S/PV.2392 Security Council

This meeting of the Security Council has been convened in response to an urgent request made to me this morning by the representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/2392) 3. Members of the Council have before them document S/15355, which contains the text of a draft resolution submitted by Guyana, Jordan, Panama, Togo, Uganda and Zaire. I. Adoption of the agenda 2. The situation in the Middle East: (a) Letter dated 4 June 1982 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/15162); (b) Letter dated 28 July 1982 from the Permanent Representatives of Egypt and France to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/15316) 4. I should like to draw the attention of the mem: bers of the Council to the following other documents: S/15345/Add.2, which is an addendum to the report submitted by the Secretary-General in pursuance of Council resolution 517 (1982); S/15348, which contains the text of a letter dated 5 August from the representative of Jordan to the President of the Council: S/15349, which contains the text of a letter dated 9 August from the representative of Nicaragua to the President of the Council; and S/ 15350, which contains the text of a letter dated 9 August from the representative of Jordan to the President of the Council. Adoption of the agenda 5. Members of the Council have received photocopies of a letter dated 12 August from the representative of Lebanon to the President of the Council. This letter will be distributed in due form tomorrow morning as a document of the Council under the symbol S/ 15353. The situation in the Middle East: (n) Letter dated 4 June 1982 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/15162). (b) Letter dated 28 July 1982 from the Permanent Representatives of Egypt and France to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/15316) 6. Members of the Council have also received photocopies of a letter dated 12 August from the representative of Jordan to the President of the Council. This letter will be distributed tomorrow morning as a document of the Council under the symbol S/15354.

In accordance with decisions taken at previous meetings [2374th, 2375th, 2377th, 2385th und 2389th meltings], I invite the representatives of Lebanon and Israel to take places at the Council table: I invite the representative of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) to take a place at the Council table; I invite the representatives of Cuba, Egypt, India and Pakistan to take the seats reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber. 7. The first speaker is the representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

The Council has been urgently convened at the request of the Soviet delegation in view of the worsening situation in Lebanon in connection with Israel’s continuing aggression. 9. First, for the fourth day in a row, Israeli forces are continuing unceremoniously to violate the cease- I 10. Secondly, as can be seen from the letter which was just received by the President of the Council from the representative of Lebanon [S/153.53], Israeli forces with tanks have moved into regions located north of Beirut. Under present conditions, in the opinion of the Soviet delegation, the Council should, in keeping with the resolutions it has already adopted on this matter, undertake immediate action to put an end to Israeli aggression. I I. Mr. NUSEIBEH (Jordan): The Council has convened today to discuss extremely ominous developments on two fronts. 12. First is the letter that the representative of Lebanon has sent to the President of the Council in which he informs him of the following: “On instructions from my Government, I have the honour to bring to your immediate attention a very grave development in the situation in Lebanon. The Israeli armed forces, taking advantage of the intensive negotiations being conducted concerning the fate of west Beirut, have undertaken military advances in areas north of Beirut. Israeli armoured carriers and tanks have reached as far as Byblos and, from there, into the mountain chain further into north Lebanon. “This expansion constitutes yet another violation of Security Council resolutions 508 (l982), 509 (1982), 516 (1982) and 517 (1982). This present development escalates the conflict to new dimensions that undermine, if unchecked, the ongoing negotiations undertaken by President Reagan’s envoy, Ambassador Philip Habib, and the attaining of a peaceful settlement in accordance with the relevant Security Council resolutions.” [S//5353.] 13. This is an extremely ominous development, because, until now and for almost two and a half months, the Israeli war machine and fascist leadership have literally destroyed the south of Lebanon. For more than eight weeks, they have been systematically destroying the capital of Lebanon, Beirut. And they have started their advance on the north, evidently to destroy what has not yet been destroyed, including and, I believe, primarily, the large historic cities of Tripoli and Baalbek and other important areas. 14. Furthermore, the advances mentioned by the representative of Lebanon indicate that the Israeli plan is obviously either to take over or encircle the Bekaa valley, which is the bread-basket of the whole of Lebanon. It is one of the most highly developed agricultural areas in the world and, even though small in size, 16. The following is the ugly situation that developed today, as set forth in a letter received by the Jordanian Mission from the observer of the PLO: .L . . . the grave Israeli aggression that has, since dawn today, 12 August 1982, turned west Beirut into a firing range for the Israeli air force, army and navy. “In nine continuous hours of air attacks on west Beirut, Israeli planes had inflicted an estimated 300 casualties in the 16 different residential quarters and Palestinian refugee camps in the bombing. “Israeli planes carried out more than 100 sorties -about, 12 per hour-using phosphorus and fragmentation bombs, as well as 2,000-pound bombs and several types of rockets. The areas attacked included Verdun, Tallat Al-Khayyat, Aisha Bakkar, Burj Abu Haidar, Barbour and a number of other heavily populated districts. “At 8.30 a.m. Beirut time, the hellish scream of Israeli war planes filled the skies of Beirut as over 25 Israeli bombing runs has been carried out since dawn. The scope of the raids widened to include the areas of Ramlet Al-Baida and the Arab University vicinity. As the Israeli planes dove low over the city and bombs tore into the heavily populated residential areas, the citizens ran for cover, crowding poorly equipped and ill-suited bomb shelters. “By 9 a.m., Israel had carried out over 30 bombing runs against the Palestinian refugee camps of Burj Al-Barajneh, Sabra and Shatila and Bir Hassan. “At 10.45 a.m., the Israeli campaign to annihilate what remains of Beirut’s four Palestinian refugee camps was well into its fifth hour and escalating by the minute. Wave after wave of Israeli war planes struck hard, dropping phosphorus bombs. . #” A friend of mine, a Canadian doctor, described to me how those phosphorus bombs not only burn the victim’s skin and bone, but penetrate the tissue Until “Expressing its most serious concern about Israel’s continued military activities in Lebanon and, particularly, in and around Beirut, “dropping phosphorus bombs to ensure the total destruction of the last refuge of Beirut’s Palestinian citizens. In addition to the camps of Burj Al-Barajneh, Sabra, Shatila and Mar Elias, the Beirut residential areas of Berbir, Ramlet Al-Baida, Corniche Al-Mazraa and the southern suburbs were all subjected to insane Israeli bombardment. “I. &rnrrnu’s that Israel and all parties to the conflict observe strictly the terms of Security Council resolutions relevant to the immediate cessation of all military activities within Lebanon and, particularly, in and around Beirut; “At noon, the sixth hour of the continuous Israeli air raids, over 400 buildings had been totally des troyed”- “2. Donutds the immediate lifting of all restrictions on the city of Beirut in order to permit the free entry of supplies to meet the urgent needs of the civilian population in Beirut; and I would repeat that figure- “over 400 buildings had been totally destroyed, crumbling over the occupants.” “3. Rcyw.st.s the United Nations observers in and in the vicinity of Beirut to report on the situation:” As the Council is well aware, the Israelis are using vacuum bombs which ensure that a building of 7 or 8 floors can collapse and kill everybody in or beneath it. I believe there are approximately IO United Nations observers now in west Beirut. “4. Detncrnds that Israel co-operate fully in the effort to secure effective deployment of the United Nations observers and to ensure their safety: “The casualty figure is expected to rise. Most of the victims are believed buried under the rubble of homes and trapped in shelters. Civil defence and ambulance teams’ rescue efforts are severely hindered because of the intensity and continuity of the air raids. “5. Reywsis the Secretary-General to report to the Security Council on the implementation of the present resolution within three hours from now: “The conscience of mankind cannot remain silent before this horrendous crime against the Palestinian and Lebanese populations of Beirut. With the utmost urgency, we urge the Security Council to assume its responsibilities.” [S/15354, untwx.] “6. Dwiclcs to meet, if necessary, in order to consider the situation upon receipt of the report of the Secretary-General.” [S//.53.55.] 19. That is the draft resolution which I have the honour to submit to the Council on behalf of the group of above-mentioned non-aligned countries. 17. I do not believe that I need to mince words to describe the suffering of the hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in west Beirut. I know that the air bombardment had stopped after the nine-hour spell, but I was informed that the shelling did not stop and that the Israeli forces have been making all-out efforts to get into west Beirut, as they have been doing over the past six days. So far, their attempts have ended in failure. Thus, the shelling and the attempts to get into west Beirut are continuing, in spite of the fact that we are all informed that Mr. Philip Habib has succeeded and that he has more or less achieved a package plan to solve the Beirut problem. Yet we see this further wanton destruction and devastation and the death of a whole city, one of the most beautiful in the Middle East, the cultural and commercial centre of the Middle East,

I call on the representative of the Palestine Liberation Organization.

The situation is rather serious: I would say it is very serious and dangerous. I thank you, Mr. President, for having convened this urgent meeting, and I wish to thank the representative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics for having called for such a meeting. 22. A message sent by Chairman Arafat at 1900 hours Beirut time, which would, I think, be one o’clock our time, reads as follows: “Planes stopped bombing at 1640 hours local time. Artillery shelling still continuing. Habib announced an hour and a half ago a cease-fire as from 1700 hours. The planes stopped, but the shelling did not. 18. On behalf of Guyana, Jordan, Panama, Togo, Uganda and Zaire, I should like to submit the following draft resolution: “The Security Council must take firm and decisive measures to protect its own decisions and to protect the lives and property of civilians.” 23. I wish to thank my brother, the representative of Jordan, for having read our letter [S/15354, nnncs], but since then the number of victims is estimated at 500 and the number of homes destroyed at 600. The number of bombs and rockets dropped over Beirut in today’s attack was 1,600. There were 12,000 shells launched from the sea and 30,000 shells from 105, 120, 155 and 17%millimetre land-based artillery. So you can understand how serious the situation was when we came to the Council. 24. Much has been said about a violation ofthe ceasefire. Naturally, with a force of tanks and infantry besieging a city, those tanks attempt to advance, and the right of the defenders of the city is to knock them out. Using that as a pretext, the Israelis then commit further murderous bombardment of civilian targets in the city of Beirut. That is all the more reason why the United Nations, through the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force, which is in Beirut and elsewhere in Lebanon, should assume its responsibility and tell us exactly what is going on. 25. We do know that, on 4 August, the United Nations reported on some of the lines where the forces stood, but it has never told us where those forces were located on I August. 26. I sincerely hope that, for once, the Council will respond to the call of those civilians who are being massacred and maimed and being denied water, electricity and medical equipment. The call of humanity makes it incumbent upon the Council to take immediate action.

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

Mr. President, I thank you for having convened this meeting and called on me now. 29. The last 48 hours have witnessed two diametrically opposed accounts: the first, reported by the media, was to the effect that Mr. Habib was on the brink of reaching an agreement between the parties concerned-that is, Israel, the PLO and Lebanon; the 30. If it is the responsibility of the entirety of the international community to put an end to this genocide and to disarm the aggressor, it is all the more the direct, historical and political responsibility of the big Powers, and particularly those with special connections and relationships with the Government of Israel, to bring it back to sanity in order to salvage the future of the Middle East and its peoples from an appalling and tragic destiny, in case this slaughter persists and these blood-baths overwhelm the city of Beirut and the whole of Lebanon. 3 1. When we address the big Powers that have special connections with Israel, we are addressing, in particular, the United States Administration, whose efforts are still enthusiastically under way to help achieve a peaceful settlement of the Lebanese crisis. However, we cannot and should not ignore or bypass a basic fact-namely, that it is highly essential to intensify these efforts at this moment in a more forthcoming, purposeful and urgent manner. While its ongoing efforts are appreciated, the United States Government is required squarely to confront the persistence of this ongoing Israeli invasion, bombardment and combing of Beirut, which has left the civilians homeless, starving, thirsty, wounded and sick, a situ* tion which signifies a deliberate attempt by Israel to secure the collapse of all endeavours to forestal the annihilation of the Palestinian people in Lebanon. Any reluctance or hesitation to act decisively and Put an immediate end to these barbaric atrocities will never be tolerated by Egypt, the Arabs or the international community. 32. It will amount to a real mockery of the whole world if we continue to talk about an imminent agreement or an honourable and just solution while the Israeli actions are being permitted to persist. It is amPlY clear that Israel is buying time, day by day and moment by moment, to accomplish a so-called final solution by killing as many Palestinians and Lebanese as PQP sible. Pretexts are being hatched and fabricated every day by the Israeli authorities through insisting on impractical, humiliating and unimaginable demands, such as complete lists of evacuees, and also through procrastination in accepting any form of multinational force in Beirut that would secure a safe withdrawal of the Palestinians, The Israeli objective is quite clear: to wipe out all traces of the existence of the PLO and of the Palestinians as a people or a national entity. 38. Therefore, Israel must not be disturbed, because if Israel is disturbed then the United States cannot influence Israel: therefore, indirectly all of us sought collectively to provide Israel with temporary immunity in order to allow the United States to exercise its influence. Israel paralysed the Council-all its resolutions. Resolutions 508 (1982) and 509 (1982) are almost in the dustbin of history, with no relevance. Cease-fire after cease-fire has been violated, and Israel says it is the PLO fighters who have violated and broken it and that therefore Israel had to retaliate. And it has been a massive retaliation.

The next speaker is Mr. Clovis Maksoud, Permanent Observer of the League of Arab States, to whom the Council extended an invitation, at its 2374th meeting, under rule 39 of its provisional rules of procedure. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. 3.5. Mr. MAKSOUD: Here we go again. In the last two months we have experienced 10 or II Habibnegotiated cease-fires. Every time Mr. Habib negotiated a cease-fire we welcomed it, expressed our deep appreciation and considered it a major American contribution to the peace. Every time we expressed our confidence in the United States because of its special relationship with Israel, we were willing to forgo our judgement of the issues in order to give the United States a free hand, as if to compensate the United States for its special relationship with Israel. Yet, every cease-fire was broken; every cease-fire introduced new fire-power, greater fire-power, more destruction. 39. How do we know the PLO violated the ceasefire? Did Israel allow neutral observers-United Nations observers, anybody’s observers-to be on the spot and discover whether the PLO had violated the cease-fire? Or did it want to remove any United Nations presence-any observer presence-so that it could undertake its carnage continuously, repeatedly, massively, destroying Beirut without any mercy or compassion for civilians or anyone else? Why? 40. By contrast, we said: “If the PLO has violated the cease-fire, let there be verification.” Israel refused, and there were resolutions asking the Council to send observers: then there was an Israeli refusal and a paralysis of the resolutions. According to Israeli double-talk, on the one hand this massive retaliation was in response to PLO violations, and, on the other hand, it was the only way to ensure that the PLO would negotiate a settlement and be bound by it. Well, we cannot figure out-and I do not think anybody in the world can figure out-what it is that Israel wants to accomplish by its genocidal policy of carnage and holocaust at the expense of the civilian population of Beirut. What does it want to accomplish by destroying seven or more hospitals, including the American University Hospital, or the buildings which house civilians of Beirut? Was this in response to PLO violations, or was it supposed to be the language that the PLO understands and, therefore, an attempt to squeeze the PLO into making a commitment to the outcome of Habib’s negotiations? \ 41. It was both. On the one hand, to muster international opinion, Israel says this was in retaliation 36. Every time we thought that the credibility of the United States itself had to be redeemed we were advised to have patience: “Mr. Habib is doing all he can.” As a matter of fact, he has developed into a great hero, and, in a way, he is. His ability to negotiate a peace settlement amidst the bombs striking Beirut is heroic in some ways. We have told ourselves, as Lebanese, as Palestinians, as Arabs: let us give him a chance; they have a special relationship with Israel; Israel is bound to allow the United States the leverage, to have the initiative when other Powers seek to intervene on behalf of rationality, on behalf of peace. 37. We shared the United States assessment that this was a sort of interruption of their own peace process. We shared it because we were under the false and illusory notion that America’s special close relationship with and sponsorship of Israel’s objectives in the region would allow the United States to curtail Israel, to provide it with an incentive to allow the United States to move freely. With every Habib- 42. And the United States, faced with this situation, falls into the other dilemma: the United States, through its intelligence operations, knows who violated the cease-fire. Mr. Habib, being on the spot, knows who violated the cease-fire. Yet the United States has been unwilling to see its judgements become policies, because the United States felt that it was in an inner debate between itself and itself: “Do we condemn Israel? Then if we do, Prime Minister Begin will become very angry. And if Prime Minister Begin becomes very angry, then woe unto the consequences of the Habib mission; woe unto the consequences of the Camp David agreements, the two principal pillars of American policy in the Middle East.” And then we plead, day after day-Arab kings, Arab presidents, the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, Arab representatives-we plead. 43. Sometimes it reaches the extent of begging the United States: “Please, because of the orphans, because of the decimated babies in Beirut, because of the people in hospitals that are being bombarded, please, United States, lift the siege of Beirut so that people can drink, so that we can avoid typhoid and cholera and other epidemics. Please, United States, let some food enter Beirut. Please, United States, if you cannot stop Israel from its massacre of Beirut, at least do not let the people die dehydrated. Please, United States, match your words with performance.” 44. We cannot deny that we seem to get adequate responses and polite answers. “We are doing our best.” 45. We have heard that statement repeatedly. The people of Beirut have constantly clung to the notion that when a great Power like the United States says “we are doing our best”, the United States means that it is doing its best. What we are asking is: is this the best that the United States can provide? We do not think so. We think that there is sufficient resilient moral power within the United States to restrain Israel from its deliberate policy of genocide. 46. And then we come to an agreement. Ah sorts of agreements are made-the Lebanese Government, the PLO leadership and Mr. Habib himself agreeing. Mr. Habib goes to Israel. Then there are certain points: for one thing, they do not want French troops; then they accept them. Then they do not want the United Nations: “How many United Nations troops will be going in? How many will be going out?” 47. Then they reintroduce new issues. Then Mr. Habib, with his characteristic patience, refines the notes, deliberately trying to persuade us to be even more patient; and while we are more patient, there are more attacks, more strikes, more victims, 48. The agreement is concluded and the PLO is committed to it. And then, while Mr. Habib is in Jerusalem negotiating the final outcome, what happens? In the meantime, Israel deems it necessary to expand the area of deployment and logistical existence of its military forces in areas way outside of Beirut: in Byblos, up in Naqoura, and in other towns and villages in Mount Lebanon, as you, Mr. President, have been notified by the Lebanese Mission (S/15353]. 49. Why does Israel do that? We do not know because at this moment Mr. Habib is negotiating the matter of Beirut. But what about the other aspects? What about the new dimensions of Israel’s expansion? What about potential new strikes in a repeat performance of what has taken place in Beirut‘? 50. The answer to these questions cannot be given at this moment because we are at a very sensitive stage of the negotiations on the Beirut peace plan. In the meantime, last Wednesday we had what was until then the most ferocious attack on Beirut. Yesterday, however, we had an even more ferocious attack, which, in turn, was surpassed in ferocity by today’s attack. 51. How long can we all wait? How long can we suffer this trauma, witness the holocaust in front of our eyes and then, in addition to that, have to face the filibustering techniques of Israel in the Security COUP cil, to prevent it from adopting adequate resolutions? How long must we stand by idly as Israel continuously paralyses its will and demeans the legitimacy of the world body? 52. How long can the international community helplessly witness this carnage? Once in a while a Red Cross bus comes in, Once in a while some food comes in. Once in a while, for three hours, the water taps are turned on, but not the electric power. Once in a while we are allowed certain amenities of life, only because, I am sure, Mr. Habib said that it was necessary. 53. Negotiating with Mr. Habib, under the circumstances of these genocidal air raids and the other attacks on Beirut, the Prime Minister of Lebanon could not take it anymore, Even Mr. Habib almost lost his patience today, and it appears that at noon today even President Reagan finally lost his patience. 54. Did they lose their patience to the extent of restraining Israel, rendering it compliant with the international community, or only to the extent of sestraining Israel to give us further breathing-space until Mr. Sharon has decided that Israel’s thirst for blood has been satisfied?

While listening today to Mr. Maksoud, 1 was reminded of the note all-egedly attached to the manuscript of one of the speeches of Sir Winston Churchill which said: “Raise your voice; argument is weak.” 56. Israel then has the temerity, the audacity, to attack people who dare to question its will and policies. Indeed, anyone who might criticize Israel’s intransigence or its violations of laws, charters and human decency is labelled as anti-Semitic. It is as if Israel were trying to cover up its terrorism on the ground in Beirut with intellectual and political terrorism of anybody who dares question its policies. 66. 1 propose to lower my voice. 1 will not even ask Mr. Maksoud what the countries of the Arab League, which he represents here, have done in recent weeks to ensure the departure, promptly and without delay, of the terrorists from Beirut in order to relieve the people of Beirut and of Lebanon of the terrorist presence that has brought untold suffering on that sorely tried people and on the entire region. 57. It is time that the Security Council, with the United States, told Israel: enough is enough. 67. I, for one, certainly do not recall any sermon by Mr. Maksoud in the Council on the latter topic. It would certainly be interesting to find out whether he has addressed the members of the Arab League, with the same fervour displayed here in the Council, on the question of relieving the people of Beirut of the terrorist presence.

1 speak today with a great sense of sorrow and frustration, but because of the lateness of the hour 1 will be extremely brief. 59. Uganda is one of the sponsors of the draft resolution now before the Council [S/15355] because we are appalled at the conduct of Israel and we are horrified by the suffering of the Lebanese and Palestinian peoples. 68. As I have had occasion to state repeatedly in the Council in recent weeks, Israel stands for a solution that would ensure, through political and diplomatic means, the departure of all terrorists from the Beirut area. Israel seeks to avoid any further bloodshed and destruction, if possible. Israel has thus repeatedly stated that it will observe and maintain a cease-fire provided that it is mutual and absolute. However, for reasons best known to the terrorists themselves -which, incidentally, have been alluded to in the Council here today--the terrorists have systematically broken each and every cease-fire in recent weeks. These violations have resulted in scores of casualties among the Israel Defence Forces, as well as among the civilian population of east Beirut, because in Beirut-and this is conveniently forgotten-there is also an east, not only a west. 60. It is now nine weeks since Israel invaded Lebanon without any provocation. These nine weeks will go down as the darkest period in the tragic history of the Middle East. Israel has unleashed a most gruesome carnage, a hell on earth, on the Lebanese and Palestinian peoples. By all accounts, the use of cluster and phosphorus bombs and the indiscriminate shelling of civilian targets have become commonplace. 61. The numerous cease-fires are better known for Israel’s violations than for their observance. Every Council resolution cited in the present draft resolution has been ignored by Israel. Even as we are meeting here, Beirut, the capital of Lebanon, is burning, and women and children are being killed and maimed. 69. In the course of yesterday alone, 22 soldiers of the Israel Defence Forces were injured as a result of the terrorist violations of the cease-fire. The breaches of the cease-fire by the terrorists naturally compel the Israel Defence Forces to return fire in order to silence the terrorist fire and to protect our own soldiers. 62. The Council cannot idly watch these atrocities. We must do everything within our power-even though that power is now more limited than ever-to bring Israel to order and to bring an end to the genocide going on in Lebanon. In spite of Israel’s continued defiance of the Council, we must continue in these efforts. It is our responsibility under the Charter of the United Nations, and we owe it to the Lebanese and Palestinian victims of Israel’s genocidal war and to all the peoples of the Middle East who genuinely desire and long for peace, 70. The attacks of the Israel air force against terrorist targets in the Beirut area today, in response to terrorist violations of the cease-fire, lasted until 4.30 p.m. local time. And then another cease-fire, the eleventh in recent weeks, went into effect at 5.30 p.m. local time, corresponding to I I .30 a.m. New York time. All Israel troops have been instructed to cease fire, and have in fact ceased fire since. They will continue to do 63. Uganda will continue to contribute to all efforts aimed at stopping the carnage of Beirut and the armed

There are no further speakers, and we have before us a draft resolution [ibid.]. We all appreciate that the issue before us is urgent. At the same time, I am informed that certain delegations would wish to have a short time to receive instructions from their Governments before proceeding to the vote. I understand, further, that the sponsors of the draft resolution have no objection to a short break to allow the delegations concerned to receive such instructions. It would therefore be my intention to suspend the present meeting for a short time. It is my understanding that, when we resume our formal meeting here, the Council would be ready to proceed to a vote on the draft resolution. 73. If there is no objection, I shall suspend the present meeting with the intention of resuming it at 4.30 p.m., or as close to that time as I can manage it. T/w meting HYIS snspend~d c/t 3.50 pm. und I’(*- surrwd ut 6.00 pm.

It is my understanding that one of the sponsors of the draft resolution which is before the Council wishes to make a statement in regard to it.

After consultation with the other sponsors of the draft resolution before us, and with their agreement, I wish to introduce the following revisions to it. 76. In the first preambular paragraph, the Security Council, instead of “reaffirming” would be “recalling” all the resolutions mentioned. 77. The second preambular paragraph would read as follows: “E.qwessirzg its most wriouLs wnc’ern about continued military activities in Lebanon and, particularly, in and around Beirut,“. 78. Operative paragraph 4 would read as follows: “Demnds that Israel co-operate fully in the effort to secure the effective deployment of the United Nations observers, as requested by the Government of Lebanon, and in such a manner as to ensure their safety;“. 79. Operative paragraph 5 would read as follows: “RPyuests the Secretary-General to report as soon as possible to the Security Council on the implementation of the present resolution;“. 82. In order to be quite clear and since there has been oral revision by the sponsors, I should simply like to read the draft resolution in its revised form, I first note that there are changes in the two preambular paragraphs of the existing draft and also in operative paragraphs 4 and 5. I shall now read the draft resolution as orally revised by the sponsors. “Recwlling its resolutions 508 (1982), 509 (1982). 511 (1982), 512 (1982), 513 (1982), 515 (1982), 516 (1982) and 517 (1982), “Expwssing its most wrious L~OIWPI’II about continued military activities in Lebanon and, particularly, in and around Beirut, ” I. Derncrnds that Israel and all parties to the conflict observe strictly the terms of Security Council resolutions relevant to the immediate cessation of all military activities within Lebanon and, particularly, in and around Beirut; “2. Demrrrzds the immediate lifting of all restrip tions on the city of Beirut in order to permit the free entry of supplies to meet the urgent needs of the civilian population in Beirut: “3. Requests the United Nations observers in, and in the vicinity of, Beirut to report on the situation; “4. Dvmruzds that Israel co-operate fully in the effort to secure the effective deployment of the United Nations observers, as requested by the Government of Lebanon, and in such a manner as to ensure their safety; “5. Reyuests the Secretary-General to report as soon as possible to the Security Council on the implementation of the present resolution; “6. DwidPs to meet, if necessary, in order ta consider the situation upon receipt of the report Of the Secretary-General.” 83. That is the text of the draft resolution as orallY revised by the sponsors. Unless I hear any objection, I shall now put the draft resolution, as orally revised, to the vote.

There have been reports today that some 200 more people have died in Israeli bombing in Beirut earlier in the day. Some reports give a higher figure. Whatever the precise figures-and in the blood and wreckage of Beirut there are no precise figures--the fact which continues to horrify my Government is that thousands of innocent civilians, Lebanese and Palestinian, are being killed and wounded by the Israeli forces in Lebanon, in pursuit of objectives which are by no means clear and, in any event, are not, in our view, about to be realized.

The United States wishes to express its deep concern about the continued violence in Lebanon. We are concerned because of the destruction and bloodshed that have resulted from the violence. We are also concerned that the new fighting presents an obstacle to the completion of the negotiations for the peaceful resolution of the Beirut crisis and, beyond that, the restoration of Lebanese sovereignty. 86. As is known, a cease-fire was announced this morning. It is our fervent hope that this cease-fire will be permanently maintained. The United States would like to reiterate in the strongest terms its view that actions in the Council should support and not complicate the negotiating process. The resolution we have adopted today is, in our judgement, constructive. We urge the Council to avoid any initiatives that could upset the negotiations during rhis present critical phase. 95. Mr. Philip Habib is doing a magnificent job. If he succeeds, it seems that the Palestinian armed forces will leave Beirut and go elsewhere, but the Palestinian problem will not thereby go away. 96. What the Government of Israel is now doing in Lebanon will not resolve the Palestinian problem, and the security of the State of Israel will not thereby be assured. 87. I reiterate the fervent hope of my Government that the cease-fire in Beirut will be maintained so that a settlement can be achieved that will bring peace to Lebanon and to the entire region. Let the guns be permanently stilled. 97. My delegation voted for resolution 518 (1982) because we want to see an end to the fighting. We hope that agreement in the negotiations still in progress will be reached, and then, in the view of my delegation, what we need is some new thinking about how to satisfy the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinians, without which there is never going to be peace in the Middle East.

Resolutions adopted by the Council are meant to be implemented. This is an obligation incumbent on all Members of the Organization. No Member State is exempt from that responsibility.

In defiance of the condemnation of world opinion and openly refusing to implement Council resolution 517 (1982), the Israeli authorities have, for some days, continued the massive bombing of west Beirut and, yesterday, began to move a large number of tanks towards northern Lebanon. 89. According to Article 25 of the Charter of the United Nations: “The Members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter,” 90. This is why my delegation voted in favour of the draft resolution submitted to us this morning by the representatives of Guyana, Jordan, Panama, Togo, Uganda and Zaire. 99. Innocent Lebanese and Palestinian people continue to be massacred. The sovereignty of Lebanon has been further violated. 100. Faced with the continued deterioration of the situation in Lebanon, the Council is in duty bound to assume the responsibility of taking further action to ensure the implementation of resolution 5 17 ( 1982) for the effective deployment and functioning of United Nations observers in order to put an end to the bombing of west Beirut and the aggression against Lebanon carried out by the Israeli troops. 91. In the face of the suffering of the people of Lebanon and the destruction of Beirut, we do not want to prolong this debate. What counts at this point is settling the situation there. That is the matter on which we must focus our attention. 92. As the representative of Lebanon said in the Ietter addressed to you this morning [S//53533, we must do nothing to jeopardize the negotiations now under way or the success of a peaceful settlement in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the Council. 101. Therefore, in this connexion, the Chinese delegation commends the non-aligned members of the Council for the efforts they have made.

Until this morning, my delegation had entertained a strong hope for the impending culmination of the recent arduous negotiations in a formal agreement among the parties concerned to put an end to the tragic situation in and around Beirut and to reaIize the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon. 104. That is why we have been shocked to learn of the expanded Israeli military activities which have been reported to the Council this morning. My delegation fully shares the concern expressed in the letter addressed to you this morning by the representative of Lebanon [ihid.], the country most directly concerned, that these activities, if unchecked, undermine the ongoing negotiations undertaken by President Reagan’s envoy, Mr. Philip Habib, and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in accordance with the relevant Council resolution. 105. My delegation strongly deplores these continued military activities, which might jeopardize the finalization of the agreement which we hope is in sight, in addition to the resultant further sufferings and hardships of the civilian population in and around Beirut. 106. Accordingly, my delegation voted in favour of resolution 518 (I982), and it sincerely hopes that this call of the Council will be heeded immediately and that the peaceful settlement of the crisis in and around Beirut will be secured, thereby opening the way towards the restoration of peace in the whole territory of Lebanon, in accordance with the relevant resolution of the Council.

I should now like to make a statement in my capacity as representative of IRELAND. 108. The Irish Government and the public in Ireland are appalled at what is happening in Beirut. It is impossible not to be appalled at what has been happening night after night, week after week-indeed, month after month. 109. We are aware of the complexity of the Middle East situation. We have always tried to be fair and balanced in our approach to it, in the Council and outside it, and to understand, as far as we can, the deep emotions and passions on either side. I 10. We are aware, too, of the delicacy of the present negotiations, and we wish well to those who have engaged in them, 111. We are also aware, and we are often reminded, that blood is being spilled elsewhere in the world. I12. It may be true that our record as a Councit seems limited. Nevertheless, we must say it, with all of this in mind: we are appalled at what is happening in Beirut. In our view, no considerations of strategic calculation of pressure, no geopolitical considerations, no considerations of self-defence, or, indeed, the tragic past history of any people, can possibly justify it. I 13. It is true that there is a complex background, but we are told that agreement in principle has been reached on the immediate issues. Each day’s decision to continue fighting, to bomb further, to shell further, must now stand on its own and be judged in its own terms. Each day’s dead and injured must nob be counted separately. 114. We wish well to Mr. Habib and to the negotiations. We wish to do nothing to disrupt them. Beyond the immediate issue, we want to see Lebanese sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity restored and, in accordance with the wish of the Government of Lebanon, all foreign forces, except those which it has authorized, withdrawn from Lebanon. 11.5. We believe, too, that the complex Middle East situation must be addressed in an effort to work towards a comprehensive, just and lasting peace and that this must be done sooner rather than later and must take account of all aspects of the problem. 116. But Beirut today and tomorrow cannot wait. The children, the civilians, the hospital patients cannol wait so long. The present carnage must stop. We are entitled in the Council to insist on that at least, and to do so without prejudice to any larger issues. 117. Over the course of two months, the Council, in exercise of its authority under the Charter of the United Nations, which all Member States have agreed to accept, has adopted all the right resolutions-508 ( 1982), 509 ( 1982) and so on. The list gets longer bY the week. Today we have adopted resolution 518 ( 1982). These resolutions so far remain unimplemented. If the Council is ever accused of being ineffective, it will certainly not be for want of effort. I IS. I want here not to address the larger issues, not even those of our earlier resolutions of June and July, but to focus on the most recent resolutions we have adopted, in the past 10 days, in regard to Beirut. 119. In the face of a complex situation, with allegations of breach of cease-fire on either side, we find it, I must say, particularly difficult to understand WhY one of the parties, Israel, alone among the parties, should flatly refuse to allow neutral and unarmed United Nations observers to observe the cease-fire IO 126. This is a call for a cease-fire that comes after the cease-fire. We cannot but regret that. However, had we, as the country concerned, been associated more closely with the drafting process, we would have probably suggested the introduction of more meaningful, practical elements directly reIated to the present developments in the situation, particularly those to which our letter of this morning [ihid.] alludes. Indeed, we cannot accept the present developments, nor do we have any explanation for them. I20. Against this background, what appears to us still to be a refusal by Israel to accept these observers in and around Beirut is extremely difficult to understand, and it must raise for us some very serious questions. 121. The focus of the present resolution is limited. It concentrates on the cease-fire, on the lifting of restrictions on Beirut in the interests of its civilian population and, particularly, on the need to admit and allow the observers to report. The text, in all the circumstances, is extremely moderate. We therefore voted for the resolution as a minimum measure in the present situation, and we most strongly urge-indeed, we beg-that it be implemented. 127. We would also have wanted this resolution to reflect more comprehensively-as you, Mr. President, have hinted-the basic policy of the Lebanese Government, namely, that Lebanese sovereignty must be restored and must be exercised solely and exclusively in all of Lebanon and, therefore, that all non-Lebanese forces should withdraw from Lebanon. 122. I now resume my functions as PRESIDENT. I28. What has happened today in and to Beirut is beyond our capacity to describe or qualify. The atrocities, the carnage, leave us silent. They would have made us despair had it not been for the reaction of various Governments and also of the Council. We take what you have given us today as a symbol of solicitude and support, and we thank you for it. 123. I call on the representative of Lebanon. I24. Mr. TUBNI (Lebanon): I have a very few brief observations to make. 125. I want to say that every time we have a new resolution we cannot but express satisfaction and appreciation. Even though this resolution is, as you have just described it, Mr. President, a minimum II HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Nations publications may be obtained liom 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 Units sont en vente dans Its librairies et les agences dfpositaircs du monde entier. Informez-vous aup& de votre libraire ou adressez-vous A : Nations Unies, Section des ventes. New York ou Gentve. KAH I-IOXYUHTB MBJ4AIIMH OPrAHM3AI[BiN Ol;‘I>E/~MHEHHMX HAIUUt COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas e&n en venta en librerias y casas distribuidoras en todas partes del mundo. Consulte a su librero o dirijase a: Naciones Unidas, Secci6n de Ventas, Nueva York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations. New York 00300 @-h0989-June 198Y--2.050