S/PV.2293 Security Council

Members of the Council have before them the following documents on this item which have been distributed since our last meetinn: three letters dated 19 and 20 Julv 1981 from the rep&ntative of Israel addressed lo thi President of the Security Council IS//&UtL S//4602 and S//4603]. MOmbe of the C&ncil also have before them the text of a draft resolution sponsored by Ireland, Japan and Spain [S//4604]. The meeting was called to order at 7.50 p.m. Adoption of the agendn The agenda was adopted. 4. I call fkst on the Secretary-General, The dtuatlon In the Mlddk Ruts Letter dated 17 July 1981 fiwn the Cba& d’al?aira r.1. of the Permemnt Mlndun of L&awn to the Unlted Nations rddrwed to the P&dent of the security councu (S/143%) S. The SECRETARY-GENERAL: It may be help ful if I make a brief statement summariz.Ing developments since the Council met last Friday [2292nd mrrting]. I. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): In accordance with decisions adopted at the 2292nd meeting of the Council. I invite the r6pmwntatlvo of Lebanon, luael and the Palestine Liberation Orpnization (PLO) to take places at the Council table; I invite the representative of Jordan lo take the place reserved for him at the side of the Council chamber. 6. Following the appod mado by the Prerident of the Security Council at that meeting, I inrttucted the Comnunder ot the United NatIoar IntorIm Force in Lobaaoa WNIFIL), Ooaoml C&&an, end the Chief of Staff of the United Nationr Tnw Suprvidon Orsanization in Palestine, General Erskine, to exert every possible effort to achieve a cessation of hostilities in Lebanon. At the imittrtion of the Presidw, Mr, TueG [Lehmm), Mr. Blrrrn (Isrcrc4J and Mr. Tcrzi (PuIestitre Liherutiorr Organizatio~f) took &ices at the Corrrtci! table; ho. Nuwibeh (Jordm) took the place reserved for him at the side of I/W Ccwrtcil chanther. 7. On 19 July, General Erskine met with the Israeli Deputy Defelice Minister, Mr. Zipori, in Jerusalem. The next day, General Callaghan held a meetiug with Mr. Arafat in Beirut. During that meeting, General Callaghan urouosed a de.facto cease-fire to take effect a1 5 a.m. ilocal time) on 21 July. Early on 21 July, Mr. Arafat informed General Callanhan that the PLO would accept the cease-fire, provided the other side also accepted it. As members of the Council are aware, efforts are continuing to secure a similar commitment from the Israeli authorities.

I should like to inform members of the Council that 1 have received letters from the representatives of Democratic Yemen, Egypt, Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, the Syria, Arab Republic and Yemen, in which they ask to be invited to participate in the discussion of the 9. Between 10.20 a.m. and 4..45 p.m., Israeli Defence Forces and the def?cto forces fired about 210 artillery rounds into the Tyre pocket and north of the Litani. The PLO fired 49 artillery rounds and 3 rockets at the Naharlya and Marjayoun areas. 10. Between 5.20 p.m. and 6.10 p.m., the Israeli forces carried out six air strikes in the Rashidiye area and north ofthe Litani. Between 6 p.m. and 7.30 p.m., the PLO tired 41 rounds of artillery and mortar and 27 rockets, some of which impacted in the NaharIya area. 11. The exchange of fire resumed atter 8 p.m. today. Since then the PLO has fired 181 rounds of artillery and mortar and 116 rockets at targets in the enclave and in northern Israel. The Israeli forces and the defacto forces have fired 2% artillery rounds at targets in the Tyre pocket and north of the Litani. Firing is reportedly continuing at this time. 12. Needless to say, General Callaghan and General Erskine will continue their efforts to secure a lasting cessation of hostilities.

I thank the Secretary-General for the information he has made available to the Council. 14. The representative of Spain has asked to be allowed to speak to introduce the draft resolution, sponsored by Ireland, Japan and Spain, which is contained in document S/14604. 13. Mr. de PINI& (Spain) (interprefation from Spanish): The steps we have been taking in these I@ few days have enabled us to become acquainted with the grave situation which once again oxIsts in the Middle Em, 0speciaIly in Lebanon. 16. We have taken note of the important statement just made by the Secretary-General, and the information it contains reveals that a cessation of hostilities has not yet taken effect. 17. What has prompted the delegations of Ireland, Japan and Spain to introduce this draft resolution is the desire to speed up action and achieve an immediate cessation of hostilities. The draft resolution, which I shall read out very shortly, does not in any way attempt to interfere with the efforts we know are being made by other delegations on a wider scale, efforts for which we wish to express our sincere gratitude. However, we think that a thorough analysis of the situation-whose usefulness in principle we do not doubt--could in this case considerably delay the Council’s taking decisions. 19. On behalf of the delegations of Ireland and Japan and my own, I have the honour to submit the following draft resolution: “The Security Council, “Reqfflrming the urgent appeal made by the Resident and the members of the Security Council on 17 July 1981 [Ibid.], which reads as follows: ” ‘The President of the Security Council and the members of the Council, after hearing the report of the Secretary-General, express their deep concern at the extent of the loss of life and the-scale of the destruction caused by the deplorable events that have been taking place for several days in Lebanon. ” ‘They launch an urgent appeal for an immediate end to all armed attacks and for the greatest restraint so that peace and quiet may be established in Lebanon and a just and lasting peace in the Middle East as a whole.’ “Taking tiote of the report of the Seeretary- Oonoral [see 2292nd meerlng) in this respect, “1. Co//s for an immediate cessation of all armed attacks; “2. Reuflr/jls its commitment to the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries; “3. Requests the Secretary-General to report back to the Security Council on the implementation of the present resolution as soon as possible and not later than forty-eight hours from its adoption.” 20. On behalf of the three delegations to which I have referred, I wish to say that we trust that this draft resolution will be adopted forthwith and without any discussion. I formally request, therefore, that the draft resolution be put to the vote as soon as possible.

I shall now call on those Council members who have asked to be allowed to speak after the vote. 23. Mr. CHEBAANE (Tunisia) fInrcrpre&trion from R.ettc/t): In coming before the Security Council today, Lebanon is bringing to its attention information of a particularly grave character. Indeed, we are engaged in debate in this organ, which bears primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, precisely because of the capital importance of this discussion, for what is involved at one and the same time and in an insertarable manner is the maintenance of peace and security in the region, resuect for the Charter of the United Nations and for themost elementary norms of law and international morality, and, above all, the fate of two peoples -Lebanese and Palestinian-who have already suffered too much and undergone too many afllictions, and who for many days now have been subjected to veritable genocide. 24. Only a few weeks ago we unanimously adopted resolution 487 (19811, which condemned Israel for its act of aggression against Iraq, and scarcely three days ago the Council launched a pressing appeal [s//45993 for Israel to put an end to its savage armed attacks against Lebanon. Once again we ventured to hope against hope that the Israeli Government would come to its senses and put an end to its blind fbry against populations which have neither the capability nor adquate or equal means to defend themselves. 2% Unfortunately, the Council has become all too familiar with this alternation of debates and acts of aggression against Lebanon and the Palestinian people and. from time to time, against other Arab countries of the region. We said as much during the debate on the complaint by Iraq against Israel, concluding that the situation was replete with lessons for anyone who would heed them. 26. The escalation of aggression against Lebanon reveals once again that the departure from a policy of defiance antl,firi/s trwttttp/i.s is but an illusion for the international community and that Israel certainly has not drawn the conclusions widely endorsed by the United Nations. 27. It also reveals the same strategy of expansionism, tlestahili;t;ilioll anti the destruction of civilian property, ;:nd the wiie will to exterminate an entire race-the 28. Obviously, this tragedy is beyond Lebanon’s ability to cope with alone. That is the reason for this emergency meeting of the Security Council. 29. If it is true that blame must be assessed on the basis of the facts, the Council is abundantly served, having been regularly seized of the numerous acts of aggression and violations which have been committed over a long period and far too often by Israel. Besides, the very detailed and most eloquent reports submitted by the Secretary-General last Friday [see 2292nd maefittg1 and again today, as well as the well-documented statements of the representatives of Lebanon and the PLO [ihid.], have clearly established the responsibility of the culprit and have shown that the pursuit of its criminal acts is part of the same “logic” -that of imposing the law of the jungle and of subjecting neighbouring countries and peoples to its own aims. 30. In such a context, the Lebanese and Palestinian peoples in particular, and all Arab countries and the nations that love peace and justice, attach vital importance to the action of the Council. We do not think it sufficient just to be heard or frequently to voice theoretical support: the Lebanese and the Palestinians need very specifically to be able to ensure the security of their women and children, of their young and their elderly, whoare being massacred by the hundreds these days; they need to be able to ensure peace at their borders and to have their rights and dignity respected, because every passing day teaches-them that the Droximitv of a tinime haunted by the folly of its dreams bf grandeur ani military supkmacy hardly means peace. 31. Merely repeating injunction8 of principle will therefore not be sufficient, for they will hardly compensate for the enormous loss in human lives and the destruction inflicted on Lebanon and on the Palestinians or guarantee the cessation of such aggression in the future. Ordering Israel to put an end to its attacks will not be sufficient to guarantee the implementation of those injunctions or to guard Lebanon from further invasions. Recalling our past resolutions will not be sufficient guarantee that conditions will prevail for the peaceful development, in conditions of security, of the neighbouring countries as a whole, and specifically of Lebanon, which continues to be apprehensive about the prolongation of a long-drawnout tragedy. 32. It is the duty of the Council to take effective and determined action in the face of the constant defiance and the uncontrollable excesses of the Israeli Government. Any State that is responsible in law must be 33. We feel that this new series of armed attacks against Lebanon, because of their scope and the abundauce of military means employed, hardly leaves any hope that Israel will abide by any measure decided upon by the Security Council unless that measure is accompanied by a combination of sanctions in accordance with Chapter VII of the Charter. 34. It is no ,;cident that the escalation of acts of aggression and the veritable massacre that has been inflicted upon the Lebanese and Palestinian peoples for so many da)-s have come at a time wh~l peace missions have succeeded in opening up prospects for detente. That escalation therefore reveals a wider strategy and more far-reaching designs. 35. The theory of the security of Israel and of preemptive measures will not deceive anyone. Furthermore, by increasing its long-term incursions into Lebanese territory, by isolating whole parts of that territory, by destroying a whole economic infrastructure that is vital for the survival of the population and by sowing death and desolation among innocent civilians, Israel is engaged in dividing and destabilizing Lebanon. 36. In the hope of achieving the beginning of a settlement that will ensure the peace and security of the peoples of the region, we express the wish that the Council may respond unanimously to Lebanon’s appeal that it liberate its territory from all aggression and take effective measures to that effect as authorized fully by the Charter. @. Tunisia could not fail to express to L&anon and to the PLO its active solidarity and its unfailing support in the long trials inflicted upon them. In calm resistance, may they feel confident of the inevitable victory of justice and law. 3X. Before I conclude, and even though we have very serious doubts about the will of the Israeli Government to put an immediate and final end to its aggression, I should like nonetheless to express the hope that the urgent decision which the Security Council has just taken will be complied with with&t delay. The PLO has already accepted the cease-fire, even though the Palestinialis are ihe victims of the aggres. sion. In our view this measure is necessary because of the considerable number of civilian victims and the

I should first like to thank the Secretary- General for the clarity and the quality of his most useful report. 40. For several days now Lebanon has once again been the target of armed intervention and bombings whose especially deadly effects are thus added to the sufferings of an already sorely tried people. These raids have taken a heavy toll, assessed at several hundred dead and wounded in Beirut, as well as in the south of the country, in Nabatiyeh, Tyre and Sidon, heavily populated areas. We must also add to this the destruction of buildings and Infrastructure. Whereas the international community as a whole should be mobilizing to assist the Lebanese Government to continue its remarkable efforts to re-establish Its administration and its authority throughout its territory, bridges and roads linking the south of the country to the capital are thus being systematically destroyed. This deliberate destruction jeopardizes the action of UNIFIL, which is under a mandate from the Security Council. 41. For all those reasons, it was most urgent for the Council unambiguously to speak out in favour of an immediate cease-fire which would be respected by all parties concerned and would put an end to the escalation of violence. That is why the French aelegation voted in favour of the resolution that has just been adopted. 42. We cannot imagine that such an appeal will remain unheeded. Indeed, how can one fail to be deeply concerned by the unprecedented nature of the massive attacks perpetrated against Lebanon, a sovereign State which provides refuge to people that are victims of war? 43. France also intends most vigorously to condemn any resort to so-called pre-emptive actions that can certainIy not be just&d by any lntrrpretation of Article 51 of the Charter. Such actions bring about counter-actions, and thus result in a further cycle of violence with equally deplorable casualties on each side. 44. Onceagain we must recall that it isnot force which will lead to an equitable settlement of the Middle Eastern conflict in which Lebanon has been caught up in spite of itself. It is not by/ fdrce that one will succeed in guaranteeing the right of Israel to live safely within secure and recognized frontiers, the right of the Palestinian people to have a homeland and the right of Lebanon to live in peace.

First. I should like to thank the Secretary-General fol 51. Then, again, the Middle East problem has become beset by stereotypes which can do nothing to advance the possibility of progress towards a just and lasting peace. We hear of “the terrorist PLO”; we hear of the “Zionist entity”. These are amongst the milder characterlzations. But what is the reality? Here, I should like to quote from the Venice Declaration of the then nine members of the European Community, the Declaration made by the European Council on 13 June 1980: 47. My Government deplores resort to armed action. We have freauentlv criticized PLO violence. But the scale of &cent *Israeli actions and the resulting deaths, particularly the civilian casualties, can in no way be justified. “the time has come to promote the recognition and implementation of the two principles universally acccptcd by the international community: the right to existence and to security of all the States in the region, including Israel, and justice for all the peck pies, which implies the recognition of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people.” [S/14009, para. 4.1 48. I was particularly struck by something which the representative of Lebanon said in his statement at the beginning of this debate on 17 July. Mr. Saghlyyah said: “What everybody in this hall takes for granted -the right to live in peace and security--appears to be a luxury in Lebanon.” [/b/& para. 35.1 This is surely the heart of the matter, as the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary of my country has so frequently stated on subsequent occasions. For example, Lord Carrlngton said earlier this month in an interview: It must be the objective of all of us in the Council to make what contribution we can to bring about a situation in which no Lebanese will have to utter so grim a phrase, a situation in which the people of Lebanon can again er\joy that peace and security which is the inherent right of all of us. “The Arabs have got to recognizc the State of Israel and give it security within its boundaries. On the other hand, Israel must rccognize the rights of the Palestinian. I simply do not believe that a Ion -term settlement in the Middle East is possible unt I both sides recognize that.” f 49. The tragedy of Lebanon is of course part of the tragedy of the Middle East problem, which has defied solution over many decades. Over the years the conflicts has developed its own vocabulary, full of phrases which have taken on spccid meanings. WC hear much of “prr-cmptive strikes”, of “cycles of violence*‘, of “retaliatory action”. We must not bc lulled into a sc%se of fan&&v and routine by these runbcmisms. What do tbw phipses mean in Pcpcticc? 9bcy mean tbc dcstruetion of property, the displaccmcnt of people: they mean wounding and death. In this particular instance, the casualties in the Israeli air attacks on Beirut have exceeded the thousand mark, We have all seen the press photographs of civilians running forcover, ofresidential buiidingsdestroyed,ofchildren being carried to hospital and of sad ceremonies at gravesides. Who can fail to be profoundly distressed by those horrors? Lord Carrington also made clear in the House of Lords, on 25 June, that: “while it is not the sole cause, the continuing frJlun to resolve the Arab-Israeli dis r ta. an important rloment in which is the need or Rkstinian selfdctormination, is indeed at the ccntn of continuing instability in the Middle East.“’ 52. Which is more likely to bring about peace and a secure life for all the peoples of the region: the putting into effect of the principles of the Venice Dechation or the continuation of “pre-emption” and “retaliation” and exchanges of verbal insults? Surely, there can be only one answer. 50. Surely no one can claim that the policy of “preemptive strikes”, with its horrible trail of human destruction, can conceivably advance the cause of peace, either in Lebanon or in the region as a whole. 53. Recent events have severely underlined the urgent need for progress towards a just and IastinR peace settlement in the Middle East. Channels arc open for the parties to take steps towards a peaceful 5 - _.?z:-i--- Best Copy Available 54. Meanwhile. the resolution that we have just udopted is what is needed in present circumstances, and my delegation is encouraged that it was adopted unanimously. My Government hopes that those concerned will heed the call for a cease-fire so that the people of Lebanon and all who have suffered and are suffering may have relief from this latest and most grave series of attacks. 55. The PRESIDENT fitttcJrpr~tcrtio,l front French): The Council will now hear statements by speakers whose names are inscribed on my list in the context of the debate devoted to this item. 56. Before we open that debate, the representative of the Palestine Liberation Organization has asked to be allowed to speak and I call on him. S7. Mr. TERZI (Palestine Liberation Organization): I wish to thank the Secretary-General for the concise and clear report he gave the Council on the response to the urgent appeal made by you. Mr. President, and the other members of the Security Council on 17 July 1981 l.S//4SYY]. 58. At 1845 hours New York time today, I was instructed by Chairman Arafat to inform you, Mr. President. that in defiance of and contempt for the Council’s appeal, about 50 Israeli armoured vehicles, including tanks, have been attempting to cross the Khardala bridge. since 2300 hours Beirut time-which is 5 p.m. here. Elements of the joint forces-Palestinians and the Lebanese National Movementare resisting that advance: they have knocked out one tank, and the fighting continues. 59. Furthermore. since 223s hours Beirut time, Israeli artillery has been shelling the Zahrani area. A new attempt was made by Israeli troops to land in the vicinity. In this case, the joinl forces are still ongaged in resisting and repelling this invasion of Israeli forces. One Israeli corporal has been captured and is being held as a prisoner of war by the joint forces. 60. The PLO expresses the sincere hope that the Security Council will take immediate action to uut an end to the invasion by Israeli forces and order the immediate and complete withdrawal from Lebanese territory. and that if will also order Israel to terminate its genocidal campaign against the Palestinian and Lebimcse peoples.

The firsl speaker in the context of the present item i\ the representative of Egypt. I invite him to take a l>likce at rhc Council table and to make his statement. 63. Once again the Council is urgently called upon to assume its Charter responsibilities with respect to the repeated Israeli attacks against civilian targets in Lebanon. The magnitude and the indiscriminate nature of the recent Israeli raids have been universallv condemned. In point of fact, well before the convening of this Council, Governments all over the nlobe as well as world public opinion had already pronounced their verdict. 64. It is now up to the Council to determine if peace and security are to be maintained in our contemporary world. States, big and small, advanced and devsloping, aligned and non-aligned, are entitled to know whether a Member State of the United Nations can take the law in its own hands and strike at will and with impunity. The lessons to be drawn from the Council’s reaction to the tragedy that is being arrogantly perpetrated in Lebanon will no doubt affect every single country. 65. It is the considered opinion of my Government that the continuation of the Israeli military attacks on civilian targets in Lebanon should be promptly and effectively terminated. In Egypt, utter dismay and indignation characterized the reaction of the people and the Government. An official statement was issued on 17 July to reflect Egypt’s grave concern at the deplorable developments in Lebanon. The statement of the Egyptian Government condemned the flagrant Israeli aggression against the Lebanese people. The Government of Egypt has, moreover. consistentlv -i - urged the termination of all attempts. to domini& Lebanon and reiterated its call for a “hands oft”’ policy in Lebanon. Furthermore, the Egyptian statomont urged that an immediate halt be called to the tragic ordeal of Lebanon by putting an end to aJl forms of Intervention and interference in Lebanese internal 66. This is not the first time that my delegation has addressed the Security Council on this very subject. Nor is it the first lime that my delegation has expressed its views on Israel’s allegations that it was acting in selfdefence. Israel’s attempt to justify its actions in Lebanon by invoking the inherent right to self-defence has been previously advanced and categorically rejected. My delegation has already stated on more than one occasion that the right lo self-defence must not be abused. The scope of self-defence in international law and in conformity with Article 51 of the Charter could never bc twisted and distorted to provide any country with a free hand to kill innocent civilians at will. 68. The underlying premise is that the mantle of legitimacy cannot be conferred on military action unless certain conditions are fulfilled. The fundamental conditions are spelled out in the provisions of Article 51 of the Charter, which clearly would not be solemnly invoked until an armed attack had occurred. The examination of available facts would confirm that the Israeli authorities announced that border incidents had occurred. It is a matter of record that the representative of Israel has recently addressed to the Security Council a number of communications drawing its attention to certain border incidents. Such incidents are usually hand: ,d by the appropriate United Nations peace-keeping machinery in the area. Last Friday (2292rrd /~erirtg), and in a letter dated 20 July IS//46033 to you, Mr. President, the representative of Israel advanced some allegations; but that was, of course, povr ~~r/sm. The action had already taken place. All these incidents should have been promptly referred to either UNTSO, which serves the General Armistice Agreement machinery between Lebanon and IsraeLZ or to UNIFIL, as appropriate. In my delegation’s view, such incidents cannot justify the massive and intensive Israeli reaction. Thus, the provisions of Article 51 could not be convincingly applicable. 69, Israel has also consistently promulgated its right to unleash pre-emptive or anticipatory attacks and its right to retaliate and conduct reprisals. In a pm-charter era, the rules were generally interpreted as sanctioning the right of States in certain conditions to undertake military actions in circumstances that were beyond the scope of the modern definition of the doctrine of self-defence. However, well before the Charter of the United Nations, the international @B&mu&y had eatablirhed defined rules to regulate the @a of force in intematlonal relations. The licence to iittack at will and wlthout llmitations disappeared decisively with the advent of this century. The point to be emphasized is that, even in a less orderly and less civilized society, States were under a customary legal obligation to observe certain limitations. The most salient of these limitations was articulated by the United States Secretary of State Webster and has been widely quoted in the Security Council. It requires that the situations that give rise to acts of self-defence, in the words of Secretary Webster, be “instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means. and no moment for deliberation”. 70. It is relevant also to note that. as far back as the period ofthe League of Nations. a report on the subject “Legitimate defence implies the adoption of measures proportionate to the seriousness of the attack and justified by the seriousness of the danger.” 71. Anain, it is self-evident that when a reaction fails to be p;oportionate it must be illegal. The response to minor border incidents, which should be referred to the proper mechanism for investigation, is usually. anywhere in the world, a protest or a complaint lodged with the Security Council, not a fWscaie armed attack launched on innocent civilians. 72. 1 turn now to the question of retaliation or reprisal. The point of departure should be an established historical fact, namely, that, having accepted the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation nmonp States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, contained in paragraph 1 of the annex to General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV). Israel committed itself tb respecting the pro;isio& of that Declaration, which calls upon all States “to refrain from acts of reprisal involving the use of force.” Even before the unanimous adoption of that Declaration by the Assembly, the Security Council had already established the law of the Charter with respect to reprisals when it adopted resolution 228 (1966). following an Israeli military attack on Jordan. In paragraph 3 of that resolution, the Council censured Israel for its large-scale military action and emphasized: “that actions of military reprisal cannot be tolerated and that, if they are repeated, the Security Council will have to consider further and more effective steps as envisaged in the Charter to ensure against the repetition of such acts”. 73. In rummation, Israel’s futile and unconvincing attempts to give an impression that the general principler of international law and the provisions of the Charter can be stretched and blown out of proportion to accommodate military attacks on ci%ns are wlthout oay foundation and, very bluntly, are void of rubs~usce. 74. Such newly-developed Israeli claims and practices, tailored to apply solely to Israel, would undermine the very foundations of the United Nations. The repercussions would transcend the boundaries of our region. In short, what is at stake is not only the credibility of this Council or the credibility of its I5 members. What is at stake is clearly the possible collapse of the contemporary international legal order. The consequence could well be retrogression to the law of the jungle, in which the use of force was the order of the day. 75. The most accurate expression of the worldwide indignation at Ist’acl’s recent aclions in Lebanon “It can only sadden the world that Israel has chosen to escaiate the cycle of violence and counterviolence in the Middle East bv bombing a densely populated area of Beirut. The SsraeJi action is d6 plorable. It is also deeply tragic, not only because it resulted in such a high loss of life but because it shows again the profoundly mistaken judgement of Israel that the road to its security lies through the gun. More and more, Israel conveys the attitude that it has the right and might to do precisely what it wants regardless of the consequences. Few think that such an attitude will ever bring peace.” 76. The Security Council has passed several resolutions and yet Israel has continued to escalate its armed incursions against Lebanon, and Israel has also consistently chosen to ignore the provisions of binding conventions. The Geneva Conventions of 1949, to which Israel is a party, prohibit, in no unclear terms, military attacks bn &vilian targets. The Additionai Protocol II of 1977 stipulates, in article 13, paragraph 2: that: “The civilian population as such, as gla;, I(ldividual civilians, shall not, be the object of : The civdlan population m Lebanon has sustained heavy human and material losses. which have added further to the tragedies and agonies of Lebanon and of the Palestinian people. It was announced yesterday in Cairo that the Government of Bgypt had promptly offered assistance to the innocent and hapless victims of the latest tidal wave of attacks on civilians in Lebanon. It was also announced that Egypt pledged to provide all the necessary aid and assistance to the victimized Lebanese and Palestinian civilians. That position stems from our determination to spare no effort in alleviating the plight of the Palestinian people and our determination to contribute positively towards achieving the exercise of tbclr rlghtr. 77. What ir urgently requirsd now is to avold any finher deterioration of an already explosive situation and to ensure a definite termination of the vicious cycle of violence that has plagued our region. We call on all parties to put an end-to;iolence an<i bloodshed. We call for a total and final cessation of all militarv attacks on Lebanese soil. The resolution just unanimously adopted by the Council should be fully and faithfully respected by all. It should be followed by a strong rejection of the policy of the use of force at will. It is the collective responsibility of the Security Council to adopt adequate measures and to enforce its decision. In this regard, further measures should be considered by the Council to consolidate, reinforce and widen the peace-keeping functions of UNIFIL, in order to ensure full respect for Lebanese sovereignty. 79. It is in vain that we focus on the effects or the symptoms and overlook the original underlying causes. The time is long overdue for the international community to join in our efforts in an intensive all-out initiative to consolidate the structure which Egypt is sincerely striving to build in order to help to achieve a just, lasting and comprehensive peaceful settlement in the Middle East-a settlement that would fulfil the rights of all peoples and all States to sovereignty and &u&y and, p&icularly, the rights of the-Pa& estinian people to self-determination and independence. Tliis is the real cause which we have to espouse and dedicate ourselves to win. 80. Peace in the Middle East cannot be achieved without mutual recognition being exchanged between Israel and the Palestinian people. This is something which Egypt has been advocating for a number of years. Reciprocity and the simultaneous and mutual recognition of the corresponding rights of both peoples are the essential elements for a just and comprehensive settlement. Therefore, Egypt renews its appeal and urges all parties to join hands in the attainment of a just and permanent peace in the area that would safeguard legitimate Palestinian rights and eliminate all causes of tension and turmoil. 81. In conclusion, the new editice of peace-indeed an historic achievement-which Egypt is faithfully striving to construct in the Middle East is being undermined with the continuation of such practices of violence and bloodshed. Having concluded peace with Egypt, Israel is called upon to renounce its reckless policies and its aggressive practices. Such policies and practices are in clear violation of the Charter of the United Nations, as well as being inconsistent with the new era of peace which Egypt sincerely hopes will pnvail in the region. 82. As P&dent Sadat da&red in I!377 in Jerusalem: “Peace is not a game of calling for peace to defend certain whims or hide certain ambitions. Peace in its essence is a dire struggle against all and every ambition and whim.”

Only a few weeks ago, after a lengthy debate, the Security Council strongly condemned Israel because of its military act of aggression against the Republic of Iraq, which represented a clear violation ot the Charter of the United Nations. Although the Council in its resolution 487 (1981) expressed, not for (he first time, its deep concern about the danger to international peace and security created by Israel’s 84. Israel has carried out evidently long prepared, massive military attacks against the terrltory of Lebanon and bombed refugee camps, communications and Lebanese villages and citils, including the capltal, Beirut. The urgent appeal of the President and the other members of the Sccurlty Council made on I7 July [S//4599] is being unscrupulously ignored. The Israeli acts of terror continue, as we have just learned from the representative of the PLO. 85. Lebanese people no less than Palestinian refugees are among the numerous victims of these terrorist attacks. In view of the hundreds of victims among Lebanese civilians, it is the height of cynicism for Israel’s representative to claim in the Security Council to have no fight with Lebanon and to be striving for peace, The fact is that Lebanon is confronted with a dangerous escalation of force and aggression by Israel, an escalation which, meanwhile, is assuming the proportions of tMI-fledged acts of war. The representatives of Lebanon, Jordan and the PLO have given convincing proof of this. 86. By its terror raids against the Lebanese population and the Palestinian refugees, Israel seeks to destroy their homes and to liquidate their families. The Israeli a gf ressors, who drove the Palestinians away from the r homeland more than three decades ago, today claim that they feel threatened by the very existence of those Palestinians in Lebanon. With that allegation, Israel’s ruling circles attempt to justify their policy. By terror and destruction, the resistance of the PnIestinian people against Israel’s policy of aggression and expansion is to bc broken. 87. The massacre of hundreds of defenceless men, women and children is closely linked \vith the dertructin avital communications with the Pim of paralysing the country and destroying the territorial integrity of &awn. At the same time, it is a further attem to : Baut IEtlte division of Lebanon with the r ^ 1 I@k&d hands, Irrael’r owompliMs. he p of 88. United Nations facilities and the lives of the United Nations troops deployed to safeguard peace in the south of Lebanon are placed in extreme danger by Israel’s military raids. The destruction of hnportant b&lges and comr&ications in southern Lebanon is substantially directed against UNIPIL and jeopardizes its capacity to act. g9. Israel’s recent acts of aggression are happening at a time when the aggressor evidently believes itself able to use for its own objectives the deterioration of the international situation caused by imperialist Powers. Like the attack on the Iraqi nuclear research centre near Baghdad a few weeks ago, Israel’s raids 90. The delegation of the Ocrman Democratic Republic again strongly opposes any attempt to bring the national liberation movements into discredit by branding them as terrorist. Under tho cloak of anticommunism, some seek to disguise the terrorism of dictators against their own people and against other peoples. The behaviour of the originators of such a policy clearly shows that they are in no way a!Tectod by the misery of the Palestinians driven from their homoland or by the suffering of the Lobanese people. 91. The people of the German Democratic Republic are bound in solidarity to the people of Lebanon and support the just struggle waged by the Palestinian peopleunder the leadoc<hip of its ieg:‘.imate representative, the PLO, for the implementation of its lnalienabie rights. 92. The delegation of the Oerman Democratic Republic strongly condemns Tel Aviv’s recent acts of wai against L&non, which not only represent a threat to international mace and security but an actual breach of it, as well ai a flagrant violation of the Charter of the United Nations and relevant resolutions of the Security Council. The policy of escalation of Israeli aggression against Arab countries can only be regarded ~8 a link in the chain of Israel’s policy against a comprehensive and just solution of the Middle East conflict. Thereforc, my delegation reiterates Its view that peace and security in the region presuppose Israel’s complete withdrawal from all occupied Palartinlan and A.& lands and the safeguarding of the inallenabk rights of the Arab people of Paloatlne, including their tight to return to their homeland, their right to wlfon and the rrtabllshtnent ofrn iWpendant ~o.~iaue~~rti~is~m~n8 &d&hpln d a rtabk solutlott to the rdld& But 93. My delegation supported the resolution that has just been adopted by the Council, because we are very much in favour of action by the Security Council without delay. In this connection, I would like to refel lo the demands for decisive measures by the Council against Israel raised by my delegation during the debate of the Council in June on Israel’s act of aggression against Iraq. What matters now is to make the aggressor feel the authority of the Council in order to stop Israel’s acts of war immediately.

The next speaker is Mr. Clovis Maksoud, Permanent 95. Mr, MAKSOUD: Mr. President, allow me to express to you, and through you, to the other members of the Security Council our appreciation for the invitation that you have kindly extended to me to speak on behalf of the League of Arab States on the question entitled “The situation in the Middle East”. I share with all those who have preceded me a high regard for the manner in which you have conducted the deliberations of this Council, the dignity and steadiness and the impressive leadership you have exhibited in your presidency and throughout your tenure in the deliberations of the Council. You have consistently demonstrated and supported a commitment to our Arab and African values, as well as own common destiny, which our experiences and our aspirations have cemented. Out common struggle against racism and all forms of colonial hegemony has been reinforced by the eagerness of the Arab and African States to spell out a policy that renders national liberation a contributor to international peace and human development and dignity. %. The Security Council is meeting in the aftermath of Isrnel’s air raid on the capital of Lebanon and the intensified Israeli aggressive strikes by air, seaand land in the south of Lebanon and on the shores of Lebanon. The extent of the loss of life among Lebanese and Palestinian civilians has been amply described bv my two colleagues from Lebanon atid the PLO.- Th; massive and indiscriminate bombing of population centres represents a qualitative change not only in the policy of Israeli aggression but in its scope, Its intensity and in the proliferation of its targets. It is necessary here to underline that what we are witnessing is not an altered Israeli policy of aOpression aoalnst Lebanon Utd the PaIestinlans but an emboldenment of Israel’s q#reaaive thrust, which is assuming genocidal dimensions. 97. This uolitativa change in scope has made it imperative or the Security Council to be seized a&n 9 of the question of Israel’s aggression against Lebanon and the violation of Lebanon’s sovereignty, airspace and territorial waters. Therefore, it is incumbent upon us toemphasize that we are dealing here with aconstant -namely, Israel’s aggression against Lebanon-and also a variable, the factors of the exterminating and genocidal dimensions of Israel’s military operations and designs. 98. It might be asked why Israel has been emboldened to rise to this new level of aggressiveness. The answer is that Israel has enjoyed a measure of immunity from the sanctions of the international community-sanctions that should have been imposed, but were not, because of the plotectivc shield the lrnited States 99. We have witnessed how by its invasion of Lebanon in March 1978 Israel circumvented and then sought to render inoperative resolution 425 (19781, and how, with impunity, Israel unnerved the mandate of UNIFIL, and by arming mutineers and providing them with logistical, military and other elements of s~pporl, forcibly prevented the central and legitimate Government of Lebanon from exercising its full authority, Such actions have enabled Israel to establish military hegemony in the south and to persist in violating Lebanon’s sovereignty for the last three years. 100. Every timo Lebauon brought the issue of Israel’s aggression and violations to the notice of the Security Council, there was a built-In resistance to the measures that would have inhibited Israel’s reckless policies and would have deterred Israel’s uninterrupted course of oscalatod aggression. 101. The latest phase of this escalating aggression against Lebanon occurred when Israel sought to use its military power to disrupt the genuine efforts of the Arab League and the President of Lebanon to bring about the national reconciliation and the political cohesion desired by all Lebanese. The Lebanese people were looking forward to national reconciliation as a way out of their long suffering and as a means of resuming their creative, intellectual and cultural fbnctions within the Arab nation and throughout the world. The cynical use of Israel’s military prowess to undermine these Lebanese aspirations was advertised by Israel as a policy aim to be pursued and roalized. 102. As the Osscrvaforc~ Rorrturro, the organ of the Holy See, stated on 18 July l9SI: “How is it possiblo not to think that the bombings which started about a week MO and culminated with yesterday’s attack were initiated with no consideration for the political context of efforts directed at posside solutionof the Lebanese crisis?” 103. It is clear that Israel intends to wreak havoc on the chatlces of peace within Lebanon and on the opportur.itics for genuine peace with justice throughout the region. 104. When Israel struck at the nuclear installations in Baghdad. the Security Council un;mimously COIIdemned the attack but refrained from imposing the necessary sanctions. Israel assumed that its immunity against sanctions was permanent and irrevocable. Condemnation of its actions, censure of its behaviour, criticism of its policies-all were treated with COIItempt, and Israel heaped insults on the international community and on the United Nations for even qurstioning its motives and its actions. 106. Israel thinks that by heaping insults on the critics of its policies and by lnforrlng that any criticism is a fr- * of “lingering antl-Semitism” it can mute and silence . .o growing scepticism and rojoction of its ideological pretensions and its arrogant iInpOsitiOn of policies that threaten peace and stability in the region and throughout the world. 107. I do not want to dwell on this facet of the intollectuai and political terrorism through which Israel attempts to pro-ompt the emergence of any objective and oven-handed policies in the Western countries, and moro particularly in the United States. Yet it must be stated for tho record that this form of intellectual, political and diplomatic terrorism is a cover-up for the sustained and moro easily identifiable terrorism that Israel practises on the ground, such as that manifested In the unmistakably genocidal raids on the capital of Lubanon. 108. The pattom of behaviour and the nature of the olcalatod aggmssivo military oporotions ordorod by Begin aro no longer subjects amenable to analysis. Rother thoy havo become subjoctrr for psychoanalysis. Tho compulsion to UK the word “torrorirt” before the montlon of tho PLO on the part of Begin and hi8 roprowntativor i8 o manifestation of a growing roolization of tho absolute legitimacy that the Palertine Liberation Q!@&atjon hor achieved in tho world community # wd u in the conccionce of mankind. 109. The declared objective of Israel, as stated by Israeli Army Chief of Staff Saguy, “to generate Lebanese civilian resentment against the presence of Palestinian guerrillas there”, is another sign of the sick Zionist mentality which seeks ro use the blood of civilians in l)eirut and in the south of Lebanon to pave the way for its destructive policies ia their next manifestation. 110. It also represents a deranged way of thinking, and the Zionists have threatened that if Lebanon cannot voluntarily do Israel’s dirty work, then the Lebanese must suffer the consequences and be pushed to carry out Israel’s wishes. This not only constitutes a misreading of Lebanon’s commitment to its 111. The danger of such an entity and of Zionist ideology should not only be contained, but curtailed so that constructive forces can function. 112. This mental frame of reference is characteristic of t3ovommonts such as those of South Africa and Israel and oarller on of Rhodesia, which mistakenly believed that “pro-emptivo strikes” and “massive retaliations” would sow discord among those whose alliances wore organic and a matter of principled commitment and conviction. In the case of Lebanon, the senso of sharing a common destiny with the Palostlnians and with the whole Arab world is axiomatic. 113, The genocidal dimension of the air strikes aBalnst the capital of Lobanon, against the shores of Lebanon and against the south of Lebanon can only have the opposite of the intended effect. It will embolden and reinforce Lebanese and Palestinian solidarity and ronew their commitment of purpose and identification with their national aspirations. 114. Israel, in the final analysis, is like all racist ontitios and ideological anachronisms serviced with modem advanced weaponry. Our shock and antIor should not be confined to mero condemnation or oxprossions of outraga. The international community must undertake moasures that inhibit Irraol’s proclivity towards aggression. Violations of torrltorlal soveroiunty and massive air strikes must bocomo costlier. H&lo the noed for the imposition of rrmctiona, which rhould rot&r the United Notion8 mOChani8m not only credible but offoctivo and concequontial. 11% A8 1 ltrtod ONiiOr, dltt’im th0 pUt few dry8 wo hrvo boon wltnoaring a qualltotive cw In the level Of Israel’s o~rerrion a&&at Lobanon and a&at the areas of Palestinian presence. What has heretofore been described as arrogance is now developing into madness. The dire consequences of Israel’s earlicl massive retaliations and pre-emptive strikes, with the heavy cost in civilinn life to both Lebanese and Palestinians, is now, as the savage raid on Beirut has shown, assuming genocidal proportions. What the Security Council is being faced with is no longer the usual and expected level of Israeli aggression, but a new and very dangerous challenge. The Arab States, those most affected by this new scale of Israeli aggression, are aware of Israel’s record of contempt and defiance of all Security Council resolutions. That, however, has not prevented Lebanon and the Arab States from 116. Tho Unitod States’ decision to postpone indofinitoly delivery of 13 F-169 to Israel constitutes a signal of strong disapproval of Israel’s aggression against Lebanon. It does not constitute, however, a dissoelation or the beginnings of a policy reversal. Although it is a positivo sGp, it does not cotiospond to the level of Israel’s violation of international law or its contemptuous abuse of American law. The decision for indefinite suspension is preferable to one which would have merely postponed delivery for a few days, but the most preforablo option of those feasible and available would have been to have cut off military and legal aid to Israel completely. 117. In the context of the United States-Israeli equation, there is noquestion that the United States strongly deplores the oxcessos of Israel and the ubvious and visible abuse of traditional united Statos permissiveness towards Israel’s creeping annexation, oxpansion and institutional discriminatbry practices, along with the multitudo of violations that are inherent in the thrust of Israel’s over-all policy. 118. However, we cannot allow this United States signal of dimapproval to go unnoticed. We take it PI a rian, flrst. of American exhaustion with a mad ally 96 the loose and aocondly, of American dirponitloh fciinaintain a dirtonco from Israeli rampager in Leb- &non and throtghout the region. 119. The decision to postpone the delivery of the F-16s indefinitely might usher in a policy reassessment -painful as that might be for those who have been conditioned to give instant and unqualified support to Israel’s self-al)pointed role as a “‘-reliable” p&iceman of strategic interests of the United States in the area. 120. However, maintaining a distance from Israel’s irrationality is far less than what is expected and needed from the United States. There must be not only dissociation from Israel’s behaviour but also the adoption of measures that perhaps only the United States can take to reintroduce a modicum of sanity into a highly volatile situation. 122. Whether or not that perception is precise in absolute terms, it is widespread and can be validated by evidence. However, we are not here to paraphrase tho past. Even though in large part United States permissiveness towards Israel has led to the spread of violence, suffering and violations of all sorts of rights -legal, human, territorial and national-we wish to spell out a tituro, but not just in terms of Arab-American relations. At thisjuncture, the United States has an historic opportunity vis-&v/s the Arab world and tbe Palestinian quostion to exercise judgement and objectivity in a long-range reassessment of its policies and to purge itself of policies vulnerable to the short-term exigencies of politics. The United States must seize the occasion to extricate its perceptions of the entire Middle East from the restricted confines of lobbies serving narrow interests and the misguided notions that attempt to reduce the region to an arena of cold war and to see the area in terms of oil wells and strategic bases. 123. When the United States extricates itselffrom this narrow and restrlctlvo optic, it can then pursue a policy predicated on a vision of the region whore human power, economic potential and the utilization of intellectual and managerial talents can coalesce in unity to servo not only tho peoples of the region but also the developmental requirements of the third world and the human aspirations of the disenfranchised constituoncios such as the Palestinians. 124. The United States must embolden the international machinery that the United Nations represents end provides and instils into ita resolutions the vitality that renders the world more amenable to the rationality and sanity that the international consensus invariably jq-. t2S. If this is construed as an appeal to the United !!ltates, let it be so construed. Inasmuch as the United States provides Israel with the implements to destroy United Nations credibility and the chances for a genuine and just peace in the region, so must the United States assume a tremendous responsibility, perhaps of historic proportions. that disallows any rupture in the dialogue and effort at persuasion. Thus, the minor steps taken by the United States towards the reassessment of its policies must be interpreted as a sign that the United States is ridding itself of its hang-ups over and its excessive identification with Israel and its objectives. 126. Perhaps Israel’s blatant act of aggression against Iraq’s nuclear research facilities and the massive indiscriminate strikes at civilian targets in 127. Perhaps American liberal supporters of Israel will be disabused of their classical and romantic conceptions and see in the dimension of the violence that Israel practises and perpetrates against Lebanon and the Palestinians the fibres of which fascism is made. Perhaps also American conservatives will be similarly disabused of their ideas that Israel is an orderly, “strategic instrument” of United States global objectives. 132. Israel’s long-standing objective of rendering Lebanon helpless is another manifestation of its heightened level of aggression and violence that was demonstrated in its recent air raid on the capital and shores of Lebanon. Lebanon, as you know, is a founding member of the League of Arab States and of the United Nations. Since its inception as an independent and sovereign country, it has been a citadel of learning not only in terms of academic and cultural freedom, but in terms of how to tolerate differences, reconcile conflicts, accommodate divergences, and dream the impossible. 128. Security Council resolutions can be made more effective if thi United States reassesses its policy in the Middle East to bring it closer to the international consensus, a consensus which Israel seeks to defy and, if possible, destroy. 129. Recent Israeli acts of aggression against Lebanon cannot be viewed either in isolation or out of the context of the over-all implications of Palestinian dispossession and disenfranchisement. The agony of Lebanon is due, in part, to Israel’s efforts to make both Palestinian hopelessness and Lebanese helplessness permanent fixtures on the regional scene, This is the central challenge to the United Nations. From it flows the whole evolution of Israel’s policies to annihilate the Palestinians, to destroy Lebanon and to render inoperative United Nations resolutions and mechanisms. Israel employs all means to justify those ends. With the passage of time, those means become more virulent, more vengeful, more destructive, more contemptuous, more provocative and more insulting to the international community and even to those who have shown varying degrees of tolerance towards Israeli ailgression. Israel’s objective of creathtg Palestinian hopelessness is evident in the attempt to present the Palestinians with three unacceptable options: if the &!8luWm insist on their national rig@ thoy muat rkrk annihilation: if they pursue politIcal stru&e, they BHIat r&k dispersion and cottfinement; and if they seek an active presence, they must acquiesce in the permanency of their reduced status, as spelled out in the so-called autonomy talks. In other words, Israel treats the Palestinians as human obstacles to the everexpanding Israeli entity and its aggressive annexationist designs. 133. Lebanon brought into the political map of the contemporary world the beauty of pluralism, the convergence of values, the humanism of co-discovery. In Lebanon, the pioneering spirit of the merchant and the creative spirit of the poet blended in a mixture that was so elegant and refined that it rendered Lebanon an anchor for all those who sought the comfort of human accommodation and the stimulus of responding to the challenges of our times. 134. Lebanon, historically, has piloted many aspects of the contemporary Arab renairsance. Throughout modem history, Lebanon was a vehicle for render& the Arabs more emphatic, in being world-conscious and in making the world more Arab-conscious. This unique role in the Arab national context gave Leb anon’s independence and sovereignty a rignificance t.hat went beyond the ammeters d thi legaiis# pampb8m8li8 tlmt is uml y 8uoci8ted with the notions of 0 amltori8l sovereignty and political independence. 135. Independence was for Lebanon the means by which it discovered its roots as well as its mission. roots that lay in the overall Arab heritage and the mission that lies in assuming full responsibility towards Arab solidarity and development. By this definition. Lebanon undertook to be in the forefront of those who defended and articulated the justice inherent in the Palestinian rights. Lebanon realizes that the Palestiniun presence within its contours is temporary and transient and that the Palestinians’ commitment to exercise their right to return to their homes and to their homeland is legitimate and inevitable. Lebanon realizes that the whole thrust of the authentic Palestinian movement lies in the struggle to establish an independent Palestinian State in the Palestinian homeland and not to 130. In the pursuit of this utterly irrational objective, Israel employs the instruments of destruction to bleed the Palestinian people and to impress upon them the futility of their struggle and the meaninglessness of their international legitimacy. 131. Can the international community, can the Security Council, can world opinion, can the conscience of mankind be resigned to the inevitability of 136. Lebanon recognizes Israel’s designs on Lebanese territories in the south. Israel’s repeated violations of Lebanon’s sovereignty in the south and its insistence on maintaining a monopoly of aerial domination over the Lebanese skies are but the elements of coercion by which Israel endeavours to corner the Palestinians into accepting the notion of a substitute homeland and thus provoke a situation where partition becomes the negation of Lebanese unity and independence. 137. This is the thrust of Israel’s conspiracy against Lebanese independence and unity. This is the aim of Israel in the destruction of Lebanese independence and sovereignty. Israel strives to achieve several of its objectives within the arena of Lebanon. In the Israeli scenario, the partition of Lebanon would paralyse Lebanon’s function within the Arab national community; would prevent, as a final solution for the Palestinian question, the Palestinian right to return and to self-determination; and disprove once and for all the validity of pluralistic experiments and human co-discovery. 138. The agony of Lebanon, grave, deep and ever painful, is far less than the resilience of the Lebanese in defending their country, its unity and its independence and its legitimate authority and the retrieval of Lebanon’s role as a major catalyst in a situation tom by anxiety. That fact of Lebanese resilience explains the diplomatic position that Lebanon edoys throughwt the world and within the United Nations. Lebanon’s resilience and the inherent txtwer of its resumed cohesion will disprove, as a mat&r of course, Israel’s prtt?yal of Lebanon as a “helpless nation” and anal s determination to nndor it so, if tt can got away ivhh it. 139. It is obvious that the Palestinians are not going to be hopeless and the Lebanese are not going to be helpless. The international community and the Security Council in particular are entrusted with seeing to it that neither of these insane Israeli objectives is reached and that the legitimacy of the Palestinian struggle and of Lebanese independence is not only ensured but reinforced and emboldened. 140. The Arab nation and the Arab people look upon the deliberations of the Council with the expectation that its utterances will be matched with performance, that the cruelty which Israel seeks to inflict upon us does not lead us to a philosophy of despair. 141. Therefore, the League of Arab States Anticipates that the Security Council, whatever resolution it adopts, will live up to the expectation of all mankind, The League of Arab States believes that the most recent aggression by Israel on Lebanon warrants that the Council take the appropriate sanctions prescribed in Chapter VII of the Charter and measures which would render impossible a repetition of these genocidal strikes and would enable the international community to pursue its search for a comprehensive, just and durable peace that the peoples of that region and of the world are eager to achieve.

The next speaker is the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

While congratulating, you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council, let me assure you that words of yours pronounced in this hall a month ago [22&M tneeting] re-echo in our ears, carrying the wisdom of a distinguished son of Africa, the far-sightedness and acumen of a diplomat with a global view of the Middle East conflict, and the deep and genuine concern that the people of Niger and the rest of our African brethren have for our Arab people. You said, Mr. President: “For 33 years the Middle East region has been unlike other regions. Instability reigns there, because law is no longer respected. Tragedies take place there because justice is flouted. Wars take place there one after the other because brutal force has the key to the city. An entire people is living the life of refugees, and the usurper has sworn to attack any neighbouring country which, out of duty or solidarity, aids and supports that people. Lebanon, for example, is currently paying a tragic price, in full view of tho United Nations and, indeed, the Security Council.” And today, under your presidency, the Council is meeting at the request of the Government of Lebanon, a Lebanon which is suffering beyond human endurance, bleeding to death, a peaceful Arab State singled out by the Israeli sadists as a target for their sophisticated methods of barbarity. 144. Yet crucifying the Lebanese and destroying their chances of reaching national accord has not been enough for Israel: scorching the fertile earth of the south and levelling entire villages with their churches, mosques and schools for years has not been exercised enough in ruthlessness and aggressiveness; blowing up bridges and factories. bombarding roads with the intention of halting the flow of food and medication I4 149. Some Israeli voices, and I am quoting from ha Nenl York Times of 25 June 1981, have acknowledged that in its isolation Israel IP “making a cult out of darkness” and that there exists in the Israeli mind a “demonization of the enemy” and a “mystification of the whole Palestinian problem”. 145. On Friday, I7 July, the Israelis decided to pull yet another murderous trick from their sadistic bag and stage a crime in the heart of the capital, Beirut. They struck at one of the most densely populated quarters of Beirut with rockets and bombs, and in less than 20 minutes they caused the death and maiming of more than 1,200 children, women and men. The scene in the capital was described as carnage, yet another decoration for the butcher Begin and for the war criminals Ziporl and Ariel Sharon, for the bloodthirsty Etan and for our arrogant Blum, who is still allowed to sit among us and snicker. 150. All colonialists have at one time or other mystified and demonized the colonized, and Israel, as a settler-colonialist suffering from endemic paranoia, finds its salvation in the physical annihilation of its victim. 151. The recent Israeli aggression against Lebanon is an additional link in the chain of premeditated stateterrorism, and it cannot be viewed by the Council in isolation from the nature of the Zionist entity. Nor can it be separated from that entity’s goals and Policy objectives, unconditionally supported by the United States of America, militarily, politically and economically. 146. We all heard the Israeli representative claiming once again that bombardment, strafing, destruction, annihilation, obliteration and other violations of the Charter, as well as violations of other international instruments, are carried out by Israel in the name of self-defence in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter. The same argument by the same representative was used to justify the attack against the nuclear research plant in Baghdad, and similar arguments have been used and re-used ever since the creation of Israel to try to legitimize every illegitimate act, every violation of the Charter and every act of terrorism. 152. At this stage, Israel is seeking to achieve two goals: to seize southern Lebanon without its Arab population and to fragment the country into statelets, satellites under Zionist hegemony. 153. The Lebanese, like the Syrians, have since I948 known that Zionist expansionism would not spare them. Nor have the Zionists hidden theirdesigns, territorial or otherwise, in regard to Arab sovereign countries bordering Palestine. 147. The irony lies in the fact that the victims of Israeli acts of aggression are being denied their inalienable right to self-defence on the same principle of selfdefence, while their national territory is being colonized and annexed and while their most sacred rights are being flouted, particularly their right to return to their homes and property and their right to self-deter- @hution. Let it be ctear that the party that can invoke &e right to legitimate self-defence is the Palestinian party. whether in exile or under occupation. Fortunately, the overwhelming majority of the international community has rejected this Israeli notion of preemptive self-defence in all its variations, since the might of Israel cannot alter rights recognized as those of peoples under the Charter. 154. As early as 1919, the Zionist movement, in collusion with the colonial Powers which were at the time busily dissecting the Arab land, made it clear in the plan submitted to the Versailles Peace Conference that southern Lebanon, the Golan Heights, as well as an a&cent zone in Jordan wan to be included sooner or later in &ret2 ISMPI. As cariy as 1919, the Zionirts realized that they could not create a State for all the Jews without controlling the water sources of Palestine, which lie in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan. To occupy and control these parts of the Arab homeland was a prerequisite for strengthening the demographic, agricultural and industrial capabilities of an ever-expanding Zionist State. 148. The irony lies in the fact that in this, as well as in previous debates, we hear the Israeli representative repeatedly pronounce the terms “terror”, “terrorist” and “terrorism”, the reason being that he cannot and will not pronounce the words “Palestine’* or “Palestinians”. To him every Palestinian woman, man and child is a terrorist. By calling the 3 million or more Palestinians “terrorists” and their legitimate and sole representative, the PLO, a “terrorist organization”, 155. Indeed, Israel accomplished part of its design in 1967 by occupying the Golan Heights and its water resources, and it is at present preparing to pounce upon the area in south Lebanon which lies between the so-called Haddad enclave-itself an extension of Israeli occupation-and the Litani River. 156. It need not be recalled that Israeli political literature reveals a long-drawn-out colonial cs *n- 157. Concurrently, Israel has been engaged in subversive activities to destroy the very fabric of Lebanese society and to undermine the foundations of exemplary coexistence among the various Lebanese communities. 158. The Israeli massive invasion of March 1978, which was deplored by the Council, signalled the beginning of Israel’s determination to implement its long-coveted expansionist designs. Attempts at liquidating the Palestinian presence and displac!ng Lebanese civilians were the precursors of the tragic events we have been witnessing since April this year. 159. The United States squarely bears responsibility for the Israeli aggression against Lebanon, inasmuch 3s it bears responsibility for encouraging Israel to colonize the West Bank, Oaza and the Golan Heights. The present Administration has broken the American record of unconditional support for Israel’s expansionist policies. The total merger of Israeli interests with those of the United States has become so complete that one can no longer differentiate between the two. even the most pro-Western elements in our area would agree that this merger of foreign policy goals, including military co-operation, has made of the United States of America the very embodiment of Israeli oppression of millions of Arabs, with the result that United States c+t&i&W has never been as low as It is today. A c&t&$ &at leaves its destiny In the hands of the r&t r&It% of Tel AVIV and allows itself to be led down a b&d alley by Begin can no longer claim that it has imv legitimate interests in our area. The last three months have proved without any doubt that only Cairo and Tel Aviv have espoused Mr. Hain’s “strategic consensus”-a euphemism to perpetuate United States-Israeli hegemony over the entire Arab wcrld. The United States condemnation of the Israeli attack on Baghdad’s nuclear research reactor has fooled no one, for, even while condemning it, the United States representative was humbly submitting her apologies to Israel and reiteraticg that “nothing has happened that in any way alters the strength of our commitment or the warmth of our feelings” [see 2288111 /nc~/irlgI She reminded the Arabs in this very Council that Israel 160, Driven by warmth of feelings, the United States surely feels that this “important and valued ally” deserves to be promoted in *‘importance and value” after its carnage in Beirut. Furthermore, it deserves to be compensated for the pursuit of its “important” role in the Middle East. 161. The NW York Thw of 19 July 1981 reveals the double standard of the U lited States as follows: “Mr. Begin also faces less opposition from the Reagan Administration to his military actions in Lebanon than he did from the Carter Administration, which frequently criticized Israeli air attacks. Whether deliberately or not, President Reagan and Secretary of State Alexander Mr. Haig have given Israel the impression that hitting potential terrorists in Lebanon is justifiable self-defence.” 162. As long ago as 6 April, Secretary of State Haig, in an effort to magnify Israeli military supremacy in the area, promised Israel an additional “qualitative edge” over the Arabs, adding, in the context of the “strategic consensus”, that only “a strong Israel” could play an essential role in protecting common American-Israeli strategic concerns. AE of that date, the situation in Lebanon began to deteriorate. According to The New York Times of 7 April 1981. no sooner had one of Mr. Haig’s senior aides announced that “we are right on the brink of a mc\lor outbreak of hostilities in and around Beirut” than a reassured Begin stated that he had “reached understanding” on mqjor points with Secretary Haig. As of that date, the people of Leban~u were to be deprived of the hopes of a burgeoning national reconciliation. 163. This hostile United States attitude towards the Arabs-once more confirmed-has killed forever all false hopes and illusions pinned on the United States’ sense of justice or its awareness and rationality. No Arab is willing today to tell the United States where its legitimate interests lie; nor will any Arab appoint him&a guardian of these Intamsts. Atparontl~,~oaty tho “i&t of Israel” will dictate his wishes to the people of-the United States of America. 164. For US Syrians-Government and people alike- Lebanon has always been and will always remain the nearest and dearest in the Arab family, Our ties with Lebanon are too old, too deep, too embedded in a long common history and a common cultural heritage for Begin, who comes from Europe, and his Western clique imported from abroad to understand or appreciate. Bit a common d. stiny has drawn us yet closer togethel in contemporary history. Since 1948, the Syrian and Lebanese Arab-peoples-have been deeply traumatized by the tragic fate of their kith and kin in Palestine and irreversibly involved in their plight-a plight which the entire Arab nation deeply feels, endures and lives. 166. We know beforehand that the United States. according to press reports, will veto such a draft resolution. Yet we find some comfort in this irresponsible and negative United States position, because this very veto will once and for all unmask to the whole world the true nature of United States imperialism and its Zionist patron. 169. The Lebanese Government has again appealed to the Security Council to take effective measures to support Lebanon against Israel’s unscrupulous attacks and to ensure strict respect for Lebanon’s indetrendence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. The Chinese Government and people llrmly support this just demand of the Lebanese Government, as we have always supported the people of the Arab countries and Palestine in their just struggle to recover lost territories and restore national rights, including the tight of the Palsstinlan people to return to their homeland and to establish their own State. In our view, the Council should t’lrmly defend the Charter and uphold justice by sternly condemning Israel for its aggrersion, and should take effective measures pursuant to the provisions of the Charter to put an end to Israeli aggressh against Lebanon. 167. Mr. LING Qing (China) finterpretation from Chhwse): The Chinese delegation has listened attentively to the statements made by the representatives of Lebanon, of other Arab States, the PLO and the League of Arab States. We fully support their stem exposure of and accusation against the crimes of the Israeli aggressors. In recent days, the Israeli authorities have again sent large numbers of warplanes to strike indiscriminately at roads, bridges, factories and schools in Lebanonand at Palesiinian residential ams in southern Lebanon. On 17 July, Israel’s aircraft bombed the headquarters of Al-Fatah in Rebut. its warships attacked Lebanon’s coastal ucu and itr bymmtge wtillery shelled the town of !M4m. This Iju-cpuwi heavy casualtier mtmg LebMeM clvilhnr &%I Palestinian refugees, as welt es great damage to properties. It is especially intolerable that so soon after the Security Council adopted resolution 487 (1981), strongly condemning Israel’s attack on an Iraqi nuclear reactor, the Israeli authorities had the audacity to launch a new series of massive armed attacks, this time against Lebanon, insolently trampling upon the Charter of the United Nations. This has not only added to the long list of serious crimes committed by the Israeli authorities against the Lebanese and Palestinian peoples but constituted a flagrant provocation designed to aggravate tension in the Middle East. The Chinese Government and peep’.? Jice their vigorous indignation at and condean :. : strongest terms these acts ofaggression by the Israeu authorities.

TIM ItQxt &p&w ic tha repraWat~tiV8 of Democmt&z Yanten, wbotn I invite to take a pIace at the Council table zstd to atake his atetement.

Mr. President, may I, at the outset, congratulate you on assuming the presidency of the Security Council for this month. We recognize hour high qualities as ajudicious and skilful diplomat and should like to hope that under your stewardship the Council will accomplish its task successfully. Yet we note with distress that one permanent member of the Council will side-step the Council’s efforts to live up to the ideals and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations. We have now learnt what to expect from the Council. 172. Last month Israel committed a calculated and premeditated act of aggression. A number of its highly 173. Last Friday, Israel had another mission: “Operation Genocide” one might call it. Waves of Israeli warolanes bombed heavily Populated neiehbourhoods in Beirut and targeis in southern Libanon, killing at least 400 and wounding more than 800 persons, mostly women and children. Israeli aircraft also destroyed at least 10 bridges in the south. But this time Israel had to make sure-that its targets would be innocent civilians. Its brutal bombardment of a university, a stadium, residential quarters and refugee camps was timed in such a way as to maximize the death toll among the civilian population. It was indeed a mission of rampage and madness: a perfect model of Israeli State terrorism, sustained and indeed encouraged by the Government of the United States. 174. Israel is not the sPoilt baby of the United States: neither is it its unruly child whb messes around with flying toys. Israel is not only the trusted friend of the United States; nor is it just another ally, whose interests occasionally clash with those of its benefactor. Israel is an American surrogate in the Middle East. It is America’s anchored base in the heart of the Arab homeland. It fights American battles and defends American interests that are intertwined with its own. It is paid for that by an uninterrupted hand-out of deadly weapons and economic aid. The United States S)oyemment is no less responsible for the aerial mrssacre of Lebanese and Palestinian women and children, for without its total support the Zionist butchers in Tel Aviv would not have dared to have committod such @l#n6us crime. i7S. Not only does the United States Government finance Israel’s adventures, but it unreservedly and pitifully espouses Israeli policies and political stratagems. It is significant that neither the American Government nor Congress can determine what is Israeli defence and what is not. Some American officials have even invoked the notion of “hot pursuit” to justify acts of Israeli aggression against Lebanon. The fact remains that Israel and South Africa alone uphold that notion and seek to promote it to the level of a principle in international law in order to legitimize their policies of aggression and expansion. 176. Every now and then American officials speak of “legitimate” Israeli defence, but they conveniently leave its definition to Tel Aviv and to the Zionist lobby 177. The question is: when are America’s Arab friends noinn to realize that Israel and the United States are iik<two sides of the same coin: that the United States can only be a broker of arms, not of peace: that it cares less for their friendship and more for their oil: and that it stands for expediency, not justice? Washington is a prisoner of its own junior ally. Its policy towards the Palestinian people and their national and political rights is dictated by Israel. It is already committed not to recognize the PLO. It cannot even question Israeli concepts of security, although they have been used as a justification to commit acts of aggression and genocide. 178. Yet, the Reagan Administration is feverishly trying to establish a so-called strategic consensus in the Middle East, lumping together Israel and its Arab victims in an unholy alliance against the Soviet Union. So far this looks like the American formula for unravelling all the local and regional conflicts in the Middle East. It is a master plan that solves problems by simply ignoring them. One would think that this is a nai’ve proposition coming from a new Administration obsessed with the cold war. 179. But here again the United States is opting for a Middle Eastern policy which fits in with long-term Israeli designs. Such a policy not only seeks to make Israel more acceptable in the region, but also increases its strategic importance and its role as a regional Power. Indeed, Israel has proved that, far from being the underdog, it is aspiring to emerge as a dominant force in the Middle East. Havingeffectively neutral&d &ypt as a roglonal Arab Power, the United States h&s made It possible for Israel to be more aggressive and defiant. 180. Today Israel is waging a total war against Lebanon and against the Palestinian people. The most modern weapons are being used to massacre innocent women and children in Beirut and other Lebanese cities. Israeli warplanes have broadened their targets to include basic infrastructural installations, Israel seems to be preparing for a full-fledged invasion of Lebanon. 181, Delaying the shipment of ten F-16 planes for a few weeks is not going to deter Israel from pursuing its policies of occupation, annexation and expansion. Israel is not short of weapons and ammunition-it is now in the business of exporting them. Israeli arro-

The noxt spoakor on my list is the representative of Yomon. I invite him to take a seat at the Council table and to mako his statomont.

My delegation is pleased at sooing you, Sir, prosiding ovor this august body during this month. We aro particularly pleased at seeing tho ropmsontativo of a country which shares faith and aspirations with my country, assumo this important and difflcult task. Your personal qualities and vast exporlonco will substantially contribute to the success of tho current deliberations. 184. Since tho end of the Second World War, our r&on has become a scone of traaic events. caused m&tIy by the expansionist policlos if the newly planted State of Israel. Since its establishment. the Zionist Stato has pursued an aggressive policy of expanslon, undermining tho political sovereignty and territorial integrity of its neighbour8 in total disregard of intornational law and morality. 185. However, tho recent attacks on Iraq and Leb- &non have added a now dimension to the long-ostablithod Israeli policy of aggression. Last month, Israeli f&es attacked an Iraqi nuclear energy project, a olvllian targot, in a country which has no common borders with Israel, Tho most recant dally Israeli attacks on Lebanon aro intentionally dire&d agalnst danwl popuhod areas in a poaco-loving country &ob%totaIIyprooccuplodwIthitsownIntomalstrlfo. n &tv #dmlttedlY frtwatad rt the Falestinhn strugulo ibr r&t to seif&totmlnstlon. They have opted for tactics of intimidation, hoping to silence the Palestinians and to force their leadership to give up their legitimate struggle. For the last 1 I days, Israeli forces have fiercely and mercilessly attacked the Palestinians in their refugee camps and innocent Lebanese civilians in their homes and shelters. Schools, hospitals, highways and bridges have been destroyed and-most important-hundreds of innocent people, mainly women and children, massacred. In theh nature and intensity, those Israeli barbaric attacks are comparable only to those employed nearly four decades ago by the bloodthirsty Nazis. 187. Last month the Israeli attack on the Iraqi nuclear energy installation was thoroughly discussed in 188. Today, encouraged by this Council’s impotonco, Israel is launching anew act of aggression. Tho negative approach of those permanent members of the Council ls precisely what has encouraged the Israeli Govommont to pursue its traditional policy of aggression. The samo irresponsible approach on the part of those Council members has encouraged the terrorist Begin proudly to announce that his Government will pursue the current policy of continual attacks against Lobanose civilians and Palestinian refugees as long as the situation in Lebanon remains unfavourable for Israel’s ambitions. Did he not previously say “We are not afraid of any reactions in the world”? 189. To be sure, the Begin Government is not the only arty & to be blamed for the ongoing gonocido practised y the Israeli forces against the innocent Palestinians and Lebanese civilians. The United States Govommont, which provides Tel Aviv with the most sophisticated weapons and pours billions of United Statos dollars into the Israeli Treasury to finance the Israeli war machinery, must bear Its share of responsibility. Unreserved American diplomatic support for Tel Aviv, including the United States’ rocurront abuso of the veto in tho service of Israel, door not contribute to the stability and security of the Middle East roglon. It remains to be seen, however, whether the United States Government will explicitly or implicitly condone tho recent massacn of innocent L&anew and PaIosziz;d out by the Amorlcan-oquippod Israeli iQ0. WC bopo that this time Senator Larry Pro&r GUI not need to say what he said Iast month: “WC are going to have to stretch our imagination a bit to tInd that the Arms Bxport Control Act has not been violated.” 191. If the Arabs are reoeatedly brinninn their complaints of Israel’s aggression to the Cou6il?t is because they still firmly believe in the legithnacy of the United Naiions and (he sanctity of its-charter. Some might misinterpret this and take it as a sign of weakness and despair. especially at a time when it has become obvious that the Council is unable even modestly to restrain the Israeli expansionist drive. 192. Although we remain convinced that upholding the Charter principles is the only alternative to vio- 193. “Violence that altars nothing is a desperate confession of political bankruptcy,” as Tlte Nent York Times said on 19 July 1981. 1%. If Bettin really boiiovos that ho can usurp Palostine forovor and oiiminato tho Palestinians, ho is in fact deceiving not only himsoif and his people but also his aiiios. No Israoii Ciovemmont can imore the reality of the oxistonco of the Palestinian poopio and offoctivoly deny them their lsu&nato riiIhts roco&od by the international community. Equally, no Istaoli Clovommont can by force impose its illegitimate ambitions on its neighbours. Israel should always romombor that ho who lives by the sword shall perish by tho 8WOrd. 195. The time ir rip0 for concroto measures to bo taken by the Council to chock offoctiveiy the Israeli a@rowion asainrt tho Arab peopio. Last month’s Israeli aagrossion a@ainst Iraq, togothor with the recant attack on Lebanon, has cioari lust for expansion and domination. x oxposod Israel’s e um tho mombon of tho Council to rhouidor their rerponribiiity, and wo puticuluiy um tho Unitod Statos Covemmont to act nspondbiy to enable the Council to dischugo its responsibility to proserve peace and security. 1%. A&. condemnation is not enou&; sanctiona ore what the whole world ir oxpsctlq.

This has been a very Ions day and you, Mr. President, have boon very patient with us ail. We thank you for your patience and for your wisdom. 199. On behalf of my Ciovommont and the peopio of Lebanon, I wish to thank the Security Council for its prompt rosponso to a most urgent situation. 200. I want to say only one thing. We have listened very caretMy to ail the epoakors. We have listened particuiariy to the representative of Spain explaining the spirit in which the resolution adopted by the Council was presented. 201. I want, on behalf of my Government, while again thanking the Council for its speedy response, to plodoo our fit11 support for the efforts undertaken by tho Secretary-Oonorai and by Clovemments that are in a position to influence dovoiopmonts in the area, to achieve not only a cease-flro but a just and lastine peace. We am confldont that the 48 hours provided for in the resolution will not bo lost, and we hope that ail those concomod will respond to this necessity. The meeting rose at IO.35 p.m. Non8 1 The Parilamrntary lkbatrr (Hansard), Fflh Srrlrr, vol. CDXXI, Howe of Lords (tOndon, HM StationW Offkr. Ill). ’ Omclul Rrcwds vf rhr Srcuri~y Ccmncll, Fmuth Yror. Sprchzi p. 3.