declared all legislative and administrative of the new State by moving the Supreme Court and actions taken by Israel to change the status of the the Knesset to that part of Jerusalem-of course, in City of Jerusalem, including the expropriation of land spite of all the vigorous protests of the Commission. and properties, transfer of population, and .legislation aimed at the incorporation of the occupied areas, to be totally invalid. In almost all of these resolutions, 69. The Commission tried to. carry out its mandate Israel has been condemned for its refusal to comply by meticulously preparing and submitting, through with them. its Committee’ on Jerusalem-of which Turkey ’ happened to be a member-detailed proposals for an *ii .y 73. It is certainly no coincidence that the mtemainternational regime for Jerusalem. However, the tional community and the Security Council have conregime’s status as envisaged by these proposals never saw the light of day because Israel, though it had stantly been occupied with one or the other. aspect participated actively in the negotiation.s, rejected the * of the Middle East question during the last few,months. proposals. Nevertheless, members of the Commission Israel, instead of complying with United,.Nations resolutions, has continued to build new settlements, continue to be bound by the mandate and the terms of resolution 194 (III), as further witnessed by the fact to expand existing ones, to expropriate *lands, to demolish houses and to expel inhabitants, -including that they have refrained from moving their diplomatic elected officials, causing the situation in theoccupied representation from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. .’ territories to deteriorate further and aggravating yet ‘8 78. The issue of Jerusalem was one of the major . Islamic issues taken up by the Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers at Islamabad. Upon the conclusion of the Conference on 22 May 1980, the’ Ministers unanimously reiterated their countries’ commitment to the implementation of the resolutions relating to Jerusalem adopted by previous Islamic Conferences and the General Assembly and Security Council. They * further condemned the Israeli Government’s new legislative actions on the annexation of Jerusalem, calling upon all Islamic and friendly countries to counter them. The Conference also decided to call for the immediate convening of the Council to carry out its responsibilities and face this grave challenge to world peace and security. 74. The attitude of Turkey vis-d-vis the Middle East question is clear. As has been made known on several previous occasions and in several forums of the Organization, Turkey believes that the Palestine question is the essence of the Middle East issue. We also believe .that a just and lasting solution to the Middle East question can be achieved only by the withdrawal of Israel from ail Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and by taking into consideration the legitimate rights of the Palestinian Arab people, including their right to establish a State ,of their own. Furthermore, it has been our constant belief that an overall solution to the problem of the Middle East should imply respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of all States’in the region, including Israel, and for their right to live in peace within secure borders. We have co-sponsored or supported all resolutions on those questions. 79. The Israeli Parliament’s decision on 14 May to approve the legislative proposal on the status of Jerusalem was the latest Zionist crime against Jerusalem and the other Arab lands occupied since 1967. It was the latest crime against the Palestinian people, the Arab nation, the Muslim ,world and the entire ; world community. ! 80. The initial approval by the Zionist Parliament to consider under basic law which cannot be reversed by future governments “Greater Jerusalem‘*, illegally occupied in 1948 and illegally annexed in 1%7, as the eternal capital of Israel is further proof of the fact that the aim of the Zionists was and still is the-continued expansion and colonization of the Arab lands and the establishment of a so-called “Greater Israel” ‘asa racist ,and ‘exclusivist State in our ‘Arab homeland. That action unveils once again the Zionist movement as a colonialist, racist and expansionist one. The policies of daily expansion and of uprooting the Palestinian people from their homes and properties are the result of the continued implementation of the. Zionist historical goals in Palestine and in the rest of the Arab lands. Those policies and practices have con- .. tinued, thanks to unlimited United States support of the Zionist aggressor enabling it to continue its occupa- ; tion of Palestine and the rest of the Arab territories, despite the fact that those policies are illegal under international law and in severe violation of the clear pertinent resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly and the relevant provisions of The Hague regulations and Geneva Conventions. 75. The universal spiritual heritage aridsignificance of Jerusalem, have found their most eloquent expression in the address of His Holiness Pope’ John Paul II before the thirty-fourth session of the General Assembly.4 Recently the European heads ,of, State and Government at Venice declared that they would not accept any unilateral initiative designed to change the status of Jerusalem [S/14009]. We feel that it is high time for the Council to take determined action on this highly delicate question, where there is unanimity in international public opinion. The Council must take all necessary ‘measures to ensure the preservation of the status of the Holy City of Jerusalem. Such determined action by the Council on the Holy City of Jerusalem -the Holy City of peace-will not only serve to solve a most important part of the question of the Middle East but will certainly pave the way for its overall solution. ’ ,’ t’ 76. The PRESIDENT: The next speaker is the representative of Qatar. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. 2;. 77. Mr. JAMAL (Qatar): Mr. President, the Security Council is’*meeting today to discuss a grave issue of our time: Jerusalem. The name evokes deep concerns and associations. It is a good omen that these delibera- 81. Some statements and press reports in the United States have attempted to play down the gravity of the latest Israeli action on the status of Jerusalem. We were told that the proposed legislation was introduced as a private bill by a representative of the Opposition and that it might be buried in the Committee. But as a matter of fact this was not the case, as proved by , the statement of a member of the Israeli Parliament on this bill. “How can we ever achieve peace, not only with 4 million Palestinians, not only with 100 million Arabs, but also with 1 billion Muslims, on the basis of the present status quo in Jerusalem? Are we ready for eternal war against the entire Arab world and against the entire Muslim world not because we insist on the sanctity of Jerusalem, but on the sanctity of the present political sfufus quo in Jerusalem?‘*. Avneri protested the grave provocation undertaken in the name of the unification of the City. He asked: “Is Jerusalem today unified when weapons and explosives are discovered on the roof of a Yeshiva school in the Old City? Is it a unified city when hundreds of policemen and troops are needed to force the Arabs to open their shops against their will?“. Avneri concluded: “This is an act of evil, even when wrapped with the cover of holiness and sanctity”. 83. On 20 May Huolum Nazi magazine published the draft bill that was approved by the Knesset. The third paragraph of the bill states the following, as translated from the Hebrew: “A Greater Jerusalem, unified and complete within the boundaries set after the six-day war, its unity and completeness may not be altered’*. 84. The part of Jerusalem illegally occupied in 1948 was proclaimed the capital of Israel contrary to General Assembly resolutions, despite the fact that no Member State has recognized that illegal act. Now we are faced with the grave action of the inclusion of that part of Jerusalem occupied in June 1967 in the. original illegal act. This bill has been referred to a committee, and this does not mean it will be killed there, as some have attempted to imply. What it means is that the bill has been initially approved. The function of the Committee is to finalize the draft and to submit it to the plenary House. If the Govemment of Menachem Begin wanted to kill this awful bill, it would have done so before it was taken to the Committee-and it did not do so. 85. The Zionist authorities gave assurances to the General Assembly before Israel was admitted to the United Nations in 1949 that they would refrain from taking any action contrary to United Nations resolutions concerning Jerusalem. Those assurances were specifically mentioned in General Assembly resolution 273 (III) admitting Israel to membership in the United Nations. Yet, Israel did not comply with that resolution. All resolutions of the General Assembly and Security Council since the occupation of Arab Jerusalem in. 1967 have been disregarded by the Israeli Government. Further measures and actions have been taken in contravention of those resolutions. That was the fate of General Assembly resolutions 2253 (ES-V) 86. In fact, the response of the Israeli occupation authorities to the Security Council resolutions was to take additional measures to change the status of Jerusalem. There was increased destruction of Arab quarters and eviction of the Arab inhabitants, additional expropriation of Arab lands and further desecration of Holy Places. After the Council unanimously adopted resolution 465 (1980) last March calling upon Israel to rescind all its measures in all occupied Palestinian and other Arab territories, including Jerusalem, the Israeli authorities announced the expropriation of another 1,000 acres of the remaining Arab lands in north-eastern Jerusalem. 87. The mass media in Europe and in the United States have recently disclosed news about another conspiracy by the criminal Rabbi Kahane, to destroy the Al-Aqsa Mosque, specifically by using explosives in the midst of the Friday prayers. The Israeli’ authorities as usual have imposed a blackout on the release of that news. 88. The Security Council is empowered to stop those, crimes and those offensive acts which gravely endanger peace and security in the area and throughout the entire world. 89. The crimes against the Holy City of Jerusalem are of the utmost gravity because of the uni-que value of that city, especially when they are seen in the wider context, as part of the genocide perpetrated by the Zionist regime against the Palestinian people; 90. In the case of Jerusalem, we must quicken our concern anew. In the case of Jerusalem, we see the issue as special, as pivotal to the history of-mankind on this planet. In the case of Jerusalem, we’ must not let the normal procedures of diplomacy block us off from confronting a single, simple fact. The global community is endangered by the continued imprisonment of the religious heart of the world. This common spirituality must be released in order to allow us to recognize not only the historical source of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, but also the fact that. Jerusalem is also the nerve-centre of Palestinian iights and destiny, and the focus of Arab and Islamic commitment.

The next speaker is the representative of Yemen. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make a statement. . 92. Mr. ALAINI (Yemen): Mr. President, allow me at the outset to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council and at the 93. I should also like to thank you and the other Council members for giving me the opportunity to speak on this sensitive issue, which concerns not only our Arab nation but also the Muslim as well as the Christian world and, indeed, all those who yearn for freedom and justice all over the world. 98. We are, however, sure that neither the Muslim peoples nor the Christian world will accept this Israeli assault on Muslim and Christian shrines. For its part, our country firmly stands with the struggling people of Jerusalem and Palestine in resisting these expansionist adventures. 94. Using every means, and supported by the colonial Powers, the Zionist organizations were able gradually to usurp Palestine. Circumstances were exceptionally favourable to the Zionist conspirators. After the Second World War, most of the Arab countries were under foreign occupation and domination and unable to render any meaningful assistance to their Palestinian brothers. The post-war international scene was dominated by the two antagonistic military alliances, and the thiid world, as we know it today, was nearly non-existent. 99. All the alarming developments in the Middle East are seriously threatening the peace and security of the region, and concern is always being expressed about those developments. But we should now be even more aware that we are facing a very serious situation, a situation which, if not dealt with effectively, will certainly have extremely dangerous consequences. 95. After the Second World War, Zionism played on the guilty feelings of some Western Governments concerning the Jewish people, blackmailing them into justifying that people’s migration to Palestine, and drew both military and moral support for its occupation. International Zionism sought to punish the Palestinian people for the crimes committed against the Jews by the racist, Fascist and Nazi regimes in Europe. However, history proves that the Arab people of Palestine had absolutely nothing to do with the inhuman practices of those regimes. History also testifies that, prior to the occupation of a substantial part of Palestine and the declaration of the establishment of the State of Israel, the Zionist movement had appealed to the Governments of Western States to help in settling the Jewish refugees, preferably in Palestine, for purely humanitarian considerations. The evil intention of the Zionists was at that time known to only a very few people. It was only after numerous massacres committed bythe Zionist terrorist organizations against the Arab population of Palestine that the real Zionist motives became unmistakably clear. As though it intended to remove any doubt as to its expansionist objectives, .Israel, in total disregard of the United Nations partition resolution of 1947, waged a series of aggressive’ ‘wars against its neighbours, after which it not only completed the occupation of Palestine but also occupied parts of the neighbouring Arab States. 100. We recall how violently millions of Muslims in various countries responded to the incident in Al- Haram Al-Makki a few months ago, especially when it was suspected that there was foreign involvement in that incident. Violence of an even wider magnitude is expected to take place if the present status of Al- Quds is in any way altered. Peace and stability in the area will in effect be greatly jeopardized and Govemments will be unable to cope with the situation. 101. The Council is called upon to take firm action and the great Powers have to shoulder their responsibilities in foiling the Israeli plans of annexation, which the Council previously termed void and illegal. 102. If the Arabs are still bringing their case to the Council, it is because they wish to reaffirm their commitment to the Charter and their belief in the role of the United Nations in the promotion of human rights and the establishment of a just peace. The day, however, may not be far away when the Arabs, under pressure of public opinion and realizing the impotence of the Organization, may be compelled to deal with their own problems by themselves, following the example of the heroic people of Viet Nam and other glorious examples. The region and perhaps the whole world will then pay dearly. 96. While Israel talks about peace and accuses others of being terrorists, it persists in its occupation of Arab land and continues its settlement policy in Arab territories in total disregard of the relevant United Nations resolutions and in contravention of intemational law. 103. The Israelis under the American umbrella are furthering their expansionist designs by annexing the occupied land as part of what they call land of Israel. In doing so, they are trying to give the impression that they are only filling a vacuum, colonizing a noman’s land. Contrary to their wishful thinking, how- 104. We have no doubt that the Palestinian people will liberate their homeland and eventually establish their own independent State. Colonialism and fascism, The meeting rose at 5.45 p.m. NOTES 1 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 75, p. 287. 2 Oflcial Records of the Economic and Social Council, Fiftieth Session, Supplement No. 4. chap, XIX, resolution 9 (XXVII). 3 Offcial Records of the General Assembly, Thirty-first Session, Supplement No. 35. 4 ibid., Thirty-fourth Session, Plenary Meetings, 17th meeting. l c . . HOW TO ORTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICA’IlONS 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. COMMENf SE PROCURER LRS PUBLICATIONS DES NA’IIONS UNIES Les publications dcs Nations Unies sent en vente dans la iibrairics et tK agenas d@ositaires du monde enticr. Informez-vous auprts de votn libraire ou adrcsscz-vows B : Nations Unies, Section dcs vcntes. New York ou Gentvc. ICAIC IIOZYPHTh EI3AAHHSf OPrAHM3AI~HW oli’bEAHHEHHMX HAItBH W3nasrxx OpraxiH3axtmf 06ae~miemib~x Hart~R YOXHO rynWrb II 8cxmc~blx mara- 3wrax H aremcmax ~0 Bcex pafionax nnpa. H~BOJJHT~ cnpaenn 06 kwtamnx B nameu K(AII~~XOY uaraxiiie mu marme uo ~pecy:OpraRHJailH~ O6'beAHHembrX KauxR.Ce~qxxnonpo~ame~sxaa~R.Hb~-JIopI(nllH~exena. COMO CONSEGUIR PURLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las pubtiiciones de las Naciones Unidas es&n en venta M liim5as y casas distribuidoras en todas partes de1 mundo. Consulte a su librrro o dirijase a: Naciones,Unidas. Qccibn de Ventas. Nueva York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations, New York 00300 83-61462-Se.@ember 1962,050