Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

said:

Speaking against the proposal, Ambassador Moynihan

"The U.S. delegation has insisted upon a vote on the issue of inviting representatives of the Palestine Liberation Organization to appear before the Security Council. As a matter of principle we shall vote against their being invited to appear.

"We have witnessed a concerted attempt to disregard the rules of procedure and to accord to the Palestine Liberation Organization a role greater even than that which over the years the Council has granted to observer governments and a role greater by far than has in more recent times been granted to the spokesmen of legitimate national liberation movements invited here under rule 39.

"The United States is not prepared to agree to an ad hoc departure from the rules of procedure tailored to meet the asserted needs of the Palestine Liberation Organization."

The proposal, which was a procedural one and not subject to the veto, was approved by a vote of 9 (Byelorussian S.S.R., Cameroon, China, Guyana, Iraq, Mauritania, Tanzania, Sweden, U.S.S.R.) to 3 (Costa Rica, U.K., U.S.), with 3 abstentions (France, Italy, Japan).

On December 5 five Council members (Cameroon, Guyana, Iraq, Mauritania, and Tanzania) introduced a draft resolution which strongly condemned Israel for its premeditated air attacks against Lebanon, called on it to desist from all military attacks against Lebanon, and solemnly warned that if such attacks were repeated "the Council would have to consider taking appropriate steps and measures to give effect to its decisions.

Arduous negotiations marked the final day of the debate, December 8, as the United States offered two amendments that would have given balance to the resolution by condemning "all acts of violence" in the Middle East and calling on "all parties to refrain from any action which might endanger negotiations." These failed to be adopted when they received only seven favorable votes (Costa Rica, France, Italy, Japan, Sweden, U.K., U.S.) instead of the required nine, and the United States then vetoed the draft resolution. The vote was 13 to 1, with Costa Rica abstaining.

In explaining the U.S. vote, Ambassador Moynihan stressed that the outcome was disappointing to the United States, which had worked strenuously for a balanced resolution. He said:

"Mr. President, the United States strongly deplores the Israeli actions which were brought to our attention by the Governments of Lebanon and Egypt through the offices of their distinguished Ambassadors who are with us tonight. But we also believe that the problem of loss of innocent life from incursions from Lebanon and other neighboring states of Israel should also be condemned. This is part of the cycle of violence with which we are dealing and which the United States, as a mediating power, hopes to bring to an end."

General Assembly Consideration

Question of Palestine

The "question of Palestine," on the Assembly's agenda for the second year, was considered directly in plenary between November 3 and 10, without prior reference to a main committee. The Assembly had before it during its debate a brief report by the Secretary General, submitted in response to the Assembly's 1974 resolution on Palestine. (The 1974 resolution had, inter alia, reaffirmed the rights of the Palestinians to self-determination, to national independence, and to return to their homes and property. It had requested the Secretary General to establish contacts with the PLO on all matters concerning the question of Palestine.) In his report the Secretary General said that he had established contacts with the PLO and that the Secretariat had been in touch with representatives of the PLO "as occasion has required." The report also noted that the PLO had established offices of permanent observers in New York and Geneva and that the Commissioner General of UNRWA and the PLO had been in contact in Beirut.

The debate, in which 50 states took part, attracted much less attention than that in 1974 when Yasir Arafat, head of the PLO, had spoken. Most of those taking part in the debate ultimately became sponsors of one or both resolutions subsequently adopted by the Assembly.

The head of the PLO delegation, Farouk Qaddumi, delivered an uncompromising statement to open the debate. His charges of repression, imperialism, and aggression were aimed at both the United States and Israel. Speaking immediately afterward, the Israeli Representative, Chaim Herzog, defended Israel and its policies and charged the PLO with rejecting negotiations and compromise and seeking to destroy the state of

Israel.

On November 4 Egypt introduced a draft resolution which in its final form was sponsored by 47 states.

The resolution (1) requested the Security Council to adopt the necessary measures to enable the Palestinian people to exercise its inalienable national rights in accordance with the resolution adopted in 1974; (2) called for inviting the PLO "to participate in all efforts, deliberations, and conferences on the Middle East which are held under the auspices of the United Nations, on an equal footing with other parties"; and (3) requested the Secretary General to inform the cochairmen of the Peace Conference on the Middle East of the present resolution and to take all necessary steps to secure the invitation of the PLO "to participate in the work of the Conference as well as in all other efforts for peace." This resolution carried out Egyptian President Sadat's proposal, made in an address before the General Assembly on October 29, to endorse an invitation to the PLO to participate in the Geneva negotiations.

A second draft resolution, introduced by Senegal on November 7 and eventually sponsored by 55 states, concerned the rights of the Palestinians. It reaffirmed the 1974 resolution, expressed grave concern that no progress had been achieved toward attaining those rights, and established a Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People to be composed of 20 member states appointed by the General Assembly. The Committee was requested to consider and recommend to the General Assembly by June 1, 1976, a "program of implementation" enabling the Palestinian people to exercise their rights.

The U.S. Representative, Ambassador Moynihan, spoke on November 7. Recalling that the United States had voted against the 1974 resolution on the rights of the Palestinians which formed the basis for the two resolutions proposed in 1975, he said:

Our reason was our reservation about. the efficacy of meeting the interests and concerns of the Palestinians through resolutions of the General Assembly rather than through the give-andtake of the negotiating process. We believe also that the exhortation to exercise any Palestinian rights in Palestine creates a serious political and legal problem. Part of the geographic entity known as Palestine now constitutes the territory of a member state of the United Nations. Thus a claim to exercise rights in Palestine appears as a claim which, at least in part, involves internal jurisdiction of a member state.

"Regarding the proposal to invite the PLO to Geneva, we note that there are various views among the present parties to the Geneva Conference. We believe that this is the crux of the problem, and our policy is that any new participation at Geneva

We

can only be the result of careful consideration,
negotiation, and agreement among the parties.
are prepared to participate actively in such ne-
gotiations. Our own views on the obstacles to
recognition of, or negotiation with, the PLO are
a matter of public record."

Both resolutions were adopted on November 10 by rollcall votes. The resolution concerning PLO participation in peace efforts was adopted by a vote of 101 to 8 (U.S.), with 25 abstentions, and the resolution creating the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People by a vote of 93 to 18 (U.S.), with 27 abstentions.

On December 17 the General Assembly decided without objection, on the proposal of Senegal, to appoint the following members to the Committee: Afghanistan, Cuba, Cyprus, German Democratic Republic, Guinea, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Laos, Malagasy Republic, Malaysia, Malta, Pakistan, Romania, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukrainian S.S.R., and Yugoslavia.

Situation in the Middle East

Although the topic "situation in the Middle East" has been on the agenda of the General Assembly each year since 1967, it has not been considered on a regular basis. There was wide expectation during the 30th Assembly that the debate would again be deferred since the Security Council's November 30 resolution (see p. 6) calling for consideration of the question in January seemed to overshadow any action the Assembly might take. Nevertheless, a brief debate was held in plenary between December 1 and 4; only 35 states took part.

On December 3 the Malagasy Republic introduced a draft resolution that was eventually sponsored by 29 The resolution condemned Israel's continued occupation of Arab territories, requested all states to desist from supplying Israel with any military or economic aid as long as it continued to occupy Arab territories and to deny the inalienable national rights of the Palestinian people, and requested the Security Council to take measures for the implementation of all relevant General Assembly and Security Council resolutions dealing with the Middle East.

The U.S. Representative, Ambassador W. Tapley Bennett, Jr., spoke on December 4. In explaining the U.S. opposition to the draft resolution he said:

"The resolution before us for our consideration does not, in the view of the United States, help us in the process toward peace we support. We shall vote against it. Its one-sided condemnation of one of the parties to the Arab-Israeli

dispute and its departure from the accepted ne-
gotiating framework established by Security Coun-
cil resolutions 242 and 338 make further settle-
ment between those parties more difficult. It
calls upon the Security Council to implement
certain resolutions that deal with problems that
can only be solved by negotiation. That is the
task before us all: to get to the serious work.
of negotiation among the parties in which real
progress can be made. Resolutions such as the
one before us today can only exacerbate the
situation.

"Further, it adds to the series of one-sided resolutions which are a disservice to ourselves and to this institution. It would take us one step further in destroying credibility throughout the world that the General Assembly is truly going about its business. These irresponsible resolutions do not take into account the legitimate concerns of one of the parties and lead us into a domain removed from the reality where a settlement can be achieved."

The resolution was adopted on December 5 by a rollcall vote of 84 to 17 (U.S.), with 27 abstentions.

UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East

Despite special contributions by the United States, Saudi Arabia, and several Western European states, and increased regular contributions by some Arab countries, UNRWA was still in a financial crisis at the end of 1975 because of continuing severe inflation and the dislocations caused by the civil war in Lebanon. In November 1975, UNRWA's deficit was $8.3 million.

The 30th General Assembly's Special Political Committee met seven times between November 11 and 21, 1975, to consider UNRWA and the other topics customarily associated with it. It had before it the report of Sir John Rennie, Commissioner General of UNRWA, a report by the Secretary General on various actions by Israel concerning the Palestine refugees, special and regular reports by the Working Group on the Financing of UNRWA, and the report of the UN Conciliation Commission for Palestine (PCC).

Forty states took part in the debate which covered a wide variety of questions arising from the ArabIsraeli issue, as well as humanitarian assistance to the refugees. A representative of the PLO also participated, without the right to vote, pursuant to a resolution of the 29th Assembly. Four resolutions were

« ÎnapoiContinuă »