S/PV.2613 Security Council

I should like to inform members of the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Bangladesh, the German Democratic Republic, Indonesia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Malta, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia and Yugoslavia in which they request 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 those representatives to participate in the discussion, without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of prokdure. President: Mr. Vernon A, WALTERS (United States of America). Present: The representatives of the following States: Australia, Burkina Faso, China, Denmark, Egypt, France, India, Madagascar, Peru, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/2613) 1. Adoption of the agenda At the invitation of the President, Mr. Wasiuddin (Bangiadesh), Mr. Ott (German Democratic Republic), Mr. Wiryono (Indonesia), Mr. Rajaie-Khorassani (Islamic Republic of Iran), Mr. Gauci (Malta)). Mr. Chamorro Mora (Nicaragua), Mr. Garba (Niger@, Mr. Shihabi (Saudi Arabia) and Mr. Golob (Yugoslavia) took the places reservedfor them at the side of the Council chamber. 2. Letter dated 1 October 1985 from the Permanent Representative of Tunisia to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/17509) The meeting was called to order at 4.10 p.m.

I should also like to inform the Council that I have received a letter dated 3 October 1985 [S/17524] from the representative of Egypt which reads as follows: Adoption of the agenda The agenda was adopted. Letter dated 1 October 1985 from the Permanent Representative of Tunisia to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/17509) “I have the honour to request that during the Security Council’s discussion of the item entitled ‘Letter dated 1 October 1985 from the Permanent Representative of Tunisia to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council’, the Council extend an invitation undkr rule 39 of the provisional rules of procedure to Mr. Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada, Secretary- General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference.”

In accordance with the decisions taken at the 2610th and 261 lth meetings, I invite the representatives of Tunisia and Israel to take a place at the Council table; I invite the observer for the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) to take a place at the Council table; I invite the representatives of Afghanistan, Algeria, Cuba, Greece, Jordan, Kuwait, Lesotho, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Mauritania, Morocco, Pakistan, Senegal, the Syrian Arab Republic, Turkey and Yemen to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber. If I hear no objection, I shall take it that the Council agrees to extend an invitation to Mr. Pirzada under rule 39 of the provisional rules of procedure. It was so decided At the invitation of the @resident. Mr. Bouzin’ (l&nisia) and Mr. Netanyahu (Israel) took pIaces at the Council table; Mr. Qaddoumi (Palestine Liberation Organization) took a place at the Council table; Mr. Zarv (Afghanistan), Mr. Taleb Ibrahimi (Algeria), Mr. Malmierca Peoli (Cuba), Mr. Dountas (Greece), Mr. Masri (Jordan), Mr. Abulhassan (Kuwait), Mr. Makhele (Lesotho). Mr. Treiki (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya), Mr. Ould Boye (Mauritania), Mr. Fi/ali (Morocco), Mr. Yaqub Khan (Pakistan), Mr. San+ (Senegal), Mr. AI-Sharaa (Syria Arab Republic), Mr. Halefo@ (Turkey) and Mr. Basendwah (Yemen) took the places reserved for them at the side of the CounciI chamber.

I should like to draw the attention of the members of the Council to the following documents: letter dated 2 October 1985 from the representative of Spain to the Secretary-General [S/175Z6J; letter dated 2 October from the representative of Democratic Yemen to the Secretary-General [S/17517); letter dated 1 October from the representative of India to the Secretary-General [S/17518iJ; letter dated 2 October from the representative of Argentina to the President of the Security Council [S/27.5191; and letter dated 2 October from the representative of Luxembourg to the Secretary-General [S/17520&

I should like to associate myself with those who have preceded me in congratulating you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for this month, which starts with consideiation of a new complaint-that by Tunisia in connection with the Israeli aggression against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Tunisia. I should also like to express our appreciation to the President of the previous month, in which the Council considered the act of aggression by the racist Pretoria regime against our brothers in southern Africa as well as the oppressive Israeli measures against the Arab population in the occupied Arab territories, 7. The Council has been urgently convened to consider the Tunisian complaint [S/17509]. Rapid action is required from the Council, action based on the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations regarding the maintenance of international peace and security and the deterrence of aggression. 8. We believe that the militr& action by Israel against Tunisia is a blatant act of aggression against the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of a’ sister country, a blatant violation of the principles and norms of international law and the provisions of the Charter. This aggression is but one more link in the chain of repeated acts of aggression by Israel against Arab countries. Such acts are still taking place daily against Lebanon and in the occupied Arab and Palestinian territories in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and the Golan Heights. And yesterday’s aggression will not be the last link in the chain if the aggressor is not punished under the provisions of the Charter. 9. It is absolutely clear that the fact that Israel has not been punished for its repeated acts of aggression in the past-particularly because of the position of the United States, which has prevented the application of sanctions against Israel under Chapter VII of the Charter-has encouraged Israel to persist in its aggressive and expansionist policy, in disregard for the Charter and the rules of international law. The Syrian Arab Republic works for the achievement of a just and comprehensive peace in the Middle East, based on total Israeli withdrawal from all occupied Arab territories and for the exercise by the Palestinian people of its inalienable rights, in the first place, its right to return to its homeland, to self-determination and to the establishment of an independent State on its national soil. We also support the convening of an international conference, under the aegis of the United Nations, to attain that peace. At the same time, Syria believes that if any of the Arab or Palestinian rights is waived or compromised, that will only contribute to making Israel more intransigent and will encourage it to commit further acts of aggression against the Arab countries, whether on the front line or-as ‘in the case of the Israeli strike against the Iraqi nuclear research centre in 1981 and this newest act of aggression against Tunisia-thousands of miles away from its borders. \ 2 11. The repeated Israeli acts of aggression have been supported by both American money and American arms and have usually been given the blessings or encouragement, either implicit or explicit, of the United States. More often than not, they have resulted in rewards and assistance to the aggressor and in 6 clear show of defiance of the international community and obstruction of the role of the Security Council as the unique instrument for the deterrence of aggression and the maintenance of international peace and security. In the light of all that, experience has taught us that there is no other way to deter Israeli aggression and establish a just and genuine peace than to work seriously in the region to achieve unity in the Arab position and to establish a strategic balance in order to meet any Israeli aggression in the future. 12. One of the first duties of the Security Council is to eliminate the effects of aggression and to punish the aggressor. Hence, my delegation repeats that it is necessary to impose sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter. 13. We state once again our total solidarity with the Tunisian people, a brother people that has been the victim of aggression.

You had a reputation that did you honour, Mr. President, before you came to the United Nations, and most of us are aware of your talents as a mediator and a conciliator. Thus, my delegation takes particular pleasure in offering you its congratulations on your assumption of the presidency of the Council. We are certain that we shall benefit from the long diplomatic experience which you have had du&ng your career. IS. Notwithstanding the suggestion made by Sir John Thomson, the President of the Council last month, I really must associate my delegation with the words of praise and thanks that have been addressed to him. September was a busy month for us, but also an historic month, and we were able to attain very satisfactory results because of the great competence, the skill and; may I say, the tenacity demonstrated by Sir John Thomson during our meetings and consultations. : 16. My delegation learned with indignation, but without surprise, of the act of aggression perpetrated by Israel on 1 October against the Republic of Tunisia and the PLO, the guests of the Tunisian Government. With indignation because, despite the appeals and condemnations of all 17. Yet that is what is involved when a country which calls itself a responsible State fails to realize the limits of its power in an orderly society and indulges in aggression and adventurism, scorning the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other States. Such an attitude deserves nothing but strong condemnation, for it constitutes a flagrant violation of the Charter of the United Nations, the rules of intemational law and the principles governing relations between States under the Charter. 22. In conclusion, I wish to express on behalf of my Government our sympathy, solidarity and support for the Tunisian Government and the PLO, represented here by our brother, Farouq Qaddoumi. We are convinced that the Council will not fail its responsibility to the Tunisian people and the Palestinian people by demanding that Israel end its acts of aggression and pay reparations for the loss of human life and the material damage resulting from such acts. 18. We find it difficult to find any sufficient justifi&on for Israel’s armed aggression against Tunisia, planned and carried out in cold blood. It has been argued that since it harboured the headquarters of the PLO, Tunisia bore a responsibility, according to the specious argument advanced, for all hostile acts against Israel and its citizens, even if they were carried out by individuals and responsibility was not claimed by the PLO. Israel could thus arrogate to itself the right to destroy all the PLO offices, wherever they were to be found-in North America, Latin America, the Caribbean, Europe, Asia or Africa. If that were so, Israel would be at war with the whole world. Moreover, as the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Tunisia reminded us, Tunisia’s support for the Palestinian people does not represent a casual decision but is part of the historic traditions that distinguish Tunisia of honouring the obligations it has freely assumed towards the liberation movements in their struggle against colonial or foreign occupation.

I extend the congratulations of the delegation of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic to you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the month of October, at a time when we have a great deal of work to do, and I wish you success in guiding the Council’s work. 24. I wish also to express our gratitude to the representative of the United Kingdom for his able guidance of the Council’s work last. month. 25. The latest aggressive act of Israel against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of yet ariother Arab country, Tunisia, has rightly aroused the indignation of the whole world and resulted in its justified condemnation. The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic believes that the concern of the victim of that aggression is legitimate, as is its appeal to the Security Council to consider the latest criminal act of Israeli aggression. 19. It has also beeq contended that the Israeli aggression is part of the struggle against international terrorism. We believe that once again there has been a mistake over the identity of the terrorist. Let us remember that the United Nations began to deal with the matter 15 years ago, when it was accepted that consideration should also be given to the profound causes that prompted people to commit acts of desperation. We have not come here to defend intemational terrorism, which we condemn. It is on that basis that we say how concerned we are about the fate of the Soviet diplomats taken hostage in Beirut. But we cannot accept the fight against international terrorism being used as only 26. It is clear from the statement of Tunisia’s Minister for Foreign AMairs 12610th meeting3 that as a. result of the attack by Israeli aircraft on the territory of Tunisia, 60 people were killed and approximately 100 were wounded, apart from significant material damage. The attack was a flagrant act of aggression, as defined in the Definition of Aggression ‘adopted by the General Assembly at its twenty-ninth session [resolution 3314 (XXW]. It was a flagrant violation of the rules of international law, as well as of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations as set out in Articles 1 and 2. It is one of the latest manifestations of the policy and practice of State terrorism, which was strongly condemned by the General Assembly at its last session. -Moreover, ‘the Israeli aircraft attacked a target on the territory of a country that is not in a state of war with Israel. to0 easy a justification for acts of aggression. 20. Only one conclusion is possible: Israel wishes to eliminate the PLO physically in order to be able to impose its own peace, ‘at the very moment when there seem to be some signs of hope, however faint, and it is not unreasonable to say that Israel’s recent act of aggression is a preventive action against peace in the Middle East. 28. These aggressive acts were carried out in spite of a Security Council resolution condemning a similar attack made by Israel in June 198 1 against peaceful Iraqi nuclear installations and calling upon Israel “to refrain in the future from any such acts or threats thereof’ [resolution 487 (1981)]. 29. As we have stressed here, on many occasions,‘Israel’s brazenness before the international community, its disregard for its Charter obligations as a Member of the Organization and its systematic non-compliance with Security Council resolutions are possible only because of the unconditional support of the United States and of some other Western Powers. It is only because of the economic, military and financial assistance provided by those countries that Israel is able to pursue its policy of aggression and expansion in the Middle East. That assistance is supplemented by political and diplomatic support, as manifested in the United Nations. It is enough to note that in the Security Council during the 1970s and 198Os, the United States made use of its veto power 17 times in Israel’s interests in order to protect it from the consequences of its expansionist acts against Arab States. Ten of those vetoes were in fact cast under the present Administration. The most recent case was on 13 September this year [2605?h meeting], when a draft resolution sponsored by the nonaligned countries [S/I74291 was blocked; had it been adopted, that draft resolution would have condemned the latest repressive measures by the Israeli authorities against the Arab population of the occupied Palestinian territories. The same stance is evident in statements made by United States Administration officials which attempt to confer legitimacy on the latest piratical act of their junior partner. 30. There can be no doubt that this unconditional assistance and support will impel Israel and its military authorities to new adventurist acts against Arab countries and peoples. The latest act of Israeli aggression, against Tunisia, has once more demonstrated to the peoples of the region what actions they can expect from the United States-Israeli strategic alliance. This latest aggressive act has once again shown the true worth of the hypocritical statements of Israeli leaders to the effect that they are working towards peace in the Middle East. It will inevitably lead to increased tension in the Middle East and to a new cycle of violence. 31. We should draw attention to the fact that this latest act of Israeli aggression took place as the international community and the United Nations were making persist- 32. Peace will not come to the peoples of the Middle East through further Israeli adventurism or through any kind of separate negotiations. The way to achieve a comprehensive, just settlement in the region will be found through the convening of an international conference on the Middle East. 33. The delegation of the Ukrainian SSR sternly condemns Israeli aggression against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Tunisia and supports Tunisia’s just demands for compensation for all damage. We wish to convey our deepest condolences to the people and the Government of Tunisia on the loss of life and the material damage sustained. Once again, we express our solidarity with the Arab peoples, including the Palestinian people which is struggling for an end to Israeli occupation and for the enjoyment of its inalienable national rights. We support the proposal that the Security Council adopt stem measures against Israel, including comprehensive mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter. It is high, ’ time that the aggressor was stopped and peace and security restored to the region. 34. I wish in conclusion to say a few words as Chairman of the Group of Eastern European States for the month of October. We sternly condemn this new act of aggression committed against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Tunisia and against the Palestinian people. This piratic raid is a manifestation of the policy of State terrorism and violates the basic norms of international law and of the Charter. We are in favour of the adoption by the Council of stem measures against Israel in conformity with the Charter.

My delegation wishes to join others in congratulating you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for the month of October. You are a man of great and rich experience and a man who is open to dialogue. We are thus convinced that under your leadership our work will be crowned with success. 36. Our congratulations go also to Sir John Thomson, who skilfully presided over the work of the Council in September. We ask him to convey to Sir Geoffrey Howe, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my delegation’s admiration for the outstanding and tactful way in which he presided over the Council’s special meeting to commemorate the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations. 37. With its cowardly and barbaric act of aggression against Tunisia and its deliberate violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a Member State, Israel

Allow me, Sir, to associate myself with those who have congratulated you on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the month of October, and the delegation of the United Kingdom for the successful conduct of the Council’s meetings last month. 38. That attitude is not suprising. It reflects the same frame of mind as prevails in southern Africa, where the racist regime of Pretoria has just-and at the very same time-called itself again to the attention of the world by adding its attack on Angola to the list of its crimes. The facts speak for themselves. Israel, like the apartheidregime, thrives on hostility. 47. The Security Council is considering the new Israeli aggression, which is part of the terrorism the Zionist entity has pursued since its inception. This act is but an episode in a series of horrific events, and is similar in dimension, meaning and objectives to what we witnessed earlier this century at the hands of the fascist and Nazi regimes. 39. The repeated violations of the Charter which we have witnessed for years have invariably prompted us to wonder why and how Member States which are prepared, unconditionally, to understand and defend those violations can continue to exist within the United Nations and especially within the Security Council. 48. Israel has perpetrated a new act of aggression against an Arab State, Tunisia, a State Member of the United Nations, a State that takes pride in its record of advocating justice, right and freedom for all the peoples of the world. If tolerated by the Organization, Israel’s perpetration of such an act of aggression will have extremely dangerous significance because it compromises not only the security and sovereignty of the State victim of that aggression but also the security and stability of each and every Member State, large or small. 40. Weary from having tried, unsuccessfully, various remedies over the years, does the Council not believe it is high time to administer to those among us who are ill the remedy provided by Chapter VII of the Charter, the only remedy we have not yet tried? For our part, we say the answer is yes, for Israel has obstinately refused to abide by Article 2, paragraph 4 of the Charter, which calls for all States to refrain from the use of force in their relations. In so doing, it has strayed from the purposes of the Organization and prefers the use of blind brute force. 49. The complaint brought before the Council by Tunisia clearly demonstrates the premeditated nature of the Israeli act of aggression, which was carefully planned against civilian targets in full awareness that it would inflict a heavy toll upon innocent Tunisians and Palestinians who have been displaced more than once from their homeland, Palestine, and uprooted, also more than once, from other countries of refuge, particularly from the Palestinian camps in Lebanon. 41. Today, peace and security are threatened in the Mediterranean area as a result of the air attack by the Israeli armed forces. 42. Let us not injure the Charter and the international community by encouraging in any way this kind of action by a Member State. Those who have paid with their lives as a result of this senseless act of aggression perpetrated by Israel deserve our respect. Let us not wait for Israel to run out of arguments: obviously it will always have arguments. 50. The Council must consider this premeditated killing and this premeditated destruction bearing in mind the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and the principles and rules of international law. The Council must also seriously consider the Israeli aggression and the risks entailed in that aggression for the peace and security in the Middle East region. The continued aggression and the continued laxity towards it could endanger our international organization and render it susceptible to meeting the same fate as the League of Nations. 43. Today, the least that can be expected of the Security Council is that it condemn Israel unanimously and vigourously for its premeditated armed aggression against Tunisia and demand that Israel offer appropriate reparations for the loss of human life and material damage resulting from the aggression. 51. The Council definitely recognizes Israel’s record in the Organization, and in the Council in particular, where the right of veto has been placed at the service of Israel. 44. The Council has an overriding obligation to come to the assistance of the Palestinian people, which Israel has pitilessly hounded in an effort to prevent it from liberating its occupied homeland. The Council must also find ways and means to deter Israel from perpetrating reprehensible acts of the kind it perpetrated yesterday against Tunisia. 52. The statement of the Israeli representative before the Council yesterday showed that the Israelis are unmoved by bloodshed and the death of innocent victims. It also showed Israel’s contempt for the will of the Council and its role of upholding peace. The statement of the Zionist representative contained new evidence of Israel’s defiance of the will of the international community. It also proved

The next speaker is Mr. Adnan Omran, Under-Secretary-General for Political and International Affairs of the League of Arab States, to whom the Council extended an invitation under rule 39 of its provi- 53. The Israeli interpretation of terrorism as presented by the Israeli representative is based on Israel’s belief and conviction that its occupation and annexation of the Arab territories is legal, which runs counter to the Organization’s decisions in this regard. Israel is convinced that the bombing of homes and residences, villages and cities, is a legitimate act, be it in the West Bank and Ghaza or in Lebanon, Tunisia or any other place for that matter. 54. As we know, Israel has enacted its own version of international law: the Israeli logic is that he is right who is capable of committing acts of aggression and occupation. However, we must remember the fate of those powers that’ in this century have followed a similar logic. True, they won one victory after another at the beginning, but eventually they crumbled and fell victims of the aggression they themselves had waged, in a war they had inflicted on the peoples of the world. 55. The terrorism adopted by Israel as a policy, system and ideology has stained with blood the entire history of Zionism and has gravely blemished the values and principles of the Jewish faith. 56. It furthermore points the finger of condemnation at those who have been the rulers of Israel since the carnage at Deir Yassin and the King David Hotel, and we know that one of the protagonists of the latter was the current Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Zionist entity. It condemns them all the way to the carnages of Sabra and Shatila and all other ,acts of terrorism and annihilation committed by Israel in Lebanon yesterday, in Tunisia today, and who knows where tomorrow. 57. In the light of this Israeli record, which is replete with acts of aggression, and of -the Israeli logic used to justify that aggression, such as that presented by the Zionist representative yesterday in the Council, when he pledged to continue Israeli aggression against innocent people and to persist in acts of destruction and terrorism-in the light of all that, do we not have the right to wonder about the reasons behind such Israeli determination to defy the will of the international community? Israel persists in its crimes because, unfortunately, it receives all the support it needs in committing those crimes from a super-Power in the Council, which does so without questioning the nature of those crimes, their cost and the number of their victims. 58. Within that framework, we,can basically look at, first, the American-Israeli Strategic Co-operation Agreement; secondly, the American-Israeli Trade Free Zone Agreement; thirdly, the ,American military support which gave Israel an arsenal that contains the most recent American means of destruction; fourthly, the billions of dollars from which the poor in American society and those in need of social services are deprived and from which many poor countries in need of assistance in Africa, Asia and Latin America are deprived. The money is used instead to finance 59. The attitude of the United States, as shown in the statements that have been made in Washington, indicates how wide the gap is between what the Arab States are trying to pursue, the efforts they are attempting to make to establish relations of friendship and co-operation with the United States and the American attitude, which has reached its highest level of hostility to the whole Arab nation. 60. This American attitude in support of Israeli terrorism, unfortunately, constitutes a great distortion of the tradition of the American people and of their praiseworthy struggle for liberty, independence and the principles of human rights. This attitude makes the Statue of Liberty, which stands a few miles away, a symbol of the abyss which separates the struggles of the heroes of freedom in the history of the American battle for independence and the reality of American policy. This attitude makes that’ lady a dead statue belonging to the past. 61. The Security Council is called upon today fully to shoulder its responsibilities. We hope once again that the United States delegation, before adopting its final position, will take into consideration the blood and tears shed as a result of the Israeli treachery and will remember the mothers who lost their children and the children who lost their fathers. We. hope that the United States delegation will ’ remember that history has no mercy and that the condemnation from which Israel may be spared today-and we hope it will not-would be an historic condemnation of a State that allows the criminal to escape with impunity. We hope that the United States will reconsider its position with. respect to that aggressive entity and will remember that by continuing ‘to support, arm and defend its aggression, it sets itself against the Arab nation as a whole. 62. I should like to express the hope, on behalf of the League of Arab States, that the Council will live up to its responsibilities and adopt a decision that responds to the hopes the people of the world have placed in the Organization and in the Security Council, particularly in this year of the fortieth anniversary of the establishment of the United Nations. 63. The decision adopted by the Council must condemn Israel for -committing aggression and must impose sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter, as well as determining the necessary reparations and other measures to deter Israeli aggression. The failure of the Council to take the necessary measures would be disappointing and would necessarily mean the further disintegration of the edifice of the Organization at a time when society is in dire need of it, in this era of nuclear terror, and of the values and principles that -the Organisation represents.

The next speaker is the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of Yemen, Mr. Abdulkarim Al-Eryany, who wishes to make a state-

Sir, I should like at the outset to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for this month. I should also like to express, through you, our appreciation to your predecessor. We are confident that your experience and wisdom, which are known to all, will enable you to conduct the business of this Council sucessfully. 72. Today the Council is being called upon to consider again the conduct of Israel and to take a responsible decision with regard to it which will show that the intemational community as represented in the Council is prepared to shoulder its responsibilities in the face of Israel’s irresponsible actions. While appealing to the Council to take such a decision, we reaffirm the solidarity of all Islamic countries with our brothers in Tunisia. We support Tunisia in its call for the condemnation of Israel and for full compensation for the materialdamage inflicted upon it by Israeli aggression. We call upon all members of the Council to support the just draft resolution submitted by Tunisia, convinced as we are that it represents the minimum the Council can do with regard to this brutal crime that has claimed the lives of so many innocent people, Tunisians as well as Palestinians. 66. I should like to express our thanks to you and to the members of the Council for giving me the opportunity to take part in the discussion on the agenda item before the Council, since the Yemen Arab Republic is now presiding over the Organization of the Islamic Conference. 67. The Security Council is meeting today to review once again a treacherous aggression which demonstrates Zionist terrorism in its worst form. That aggression committed by Israel the day before yesterday against the’ Republic of Tunisia, a State Member. of the Organization, is another example of the aggressive policies that it adopts against Arab countries at a time when they are affirming their sincere desire to seek peace based upon justice. That barbaric raid launched by Israeli aircraft over civilian areas in the Tunisian capital is a flagrant violation ‘of the sovereignty of a Member State, a violation of its territorial integrity and airspace. That act constitutes a blatant aggression and a violation of the Charter of the United Nations as well as of the norms of international law which guarantee the peace and security of States. 73. On behalf of all Islamic countries, I extend condolences to Tunisia and to the PLO.

The next speaker is the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Mr. Ali A. Treiki. I welcome him and I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Allow me to associate myself with preceding speakers, Sir, in congratulating you on presiding over the Council’s deliberations this month. We wish the Council all success. I should also like to thank Sir John Thomson, representative of the United Kingdom, for the constructive way in which he conducted the deliberations of the Council last month. 68. Along with all peace-loving countries, we have repeatedly warned that Israel and its aggressive practices in defiance of international law represent a threat to the security and peace of the Middle East and of the entire world. Israel’s recent act of aggression and provocation against the capital of Tunisia gives ample proof of the pertinence of the warnings we have voiced in the Council and other international forums. 76. I shall not dwell upon the illegal aspects of the act of aggression against the sister country of Tunisia or upon the fact that it contravened the Charter of the United Nations. Because of the Zionist entity, we have been forced to come to regard such action as habitual. This latest deed is but one link in the chain of acts of aggression perpetrated against Arab and non-Arab States. 69. It is a matter for profound regret that Israel’s aggressive conduct should be supported and unfoundedly justified by the United States Administration, whose international responsibilities should impel it rather to support peace and justice and deter aggression anywhere in the world. 77. The, nature of Zionism is continuous expansion and aggression. Ever since the United Nations committed the grave error of establishing that entity, it has persisted in engaging in continual wars and acts of aggression against the Arab nation in violation of,the Charter and resolutions of the United Nations. The Zionist entity annexed the Holy City of Jerusalem in violation of all relevant intemational decisions, and what was our answer? What steps have we taken? It annexed the Syrian Golan Heights, and what steps did we take then? What did the Council do? 70. By its latest act of aggression against Tunisia and its~ violation of the sovereignty of a State Member of the United Nations and of international law, Israel has shown that it is not satisfied with having usurped the territories of Palestine, displaced the Palestinian people and dispersed them throughout the world, that it is not satisfied with perpetrating acts of aggression against its Arab neighbours or invading and destroying Lebanon; but that it will persist in pursuing its illusory goal and its desire to shed blood and destroy the Palestinian people wherever they may be. 78. The Zionist entity still occupies part of southern Lebanon, and a short while ago it occupied the greater part of Lebanese territory, killing. or displacing thousands of 71. Israel’s treacherous act of aggression against the sister country of Tunisia and the PLO, the sole and legitimate 79. We in the Arab nation have given warnings about the nature of the racist Zionist entity and against the danger that entity represents. Now we see new evidence of its nature in its direct aggression against a State Member of the United Nations far remote from Palestine. $0. Why has this happened? It is said that it was because Tunisia offered refuge to the Palestinians. What is the Zionist entity’s aim with regard to that people? It is to annihilate them, to liquidate them physically. We are told that Hitler tried to annihilate the Jews. We were against that because, in the fmal analysis, the Jews are our cousins; we are of the same race. But what the Zionist entity is doing is even more terrible than the carnage for which Hitler was responsible. Hitler killed the Jews in Germany, but the Zionist entity kills the Palestinians not only in Palestine but also in every part of the world, in an attempt to annihilate them directly. 81. What is left to the Council? What is left of its prestige and importance if it does not take the necessary measures to expel that entity and to compel it to comply with United Nations resolutions? The United Nations is no longer honoured by the presence of the Zionist entity because it is a blemish to the Organization to include such a Member. 82. What is the role of the Council and what respect is it shown? What are we, the small peoples, going to say to the Council? Our independence is jeopardized and our peace and security are jeopardized. Yesterday it was Iraq, today it is Tunisia; tomorrow, who knows whose turn it will be? At one point, it was the turn of Uganda. 83. We had neglected, and the world had ignored for a period .of time, what Hitler did. When the-invasion of Czechoslovakia began and continued, and the aggression continued, what was the result? Tens of millions of victims. And if the world does’not unite today in the face of Zionism, which was termed a racist movement by the United Nations, the world will pay the price, which will indeed be costly. If we, the Arabs, have paid a high price, others will do so as well. 84. The representative of the Zionist entity spoke yesterday of peace. Which peace is that-the annexation of Jerusalem, the annexation of the Golan Heights, the carnage of Sabra and Shatila, aggression against Tunisia, the annexation of the Arab territories? Is that peace? Is there one among us, including the United States, who can justify support for the Zionist entity? Is there a single, peaceloving State or one that claims its love for peace and freedom, regardless of its point of view, that can say yes to that entity? 86. The representative of the Zionist entity sDoke of terrorism. We all condemn terrorism. We -condemn the hijacking of air-planes, including the hijacking of American airplanes. We condemn the assassination of diplomats, whether they be Americans, Russians or others. However, 1 shall we allow such international terrorism to take place? Shall we allow a State to act according to the law of the jungle? Do we allow it to send its airplanes to displace and kill innocent Tunisians? There are Palestinians here in the United States. Do we expect the Zionist entity to strike at the United States and American targets because there are Palestinians in this country? 87. This is really dangerous. We see ourselves confronting stark aggression. But at the same time as we see the whole world condemn and denounce this act of aggression, we unfortunately find the United States defending and justifying it and commending Israeli intelligence for having chosen those who were going to be hit. Such an attitude cannot but encourage the Israeli entity to commit acts of aggression. American arms are responsible for killing children in Egypt at the school of Bahr Al-Bakhar. American armaments have killed thousands of innocents, martyrs, women and children, including Syrians and Lebanese. Has the time not yet come for the United States to reconsider its attitude and to shoulder its responsibility as a super-Power and permanent member of the Security Council? Or will we continue to witness indefinite support of this entity by American airplanes and American financing? 88. We in the Arab world have lost patience. We used to look with admiration to the American people when it united and supported liberation movements and the Algerian revolution. However, what are we to tell our people today? What are we to tell our children about the American attitude, which supports the Zionist entity? 89. A few days ago, in an attempt by the United States administration to divide Tunisia and Libya, we heard a statement by the official spokesman of the American State Department claiming that there had been Libyan aircraft violating the air space of Tunisia. He then said: “President Bourguiba in June paid a visit to the United States. President Reagan noted that the United States is firmly committed to the security of Tunisian territory, its integrity and the principle of noninterference in its internal affairs. Tunisia can rely on the continued support and the friendship of the United States.*‘* 90. Where is this friendship of the United States for Tunisia? When Zionist aircraft bomb Tunisia, we cannot say *Quoted in English by the speaker. 98. I appeal to the Council to take all the measures provided for in the Charter and to confirm its support for-and solidarity with the Tunisian people and the sister country of Tunisia as well as with the Palestinian people. 91. Tunisia has not been a victim of aggression on the part of Libya, because Libya is a fraternal country and a neighbour to Tunisia and will remain so. The security of Tunisia is part of our own security. It has been proved beyond any doubt that the aggressor against Tunisia could not be and is not Libya, but rather the aggressor against the Arab nation. It is the enemy of the Arab nation, including the people of Tunisia, Palestine, Algeria, Syria and Morocco.

At this point I take off my presidential hat and put on the hat of representative of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 100. I wish simply to say that later, at the end of the debate, I shall reply to the intemperate words and veiled threats contained in the Libyan representative’s speech, about the United States “paying the price”.

I wish at the outset to congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for the month of October and to express my confidence that under your able stewardship the deliberations of the Council will prove most productive. 92. At a time when we condemn and denounce this act of aggression, we should like to say that we fully support the fraternal country of Tunisia and the Tunisian people. We are at the service of Tunisia, because what happened in Tunisia will happen to us one day and will happen to every Arab State tomorrow. 102. I take this opportunity also to pay a tribute to Sir John Thomson, representative of the United Kingdom, for the skilful manner in which he conducted the Council’s proceedings over the past month. 93. At the same time, we hold the Council, including the United States, responsible before history. We thus ask that the United States reconsider its attitude and realize that peace will not be achieved either with aircraft or with Israeli terrorism. Peace is basically achieved through respect for human rights and international instruments, as well as through withdrawal from the occupied‘ Arab territories, That is genuine peace. 103. I am sure I speak for all members present’ when I express our congratulations and our thanks to Sir Geoffrey Howe, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom, on the professional manner in which he conducted our commemorative meeting on 26 September. We were particularly impressed by the great facility with which he synthesized all the strands of our respective contributions into a comprehensive summary. 94. We will ail pay the price, including the United States, if we fail to achieve this. If we do not implement Chapter VII of the Charter, we shall find ourselves faced with another act of aggression and with discussions of one act of aggression after another. It might then be too late. 104. It was with great distress and indignation that my delegation learned of the deplorable air attack conducted by Israel on 1 October in the locality of Hammam-Plage, south of Tunis, which resulted in extensive casualties, among which at least 50 were killed. Our condolences go to the bereaved families and to the Government and people of Tunisia. 95. The Arab nation, even if it is now incapable of defending itself against this act of aggression because the perpetrator is supported by the strongest Power on earth, will one day be capable of defending itself. History has taught us that the peoples will eventually prevail. Where are Hitler and Mussolini? Mussolini killed more than half the Libyan people during his period in power. But fascism is dead; nazism is dead; and zionism and the Zionist regime will also die. 105. Only a few days ago, at the meeting of the Council convened to commemorate the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations, we all~reaffhmed our obligations under the Charter of the United Nations and our continued commitment to its principles and purposes. It is therefore a sad reflection on the Council’s credibility, and indeed, on the present conduct of international relations, that a State Member of the United Nations should so flagrantly violate the very principles on which the Organ&&ion is founded. There can be absolutely no justification for Israel’s violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Tunisia. 96. We will not be patient; our patience has run out. We ask the members of the Council not to make us lose confidence in the United Nations and the Security Council. We do not want to lose hope in the Council, although we see that it is paralysed by the veto right. We call upon the Council to cancel this veto right. It should not be given to one group of States. We have seen this veto right being used by that group of States against the will and the rights of peoples. We shall see it used once again now to protect and support aggression. 106. We are all committed to peace and to upholding the purposes and principles of the Charter. Members of the Council therefore cannot, in all conscience, condone such an act of hostility and the consequent loss of innocent 107. My delegation wishes to reiterate that only through the resolution of the Palestinian problem, which lies at the heart of the Middle Fast conflict, will there be durable peace in the area. This peace can never be achieved unless the Palestinian people are able to exercise their inalienable right to self-determination and establish an independent Palestinian State, in conformity with all the relevant resolutions of the United Nations. We recognize the right of all States in the region, including Israel; to exist and to live in peace within secure borders that are internationally recognized, in accordance with Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) 108. Less than three weeks ago. attemnts bv the Council to address the deteriorating s&ration in-the &-ritories illegally occupied by Israel were frustrated. Unless we deal with this fundamental problem of Palestine, there will be little hope of finding a solution which will open the gateway of peace to this area. The reprehensible raid by Israel against Tunisian territory emphasizes the need for the Council not only to take prompt action on this immediate problem, but to deal expeditiously with the wider Middle Fast question.

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

Mr. President, I thank you and through you the members of the Council, for giving me the opportunity to address this meeting. 1 Il. At the very outset, allow me to congratulate YOU on your assumption of the &ice of President of the Council for the month of October. This is a period which, apart from coinciding with the celebrations of the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations, will unfortunately be a diffrcult one. The Council is seized of a number of recent cases of violations of the Charter of the United Nations. I am sure that with your well-known wide, and long experience in international affairs, you will be able to guide the Council’s deliberations successfully. 112. I also congratulate the President of the Council for the month of September, Sir John Thomson, representative of the United Kingdom, on the able way in which he carried out his duties. 113. On instructions of my Government, I should like to refer to the recent attack by the Israeli air force against 115. The Greek Government has on many occasions unequivocally condemned all acts of terrorism. The Minister for Foreign Affairs of Greece recently strongly reiterated that position in addressing the General Assembly.* It was within this context that we also condemned the brutal slaying of Israeli nationals in the Republic of Cyprus, itself a victim of continuous aggression. We are convinced, however, that acts of terrorism cannot in any way serve as an excuse for a Government to launch an armed attack on a third country. 116. The Middle Fast problem is almost as old as our organization. At a time when efforts are being made to promote a peaceful solution to this perennial conflict, actions such as those taken by Israel cannot but hamper the process towards peace. My Government urges the. Government of Israel to abandon the policy of mass retaliation, which violates the very principles of the Charter and of international law in general. 117. In concluding, I extend to the Government and people of Tunisia, to the Palestinian people and to the families of the victims the profound sympathy of my Government.

The next speaker is the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Co-operation of Morocco, Mr. Abdellatif Filali, whom I welcome. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

I wish first, Sir, to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the month of October. We are convinced that, thanks to your human qualities and your great ~experience in international affairs, our debates will be crowned with success. 120. I should also like to pay a particular tribute to Sir John Thomson for the adroit and competent manner in which he led the Council’s debates during September. 121. Finally, I am grateful to you, Mr. President, and to all the members of the Council for allowing me to take part in this debate, which I hope will have a positive outcome. 122. For the past 40 years, the question of Palestine has constantly and persistently demanded the attention of the Organization because of the policy of aggression and systematic expansion followed by Israel in the Yiddle East. 124. The Council is meeting today in tragic circumstances to consider yet another criminal act of aggression by Israel against an Arab State Member of the United Nations. This time it is a raid carried out by the Israeli air force more than 2,400 kilometres from its bases against the headquarters of the PLO, which caused dozens of innocent victims among Palestinian and Tunisian civilians. 13 1. Official terrorism cannot go unpunished, unless we want to go back to the rule of the law of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and to the endless escalation of violence and destruction. The Council must, in the overriding interest of international security and stability, strongly condemn Israel and demand that it provide suitable and complete compensation to the victims of its act of aggression. 125. When such a close member of our Maghreb family is harmed, we share in the grief and sorrow, and the entire Moroccan people joins its Tunisian brothers both in mourning and in indignation and revulsion. 126. The Kingdom of Morocco, which pays homage to the innocent victims, strongly condemns Israel’s violation of the sovereignty of the brother people of Tunisia, to which we offer our solidarity and unreserved support in the present time of trial. The terrorist aggression is a denial of the most basic principles of international law set forth in the Charter and in all the major declarations interpreting it, such as those to be found in General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV) of 24 October 1970, the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, and resolution 3314 (?0UX) of 14 December 1974 on the Definition of Aggression. 132. Since the Fez, Summit of 1982, when a -peace plan was adopted unanimously [see S/15510 of 6 December 1982, annex], the Arab leaders have been working ceaselessly to achieve a just and lasting peace in the Middle East with respect for the principles of the United Nations. It must be said that so far they have come up against the policy of force of Israel; which has just attacked a country which is the host of the League of Arab States and has always been among the first loudly to proclaim its desire for a peaceful settlement under appropriate international auspices. However, we remain convinced that, thanks in particular to the firmness that the Security Council will not fail to show on this occasion, justice will prevail, in the interest of all the peoples concerned. 127. Wanton reprisals against innocent civilians, including women and children, have always been condemned by the international community since the Second World War, and if self-defence consisted ‘in bombing all those tenitories where Palestinians live, no country would be safe from Israel’s destructive folly.

The next speaker is the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Jordan, Mr. Taher Masri, whom I welcome. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. 128. It was a deliberate action when the Government of Israel chose to strike, on 1 October, against a moderate Arab country and against the PLO headquarters, at the moment when the Organization, in co-operation with all responsible, peace-loving States, is making every effort to achieve a just and lasting solution to the question of the Middle East. The act of aggression against Tunisia was really nothing less than an attempt to sabotage the process of restoring peace to the Middle East, and once again gives the clearest possible proof of Israel’s persistence in its policy of confrontation and denial of all the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people.

I wish first of all, Sir,.to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for the month of October. I am certain that, thanks to your vast knowledge of international affairs and your well-known qualities as an enlightened diplomat, the Council will carry out its duties successfully. I wish also to thank your predecessor, Sir John Thomson, the representative of the United Kingdom, for the exemplary manner in which he guided the work of the Council last month. 135. Moreover, I thank the members of the Council for their prompt response to Tunisia’s request that the Council be convened urgently to consider Israel’s attack on the southern portion of the Tunisian capital. I have every hope that the joint response of the Council will meet the challenge before it. 129. The Security Council, which recently reaffirmed, at its meeting on 26 September at ministerial level, its commitment to fulfil its prime responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, is now duty-bound fully to use its powers under the Charter and 137. We need not recall the disastrous consequences and complications of this unjustifiable Israeli attack; Israel illegally violated Tunisia’s territory and sovereignty, jeopardizing its stability and national security. The toll among the civilian population was more than 150 dead and wounded. 138. Members of the Council know that in 1982 Tunisia welcomed Palestinians from Beirut under international agreements which have been respected by a number of States, including certain members of the Council. It did this in order to facilitate the withdrawal of Palestinians from Beirut. Furthermore, history has forged the closest of links between Tunisia and the rest of the Arab nation. Tunisia is a State known for its moderation, balanced policies and open attitude. It has never been a staging area for terrorism; on the contrary, it houses the headquarters of the League of Arab States, which in 1982 adopted the Arab peace plan [ibid.]. That is why Tunisia’s willingness to welcome Palestinians after Israel invaded Lebanon is praiseworthy, for it contributed to lessening the tension in our region, thereby preventing a further outbreak of violence. This is an important fact which should be overlooked by no one, certainly not by the members of the Council. 139. Everyone knows that the persistence of the Palestinian problem and Israel’s continued occupation of Arab territories are the real causes of the tension and instability in the Middle East and of the resulting extremism. The cause of the violence is obvious: it lies in the absence of a just political solution. That is why it is of paramount importance to get the peace process moving again and to work seriously and sincerely for peace, rather than supporting or encouraging Israeli aggression. For in fact, Israel is trying by its military retaliatory actions to hobble the peace process and gain control of a situation marked by violence and extremism, a situation in which Israel holds the trump cards. Israel is trying to delay as long as possible a lasting solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict. That is why we are greatly concerned at actions to mask the true nature of Israel’s raid against Tunisia on 1 October and to attempt to justify it. 140. We take comfort from the growing wave of intemational indignation at this blatant act of Israeli aggression, but what we are hearing from the capital of one country in justification of this attack is very dangerous for the Middle 141. This act of aggression was perpetrated just as sustained efforts were being made to get the peace process moving again. That is why we believe that the attack was directed against the peace efforts now being made. 142. The attack by Israel is an unlawful military act with disastrous political consequences. We would draw attention to the political gravity of this senseless and serious illegal act, an Israeli attack carried out against the offices of the PLO, near the capital of Tunisia. It is yet another example of the policy of pre-emptive surprise attacks, and goes in tandem with the “iron list” policy being pursued by Israel in southern Lebanon, on the West Bank and in the Gaza Strip. It is the very essence of Israel’s crude approach to its security, an approach based on senselessly using military force against the Arab countries. The bombing of Baghdad, Beirut and Tunis is a vivid illustration of that policy. 143. The Arab region has suffered much and has paid dearly for Israel’s policies, which are marked by military reprisals and by the occupation of the territory of others, and arise from Israel’s conviction of its own military superiority. 144. Israel tries to blame others for its continued occupation of Arab territories, for the arbitrary actions of its, occupation forces and for the internal resistance of the inhabitants under occupation. As a result of these policies, there have been 18 years of persistent occupation, no peaceful and just settlement, ever increasing destruction and the dispersal and exile of inhabitants. 145. The primary danger of Israel’s attack upon Tunisia arises from its being an attempt by Israel to keep the region locked in this spiral of violence, tension and instability. This policy will serve only the interests of the extremists and the enemies of peace. 146. In conclusion, it is true that we are still caught up in violence and extremism in the Middle East, but now we must cut the Gordian knot and draw a distinction between cause and effect. In our opinion, the Council is the right body to deal seriously, objectively and impartially with this thorny problem. The Council will, I am sure, strongly condemn Israel’s raid, denounce it and hold Israel responsible for the losses Tunisia has suffered as a result, commit it to reparations and adopt a resolution forcing Israel to change and put an end to its senseless, irresponsible acts. L hardIy need to say that if the Council adopted such an attitude, its prestige and credibility would be restored, as would our confidence in it and in international public order. 153. We, the small countries, felt a chill go through our spines, for, shockingly, we heard that today the mighty and the strong have a right to hit left and right with impunity. Israel, a State that professes to yearn for peace, is being encouraged to be a bully in the Middle East. Is that the sort of peace Israel is asking for?

Allow me at the very outset, Sir, to express my delegation’s sincere congratulations to you on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the month of October. Your qualifications, expertise and diplomatic skills preceded your arrival here as the new Permanent Representative of your country to the United Nations. We are therefore more than confident that you will guide the deliberations of the Council to a fruitful conclusion. As a representative of a permanent member, a great Power and a leader of the Western countries, your responsibilities towards your people and the world community are onerous. The eyes of the world are on you, and we are confident that you will live up to expectations. 154. Unfortunately we see a pattern: on the southern tip of Africa we see a State which has also elevated terrorism to State policy. Like Tunisia, Angola has been subjected to successive acts of aggression and State terrorism-from South Africa. We speak out and condemn this lawlessness because it was not so long ago that my own country was wantonly attacked by a bully in our region, a bully that has turned itself into a regional policeman. 149. Permit me to express our appreciation to your predecessor, the representative of the United Kingdom, for the efficient manner in which he and the British Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs conducted the work of the Council during September. 155. The United Nations, and particularly the Security Council, is the only body that can and must protect peaceful and powerless countries like Tunisia from the use of force by bullies like Israel. We call upon all small countries to speak out against this brutal misuse of force. It must be borne in mind by .a11 that these peace-loving and powerless countries will always be victims of these types of acts of aggression. 150. The events of 1 October 1985, in which Israel committed an act of aggression against Tunisia, a State Member of the Organization and a member of the Organization of African Unity, compel me to express Lesotho’s shock and dismay at that callous act. I need not rehash the facts of that act, which has claimed the innocent lives of over 50 persons, including Palestinian refugees-and the Palestinian people has been denied a homeland and statehood for over 40 years. 156. We therefore strongly condemn this attack and call upon Israel to rethink its policies and to embark on a path of peace. 157. We shall conclude by expressing our condolences and sympathy to the Tunisian Government and the Palestine Liberation Organization and the families that have lost their loved ones. Israel must be called upon to desist from these acts and be enjoined to resort to peaceful means to solve disputes and to give fair and full compensation to the Tunisian Government: 151. We are all gathered here to celebrate the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations in the name of peace. It was only last week that the Council held a special meeting at the ministerial level, at which members rededicated themselves to the objectives and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the basic thrust of which is nothing but peace. They rededicated themselves to the settlement of disputes by peaceful means and to renunciation of the use of force as a means of resolving disputes. We have heard statements, even during the general -debate in the General Assembly, condemning terrorism in all its forms and manifestations.

There are still a number of speakers on my list. In view of the lateness of the hour, I intend to adjourn this meeting now. But before we adjourn, I shall call on the representative of Israel, who wishes to make a statement in exercise of the right of reply.

With few exceptions, the countries that are represented in this chamber comprise essentially two categories in connection with the issue now under discussion. They are either the victims of terrorism or its backers and promoters. Yesterday I addressed some of my remarks to the States in the first category, the victims. Today I should like to say a few things to the sponsors and supporters. We have listened to some of them just now around this ‘very table. 152. My delegation fully associates itself with these condemnations. Yet it is under these circumstances, at this very hour of the solemnization of peace, that the State of Israel has negated all we are here for. By violating the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Tunisia, a small, peace-loving country like Lesotho, Israel has not only violated international law but has proved beyond doubt that it practises State terrorism against its neighbours and is far from creating a climate conducive to peace. A sad day in the annals of the Organization has again been registered, for indeed Israel has demonstrated that international law has been replaced by the law of the jungle, where might is the rule. History has been rewritten and the clock has been 160. We have heard, for example, from Syria, the butcher of Lebanon, a country which systematically practises terrorism, including such Syrian specialties as car bombs and assassinations, from Tripoli to Sidon. Syria has 161. We heard yesterday from the Soviet Union, whose press in the last few days has been unleashed to pour out a torrent of abuse against Israel, accusing us-as the Soviet representative did yesterday-of State-sponsored terrorism. The Soviets know whereof they speak when they discuss this subject. They have unstintingly and generously supported terrorist groups around the world. They have gone so far as to train terrorists in special camps in the Soviet Union itself. The Soviet attitude towards indiscriminate violence ‘is well-evidenced in the bombings-not, mind you, surgical strikes against military targets, but carpet bombings-of entire villages in the Panjsher Valley in Afghanistan. 162. But when talking about the Soviet Union today, I must note that at this very moment, and perhaps only for a brief moment, the Soviet Union happens to belong to both categories of countries. It is ‘now, both backer and victim. Having nurtured the serpent of terror for so long, the Soviet Union has discovered that it is not fully domesticated, as can be seen by the recent kidnappings and murder of Soviet diplomats in Lebanon by groups which the Soviet Union has uncritically supported in many forums, including this one. 163. And what about Cuba? Its export of sugar and cigars has long ago been exceeded by Cuba’s principal export, namely, terror and subversion throughout Latin America. Cuba’s terror business is so successful, in fact, that it is flourishing now not in just one but in both hemispheres. 164. And what shall we say about Libya, preposterous Libya which sends terror squads to kill the leaders of so many of the countries represented here-Libya, which shoots unarmed civilians from its own embassy in London, which hatches the maddest terrorist plots imaginable? Or perhaps there is not much to say as to Libya but to caution some here who have been offered “brotherly assistance” from Libya. If it patterns the brotherly assistance given to Chad, to the Sudan and to Egypt, brother beware. 165. We are used to the techniques resorted to by those countries of accusing others of their own practices. But let me say that for Israel, which remains unshakably committed to the tight against terrorism, the condemnation of such regimes is a badge ‘of honour. 166. Let me now go back to the other countries, those that are on the receiving end of terrorism. We had expected, perhaps from an incurable faith in human logic and decency, that the victims of terrorism would be the first to applaud the defensive action taken by Israel against the nerve centre of world terrorism and indiscriminate murder. Instead, we listened with amazement to the incredible criticism, and even denunciation, of Israel’s action by those who should know better, and worse, by those who do know better. We had hoped that the pres- 167. Since when did the rights of sovereignty include the right to shelter professional murderers, whose web of terror covers the entire world? Consider the pirates of the 19th century who ravaged the Mediterranean from Cyprus to Gibraltar and took refuge on the very coast of North Africa that we are dealing with here today. Did they enjoy immunity? Or are we going back to the distant times when there, was no vestige of international order? 168. Terrorism, ,like piracy, can enjoy no political immunity, no, military protection, no legal privileges; the only connection it has to sovereignty is the obligation of the sovereign to exclude it from its domain. To assert that the victims of terrorism should be handcuffed so that they may be prevented from defending themselves, so that the terrorists roam free and unpunished, is to invite the rule of lawlessness and savagery. The civilized world will commit a terrible error if it plays politics with this issue. For what is at stake here are the very foundations of society and the future of freedom in the world.

The representative of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya has asked to speak in exercise of the right of reply. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

It seems that if a human being wants a certificate of good conduct, he must perpetrate some massacres. We all know about those massacres, and we do not have to recall them here because they would make one feel disgusted. We all know what happened at Deir Yassin, at Kibya, at Sabra and Shatila and at Bahr Al-Bakhar. While we are sitting here and listening to this debate, bodies are being dug out from the rubble in Tunisia, the bodies of women and children. I do not want to talk about this subject. 171. All those who spoke yesterday and today have con; demned that barbaric aggressive,act. Nobody has deviated from that position. l72. I do want to explain one thing. I was sitting behind my Minister when he was speaking this afternoon and there was a mistake in the interpretation. What my Minister said was that the international community must take action to confront this type of aggression; otherwise it would be faced with the situation that faced the international community at the time of Hitler and Mussolini. The price for that would be paid. by all peoples, including the American people, the Libyan people and all peace-loving peopie. 176. From States like Libya or Cuba we accept no lessons on international conduct, nor do we permit them to determine our foreign policy. 175. My country has suffered grievously at the hands bf terrorists. Many American ambassadors ‘have been killed. Many Americans have been hijacked and terrorized. Very ’ olfficial Records of the General Assembly, Fortieth Session, Plenary Meetings, 7th meeting. i%e meeting rose at 6.20 p.m. NOTE I 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. CO%lMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publications des Nations Unies sont en vente dans les librairies et les agences dCpositaires du monde entier. Informez-vous auplps de votre libraire ou adressez-vous A : Nations Unies. Section des vent&. New York ou Geneve. KAK l-IOJIYYHTb W3AAHMR OPrAHM3A~Hl-l OB’bEJ44HEHHblX HAuHfl ki3LliSlWl OpWM3iUViM O6aenHHeHHbrx HamB MOXHO KYllHTb B KHHXCHblX MariUHHaK H areHTcmax 80 ncex pasoHax MHpa. HaBonwTe cnpamo4 06 H3nam4nx B Baueki KHHXHOM Mara3mie HnH ntim5fTe no anpecy: OpramisauHa 06belHHeHHblX HauHB, Cexuwr no nponaxce H3XaHHfl. HbKdOpK HnH XtHCBa. COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas es& en venta en librerfas y casas distribuidoras en todas panes det mundo. Consulte a su librero o ditijase a: Naciones Unidas. Seccidn de Ventas. Nueva York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations, New York 00400 90-61439-January 1995-1925