Question of Palestine home || Permalink || About UNISPAL || Search

English (pdf) ||Arabic||Chinese||Français||Русский||Español||



About the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People
Follow UNISPAL Twitter RSS

UNITED
NATIONS
A

        General Assembly
Distr.
GENERAL
A/AC.183/SR.94
30 November 1983

ENGLISH
ORIGINAL: SPANISH

COMMITTEE ON THE EXERCISE OF THE INALIENABLE RIGHTS
OF THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE 94th MEETING
Held at Headquarters, New York,
on Monday, 28 November 1983 at 10.30 a.m.

Chairman: Mr. SARRE (Senegal)

CONTENTS

Preliminary consideration of draft resolutions on the question of Palestine




This record is subject to correction.

Corrections should be submitted in one of the working languages. They should be set forth in a memorandum and also incorporated in a copy of the record. They should be sent within one week of the date of this document to the Chief, Official Records Editing Section, Department of Conference Services, room DC2-0750, 2 United Nations Plaza.

Any corrections to the record of this meeting and of other meetings will be issued in a corrigendum.


The meeting was called to order at 11.10 a.m.


PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATION OF DRAFT RESOLUTIONS ON THE QUESTION OF PALESTINE

1. The CHAIRMAN suggested that the Committee should consider the six draft resolutions which the General Assembly would have before it during the current session. If he heard no objection, he would take it that his suggestion had been accepted.

2. It was so decided.

3. The CHAIRMAN said that the draft resolutions before the Committee had been drawn up on the basis of Committee documents and in accordance with the non-aligned countries' suggestions, particularly those of the committee of eight concerned with the question of Palestine. He suggested that after an exchange of views on the subject, final drafting should be left to the Bureau. He requested all members of the Committee to sponsor the draft resolutions submitted, as was the custom.

4. Mr. TARASYUK (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) said that his delegation was not ready to state its position on the draft resolutions, which it had only just received. Once it was familiar with their contents, it would express its views.

5. Mr. TERZI (Observer, Palestine Liberation Organization) said that, on first reading, draft resolution A appeared to lack a reference to the Conciliation Commission which, had all the necessary documents, maps and registers. He suggested that the co-operation of the Commission on the subject of documentation should once again be sought.

6. Mr. GAUCI (Malta), Rapporteur, said he felt that the positive impetus given by the International Conference on the Question of Palestine should be exploited and that it was vital for the General Assembly to be able to adopt the Conference's recommendations, particularly the Declaration on Palestine. The Committee should therefore facilitate to the greatest extent possible the adoption by consensus of the decisions taken by the Conference.

7. He also pointed out that priorities needed to be assigned to the results of the International Conference: the most obvious priorities were the preparations and a political climate conducive to the steps needed to prepare for the proposed peace conference on the Middle East. He requested the representative of India, under whose chairmanship four of the draft resolutions had been drafted, to describe the background to each draft for the benefit of all delegations.

8. Mr. KUNADI (India) said that the committee of eight had met at the representative level in New York some days before to consider draft resolutions C, D, E and F. Resolution C was based on the Declaration adopted by the International Conference on the Question of Palestine and referred essentially to the proposed international peace conference. Resolution D was based on the Programme of Action adopted at the Conference, and referred to a Programme of economic and social assistance for the Palestinian people. Resolution E was also based on the Programme of Action and dealt with information questions. Resolution F, which, too, was based on the Programme of Action, called for a review of the implementation of the recommendations appearing in the Programme. The representatives on the committee of eight, who had considered the resolutions were in complete agreement on the subject.

9. The CHAIRMAN remarked that there were two elements which needed to be considered: first, there were those resolutions which, as he understood it, were adopted every year without much difficulty; secondly, there was the Conference on Palestine which had adopted the Declaration and Programme of Action. The principal element of the Declaration was, obviously, the international peace conference on the Middle East, which had to have the support and agreement of all nations in order to find just and lasting solutions to the question of Palestine. That, among all the drafts, was the key resolution as far as the work of the Committee was concerned. The remaining resolutions comprised a programme of action in which various elements to be applied during the year needed to be highlighted.

10. Although he understood the Ukrainian representative's point of view, he had thought that it should be possible to consider the draft resolutions, since all members had taken part in the proceedings of the International Conference, and to reach a consensus like that arrived at in Geneva.

11. Mr. TARASYUK (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) said that his delegation fully supported the aims of the Committee's work, particularly in relation to the draft resolutions. His comments applied not to substantive matters but to details of the organization of work. He repeated that his delegation was not ready to adopt the draft resolutions at the current meeting.

12. Mr. LESSIR (Tunisia) said that it might perhaps be possible to consider the draft resolutions which, as the Chairman had said, were adopted every year without great difficulty and then, later, conduct a general exchange of views on the remainder of the draft resolutions.

13. The CHAIRMAN said that the Bureau would continue to consider all the draft resolutions and would take into account the comments made at the current meeting. Meanwhile, it should be possible to discuss the non-controversial draft resolutions. Delegations wishing to make comments should do so forthwith or communicate them to the Bureau so that, if necessary, an emergency meeting of the Committee could be called to finish the work.

14. Mr. LOGOGLU (Turkey) said he agreed with what the observer for the Palestine Liberation Organization had said regarding the reference to the Conciliation Commission.

15. Mr. BURAYZAT (Observer for Jordan) asked what the observer for the Palestine Liberation Organization thought of draft resolution A, and remarked on the importance of giving delegations enough time to consult their Governments. He hoped that no definitive conclusion would be reached at the current meeting on any of the draft resolutions, and urged the Committee and the Bureau to recognize the importance of making contact with Governments.

16. Mr. TERZI (Observer, Palestine Liberation Organization) re-emphasized the importance of asking the Conciliation Commission to make its documentation available to the Committee.

17. The CHAIRMAN suggested that the Committee should proceed to a first reading of the text, and said that representatives would be given time to consult their Governments.

18. Mr. GAUCI (Malta), Rapporteur, said that the reason why no reference to the Conciliation Commission appeared in the draft resolution was that the Commission had said it was prepared to co-operate at any time in the debate on the question of Palestine. The matter was not one of substance but of form.

19. Mr. TERZI (Observer, Palestine Liberation Organization) said he had not been informed that the Committee had received a reply from the Conciliation Commission. If, indeed, the Committee had received such a response, the draft resolution should indicate that note was taken of the Commission's favourable reply.

20. The CHAIRMAN said that at an appropriate time, the Committee could find a way of including a reference to the Conciliation Commission.

21. Mr. BURAYZAT (Observer for Jordan) said that although Jordan attached great importance to the Geneva Declaration and the Programme of Action, it believed that paragraph 2 of draft resolution A should be reconsidered, taking into account draft resolution F.

22. The CHAIRMAN asked what changes the Observer for Jordan wished to make to paragraph 2 of draft resolution A.

23. Mr. BURAYZAT (Observer for Jordan) said that in that paragraph he would delete the words "as repeatedly endorsed by the General Assembly at its thirty-first session, and subsequently,". He suggested that members of the Committee should not make various proposals simultaneously and said that it was important not to divert attention from the Programme of Action.

24. Mr. GAUCI (Malta), Rapporteur, said that he understood the point raised by the Observer for Jordan but the fact remained, and could not be ignored, that the General Assembly had endorsed the Committee's recommendations on various occasions. The degree of urgency involved was also an important factor to be taken into account in the recommendations of the International Conference on the Question of Palestine. Moreover, it was not possible to say that the Security Council should have taken action long ago, because the recommendations had not been formulated until the end of the previous month. In his view, the phrase concerned was concise and precise and it was not necessary to change it.

25. The CHAIRMAN asked whether, apart from the change to be made concerning the Conciliation Commission, with an appropriate wording, it could be considered that there was no objection to draft resolution A in first reading.

26. Mr. BURAYZAT (Observer for Jordan) said that he had no objections. He understood the observations made by the Rapporteur and said that the Security Council was being asked to take action regarding the Committee's recommendations or the Geneva Declaration. He asked what should be done about the Programme of Action. He believed that the request that the Security Council should take action should refer to the Geneva Programme of Action and the Geneva Declaration, and not to the Committee's recommendations, since both the Programme of Action and the Declaration had been adopted by acclamation.

27. The CHAIRMAN said that the two things were not contradictory.

28. Mr. LOGOGLU (Turkey) said that the Observer for Jordan had raised an important point, although the two things were not mutually exclusive.

29. Mr. TERZI (Observer, Palestine Liberation Organization), referring to annex I, part III, paragraph 72 of the Committee's report (A/38/35) referred to in draft resolution A, said that in that paragraph the Security Council was requested to take action which should have been taken long ago. Moreover, draft resolution F requested that the Committee should keep under review the implementation of the recommendation of the Programme of Action, and that went further than the recommendations appearing in paragraph 72. Socio-economic aspects and other elements must be taken into account, not only those referred to in paragraph 72.

30. He saw no contradiction between the two things, unless it was believed that it was not possible to entrust those questions to the Committee, although in that respect the committee of eight had expressed full confidence in the Committee.

31. The CHAIRMAN said that a compromise solution could be found by which the Bureau would consult the Observer for Jordan about an appropriate formula. In general the observations made by the Observer for Jordan would be taken into account without deviating from the basic principle of the recommendations and Geneva Declaration.

32. Mr. LOGOGLU (Turkey) said that he had no objection to that procedure. All his observations about the draft resolution had been inspired by the concern to maintain the impetus achieved at the International Conference on the Question of Palestine and were aimed at achieving the broadest possible consensus and the adoption of concrete measures which would be almost universally accepted.

33. As to draft resolution B, he believed that operative paragraph 3 (a) would improve in quality and flexibility if the final phrase "particularly in those areas in which impartial information on the question of Palestine is inadequate" were replaced by the phrase "particularly in cases in which information on the question of Palestine is inadequate".

34. Mr. TERZI (Observer, Palestine Liberation Organization) said that he hoped that in drawing up the draft resolution the financial implications of operative paragraph 3, subparagraphs (a) and (b) had been taken into account so that the implementation of the draft resolution would not be impeded by lack of funds.

35. Mr. TARASYUK (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) asked whether the representative of the Secretariat could provide figures indicating the financial implications of the draft resolution.

36. Mr. YOGASUNDRAM (Chief of the Division for Palestinian Rights) said that he did not have details at the current time. It would be necessary to consider how many meetings or symposiums would have to be held and whether they would be held in New York or at the regional level. He wished to hear the Committee's view on the question.

37. Mr. TERZI (Observer, Palestine Liberation Organization) said that the fact remained that in section III of the Programme of Action adopted at Geneva, many activities of intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations were mentioned which would involve expenditure. Moreover, the Committee and the Division would have to provide the various organizations with background documents, lectures, seminars, etc. He asked whether that expenditure had been considered in calculating the financial implications of those measures.

38. The CHAIRMAN said that, if there was no objection, the Bureau would study the financial implications with the Chief of the Division for Palestinian Rights and would inform the Committee of the results in due course.

39. It was so decided.

40. The CHAIRMAN said that in respect of draft resolutions C, D, E and F, which were directly related to the International Conference on the Question of Palestine and the Declaration and Programme of Action, some time was required so that representatives could make contact with their Governments and then inform the Committee about their observations.

41. Mr. LOGOGLU (Turkey) requested clarification about the background and purposes of preambular paragraph F and operative paragraph 5 of draft resolution C.

42. Mr. TERZI (Observer, Palestine Liberation Organization) said that preambular paragraph F referred to the legal status of the Palestine Liberation Organization in conferences, a status which was related to operative paragraph 3 (b) and operative paragraph 4 which established that the Palestine Liberation Organization would participate on an equal footing and with equal rights in all efforts, deliberations and conferences on the Middle East. He recalled that in Geneva some legal formalities had been raised and that to avoid that situation it was specified that the Palestine Liberation Organization had to participate on an equal footing and with equal rights with the other participants.

43. Mr. LOGOGLU (Turkey), referring to operative paragraph 5 of draft resolution C inviting the Security Council to facilitate the organization of the Peace Conference, asked in what manner the Security Council could do that.

44. Mr. TERZI (Observer, Palestine Liberation Organization) quoted part II, section A, paragraph 2 of the Geneva Programme of Action and said that if the question of convoking an international conference were left exclusively to the Security Council, it would certainly not be held, since the United States of America was against peace and the holding of a peace conference. The expression "to facilitate the organization of the conference" had been used, instead of "to organize the conference", so that the United States of America could not veto the calling of the conference in the Security Council.

45. Mr. BURAYZAT (Observer for Jordan) expressed support for the questions which had been asked. He noted the explanation offered by the Observer for the Palestine Liberation Organization, but did not think that it sufficed to clarify the doubts and ambiguities referred to by the delegation of Turkey. He reiterated his delegation's concern regarding draft resolution C, preambular paragraph C (a), which recalled recommendations formulated at the thirty-first session of the General Assembly and asked for action to be taken in respect of them. He believed it was necessary to draw up and work for a single proposal. As to preambular paragraph F he asked how the Palestine Liberation Organization could have been invited to participate in the Security Council pursuant to rule 37 of its rules of procedures. Rule 37 referred to States Members of the United Nations which were not members of the Security Council. He recalled that whenever the Palestine Liberation Organization had been invited to attend a meeting, it had been done by a procedural vote. At Geneva, the Palestine Liberation Organization had been seated among the Members States for reasons of space, but he was not aware that it had been seated there because of rule 37 of the rules of procedure.

46. With reference to draft resolution C, paragraph 3 (f), he said that the first clause, which read "the right of all States in the region to existence within secure and internationally recognized boundaries", should in his opinion be replaced by the words "the right of all States in the region to live within internationally recognized boundaries", given that the word "secure" had been repeatedly used by Israel to justify its aggression.

47. With respect to operative paragraph 4, which reflected paragraph 5 of the Declaration, he said that his delegation had no problem with the Palestine Liberation Organization being offered equal or greater rights, but he asked whether it was possible to say that it had to participate in the peace conference on an equal footing and with equal rights. He wondered whether that referred only to the organization of the conference or also to decisions on the future of the region. He still did not understand how that could be accepted in principle.

48. He repeated that a radical reconsideration of the matter was necessary and expressed the view that if it was desired to invite the Security Council to organize the conference, the invitation would have to be based exclusively on the Geneva Conventions.

49. Mr. EL-FATTAL (Observer for the Syrian Arab Republic) stressed the importance of draft resolution C concerning a future peace conference. He observed that paragraph 5 of the Declaration contained an introductory part which, in his opinion, constituted an essential element for the achievement of a just solution to the Middle East conflict, but it was not included in paragraph 4 of draft resolution C. He wondered whether the Palestine Liberation Organization, which had been present at Geneva, wanted that introductory part to be removed from the substance of any future conference on the Middle East. An exchange of opinions on the matter was necessary with those delegations which had been present at Geneva and had prepared the draft, since that introductory part contained references to past resolutions which recognized the rights of the Palestinians and their right to participate in all meetings. The international peace conference should have not only "guidelines" but also a legal basis for its work; its work must be based on United Nations resolutions, since the question of Palestine should be considered in the United Nations only under the auspices of the United Nations.

50. What was stated in preambular paragraph F was not based on United Nations resolutions whereas the guidelines, for example, were United Nations guidelines. Furthermore, operative paragraph 4 was not sufficiently linked to United Nations resolutions aimed at achieving a just and lasting solution to the problem of Palestine, a basic element of which would be the creation in Palestine of the independent State of Palestine.

51. Mr. TERZI (Observer, Palestine Liberation Organization) pointed out that in draft resolution C preambular paragraph C reiterated the objectives of the Conference. As to the operative part, it had to be read in its entirety: paragraph 2 endorsed the Geneva Declaration as a whole; paragraph 3 welcomed the call for convening an international peace conference in conformity with the guidelines drawn up, and that indicated that the international conference should adhere to those guidelines. Paragraph 6 requested the Secretary-General to undertake immediate preparatory measures to convene the international peace conference. It was worth noting that the conference was thus to be convened through the United Nations Secretary-General and not independently of the Organization. He had to point out to the Observer for Jordan that the wording of preambular paragraph F was similar to that of the Security Council's decision inviting the Palestine Liberation Organization to participate with the same rights as were accorded to a State Member when invited to participate pursuant to rule 37 of the Security Council's provisional rules of procedure.

52. Paragraph 4 invited all parties to an international peace conference in which all would enjoy equal rights. If any representative could offer a more suitable wording, he should submit suggestions for clarifying the paragraph.

53. Mrs. MAIR (Secretary of the International Conference on the Question of Palestine) said it would be advisable for members of the Committee and the Bureau to take account of the draft resolution entitled "Assistance to the Palestinian people" (A/C.2/38/L.24/Rev.1) which had been adopted by the Second Committee under agenda item 12. To avoid duplication, it should be examined in connection with one of the draft resolutions before the Committee, draft resolution B.

54. Mr. TERZI (Observer, Palestine Liberation Organization) thanked the Secretary of the International Conference on the Question of Palestine for drawing attention to the draft resolution mentioned. Account should be taken of its contents in order to avoid duplication or contradictions between the two resolutions.

55. Mr. BURAYZAT (Observer for Jordan) agreed with the Secretary of the International Conference on the Question of Palestine. Since all the resolutions of the Second Committee had to be approved in plenary meeting, there was no need to have another resolution on the same question.

56. Mr. EL-FATTAL (Observer for the Syrian Arab Republic) said that the Observer for the Palestine Liberation Organization had not commented in detail on the observation made by the Syrian delegation. The international peace conference related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, which centered on the question of Palestine. In connection with paragraph 4, it was necessary to insist that the conference should be held under United Nations auspices for the purpose of implementing United Nations resolutions on the Question of Palestine and the Middle East, since those resolutions dealt with the rights of the Palestinian people and of the States whose territories were occupied.

57. Mr. BURAYZAT (Observer for Jordan) said it was sometimes unnecessary to re-examine questions which had already been decided by consensus, although it was undoubtedly necessary to recognize the importance of other factors. It was to be hoped that the Observer for Syria was aware that there were other opinions and that the remarks he had made represented only his own.

58. The CHAIRMAN said that the exchange of views was concluded and asked that comments should be sent to the Bureau as soon as possible so as not to delay the submission of the draft resolutions.

The meeting rose at 12.30 p.m.

Follow UNISPAL RSS Twitter