S/PV.2327 Security Council

I should like to inform members of the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Burundi, Czechoslovakia, Indonesia, Mauritania, Oman and the United Arab Emirates in which they request to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on the Council’s 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 Chartel and rule 37 of the provisional rules of procedure. Adoption of the agenda The ngcndcr IW.S ctdoptcd. The situation in the occupied Arab territories: (a) Resolution 497 (1981); (h) Report of the Secretary-General (S/14821) I . The PRESIDENT (interpretation ,f?om Russion): In accordance with decisions taken at previous meetings [2322nd to 2325th meetings], I invite the representative of Israel and the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic to take places at the Council table: I invite the representatives of Afghanistan, Algeria, Bangladesh, Bulgaria, Cuba, Democratic Yemen, the German Democratic Republic, Greece, Hungary, India, Iraq, Kuwait, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Mon-s golia, Morocco, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Portugal, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sri Lanka, the Sudan, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Viet Nam, Yemen and Yugoslavia to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber; I invite the representative of the Palestine Liberation Organization to take the place reserved for him at the side of the Council chamber. At the itwitcrtion of the Ptvsidetat, Ms. Bwctkisu (Burundi), Ms. St!@ (Czct~hoslo~~rrkitr), Ms. Qjrrlcrl (Indonesicr), Ms. Ottld Sid’Ahnwd (Mcrurirrrtzitr), Ms. Sultritnurz (Otntrn) ond Ms. Al-Qasirni (United Artrb EtnisutljS) took thr plcwes se.srr~r~c~dfo~~ than crt the sidr qf the Cotrnc’il ~hcrtnber. 3. Mr. de PINIGS (Spain) (intesptvtcrtion .fiotn Spunish): Mr. President, you have already presided over the Council in the past and therefore the fair, balanced and sound way in which you have been directing our deliberations comes as no surprise to us. You are an expert in diplomacy, and I should like to reassure you of the support of the Spanish delegation , * in the discharge of your responsibilities, given the cordial relations that exist between our two countries. At the invitcrtion of the Pwsidetzt, Mr. Blutn (Isrcrel) and Mr. El-Futtctl (Syrian Atuh Repttblir) rook plcrc~s ~tf thr Coltnc~il tub/e; Mr. Zcr~iJ’(A.f~hcnnistctn), Mr. Bpdjctorti (Algeria), Ms. Kctiser (Bcmgl~tdesh), Mr. Tsvelkw (Bttlgatia), Mr. Rocr Kouri (Cuba), Mr. Ashtcrl (Detno- 4. I should also like to extend a special greeting to the President of the Council for the month of December, Mr. Olara Otunnu, for whose qualities and skills there has been repeated praise in the Council. 5. No one will be surprised that I should be dedicating a deserved tribute to my distinguished friend the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier P&rez de CuCllar, a Peruvian of ancient ancestry, an expert diplomat, a skilful negotiator, a humanist and a person dear to us all, whose election is the result of his personal attributes and of the high esteem in which he is held by us all. We extend our most cordial congratulations and best wishes to him and his country. The new Secretary- General may be assured that Spain will spare no efforts to help him in the successful discharge of all the duties of his onerous and lofty post. 6. My delegation spoke in the debate in the Council on 16 December 1981, when it was considering the complaint of the Syrian Arab Republic concerning the annexation by the State of Israel of the Golan Heights. At the end of our statement we pointed out: “My delegation believes that the Council, acting now as speedily as the case requires, must bear in mind fully its responsibilities as the guardian of international peace and security, which have once again been threatened by Israeli actions, and must give serious consideration to the consequences of a possible rejection of its request with a view to future action by the Council. “My delegation hopes that, after the adoption of a resolution and a certain amount of time allowed to await the Israeli Government’s reaction, if there is a negative response, necessary measures will be taken speedily by the Council to force the Government of Israel to rescind and revoke all the measures that it wishes to apply to the Golan Heights.” [23/7th mmting, puras. 66 und 671 7. The explanations given us by the representative of Israel, which are contained in the report of the Secretary-General [S//4~?221, prrra. 31, neither convince us nor seem acceptable, The action of applying Israeli laws, jurisdiction and administration is equivalent to a pure and simple annexation of the Golan territory; it is a violation of international law, a breach of the fourth Geneva Convention of 1949’ and of Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), and a defiance of the decisions adopted by the Council. 8. There is no legal basis whatsoever to affirm that, because 15 years have elapsed since the six-day war, Israel has a right to apply its legislation in the Golan. As the representative of Syria told us the other day, out of a population of 200,000 that used to live in those Heights, some have been expelled and others have had 9. For the Government of Israel to state that it is prepared unconditionally to negotiate with Syria to achieve lasting peace and for it in the meantime to apply its own legislation is nothing more than an attempt to exert additional pressure to the military occupation of the Golan Heights. IO. The Council is duty-bound to act. That is why we unanimously adopted resolution 497 (1981). The Council cannot remain inactive because that would be opening the door to Israel’s acting again in another territory, also applying its legislation as a means of additional pressure as it is doing now in the Golan Heights. I I. My delegation is prepared to support those measures that may compel the State of Israel to rescind the decisions it has adopted in connection with the G,olan Heights and require Israel to withdraw from the territories it has been occupying since June 1967. Of course, resolution 242 (1967) refers to secure and recognized boundaries, but in order to achieve those boundaries the first thing required is withdrawal from all the territories occupied, including the Golan Heights, Jerusalem, the West Bank of the Jordan and the Gaza Strip. Once that withdrawal takes place, once the legitimate national rights of the Palestinian people are recognized, we shall be on the way to achieving a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, a peace to which we must all aspire and in the attainment of which the Council has a primary responsibility.

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

Mr. President, I should like first of all to express my appreciation to you and to the members of the Council for offering me this opportunity to speak on this item. Our delegation is particularly glad that this body that has the primary responsibility for the maintenance and strengthening of international peace and security should have begun its work this year under the able and competent guidance of the representative of the fraternal Soviet Union, a country which has so actively, consistently and as a matter of principle struggled to attain a relaxation of international tension and has so well defended the vital interests and rights of peoples, 14. At the same time, we should like to express OUI appreciation to Mr. Otunnu of Uganda, who so ably presided over the work of the Council last month. 16. On behalf of my country and on my own behalf, I should like sincerely to congratulate and welcome Mr. Plrez de CuCllar, the new Secretary-General, an outstanding diplomat who has earned broad international respect. 17. I also take this opportunity to pay due tribute to Mr. Kurt Waldheim, who has now completed his term in that post. 18. The situation in the Middle East is in our view deteriorating daily. As Israeli aggressiveness grows, so does military danger in the region. The main reason for the persistence of this situation is the continuing illegal occupation of the Arab territories by Israel and its systematic policy of annexation. 19. Today there can be no doubt that the arrogance of the aggressor and its disregard for the decisions . ,taken by this body, primarily its flouting of the legitimate rights of other peoples, are the main features of the Israeli policy which has now been manifested in the annexation of the Golan Heights. This is a policy that is a challenge to any hopes for attaining a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. There is no doubt but that that policy is aimed at an increased concrete fulfilment of the aims of Israeli expansionist acquisitions. 20. The fact that Israel has not complied with the Council resolution adopted three weeks ago [resolutiorr 497 f/Y8/)], that it has not heeded the voice of reason of the international community and that it has not rescinded its illegal decision to annex the Golan Heights unfortunately bears witness to the absence of political farsightedness. Clearly such a policy cannot lead us to an improved situation in the Middle East. On the contrary, it simply exacerbates the already explosive situation in that part of the world, which has already suffered so much. 21. The position of principle of my country on the .annexation is reflected in the following statement from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czecho-* Slovak Socialist Republic dated 22 December 1981: “Israel’s conduct is another link in the continuing chain of hostile actions against the Arab countries and primarily against the sovereign Syrian Arab Republic. It is a very gross violation of the Charter of the United Nations, of international law and of the resolutions of the Security Council dealing with a settlement in the Middle East. This illegal act of the Israeli Government has once again confirmed that it considers a flouting of international law to be an integra1 part of its policy. Israel’s ruling circles have once again confirmed that they do not wish to live in The statement also emphasizes that: “The United States also bears full responsibility for the annexation of the Golan Heights.This new act of aggression is a direct consequence of the policy of separate deals and the anti-Arab Camp David accords. This is a consequence of the United States-Israeli deal on ‘strategic co-operation’. The suspension by the United States of the validity of that deal in no way alters this fact. The Israeli Covernment could not have carried out its anti-Arab expansionist policy without comprehensive American support and assistance.” 22. Against the backdrop of reports that the Pentagon plans to increase credit for Israeli arms purchases by $300 million, can anyone still have any doubt that the recently established military-political alliance has in fact existed for a long time and still does? One gets the impression that the various modified manoeuvres putting distance between Israel and its strategic ally are intended only to calm an indignant international public. In fact, Israel’s policy of expansion and annexation is fully in accord with Washington’s new strategy designed to ensure that it takes over the exclusive right to control the natural resources of the region and the approaches to it, and along with that to strengthen its military presence there. 23. Czechoslovakia strongly condemns the Israeli aggressive attacks against neighbouring Arab States. We. express our support for and solidarity with the people of the Syrian Arab Republic, with which my country has traditionally maintained close and friendly relations. At the top-level meeting of the representatives of the two countries in May 1979, it was emphasized that: “A just and lasting peace in the area can be achieved only through a comprehensive settlement of the Middle East problem on the basis of a withdrawal of Israeli forces from all Arab territories occupied in 1967 and the exercise of the inalienable national rights of the Arab people of Palestine.” 24. We would join those countries which have here stated that in circumstances where Israel is refusing to abide by a resolution of the United Nations-in this case, Security Council resolution 497 (1981)-the Council can and must deal firmly with this item and

The next speaker is the representative of Oman. 1 invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Sir, I should like first of all to extend to you my delegation’s sincere congratulations on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for this month, 27. At the same time I should like to pay a tribute to your predecessor, Mr. Olara Otunnu of Uganda, for the skill, wisdom and clarity with which he conducted the work of the Council last month. 28. I take this opportunity also to congratulate the new members of the Council and to welcome the new Secretary-General, Mr. Perez de Cuillar, and to wish him every success in his onerous task. I should like also to pay a tribute to the outgoing Secretary-General, Mr. Kurt Waldheim, for his genuine contribution and devotion to the causes of peace and justice. 29. Once again, in a new mood of aggression, Israel on 14 December 1981 decided to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration-this time in the occupied Arab territory of the Golan Heights. This Israeli decision augments an ongoing act of aggression and occupation begun in June 1967. 30. The indignation at that illegal Israeli action is universal. The position of Oman in this regard was expressed on 15 December 1981 in an official statement by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in which the Sultanate of Oman vehemently condemned the Israeli Government’s decision to annex the Golan Heights, expressed the opinion that that decision coupled with its utter disregard for the resolutions of the Council showed the aggressive and expansionist nature of Israel, and calfed upon the international community to take the necessary steps to stop that blatant aggression. 31. The prompt action by the Council and the unanimous adoption of resolution 497 (1981), which reiterates the principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force, were indeed commendable and gratifying, especially since the Israeli action was a clear projection of the imagined and mythical “greater Israel” whose territory would be created through a gradual take-over of Arab lands. 33. This Israeli attitude is neither new nor Partic* ularly surprising. The sustained disregard and trl’rrbgance with which Israel reacts to United Nations rehtae lutions is a well-known fact. 34. The international community has grown imp+g* tient with the two-pronged policy of Israel: the ruth* less infliction of monumental injustice on the PalC*- tinian people, the expropriation of Arab land and ntn~ the annexation of the Golan Heights, on the one handand total disregard for United Nations res~~luti~~t\~. on the other. 35. Now the Security Council is meeting in accor& ante with paragraph 4 of resolution 497 ( 198 1). It muxl consider the consequences of non-compliance b?- Israel and decide which of the appropriate meilsurl’~ provided for in the Charter of the United Nations in will take. 36. Israel’s refusal to implement Council resolutions in the past and the inability of the Council to take appropriate measures against it have paved the way Ir* tragedy and lawless actions by Israel. To mention ;! few: changing the physical character, demographiL* composition and institutional structure of the HoI! City of Jerusalem; expropriating land and building new settlements in the West Bank and Gaza; torturing prisoners and inflicting collective punishment urn whole villages; deporting Palestinians and demolishing innumerable homes; killing more than 3,000 civiliun++ and displacing well over 500,000 in Lebanon; bombing’ the Iraqi nuclear installation. 37. In the face of all those violations of the lxlsic norms of international law and the Charter, no\\ manifest in Israeli non-compliance with resolution 497 (l98l), we believe it to be the urgent responsibilit> of the Council to go one step further than a repetition of condemnation. What is now required is for rhc Council to take actionunder Chapter VII ofthe Chap ter. Only the application of mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII will compel Israel to put an end to thi\ lawless and aggressive behaviour, 38, Under Article 39 of the Charter, the Council is empowered to consider Israel’s non-compliance with resolution 497 (1981) to be a threat to or breach elf Peace- Moreover, Article 25 creates a legal obIigatic)n on the Part of the Members to accept and carry out the decisions of the Council. Rejection obligation is very grave indeed. of this legal 47. As representatives are aware, on the same day that the Council adopted resolution 497 (1981), the General Assembly, in its resolution 36/226 B, supported by my delegation, also took strong exception to this illegal action by Israel and requested the Council to invoke Chapter VII of the Charter if Israel refused to rescind its decree of annexation. 40, The PRESIDENT (intc,pretcrtionfi.om Russian): The next speaker is the representative of Indonesia. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

First of all, Sir, my delegation wishes to extend its warm greetings to you and to congratulate you upon your assumption of the presidency of the Council for this first month of the new year. We are confident that under your wise and able guidance the Council will fulfil its responsibilities before the international community and reach a meaningful conclusion to its deliberations. 48. My Government is satisfied with and lauds the Council for its unanimous adoption of resolution 497 (1981). It is our considered view that the provisions of that resolution can form the basis for further unified action by the members of the Council with a view to compelling Israel forthwith to implement resolution 497 (1981), thereby demonstrating to the world the Council’s resoluteness about achieving a just solution of this problem, a solution based on the relevant United Nations resolutions. 42. I should also like to join preceding delegations in voicing admiration for the previous President, ‘Mr, Otunnu, for his invaluable contribution to the work of the Council. 49. The feeling of the international community has been clearly expressed in the General Assembly resolution to which I referred earlier and in the joint communiqui of the non-aligned movement of 5 January 1982 [S//4829, rrnrwx]. My delegation is therefore deeply disappointed and seriously disturbed at Israel’s defiance and rejection of the Security Council and General Assembly resolutions. There is no doubt that the international community at large, including my delegation, will rally behind the Council with regard to any actions that it decides to take in accordance with the provisions of Chapter VII of the Charter, including the application of Article 41, to force Israel to rescind its annexation of the Golan Heights as a prelude to meaningful steps towards a comprehensive settlement of the Middle East question. 43. My delegation would also like to express its appreciation to you, Mr. President, and to the members of the Council for affording us this opportunity to speak on a matter of grave concern to all States. 44. When, four weeks ago, the Council began its deliberations on this new and most ominous development in the Middle East, the international community expressed its collective shock upon learning of Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights. During that debate my delegation had the occasion to address the Council: we expressed our solidarity with Syria and made clear the position of the Government of Indonesia. In its formal communiquk condemning the annexation of the Golan Heights, my Government declared that that provocative act would predictably escalate the tension in the Middle East and further endanger international peace and security [2.3/9tlz t?leeting, para. 101. 50. The PRESIDENT (ilztp/pr’ctrrtion f,.otn Russitrnj: The next speaker is the representative of Mauritania. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. 45. As has been stated by many delegations, this illegal unilateral act by Israel, far from being an isolated development, is another blatant example of Israeli aggression and further evidence-if any more was needed-that it has never sincerely desired nor is it willing to seek a comprehensive and peaceful solution to the Middle East question, the basis of which -as reflected in the relevant United Nations resolutions-has been and remains the unconditional return of all the occupied Arab territories. 5 I. Mr. OULD SID’AHMED (Mauritania) fir&+ pwtcrtion .fiom Fwtwh): I wish to congratulate you, Mr. President, on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for this month and to express to you and the members of the Council the sincerest thanks of the Mauritanian delegation for allowing us to participate in your deliberations on a question which is of concern to us. 52. May I be allowed also to pay a well-deserved tribute to your predecessor, Mr. Olara Otunnu, the representative of Uganda, for having throughout the past month-a month particularly rich in events of great significance for the United Nations-conducted the Council’s work with tact and authority. 46, Council resolution 497 (198 1) unambiguously expressed the unanimous will of the international community. It declared the annexation of the Golan Heights to be null and void. It established a specific 54. The Government of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania has already expressed its official position on Israel’s annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights. On the very next day after the announcement of that decision, my Government issued the following communiquC: “Once again, the Israeli Zionist authorities have taken a further step in their expansionist and hegemonic policy by annexing an internationally recognized part of Syrian territory. This is an act that demonstrates, if any demonstration were needed, the true designs pursued covertly but methodically by Zionist authorities against the Arab nation. “The Government of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania vigorously condemns this illegal act and considers it to be not only null and void but also a rejection of the cease-fire with Syria, with all the consequences that that can have for the region and the world. It addresses a pressing appeal to the friendly Arab brothers to close their ranks in order to take up this intolerable challenge and harmoniously to co-ordinate their efforts and solidarity in action, to the African countries to realize the treachery of the action taken by Israel lately in Africa and to understand that more than ever their Arab brothers must count on their resolute support, to the international community at large forcefully to condemn this irresponsible act and, before it is too late, to take the measures against the Israeli authorities demanded by the seriousness of the situation.” 55. At the same time as that communiquC was published, the Chairman of the Military Committee of National Recovery, head of the Mauritanian State, addressed the following message to Mr. Hafez AI- Assad, President of the Syrian Arab Republic: “Information has reached us about the decision of the Israeli Zionist authorities-a decision which falls within the framework of their aggressive policy-to annex the Golan Heights, internationally recognized as part of Syrian Arab territory. “We strongly condemn that decision, which violates all international laws and norms, We declare our firm support for the fraternal Syrian Arab people and are convinced that those people, who have written with the blood of their children one of the most glorious pages in the history of the Arab struggle against Zionist colonialism, imperialism and expansionism, will be able to face this further escalation of Zionist aggression. 56. Today the Council is meeting to take note once again of Israel’s refusal to comply with its resolutions -even those adopted unanimously-and to draw the j conclusions arising from that refusal. The report in document S/l4821 submitted by the Secretary-General in accordance with resolution 497 (19811, which was adopted on 17 December last by the Council. and ’ the official statements made the same day and on other occasions by the representatives of the Zionist entity I can leave no doubt as to the categorical refusal of 1 Israel to accept-still less to comply with-resolution i 497 (1981). In that resolution, the Council stated ! unequivocally that Israel’s decision to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration in the Syrian Golan Heights was null and void. It therefore demanded that Israel rescind that decision forthwith. 57. In the face ofthis defiance, my delegation believes that the least the Council can and must do is to draw the serious consequences arising from the refusal by a Member State to comply with its decisions and take the appropriate measures provided for under the Charter of the United Nations. 58. Over and beyond the future of the Syrian Golan Heights and the political, economic and social consequences of the act of aggression committed by the Zionist entity against the Syrian Arab Republic, the Council is also considering, as a background to its agenda, the serious threat to its own authority posed by the acts of the Zionist authorities in Tel Aviv. In fact for the Council what is at stake is maintaining and reinforcing its own credibility and that of the United Nations as a whole in the face of the tireless efforts of certain pirate States. Israel and South Africa indeed spare no effort to discredit the Organization by deliberately trampling under foot the ideals and values that it represents. In that task, they benefit from the complicity or complaisance, as the case may be, of certain Member States-and not the least important among them. They think that whatever their crimes and misdeeds, they will always be able to escape the verdict of the international community thanks to political support and economic and military resources generously offered them by their protectors. 59. The constant danger to international peace and security caused by co-operation between the Pretoria and Tel Aviv racist &gimes was the subject of a message recently addressed by the head of State of Mauritania to the acting President of the Organization of African Unity and to all other African heads “At a time when the State of Israel is reaching the illegal and warmongering decision to annex the Syrian Arab territory of the Golan, I have the honour of drawing your attention to the seriousness of the new situation thus created. By defying the rules of international law, raising permanent aggression to a principle of conduct in international relations and taking force and occupation as bases of legitimacy, Israel in many respects reminds us Africans of the racist illegal regime of South Africa. Israel and South Africa are in fact two bastions of imperialism, the one at the heart of the Arab nation, the other at the southern opening of the African continent. It is more than ever necessary to undertake the same struggle against them. Just as we do not accept the reign of the crpwthcid regime in Namibia and Azania, we do not accept a Palestine dominated and Arab territories occupied by Israel. The decision to annex the Golan demonstrates, if further demonstration were needed, that Israel is not in any way seeking peace. On the contrary, it is clear that the Zionist entity remains, as it has been since its creation, based on constant aggression, territorial usurpation and racial oppression, in defiance of the rules of international law. Africans and Arabs alike, in the face of identical manifestations of racism and violation of the most basic rules of the rights of peoples, must be aware of how similar their struggle is. Towards that end,“-the head of State concludes, in addressing his African brothers--“1 ask you, as in the past, to provide your support to the Arab cause by firmly condemning the illegal and unacceptable decision by Israel to annex the Syrian territory of the Golan.” 62. Aware of its responsibilities and of the extreme seriousness of the situation created by the Israeli authorities in a region which has already undergone too much suffering, the Council, we are certain of this, will find no difficulty in reaching such a decision. Moreover, a look at recent events in the region must dispel any doubts that may exist regarding Israel’s defiance of the Council’s decisions and its resolve to make State terrorism and constant aggression the golden rules of its behaviour. The policy of settlements. the annexation of the Holy City of Al-Quds, the premeditated attack against the Iraqi nuclear installation, the bombardments of civilians in Lebanon and, more recently, the violation of the airspace of Saudi Arabia and Iraq are only a few links in a long and varied chain of crime and aggression. My delegation has enough confidence in the wisdom and authority of the members of the Council not to despair of achieving redress of a situation so fraught with danger for the entire international community.

Permit me, Sir, from the outset to congratulate you most warmly on your assumption of the high office of President of the Council for the month of .January. Your diplomatic skills, your ability as a negotiator and your spirit of cooperation are qualities which are recognized by all. We are confident that under your guidance the Council will make a positive contribution in meeting its obligations, The Soviet Union and Uganda enjoy most cordial and fruitful relations. Coming from Africa, I am aware and appreciative of your country’s contribution to the decolonization process and to the liberation struggle. You can count on our co-operation in your work. 60, The Council must today meet the challenge posed by Israel. It must react, react severely and forcefully, because the measures recently adopted by the Zionist authorities in Tel Aviv mark, thanks to the impunity they have enjoyed until now, the beginning of a new episode in the constant chain of crimes committed for over 30 years now against the Palestinian people and other Arab peoples. Lack of action or inappropriate action on the part of the Council can only be interpreted by Israel as encouragement to pursue its policy of expansion and genocide. 64. It gives my delegation immense satisfaction to express our warm welcome and congratulations to Mr. Perez de CuelIar, the new Secretary-General. That he comes, as he does, from Peru, a third world country, gives my delegation greater cause for satisfaction. His experience in diplomacy and his involvement in complex negotiations on a number of international crises give us confidence that he will succeed in meeting the challenges of his new role. On behalf of my delegation, I wish to,pledge Uganda’s support for him in his endeavours. 61. Following the recent aggression against the Syrian Arab Republic, there can be no doubt-even in the minds of the most unconditional supporters of Israel-about the bad faith and arrogance of the Zionist entity. The patience and persuasive ability of the Council have been challenged for far too long and too severely by the rash actions of the Zionist authorities in Tel Aviv. My delegation feels that the time has come for the Council to use the means provided it by the Charter to safeguard international peace and security. The imposition of binding sanctions against Israel pursuant to Chapter VII of the Charter seems to us 65. I wish to speak a word of welcome to my brothers the representatives of Togo and Zaire. My delegation has had the privilege of working with both of them in the Group of African States and the General Assembly, where they have made a most useful contribution. Equally welcome to the Council are the representatives of Guyana, Jordan and Poland. Their wealth of experience in the United Nations will be helpful in the Council’s deliberations. I wish to assure them of Uganda’s co-operation and solidarity in our common task. 67. On Monday, 14 December 1981, hmd, with utter disdain for world opinion, extended its jurisdiction and administration to the Syrian Golan Heights. The world community was outraged and, indeed, the Council could not remain indifferent in the face of this brazen affront to international law. 68. The Council, on 17 December, determined that the Israeli decision to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights was null and void and without international legal effect; that Israel, the occupying Power, should rescind forthwith its decision; and that the 1949 Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War’ was applicable to the Syrian territory occupied by Israel [resolution 497 ff 981)]. 69. The Council is meeting today not to debate the legality of the Israeli annexation of the Golan Heights. The illegality of the Israeli action was determined on 17 December, when the Council gave Israel a grace period within which to comply with the Council’s resolution. 70. We are meeting precisely because Israel refused to comply with the Council’s resolution in the time stipulated. Paragraph 4 of resolution 497 (198 1) requires us to “consider taking appropriate measures in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations”, The work of the Council is thus to address itself to the question of what measures to apply against Israel until it complies with the resolution. 71. When we consider what measures to take, the annexation of the Golan Heights has to be looked at in the context of Israel’s persistent aggressive acts in the region. The annexation is an integral part of the .&mist programme, which includes the permanent oppression of the Palestinians, the dismemberment of Lebanon, the domination of the entire Arab world and the expansion of Israel’s borders, which up to now remain undefined. 72. Another factor to take into account when considering what to do is Israel’s flagrant and persistent violations Of Security Council and General Assembly resolutions. For the last 14 years, Israel has been consolidating its hold on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and subduing the Palestinian people with a view to annexing those territories, Arab lands have been expropriated and massive Israeli settlements have been set UP. Systematic terror and collective punishment have been used as a way to force the Arab population to leave the occupied territories. The Israeli leaders have not hidden their ambition to use the settlements as a means of extending the borders of Israel. 74. The Council, in its resolution 476 (1980). hi&cl warned Israel not to proceed with enacting the “hrl~ii law” on Jerusalem. Despite the warning, Israel przbceeded to enact the “basic law”. The Council, indiynant at this flagrant challenge to its authority, CL”~- sured Israel in resolution 478 (1980) and detcrminecl that the law was null and void and must be rescinded forthwith, To date that resolution has not been hc?noured by Israel. This is yet another indication of tllr: disdain with which Israel treats the Council’s re%+ lutions and its obligations under the Charter of tht’ United Nations. 75. We are all aware of Israel’s intentions with rega~rct to Lebanon, which have resulted in constant acts oh aggression against that country. The clear aim of fll~’ Zionist leaders is to destabilize Lebanon, then ta cJi~- i 1 member it through the instrumentality of that renegatic. Major Haddad, and finally to annex southern I.,e~~- anon. To this end, in utter contempt for Council rew*- lution 425 (197% Israel has unleashed incessant terror and unprovoked attacks against Lebanon, I.;CNE year we witnessed the carnage of Beirut, when 1sruc”li aeroplanes carried out a massive bombardment of ttl;tilt city and southern Lebanon, causing the loss of the live% of hundreds of Lebanese civilians: hundreds of thulrsands were rendered homeless. The Council ]l;r< adopted numerous resolutions censuring Israel and calling upon it to desist from its acts of aggressir.lal. None of these resolutions has been complied with. ~ 76. We also saw last year an unprovoked attack &,> Israel on the Iraqi Osirak riuclear research stztirrn. The Council adopted a resolution censuring Ist-a~1 [~esol~ifiorz#87(/98/)], but instead of heeding that rear Ilution, Israel swore to repeat its actions. Uniterl States Senator Mark Hatfield, commenting on thit attack, summed up the Israeli attitude as follows: “There is an enormous and dangerous arroguncu which surrounds the unilateral decision to use Unit4 States-made weapons to attack an Iraqi nuc]@s%r reactor on Sunday, an arrogance which has resulted in one of the most provocative, [ill-timed] and intcrnationally illegal actions taken in that nation”% history”. The annexation of the Golan Heights falls in the s:l~lic! category of acts as that to which Senator Hatfield \n-;sh referring. 77. That is the background we should take itltcl account when we consider what measures to take. 78. We have already invoked Article 40 by asking Israel to desist from the dangerous and illegal course it has hitherto been pursuing. It is quite clear that Israel will not respond to such calls. We have on several occasions appealed to, called upon and censured Israel. But all this has been to no avail, It is incumbent on the Council to assume its obligations under the Charter and to act to ensure compliance. 84. It was a visit that gave encouragement and comfort to South Africa in its aggressive acts against Angola and other front-line States. Indeed, at the end of the visit, the Israeli Minister advised that South Africa needed more weapons. These weapons can only be meant for use in the fight against the liberation forces and those opposed to South Africa’s illegal occupation of Namibia. 79. The fact that Israel has got off lightly without effective measures being taken against it for the most blatant violation of the Charter has encouraged .its arrogance and spurred it to ever more reckless adventures. 85. That, then, is the record which the Council should take into account. 86. It has already been established here on numerous occasions that both Israel’s and South Africa’s international conduct, their relations with their neighbours, are characterized by threats to peace, breaches of the peace and acts of aggression, the redress of which calls for nothing short of the application of Chapter VII of the Charter. SO. It is therefore not surprising that after the annexation of the Golan Heights Prime Minister Begin had the audacity to state the following: “As to the future, kindly inform the Secretary of State that the Golan Heights Law will remain in force. There is no power on earth that will bring about its repeal,” 87. Uganda has maintained, and continues to maintain, that position. We submit that the gravity of the matter now before the Council demands and dictates that appropriate action be taken. 81. We hardly need to remind ourselves of the enormous amount of time devoted by the Council to addressing, time and again, the serious danger posed to international peace and security. The twin brothers in the furtherance of racism and aggression-namely, Israel and uptrrtheiti South Africa-have persistently and arrogantly flouted numerous resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly. 88. We advocate that the principles of international law governing relations among nations must be applied and must be seen to be applied in equal measure to all nations. In case of any breaches of those principles, such international sanctions which are relevant under the law must be invoked, without selectivity, in the interest of international peace and security. .82. The behaviour of Israel is akin to that of racist South Africa. Indeed, these two have in the past acted in concert in their designs to breach international peace and security and subvert international law. As 89. Should the Council fail yet again to adopt punitive measures against Israel for its acts of aggression against Syria, the credibility of this body, which under the Charter is the repository of international peace and security, would be further called into question. The Council would be failing in its duty to fulfil the obligations imposed on it by the Charter. was reported in The New York Times of 14 December 1981: “The military relationship between South Africa and Israel, never fully acknowledged by either country, has assumed a new significance with the recent IO-day visit by Israel’s Defence Minister, Ariel Sharon, to South African forces in Namibia along the border with Angola.” The meeting rose at 5.35 p.m. ,. 83. What, then, was the purpose of the visit of Israel’s Defence Minister to the front line of occupied Namibia? Was it to further the cause of peace and NOTE 1 United Nations, T,ertr~l SetV~s, vol. 75. No. 973, p. 287. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Nations publications may be obtained from bookstores and distributors throughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write to: United Nations, Sales Section, New York or Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publications des Nations Unies sont en vcnte dans les librairies et les agences dCpositairesdu monde entier. Informez-vous aup& de votre libraire ou adressez-vous ;i : Nations Unies, Section des ventcs, New York ou Gen&ve. COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NAClONES UNIDAS Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas estan en venta en librerias y casas distribuidoras en todas partes de1 mundo. Consulte a su librero o dirijase a: Nacioncs Unidas, Secci6n de Ventas, Nueva York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations, New York 00300 88-60989-April 1989-2.050