S/PV.6248 Security Council

I thank Mr. Serry for his briefing. I shall now give the floor to members of the Council wishing to make statements.

After two years as a member of the Security Council, I wish to take the floor at today’s meeting, as it is the last on the Palestinian question that my delegation will be participating in as a member. I wish to assess the way in which the Security Council has dealt with this issue. We have participated in the work of the Security Council with good intentions and a positive attitude. Sometimes, we have even given up our positions of national principle in order to make progress in the Council’s work because of words we often hear in the Council: “peace” and “final solution”. However, let us stop to consider the situation in Palestine and Israel. Last year, in 2008, after Israel had carried out a widespread attack on Gaza — Operation Cast Lead — and used white phosphorus, banned under international law, killing some 1,500 civilian and destroying United Nations facilities, the Council adopted resolution 1860 (2009). What happened after that? The siege continues. At the request of the Secretary-General, the Board of Inquiry went to Gaza to draw up a report. What has happened with that report? Nothing. There has been an advisory opinion (see A/ES- 10/273) of the International Court of Justice on the apartheid wall built by Israel, and no one even mentions it. The entire world acknowledges that what is happening in Gaza is a crime in the true sense of the word. What have we done? Even in resolution 1860 (2009), Israel is still above the law and beyond accountability. We now hear talk of the West Bank as a prosperous paradise compared to Gaza, which is governed by “terrorists”, as the members of Hamas are called — even though they were elected by the Palestinian people. If the Palestinians elect a militant group, they are called terrorists. But if the Israelis elect terrorists, they are called democratic. That is not fair, because if any State tries to bring Israelis to justice for the crimes committed in Gaza, the Council seems to be trying to change the law so that criminals will not be prosecuted. Three days ago, a photograph was published, which I am now displaying to members, and I urge them to look at it. It shows a young Palestinian tied up and blindfolded in the midst of a group of Israeli soldiers. This is a young Palestinian tied up, surrounded by Israeli soldiers, and suddenly, an Israeli soldier attacks and kills him. He was tied up and blindfolded, yet he was killed. Even worse, the occupation forces invaded his home and took these photographs inside his home. Then, there is talk of Shalit. Is Shalit a Boy Scout? Had he gone where he was captured for a picnic, or had he gone there to kill? There is talk of Rwanda and Burundi and the rape, murder and violence against civilians and pregnant women. What about the thousands of pregnant Palestinian women? When the Council discusses a Palestinian State, I ask it to show photographs of settlements, such as the ones I am displaying now. When the Council talks about a Palestinian State — I am also addressing the Personal Representative of the Secretary-General — where will that State be created? In a vacuum, in the air or on the ground? Now I shall display some maps: this was Palestine in 1948; this is Palestine since 1967; these spots are all settlements. The second map shows the 1947 partition, with two States: Palestine and Israel. And after 1967, the West Bank and Gaza can be seen marked in yellow. I have a question about this map, which resembles a tiger skin. There are settlements and infrastructure throughout the area, and when Mr. Netanyahu says he is going to freeze settlement building for 10 months in a very limited number of places, I am not at all convinced. Mr. Netanyahu said, in his book “A Place Among the Nations,”, published in 1996, that the West Bank belonged to Israel, and he affirmed that Israel would not leave the West Bank. Anyone can read this in his book. So there are contradictions that destroy his credibility. Unfortunately, as far as any evaluation is concerned, we can say that we are convinced that for certain members of the Council Palestinian lives do not count and their massacre will not be punished. Yet if a single Israeli is killed by a Palestinian rocket, it is considered an unpardonable crime, while the massacre of hundreds of Palestinians, including dozens of women and children, seems to be almost a legal Israeli right. When one single Israeli soldier is taken prisoner, that is considered to be an unpardonable condemnable crime, whereas the detention of more than 11,000 Palestinians, including hundreds of women and children, seems to be considered standard procedure, both legal and not requiring mention. These are double standards. Some members have given endless speeches on human rights, and yet their true stance was revealed at the moment of truth when they voted in the General Assembly on General Assembly resolution 64/10 on war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by Israel in Gaza (see A64/PV.39). Things will become clearer in the next few months when United Nations bodies endeavour to follow up on the Goldstone report on war crimes committed by Israel in Gaza. Sadly, I have to say, in conclusion, that this has been a bitter experience for us. We have witnessed injustice, oppression and inequity destroy truth and justice. The poor Palestinians, the Arab system and the official Arab order could not take a solid stance to face these challenges and our rights have, therefore, been wasted and our position has been weak.

We will make our formal statement in consultations. I just want to say that, while we certainly respect any member’s right to speak in the Chamber and say what they think, we think the better part of wisdom is to focus on the goal we all share, which is achieving a genuine two- State solution. A rhetorical display designed to enflame is not necessarily a constructive way to advance that goal. The United States remains fully committed to achieving a negotiated solution to the Israeli- Palestinian conflict, and we hope and expect that our colleagues on the Security Council will continue to be supportive in that endeavour.

In accordance with the understanding reached in the Council’s prior consultations, I now invite Council members to informal consultations to continue our discussion on the subject.