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

Follow UNISPAL Twitter RSS


        General Assembly
3 November 1980


Thirty-fifth session
Agenda items 26 and 91



Letter dated 31 October 1980 from the Permanent Representative of
Israel to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General

I have the honour to refer to my letters of 16 November 1978 (A/33/376), 20 December 1978 (A/33/543) and 3 July 1980 (A/35/316-S/14045), in which I registered my Government’s strong objection to the publication by the United Nations Secretariat of a series of pseudo-scientific “studies” on various issues relating to the Arab-Israel conflict.

In the first of those letters I expressed regret that the United Nations had been drawn into the pattern, so characteristic of certain régimes, of rewriting history on the basis of transient political interests. With the second of them, I enclosed a detailed schedule illustrating the factual and historical errors and distortions contained in the two-part “study” entitled The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem, Part I: 1917-1947 1/ and Part II: 1947-1977 2/ (ST/SG/SER.F/1). With the last of those letters, I attached a memorandum of law prepared by an eminent authority on international law, Professor Julius Stone, currently of the University of New South Wales, Australia. That memorandum addressed itself to the “studies” in the above-mentioned series; it demonstrated that they all rest on flawed foundations and that, as a result, their conclusions are untenable.

In parallel with that series, the “Special Unit on Palestinian Rights”, established within the United Nations Secretariat, has over the last year begun to issue a series of popularized pamphlets bound in blue covers. Like the first series of so-called “studies”, also produced by that Unit, these blue pamphlets are emblazoned with the emblem of the United Nations and have been prepared “under the guidance of” the body known as the “Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People”. As anyone who followed the activities or read the publications of that Committee knows, it is nothing but a pliant tool in the hands of the PLO, and its efforts are essentially aimed at supporting the declared objective of that terrorist organization – namely, the dismantlement of the State of Israel, if not in one fell swoop, then in stages.

By producing and disseminating these “studies” and pamphlets, the United Nations is serving the cause of international terror, not the cause of international peace. In the process, the United Nations has once again misused international funds, gravely compromised the integrity of the Secretariat and exposed the Organization to severe and well-warranted criticism.

Most of the blue pamphlets are based on material which was first published in the “studies”. Given their sponsorship and their provenance, it is not surprising that they suffer from the same gross defects at the earlier series and are little more than thinly disguised pieces of propaganda on behalf of the PLO.

One of the pamphlets which is not based on previously published material is entitled “Israel’s Policy on the West Bank: Water Resources”. I attach herewith a critique of that pamphlet, illustrating a number of its conscious omissions and distortions. Similar serious flaws permeate all the other pamphlets in the series.

I have the honour to request that this letter and its attachment be circulated as an official document of the General Assembly under agenda items 26 and 91.
(Signed) Yehuda Z. BLUM
Permanent Representative of Israel
to the United Nations


1/ United Nations publication, Sales No. E.78.I.19.

2/ United Nations publication, Sales No. E.78.I.20.


Water Resources in Judea and Samaria

A recent publication issued by the “Palestinian Unit” in the United Nations Secretariat, entitled Israel’s Policy on the West Bank: Water Resources, presents and encourages a bogus thesis on this subject. It alleges, in essence, that Israel is exploiting the limited water sources of Judea and Samaria “at the expense of Arab farmers” in order “to make a larger amount of water available for Israeli consumption” (p. 10).

As the following data demonstrated, this thesis does not hold water.

1. Subterranean water sources, in the Middle East and elsewhere, do not correspond to political demarcation lines. Since 1967, it has been possible to develop the water system on the basis of geophysical, as opposed to political, considerations, with a view to the proper utilization and preservation of the available water resources. 2. Water consumption for domestic purposes by the inhabitants of Judea-Samaria has almost tripled since 1967, rising from 5.4 million cubic meters to almost 15 million cubic metros. Dependence on shallow wells, subject to extreme fluctuations caused by changing weather conditions, has been made unnecessary in large parts of Judea-Samaria. Instead, most inhabitants are assured a steady supply of water from modern, Israeli-built water supply systems taking advantage of new drilling technologies to reach previously untapped water sources. There are now almost 50 villages with running water, as opposed to a mere handful in 1967.

3. If, as the pamphlet insists, Israel’s water policies “have become a problem for citrus producers and vegetable farmers” (p. 10), that “problem” would have been reflected in statistics which would indicate declining agricultural productivity. In fact, the agricultural yield in Judea-Samaria has increased twelve-fold and the cultivated area under irrigation has expanded by 160%. These advances have been achieved despite the seemingly contradictory fact that actual water consumption for agricultural purposes has remained constant since 1967. The explanation lies in the more sophisticated methods of cultivation and economic watering systems – such as drip irrigation – introduced to Arab villagers in Judea-Samaria by Israeli agronomists.

4. In addition to tripling domestic water consumption and increasing Agricultural output twelve-fold, Israeli authorities have made various improvements in the water supply and delivery system in Judea-Samaria.

These facts demonstrate that the Arab inhabitants of Judea and Samaria are today the beneficiaries of an increased, safer and more assured supply of water than ever.

This, in itself, is enough to refute the allegations in the pamphlet under consideration. However, certain of its more glaring misstatements and innuendoes cannot be allowed to pass in silence.

4. The Awja Case

Table 1

New Wells Provided by
The Israel Administration
Since 1967

(in cubic metres per hour)
Herodion 2

Herodion 1
Deir Shaer
Shibtin 4
Beth Iba


Total yield



(supplying Bethlehem and
Hebron areas)
(supplying Ramallah area)
(supplying Nablus and its
western suburbs)
(supplying Jenin and vicinity)

Table 2

New Storage Facilities Provided by
The Israel Administration
Since 1967

Capacity (in cubic meters)
Kiryat Arba
Deir Abu Mas’al
Deir Shaer

Total capacity

9,850 cubic meters

Follow UNISPAL RSS Twitter