S/PV.2679 Security Council

I thank the eepreeentative of Bmgledeeb for the kind ontde addreemcl to my country and to met. Sit John TK- (United Ring&m): All the world knowa that France knows how to live well. All tbe wrld knows tbat the Prencb are wise and eubtle in po1itius. All tbe world admit06 tbe aulture and language of tbe French. You, nr. President, are a true embodiment of the talent8 of your country. You have brwbt fresh air to the proceedinga of the security C~un&l for the year and Iy)re tbat you have been here, and we are all Grateful to you. And if it ie unusual for a Britiehet to pay aorplimente to a Frenchman, in a spirit of rivalry you ehould take It all the r)re wrioualy. I hould like to may thank you wery much to our N friend the ubareador of Bemark. It sewa to ma that he bore an unusual burden aa President in a particularly difficult and buuy month. He encountered one or two problem that I ae not mre any President bag encountered hefore , and be surmounted them with great uomon bana8 and firmew. I turn fKw to the l ubject of tbia debate. The Security Council is faced with a difficult problem. Recent event8 force us to consider an isaw which we have all been aware of for come years but which is so difficult, and to w extent 90 contrwetsial, that ue have ehied avay ftm dealing with it am a whole. We have tried - understandably - to avoid the central issue and to deal ad hoc with its individual manifestations. That laeue ie terrorinm. In one sense there is rm problem: We are all agreed that terrorism is bad. More precisely, we ate all agreed that terrorism is criminal. For exauple, on 9 October last year the Prealdent of the Security Council, speaking on behalf of the laembere of the Council, said: (Sir Yohn Thou&h, United Kingdom) .They endorse the Beoretary4enetal’e etatement of 8 October 1985, which condemn8 al: aota of terroriem. ‘They resolutely condemn this unjuetifable and criminal hijaoking ae well as other act8 of tetrroriem, inuluding hostage-taking. “They also condemn terrorism in all its forms, wherewet and by whomever comitted”. (s/PV.2618, p.2) On 9 Dmxmber last year the General ~esembly ad-ted without dieeent - I l treaer without diement - remolution 40/61. Inter alia, that reeolution tcck note of ‘th deep concern and wndemation of all act8 of international terraria expremmed by the Security Council and the Secretary-Generalm~ (fifth ptea&ular paragraph) In the mm reeolution, the Gunerel Aseembly exprersed its concern ‘that in recent yearm terrorin ha6 taken on forms that have an increaringly deleteriow effect on internaticmel relationn, which mey jeopatdire the very territorial integrity and eecurity of States’. (eleventh preamhular paragraph) fn its firrt operative paragraph the resolution l Unec!uivocably condemns, as criminal, all acts, methods and precticee of terrorism wherever and by w!mmever mitted, including thorn which jeopardize friendly relations emmg State8 end their security”. (operative parsgraph 1) (Sir John Thomson, United Kingdom) It further ‘Calls upon all States to fulfil their obligations under international law to refrain fraar organizing, inetigating, aaeieting or participating in terrorirt act6 in Other States, or aaquieecing in activities within their territory clirectad towards the coamieeion of such acta’. (General AeeemW reealution 40/61, Para. 6) A few dayye later the Seuurity Council unaninoualy edopted Security council remlution 579 (198S), which, inter alia, condemned unequivocally all acte of hootage-taking and abduction and called for “the imediate bafe release of all hootagea and abducted peremna wherever and by whcmever they are being held”. (reeolution S79 (198S), para. 2) Then, on 30 Dwember, the Preridert of the Council, qmaking on behalf of the mnber#, strongly condemnad the unjustifiable and criminal tetroriat l ttecke at the ?nme and Vienna aicportr which cawed the taking of innocent humen lives. He continued that the me&mm of the Council urged that thorn respomlble for those deliberate and indiecrinlnate killing8 be brought to trial in accordance with clue procem of law, and he concl4ad by expteeeing the hcqe, on behalf of the mm&era of the Ccnmcll, that there would be ‘determined effort6 by all govetnwntn and authorities concerne4, fn acaxdance with eetabllehed principles of fnternatlanal law, in order that all acts, #thds and practice8 of terrorism may be brought to an end,. (8/PV.2639, p. 56) Thue we are all agreed that terrorism io unjuetifiable and criminal. That must be our etarting point in any general or particular consideration of the problem and of what to do about it. On behalf of the international comunity as a whole the Council ha6 estahliahed those baeic principlee. The General Assembly resolution that I have quoted ehcws that the internatfmel cmraunity has indeed (Sir Jahn Thorneon, United Kingdom) acaepted them as principles. But having got a principle, we now have to make it work in practice. At onae we encounter rnsny difficulties. Terrorism can and doem exist within a single State. There are plenty of ead examples both in the developed and the developing worlb. It has political roots, but it is dealt with primarily se a criminal action. where terroriete are caught they are tried by due process of 1~ and if convicted punished accordingly. A wise Government will no doubt ale0 try to deal with the political issues out of which terrorihas grown, but it must and will insist that tha terrorist ie treated as a ct iminal. f suggested that the international -unity should, so far as it is able, proceed in the sams way. We all ackmwlsdge tht much, though perhaps not all, terrorism is connected with political problem, whether grievance ie justified or not. The Council hae the primery role within the international a-nity of dealing with political problems that get out of hand or threaten to do ao. Of course, it is better if tw can be tiesolved peacefully by rmqotiatian btween the participanta, without having rwourae to the Council. But the Council must insist, a6 any of our individual Governments vould insist, that it will not negotiate under pressure aM that it will not allow its judgment to be ewayed by terrori-. It aunt insist tbt the principleo that it has already laid down, that terrorism is criminal, should be sdhered to in specific caaea and that the terrorists should be punished accordingly. I have referred to the difficulties that arise because terrorism grows out of political disputes. I shall mu refer to the difficulties arising frcxn acks of terrOri8m carried out not by individual people with an individual grievance but by States, as an act of policy. We are used to comamn mul-der as ar. occurrence that is almost a8 old, sadly, as mankind. We have not ibeen able to stop it, but we know (Sir John Thomson8 united Ringdam) how to deal with it. Many of our counttiee, both developed end developing, have had prpoh experience of internal terrorism. We have not alwaye been able to prevent it, but on the whole we know hew to deal with it. The ieeue before ue is an international one, but we met recognise it for what it is. Terooriam, which coetx innocent lives, whatever ite political origins may be, is an act of coaum murder. But when it is carried out, whether overtly or covertly, by the agents of a State or a uculd-be State it ie of a different and uoree kind; it ir a deliberate act of Skate policy. Stattdiractsd terrorlen, ie in fact war by another name. We mu8t learn to treat the act for what it i8 - namly, murder - while dealing with the political wneideratione involved. A murder ccmitted on the orders of a Goverrnent ie no better than a murder wmitted by an individual. Indeed, it is much worse. It i8 wor80, fir&, hecauw the body ordering it and carrying it out - namely, a Govermnt - ie doing it deliberately and in wld blood. Secondly, it ix eubverrive of ccmfidence between nationr end bstmen peoplex. Terrori8a ir prrtfcularly dangerous to free wietiee. All terrorixa, including Stattdirectad terroriea, explofte the natural reluctance of a free 8cciety to defend itxelf in the last rewrt with et-. Statbdirected terrorlxB claim for itself all the d-catic dvantager Gf free emcietieo while tryiw to underaine them and while certainly putting innocent and lav-abiding people at tick and in fear of their lives. It ix in fact a deli&rate attempt by ore State, ueually an authoritarian one , to subvert by meane short of war, but including murder, the free and tiemocratic tabric ot other riocieciee. (Sir John Thomson, United tingdom) AO I have eeid, it ita high time the Council and the international comaunity facmd up to the hard iaouei of terrotiem. We here have laid down the principle &at tertoriam is unjuetifiable and criminal. We have called upon all Statea to fulfil their obligationa under international law to refrain from organising, instigating, assieting or participsting in terrotiat aoto in other States OK acquiescing in activities within their territory directed towards the comieaion of such acte. Wow that we have out principlea M muat put them into effect. We have before uo a perticular and flagrant exaqle, maintained over aany yeara, of the uae of tetrorbm - that ie, camon murder - ae an inattment of State PlkY. That haa been th prmtice and the policy of Colonel Qaddafi. Hitherto, p&ape for too long, we heve IOKO OK leae put up with it, in the hope that if he doea -5: see the etxot of that policy hia frienda do and will peteuede him to change it. ?het hope ham been dimappointed. Colonel Qeddafi’a friend8 have a great reqmWbllity. X & not may much about Colonel Qaddafi’a tetroriat cereer, for many of the facta are well known, moon thaagh they probably represent only a emall proportion of what ha haa actually been reaponeible for. I do not ruppoae there is anyoue who blieve6 t&l-l Qaddafi when he says, as he did at hia ptearr conference yemterday, *We have given m orders that anyone anywhere in the world should he killed. Libya has not ordered anyone killed. we are not reeponeible for cperationo that have been carried out in Europe or anywhere else.” (Sir Jdrn Thomson, united Kingdom) These are liea, and even those who condemn the action the Amerioans have taken undaretand their reseats for doing 60. This attitude might be eumed up in a sentence fram an editorial in an Indian newepaper. The Rinduetan Time8 wrote as follam: Washington in the first place can be accused of bestowing the halo of a martyr on a man 4mee politics many of his publicly declared friends secretly find abcminable: This editorial puts its finger cm a critical problem - the difference between what Governments think and tit they say. Nearly werycne think8 colonel Oaddafi abominable, but not everyone is prepared to say so, and fewer still are prepared to take action to persuade him to cease his abominable acts. My Qvernment has shown restraint. It is exactly two years to the day since cm of Colonel Qaddafi’s es,ployees shot frcm a win&u of the Libyan People’s Bureau in London and killed Poli~mn Yvarne Plet&er. wcr handled that situatiar in a restrained, legal md civilired my, even thouqh it Y&S by no wsn8 the first gross prooacation which M had teaeived ftor Colcnel Qaddafi, nor was it the firrt murder carried tit by his employees in Britain. Colonel Qaddafi has tried repeatedly to interfere in the internal affairs of my country. It is beyond doubt that Libya provides the Ptovi8imal IRA with sUMey and weapons. The Discovery by the Irish authorities on 26 January of thin year of the largest wcr find of arms included rifles and ammunition Iran Libya, even in boxes vith Libyan army markings. So Colonel Qaddaf i’s attempts to intervene in the internal affairs of my country and indeed in those of our friend and neighbour the Republic of Ireland continue up to the present. These arms are of course used for aurder. It is hare to know vhat Libyan interest is involved. It is harder ‘. >ll to understand that this intervention by Libya in the internal affairs of two (Sir John Thoumn, united RingBOx) Western uountries is of any profit to the Arab cause. I leave it ta Arabs to judge themelves whether that muse is beat prmted by Coloxel Qaddafi’s interventions and terrorLt sots or not. Britain and Ireland are not the only Western countries which have suffered from Colanel Qaddafi ‘8 terror lea. For exaxple, Pr ante expelled two rmllbers of the Libyan PeOple’s Bureau in Paris soon after a plot was uncovered three weeks ago to attack with a boab civilians qusueing for visas at the Aaerican Embassy in Paris. tiricma 40 not need viaas to coto the United States, so the casualties would have been wurrrhelaingly French and other nob#et icans. But Colonel Qaddsfi does not care. On 6 April of this year, an atteqst which we know to have baen undertaken on Libyan C0verment instructiooa was made to attack the United Ststes IWassy in Beirut. It failad whsn the rocket exploded on launch. This sorning a rocket warn fired at the British abauy in Beirut. *at conclusion are we to draw? On 25 March instructions weta sent from Tripoli to the Libyan People’s Hureau ix Bast Wflin to carduct a terrorist attack against the mericans. On 4 April the People’s Bureau alerted Tripoli that the attack would be carried Out the follwing sorning, Sarly on 5 April a barpb killed two people and injured 230 of vacfoue naticmalitier. Llter that norning the Bureau reported to Tripoli that the operation had been carried out successfully. We km that sore attacks sponsored by Colmcl Qadhafi have been planned. Some are Intended tie be carried out by hia om agents. In other casee he intends ,+ rat- 11-o .-kc AChAC U‘AAI - O-.-L--- L-----J-.. ------ --- -L . . . . ..-- ‘YIy..T -PcTLrI bsLi”L LIIC ycirupii. ii; resiiy aware that State directed terrorim ia the main policy of the Qaddafi Wetment. That Government admit that they tried earlier this week, albeit msuccessful:y, to attack !-JA~ installations on the Italian island of ramped-a. unitea Kingdom) No wcnaer the Ministers of Foreign Af fa its of the twelve member States of the EuroOean Colrmrunities said on 14 April that they considered that States clearly implicated in supporting terrorism should be induced to renounce such SuQQort and called upon Libya to act acwrdingly. The Foreign Minieters went on that they were convinced that terrorist attacks did not serve whatever political came t.h8 Psreetrators claimed to be furthering. Outrages like the ones recently perpetratea on the ‘IWA alrcraft and in a diSWthegU8 in Berlin wuld never bs justified. The Poreign Ministers also rejected the threat made by Libyan leaders against Member States whit& deliberately encouraged rewurse to acts of violence cmd air=Wt threataned l&r-. They mrned that any actiw of this sort muld M8t with a vigo~oue and appropriate responee on the part of the hrelve. wo country which lands srrpport to terrorisa can expect to maintain norul relation8 with the hr81Ve. The Twelve concluded that they would inform the Arab States and the tsa9Ue of Arab States about their wnclusians and crould invite them to analyse jointly amI urgently the issue of international terraria. Ye8Urdry the Colonel announced that he uaa not going to escalate military oprationa in southern Europa. Well, gooa. But r+ro can believe anything he says nW7 Ba has told UIB that his objectives are world-wide. In his press conference yetstefday, apart fraP lying about not issuing orders for murdering pnybody, he said in the sm breath: “We are inciting rcvoluticm. Inciting revolution and establishing ppular revolution everywhere in the world ie one of our aim8.” NOW W have all been put on notice that no one is safe from Colonel Qaddafi’s murderers. This has already been vell known to many Governments and popular leader8 in the Arab vorld. It is well kncmm to Colonel Qaddafi’s neighbours i2 Africa. It is well known in Ireland, md now it 5~ perhaps going to be veil. known WOSld-Wide. Something has to be done about this. The law-abiding nations of the world must co-operate to put an end to it. There are, I admit, many differences of opinion between the soviet Union and Britain, md I do not therefore always quote the General Secretary of the Central Coaittee of the Comunist Party of the soviet union with approval. But when w are faced with international criminality we have cad in camnon. speaking at the ~nty=Seventh Cangrass of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union on 25 February 1986, Mr. Gorbachev said, according to the text cfrculated by the soviet delegation; .Crises and aanflicts are fertile soil also for international terrorism. Undeclared wars* the export of oowter-revolution in all forms, political assassinations, the taking of hostages, the hijacking of aircraft, and bab attacks in streets, airports and railway stations - wch is the hideouci face of twrol:iea, which iti instigators try to aark with various cynical fabrications. The 08SR rejects terrotir ln principle end is tea4 to co-operate actively with other states in order to uproot it. Tho soviet Unicm will resolutely protect its citizen from acts of violwce snd Q 4v4rYthiW to defend their lives, hmour and dignity.” (~/4l/le5, p. 9) MY delegatim finds nc. Gorbechw*‘e attitude very understandable, and I IP not sUtprfsed einc4 tha 6wiet delegation played d notable part in producing the Security Council documerlte &out tatrorfa whish I quoted at the begiMing of ray sp4ch. (Sir John Thomson, United Kingdom) I spoke earlisr of the reetraint with which my Government had.met the murder of Yvonne Fletohar and the other provocations offered to us by Colonel Qaddafi. That teattaint seems not to have had the desired result. This morning three bodiae were found about 10 miles south-east of Beirut. They have not yet been positively identified. But, I have to So? sadly, it seems likely that tvo of them are the bodies of Leigh Douglas and Phillip Padfield, who were kidnapped in Beirut on 24 uaroh this year. They w8re in Lebanon, a friendly Arab country, teaching young Arabs who wished to come to listen to th8m. Now, it meme, they are dead. It is hard not to conclude that this is yet another act of State-directed terrorism. I may hsve more to say on this matter presently. Much of the debate 60 far has concentrated on 8xpreesime ot CWId8~atiOn Of th5 military aoticm tak8n in aelf-defenc8 by the nnitd States againat Libya follouirbg incontrovertible 8vid8nce of the Libyan Gov8rmnt’s direct involv8ment in promoting terrorist attackm against the United States and other oountrias, including my own, an& of its plans for a wide range of further attacks. My d8lagation supports th8 ptinciplcr which ha08 b88n invok8d by many apealters, of th8 11486 to s88k ths pesceful aettlmnt of disputea and to refrain fro8 the thr8at OK use Of fOrC8, in accordance with Article 2 of the Chart8r. Those principles continue to apply, and they apply to Libya as to any other Member Stat8. Can anyone declare, with a clerr conscience, that Libya haa refrained in its international relations fram the threat or u5e of force in any mantmr inconsistent with the Purpoeee of the United Nations, to quote Article 2 (4)7 Aze we to disregard the many explicit, public and official statements of the Libyan authorities threatening terrorist attacks on other States? For example, in a opeech in June 1984, Colonel Qaddaf i said: “We are capable of exporting terro;ism to thv heart of Amertza. We are alfio capable of physical lioliida>ion and destruction and arson inside America.” Even without Colonel Qaddafits own word& none of us here wae in any doubt about the mrioumeso with whiah ehe United States rightly regarded the threat of Libyan terror im. The Counoil wan indeed already engaged in coneultatione to avert a further twist in the rpiral of violenae. Ae my delegation made alear at the time, W WoloCmed rmrw to preventive diplom&y ad wiehed it to be effective. Yet, a8 ue also had ocaaeion to make alear when the draft reeolution eubmitted by PIalta a8 doaument s/17984 uau being aieaueeed, we did not consider the text or anything like it to addrwe the full problem and thereby contribute realiatiaally to it8 solution. ‘fhia orre-sided approach, ae before, has had the indtable ad tragic result of loding Libya to aonalude it was immune from ttm conrquencee of ito aation. The United State8 #a jumtifiod in drawing the conclusion from thie epimde an4 fra all that had preceded it, that Libyan defiance of the IY)r8a Of internatimel behaviour would continue. In addition, the United States ha8 We clear that it haa conclumitn evident% of direct Libyan involvement in rwOnt terrorist act8 and in planning for further such dCt6. My own Government al80 har evidmce kmyond ai8puk. The United State8 ban, a8 any of ua do, ttm inhmmt right of wlf-defence, ae reaffiraad in Article 51 of the Charter. he Sir Geoffrey Rowe mid in the Bouea of coprol~s yesterday, the right Of wlf-defence ia not an entirely pamitre tight. It plainly includes the right to deetroy or waken the sapscity of one*e aemailant, to reduce his tebburcell~ and to waken him will M, au to dimur*ge and prevent further violence. At the 8aae tim, the right of #elf-defence should be ueed in a prwrtionate way. That i8 why when Preefdent Reagan told Mrs. Thatcher bat waek that the United States Intended to take action, she concentrated on the principle of self-defence and the consequent need to limit the action and to relate the aelectlon of targets clearly to tercorirm. (Sir John Thomson, Wnited Kingdom) Speaking in the House of Comaone yeeterday, #ta. Thatcher said: ‘There were of ooutee risks in uhat wae proposed.* Decisions like this are newer easy. The British Government’s ansuer to the &aettican reoueot for the we of rmerican aircraft based in the United Kingdom was, as Mrs. Thatcher stated, thatt *we would support action directed against specific Libyan targets demonstrably involved in the conduct and support of: terrorist activities”. President Reagan responded that the operation would be lir.ited to clearly defined targets relatetd to terrorism , and that every effort vould be made to minisize collateral damage. The F-1118 had an important role in minimizing such damage and in reducing caeualtiee. In the interests of proportionality they were tha tight aircraft to uw. If they had not been used more lives would probably have been lost, both on the ground and in the air. We join all those uho have already expressed their ccndolences to the families of those uho have been killed in this sction, knowing, as we do at firet hand, of the anguish this cycle of violence causee. The death of children is particularl~~ poignant. We, too, have had experience of thet. ny country has had direct ewrience of Libyan terroriea. So have mny of our friend@ in Zuropo and the Areb world. It is in all our interests that effective measures be taken to put an end to this menace ma that no State will feel obliged to have recourse to armed force as a last resort in defence of itr citizenm oc of ite territory. In my statement before this Council on 27 March, I apoke of Libya.8 eccentric horder policies: four of Libya’s six neighbours, to public knculedge, have suffered Libyan aggreesfon in one form or another in recent years. The problem is not therefork one for the United States alone: it is for all of u8. We must all continue to seek a peaceful solution to the central questions Of t.he Middl? East. My Government recoqnizra the importance of that issue. Action by (Sir John Thomson, United Kingdom) take for peace. At the eem time, it ie right that we should addteeo oureelves to the problem of the areas in which terrorlets thrive. Colonel Qaddafi eeeke to drape hie nefarioue activities in the colour0 of Arab and Palestinian national.ism. In fact these activitiee do nothing but harm to the Arab and Palestinian causes. My country seeks friendship with the Arab rrarld and . justice for the Palestinians. Colonel Qaddafi is an obstacle in the way of both. Many, including the Permanent Representative of the United Arab Emirates here on sy right, have spoken of the ineffectiveneae of the Council in ceeolving thie long&ending threat to international peace and eecurity. I agrecl entirely with that thought. I vould add that, as a Council, we are today ae far from a emlution am ever. It will cgtinue to elude ue for as long as, by our lack of reeolve, Libye ia led to believe that its unacceptable behaviour will carry no adveree oonowuenoes for it in the international -unity as a whole. Now more then ever the Council need8 to ahov the courage and wider expected of it, and aklre~~ itmelf to the task of ensuring proper rerpact for internati-1 law by Libya and by any otlnr State involved in mapporting terroria. I repeat that the central iaeue before ue is terrorim, Bince this debate began there have been horrifying reports that at lea& three more Britona have been killed in cold blood by terroriota , and another haa been kidnapped today in Beirut by unknown perrons. What is the Council going to do about this? Something or nothing? (Sir John Thomson, United Rinqdam) he I have alreedy said, sly Governsent haa exeraised great restraint in the fwe of Co’lonel Q~ddafi’ta many provocationa, including ewen the murder of British aitiaen8. We have done so in the intereet6 of international peaue and eeuurity. Can anyone assure UII that this policy hae worked? Have Colonel QaUdaf i ‘e friends told him ta atop? Have they used their influence to Qake him #tap? Those who have not dune them thinga have no moral standing to speak in thio debate, &ill lees to aaabdm the United States for aating to protect ite citirena. I read1 again with approval Mr. ~rbeabeo’~ wtdo which X quoted earlier. All Htould shun a-1 Qeddafir none should act ae if they were his wliaee. The iuue ia terrorism. The tine for a&ion im now. Othmwime wee live0 will be la& end mra damge done to the internationai oomunity. mr the intwaat iaml aamunity, have eetabliehed the prineiplee. Bven Liby8 claime to mrt them. Mow let ue put tham into effat aa ue u0ul.d in aur oun countriecr. kt uo deal uith u wrderorr for what they are. Let urn deal with the politbal l ituationm in which krrorin thrives. Ud let ua ahun and deal ruolutely uitb awntrieo which are the hae of Stat~mponmrmd terrorin. Let llo* in mbart, live up to our sun reeolutionr. The PRPBIDLRR (interpretation from Item&) t f was partiuularly touched ty the wrda of the representative of the United Ring&m. Behind the ceremony I wnwd their rincerity vhich did not leave me indifferent. There are no further apttakers for thir meeting. The next meeting of the Security Council to continue consideration of the crgen4a iten will be at 10.30 a.---- u-I4 - -....I --..-..>. The meeting rose at 5.35 p.m.