Question of Palestine home || Permalink || About UNISPAL || Search
Droit de peuple Palestine à l’autodétermination - Débat de la Troisième Commission de l’AG /Vote – Compte rendu

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



Follow UNISPAL Twitter RSS

UNITED
NATIONS
A

        General Assembly
Distr.
GENERAL
A/C.3/64/SR.41
24 March 2010

Original: English

Sixty-fourth session
Official Records



Third Committee

Summary record of the 41st meeting
Held at Headquarters, New York, on Thursday, 12 November 2009, at 10 a.m.

Chairperson: Mr. Penke .................................................................. (Latvia)



Contents

/...

Agenda item 68: Right of peoples to self-determination (continued)

/...



The meeting was called to order at 10.40 a.m.


/...

Agenda item 68: Right of peoples to self-determination (continued) (A/C.3/64/L.51, L.56 and L.57)

/...

Draft resolution A/C.3/64/L.56: The right of the Palestinian people to self-determination

27. The Chairperson noted that the draft resolution had no programme budget implications.

28. Mr. Khane (Secretary of the Committee) recalled that the following countries had joined the list of sponsors when the draft resolution had been presented: Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Belize, Brunei Darussalam, Burundi, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Croatia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Gabon, Ghana, Iceland, Italy, Jamaica, Lesotho, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Norway, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland and Uzbekistan.

29. Mr. Attiya (Egypt) noted that Austria, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Chad, Montenegro and New Zealand had joined the list of sponsors of draft resolution A/C.3/64/L.56. Recalling that the Palestinian people had been living under Israeli occupation for more than 40 years, he said that he hoped Member States would demonstrate their solidarity and support by adopting the draft resolution by consensus, so that the Palestinian people could exercise their right to self-determination in their territory and create their own viable, sovereign and independent State, with East Jerusalem as its capital.

30. Mr. Khane (Secretary of the Committee) announced that Bolivia (Plurinational State of), El Salvador, Grenada, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Serbia, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Ukraine and United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland had joined the list of sponsors of the draft resolution.

31. Ms. Shahar (Israel) requested that a recorded vote be taken on the draft resolution.

32. Mr. Sammis (United States of America), speaking in explanation of vote before the voting, said that his country — which was committed to the principle of the peaceful coexistence of two States — provided significant financial support to the Palestinian Authority, while also supporting the State of Israel. It was discouraging to see that the text of the draft resolution was unbalanced, prejudged the outcome of permanent status issues that should be resolved through bilateral negotiations, and undermined the credibility of the United Nations.

33. Ms. Shahar (Israel), speaking in explanation of vote before the voting, recalled that her country had recently reiterated its desire to reach an agreement based on the peaceful coexistence of two States and, to that end, had called for the resumption of negotiations. Only bilateral negotiations would enable progress to be made towards that end, and the adoption of one-sided resolutions that exempted the Palestinian people from any obligation towards Israel did not serve the cause of peace. Therefore, Israel would be voting against the draft resolution.

34. A recorded vote was taken on draft resolution A/C.3/64/L.56.

In favour:

Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Leso tho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:

Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Palau, United States of America.

Abstaining:

Botswana, Cameroon, Canada, Tonga, Vanuatu.


35. The draft resolution was adopted by 171 votes to 6, with 5 abstentions. 1

36. Mr. Quinlan (Australia) said that his country supported the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination and was convinced that the only way to build peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians was a two-State solution, so he urged the two sides to resume negotiations. Although Australia had been a long-time supporter of the draft resolution at hand, it had abstained from voting after 2004 because it did not agree with the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice mentioned therein. However, it was now of the opinion that that issue alone no longer justified such a position, and had voted in favour of the draft resolution.

37. Mr. Díaz Bartolomé (Argentina), referring to the question of the Malvinas Islands, noted that the exercise of a people’s right to self-determination in a territory presupposed the existence of a people subject to alien exploitation and occupation.

38. Mr. Bahreini (Islamic Republic of Iran), explaining his vote in favour of the draft resolution, reaffirmed his country’s determination to defend the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. The essential conditions to a lasting peace in the region were the end of the occupation, the return of all Palestinians to their territory, and the creation of an independent State with Al-Quds Al-Sharif as its capital.

39. Mr. Zvachula (Federated States of Micronesia) said that his country was committed to the principle of the coexistence of two States and the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. He nonetheless criticized several of the provisions in the preamble of the draft resolution, since they prejudged the outcome of the negotiations between the two parties, in particular the reference to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice. In addition, paragraph 2 of the text endangered the impartiality of the United Nations. As a result, the Federated States of Micronesia had voted against the draft resolution.

40. Ms. Rasheed (Observer for Palestine) thanked the around 140 States that had sponsored the draft resolution and everybody that had voted in favour of it. Such broad support would be crucial when the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination, which had been brutally denied, was finally established. The statement made by the representative of Israel warranted no other response than that overwhelming vote. On the other hand, Israel’s negative vote once again demonstrated that it rejected any peaceful solution based on the coexistence of two States and did not recognize the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people. However, any negotiation must begin with mutual recognition by the two parties. The right to self-determination was an inalienable right of all peoples. The Israeli refusal to recognize that right for the Palestinian people was consistent with its policy of colonizing Palestinian land and the construction of the separation wall. She wondered what would be left to negotiate if the expansion of Israeli settlements continued. She once again urged Israel to stop its illegal colonization campaigns before the resumption of negotiations.

41. She questioned the paradoxical position of the United States — extolling the peaceful coexistence of two States while continuing to vote against a resolution that affirmed the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. The Government of the United States should review its position on the matter and consider the message being sent by the international community. On the other hand, her delegation welcomed the positive vote from Australia.

42. Only a resolution guaranteeing the rights of both peoples, including the right to self-determination and the right to have a State, would pave the way for peace in the region. The Palestinian people had been fighting for those rights for 40 years and would never give up.

/...




1 The delegations of Norway and Botswana subsequently informed the Committee that they had intended to vote in favour of the draft resolution.



The meeting rose at 1 p.m.


This record is subject to correction. Corrections should be sent under the signature of a member of the delegation concerned within one week of the date of publication to the Chief of the Official Records Editing Section, room DC2-750, 2 United Nations Plaza, and incorporated in a copy of the record.

Corrections will be issued after the end of the session, in a separate corrigendum for each Committee.



Follow UNISPAL RSS Twitter