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

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

See also: UN DPI Multimedia (Ref: 038-089)
Follow UNISPAL Twitter RSS


        Security Council
20 April 1982

2357th MEETING

Held in New York on Tuesday, 20 April 1982, at 12.30 p.m.

President: Mr. KAMANDA wa KAMANDA

Present: The representatives of the following States: China, France, Guyana, Ireland, Japan, Jordan, Panama, Poland, Spain, Togo, Uganda, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Zaire.

Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/2357)

1. Adoption of the agenda

2. The situation in the occupied Arab territories:
Letter dated 12 April 1982 from the Permanent Representative of Morocco to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/14967);

Letter dated 13 April 1982 from the Chargé d'affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Iraq to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/14969)

The meeting was called to order at 12.45 p.m.

Adoption of the agenda

The agenda was adopted.

The situation in the occupied Arab territories:
Letter dated 12 April 1982 from the Permanent Representative of Morocco to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/14967);

Letter dated 13 April 1982 from the Chargé d'affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Iraq to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/14969)

1. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): In accordance with decisions taken at previous meetings on this item [2352nd to 2356th meeting], I invite the representatives of Israel and Morocco to take places at the Council table. I invite the representative of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) to take a place at the Council table. I invite the representatives of Bangladesh, Djibouti, Guinea, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Malaysia, the Niger, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Somalia, the Sudan, the Syrian Arab Republic, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber.

At the invitation of the President, Mr. Blum (Israel) and Mr. Mrani Zentar (Morocco) took places at the Council table; Mr. Terzi (Palestine Liberation Organization) took a place at the Council table; Mr. Sobhan (Bangladesh), Mr. Farah Dirir (Djibouti), Mr. Coumbassa (Guinea), Mr. Krishnan (India), Mr. Djalal (Indonesia), Mr. Rajaie-Khorassani (Iran), Mr. Mohammad (Iraq), Mr. Burwin (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya), Mr. Zainal Abidin (Malaysia), Mr. Oumarou (Niger), Mr. Naik (Pakistan), Mr. Allagany (Saudi Arabia), Mr. Djigo (Senegal),-Mr. Adan (Somalia), Mr. Abdalla (Sudan), Mr. EI-Fattal (Syrian Arab Republic), Mr. Kirca (Turkey) and Mr. Al-Qasimi (United Arab Emirates) took the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber.

2. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): I should like to inform members of the Council that I have received a letter from the representative of Kuwait in which he requests to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on the Council's agenda. In conformity with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite that representative to participate in the discussions without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the provisional rules of procedure.

At the invitation of the President, Mr. Abulhassan (Kuwait) took the place reserved for him at the side of the Council chamber.

3. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): Members of the Council have before them document S/14985, which contains a draft resolution submitted by Jordan and Morocco. Iraq and Uganda have also become sponsors of the draft resolution.

4. Mr. NUSEIBEH (Jordan): On behalf of the sponsors of draft resolution S/14985 and of the States which presented the complaint, I have the honor to submit the said draft resolution to the Council and respectfully to request that it be put to the vote.

5. The outrageous Israeli armed attack which occurred on Easter Sunday, 11 April, against one of the holiest and oldest Islamic sanctuaries, and the attendant grievous loss of life and numerous injuries have shocked the entire civilized world. The subsequent train of terror, which still afflicts the unarmed civilian inhabitants of the occupied territories, should be an intolerable burden on the conscience of the Council, upon which we call to redeem its obligations.

6. I am in duty bound to make it perfectly clear that the text of the draft resolution before us today is regarded by the 36 States which presented the complaint as failing far short of what would be commensurate with the enormity of the crime, which is but part of a continuing pattern that has gone on unabated and will continue in the future. But constrained by the imperative of obtaining the maximum number of votes from member States, the sponsors thought it prudent to put the draft resolution in the mild form in which it is being submitted to make it palatable to the Council. The Council having had arduous debates on these momentous events, I have nothing else to add but to seek your support and to request that the draft resolution be put to the vote.

7. Mr. de La BARRE de NANTEUIL (France) (interpretation from French): The Council is meeting today to consider the complaint of the Islamic countries following an incident the exceptional gravity of which has not escaped the notice of my Government. France understands the reactions aroused by these acts, which are not only criminal but also sacrilegious, since they were attacks committed against Islamic holy places the mosques of Caliph Omar and Al-Aqsa-at the very time when the worshippers had gathered for prayer.

8. Deeply moved by the tragic events of recent days, the French Government cannot remain indifferent to this new tragedy: it shares the feelings of the 41 member States of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, as well as their indignation over the unjustifiable acts which have just been committed. France firmly condemns those acts, and those responsible for them should be punished severely. The Israeli authorities must, in future, take all necessary measures to prevent a repetition of such tragic events. France would further remind Israel of the need to ensure respect for the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 1949,1 which is applicable to the occupied territories.

9. My Government is convinced that the best means of preventing such acts would be to infuse into people's minds a spirit of peace and to prevent the maneuverings of fanatics of whatever stripe by restoring a climate of confidence. Only through dialogue and by working towards agreement among the interested parties will it be possible to find the favorable atmosphere of understanding that would make it possible to preserve the unique and universal character of the City of Jerusalem. Indeed, only through mutual respect among the different faiths and relations among men of faith and good will can it be possible to preserve the sacred nature of that city, which should be a beneficial meeting place, rather than a place of bloody and sterile confrontation.

10. As was stated by His Majesty Hassan II, King of Morocco, in a message he sent to the Council, Islam preaches tolerance and recommends in its Holy Book that people act with moderation in order to prevail, by the most appropriate means, upon enemies to think of themselves as friends. My country endorses that recommendation, which is at the very heart of the message of the three great monotheistic religions.

11. Mr. WYZNER (Poland): The Council is once again holding a series of urgent meetings to consider grave events taking place in the occupied Arab territories. Once again it is called upon to deal with the situation there-specifically in the City of Jerusalem--and to take the necessary steps in the interests of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and of safeguarding international peace and security, as well as for the protection of the basic rules of international law. Once again the aggressive Israeli policies of creeping annexation of those territories, and the resulting methods of terror, and the subject of our deliberations.

12. It was with deep shock that public opinion of the world learned of the armed attack by an Israeli soldier on the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, one of the most sacred places for Islam, a monument of Islamic culture belonging to the treasury of civilization and an object of superb architecture. The bullets of the perpetrator took innocent human lives and injured numerous people. New names were added to a long list of victims who have fallen in recent days in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and the other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967. This action cannot but add to the serious tensions already existing in the Middle East; it cannot but increase the danger of conflagration.

13. There is no need to point to the explosiveness of the situation in the region. Poland's position in that respect was presented unequivocally on 13 April 1982 by Joseph Czyrek, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Polish People's Republic, who met with Arab ambassadors accredited to Warsaw. At that meeting, the ambassadors outlined the position of the Arab States concerning the present situation in the Middle East Mr. Czyrek assured them that Poland would continue to render its support to the struggle of the Arab peoples for a just peace in the Middle East and that I would oppose the policy of aggression and terror, as well as interference, of imperialist forces in the affairs of Arab nations.

14. The tidal wave of protests and manifestations of solidarity with the Arab people inhabiting the occupied territories is passing now through many countries. It is not limited to Islamic communities all over the world; it reaches all those to whom human values are dear and close. At the same time, we are witnessing ceaseless Israeli threats and military preparations. We are meeting with persistent and intensified policies of terror pursued by Israel towards the Palestinian Arab population.

15. The Council, under these circumstances, must live up to its high responsibilities. In our view, it should, inter alia, strongly condemn the appalling acts that I referred to earlier, as well as strongly emphasize and reaffirm the applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949,1 to all territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem, as has been done in numerous United Nations resolutions; for it is the occupying Power which bears responsibility for the events on that dark Easter Sunday and which is obliged to observe the provisions of that convention and other international instruments governing military occupation.

16. At the same time, the Council should point out that such criminal acts cause not only loss of, and injury to civilian life, but also losses to the cultural heritage of mankind. In consequence, they also endanger international peace.

17. At this juncture, my delegation wishes once again to stress forcefully that no acquisition of territory by military conquest is admissible and that all attempts designed to alter the status of the city of Jerusalem are impermissible and illegal.

18. In conclusion, I should like to underline that only the total withdrawal of Israel from all the occupied Arab territories, which is a prerequisite for establishing a lasting and just peace in the region, can be the ultimate safeguard against acts of violence, destruction or profanation against religious buildings and sites in those territories.

19. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The next speaker is the representative of Kuwait. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

20. Mr. ABULHASSAN (Kuwait): Sir, the delegation of Kuwait congratulates you warmly on your assumption of the presidency of the Council. This is a high office that places enormous responsibility on your shoulders, but we are certain that, with your skill, you will handle it with success. We pledge our support to you. We should also like to thank the out- going President, Mrs. Kirkpatrick of the United States of America, for her efforts during the month of March.

21. In the United States there is a word for habitual criminal offenders who keep on committing crimes while waiting for justice to take its course against their previous crimes. They are called "repeaters". In the international field we have a "repeater" of the worst type. Hundreds of unheeded resolutions of the Security Council, the General Assembly and other United Nations bodies and agencies are pilling up to stand as monumental testimony to Israel's arrogant defiance of the world community and of the civilized world.

22. But the crime committed by Israel this time, the sacrilegious and treacherous attack on the sacred Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, the third- holiest shrine of the 800 million Muslims all over the world, defies any comprehension and any exercise of patience. It also shows that there is no limit to the Israeli crimes, either in number or in kind.

23. The Israeli representative called this act a despicable act of lunacy. That was about the only right thing he has said since this horrible incident was brought before this body. But we do not agree with him, with his masters in Tel Aviv and with those friends of theirs who hastened to say almost instantly that it was the act of a deranged individual.

24. Legally it might look so, because it was the culprit, Goodman, who was caught pulling the trigger; but there is ample proof, as indicated by the report of the Islamic Higher Council in Jerusalem, that there is no way that the damage in the Dome of the Rock could have been done by one shooter.

25. But this crime is so grave and so outrageous that evaluation of it should go far beyond the mere punishment of the culprit. Rather, any such evaluation should be made within the context of several relevant considerations, which I shall sum up as follows.

26. First, this act should not be looked upon as an isolated act, because it is not. The same Haram al--Sharif was subjected to another despicable act when a fire was set in the Al-Aqsa Mosque in 1979. So, in the short span of three years, this seven-century-old Islamic shrine has been subjected to two heinous crimes. Both have taken place during the Israeli occupation of the Holy City of Jerusalem and both have been handily characterized as being the act of a deranged person.

27. Secondly, this act should also be seen within the context of the suspicious excavations which have been taking place beneath the Muslim shrine since the Israeli occupation of the Holy City of Jerusalem. In paragraphs I and 2 of its resolution 36/15, the General Assembly rightly characterized those excavations as "a flagrant violation of the principles of international law and the relevant provisions of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949," and decided that "such violations by Israel constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive and just peace in the Middle East as well as a threat to international peace and security".

28. Thirdly, this act should also be seen within the context of the kind of lunatic ideologies and philosophies with which young Israelis and Jews all over the world are indoctrinated. I mean by that the Zionist doctrines which started with the false maxim of the Zionist pioneers-"a land with no people to a people with no land-and which ended up With philosophies which can create the conditions to make that false equation come true. To achieve that goal, the Israelis are now acting on these three equally false assumptions: that the whole land of Palestine is the land of Israel-or "Eretz Yisrael" as they call it-and that it should be taken over by the Jews by any means; that the Palestinian people are aliens in their own ancestral homes and therefore should be driven out in order to make room for the Jews; and that any method is right to achieve those two objectives.

29. This ultimate plan of the Israeli colonialist settlers in Palestine is being systematically implemented by a very comprehensive set, of processes, ranging from forcibly confiscating the lands of the Palestinians, to terrifying the people in an effort to drive them out of the country, to changing the character of the land in an effort to give it eventually a totally Jewish character.

30. The United Nations is well aware of the Israeli intentions through the reports of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories, on the one hand, and through the consideration of nonstop Israeli violations of international law or the Charter of the United Nations on the other.

31. This lawlessness of the Israeli regime as indicated by its total disregard of international law as well as international norms of behavior could have only one impact on the minds of Israeli fanatics, namely, to encourage them to do whatever they feel like doing.

32. Now, those fanatics who want to go on stealing Palestinian land and driving the Palestinians out of their homes and country by methods more outrageous than those preferred by the less fanatic Israelis are the fringe in Israel, and the gunman who desecrated the Holy Shrine of the Dome of the Rock is, as reported by The Washington Post of 13 April, "from the fringe but it is a fringe sustained politically and psychologically by a far larger and more central body of Israeli opinion".

33. Against that background, it can be easily perceived that the culprit in this heinous crime is not the individual or individuals who pulled the trigger but, rather, the lunatic and deranged ideologies of the Israeli leadership. All one has to do is listen to the hate-mongering trio of Begin-Sharon Shamir to be certain that there will be more and more Goodmans in the months and years ahead.

34. Those are the ideologies that encourage an Israeli soldier to kill in cold blood a seven-year-old boy or a fifty-year-old woman just coming back from the field or another soldier, although he had been ordered to withdraw after the incident was over, to throw a tear-gas grenade near the mosque. As The New York Times of 12 April reported: "worshippers came out coughing and wiping their eyes. One elderly man was carried to an ambulance. A few of the troops walked away laughing."

35. Those soldiers, together with the trigger-happy soldiers who go on shooting with live ammunition at stone-throwing teenagers. who never shot a bullet in several weeks of uprising against the ruthless measures of the occupying Power, are the true disciples of the teachings of that Israeli trio.

36. It is one of the ironies of our age that the victims of fascism in the first half of this century have become the neo-Fascists of the second half. It is yet another irony of the age that the "David" of the past has become the "Goliath" of the present. This has been so obviously manifested by the fact that the army with the most modern and most sophisticated United States-supplied arms is acting as though it was afraid of the oldest instrument of self-defense-the stone. But, actually, the so-called valiant Israeli army is not afraid of stones. It is afraid of the will of the Palestinian people to challenge the Israeli occupation even if they have to do it with stones. The upsurge of national feeling in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, which sets a stone-armed people under occupation against the most ruthless and relentless occupying Power in memory, should be proof enough to the Israelis-who are apparently not good judges of history-that the Palestinians are determined to continue their struggle against their colonialist settlers until they achieve all their goals-goals which have been upheld by various resolutions of the United Nations.

37. The latest act of desecration perpetrated by the Israelis against one of the holiest shrines in Islam could not be, and should not be, taken as an isolated incident but, rather, as part and parcel of the entire gradual process of Zionizing the whole of Palestine. It is only one phase of the Zionist grand design to de-Palestinize, de-Arabize and de-Islamize the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in preparation for their annexation to Israel. Hence the over-all outrage which has swept the Islamic world, outrage made manifest by the joint draft resolution before the Council [S/14985] on the one hand, and by the general strike which has marked the total solidarity of the Muslim world with the Palestinian struggle, on the other.

38. It is time that the Council lived up to its international duty and tried to put an end to the unending Israeli defiance of its will. It is also time that the one permanent member of the Council which provides Israel's continued encroachments on world peace with its protective shield, through its indiscriminate use of the power of veto, reassessed its position and lived up to its commitment as a guardian of world peace in its capacity as a permanent member of the Council.

39. Mr. IRUMBA (Uganda): Once again the Council has met to consider the question of the situation in the occupied Arab territories. Only two weeks ago we considered the developments in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip resulting from measures adopted by the Israeli Government-measures which point clearly to Israel's intention to annex the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and force the Palestinians to flee that area.

40. The shooting and killing of innocent civilians anywhere is regrettable and ought to be condemned. It is particularly reprehensible when it occurs in a place of worship. My delegation shares the sense of outrage of the Islamic community at this senseless act of sacrilege.

41. There have been attempts to explain the act as that of a lone mentally deranged individual. My delegation does not accept this explanation. The statement of the Islamic Higher Council clearly shows that it was not an act perpetrated by a mere lone gunman but that other Israeli soldiers were implicated.

42. This incident should not be viewed in isolation. The repetition of these acts of sacrilege follows the series of legislative and administrative measures aimed at altering the status and very character of the Holy City of Jerusalem, which the Tel Aviv authorities have proclaimed as their eternal capital. This they have done in defiance of the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council. The general pattern of Israel's policy in the occupied Arab territories is that of violence against the Palestinian people. It is this policy which gave encouragement to the commission of this wanton and senseless act of 11 April. It must be emphasized that the root of the turmoil in the Middle East is the denial of the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people and the continued illegal occupation of Arab lands by Israel. The desecration of the Mosque and the Dome of the Rock under-scored the need for a quick and just solution of the root problem of the Middle East. Such a solution must include, inter alia, the withdrawal of Israel from the occupied Arab territories, the right of the Palestinians to return to their homeland and the exercise by the Palestinians of the right to self-determination.

43. Since restoration of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people constitutes the centerpiece of a settlement, it follows that the Palestinians, through the PLO, their sole representative, must necessarily be involved in the negotiations. To pretend that a solution can be achieved without the participation of the PLO is indeed to bury one's head very, very deeply in the sand.

44. In the course of this debate, the Israeli representative accused the Arab countries of not honoring General Assembly resolution 181 (II), but conspicuously missing from his statement was any indication as to whether Israel was prepared to adhere to that resolution. The passage of time has in no way detracted from the validity of that resolution or of resolution 194 (III), which provided for the return of the Palestinian refugees to their homes.

45. My delegation wishes to emphasize that it is imperative that the holy and international character of Jerusalem should be preserved. To do otherwise would be an affront to the international community.

46. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): I now call on the representative of Israel.

47. Mr. BLUM (Israel): The course of this debate and the nature of the draft resolution before us [ibid.] are yet another glaring evidence of the double standard which Arab Governments and their supporters seek to apply to Israel. They are also evidence of the abuse to which the machinery of the Security Council has been put by the sponsors of this debate. Exercises such as this are sapping whatever little authority and effectiveness the United Nations may still have retained.

48. While their own countries are torn by dissension, internal strife and endless backbiting, the Arab Governments, in a rare display of togetherness, have gathered here to demonstrate their unity in hatred of Israel. They have fallen over each other in attributing to Israel crimes of which they themselves are guilty.

49. A despicable act of sacrilege was committed by a single individual at the Dome of the Rock. That person has already been arraigned and will stand trial before an Israel court of law. The Government of Israel has expressed its dismay and shock and has acted swiftly, energetically and effectively. Yet, in a ritualistic outburst of frenzy, the Arab Governments and their fellow travelers have discerned in this affair a golden opportunity to stir up religious hatred and fanaticism. This has been done to mask Arab misdeeds and to project Arab guilt onto others. The mosque- destroyers and the church- and synagogue-demolishers have held forth sanctimoniously on the desecration of religious sites. The royal custodian of the holiest shrine of Islam, who for long suppressed details of a massive, politically motivated and costly raid on the great mosque at Mecca, asked for a work stoppage all over the Muslim world, to condemn an isolated act in Jerusalem. I mentioned before "fellow travelers". At last two of them spoke earlier in this debate today. The representative of the martial-law regime of Poland saw fit to leap into this debate. So did the representative of Uganda.

50. The PRESIDENT interpretation from French): I call on the representative of Poland on a point of order.

51. Mr. WYZNER (Poland): Mr. President, with all due respect I would recall that some time ago-I believe it was two or three days ago-you made a ruling that representatives around this table should be addressed using the proper name of their countries. Could you kindly ask the representative of Israel to abide by your ruling.

52. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): As I have had occasion to do in the past, I now reiterate the appeal I made to members of the Council. I now invite the representative of Israel to continue his statement.

53. Mr. BLUM (Israel): The representative of Poland, who speaks for a country that is under a martial-law régime, and the representative of Uganda have leapt into this debate. Let me tell both of them: "Charity begins at home."

54. With regard to Uganda, many of us have been appalled in recent days by a report of Amnesty International detailing the massive violations of human rights reported from Uganda-and I am speaking about contemporary Uganda, not the Uganda of Idi Amin- including extra-legal executions, torture and killings of people in detention and abductions. According to one report, more than 70 people were killed at Katabi barracks in Entebbe at the end of March shortly after they had been rounded up. They were said to have been buried in a mass grave near the barracks. More examples of the massive violation of human rights by Uganda can be found in this press release by Amnesty International which was published on 14 April 1982.

55. So let me repeat to the fellow travelers what I said before: "Charity begins at home."

56. Had the meetings of the Council over the past few days been confined to a litany of cynical incantations by the Arabs and their friends, that in itself would have been bad enough. But the attacks on Israel were only one part of a studied plan of harassment by all means possible. These means are now spilling over into the area of religious and racial incitement. The Syrians, the Jordanians, the Saudis were never held responsible nor were they accused of the many crimes they committed against holy shrines in their own countries. What is all this if not bigotry-religious, political and racial bigotry? What is this if not hypocrisy on an unprecedented scale?

57. It would be naive to characterize this debate merely as an outrage, for there are great and horrible dangers in the stirring of religious emotions through the machinery of the United Nations. These thoughts must surely have crossed many minds here. More-over, the silence of many of the onlookers in this chamber has been profoundly disturbing and remi-niscent of a period we thought belonged to the past.

58. The draft resolution submitted yesterday is a mirror image of the entire debate. The draft seeks to associate Israel with the crime of a single individual acting on his own.

59. Israel would have been prepared to consider supporting the terms of a draft resolution that spoke of the 95 mosques and the many churches destroyed in Hama by the Syrian army, of the necessity of studying the lessons to be gleaned from the attack on the Great Mosque in Makkah, of the destruction of the many churches and holy shrines in Lebanon and of the 58 synagogues destroyed by the Jordanians in Jerusalem up to the reunification of the city in 1967.

60. Any approach that would single out Israel for a crime it did not commit and one which it has condemned, an approach that would totally ignore in the same context the massive acts against holy sites of all religions in the Arab world, would be a demonstration of hypocrisy that should not bear the seal of the Security Council.

61. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): Mr. Clovis Maksoud, the Permanent Observer of the League of Arab States, to whom the Council has extended an invitation under rule 39 of its provisional rules of procedure [2352nd meeting], wishes to make another statement. With the consent of the Council, I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make that statement.

62. Mr. MAKSOUD (League of Arab States): It was not our intention to make a further statement. However, developments in recent days and even recent minutes indicate that there has been an attempt to distort the objectives of the Arab and Islamic countries in coming to the Council in the aftermath of the sacrilegious attack on the holy shrines of Islam in Jerusalem. There has been an attempt to deflect the proceedings of the Council from the focus of what has taken place and from the international consensus that has developed concerning the vicious attack on the Holy Dome of Islam, and to picture the situation as though this display of Arab unity and Islamic unity was not an articulation of the genuine feelings, the outrage, of the whole Muslim world about that vicious attack. The attempt to absolve the occupying Power in Jerusalem, ab initio, of its direct responsibility under the fourth Geneva Convention' and under international law is an attempt to create a situation where Jerusalem is not treated as an occupied territory, an attempt to legitimize what the international community has correctly defined as illegal and illegitimate occupation.

63. We have witnessed Israeli representatives coming to the Council and holding a stick with which they attack, back and forth, right and left, anybody who questions or criticizes the policies and behavior of the Israeli occupying authorities in Jerusalem and in the rest of the occupied Palestinian territories. They are treating the Council almost in the same manner as the tanks and bayonets of the Israeli occupying authorities treat the Palestinian and Syrian inhabitants of the occupied territories.

64. This is not a rare display of Arab and Islamic unity; rather, it is characteristic behavior. It is true that we might have our great challenges and different responses to our internal social problems and developmental processes. But the debate within the Arab body politic, however acute it might be, results from the organic nature of our national relations and responsibilities. So, when, the Arab and Islamic countries approached the Council to seek relief in regard to the crimes being committed in Jerusalem and in the rest of the occupied territories, it was because we had a firm belief, a conviction, and indeed faith, in the credibility and effectiveness of the United Nations, its mechanisms, its Charter and its resolutions-a belief, conviction and faith in contradistinction to the institutionalized contempt that Israel has for the United Nations, its Charter, its resolutions and its mechanisms. To say that we have come to the United Nations in order to fan hatred is totally untrue. Indeed, that would be uncharacteristic of both Islamic and Christian believers, who respect Judaism and an integral part of our spiritual and moral heritage, and who know that at no time has any Muslim or Christian in the Arab and Islamic world considered an Arab Jew to be anything but an Arab. For in its real value system Islam, as well as Christianity, teaches that we have to respect all religious beliefs. And it is out of our desire to bring about a level of tolerance, compassion and human reconciliation that we have come to the Council.

65. To treat criticism of Israel or condemnation of its activities and behavior as a form of intolerance is just ludicrous. Israel cannot assume that it speaks for Judaism or the entirety of the Jewish people. If I may say so, in many ways, philosophically, Israel usurps the representation of Judaism and of world Jewry. That is why all our endeavors are directed towards ensuring that the United Nations, including the Security Council, is seized of the problem so that all hell will not break loose. The recklessness of Israeli behavior, the institutionalized discrimination against non-Jews represented by many of the behavior patterns of Israeli authorities in the occupied territories, Israel's racist concept of others, the dichotomy between the Jew and others that Israel has institutionalized and built into a mystique and a State structure: all that is at the root of the behavior pattern of an Israel that unfolds its conquering and annexationist policies inside and outside Jerusalem.

66. How can we be told here that the whole Organization of the Islamic Conference and all the States of the Arab League have brought this question to the United Nations to fan hatred, when what we want is to resolve the roots of a conflict peacefully? In our entire heritage, the Arab heritage and the Islamic heritage, we have borne hatred for nobody. But we claim the legitimacy of our resistance to annexation, to occupation, to usurpation and to the violation of our rights.

67. If at any time the young children of Palestine have raised sticks and stones -when confronted with the bayonets and tanks of Israel and that is considered violence, it is the violence of those who have committed themselves to the dignity that equality introduces.

68. Israel claims that it is an aggrieved party and goes roaming around on a fishing. trip in its strikes and attacks against those who criticize its policies. That is a well-known phenomenon to which Israel has repeatedly resorted. If it cannot answer criticisms and condemnations, it resorts to trying to undermine the credibility and veracity of its critics and those who condemn its activities.

69. This is an issue of deep emotional and moral concern for the entire Islamic world. This is a matter of which the Council must be seized, because at the roots of the strikes against Muslim shrines in occupied Jerusalem are the beginnings, the seeds of conflict that might at a certain moment in the future be uncontrollable and unmanageable.

70. That is why we came to the Council-to bring about genuine and historic reconciliation-not to fan the emotions of hatred, as has been distortedly claimed.

71. Mr. IRUMBA (Uganda): The representative of Israel has, in his characteristic way and that of his country, attempted to slander my country, as indeed anybody who speaks out in favor of the Palestinian people.

72. This slander has not been confined to Uganda alone. As we know, they extend it to former President Giscard d'Estaing. They extended it to Chancellor Schmidt and to Secretary Casper Weinberger. And the Council will recall that when Israel annexed the Golan Heights and the United States made a statement and representations to them about annulling that act Prime Minister Begin summoned the Ambassador of the United States and gave him a lecture in which he indicated that they knew about the American body count concept in Viet Nam and that they should not be lectured about human rights violations by the United States-even though it is their benefactor. That is the type of slander for which Mr. Blum is well known.

73. With reference to my country, the Council might recall that it has gone through a period of Fascist dictatorship from which it is just recovering-a dictatorship with which, I must say, Israel fraternized until things went sour for them.

74. The Uganda Government has been co-operating with the United Nations in the areas of human rights and returning the country to normalcy-unlike Israel, which does not allow United Nations human-rights personnel to visit it to investigate human rights. Our country is returning to normalcy; we have held elections. There have been attacks by people unwilling to accept the results of the election and the ballot-box results. We do investigate those human-rights violations that are indicated.

75. But what the representative of Israel has done is to rely on reports which are at best unsubstantiated press reports. The tactics of the representative of Israel will not prevent Uganda from supporting the just rights of the Palestinian people.

76. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): I take it that the Council is ready to proceed to the stage of voting on the draft resolution before it [S/14985].

77. I shall now call upon those representatives who wish to speak before the vote.

78. Mr. NISIBORI (Japan): The Council has once again been seized of the situation in the occupied Arab territories, particularly in Jerusalem, where we have witnessed increased tension following the tragic shooting of innocent, worshippers and the appalling sacrilege committed against the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aqsa Mosque in that Holy City last Easter Sunday.

79. This is indeed a source of profound sorrow not only to those who adhere to the Islamic faith but also to all those who earnestly wish to preserve the Holy City of Jerusalem, the center of the great spiritual traditions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

80. My delegation deeply regrets the loss of innocent lives and the desecration of the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, and we fear that the situation in the occupied Arab territories might deteriorate further. We strongly hope that Israel, the occupying Power, will fulfil its responsibilities by protecting and safeguarding the sanctity of the Holy Places in the occupied Arab territories and preventing any acts of destruction or profanation of the Holy Places in the future.

81. My delegation will therefore vote in favor of the draft resolution in document S/14985.

82. Mr. KARRAN (Guyana): The Council has once again met to consider the serious situation existing in the occupied Arab territories, this time at the request of His Majesty King Hassan II of Morocco in his capacity as Chairman of the Al-Quds Committee of the Organization of the Islamic Conference.

83. The particular event that brought about this request was the dastardly act of violence and sacrilege committed in the Holy Places of Jerusalem on 11 April last. On that day an Israeli soldier-and we are told by the Israelis that he was mentally deranged and acted alone-attacked and cold-bloodedly murdered and injured innocent Muslims as they worshipped at the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

84. My delegation adds its voice in strong condemnation of that reprehensible act. The violence committed against innocent Muslims at prayer in itself calls for the strongest condemnation, but the act was consummated in the sacred Al-Aqsa Mosque, one of the holiest shrines of the Muslim people. That act greatly affronted not only the Muslim people and their religion, but all religious faiths throughout the world.

85. In my delegation's view, the Israeli authorities cannot escape blame for the violence and sacrilege committed on 11 April. That act has to be seen in the context of Israel's own deliberate policies of State-sponsored violence against the Arab peoples in the occupied territories, of colonization and annexation, of expulsion and repression of the Palestinians. Those official acts of a Government which has itself acted in defiance of the will of the international community and the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people provided encouragement for the criminal and brutal act.

86. My delegation will support the draft resolution in document S/14985.

87. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): I speak now in my capacity as representative of ZAIRE.

88. It was with genuine shock that the Government and people of Zaire learned of the sacrilegious attack against peaceful worshippers in the Al-Aqsa Mosque and against the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem.

89. Jerusalem, a holy city venerated by the three major revealed, monotheistic religions of the' world -Judaism, Islam and Christianity-is both the symbol of supreme inspiration to believers and the focal point of their faith. The sacred nature of heavenly Jerusalem-of the new Jerusalem which emerged a jewel from the desert, in the words of Racine-a city where Muslims and Christians, bound together by deep faith, mingle in the bustling streets-has been affirmed down through the ages. Be it the set of dogmas and practices of a particular religious belief or a moral and mystical approach to life based not on revelation but on reason, the heart and on various human traditions, religious faith is what intimately compels people to follow given rules of conduct. It has always been a major force, if not the major force, galvanizing men to action inspiring believers to the very limits of sacrifice. It is considered by believers to be one of their most sacred duties, and the essence of monotheistic religion is that it honors; a single God, as Saint Thomas said, for the sole reason that He is the prime mover behind the creation and government of the world.

90. According to age-old traditions, prayer and religious observance on the part of believers are a visible assertion of that essence. Thus one can easily understand how in such an atmosphere any irreverent manifestation, any act of disrespect to God, to their faith, to holy things, to places of worship and prayer, is regarded by the faithful as an act of provocation. As such, it can have extremely grave consequences.

91. Such manifestations, as you know, have often been the root-causes of war, because acts of desecration are often considered attacks upon respect for what is most intimately cherished by man: his autonomy and dignity-in sum, everything he is and represents. And it will be noted that the problem now before us affects not only Moslems. No other religion -no other religious group, could tolerate such acts against it.

92. That is why, in its many resolutions, particularly resolution 476 (1980), the Council has reaffirmed the need to respect the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem and has reiterated that all measures and actions which purport to alter the geographic, demographic and historical character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem are null and void and must be reversed under the terms of the relevant resolutions of the Security Council.

93. That is why the shooting of peaceful worshippers in the Al-Aqsa Mosque-a wanton, deranged act of provocation-horrified millions of believers all over the world and throughout the international community.

94. Indeed not a single voice has been heard in this chamber which has not condemned and deplored that act of senseless violence committed against one of Islam’s most sacred mosques, in the holiest city of the world, and on a day of special significance to believers, particularly to Christians: Easter Sunday.

95. Muslims and Christians of Zaire rightly share the feelings of the international community and of the members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference and have condemned this act of sacrilege.

96. Thus, the unanimity of this universal condemnation shows that, despite certain quite natural differences among us-because we are all differently situated-in the end we are all members of the same human family; that therefore, we all recognize and agree that there are things which are not done and things which cannot be touched without violating our very humanity, our very freedom, our very will to be and to remain what we are-links in the great chain of human brotherhood-and that we may draw from these ideas the strength to transcend our differences.

97. The fact that this barbarous act took place in one of the most sensitive areas of the world, where for many years-all too many years-Arabs and Jews have been pitted one against the other in the complex Middle East Conflict, imbues it with a tremendous political dimension, because it is difficult for the parties, when carried away by emotion, to hold forth rationally and calmly on whether the act was an isolated one or not, or on whether it was accidental or planned as a provocation. And therein lies the enormous gravity of such a situation.

98. That is why the Council must be in a position to express unanimously the universal condemnation of that act; to assuage the legitimate anger of a group of human beings cut to the very quick by this act of sacrilege; to recommend that appropriate measures be taken and that Israel step up its vigilance to protect the holy places and spiritual treasures in the occupied Arab territories, including Jerusalem, in keeping with its obligations under the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, I so that such patently dangerous situations can be averted in future.

99. It is in that spirit that the delegation of Zaire will vote in favor of the draft resolution contained in document S/14985, without necessarily !inking this act of sacrilege and fanaticism to the Government of Israel, which has itself condemned it here in the Council.

100. I now resume my functions as PRESIDENT.

101. Unless I hear any objection, I shall put to the vote the draft resolution contained in document S/14985.

A vote was taken by show of hands.

In favor: China, France, Guyana, Ireland, Japan, Jordan, Panama, Poland, Spain, Togo, Uganda, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Zaire.

Against: United States of America

The result of the vote was 14 votes in favor and 1 against.

The draft resolution was not adopted, the negative vote being that of a permanent member of the Council.

102. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): I shall now call on those members of the Council who wish to explain their vote after the vote.

103. Sir Anthony PARSONS (United Kingdom): My Government, like other members of the international community, was deeply shocked by the dreadful crime committed at the Dome of the Rock on 11 April. We are greatly saddened by the injuries and loss of life which occurred and wish to extend our sincere condolences to all those who were injured or bereaved.
104. All of us in the Council recognize and are deeply conscious of the great depth of feeling which attaches to all matters concerning the Holy Places in Jerusalem. This feeling has found expression in many of the statements which have been made in the debate. We greatly regret that it was not possible for the Council to reach consensus on a draft resolution, and in the circumstances I think we need to ask ourselves whether in this case the interests of the international community were best served by having a resolution at all.

105. My Government voted in favor of the draft resolution because we wished to associate ourselves with the condemnation of the act of sacrilege which occurred. We did so, however, on the understanding that the draft resolution cannot prejudge the facts of the incident, which we understand is under investigation. We take full note in this context of the clear statement by the representative of Israel that his Government has promptly and vigorously condemned the crime and that the people of Israel and Jewish people around the world share the sense of revulsion at this despicable act [2352nd, meeting, para. 42]. I should like to take this opportunity to reiterate my Government's firm view that the fourth Geneva Convention of 12 August 19491 is applicable to all the territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including East Jerusalem. We have frequently made clear our condemnation of Israeli practices both in East Jerusalem and in other occupied territories, but at the same time we recognize that the Israeli authorities have in general fulfilled their obligations on access to the Holy Places.

106. More widely, I should like to reiterate my Government's recognition, expressed in the Venice declaration of 13 June 1980, of the special importance of the role played by the question of Jerusalem for all the parties concerned [SI14009, para. 8]. My Government adheres to the position set out in that declaration -that it will not accept any unilateral initiative designed to change the status of Jerusalem, and that any agreement on the city's status should guarantee freedom of access for everyone to the Holy Places.

107. Mrs. KIRKPATRICK (United States of America): Mr. President, I should like to begin by expressing my personal admiration, and that of my Government, of the dispatch and good judgement with which your conduct of the difficult affairs of the Council has been marked.

108. The United States profoundly regrets and strongly condemns the senseless act of violence that occurred on 11 April at one of Islam's most sacred mosques, the Dome of the Rock. We extend our condolences to all those who have suffered physically and spiritually from this act.

109. Last Friday, 16 April, President Reagan met with six ambassadors delegated by the Islamic countries represented in Washington. I should like to read out the official report of that meeting.

110. President Reagan, it said,

"expressed his deep personal sorrow and that of all Americans over last Sunday's violence at the hands of a deranged individual in an area sacred to three of the world's great religions. The President expressed his sympathy with the concern of the Islamic world over the disruption of the tranquillity of one of its most holy shrines. This concern is shared by members of all faiths, he noted.

"He reiterated his conviction that the peace of the Holy Places of Jerusalem must be maintained, and confirmed the dedication of the United States to encouraging the conditions necessary for the well- being of those who draw their spiritual inspiration from that city.

"The President called upon all the Governments and peoples of the Middle East to work to decrease tensions in the area and prevent further acts of violence and loss of life."

111. We understand that this goal-to decrease tensions in the area and prevent further acts of violence and loss of life-is also the chief objective of the Council. We have considered it carefully in my Government, but regrettably we do not believe that the draft resolution before us helps to achieve our shared objective.

112. For these reasons, we think it serves no constructive purposes, but will further embitter the peoples of the region and deepen the divisions that could lead to conflict. Thus, as much as we condemn the act of violence that occasioned this debate of the Council, we must oppose this draft resolution, which, in our view would make new acts of violence more, not less, likely to take place in the future.

113. We voted against the draft resolution because it contains language, in the preambular and the operative paragraphs, which implies that the responsibility for this terrible event lies not with the individual who was responsible for the incident but with. the Israeli authorities, who have unequivocally denounced the act. The text also implies that Israel has hindered the efforts of the Islamic Higher Council to perform its responsibilities for the administration of the Holy Places whereas the evidence is that Israel has in the main carefully respected the Council's role.

114. To eliminate any misunderstanding, I may add that our vote does not affect our long-standing position on the status of Jerusalem. As President Reagan explained to the Muslim ambassadors last Friday, the United States position remains as previously stated, that is, that the final status of Jerusalem can only be determined through negotiations among all concerned parties.

115. Mr. DORR (Ireland): Ireland voted in favor of the draft resolution. We did so to express our concern at the events in Jerusalem on 11 April which have been the subject of debate in the Council over the past week. Our concern derives from three points: first, we are concerned at the immediate loss of life involved in the incident and at the injuries caused to innocent bystanders and worshippers in the mosque; secondly, we are concerned about the outrage to the feelings and religious beliefs of many millions of people, which must inevitably arise from an act of desecration to one of the holy shrines of the Islamic faith; thirdly, we are deeply concerned because of the wider dangers of the situation in the occupied territories, including Jerusalem. It is evident that an atmosphere of tension, of grievance and of alienation prevails at present throughout territories occupied now for some 15 years. Our fear is that in such an atmosphere any spark could strike a flame that could easily lead to a wider conflagration in the region.

116. For all of those reasons, we thought it right to express our serious concern by voting for the draft resolution. We regret that it was not adopted. Nevertheless we maintain our support for the position repeated again in paragraph 3, that Israel must observe and apply fully the provisions of the fourth Geneva Convention throughout the occupied territories.

117. Having expressed these serious concerns, I also wish to recognize and acknowledge fully the fact that the Government of Israel has strongly condemned the outrage of I I April. An individual is in custody and criminal charges are being brought. Furthermore, the representative of Israel, speaking before the Council on 13 April, expressed the sense of revulsion of the people of Israel and of Jewish people around the world at, the act in question [2352nd meeting, para. 42]. We believe it right that this expression of deep concern should be fully acknowledged.

118. For our part, we believe that any further measures which may be necessary to maintain the security and preserve the sacred character of the mosque, which is revered by so many believers, should quickly be undertaken by the Israeli authorities so that such a dangerous incident may not recur.

119. This present issue emphasizes once again for my delegation a point I have stated frequently in the Council: that is, that what is required in the region is a comprehensive, just and lasting peace settlement achieved by a negotiation involving all the parties and taking full account of all aspects of the problem. This must, of course, include the issue of Jerusalem, a city which occupies a special place for believers of three great world religions and for all the peoples of the region.

120. We know that the achievement of such a settlement often seems a distant goal. Pending some new effort, in the Council or elsewhere, to address the fundamental issues through such a settlement, we are limited to doing what we can to damp down tensions when they threaten to explode, as in the present case.

121. With this in mind, we voted for a draft resolution which, in substance, condemns the act, deplores as dangerous any profanation of Holy Places and calls for full application of the fourth Geneva Convention.

122. Mr. OVINNIKOV (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (interpretation from Russian): Today's negative vote in the Council by the United States warrants dwelling on it particularly. It seems that the representative of the United States, Mrs. Kirkpatrick, has preferred to leave today's meeting already, no doubt on the principle known since the time of Shakespeare-the Moor, having finished his business, may leave.

123. However, I think that the sense of the vote of the United States and the ominous context in which it was cast makes it worth while to dwell on this particularly. This context has three elements. The first is that on 20 January this year [2329th meeting], the United States vetoed a draft resolution [S/14832/Rev.1] which would have punished Israel for its illegal annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights. The sense of this vote by the United States was that the United States was ready to forgive Israel for its annexation of territory of the Syrian Arab Republic. Secondly, on 2 April this year [2348th meeting], the United States used the veto against a draft resolution [S/14943] which called upon Israel to rescind illegal measures on the West Bank with regard to the dissolution of municipal councils and the dismissal of the mayors of three towns. The sense of that vote was permission from the United States to Israel to continue its creeping annexation of the West Bank. Thirdly, today, 20 April, the United States did not permit the adoption of the draft resolution [S/14985]-and I would say that it was a more than mild draft resolution-which called upon Israel to put an end to acts of vandalism against Muslim Holy Places in Jerusalem. The sense of this most recent vote of the United States is that it does not intend in general to limit Israel in any way. I shall not be revealing any great secret if I say that the United States voted against this draft resolution also because it does not recognize that East Jerusalem is territory occupied by Israel. The United States, like Israel, believes-and it has confirmed this by its vote today- that Jerusalem is the unified, sole and eternal capital of Israel.

124. Now, what does all this demonstrate-and even before the United States came forward in the role of champion and protector of Israel? What has been happening in the last few months is a qualitatively new shift in the policy of the United States in the Middle East. The United States has thrown overboard the policy of even apparent even-handedness between Israel and the Arabs. Now Israel, which has recently been called officially an ally of the United States, enjoys Washington's unlimited sympathy. The United States has jettisoned the principle of non-acquisition of territory by force, a principle to which at one time the United States subscribed. Now the United States is covering up, and thereby encouraging the carrying out by Israel of territorial annexation in the Middle East.

125. Something that was concealed and has now become clear is the substance of the agreement on strategic co-operation between the United States and Israel-and the Soviet delegation mentioned this only yesterday. Now those people should give some thought to this; because of their political naivety they have not yet understood this. Through the strategic co-operation agreement, the United States and Israel are counting on force in the Middle East, on the annexation of Arab territory and on converting the Middle East into a colonial protectorate of American imperialism and Israeli Zionism. To buttress this policy, American emissaries today are travelling around the Middle East looking for bases and other strong points for the stationing of United States troops in the Middle East -the so-called rapid deployment force.

126. However unsavory it may appear, this is the policy-a policy detrimental to the interests of Arab countries and peoples and to the advantage of Israel, which is being promoted and defended by the vote of the United States in the Council.

127. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The representative of the Syrian Arab Republic has asked to speak. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

128. Mr. EL-FATTAL (Syrian Arab Republic): The Israeli representative of the Zionist entity saw fit-no doubt encouraged by his masters-to cast aspersions on and make accusations against Syria again.

129. The-matter before us is not an isolated act. This has been said by almost every delegation which has spoken on this subject. It is the continuation of the process started in 1948. That process is the Zionization of Palestine under the guise of Judaization-that is, using religion to attain colonial gains.

130. I think that the representative of Jordan yesterday reviewed the history of this entity that keeps expanding, annexing, evicting, killing, deporting, depriving the inhabitants of their rights protected under the fourth Geneva Convention. I do not have to go into that again.

131. Israel, we should not forget annexed Jerusalem in 1967 and last year that city was declared the "eternal capital" of the Zionist colonial entity. Yet we should like to remind the permanent and non-permanent members of the Council that Jerusalem is the West Bank and the West Bank is Jerusalem. Therefore, when the United States through its veto indicates that Jerusalem must be left apart because some secret or overt agreements were reached at Camp David, to us it means that when Jerusalem is separated from the West Bank, the West Bank is already annexed. This should be borne in mind and studied in depth by the members of the Council who are interested in peace-keeping, in protecting our world from another conflagration and in maintaining the peace and security of the area and of the world.

132. There is a certain mentality behind the Israeli pronouncements in the Council. This mentality was portrayed by Mr. Dayan, who died, but who nevertheless was responsible-he and his establishment-for genocide against the Arabs-and I do not want to mention any figures. He confided that:

"Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You don't even know the names of these Arab villages, and I don't blame you, because these geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahalal [Dayan's own village] arose in the place of Mahlul, Gvat [a kibbutz] in the place of Jibta, Sarid [another kibbutz] in the place of Haniefa, and Kfar-Yehoshua in the place of Tel-Shaman. There is not one single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population."

I wonder what happened to the mosques and the churches in those villages that were rased.

133. The issue is not between the Jews and the Muslims. The issue is between zionism, on the one hand and the world-whether Christian or non-Christian-on the other. It concerns every person here, of any religion, any denomination any creed any ideology

134. I would have expected-even wished-to hear representatives of countries that were once called "the, daughters of the Church" defending Christian interests in Jerusalem because, according to all information, from primary sources, 100,000 Christians have left the occupied territories since 1967. We know that churches, Christian institutions, cannot receive aid and assistance from outside.

135. We know how money has been squandered by, the Israeli establishment. The corruption in Israel is not a new thing. We heard news today about another, a second Minister.

136. The United States veto was expected. We could see in the Delegates' Lounge, in the Council chambers here and there, the pressures exerted by the super-Power to delete the words "including Jerusalem" and I have explained the reasons for that before. However, in response to Mr. Reagan's White House press release, let me say that we do not need his deep personal sorrow. We need the sorrow of the American people-that is, the United States Government. It is claimed that the United States Government and its President are elected, but his personal feelings cannot' deflect us from the goal we wish to reach, that is, the, liberation of Jerusalem. Let him keep his personal sorrow to himself. We do not need it. It does not help; it only harms.

137. It views Jerusalem as a city of religion. Jerusalem is not a city only of religion. Jerusalem is an Arab Muslim city which has been occupied by a secular movement, a colonialist movement born in Europe shaped along colonialist lines, which took advantage of the United Kingdom and others to establish an imperialist-colonialist base in our area, to extend its hegemony over our oil, over the Suez Canal, over the strategic routes. This is the conflict. It is not religious; it is political.

138. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The representative of the Palestine Liberation Organization has asked to be allowed to speak. I now call on, him.

139. Mr. TERZI (Palestine Liberation Organization): The peak of arrogance was reached this afternoon when the representative of Israel tried to arrogate to himself the powers of the judge of the universe, the new Almighty; but I am not really surprised. However, there is a point of history and fact that I should specify. I do not know about the 58 synagogues referred to that were destroyed in Jerusalem. It so happens that I am a son of Jerusalem and I lived for as long as I could in Jerusalem. I know there were about three or four synagogues there. But, of course, I do admit that there were chapel-like small places of worship in different houses. They could have numbered 58 or 100-I do not know. But if we had to consider every little chapel around the world as a cathedral, then there would be millions of them. But be that as it may, those houses, which were the property of the Magreb waqf, were destroyed by the Israeli army and not by the Jordanian army. Therefore, I would suggest that our friend from Morocco, who is from the Magreb, should seek indemnification for this assumption by the Israelis of the ownership of those buildings that belonged to the Magreb waqf. The Jews of Jerusalem had nothing to do with that. They only had property amounting to something like 20 per cent of the area.

140, However, at the closing of this debate, in the name of my brothers and sisters in Jerusalem, in Palestine, in the Arab world and the Islamic -world, and in the name of the PLO, I wish to thank the members of the Council who voted in favor of the draft resolution. I also wish to thank all the friends who participated in the current debate on a heinous crime, an act of State terrorism. And I sincerely wish to thank the representative of the Government of the United States-who has decided to leave the meeting-for her vote. It really helps to unmask the real policies and designs of the Washington Administration, if more clarification were really needed.

141. In my statement yesterday, I said that the United States:

"is duty-bound to reaffirm that the status of the Holy City of Jerusalem has not been changed and that the United States is committed to upholding the provisions of the fourth Geneva Convention, and to reaffirm the applicability of its provisions to occupied Jerusalem. The failure of the United States Government to state that in very clear terms can only be interpreted by us Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims all over the world as a clear and unambiguous commitment of the Government to support and encourage Israel in its policies and practices." [2356th meeting, para. 39]

142. By the negative and arbitrary vote today to prevent the Council from pronouncing itself on the most recent Israeli act of State terrorism against my people, by that veto to obstruct the task and the work of the United Nations, the United States has in very clear terms and with no ambiguity chosen to be a minority of one, isolated from the rest of the world and a renegade. The Government of the United States of America has rendered the Council and the United Nations-the hope of mankind-helpless and ineffective.

143. Now it has become clear and imperative that the Arab world, the members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the Al-Quds Committee and their respective Chairmen, and the rest of the world, have to reconsider and reassess their relations with the Government of the United States of America. The Government of the United States must pay the price for its hostile attitude and policies towards the Palestinian people, the Arab nation, towards Islam and the Muslim believers, towards peace and stability in the world. The Government of the United States has selected an ally, a strategic ally, as against those it considers as friends and those who had considered the United States as their friend. This identification and solidarity with Israel has just been reaffirmed. The negative vote is only an affirmation of the fact that the United States and Israel are coculprits, that the United States ' no longer considers the Holy City of Jerusalem as occupied territory and that the Government of the United States considers and recognizes in fact the legitimacy of all measures taken by Israel, the occupying Power, in Jerusalem. That position, as was shown here, is definitely against the international consensus.
144. Mr. President, as for the Palestinian people, under the leadership of the PLO, we assure you that while we maintain our faith and trust in the Organization and in the Council, we are still determined to struggle by all means to regain our rights and to achieve peace in the land of peace, in Palestine, in Jerusalem. The United Nations is duty-bound to provide a remedy, a comprehensive, just and lasting peace through peace in Palestine. And if the role of the United Nations, as has been demonstrated there, is undermined by a permanent member of this Council, the United States, then we have no alternative but to resort to the other legitimate option. Our resistance by all means-strikes, demonstrations, stone-throwing and even explosives- to foreign occupation, to Israeli occupation of our homes, is legitimate. It is our right, it is our duty and members may rest assured that we shall not abandon our rights.

145. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The representative of Morocco has asked to be allowed to speak. I now call on him.

146. Mr. MRANI ZENTAR (Morocco) (interpretation from French): First of all, Mr. President, I should like to address to you and to the members of the Council the gratitude of my delegation for having responded to the request by His Majesty King Hassan 11, Chair-man of the Al-Quds Committee, by convening a Council meeting during which moving and sincere statements have been made in response to the horrified feelings of the Islamic community, which was most deeply wounded by the profanation of holy places in Jerusalem.

147. I should also like to express the thanks of my delegation and those of the Organization of the Islamic Conference as a whole to the many delegations that voted in favor of our draft resolution. While the results of the vote which has just taken place do not respond exactly to the expectations of those who called for this debate in the Council, they cannot in any manner change the unanimous condemnation of Israel which has been expressed in this Council as well as throughout the world, nor can they attenuate the seriousness of the crime which has been committed by at least one armed Israeli soldier in uniform against peaceful worshippers at a holy site profaning and desecrating one of the holiest places of Islam.

148. Israel's responsibility for this indescribable act is beyond doubt, because in carrying out its blind policy of out-and-out provocation, the Begin Government has been constantly and openly encouraging potential or actual criminals of that kind. The Israeli Government has neither attempted nor done anything to prevent such acts, while in Israel there flourish archaic and obscurantist organizations that go on making the gravest threats against the Islamic holy places in Jerusalem, threats that are unfortunately followed by destruction and profanation, like the acts perpetrated against the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Mosque of Omar.

149. In his message to the Security Council [2352nd meeting, para. 15), His Majesty King Hassan II stated that Israel's responsibility cannot be disputed. The international community has over and over again clearly repudiated and vigorously condemned the series of crimes against law, justice and reason perpetrated by Israel in all the occupied Arab territories, including Jerusalem.

150. But we have faith and we believe that law, justice and reason will prevail in Jerusalem also, because the Islamic community, like the universal community, is too devoted to the cause of peace and freedom not to shoulder its responsibilities towards -the Palestinian people and the Holy City of Jerusalem, which for centuries has been the very symbol of freedom, fraternity and peace.

151. Strongly condemning the state of violence and intolerance that disfigures and desecrates the Holy City of Jerusalem and steeps it in blood, His Majesty King Hassan II ended his message to the Council with dignified and wise words that are entirely appropriate to conclude this debate: "Only tolerance and mutual respect among men of faith and goodwill, not new to religious wars, will enable Jerusalem once again, regain its truly holy significance."

The meeting rose at 2.45 p.m.


1/ United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 75, No. 973, p. 287.

Follow UNISPAL RSS Twitter