S/PV.2480 Security Council

MemberS of the Council have before them the report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) for the period from 13 July to 12 October 1983. They also have before them document S/16046, which contains the text of a draft resolution prepared in the course of the Council’s consultations. Present: The representatives of the following States: China, France, Guyana, Jordan, Malta, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Poland, Togo, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Zaire, Zimbabwe. 4. I call on the representative of Lebanon. Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/2480)

Mr. President, allow me to extend congratulations to you on your assumption of the presidency for the month of October. I am confident that your personality, your ability and your experience in the political and diplomatic fields will &able you to guide the Council in the carrying out of the duties entrusted to it. The meeting was called to order at 12.40 p.m. 1. Adoption of the agenda 2. The situation in the Middle East: Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (S/16036) 6. I should like to take this opportunity to express appreciation for the efforts made by your predecessor, the,,President for last month, Mr. Sinclair, to ensure that the Council assume its natural role for bringing peace to Lebanon. Expression of thanks to tbe ret&g Resident

As this is the first meeting of the Council for the month of October, I should like to pay a tribute, on behalf of the Council, to the President for the month of September, Mr. Noel Sinclair, representative of Guyana, for the great diplomatic skill and courtesy with which he conducted the Council’s business last month. 7. I also have pleasure in expressing to the Secretary- General appreciation and thanks for his constant interest in everything relating to Lebandn and also for the report he has submitted to the Council on 12 October in which, in response to the request by the Government of Lebanon, he has recommended an extension of the mandate of UNIFIL for six months without any changes in its duties as set forth in Council resolutions 425 (1978) and 426 (1978). Adoption ,of the agenda 72e agenda was adopted 8. The presence of UNIFIL in southern Lebanon, as pointed out in the repcirt of fhe Secretary-General, is a consecration of the United Nations commitment to the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Lebanon and to the assurance of the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the south, in accordance with Council resolutions 425.( 1978) and 509 (1982). Furthermore, that international presence constitutes a fundamental factor for stability in the region. ‘I%e situation 4n the Middle East: Report of the Secretary-GeneraI on tbe Unhd Nations Interim Force in ,Lebanon (S/16036)

.I should like to inform members of the Council that I .have received a letter from the representative of Lebanon, in which he requests to be invited to participate insthe discus- .sion of the item on the agenda. In .conformity wilh the usual practiti, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite that representative to participate in the discussion without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the provisional rules. of procedure. 9. Approval of the renewal of UNIFIL’s mandate for a ,further six months would enable the Lebanese authorities to resTore legitimacy in the south up to the internationally recognized boundaries and to find solutions to bring about the withdrawal of all unauthorized forces from all Lebanese territory. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Turk (Lebanon) took a place at the Council table 10. In presenting on behalf of my Government the request to renew the mandate of UNIFIL in southern Leb-

I thank the representative of Lebanon for the kind words he addressed to me. _ 12. It is my understanding that the Council is ready to proceed to the vote on the draft resolution before it [S/Z60&J. Unless I hear any objection, I shall now put the draft resolution to the vote. A vote ‘was taken by show of hank. h favour: China, France, Guyana, Jordan, Malta, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Togo, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Zaire, Zimbabwe. Against: None. Abstaining.- Poland, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The draft resolution was adopted by 13 votes to none, wiih 2 abstentions [resolution 536 (1983)j.

I shall now call upon those members of the Council who wish to make statements after the vote. 14. Mr. van der STOEL (Netherlands): I should like first of all, Sir, to congratulate you on assuming the presidency of the Council. Your wisdom and wide experience are well known. There are few who are so well qualified for this difficult task as you. 15. When the Council discussed the mandate of UNIFIL in July of this year 12456th meeting], I had been instructed to inform the Council that the Netherlands UNIFIL battalion, .barring entirely new circumstances which would enable my Government to reconsider its position, would be withdrawn from Lebanon as from 19 October. At the same time, we indicated our willingness to remain in close contact with the Government of Lebanon, with the Secretary-Genera1 and with our friends in UNIFIL and with all other parties concerned to assess any useful contribution UNIFIL could make after 19 October. 16. The situation within the UNIFIL area of operations in southern Lebanon has certainly not changed dramatically since we last discussed the subject in the Council. In . 17. We also note that, although the Israel Defence Forces continued to recruit and arm selected villagers in the UNIFIL area, incidents with those armed irregulars have occurred less frequently and have tended to be less serious than before. We repeat our call on the Government of Israel to respect UNIFIL’s mandate. 18. The situation in southern Lebanon has not changed to the extent that the original peace-keeping functions of UNIFIL may be restored within the foreseeable future. However, we realize at the same time that a decision on our part to withdraw from UNIFIL completely could have an adverse effect on efforts of the United Nations to contribute to a solution of the crisis in Lebanon. We fully support the endeavours of the Secretary-General to that end, and I should like to repeat what the Foreign Minister of the Netherlands, Mr. Hans van den Broek, has recently said in the General Assembly: “the Netherlands interest in United Nations peace-keeping remains undiminished”.’ 19. Moreover, we still hope that the Council, acting in agreement with the Government of Lebanon, may devise a more meaningful role for UNIFIL than the Force is able to fulfil nowadays. 20. It is with those considerations in mind that the Netherlands Government, after close consultation with the Secretary-General, the Government of Lebanon and our friends in UNIFIL, has decided not to ‘withdraw ,from UNIFIL altogether but to retain a limited contingent with the Force. 21. The international community would be neglecting - its commitment to support the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of Lebanon, as expressed in so many resolutions-of both the Security Council and the General Assembly, if it failed to make appropriate use of the potential of United Nations peace-keeping operations to restore international peace and security in the area. We agree with the Secretary-General that UNIFIL, despite the present circumstances, still remains an important expression of this commitment of the United Nations to assist the Government of Lebanon in achieving the resto- 22. It is essentiaf that all foreign forces whose presence is not desired by the central Government should withdraw from Lebanon. My Government wishes therefore once again to impress upon all parties the need to co-pperate seriously toward that end. 29. It is to be hoped that this will be only a temporary situation and that there, as everywhere else in Lebanon, the unity, integrity and independence of the country will be restored. We think that, in the same spirit, the Council will be called upon to give UNIFIL,in addition to the missions that it is already carrying out, new tasks in new areas. A useful instrument, very well adapted and well organ&d, the Force has demonstrated its usefulness in the field by restoring security to the countryside. Similarly, it seems to us that observers with the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization, who are fully qualified for the tasks they undertake in particularly difficult conditions and who have acquired a reputation of impartiality and objectivity, could certainly be invited to carry out other missions in other areas. 23. Finally, I should like to express my Government’s concern about the increasing financial difficulties faced by UNIFIL. The Secretary-General has informed us that, as of the beginning of October 1983, there is an accumulated shortfall in UNIFIL’s special account of some $173.9 million. It is most regrettable that some Member States, while professing support for maintaining peace and security, are consistently failing to honour their obligations. Consequently, they are placing an additional financial burden on the troop-contributing countries,. some of which are developing countries that badly need their financial resources. This attitude might, in the future, place in jeopardy the functioning of peace-keeping operations, as well as hinder efforts to ensure wide geographical representation in the peace-keeping forces. 30. I listened most attentively to the statement made by Mr. Turk, the Secretary-General of Lebanon’s Ministry for Foreign Affairs. I should like to tell him on this occasion that France stands by his country’s legal Govemment, to which it will continue to give its support. .24. We therefore hope that the most urgent appeal of the Secretary-General to all Member States to pay their assessments without delay will be promptly heeded.

I thank the representative of the Netherlands for his kind words about me. 31. In conclusion on this subject, I wish to pay a tribute to the Secretary-General for his persevering work in respect of UNIFIL. I express to him the complete confidence of my authorities in the delicate and di!Iicult task that he has embarked upon, and I assure him of our support. 26. Mr. de la BARRE de NANTEUIL (France) (inrerpreration from French): I should like to say’ first, Sir, how pleased my country is to see your country assuming the presidency-and particularly how pleased we are to see you presiding over our work. We recall that you represented your country in our capital in a particularly outstanding way, and that you gained many friends there, as you have done in all the other posts you have held. We are sure that your intelligence, your wisdom, your vast experience and your professional qualifications guarantee the success of your term in office as President. May I add that your personal courtesy, your kindness and your sense of humour-which, I would say, is another expression of your kindness and your curiosity about others-are also guarantees that you will have not only a very fruitful presidency but also one that will be very pleasant for all of us. 32. Finally, I should like to say how much we appreciated the remarkable, brilliant and intelligent way in which the Council was presided over last month by our colleague from Guyana, with whose courtesy, kindness, intelligence and skill we are all familiar; this made it possible for him to bring out the best in everyone. We thank him most warmly for this.

I thank the representative of France for the kind and warm words and particularly for the praise that he addressed to me.

Today, the Council is having to deal yet again-for the fourteenth time-with the question of the extension of the mandate of UNIFIL. This fact is in itself eloquent testimony to the continuing explosive situation in that country. . 27. The Council has just renewed for a six-month period the mandate of UNIFIL. By associating itself with the decision just taken, my delegation wished to show the importance it attaches to UNIFIL’s role in southern Lebanon. France, in fact, shares the assessment made by the Secretary-General in his report that .“It is evident that, despite the present circumstances, TIFIL remains an important element of stability in southern Lebanon” [ibid, para. 24. UNIFIL’s presence also expresses the resolve of the United Nations to support Lebanon% independence, ,sovereignty and territorial integrity. 35. In order to understand the true essence of the events occurring in Lebanon, we have to place them in their proper perspective. To this very day, the consequences of the large-scale aggression committed against Lebanon by Israel in the summer of 1982, with the support and patron-. 36. To this day the Israeli occupiers remain in possession of a considerable portion of Lebanese territory. Israel’s recent so-called redeployment of its forces is aimed essentially at the long-term entrenchment of the aggressor along new lines, and at the perpetuation of Israeli occupation of areas of southern Lebanon. In other words, it is aimed, in the final analysis, at the annexation of those areas. We are reminded of Israel’s true designs.by the following fact: the lines along which Israeli troops are at present deployed in Lebanon are almost identical to the lines which as far back as 1919 were declared by the Zionists to be the northern frontier of Israel. 37. Washington and Tel Aviv forced Lebanon at gunpoint to agree to a capitulationist agreement with Israel, which infringes upon the sovereignty and independence of the Lebanese State and poses a threat to the security of neighbouring Arab countries. 38. Along with Israel, the so-called multinational force is consolidating its position on Lebanese soil. The backbone of that force is the American contingent of marines. On the pretext of ensuring the defence of this interventionist corps, a whole armada of naval vessels of the United States and its allies of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is lying off the Lebanese coast. 39. It should lx recalled that a year ago, when the first contingent of marines was sent to Lebanon, it was declared that those troops were intended only to ensure the security of the Palestinian and Lebanese populations. It was further asserted at that time that the “multinational force” was to be in Beirut for no longer than a month. It was stated that in no circumstances would it engage in combat. Now strenuous attempts are being made to forget those assurances. It would appear that, like certain Council resolutions on Lebanon, these have been consigned to the ‘*redundant’* file. 40. Now the logic of imperialist intervention has borne its inevitable fruit. The “multinational force” which went to Lebanon allegedly to defend the local civilian population, has now engaged there in actual combat, using aircraft and naval artillery. The Western press has reported the deaths of marines, but for some reason or other has remained silent about the number of civilians who have been killed by foreign bombs and shells. 41. I would remind members that a year ago, .when deployment of the “‘multinational for&on Lebanese soil had just begun, the Soviet Union issued a strong warning about the possible dangerous consequences ofthat step. At that time there were those who were inclined to consider that those apprehensions were excessive, but time has-only confirmed our worst forebodings. 43. The Soviet Union is firmly in favour of a unified Lebanon and of the restoration of Lebanon’s sovereignty, security and territorial integrity. It is imperative that Israel should withdraw unconditionally from Lebanon. Neither American troops nor any of the foreign troops that accompanied them should remain on Lebanese soil. A settlement of the situation in that country should be achieved not through separate deals or arm-twistiug, but on the basis of strict, unswerving compliance with the decisions of the United Nations; first and foremost Council resolutions 508 (1982) and 509 (1982), which no one has rescinded. Only in that way can we ensure a proper solution to the Lebanese problems. , 44. As to UNIFIL, the Secretary-General’s report points ‘out that in the difficult circumstances of Israeli occupation the Force remains an important element of stability in its area of operations. 45. Therefore, taking into account the request of the Lebanese Government and the recommendation contained in the report of the Secretary-General, and bearing , in mind that the purposes and tasks,of UNIFIL will continue to be defined by its mandate as laid down in resolution 425 (1978) and subsequent resolutions of the Council on this subject, the Soviet delegation found it possible not to object to the extension of the mandate of the Force.

I thank the representative of the Soviet Union for the kind words he addressed to me.

May I join in the congratulations, Sir, on your assumption of the oflice of President of the Council and in the appreciation of the personal qualities which you bring to that task. 48. May I also join in the expressions of gratitude to Mr. Noel Sinclair of Guyana for the excellence of his presidency of the Council last month. 49. My Government has supported the extension of the mandate of UNIFIL for a further six months. We did so in the light of the Secretary-General’s recommendation favouring an extension. We have noted his view that the Force remains an important element of stability in southem Lebanon and that it represents a commitment by the United Nations to the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Lebanon ,itself. 50. We extend again our tribute to the officers and men of UNIFIL and our appreciation to their Governments. 59. May I also take this opportunity to express our appreciation to your predecessor, Mr. Sinclair of Guyana, for the very able manner in which he carried out his functions as President of the Council last month. 60. It was not my intention to take the floor here today. However, in view of the statement made by the representative of the Soviet Union, replete as it was with the customary Soviet distortions regarding the situation in Lebanon, I feel constrained to state anew my country’s position. In so doing, I wish to express our appreciation to the representative of the Soviet Union for his renewed assertion of his country’s respect for the Charter of the United Nationswhich respect is so vividly demonstrated throughout the length and breadth of Afghanistan. 52. It is saddening that the Secretary-General, in his report, should yet again have called the Council’s attention to the increasing financial difficulties faced by UNIFIL. The accumulated shortfall in the UNIFIL Special Account has increased since July by a further $5.5 million, to $173.9 million. The Secretary-General rightly expresses his extreme concern about this state of affairs, which he warns could jeopardize the functioning of the Force. 61. I should also like to refresh the memory of the members of the Council. It was the Soviet Union that opposed the establishment of UNIFIL in the first place and never gave its support to the establishment of the Force and, subsequently, to the extension of its mandate. In keeping with that position, the Soviet Union has not contributed even one penny to the maintenance of the Force, and it is, to say the least, exceedingly moving to listen to the concern displayed by the representative of the Soviet Union for the well-being and the functions of the Force. 53. It is scandalous that some countries still refuse to pay their assessed contributions. They are throwing the burden onto the troop-contributing countries, several of which are developing countries which can ill afford it. They are also rapidly increasing the overall deficit of the United Nations, already in excess of $300 million, a deficit which, in the end, has to be covered by all Member States. 54. I should like to associate myself with the remarks of the representative of the Netherlands on this subject, and I trust that the withholding States will reconsider their policy and pay their fair share of the costs of UNIFIL instead of expecting other, often poorer, States to bear it for them. 62. Under the circumstances, I should like-as I have indicated before-to state anew my country’s position with regard to the situation in Lebanon in general and concerning UNIFIL’s mandate in particular.

I thank the representative of the United Kingdom for the kind words he addressed to me. 63. The resolution adopted by the Council today does not ‘change in any manner UNIFIL’s existing mandate, subject, of course, to the observation made by the Secretary-General in paragraph 21 of his report, in which he rightly stated that recent events in Lebanon had “radically altered the conditions under which UNIFIL was created and is intended to function**. 56. I should like to inform members of the Council that I have just received a letter from the representative of .Israel in which he requests to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on the agenda. In keeping with the usual practice, I propose; with the consent of the Council, to invite him to participate in the discussion without the right to vote, in conformity witb the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the provisional rules of procedure. 64. Over the east vear the Government of Israel has 1 repeatedly stated thai in the new circumstances surrounding the situation in Lebanon UNIFIL as established in 1978 has outlived its usefulness and its presence is no longer called for in southern Lebanon. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Blum (Israel) took a place at the Council table. 65. The continuing tragedy of Lebanon is a consequence of the havoc .wreaked by the PLO [Palestine Liberation Organization] and its allies over the past decade. Knowing e full well the potential for subversion inherent in the PLO, Arab Governments were unwilling to tolerate the presence of this terrorist organization on their own countries’ soil and, as a result, dumped that group upon Beirut and on the people of Lebanon. As a consequence, Lebanon’s sovereignty was eroded and the country was torn apart by violent strife. This, in turn, was seized upon by Syria as a pretext for invading Lebanon in an attempt to realize its ._ 5

I call on the representative of Israel.

Permit me at the outset, Sir, to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the month of October. You and I represent ‘in the United Nations the two States that emerged on the territory of the former Palestine Mandate--e Arab and one Jewish. For reasons well known to all of us, we have not been able thus far to enjoy the blessings of peace in onr 66. It is well known that Israel stands for the full restoration of Lebanese sovereignty, of Lebanese independence, of Lebanese territorial integrity and of the unity of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries, as well as for the restoration of the authority of the lawful Government of Lebanon within the country. 67. Israel believes that, in order to permit the attainment of that goal, all foreign forces must be withdrawn from the country. 68. Alongside these objectives, and bearing in mind the experience of recent years, Israel’s legitimate security needs must also be guaranteed and Lebanese territory must never be used again for attacks upon our citizens. 69. The Agreement concluded by Israel and Lebanon on 17 May 1983 is linked to these requirements. Israel was and remains determined to proceed towards full and speedy implementation of this Agreement aimed at the restoration of Lebanese sovereignty. However, it must have become clear to everyone by now that Syria and the PLO have no more intention of respecting Lebanese sovereignty today than they did in the past. We have all heard Lebanon’s emphatic and repeated demands for the withdrawal of the Syrian forces and the PLO from its territory. Last year Lebanese President Amin Gemayel used the rostrum of the General Assembly to call for “the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all non- Lebanese forces from Lebanon”.2 70. In a letter to the Twelfth Arab Summit Conference, held at Fez in November 1981 and September 1982, Lebanon explicitly demanded the termination of the Syrian and PLO presence in that country. Lebanon reiterated its demands as recently as last month. On 2 September the Lebanese Foreign Minister wrote to the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States [S/25953, annex] insisting again on Syrian and PLO withdrawal. He repeated this demand in his statement in the general debate of the General Assembly. 71. Yet all this has been to no avail. Not only has Syria paid no heed to these demands, but it has increased its involvement in Lebanon and is engaged in direct warfare against the legitimate Government of that country. President Hafez Al-Assad, backed diplomatically and militarily by the Soviet Union, and assisted by Palestinian terrorists, continues his ruthless operations to keep Lebanon in disarray in an attempt to force Lebanon to submit to Syrian domination. Resorting to its well known tactics of threats and extortion, Syria continues to undermine Lebanon’s path to regaining its sovereignty. This is pursued by Syria directly. or by proxy, and its uninhibited brutality stops short of nothing. 72. Israel’s withdrawal from the Shouf mountains, a first step in the direction of total withdrawal, was announced 73. Israel welcomes the cease-fire declared in Lebanon a fortnight ago and expresses its hope that the cessation of hostilities will endure, leading to true reconciliation free of outside interventions and dictates. We are following the situation closely and are looking forward to the establishment of conditions which will ensure security and tranquillity along the Israel-Lebanese border. Under no circumstances will Israel agree to-return to the state of affairs which prevailed until 16 months ago, when Lebanese territory was used .as a base for terrorist operations against our citizens, Israel sincerely hopes for and wishes to see an independ.ent Lebanon in which a strong and stable regime exercises control throughout the country.

The Council has heard the statement by the representative of Israel. I should like to point out the ill will and hypocrisy evident in that statement, especially as regards his country’s alleged love of peace. I think it my duty as representative of Jordan to remind the Council that Israel, which arrogantly speaks of peace, has occupied Jerusalem, the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights for more than 16 years, in addition to its occupation of southern Lebanon, its refusal to be inclined towards peace ever since it was established, its dependence on military expansion and its. attempt to impose its domination and hegemony over the region at the expense of its indigenous peoples. 75. I now request the representative of Israel to resume his place at the side of the Council chamber. 76. I should like to inform the members of the Council that I have just received a letter from the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic in which he requests to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on the agenda. In conformity with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council;to invite that representative to participate in the discussion without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the provisional rules of procedure. At the invita$on of the President, Mr. El-Fattal (Syrian Arab Republic) took a place at the Council table.

I call on the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic.

I should like, Sir, to thank you and the members of the Council for allowing.me to make my statement. On this occasion, I should like to congratulate you, the Arab President of the Security Council. Our relations, which are of long standing in the Counci!, have always been constructive, and through them we have always been able to arrive at important resolutions. I would mention in particular resohution 509 (1982), in 80. It was not my delegation’s ‘intention to intervene in this discussion. However, the representative of zionism has come here to disturb the atmosphere during these deliberations of the Council, and that has obliged me to speak. 81. How could the representative of Israel be invited to make a statement to the Council? This is an organ of the United Nations. I wish to remind the Council of.one thing, namely, the crimes committed by Israel against the United Nations. In view of the lateness ofthe hour I shall mention just one-the crime committed by Israel’s present Prime Minister, Shamir, who personally implemented the physical liquidation of the United Nations mediator in Palestine, Count Folke Bernadotte. The representative of Israel also represents his Prime Minister, Shamir, who is a criminal well known to everyone. That crime even motivated some authorities in Sweden to demand that Shamir be tried as a war criminal. How can the representative of such a person attack Syria and its noble objectives in Lebanon, its sacrifices on Lebanese territory, made in the interests of Lebanon, when his Prime Minister committed a crime that is punishable even by Israel’s laws themselves? 85. Because of the lateness of the hour, I shall not speak at length, but I should like to inform the Council of the statement made by the President of Syria to Swiss television a few days ago. Asked “Do you believe that Lebanon can attain peace if all foreign forces withdraw from it?‘, he replied: “In Lebanon there is one foreign army, the Israeli army, which is an invader. The Lebanese and Syrians are Arabs and one people. We have one language, one common history. It seems that this fact is not known to many in the Western world. Despite the fact that we are one people, we have not gone into Lebanon except at the request of the legitimate authority in Lebanon. A Syrian force was requested to put an end to the civil war. If the Lebanese Government had requested the withdrawal of Syrian forces prior to the Israeli invasion, the Syrian forces would have withdrawn at the time set by the Lebanese authorities. Moreover, we had at one time wished to withdraw from Lebanon, but the legitimate authorities there insisted that we stay on. If you refer to statements of the ,Presidents of Lebanon from 1976 until prior to the Israeli invasion, and even during it, you will find proof of what I have said (you will find proof in the statements of the two Presidents of Lebanon who were in power from 1976 until the Israeli invasion); and you will find praise for the Syrian forces and their role in putting an end to the civil war. The conflicting parties had to remove the seeds of the civil war. 82. Israel claims that zionism is a liberation movementa liberation movement that destroyed Palestine from end to end, and led to the occupation of the Golan Heights and the larger part of Lebanon. How can Israel call that a liberation movement, when the real liberation movements are bombarded and attacked in their camps, with no regard for the civilian population made up of old men, women and children, who are attacked and have crimes committed against them under the protection of the Israeli authorities? I remind the Council of the crimes committed by Israel after that of Deir Yassin-namely, the massacres of Sabra and Shatila, near Beirut. 83. I believe if the Council wishes to carry out its duties towards the people of Lebanon, it must without delay~fullil its commitments under the whole of resolution 509 (1982) and put an end to any attempt to distort that resolution. There are serious attempts through the current manoeuvres-and we have just heard the representative of zionism here-to put the Syrian forces, which are part of the Arab peace-keeping forces, on the same level as the Israeli invading forces. These attempts are rejected by Lebanon, Syria and the other Arabs, and they have already been rejected by the majority of members of the Council. “Israel must withdraw from Lebanon. There is only one foreign army in Lebanon, and that is the Israeli army, which came in as an invader. Israel has its own language and systems, in no way linked to Lebanon or any other Arab country. The Israeli forces must withdraw from Lebanon without imposing any conditions on that country. The withdrawal of the Israeli forces will help to put an end to the Lebanese disputes, with the help of the Arabs. 84. Israel’s ambitions in Lebanon are well known to all. At the Versailles Peace Conference in 1919, when the zionist delegation distributed a map of the so-called territory of 86. The PRESfDBT (interpretation from Arabic): I thank the represenrative of the Syrian Arab Republic,for the kind words he addressed to me. I request him to resume his place at the side of the Council chamber. 7le meeting rose at 1.55 p.m. NOTES .’ -: 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 SJ3 PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Lcs publications des Nations Unies sent en vente darts les libralries et les agences dt5positaires du monde entier. Informez-vous aupres de votre libraire ou adressez-vous a : Nations Unies, Section des ventes, New York ou Geneve. KAK l-IOJIY%ITb H3,&4HbVf OPI-AHH3AI@iH OE’b~HHbIX I-IAUm ki3~mnin Oprartrtsamm 06aeminermbrx Haturn MOXHO KymTb B KHUmib~X Mara3maX HaTeHT~Ba~BO~ceXp~OHaXMApa.HaaomrTeCUpaaIcu 06 H~~I~HS~KXBB~IJI~~~KHU~AOM mra3me WIH nmmTe no a,qpecy: Opramrsamra 06aemmemrbtx Ha&l. Cerorsrx no nponame H3niuIti,HbH)-ROpK imi XeHeBa. COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas estdn en venta en librerfas y cams distribuidoras en todas partes de1 mundo. Consulte a su librero o dirfjase a: Naciones Unidas, Seccidn de Ventas, Nueva York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations, New York 00300 90-60205-January 1992-2.050