S/PV.3745Resumption2 Security Council
▶ This meeting at a glance
21
Speeches
0
Countries
0
Resolutions
Topics
Security Council deliberations
Israeli–Palestinian conflict
Peace processes and negotiations
Global economic relations
Diplomatic expressions and remarks
UN procedural rules
Middle East
The President: The next speaker is the. representative
of Morocco 1 invite him to take a seat at the Council table
and to make his statement.
Mr. Snoussi (Morocco) (interpretationfrom French):
I would like at the outset to extend to you. Mr. President.
the congratulations of the Kingdom of Morocco on your
assumption of the presidency of the Security Council. 1 also
take this opportunity to extend to your predecessor my
country's compliments for the wise manner in which he
conducted the work of the Council last month.
I would also like to offer you my sincere
congratulations for having dealt expeditiously with the
problem that has brought us together today: the decision of
the Israeli Govemment to establish new settlements south-
east of the Holy City of Al-Quds, the third Holy Place of
the Muslim religion and the cradle of the three revealed
religions.
We have once again been unpleasantly surprised by
the decision of the Israeli Government to establish a new
settlement on the Jabal Abu Ghneim hill. also known as
Har Homa, We can readily imagine the negative effects that
such a decision might have on a peace process that is
already fragile but which we had dared think to be well
under way.
There is no doubt that this decision is a flagrant
violation of international law and of the various Security
Council resolutions on Al-Quds, which prohibit any
decision tending to alter its legal status. demographic
composition and cultural nature.
From the standpoint of international law. everyone is
aware that the status of East Jerusalem is exactly the same
as that of the West Bank. This is an occupied territory to
which applies the Fourth Geneva Convention. which
prohibits the occupying Power. in this case israel, from
making permanent changes in the territory it occupies or
from settling any part of its population on it.
Any intention of using this action to launch a new
annexation campaign should be denounced by the entire
international community, because it is a violation not only
of a State's agreements, but also of its word, It represents
a deliberate attempt time and time again to call into
question the peace process and the protocols signed in
td
JIQJUI lllCClulE \1\UD\JLLLIJLLU11 4.1
6 March 1997
Washington in full view of the entire international
community.
As members know, the Arab Group at the United
Nations, of which we are a part, unanimously condemned
this decision and detailed in its letter its concerns and
position in this regard. As they also know, the view of the
Arab countries is dictated by legal and political reasons
alike. We believe that the recent Israeli decision must be
seen as a new defiance of the international community,
since it threatens the fragile trust that we took so many
years to build.
The Arab Inter-Parliamentary Union, which is
headed by Morocco, also took the opportunity last
Thursday to ask the Council to intervene immediately to
prohibit Israel from implementing its settlement plan.
Furthermore, at a meeting held on 3 March, the
Islamic Group of the Organization of the Islamic
Conference expressed its deep concern about the unlawful
measures taken by Israel and called upon the international
community and the Security Council to take urgent steps
to persuade the Israeli Government to rescind its decision
and renounce all settlement activities in all the occupied
Arab territories, particularly East Jerusalem.
Must I remind the lsraeli authorities of the great
effort that was necessary from countries of good will,
such as my own, to stitch together this policy based on
trust? Casablanca, Amman and Cairo were not mere
conferences or simple meetings; they were truly giant
steps that were taken following the signing of the
Washington agreement. What the Israeli authorities seem
to forget is that the capital that has been wasted will,
unfortunately. be the most difficult to regenerate. Indeed,
all those countries that had been hesitant are now telling
us that they were right to hesitate. We told them that the
Washington and Oslo momentum was under way and they
eventually believed us. The international community
hoped to see peace achieved with Syria and Lebanon.
However, for equally inexplicable reasons, this peace has
not yet come about.
The Israeli decision to establish new settlements,
thereby seriously modifying the demographic composition
of that area, came on the heels of the tunnel incident but
before the recent Israeli decision to close four Palestinian
offices in Jerusalem. It took endless cajoling and
interventions for Israel finally to agree to sign the Hebron
agreements. Arabs now remember this, too, as proof of
bad faith.
Security Council 3745tl1 meeting (Resumption Z)
Fifty-second year 6 March 1997
My country deplores this blind attitude, just as it
profoundly regrets the fact that the Israeli authorities are
taking no account of either the impact of their own
unfortunate actions nor of the harmful consequences these
will have on the hopes we had so cherished.
The peace process was launched in a climate of
confidence. However, we will now need several miracles,
not just one, in order to convince all the parties concerned
to embark once again on the path of genuine peace, as this
peace is dailybeing called into question. We fear not only
confrontations between Palestinians and Israelis, but also
the doubts now being sown in the minds of Arabs with
regard to the peace process for which all of us here have
fought.
Israel, which once made communication its basic
weapon, should today realize that international opinion is
growing familiar with this new face of Israel, which
through its reckless acts is now bringing to nought all the
efforts made to achieve what was hailed as the event of the '
century.
The international community today cautions Israel and
calls on it to show wisdom and respect for the
commitments it has undertaken.
The Kingdom of Morocco, host country of the A1-
Quds Committee, which is chaired by His Majesty King
Hassan II, remains convinced that the Security Council,
charged with the maintenance of international peace and
security and the rule of law, is duty-bound to impose its
will by compelling Israel to rescind its decision.
Let me quote His Majesty King Hassan II, who on the
national holiday marking the anniversary of his coronation,
on 3 March, said that
"Peace cannot be built where feelings of frustration,
hatred and fear remain".
Let us - let the Security Council - ensure that the
decisions that the Council adopts remind Israel that no one
can defy the international community, and that no one can
enter into commitments one day and go back on them the
next. Let us give our peoples the genuine peace for which
so many generations have hoped. We must not play with
fire: let us not foment hatred and fear among ourselves, for
these are our worst enemies.
The President: I thank the representative of Morocco
for the kind words he addressed to me.
The next speaker is the representative of Cuba. I
invite him to take a seat at the Council table and to make
his statement.
Mr. Nunez Mosquera (Cuba) (interpretation from Spanish): I wish on behalf of my delegation to
congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the
presidency of the Security Council for the month of
March. We also convey our appreciation to the Permanent
Representative of Kenya for the manner in which he
presided over the work of the Council last month.
Barely five months ago, on 27 and 28
September 1996, the Security Council met to discuss the
situation in the occupied Arab territories. At a meeting
with the participation of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs
of a number of Member States, the Council adopted
resolution 1073 (1996), in which it called for the
immediate cessation by Israel of all acts which had
resulted in the aggravation of the situation in the area and
which had negative implications for the Middle East
peace process.
Today the Council is meeting once again, and we
note that resolution 1073 (1996) has yet to be
implemented; to the contrary, the international community
is witnessing a fresh escalation by the occupying Power,
which is again jeopardizing the entire peace process in the
region.
The decision of the Israeli authorities to establish
new settlements in the southern part of East Jerusalem is
yet another example of the obstacles being placed in the
path of the peace process. These settlements, moreover,
constitute a flagrant violation of the most basic rules of
international law and run counter to the letter and the
spirit of United Nations resolutions, including those of the
Security Council itself, on the Arab-Israeli conflict and
the Palestinian question; these resolutions continue to be
completely ignored.
Once again, the Middle East peace process is in
jeopardy, along with the fate of the occupied Arab
territories. Once again, the United Nations must without
delay take a firm stand against this challenge. The
Security Council must act without delay and with
unmistakable clarity to demand that Israel put an end to
the construction of settlements in the occupied Arab
territories in general and in Jerusalem in particular. The
policy of modifying the legal status, demographic
composition and geographical character of Jerusalem is
unacceptable.
Security Council 3745th meeting (Resumption 2)
Fifty-second year 6 March 1997
Cuba reiterates its firm position in favour of the return
of all Arab territories occupied by Israel, and hopes that the
Security Council will shoulder the responsibility entrusted
to it under the Charter - and will do so with the same
vigour and alacrity it has displayed with respect to other
items it has considered.
The President: I thank the representative of Cuba for
the kind words he addressed to me.
The next speaker is the representative of the Sudan. I
invite him to take a seat at the Council table and to make
his statement.
Mr. Erwa (Sudan) (interpretation from Arabic): I
congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency
of the Security Council for the month of March. We are
well aware of the wisdom and skill you bring to bear in
guiding the work of the Council. I also thank your
predecessor, my brother, the Permanent Representative of
Kenya, for the excellent way in which he led the work of
the Council last month.
There is no doubt that a just and comprehensive peace
in the Middle East is the goal of all peace-loving States, a
goal which those countries seek to reach on the basis of the
principles of justice and equity. The failure to live up to
commitments entered into is inconsistent with a genuine
desire for peace, and undermines efforts to achieve that
peace. The destruction of the chances for a just, lasting and
comprehensive peace owing to the practices of the Israeli
forces of occupation in territory that does not belong to
them constitutes one clear proof that occupation and peace
are incompatible.
The decision taken by the Government of Israel on
26 February 1997 to build a new 6,500-unit settlement at
Jabul Abu Ghneim in East Jerusalem - in occupied
Palestinian territory -~ adjacent to lands expropriated in
1991 and 1992 is part of an Israeli policy to build a series
of settlements encircling Al~Quds with a View to isolating
the other Arab areas of the West Bank. The purpose is to
judaize Al-Quds and to change its legal status and
demographic composition, in contravention of Security
Council resolutions, including resolution 478 (1980). Nor
can we forget Israel's other systematic steps in the same
direction, such as the opening of a tunnel west of the Al-
Aqsa Mosque in Al-Quds, and the ensuing violent
repression of innocent protesters.
Israel has not complied with Security Council and
General Assembly resolutions; it has ignored international
declarations and broken commitments it has itself
undertaken; it continues to disregard the views of the
international community. All of this reflects Israel's
refusal to comply and its lack of respect for the peace
process. It will inevitably lead to severe consequences
with respect to the other States of the region and will
have a negative effect on the peace process and on world
peace and security.
Sudan expresses its concern over the steps taken by
the Israeli Government. Based on the need to respect the
international agreements, instruments and conventions
concluded between the two parties and freely consented
to by them, Sudan asks that the Security Council shoulder
its responsibility fully and, in order to safeguard
international peace and security, ask Israel to rescind its
decision and put an end to any steps that might harm the
city of Jerusalem, a city where the holy places of the
faithful of three religions can be found.
For all these reasons, we must work together to
preserve the special nature of that city, which is so dear
to the hearts of all who cherish the holy places and who
are imbued with the spirit of peace. That is why the
Council must adopt specific, concrete measures to compel
Israel to go back on its decision and to put an end to any
steps that might constitute acts of provocation in the
occupied Arab territories, including Jerusalem, the
occupied Syrian Golan and occupied southern Lebanon.
Sudan, on the basis of its solidarity with the struggle
of the Palestinian people for their inalienable rights and
for justice, and to strengthen the right to justice and
fairness, asks the Council to shoulder its responsibility
and not adhere to a double standard, and to strengthen its
credibility by working to implement the resolutions
relevant to the Israeli-Arab conflict, with the goal of
achieving a just and comprehensive peace. This is the
only way to guarantee stability in the region and
throughout the world.
The President: I thank the representative of the
Sudan for the kind words he addressed to me. -
The next speaker is the representative of Qatar. I
invite him to take a seat at the Council table and to make
his statement.
Mr. Al-Khalifa (Qatar) (interpretation from Arabic):
Allow me to congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of
the presidency of the Security Council for this month. I
wish also to congratulate your predecessor, Ambassador
Fifty-second year " ........., 'E'ixiileifieg'i
Mahugu, on his excellent performance last month. Finally,
I should like to thank you for convening this important
meeting at the request of the Group of Arab States.
This is a critical time. The occupied Palestinian
territories once again face an extremely grave situation,
which is seriously endangering the Middle East peace
process. The Israeli Government's decision to build a new
settlement of 6,500 housing units in Jabal Abu Ghneim is
a deliberate attempt to cut off Arab East Jerusalem from the
remainder of the Palestinian West Bank. It is a move
calculated to alter the legal status and demographic
composition of J erusalem. This is a new development in a
disturbing pattern of decisions and actions aimed at
imposing afait accompli prior to the opening of final-status
negotiations this month.
Since coming to power, the present Israeli Government
has acted to strip the peace process of its content. It has
even exploited the process to serve its own political
objectives. First, it announced that it would not be bound
by agreements signed by the previous Government and the
Palestinian National Authority. Then it ruled out any
compromise on East Jerusalem or on a Palestinian state. It
has repeatedly delayed withdrawal from occupied areas, and
in September 1996 its decision to open the tunnel under the
Western Wall of the Al-Aqsa Mosque precipitated a well-
known crisis, which led to serious violence. The decision to
build this settlement is yet another step in a premeditated
policy of creeping annexation of Arab lands.
As Chairman of the Group of Arab States for this
month and on behalf of my own country, I should like to
express to the Security Council our outrage and dismay at
this arrogant move, which undermines the basic principle of
land for peace that was agreed to at the Madrid Conference.
We strongly condemn this decision by the Israeli
Government. It is a decision that constitutes a flagrant
violation of the fourth Geneva Convention relative to the
Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (1949). It is
also a serious infringement of United Nations resolutions
and floats numerous relevant resolutions of the Security
Council. In this respect, we should like to recall resolution
242 (1967), which calls on Israel to withdraw from all Arab
territories occupied in 1967, and resolution 252 (1968),
which declares that all legislative and administrative
measures taken by Israel, including the expropriation of
land and properties, that alter the status of Jerusalem are
null and void, and calls upon Israel to rescind all such
measures taken and to desist from further actions affecting
the status of Jerusalem.
In the same context, we would recall Security
Council resolution 446 (1979), which determines that the
Israeli policy of establishing settlements in the territories
occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, constitutes a
serious and illegal obstruction to achieving peace in the
Middle East. The resolution calls once more upon Israel
to desist from taking any action which would result in
changing the legal status and geographical nature and
materially affecting the demographic composition of the
Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem.
We would like also to recall a series of resolutions
in which the Security Council deplored Israel's refusal to
comply with international law, as well as the Council's
repeated calls to Israel to abandon its intransigent and
expansionist policies. These resolutions include 267
(1969), 271 (1969), 298 (1971) and, in particular,
resolution 476 (1980). This resolution asserts that the
application by Israel of the so-called basic law on
Jerusalem is a violation of international law; it affirms the
applicability of the fourth Geneva Convention to all the
territories occupied by Israel since 1967; and it rejects
Israel's claim to Jerusalem, along with other actions by
Israel that alter the status of Jerusalem. Furthermore,
settlement activities violate the 1993 Oslo accords and the
1995 Interim Agreement between Israel and the
Palestinian National Authority on the territories occupied
since 1967.
For the past five years, there has been a genuine
movement forward towards the achievement of a lasting
peace in the region. We have witnessed progress, from
the Madrid Conference on to Oslo on to the peace
agreement with Jordan. Our hopes for the future were
raised by three economic conferences on the Middle East
and North Africa, held in Casablanca, Amman and Cairo,
respectively. A fourth conference is scheduled to be held
in Doha, the capital of Qatar, this year. The goodwill,
dedication and courage invested by those committed to
achieving peace must not be squandered. This reckless
move highlights the lack of Israeli commitment to the
peace process and threatens to reverse all our efforts.
It is the responsibility of the international community
and of the co-sponsors of the peace process to ensure that
Israel complies with all its conunitments. Furthermore, we
want this debate in the Security Council to send a clear-
cut message to the Israeli Government that its persistent
policy of building settlements and delaying the
implementation of existing agreements is categorically
unacceptable.
Eiiifilfcfly'll ' ...W...., "33,3313;
In conclusion, I would like, on behalf of the Arab
Group and my country, to express my appreciation to those
representatives who declared their Governments' rejection
of the Israeli decision, which violates international legality
and constitutes an obstacle to peace in the Middle East.
Proceeding from genuine concern for the future of
peace, we call on the Council to take the necessary actions
to ensure that no settlement activities will be implemented
in the occupied Arab territories, including in the Holy City
of Al-Quds/Jerusalem, and in particular to ensure that the
Israeli decision to establish this settlement at Jabal Abu
Ghneim will not be implemented, so that the resolutions of
the Security Council will be upheld and the peace process
preserved.
The President: I thank the representative of Qatar for
the kind words he addressed to me.
The next speaker is the representative of Argentina. I
invite him to take a seat at the Council table and to make
his statement.
Mr. Petrella (Argentina) (interpretation from Spanish): Allow me, Sir, to convey our best wishes for
success in your term as President of the Security Council
for the month of March. Allow me also to congratulate you
for convening this formal meeting and to convey the warm
feelings that Argentines have for Poland, a country to
which we are linked by strong ties of friendship and
cooperation. Likewise, I am pleased to extend our
appreciation to the Permanent Representative of Kenya for
his outstanding leadership of the Council last month. The
work of Ambassador Mahugu not only does credit to him
and to Kenya but also lends prestige to the developing
world,
My delegation is taking part in this Security Council
debate with renewed sadness and concern. After only five
months, the organ with the ultimate responsibility for world
peace and security is obliged to meet to urge the parties not
to depart from the peace process.
In the resolution of any conflict, the antagonists must
be parties to the peace process. That role not only carries
obligations but alsocalls for specific attitudes, such as not
altering the climate of understanding necessary to move
ahead in any negotiation.
The decision of the Israeli Government to build
settlements in East Jerusalem is viewed with the greatest
concern. Argentina shares that feeling, and we hope that
Israeli politicians will reflect on the consequences that
these measures are having on the future of the peace
process. The settlements in occupied territories run
counter to international law and run counter to resolutions
adopted by this Council in the past.
Much progress has been made toward peace in the
Middle East, and many lives have been sacrificed in that
cause. Accordingly, the efforts and commitments of the
international community should not waver but should
rather grow stronger. We hope that at this stage the Israeli
Government will refrain from adopting decisions that can
lead to altering the de facto situation in Jerusalem or to
hampering the success of the negotiations on the final
status of that city. We should all be aware of the
importance that Jerusalem has for the various cultures that
have been a part of its history.
As was stated by the Minister for Foreign Affairs for
Argentina, Guido Di Tella, in the previous debate on the
situation in the occupied Arab territories:
"The security of peoples depends on moderate
policies, and certainly not on extreme formulas of
any kind". (S/PV.3698 (Resumption I), p. 24)
Today, once again, we feel at one with those States
that are committed to the cause of peace, which Wish to
give their support to the negotiating process that began in
1992, and want to preserve the climate of understanding
that is required for that purpose.
The President: I thank the representative of
Argentina for the kind words he addressed to me.
The next speaker is the representative of Brazil. I
invite him to take a seat at the Council table and to make
his statement.
Mr. Valle (Brazil): I would like, first of all, to
congratulate you, Ambassador Wlosowicz, on your
assumption of the presidency of the Council for the
month of March. We are confident that under your skilled
guidance the work of the Security Council will be
conducted with great efficiency. Let me also take this
opportunity to thank your predecessor, Ambassador
Mahugu, for the competence with which he presided over
the Council during the month of February.
In recent years a lot has been done to bring "peace to
the Middle East From the Madrid Conference of 1991 to
the Declaration of Principles signed in Washington in
Security Council 374Sth meeting (Resumption 2)
Fifty~second year 6 Match 1997
1993, from the Agreement on the Gaza Strip and the
Jericho Area of 1994 to the Agreement on the Preparatory
Transfer of Powers and Responsibilities of 1994, many
milestones in the direction of the attainment of a durable
peace have been established.
However. we have had to face occasional obstacles
which stand in the way of the realization of our best hopes.
The peace effort is a confidence-building process. Parties to
this process should refrain from any action or measure
which could lead to mistrust and to a gradual erosion of a
carefully and laboriously designed peace process,
jeopardizing the intense efforts which have been made. In
this context, it is with concern and apprehension that we
witness the latest developments related to the decision to
initiate new settlement activities in East Jerusalem.
The Brazilian Government wishes the parties involved
in the peace process to immediately resume the positive
track of dialogue and compromise, on the basis of
agreements already reached and observing legal obligations
and responsibilities under universally accepted international
instruments, Only through the renewal of mutual trust
among the parties will it be possible to surmount this
difficulty while continuing to strive for durable peace in the
region."
The President: I thank the representative of Brazil for
the kind words he addressed to me.
The next speaker is His Excellency Mr. Engin Ansay,
Permanent Observer of the Organization of the Islamic
Conference to the United Nations, to whom the Council has
extended an invitation under rule 39 of its provisional rules
of procedure I inv1te him to take a seat at the Council table
and to make his statement . '
Mr. Ansay (Organization of the Islamic Conference):
I would like, Sir, to extend to you my warmest
congratulations on your assumption of the presidency of the
Security Council for this month. We are confident that your
rich experience and known professional skills will serve the
Council well in the successful discharge of the very
complex task currently facing it. If the cordial relations that
have historically existed between your country and the
country i come from prevailed among the nations today, we
would all be living in a much less troublesome world.
I should like to take this opportunity also to thank
your predecessor, Ambassador Mahugu, the Permanent
Representative of Kenya, for, his able performance in
steering the work of the Council during the month of
February.
On behalf of His Excellency Mr. Laraki, Secretary-
General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference
(OIC), I thank you for giving me the floor to address the
Council on the situation in the occupied Arab territories.
At the outset, let me say, as I have said before, that
I wish I were taking the floor under better, instead of
what have become bitter, circumstances. For we in the
01C joined forces with the international community in
supporting the peace process in the Middle East in full
measure, despite some of the disadvantageous elements
that the relevant agreements contained affecting
Palestinian interests. We were even beginning to feel
hopeful about the future of peace in the area because of
those few achievements that had already emerged during
the early stages of the implementation of the Oslo
accords. We were very pleased, last January, when
agreement was finally reached on the redeployment of
Israeli troops from Al-Khalil, and we were prepared to
continue to lend our full support to the attainment of the
agreed goals and objectives of the peace process.
Regrettably, our hopes, together with those of well-
wishers in the international community, have been
shattered by the unfortunate turn of events in Palestine,
the responsibility for which must lie with Israel and Israel
alone. The turmoil has been brought about by an
accumulation of violations of various elements of the
peace agreements by Israel, and the Israeli decision on 26
February 1997 to build a new settlement in Jabal Abu
Ghneim in East Jerusalem. The latter constitutes the latest
attempt by Israel to preempt the outcome of the
negotiations on final status by changing the legal status
and demographic composition of Jerusalem/Al-Quds Al-
Sharif, a city that is of central importance to the Arab and
Muslim worlds, as it is the first kiblak and the third
holiest city of Islam, to the three major religions, and to
the international community at large. The Israeli decision
not only violates the relevant resolutions of the Security
Council and the General Assembly, the Declaration of
Principles and subsequent agreements, but threatens to
undermine the progress that has been achieved in the
Middle East peace process.
In this regard, the Islamic Group at the United
Nations, at its meeting held on 3 March 1997, called on
the international community, including the Security
Council, to take urgent steps to ensure that the
Government of Israel reverses its decision and renounces
we..." "..........
Fifty-second year 6 March 1997
all settlement activity in all the occupied Arab territories, in
particular in East Jerusalem.
In the spirit of our solidarity with the peace process in
the Middle East, we condemn this latest decision by the
Israeli Government concerning East Jerusalem, just as we
condemned the opening of the tunnel under the western
wall of the holy Al-Aqsa Mosque.
I would like to take this opportunity to reaffirm the
position of the OIC that a comprehensive and lasting peace
in the region cannot be achieved without the full
implementation of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967)
and 338 (1973) which, inter alia, emphasize that Jerusalem
is part and parcel of the territories occupied since 1967.
In this context, we in the OIC would like to request
the Council to implement all of its relevant resolutions,
including resolutions 252 (1968), 267 (1969), 465 (1980),
476 (1980), 478 (1980) and 1073 (1996), all of which
concern Jerusalem; to take all necessary measures to
prevent Israel from altering the geographical and
demographic status of Jerusalem; and to prevent it from
taking any action that in any way affects the status of
Jerusalem, the final status of which is to be discussed in the
subsequent stages of the peace process.
We would like the Council to take the necessary
measures to bring an end to the continuation of Israeli
expansionism and settlement policies in the occupied
Palestinian and Arab territories, including Jerusalem, and
for it to consider all these Israeli policies and practices as
violations of all relevant United Nations resolutions, of
international agreements, especially the Fourth Geneva
Convention of 1949, and of international law.
We would also like to request the international
community to persuade Israel to lift the siege around
Jerusalem and to stop the implementation of all decisions
and practices that adversely affect the interests of the
Palestinian people, especially the confiscation of Palestinian
lands, the demolishing of Palestinian properties and houses,
and the withdrawal of identity cards issued to Palestinians,
designed to expel them from J erusalem, We also request the
international community to prevent Israeli excavations
around the Al-Aqsa Mosque and to make Israel cease
forthwith the violations of Islamic and Christian holy places
in Jerusalem.
In conclusion, I would like to assure this Council,
through you, Mr. President, that as soon as the necessary
measures to restore peace and security in the area have
been undertaken, improving the environment for the
resumption of the peace process, the OIC and its 54
member States, representing the very serious concerns of
more than one billion Muslims all over the world, will
also reaffirm their wholehearted support for the peace
process, in fulfilment of their collective desire to see
peace and tranquillity return to the area.
The President: I thank Mr. Ansay for the kind
words he addressed to me.
The next speaker is the representative of Colombia.
I invite him to take a seat at the Council table and to
make his statement.
Mr. Garcia (Colombia) (interpretation from Spanish): I should like, at the outset, to congratulate you,
Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security
Council for the month of March. I should like also to
extend our congratulations to Ambassador Mahugu of
Kenya for the very able manner in which he conducted
the business of the Council last month.
My delegation has anxiously watched the
development of the Middle East peace process, especially
the most recent events. Despite undeniable strides made
in recent years, the fate of the process is still a source of
concern, as the road to full independence and self-
determination for the Palestinian people is at a critical
juncture. We saw the recent signing of the agreement on
Hebron as an important step towards the definition of a
conclusive peace settlement that would include the status
of Jerusalem, legal settlements and refugees. Today,
unfortunately, we are forced to acknowledge a different
situation that strains the atmosphere of the process and
constitutes a further obstacle to the consolidation of peace
in the region.
As the international community has stated, and as
has been made clear today, the policy of settlements in
the occupied territories constitutes a serious obstacle to
peace. Insistence upon the creation of fairs accomplis on
matters as esSential to the forthcoming permanent status
negotiations as Jerusalem. and the settlements can be
interpreted as a desire to prejudge the result of the
negotiations, and thus inevitably and seriously affect the
climate of trust so urgently needed for the peace process.
It is fitting to recall today what was said on the
subject of Jerusalem by the Heads of State or Government
of the 113 countries members of the Non-Aligned
Movement at the Cartagena Summit in 1995. They
Security Council 3745th meeting (Resumption 2)
Fifty-second year 6 March l997
expressed their unqualified support for the legitimate
struggle of the valiant Palestinian people to guarantee
respect for its inalienable right to self-determination and
independence and reiterated the demand that Israel
withdraw from all occupied Arab and Palestinian territories,
including Jerusalem.
The Heads of State and Government also expressed
regret at Israel's decision to confiscate Palestinian lands and
properties in Jerusalem and its attempts to alter the
religious and historical character of the Holy City. In that
regard, they endorsed all the Security Council and General
Assembly resolutions on Jerusalem and deemed null and
void all Israeli actions that run counter to those resolutions.
They also called for the complete and scrupulous
implementation of the agreements, in particular the
provisions contained in Security Council resolutions 242
(1967), 338 (1973), 465 (1980), 478 (1980), and
underscored the need for the mechanism dealing with the
question of Palestine established by the General Assembly
to continue to function effectively. They then expressed
their support for the appeal made by the Jerusalem
Committee at its meeting in Ifrane, Morocco, in January
1994 to the Security Council, and especially to the two
sponsors of the peace process to take the necessary
measures with a view to demanding that Israel refrain from
establishing settlements, Judaizing the Holy City of
Jerusalem and making any geographic or demographic
change to the city. Israel was also asked to comply with the
agreements and conventions on the preservation of
Palestinian institutions and the Islamic and Christian holy
places in the Holy City of Jerusalem, in keeping with the
relevant resolutions of the Security Council.
On 25 September 1996, in this city, the Ministers for
Foreign Affairs of the member countries of the Non-
Aligned Movement met during the fifty-first session of the
General Assembly to commemorate the thirty-fifth
anniversary of the founding of the Non-Aligned Movement.
In their joint communique, the Ministers for Foreign Affairs
and Heads of delegations expressed their concern at the
deterioration of the situation in the region, and particularly
at the difficulties encountered by the peace process. They
expressed their unconditional support for the legitimate
struggle of the Palestinian people to secure their inalienable
rights to self-determination and independence and reiterated
their appeal that Israel withdraw completely from all the
Palestinian territories and other occupied Arab territories,
including Jerusalem.
To conclude, my delegation wishes to reiterate its
support for the peace process in the Middle East and to
urge the Security Council to adopt measures conducive to
respect for international law with a View to the
establishment of comprehensive peace and common
prosperity in the region.
The President: I thank the representative of
Colombia for the kind Words he addressed to me.
The next speaker is the representative of the
Philippines. I invite him to take a seat at the Council table
and to make his statement.
Mr. Mabilangan (Philippines): Allow me to extend
to you, Sir, my congratulations on your assumption of the
presidency of the Council and to pay tribute to your
predecessor, the Permanent Representative of Kenya, for
his successful term.
The Philippines expresses its deep concern about the
Israeli Government's decision to proceed with
construction in the eastern part of Jerusalem/Al-Quds.
This action, sadly, is not in conformity with the
spirit of dialogue and reconciliation which has otherwise
characterized the tenor of relations between the
Governments of Israel and Palestine as they engage
themselves in the Middle East peace process, Let us recall
the great progress made between Israel and Palestine in
the peace process, with the joint Declaration of Principles
signed in 1993, the Interim Agreement of 1995 and, more
recently, the Hebron protocol, concluded just two months
ago. We are most anxious that this recent development
may and will pose a serious obstacle to the final status
negotiations scheduled to commence in the next few
weeks.
The Philippines has long held that the Holy City of
Jerusalem is the sacred treasure of the faithful of
Christianity, Islam and Judaism. Thus, there is no room
for unilateral action with respect to the administration and
deveIOpment of the city. We reiterate our view that
further settlement in the occupied territories in Jerusalem
is contrary to the spirit and intent of the agreements
concluded between the Israeli and Palestinian authorities.
For its part, the Philippines has learned from its own
experience that parties to a peace process must at all
times have mutual consideration for each other's interests,
as well as a sincere willingness to make sacrifices for the
greater good. There certainly can be no greater good than
a secure and lasting peace.
Security Council 3745111 meeting (Resumption 2)
Fifty~second year 6 March 1997
The Philippines joins the Secretary-General and the
global community, which has spoken with unanimity in this
Chamber, in urging the Israeli Government to reconsider its
decision in the interest of peace for all peoples in the
region. The Philippines reiterates its unwavering support for
the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, as expressed
in our consistently voting in favour of all resolutions
pertaining to Palestine in the General Assembly.
The Philippines also renews its call for the
implementation of the resolutions on the Middle East
situation and the occupied territories enacted in this very
Chamber, particularly Security Council resolutions 242
(1967), 338 (1973) and 425 (1978), and for the successful
conclusion of the peace process bravely embarked upon by
the Israeli and Palestinian peoples and their neighbours.
Though the path may be arduous, let us continue to move
forward.
The President: I thank the representative of the
Philippines for the kind words he addressed to me.
The next speaker is the representative of Malta. I
invite him to take a seat at the Council table and to make
his statement.
Mr. Pace (Malta): Allow me to congratulate you, Sir,
on your assumption of the presidency of the Security
Council. Our congratulations also go to the outgoing
President for the excellent manner in which he presided
over the Council.
Peace has been the long-desired goal of the
international community. It requires of us all a
demonstrable commitment to the ideals enshrined in the
Charter of the United Nations and respect for the various
proclamations by both the Security Council and the General
Assembly on the various items which have been the subject
of deliberations in this Organization.
The issue under consideration today is not new; nor is
it one to which the international community has failed to
respond. It touches on the very nerve of a process which
has taken root in recent years; it threatens to undermine the
arduous path to peace, The Middle East has been blessed
with hope for a different future, one in which communities
and generations can live together in confidence and mutual
trust.
Actions which contravene the very spirit on which the
peace process has embarked cannot but be strongly
deplored. The recent decision by the Government of Israel
10 -
to undertake the construction of new housing units in the
Har Home/Jabal Abu Ghneim area of East Jerusalem not
only impacts on the more immediate consequences arising
from such actions, but will have long-lasting
repercussions on the ability to achieve a just and lasting
peace in the region.
The recent Hebron accord is a signal by the parties
of their willingness to build peace. As stated by my
Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs
in a letter to Prime Minister Netanyahu and President
Arafat on the signing of the accord,
"This historic accord is yet another
manifestation of the fact that quiet diplomacy
succeeds Where other measures, in failing, leave only
pain, disappointment and bitterness".
The decision taken on the construction of new
housing units stands in stark contradiction to this spirit. It
contravenes the relevant resolutions {of the Security
Council and the General Assembly, as it seeks to change
the physical character, demographic composition,
institutional structure or status of the Palestinian and other
Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem,
and it contravenes the fourth Geneva Convention of 1949.
The status of East Jerusalem remains subject to the
principles enshrined in Security Council resolution 242
(1967), notably the inadmissibility cf the acquisition of
territory by force.
The Government of Malta joins the rest of the
international community in calling on Israel to
demonstrate the resolve required in sustaining the
momentum achieved in the past years and days, and to
rescind its decision. Any change to the status of
Jerusalem prejudges the final status negotiations and
could lead to the reversal of a process of peace.
Malta joins others who have called on the leaders in
the region and beyond for a recommitment to the
objectives of peace. It is through the committed courage
of leaders that peoples may come to reap the benefits of
peace -»- a peace which we hope can become a reality for
the generations of Israelis and Palestinians who have lived
under the shadow of mistrust for too long.
The President: I thank the representative of Malta
for the kind words he addressed to me.
There are no further speakers on my list.
bemmty LDlmCtl 374m] meeting (Resumption 2)
Fifty-second year 6 March 1997
I would like to take this opportunity again to thank
representatives for their kind words addressed to
Ambassador Mahugu and to me in the course of this
debate.
The next meeting of the Security Council to continue
the consideration of the item on the agenda will be fixed
in consultation with the members of the Council.
The meeting rose at 4.25 pm.
11
▶ Cite this page
UN Project. “S/PV.3745Resumption2.” UN Project, https://un-project.org/meeting/S-PV-3745Resumption2/. Accessed .