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

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



Follow UNISPAL Twitter RSS

UNITED
NATIONS
S

        Security Council
PROVISIONAL
S/PV.2613
3 October 1985

PROVISIONAL VERBATIM RECORD OF THE TWO THOUSAND
SIX HUNDRED AND THIRTEENTH MEETING

Held at Headquarters, New York,
on Thursday, 3 October 1985, at 3.15 p.m.


President: Mr. WALTERS (United States of America)
Members: Australia Mr. WOOLCOTT
Burkina Faso Mr. BASSOLE
China Mr. HUANG Jiahua
Denmark Mr. BIERRING
Egypt Mr. KHALIL
France Mr. de KEMOULARIA
India Miss KUNADI
Madagascar Mr. RABETAF IKA
Peru Mr. BERAUN
Thailand Mr. KASEMSARN
Trinidad and Tobago Mr. ALLEYNE
Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic Mr. OUDOVENKO
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Mr. SAFRONCHUK
United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland Sir John THOMSON





This record contains the original text of speeches delivered in English and interpretations of speeches in the other languages. The final text will be printed in the Official Records of the Security Council.

Corrections should be submitted to original speeches only. They should be sent under the signature of a member of the delegation concerned, within one week, to the Chief, Official Records Editing Section, Department of Conference Services, room DC2-750, 2 United Nations Plaza, and incorporated in a copy of the record.




The meeting was called to order at 4.10 p.m.

ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

The agenda was adopted.

LETTER DATED 1 OCTOBER 1985 FROM THE PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF TUNISIA TO THE UNITED NATIONS ADDRESSED TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL (S/17509)

The PRESIDENT: In accordance with the decisions taken at the
2611th meeting, I invite the representatives of Tunisia and Israel to take a place at the Council table; I invite the representative of the Palestine Liberation Organization to take a place at the Council table; I invite the representatives of Afghanistan, Algeria, Cuba, Greece, Jordan, Kuwait, Lesotho, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Mauritania, Morocco, Pakistan, Senegal, the Syrian Arab Republic, Turkey and Yemen to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council Chamber.

At the invitation of the President, Mr. Bouziri (Tunisia) and Mr. Netanyahu (Israel) took places at the Council table; Mr. Kaddoumi (Palestine Liberation Organization) took a place at the Council table; Mr. Zarif (Afghanistan), Mr. Ibrahimi (Algeria), Mr. Malmierca Peoli (Cuba), Mr. Dountas (Greece), Mr. Masri (Jordan), Mr. Abulhasan (Kuwait), Mr. Makhele (Lesotho), Mr. Treiki (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya), Mr. Ould Boye (Mauritania), Mr. Filali (Morocco), Mr. Yaqub Khan (Pakistan), Mr. Sarre (Senegal), Mr. Al-Sharaa (Syrian Arab Republic), Mr. Halefoglu (Turkey) and Mr. Basendwah (Yemen) took the places reserved for them at the side of the Council Chamber.

The PRESIDENT: I should like to inform the members of the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Bangladesh, the German Democratic Republic, Indonesia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Malta, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia and Yugoslavia in which they request 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 those representatives to participate in the discussion, without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure.

There being no objection, it is so decided.

At the invitation of the President, Mr. Wasiuddin (Bangladesh), Mr. Ott (German Democratic Republic), Mr. Wiryono (Indonesia), Mr. Rajaie-Khorassani (Islamic Republic of Iran), Mr. Gauci (Malta), Mr. Chamorro Mora (Nicaragua), Mr. Garba (Nigeria), Mr. Shihabi (Saudi Arabia) and Mr. Golob (Yugoslavia) took the places reserved for them at the side of the Council Chamber.

The PRESIDENT: I should like to inform the Security Council that I have received a letter dated 3 October 1985 from the Permanent Representative of Egypt to the United Nations, which reads as follows:

"I have the honour to request that during the Council's discussion of the item entitled `Letter dated 1 October 1985 from the Permanent Representative of Tunisia to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/17509)' the Security Council extend an invitation under rule 39 of the provisional rules of procedure to His Excellency Mr. Seid Sherifuddin Pirzada, Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference." That letter has been issued as Security Council document S/17524.

If I hear no objection, I shall take it that the Security Council agrees to extend an invitation to Mr. Pirzada under rule 39 of the provisional rules of procedure. There being no objection, it is so decided.

The PRESIDENT: The Security Council will now resume its consideration of the item on its agenda.

(The President) I should like to draw the attention of the members of the Council to the following documents: S/17516, letter dated 2 October 1985 from the Acting Permanent Representative of Spain to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General; S/17517, letter dated 2 October 1985 from the Permanent representative of Democratic Yemen to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General; S/17518, letter dated 1 October 1985 from the Permanent Representative of India to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General; S/17519, letter dated 2 October 1985 from the Permanent Representative of Argentina to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council; and S/17520, letter dated 2 October 1985 from the Permanent Representative of Luxembourg to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General.

The first speaker is the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Syrian Arab Republic, Mr. Farouk Al-Sharaa. I welcome him and I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. AL-SHARAA (Syrian Arab Republic) (interpretation from Arabic): I
should like to associate myself with those who have preceded me in congratulating you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for this month, which starts with consideration of a new complaint - that by Tunisia in connection with the Israeli aggression against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Tunisia. I should also like to express our appreciation to the President of the previous month, in which the Council considered the act of aggression by the racist Pretoria régime against our brothers in southern Africa well as the oppressive Israeli measures against the Arab population in the occupier Arab territories.

(Mr. Al-Sharaa, Syrian Arab Republic)


The Security Council has been urgently convened to consider the Tunisian complaint in document S/17509. Rapid action is required from the Council, action based on the provisions of the Charter regarding the maintenance of international peace and security and the deterrence of aggression.

We believe that the military action by Israel against Tunisia is a blatant act of aggression against the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of a sister country, a blatant violation of the principles and norms of international law and the provisions of the Charter. This aggression is but one more link in the chain of repeated acts of aggression by Israel against Arab countries. Such acts are still taking place daily against Lebanon and in the occupied Arab and Palestinian territories in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and the Golan Heights. And yesterday's aggression will not be the last link in the chain if the aggressor is not punished under the provisions of the United Nations Charter.

It is absolutely clear that the fact that Israel has not been punished for its repeated acts of aggression in the past - particularly because of the position of the United States of America, which has prevented the application of sanctions against Israel under Chapter VII of the Charter - has encouraged Israel to persist in its aggressive and expansionist policy, in disregard for the Charter and the rules of international law. The Syrian Arab Republic works and calls for the achievement of a just and comprehensive peace in the Middle East, based on total Israeli withdrawal from all occupied Arab territories, and for the exercise by the Palestinian people of its inalienable rights, and in the first place its right to return, to self-determination and to the establishment of an independent State on its national soil. We also support the convening of an international conference, under the aegis of the United Nations, to attain that peace. At the same time, Syria believes that if any of the Arab or Palestinian rights is compromised, that will only contribute to making Israel more intransigent and will encourage it to commit further acts of aggression against the Arab countries, whether on the front line or - as in the case of the Israeli strike against the Iraqi nuclear power plant in 1981 and this newest act of aggression, against Tunisia - thousands of miles away from its borders.

Experience has taught us since the forging of the Camp David Accords and, particularly, during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon that if any Arab party were to beg for peace from Israel, that would result only in an escalation of Israel's aggressive spirit and an increase in its expansionist desires. For the Israeli concept of aggression is synonymous with hegemony. The Israelis believe that undermining the role of the United Nations, violating international law and taking the law into their own hands are the ways to make the Arabs surrender - and that is the kind of peace they want.

The repeated Israeli acts of aggression have been supported by both American money and American arms and have usually been given the blessings or encouragement, either implicit or explicit, of the United States. More often than not, they have resulted in rewards and assistance to the aggressor and in a clear show of defiance of the international community and obstruction of the role of the Security Council as the unique instrument for the deterrence of aggression and the maintenance of international peace and security. In the light of all that, experience has taught us that there is no other way to deter Israeli aggression and establish a just and genuine peace except by working seriously in the area to achieve unity in the Arab position and to establish a strategic balance in order to meet any Israeli aggression in the future.

One of the first duties of the Security Council is to eliminate the effects of aggression and to punish the aggressor. Hence, my delegation repeats that it is necessary to impose sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter. We state once again our total solidarity with the Tunisian people, a brother people that has been the victim of aggression.

The PRESIDENT: I thank the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Syrian Arab Republic for the kind words he addressed to me.

Mr. RABETAFIKA (Madagascar) (interpretation from French): You had a
reputation that did you honour, Mr. President, before you came to the United Nations, and most of us are aware of your talents as a mediator and a conciliator. Thus, my delegation takes particular pleasure in offering you its congratulations on your assumption of the presidency of the Council. We are certain that we shall benefit from the long diplomatic experience which, fortunately for us, you have had during your career.

Notwithstanding the suggestion made by the Sir John Thomson, the President of the Council last month, I really must associate my delegation with the words of praise and thanks that have been addressed to him. September was a busy month for us, but also a historic month, and we were able to attain very satisfactory results because of the great competence, the skill and, may I say, the tenacity demonstrated by Sir John Thomson during our meetings and consultations.

My delegation learned with indignation, but without surprise, of the act of aggression perpetrated by Israel on 1 October 1985 against the Republic of Tunisia and the Palestine Liberation Organization, the guests of the Tunisian Government.

We learned of the aggression with indignation because despite the appeals and condemnations of all kinds, Israel - from Baghdad to Tunis, and passing through Syria, Jordan and Lebanon on the way - has over the years been constantly resorting to occupation, oppression, repression, threats, pre-emptive attacks and reprisals, all in the name of self-defence - and Israel's concept of self-defence is very far from that in international law.

My delegation learned of the aggression without surprise because we have unfortunately become accustomed to the escalation of arrogance and cynicism and the improper equation of liberation movements with terrorism that some circles try to impose on us, while modestly covering their faces when we dare to speak about State terrorism.

(Mr. Rabetafika, Madagascar)

Yet that is what is involved when a country which calls itself a responsible state fails to realize the limits of its power in an orderly society and indulges in aggression and adventurism, scorning the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other States. Such an attitude deserves nothing but strong condemnation, for it constitutes a flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter, the rules of international law and the principles governing relations between States under the Charter.

We find it difficult to find any sufficient justification for Israel's armed aggression against Tunisia, planned and carried out in cold blood. It has been argued that since it harboured the headquarters of the PLO Tunisia bore a responsibility, according to the specious argument advanced, for all hostile acts against Israel and its citizens, even if they were carried out by individuals and responsibility was not claimed by the PLO. According to this reasoning Israel could arrogate to itself the right to destroy all the PLO offices, wherever they were to be found - in North America, Latin America, the Caribbean, Europe, Asia or Africa. If that were so, Israel would be at war with the whole world.

Moreover, as the Foreign Minister of Tunisia reminded us, Tunisia's support for the Palestinian people does not represent any arbitrary decision, but is part of the historic tradition that distinguishes Tunisia of honouring the obligations it has freely assumed towards the liberation movements during their struggle against colonial or foreign occupation.

It is also contended that the Israeli aggression is part of the struggle against international terrorism. We believe that once again there has been a mistake over the identity of the terrorist. Let us remember that the United Nations began to deal with the matter 15 years ago, when it was accepted that consideration should also be given to the profound causes that prompted people to commit acts of desperation. We have not come here to defend international terrorism, which we condemn. It is on that basis that we say how concerned we are about the fate of the Soviet diplomats taken hostage in Beirut. But we cannot accept the fight against international terrorism being used as justification for acts of aggression.

Only one conclusion is possible, Israel wishes to eliminate the PLO physically in order to be able to impose its own peace, at the very moment when there seem to be some signs of hope, however faint, and it is not unreasonable to say that Israel's recent act of aggression is a preventive action against peace in the Middle East.

At the beginning of my statement I said that our appeals had been rejected and our condemnations had had no result, because Israel had chosen to ignore them. The growing and ever more worrying impunity enjoyed by Israel is not unconnected with that fact, and we have the right to ask whether the time has not come, in view of Israel's repeated use of the threat or use of force, and its refusal to comply with its obligations under Article 25 of the Charter, to consider the adoption against Israel of appropriate measures provided for in the Charter, including Chapter VII. We did that in resolution 566 (1985) with regard to Namibia. The case that we are considering today is not very different, and our authority and credibility are at stake.

In conclusion, I wish to express on behalf of my Government our sympathy, solidarity and support for the Tunisian Government and the Palestine Liberation Organization, represented here by our brother, Farouk Kaddoumi. We are convinced that the Council will not fail to shoulder its responsibility to the Tunisian people and the Palestinian people by demanding that Israel end its acts of aggression and pay reparations for the loss of human life and the material damage resulting from such acts.

The PRESIDENT: I thank the representative of Madagascar for the kind
words he addressed to me.

Mr. OUDOVENKO (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) (interpretation from Russian): I extend the congratulations of my delegation to you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for the month of October, at a time when we have a great deal of work to do, and I wish you success in guiding the Council's work.

I wish also to express our gratitude to the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom for his able guidance of the Council's work last month.

The latest piratical act of the Israeli militarists against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of yet another Arab country, Tunisia, has rightly aroused the indignation of the whole world and resulted in its justified condemnation. The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic believes that the concern of the victim of that aggression is legitimate, as is its appeal to the Security Council to consider the latest criminal act of Israeli aggression.

It is clear from the statement of Tunisia's Foreign Minister that as a result of the attack by Israeli aircraft on the territory of Tunisia, 60 people were killed and approximately 100 were wounded, apart from significant material damage. The attack was a flagrant act of aggression, as defined in the Definition of Aggression adopted at the twenty-ninth session of the General Assembly. It was a flagrant violation of the rules of international law, as well as of the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, as set out in Articles 1 and 2. It is one of the latest manifestations of the policy and practice of State terrorism, which was strongly condemned by the General Assembly at its last session.

The Israeli aircraft attacked a target on the territory of a country that is not in a state of war with Israel. This latest aggression against an Arab country that is thousands of kilometres away from Israel is part and parcel of Israel's policy of aggression and expansion in the Middle East and yet another in a series of crimes against the Arab peoples. Suffice it to recall that Israel has caused five major wars in the region, wars in which large Arab territories have come under the heel of the occupier. Those territories include the Palestinian West Bank of the Jordan River, the Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem, the Syrian Golan Heights and southern Lebanon.

In the very same way, the Palestinian people has been deprived of its inalienable rights, including its right to exist as a State. The latest act of aggression was carried out in spite of a Security Council resolution condemning a similar piratic attack made by Israel in June 1981 against peaceful Iraqi nuclear installations. That resolution, adopted on 19 June 1981, called upon Israel "to refrain in the future from any such acts or threats thereof" (resolution 487 (1981), para. 2).

As we have stressed on many occasions before this Council, Israel's brazenness before the international community, its disregard for its Charter obligations as a Member of this Organization and its systematic non-compliance with Security Council resolutions are possible only because of the unconditional support of the United States and of some other Western Powers. It is only because of the economic, military and financial assistance provided by those countries that Israel is able to pursue its policy of aggression and expansion in the Middle East. That assistance is supplemented by political and diplomatic support, as manifested in the United Nations. It is enough to note that in the Security Council during the 1970s and 1980s the United States of America made use of its veto power 17 times in Israel's interests, in order to protect it from the consequences of its expansionist acts against Arab States. Ten of those vetoes were in fact cast under the present Administration. The most recent case was on 13 September this year, when a draft resolution sponsored by the non-aligned countries was blocked; that draft resolution would have condemned the latest repressive measures by the Israeli authorities against the Arab population of the occupied Palestinian territories. The same stance is evident too in statements made by Administration officials, which attempt to confer legitimacy on the latest piratical act of their junior partner.

There can be no doubt that this unconditional assistance and support will impel Israel and its military authorities to new adventurist acts against Arab countries and peoples. The latest act of Israeli aggression, against Tunisia, has once more demonstrated to the peoples of the region what actions they can expect from the United States-Israeli strategic alliance. This latest aggressive act has once again shown the true worth of the hypocritical statements of Israeli leaders to the effect that they are working towards peace in the Middle East. It will inevitably lead to increased tension in the Middle East and to a new cycle of violence.

We should draw attention to the fact that this latest act of Israeli
aggression took place as the international community and the United Nations were making persistent efforts to achieve a comprehensive and just Middle East settlement. Those efforts, however, meet with fierce opposition from those two "strategic partners". In place of those efforts, they are attempting to impose on the Arabs their military and political diktat and to draw them into humiliating and dangerous separate deals with the aggressor, deals which are only to the advantage of imperialism.

Peace will not come to the peoples of the Middle East through further Israeli adventurism or through any kind of separate negotiations under the aegis of Washington. The way to achieve a comprehensive, just settlement in the region will be found through the convening of an international conference on the Middle East.

The delegation of the Ukrainian SSR sternly condemns Israeli aggression against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Tunisia and supports Tunisia's just demands for compensation for all damage. We wish to convey our deepest condolences to the people and the Government of Tunisia on the loss of life and the material damage sustained.

Once again, we express our solidarity with the Arab peoples, including the Palestinian people, which is struggling for an end to Israeli occupation and for the enjoyment of its inalienable national rights. We support the proposal that the Security Council adopt stern measures against Israel, including comprehensive mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. It is high time that the aggressor was stopped and peace and security restored to the region.

I wish in conclusion to say a few words as Chairman of the Group of Eastern European States for the month of October. We sternly condemn this new act of aggression committed against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Tunisia and against the Palestinian people. This piratic raid is a manifestation of the policy of State terrorism and violates the basic norms of international law and the United Nations Charter. We are in favour of the adoption by the Security Council of stern measures against Israel in conformity with the United Nations Charter.

The PRESIDENT: I thank the representative of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic for the kind words he addressed to me.

Mr. BASSOLE (Burkina Faso) (interpretation from French): My delegation wishes to join others in congratulating you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for the month of October. You are a man of great and rich experience and a man who is open to dialogue. We are thus convinced that under your leadership our work will be crowned with success.

Our congratulations go also to Sir John Thomson, who skilfully presided over the work of the Council in September. We ask him to convey to Sir Geoffrey Howe, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my delegation's admiration for the outstanding and tactful way in which he presided over the Council's special meeting to commemorate the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations.

(Mr. Bassole, Burkina Faso) With its cowardly and barbaric act of aggression against Tunisia and its deliberate violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a State Member of the United Nations, Israel has shown once more that it does not deserve to be among us. By violating the United Nations Charter once again, Israel has made it clear, as if it needed clarification, that it is not and never will be prepared to fulfil its obligations under the Charter or abide by the resolutions and decisions of the Organization.

That attitude is not surprising. It reflects the same frame of mind as prevails in southern Africa, where the racist régime of Pretoria has just - and simultaneously - manifested that frame of mind by adding its attack on Angola to the list of its crimes. The facts speak for themselves. Like the apartheid régime, Israel can live only by hostility.

The repeated violations of the Charter which we have witnessed for years have invariably prompted us to wonder why and how Member States prepared unconditionally to understand and defend those violations can continue to exist within the United Nations and within this Council.

Weary from having tried, unsuccessfully, various remedies over the years, does the Council not believe it is high time to administer to those among us who are ill the remedy provided by Chapter VII of the Charter, the only remedy we have not tried?

For our part, we say the answer is yes, for Israel has obstinately refused to abide by Article 2 (4) of the United Nations Charter, which calls for all States to refrain from the use of force in their relations. In so doing, it has strayed from the purposes of our Organization, giving priority to the use of blind brute force.

Today, peace and security are threatened in the Mediterranean area as a result of the air attack by the Israeli armed forces.

Let us not do violence to the United Nations Charter. Let us not offend the international community by encouraging in any way this kind of action by a Member State of our Organization. Those who have paid with their lives as a result of this senseless act of aggression perpetrated by Israel deserve our respect. Let us not wait for Israel to run out of arguments: obviously it will always have arguments.

Today the Security Council must at the very least condemn Israel unanimously and vigorously for its premeditated armed aggression against Tunisia, demand that Israel offer appropriate reparations for the loss of human life and material damage resulting from the aggression. The Security Council has an overriding obligation to come to the assistance of the Palestinian people, which Israel has pitilessly hounded in an effort to prevent it from liberating its occupied homeland. The Security Council must find ways and means to deter Israel from perpetrating reprehensible acts of the kind it perpetrated yesterday against Tunisia.

The PRESIDENT: I thank the representative of Burkina Faso for the kind words he addressed to me.

The next speaker is Mr. Adnan Omran, Under-Secretary-General for Political and International Affairs of the League of Arab States, to whom the Council extended an invitation under rule 39 of its provisional rules of procedure at the 2611th meeting.

I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. OMRAN (interpretation from Arabic): Allow me, Sir, to associate myself with those who have congratulated you on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the month of October and the delegation of the United Kingdom for the successful conduct of the Council's meetings last month. The Security Council is considering the new Israeli aggression, which is part of the terrorism the Zionist entity has pursued since its inception. This is but an episode in a series of horrific events, and is similar in dimension, meaning and objectives to what we witnessed earlier this century at the hands of the fascist and Nazi régimes. Israel has perpetrated a new act of aggression against an Arab State, Tunisia, a State Member of the United Nations, a State that takes pride in its record of advocating justice, right and freedom for all the peoples of the world. Israel's perpetration of such an act of aggression is extremely dangerous because it compromises not only the security and sovereignty of the State victim of that aggression but also the security and stability of each and every State Member of this Organization, large or small.

The complaint brought before the Council by Tunisia clearly demonstrates the premeditated nature of the Israeli act of aggression, which was carefully planned, against civilian targets in full awareness that it would inflict a heavy toll upon innocent Tunisians and Palestinians who have been displaced more than once from their homeland, Palestine, and uprooted, also more than once, from other countries of refuge, particularly from the Palestinian camps in Lebanon.

The Council must consider this premeditated killing and this premeditated destruction bearing in mind the provisions of the Charter and the principles and rules of international law. The Council must also seriously consider the Israeli aggression and the risks entailed in that aggression for the peace and security in the Middle East region.

The continued aggression and the continued leniency towards it could endanger our international Organization and render it susceptible to meeting the same fate as the League of Nations.

This Council definitely recognizes Israel's record in the international Organization and in this Council in particular, regardless of the fact that the right of veto has been placed at the service of Israel.

The statement of the Israeli Zionist representative before the Council yesterday showed that the Israelis are unmoved by bloodshed and the death of innocent victims. It also showed Israel's contempt for the will of this Council and its role of upholding peace. The statement of the Zionist representative contained new evidence of Israel's defiance of the will of the international community. It also proved Israel's disregard of the principles and values cherished and defended by all the peoples of the world represented in this Organization, including the American people.

The Israeli interpretation of terrorism as presented by the Israeli
representative is based on Israel's belief and conviction that its occupation and annexation of the Arab territories is legal. Regardless of the international Organisation's decisions in this regard, Israel is convinced that the bombing of homes and residences, villages and cities, is a legitimate act, be it in the West Bank and Ghaza or in Lebanon, Tunisia or any other place for that matter.

The Israeli logic is that he is right who is capable of committing acts of aggression and occupation, and, as we know, Israel has enacted its own version of international law. However, we must remember the fate of those powers that in this century have followed a similar logic. True, they won one victory after another at the beginning, but eventually they crumbled and fell victims of the aggression they themselves had waged in a war they had inflicted on the peoples of the world.

The terrorism adopted by Israel as a policy, system and ideology has stained with blood the entire history of Zionism and has blemished the values and principles of the Jewish faith. It furthermore points the finger of condemnation at those who have been the rulers of Israel since the carnages of Deir Yassin and the King David Hotel, and we know that one of the protagonists of the latter was the Foreign Minister of the Zionist entity. It condemns them all the way to the carnages of Sabra and Shatila and all other acts of terrorism and annihilation committed by Israel in Lebanon yesterday, in Tunisia today and who knows where tomorrow.

In the light of this Israeli record, which is replete with acts of aggression, and of the Israeli logic used to justify that aggression, such as that presented by the Zionist representative yesterday - a logic by which the Zionist representative in this Council pledged to continue Israeli aggression against innocent people and to persist in acts of destruction and terrorism. In the light of all that, do we not have the right to wonder about the reasons behind such Israeli determination to defy the will of the international community. Israel persists in its crimes because, unfortunately, it receives all the support it needs in committing those crimes from a super-Power in this Council, and that super-Power does so without questioning the nature of those crimes, their requirements, the number of their victims or their cost.

Within that framework, we can basically look at, first, the American-Israeli Strategic Co-operation Agreement; secondly, the American-Israeli Trade Free Zone Agreement; thirdly, the American military support which gave Israel an arsenal that contains the most recent American means of destruction; fourthly, the billions of dollars from which the poor in American society and those in need of social services are deprived and from which many poor countries in need of assistance in Africa, Asia and Latin America are deprived. The money is used instead to finance acts of aggression and murder against the Palestinian people and against the Arab States without any exception. To that we must add the American support that Israel receives internationally and politically in this Council as well.

The attitude of the United States, as shown in the statements that were made in Washington, indicates how wide the gap is between what the Arab States are trying to pursue, the efforts they are attempting to make to establish relations of friendship and co-operation with the United States, and the American attitude which has reached its highest level of hostility to the whole Arab nation.

This American attitude in support of Israeli terrorism, unfortunately, constitutes a great distortion of the tradition of the American people and of their struggle for liberty, independence and the principles of human rights. This attitude makes the Statue of Liberty, which stands a few miles away, a symbol of the abyss which separates the struggles of the heroes of freedom in the history of the American battle for independence and the reality of American policy. This attitude makes that lady a dead statue belonging to the past.

The Security Council is called upon today fully to shoulder its
responsibilities. We hope once again that the United States delegation, before adopting its final position, will take into consideration the blood and tears shed as a result of the Israeli treachery and will remember the mothers who lost their children and the children who lost their fathers. We hope that the United States delegation will remember that history has no mercy and that the condemnation from which Israel may be spared today - and we hope it will not - would be a historic condemnation of a State that allows the criminal to escape with impunity. We wish and hope that the United States will reconsider its position with respect to that aggressive entity and will remember that by continuing to support, arm and defend aggression, it sets itself against the Arab nation as a whole.

I should like to express the hope, on behalf of the League of Arab States, that the Security Council will adopt a decision that will live up to its responsibilities and will respond to the hopes of the people of the world in this Organization and in the Security Council, particularly in this year of the fortieth anniversary of the establishment of the United Nations.

The decision adopted by the Council must condemn Israel for committing aggression and must impose sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter, as well as decide on the necessary reparations and other measures to deter Israeli aggression. The failure of the Security Council to take the necessary measures would be disappointing and would necessarily mean the further disintegration of the edifice of our international Organization at a time when society is in dire need of the Organization in this era of nuclear terror and of the values and principles that this Organization represents.

The PRESIDENT: The next speaker is the Deputy Prime Minister and
Minister for Foreign Affairs of Yemen, His Excellency Mr. Abdul Karim Al-Eryani, who wishes to make a statement in his capacity as Chairman of the Organization of the Islamic Conference.

I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. AL-ERYANI (interpretation from Arabic): Sir, I should like at the outset to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for this month. I should also like to express, through you, our appreciation to your predecessor. We are confident that your experience and wisdom, which are known to all, will enable you to conduct the business of this Council successfully.

I should like to express our thanks to you and to the other members of the Council for giving me the opportunity to take part in the discussion on the agenda item before the Council, since the Yemen Arab Republic is now presiding over the Organization of the Islamic Conference.

(Mr. Al-Eryani) The Security Council is meeting today to review once again a treacherous aggression which demonstrates Zionist terrorism in its worst form. That aggression committed by Israel the day before yesterday against the Republic of Tunisia, a Member State of this Organization, is another example of the aggressive policies that it adopts against Arab countries at a time when they are affirming their sincere desire to seek peace based upon justice. That barbaric raid launched by Israeli aircraft over civilian areas in the Tunisian capital is a flagrant violation of the sovereignty of a State Member of our Organization, a violation of the territorial integrity and the airspace of that country. That act constitutes a blatant aggression and a violation of the United Nations Charter as well as of the norms of international law which guarantee the peace and security of States.

(Mr. Al-Eryani) Along with all peace-loving countries, we have repeatedly warned that Israel and its aggressive practices in defiance of international law represent a threat both to the security and peace both of the Middle East and of the entire world. Israel's recent act of aggression and provocation against the capital of Tunisia gives ample proof of the pertinence of the warnings we have voiced in this Council and other international forums.

It is a matter for profound regret that Israel's aggressive conduct should be supported and justified by the American Administration, whose international responsibilities should impel it rather to support peace and justice and deter aggression anywhere in the world.

By its latest act of aggression against Tunisia and its violation of the sovereignty of a State Member of the United Nations as well as of international law itself, Israel has shown that it is not satisfied with having displaced the Palestinian people and dispersed them throughout the world, that it is not satisfied with perpetrating acts of aggression against its Arab neighbours or invading and destroying Lebanon, but that it will persist in pursuing its illusory goal and its desire to shed blood and destroy the Palestinian people wherever they may be.

Israel's treacherous act of aggression against the sister country of Tunisia and the Palestine Liberation Organization, the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, is aggression against international peace and security and a further challenge to this Council, which is the organ that embodies the international will that entrusted to it responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.

Today the Council is being called upon to reconsider the conduct of Israel and take a responsible decision with regard to it that will show that the international community as represented in the Council is prepared to shoulder its responsibilities in the face of Israel's irresponsible actions. While appealing to the Security Council to take such a decision, we reaffirm our solidarity and that of all Islamic countries with our brothers in Tunisia. We support Tunisia in its call for the condemnation of Israel and for full compensation for the material damage inflicted upon it by Israeli aggression. We call upon all members of the Council to support the just draft resolution submitted by Tunisia, convinced as we are that it represents the minimum this Council can do with regard to this brutal crime that has claimed the lives of so many innocent people, whether Tunisians or Palestinians.

On behalf of all Islamic countries, I extend condolences to Tunisia and to the Palestine Liberation Organization.

The PRESIDENT: I thank the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of Yemen for the kind words he addressed to me. The next speaker is the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, His Excellency Mr. Ali A. Treiki. I welcome him and I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. TREIKI (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya) (interpretation from Arabic): Allow me to associate myself with preceding speakers, Sir, in congratulating you on presiding over the Council's deliberations this month. We wish the Council all success. I should also like to thank Sir John Thomson, Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom, for the constructive way in which he conducted the deliberations of the Council last month.

I shall not dwell upon the illegal aspects of the act of aggression against the sister country of Tunisia or upon the fact that it contravened the United Nations Charter. Because of the Zionist entity, we have been forced to come to regard such action as habitual.

(Mr. Treiki, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya)

This latest deed is but one link in the chain of acts of aggression
perpetrated against Arab and non-Arab States. The nature of Zionism is continuous expansion and aggression. Ever since the United Nations committed the grave error of establishing that entity it has persisted in engaging in continual wars and acts of aggression against the Arab nation in violation of the Charter and resolutions of the United Nations. The Zionist entity annexed the Holy City of Jerusalem in violation of all relevant international decisions, and what was been our answer? What steps have we taken? It annexed the Syrian Golan Heights, and what steps did we take then? What did this Council do?

The Zionist entity still occupies part of southern Lebanon, and a short while ago it occupied the greater part of Lebanese territory, displacing thousands of people. What was our answer? It was negative. The Zionist entity, in contravention of all international laws, is altering the physical character of the occupied Arab territories establishing settlements. Here, too, our attitude has been negative. The United Nations and the Security Council, as a result of circumstances in which they operate, have always been unable to adopt any measure against the Zionist entity.

We in the Arab nation have given warnings about the nature of the racist Zionist entity and against the danger that entity represents. Now we see new evidence of its nature in its direct aggression against a State Member of the United Nations far removed from Palestine. Why has this happened? It is said that it was because Tunisia offered refuge to the Palestinians. What is the Zionist entity's aim with regard to that people? It is to annihilate them, to liquidate them physically. We are told that Hitler tried to annihilate the Jews. We were against that because, in the final analysis, the Jews are our cousins; we are of the same race. But what the Zionist entity is doing is even more terrible than the carnage for which Hitler was responsible.

Hitler killed the Jews in Germany, but the Zionist entity kills the Palestinians not only in Palestine but also in every part of the world in an attempt to annihilate them directly.

What were we told, and what is left to this Council? What is left of the prestige and importance of this Council if it did not take the necessary measures to expel that entity and to compel it to comply with United Nations resolutions? The United Nations is no longer honoured by the presence of the Zionist entity because it is a blemish to the United Nations to include such a Member.

What is the role of this Council and what respect is shown it? What are we going to say to the peoples? What are we going to say to this Council? Our independence is jeopardized and our peace and security are jeopardized.

Yesterday it was Iraq, today it is Tunisia, tomorrow, who knows whose turn it will be, as it was at one point the turn of Uganda.

We had neglected and the world had ignored for a period of time what Hitler did. When the invasion of Czechoslovakia began and continued, and the aggression continued, what was the result? Tens of millions of victims. And if the world does not unite today in the face of Zionism, which was termed a racist movement by the United Nations, the world will pay the price, which will indeed be costly. If we, the Arabs, have paid a high price, others will do so as well.

The representative of the Zionist entity spoke yesterday of peace. Which peace is that - the annexation of Jerusalem, the annexation of the Golan Heights, the carnage of Sabra and Shatila, aggression against Tunisia, the annexation of the Arab territories? Is that peace? Is there one among us, including the United States, who can justify support for the Zionist entity? Is there a single, peace-loving State that claims its love for peace and freedom, regardless of its point of view, that can say yes to that entity?
All of us, including the United States of America, will pay a high price.
Zionism will destroy the United States and American society and the American people will pay the price. Thus, we should start immediately to eradicate this scourge which threatens all mankind.

The representative of the Zionist entity spoke of terrorism. We all condemn terrorism. We condemn the hijacking of air planes, including the hijacking of American air planes. We condemn the assassination of diplomats, whether they be Americans or Russians. However, shall we allow such international terrorism to take place? Shall we allow a State to act according to the law of the jungle? Do we allow it to send its air planes to displace and kill innocent Tunisians?

There are Palestinians here in the United States. Do we expect the Zionist entity to strike at the United States and American targets because there are Palestinians in this country?

It is really dangerous. We see ourselves confronting stark aggression. But at the same time as we see the whole world condemn and denounce this act of aggression, we unfortunately find the United States of America defending and justifying this act of aggression and commending Israeli intelligence for having chosen those who were going to be hit.

Such an attitude cannot but encourage the Israeli entity to commit acts of aggression. American arms are responsible for killing children in Egypt at the school of Bahr el-Bakhar. American armaments have killed thousands of innocents, martyrs, women and children, including Syrians and Lebanese. Has the time not yet come for the United States to reconsider its attitude and to shoulder its responsibility as a super-Power and permanent member of the Security Council? Or will we continue to witness indefinite support by American air planes and American financing?

We in the Arab world have lost patience. We used to look with admiration to the American people when it united and supported liberation movements and the Algerian revolution. However, what are we to tell our people today? What are we to tell our children about the American attitude, which supports the Zionist entity?

A few days ago, in an attempt by the American administration to divide Tunisia and Libya, we heard a statement by the official spokesman of the American Department of State, claiming that there had been Libyan aircraft violating the air space of Tunisia:

(spoke in English)

"President Bourguiba in June paid a visit to the United States. President Reagan noted that the United States is firmly committed to the security of Tunisian territory, its integrity and the principle of non-interference in its internal affairs. Tunisia can rely on the continued support and the friendship of the United States."

(continued in Arabic)

Where is this American friendship to Tunisia? When Zionist aircraft bomb Tunisia, we cannot say that the Americans, who own the most up-to-date means of intelligence and surveillance, did not know of this. Why did the American administration not protect Tunisia? Why did it support the act of aggression against Tunisia?

We would have hoped that the American administration would be committed to what it had said and that it would protect Tunisia against aggression. Tunisia has not been a victim of aggression on the part of Libya, because Libya is a fraternal country and a neighbour to Tunisia and will remain so. The security of Tunisia is part of our own security. It has been proved beyond any doubt that the aggressor against Tunisia could not be and is not Libya, but rather the aggressor against the Arab nation. It is the enemy of the Arab nation, including the people of Tunisia, Palestine, Algeria, Syria and Morocco.

At a time when we condemn and denounce this act of aggression, we should like to say that we fully support the fraternal country of Tunisia and the Tunisian people. We are at the service of Tunisia because what happened in Tunisia will happen to us one day and will happen to every Arab State tomorrow.

At the same time, we hold this Council, including the United States of America, responsible before history. We thus ask that the United States reconsider its attitude and realize that peace will not be achieved with either aircraft or Israeli terrorism. Peace is basically achieved through respect for human rights and international instruments. That is genuine peace.
We will all pay the price, including the United States, if we are blind to his. If we do not implement Chapter VII of the Charter, we shall find ourselves faced with another act of aggression and with discussions of one act of aggression after another. It might then be too late.

The Arab nation, even if it is now incapable of defending itself against this act of aggression because the perpetrator is supported by the strongest Power on earth, will one day be capable of defending itself. History has taught us that the peoples will eventually prevail. Where are Hitler and Mussolini?

Mussolini killed more than half the Libyan people during his period in power. But fascism is dead; Nazism is dead; and Zionism and the Zionist régime will also die.

We will not be patient. Our patience has run out. We ask the members of this Council not to make us lose hope in the United Nations and the Council. We do not want to lose hope in the Security Council, although we see that it is paralysed by the veto right. We call upon the Council to cancel this veto right. It should not be given to a group of States. We have seen this veto right being used by that group of States against the will and the rights of peoples. We shall see it used once again now to protect and support aggression.

Do not make us lose confidence completely. We are small countries, but, even so, we are determined to live free or to die in dignity.

I appeal to the Security Council to take all the measures provided for in the Charter and to confirm its support for and solidarity with the Tunisian people and the sister country of Tunisia as well as with the Palestinian people.

The PRESIDENT: At this point I take off my presidential hat and put on the hat of United States representative.

I wish simply to say that later, at the end of the debate, I shall reply to the intemperate words and veiled threats contained in the Libyan representative's speech, about the United States "paying the price".

Mr. ALLEYNE (Trinidad and Tobago): I wish at the outset to congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for the month of October and to express my confidence that under your able stewardship the deliberations of this Council will prove most productive.

I take this opportunity also to pay a tribute to Sir John Thomson, Ambassador of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, for the skilful manner in which he conducted the Council's proceedings over the past month.

I am sure I speak for all members present when I express our congratulations and our thanks to Sir Geoffrey Howe, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, on the professional manner in which he conducted our commemorative meeting on 26 September. We were particularly impressed by the great facility with which he synthesized all the strands of our respective contributions into a comprehensive summary.

It was with great distress and indignation that my delegation learned of the deplorable air attack conducted by Israel on Tuesday, 1 October 1985, in the locality of Hammam-Plage, south of Tunis, which resulted in extensive casualties, among which at least 50 were killed. Our condolences go to the bereaved families and to the Government and people of Tunisia.

Only a few days ago, at the meeting of this Council convened to commemorate the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations, we all reaffirmed our obligations under the Charter and our continued commitment to its principles and purposes. It is therefore a sad reflection on this Council's credibility and indeed on the present conduct of international relations that a Member State of the United Nations should so flagrantly violate the very principles on which our Organization is founded. There can be absolutely no justification for Israel's violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Tunisia.

We are all committed to peace and to upholding the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter. Members of this Council therefore cannot, in all conscience, condone such an act of hostility and the consequent loss of innocent human lives and destruction of property. Israel's act of aggression can only serve to increase tension in the region and militate against attempts to secure a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. This attack took place just at the time when there was some optimism that direct negotiations could commence involving some major parties to the conflict from the region. Acts of violence such as that which occurred last Tuesday can only undermine this regional peace process and the efforts by the United Nations to convene the International Peace Conference on the Middle East.

My delegation wishes to reiterate that only through the resolution of the Palestinian problem, which lies at the heart of the Middle East conflict, will there be durable peace in the area. This peace can never be achieved unless the Palestinian people are able to exercise their inalienable right to self-determination and establish an independent Palestinian State, in conformity with all the relevant resolutions of the United Nations. We recognize the right of all States in the region, including Israel, to exist and to live in peace within secure borders that are internationally recognized, in accordance with Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973).

Less than three weeks ago, attempts by this Council to address the
deteriorating situation in the territories illegally occupied by Israel were frustrated. Unless we deal with this fundamental problem of Palestine, there will be little hope of finding a solution which will open the gateway of peace to this area. The reprehensible raid by Israel against Tunisian territory emphasizes the need for the Council not only to take prompt action on this immediate problem, but to deal expeditiously with the wider Middle East question.

The PRESIDENT: I thank the representative of Trinidad and Tobago for kind words he addressed to me.

The next speaker is the representative of Greece. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. DOUNTAS (Greece): Mr. President, I thank you and through you the
other members of the Council, for giving me the opportunity to address this meet At the very outset, allow me to congratulate you on your assumption of the office of President of the Council for the month of October. This is a period which, apart from coinciding with the celebrations of the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations, will unfortunately be a difficult one. The Council is seized of a number of recent cases of violations of the Charter. I am sure that with your well-known wide and long experience in international affairs you will be able to guide the Council's deliberations successfully.

I also congratulate the President of the Council for the month of September, Sir John Thomson, Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom, on the able way in which he carried out his duties.

On instructions of my Government, I should like to refer to the recent attack by the Israeli air force against Tunisia, which left a great number of dead and of wounded, many of them seriously.

My Government has strongly denounced this act of aggression and, together with other member States of the European Community, has energetically condemned it. I should simply like here to reiterate our condemnation of this armed violation of the territory of the Republic of Tunisia, a truly peace-loving country with which Greece has traditionally maintained close ties of friendship.

The Greek Government has on many occasions unequivocally condemned all acts of terrorism. The Foreign Minister of Greece recently strongly reiterated that position in addressing the General Assembly. It was within this context that we also condemned the brutal slaying of Israeli nationals in the Republic of Cyprus, itself a victim of continuous aggression. We are convinced, however, that acts of terrorism cannot in any way serve as an excuse for a Government to launch an armed attack on a third country.

The Middle East problem is almost as old as our Organization. At a time when efforts are being made to promote a peaceful solution to this perennial conflict, actions such as those taken by Israel cannot but hamper the process towards peace. My Government urges the Government of Israel to abandon the policy of mass retaliation, which violates the very principles of the Charter and of international law in general.

In concluding, I extend to the Government and people of Tunisia, to the Palestinian people and to the families of the victims the profound sympathy of my Government.

The PRESIDENT: I thank the representative of Greece for the kind words
he addressed to me.

The next speaker is the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Co-operation of Morocco, His Excellency Mr. Abdellatif Filali, whom I welcome. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. FILALI (Morocco) (interpretation from French): I wish first, Sir, to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the month of October. We are convinced that, thanks to your human qualities and your great experience in international affairs, our debates will be crowned with success.

I should also like to pay a particular tribute to Sir John Thomson for the adroit and competent manner in which he led the Council's debates during September.

Finally, I am grateful to you, Mr. President, and to all the other members of the Council for allowing me to take part in this debate, which I hope will have a positive outcome.

For the past 40 years the question of Palestine has constantly and
persistently demanded the attention of our Organization, because of the policy of aggression and systematic expansion followed by Israel in the Middle East. The United Nations and, in particular, the Security Council have been asked on many occasions to take decisions in connection with massacres of the Palestinian people, the violation of the internationally recognized borders of neighbouring States and acts of terrorism made into a State policy by Israel, such as the destruction by the Israeli air force on 7 June 1981 of the nuclear research centre at Tammuz, near Baghdad.

The Security Council is meeting today in tragic circumstances to consider yet another criminal act of aggression by Israel against an Arab State Member of the United Nations. This time it is a raid carried out by the Israeli air force more than 2,400 kilometres from its bases against the headquarters of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), claiming dozens of Palestinian and Tunisian civilians as innocent victims.

When such a close member of our Maghreb family is harmed, we share in the grief and sorrow, and the entire Moroccan people joins its Tunisian brothers both in mourning and in indignation and revulsion.

The Kingdom of Morocco, which pays homage to the innocent victims, strongly condemns Israel's violation of the sovereignty of the brother people of Tunisia, to which we offer our solidarity and unreserved support in the present time of trial.

The terrorist aggression is a denial of the most basic principles of international law set forth in the Charter and in all the major declarations interpreting it, such as those to be found in General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV) of 24 October 1970, the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, and resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 14 December 1974 on the definition of aggression.

Wanton reprisals against innocent civilians, including women and children, have always been condemned by the international community since the Second World War. If self-defence consisted in bombing all those territories where Palestinians live, no country would be safe from Israel's destructive folly.

It was a deliberate action when the Government of Israel chose on 1 October to strike against a moderate Arab country and against the PLO headquarters at the moment when our Organization, in co-operation with all responsible, peace-loving States, is making every effort to achieve a just and lasting solution to the question of the Middle East. The act of aggression against Tunisia was really nothing less than an attempt to sabotage the process of restoring peace to the Middle East, and once again gives the clearest possible proof of Israel's persistence in its policy of confrontation and denial of all the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people. The Security Council, which recently reaffirmed, at its meeting on 26 September at ministerial level, its commitment to fulfil its prime responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, is now duty-bound fully to use its powers under the Charter and impose the necessary sanctions against the Israeli aggressor.

The whole of international public opinion, indignant at the savage, criminal act perpetrated against innocent civilians in Tunisia, is placing its hopes in the Security Council to restore respect for the system of values on which international society in our day is based and for the valuable achievements of the United Nations. What is at stake is the credibility of the Council and of our organization as a whole, at a time when it is commemorating its fortieth anniversary and intends to prove its effectiveness in bringing about a better world and its dedication to its founders' desire for peace.

Official terrorism cannot go unpunished, unless we want to go back to the rule of the law of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and to the endless escalation of violence and destruction. The Council must, in the overriding interest of international security and stability, strongly condemn Israel and demand that it provide suitable and complete compensation to the victims of its act of aggression.

Since the Fez Summit of 1982, when a Peace Plan was adopted unanimously, the Arab leaders have been working ceaselessly to achieve a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, with respect for the principles of the United Nations. It must be said that so far they have come up against the policy of force of Israel, which has just attacked a country which is the host of the Arab League and has always been among the first loudly to proclaim its desire for a peaceful settlement, under 1 appropriate international auspices.

However, we remain convinced that, thanks in particular to the firmness that the Security Council will not fail to show on this occasion, justice will prevail, in the interest of all the peoples concerned.

The PRESIDENT: I thank the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Co-operation of Morocco for the kind words he addressed to me.

The next speaker is the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Jordan, His Excellency Mr. Taher Masri, whom I welcome. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. MASRI (Jordan) (interpretation from Arabic): I wish first of all, Sir, to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for the month of October. I am certain that, thanks to your vast knowledge of international affairs and your well-known qualities as an enlightened diplomat, the Council will carry out its duties successfully.

I wish also to thank your predecessor, the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom, Sir John Thomson, for the exemplary manner in which he guided the work of the Council last month.

Moreover, I thank the members of the Council for their prompt response to Tunisia's request that the Council be convened urgently to consider Israel's attack on the southern portion of the Tunisian capital. I have every hope that the joint response of this Council will meet the challenge before it.

It is our earnest hope that in this year of the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations the Security Council will take decisive action on the Tunisian complaint, so that the world may forget the Council's past inability to carry out its responsibilities under the Charter regarding the Middle East. We hope that our commemoration of this anniversary will do honour to our collective responsibility and will make us aware of our joint task in this international Organization, on which the peoples and nations of the world have pinned their hopes.

We hope that this time the Council will play its proper role and will
discharge its responsibility by condemning the aggressor and forcing it to mend its ways, in keeping with the justice of the complaint lodged by the sister republic of Tunisia.

We dare not think of the disastrous consequences of this unjustifiable Israeli attack; Israel illegally violated Tunisia's territory and sovereignty, jeopardizing its stability and national security. The toll among the civilian population was more than 150 dead and wounded.

Members of the Council know that in 1982 Tunisia welcomed Palestinians from Beirut under international agreements which have been respected by a number of States, including certain members of this Council. It did this in order to facilitate the withdrawal of Palestinians from Beirut. Furthermore, history has forged the closest of links between Tunisia and the rest of the Arab nation. Tunisia is known for its moderation, balanced policies and open attitude. It has never been a staging area for terrorism: on the contrary, it houses the headquarters of the League of Arab States, which in 1982 adopted the Arab peace plan.

That is why Tunisia's willingness to welcome Palestinians after Israel occupied Lebanon is praiseworthy: it contributed to lessening the tension in our region, thereby preventing a further outbreak of violence. This is an important fact which should be overlooked by no one, certainly not by the members of this Council country in justification of this attack is very dangerous for the Middle East, both for the present and for the future. This sympathy towards such an act perpetrated against an independent Arab State can only encourage Israel to continue its acts of aggression against the Arab countries of the region. The assertion that the Israeli attack can in some way be justified is unacceptable to us. It could provide a political shield and a financial underpinning for Israel's acts.

This act of aggression was perpetrated just as sustained efforts were being made to get the peace process moving again. That is why we believe that the attack was directed against the peace efforts now being made.

The attack by Israel is an unlawful military act with disastrous political consequences. We would draw attention to the political gravity of this senseless and serious illegal act, an Israeli attack carried out against the offices of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) near the capital of Tunisia. It is yet another example of the policy of pre-emptive surprise attacks, and goes in tandem with the "iron fist" policy being pursued by Israel in southern Lebanon and in the West Bank. It is the very essence of Israel's crude approach to its security, an approach based on Israel's own technique of senselessly using military force against the Arab countries.

The bombing of Baghdad, Beirut and Tunis are regrettable, vivid illustrations of that policy. The Arab region has suffered much and has paid dearly for Israel's policies.

It is a policy marked by military reprisals, by the occupation of the
territory of others, and arises from Israel's sense of its own military
superiority. It tries to blame others for its continued occupation of Arab
territories, for the arbitrary actions of its occupation forces, and for the internal resistance of the inhabitants under occupation.

As a result of these policies, there have been 18 {ears of persistent occupation, no peaceful and just settlement, continuing destruction, and the dispersal and exile of inhabitants.

The primary danger of Israel's attack upon Tunisia arises from its being an attempt by Israel to keep the region locked in this spiral of violence, tension and instability.

This policy will serve only the interests of the extremists and the enemies of peace.

In conclusion, it is true that we are still caught up in violence and
extremism in the Middle East. But now we must cut the Gordian knot and draw a distinction between causes and effects. In our opinion, the Council is the right body to deal seriously, objectively and impartially with this thorny problem. The Council will, I am sure, strongly condemn Israel's raid, denounce it, and hold Israel responsible for the losses Tunisia has suffered as a result, and commit itself to reparations.

The same is true for all those who might be capable of forcing Israel to change and put an end to its senseless, irresponsible acts. I hardly need to say that if the Council adopted such an attitude, its prestige and credibility, would be restored as would our confidence in it and in international public order.

The PRESIDENT: I thank His Excellency the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Jordan for the kind words he addressed to me.

The next speaker is the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Lesotho,
His Excellency Vincent Monts'i Makhele. I welcome him, and invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. MAKHELE (Lesotho): Allow me at the very outset, Sir, to express my delegation's sincere congratulations to you on your assumption of the presidency of this Council for the month of October. Your qualifications, expertise and diplomatic skills preceded your arrival here as the new Permanent Representative of your country to the United Nations. We are therefore more than confident that you will guide the deliberations of this Council to a fruitful conclusion. As a representative of a permanent member, a great Power and a leader of the Western countries, your responsibilities towards your people and the world community are onerous. The eyes of the world are on you, and we are confident that you will live up to expectations.

Permit me to express our appreciation to your predecessor, the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom, for the efficient manner in which he and his Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs conducted the work of this Council during September.

The events of 1 October 1985, in which Israel committed an act of aggression against Tunisia, a State Member of this Organization and of the Organization of African Unity, compel me to express Lesotho's shock and dismay at that callous act. I need not rehash the facts of that act, which has claimed the innocent lives of over 50 persons, including Palestinian refugees - and the Palestinian people has been denied a homeland and statehood for over 40 years.

We are all gathered here to celebrate the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations in the name of peace. It was only last week that this very Council held a special meeting at the ministerial level, at which the members of this Council rededicated themselves to the objectives and principles of the Charter, the basic thrust of which is nothing but peace. The members rededicated themselves to the settlement of disputes by peaceful means and to renunciation of the use of force as a means of resolving disputes. We have heard statements, even during the general debate of the General Assembly, condemning terrorism in all its forms and manifestations.

My delegation fully associates itself with these condemnations. Yet it is under these circumstances, at this very hour of the solemnization of peace, that the State of Israel has negated all we are here for. By violating the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Tunisia, a small, peace-loving country like Lesotho, Israel has not only violated international law but has proved beyond doubt that it practises State terrorism against its neighbours and is far from creating a climate conducive to peace. A sad day in the annals of this Organization has again been registered, for indeed Israel has demonstrated that international law has been replaced by the law of the jungle, where might is the rule. History has been rewritten and the clock has been turned back. What is even more distressing is that this cowardly act has been hailed by a super-Power, permanent member of this Council.

We, the small countries, felt a chill go through our spines, for, shockingly, we heard that today the mighty and the strong have a right to hit left and right with impunity. Israel, a State that professes to yearn for peace, is being encouraged to be a bully in the Middle East. Is that the sort of peace Israel is asking for?

Unfortunately we see a pattern: on the southern tip of Africa we see a State which has also elevated terrorism to State policy. Like Tunisia, Angola has been subjected to successive acts of aggression and State terrorism - from South Africa. We speak out and condemn this lawlessness because it was not so long ago that my own country was wantonly attacked by a bully in our region, a bully that has turned itself into a regional policeman.

The United Nations, particularly this very Council, is the only body that can and must protect peaceful and powerless countries like Tunisia from the use of force by bullies like Israel. We call upon all small countries to speak out against this brutal misuse of force. It must be borne in mind by all that these peace-loving and powerless countries will always be victims of these types of acts of aggression.

We therefore strongly condemn this attack and call upon Israel to rethink its policies and to embark on a path of peace.

We shall conclude by expressing our condolences and sympathy to the Tunisian Government and the Palestine Liberation Organization and the families that have lost their loved ones. Israel must be called upon to desist from these acts and be enjoined to resort to peaceful means to solve disputes, and to give fair and full compensation to the Tunisian Government.

The PRESIDENT: I thank the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Lesotho for the kind words addressed to me.

There are still a number of speakers on my list. In view of the lateness of the hour I intend to adjourn this meeting now. But before we adjourn, I shall call on the representative of Israel, who wishes to make a statement in exercise of the right of reply.

Mr. NETANYAHU (Israel): With few exceptions, the countries that are
represented in this Chamber comprise essentially two categories in connection with the issue now under discussion. They are either the victims of terrorism or its backers and promoters. Yesterday I addressed some of my remarks to the States in the first category, the victims. Today I should like to say a few things to the sponsors and supporters. We have listened to some of them just now around this very table.

We have heard, for example, from Syria, the butcher of Lebanon, a country which systematically practises terrorism, including such Syrian specialties as car bombs and assassinations from Tripoli to Sidon. Syria has also recently acquired a wholly-owned subsidiary of the PLO. And let me remind all members that it was Syria that imported the Iranian Hezballah into Lebanon in the first place.

We heard yesterday from the Soviet Union, whose press in the last few days has been unleashed to pour out a torrent of abuse against Israel, accusing us - as the Soviet representatives did yesterday - of "State-sponsored terrorism". The Soviets know whereof they speak when they discuss this subject. They have unstintingly and generously supported terrorist groups around the world. They have gone so far as
to train terrorists in special camps in the Soviet Union itself. The Soviet
attitude towards indiscriminate violence is well-evidenced in the bombings - not, mind you, surgical strikes against military targets, but carpet bombings of entire villages in the Pangshir Valley in Afghanistan.

(Mr. Netanyahu, Israel) indiscriminate murder. Instead, we listened with amazement to the incredible criticism, and even denunciation, of Israel's action by those who should know better, and worse, by those who do know better. We had hoped that the pressures exercised by the Arab countries and the other accomplices and apologists of terror would not, for once, be the predominant consideration, at least not in this case. I say "in this case" because as surely as night follows day, it is clear that our action was pinpointed against the terrorists themselves and the extra-territorial base from which they operated, not against the host country, whatever its responsibilities. The false assertion that we somehow violated the sovereignty of a State would appear even more ludicrous here than it appeared in the case of Entebbe.

Since when did the rights of sovereignty include the right to shelter
professional murderers, whose web of terror covers the entire world? Consider the pirates of the 19th century who ravaged the Mediterranean from Cyprus to Gibraltar and took refuge on the very coast of North Africa that we are dealing with here today. Did they enjoy immunity? Or are we going back to the distant times when there was no vestige of international order?

Terrorism, like piracy, can enjoy no political immunity, no military
protection, no legal privileges; the only connection it has to sovereignty is the obligation of the sovereign to exclude it from its domain. To assert that the victims of terrorism should be handcuffed so that they may be prevented from defending themselves, so that the terrorists roam free and unpunished, is to invite the rule of lawlessness and savagery. The civilized world will commit a terrible error if it plays politics with this issue. For what is at stake here are the very foundations of society and the future of freedom in the world.

The PRESIDENT: The representative of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya has asked to speak in exercise of the right of reply. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. FARTAS (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya) (interpretation from Arabic): It seems that if a human being wants a certificate of good conduct, he must perpetrate some massacres. We all know about those massacres and we do not have to recall them here because they would make one feel disgusted. We all know what happened at Deir Yassin, in Kibya, in Sabra and Shatila and in Bahr el Bakar. While we are sitting here and listening to this debate, bodies are being dug out from the rubble in Tunisia, the bodies of women and children. I do not want to talk about this subject.

All those who spoke yesterday and today have condemned that barbaric
aggressive act. Nobody has deviated from that position.

I do want to explain one thing. I was sitting behind my Minister when he was speaking this afternoon and there was a mistake in the interpretation. What my minister said was that the international community must take action to confront this type of aggression; otherwise it would be faced with the situation that faced the international community at the time of Hitler and Mussolini. The price for that would be paid by all peoples, including the American people and all peace-loving people.

The PRESIDENT: I shall now make a statement in exercise of the right of reply in my capacity as representative of the United States of America.

I have heard here today a series of intemperate attacks on my country from the representatives of Cuba and Libya. My country has fought two great wars for human freedom in this century. We have annexed no territory nor have we enslaved any people. In my country the people are free to choose their own Government.

My country has suffered grievously at the hands of terrorists. Many American ambassadors have been killed. Many Americans have been hijacked and terrorized. Very recently a young American sailor was slowly and brutally beaten to death. We have felt the acts of terrorism in the flesh of our people.

From States like Libya or Cuba we accept no lessons on international conduct, nor do we permit them to determine our foreign policy.

I now resume my function as President of the Council.

The next meeting of the Security Council to continue consideration of the item of its agenda will take place tomorrow, Friday, 4 October 1985, at 3.15 p.m.

Before adjourning the meeting, I should like to remind members that the Security Council will resume its consideration of the item "Complaint by Angola against South Africa" tomorrow, Friday, 4 October 1985, at 10.30 a.m.

The meeting rose at 6.20 p.m.







Follow UNISPAL RSS Twitter