Ninth emergency special session



Held at Headquarters, New York,

on Friday, 29 January 1982, at 3 p.m.


President Mr. KITTANI (Iraq)


The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Arabic)  The Assembly will begin its consideration of the item before the emergency special session.

Before calling on the first speaker, I should like to propose, as I announced this morning, that the list of speakers be closed on Monday, 1 February  at 6 p.m.  May I take it that the Assembly agrees to this proposal?

“It was so decided.

The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Arabic):  I now call on the first speaker in the debate, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Syrian Arab Republic, Mr. Abdul Halim Khaddam.

Mr. KHADDAM (Syrian Arab Republic) (interpretation from Arabic): Mr. President, I thank you for your efforts in conducting the work of the General Assembly and organizing its business, so that the Assembly will fulfil the objectives of this session,

I take this opportunity to congratulate Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar the Secretary-General of the United Nations, on the confidence that has been placed in pin by the international community in electing him to this high post. The objectivity, wisdom, seriousness of purpose and neutrality characterizing .Mr. de Cuellar  in his handling of various issues make us hopeful and optimistic. I wish to assure him of our cooperation, especially in matters related to right and justice and the furtherance of peace and security in the world.

I am also in duty bound to praise  in this forum, the outstanding qualities of outgoing Secretary-General, Mr. Kurt Waldheim, who for whole decade devoted his time and efforts to the United Nations.  He well understood the major problems of the world, particularly the problems of the third world. He also understood the Palestine issue and the complicated problems resulting therefrom.  He realized too the dangers that would arise from. that issue if the international community failed to establish a just peace in the Middle East.  I hail him from this rostrum and wish him good health and happiness.

This special emergency session of the United Nations General Assembly is being;- held in grave and extremely complicated international circumstances. The potentials of confrontation have emerged, after the phase of detente. The world is now experiencing a new state of fear and anxiety in view of the possibility of a world collapse that would undermine the relative stability achieved by the peoples of the world in the years since the Second World War.

In this turbulent international atmosphere Israel has taken a new aggressive step by enacting a law annexing to the Israeli entity the occupied Syrian Arab territories in the Golan Heights.  The Assembly undoubtedly realizes the grave implications of such a law.  On the one hand, it constitutes a flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter and of Security Council resolution 338 (1973). On the other, it represents usurpation of part of the national soil of the Syrian Arab Republic. That Israeli step manifests the aggressive and expansionist objectives of the Zionist entity in Palestinewhich aims at establishing a State extending from the Nile to the Euphrates at the expense of our existence, our future and our national interests, as well as at the expense of peace arid security in the region and the world.

We have chosen to resort to the international legitimacy represented by the Security Council, to take the proper position in order to tackle this dangerous situation.  We have done so because of our desire to consolidate the role of the international Organization and out of consideration for international security and peace.  The repercussions of the situation in the Middle East will not be confined to the territorial boundaries of the region but will extend to the international situation because of the region’s location and its strategic and economic importance.

The Security Council has debated this dangerous situation, and in its resolution 497 (198l)  it stressed the gravity of the problem and the Israeli decision.  The Council emphasized its rejection of the Israeli decision and considered it null and void.  It called upon the Israeli Government to rescind it immediately and decided to resume its work within two weeks in order  to take the appropriate measures in accordance with the United Nations Charter,

After the fixed period had elapsed the Council met to discuss and adopt the appropriate measures.  The majority decided on a draft resolution which, it believed, represented the necessary minimum for tackling this dangerous situation, which constitutes a real threat to peace and security.  That draft resolution was, however, frustrated by the American veto, and thus, as a result of the American decision to exercise the veto, the Security Council failed to adopt the appropriate resolution.

Faced with the inaction to which the Security Council had been reduced, the majority had to resort to the General Assembly, availing itself of the Council’s right to refer the issue to a body in which no veto could be exercised to block any resolution.

The Israeli decision to annex the occupied Syrian Arab territories is but one chapter in a long series of aggressive, expansionist Israeli actions.  It exposes the real character of that aggressive, fascist entity and necessitates a responsible discussion in depth by the international community represented by this Assembly.   The discussion should result in the adoption of measures and resolutions that will uphold international peace and .justice and preserve the United Nations and its Charter,

In this respect the following facts must be borne in mind.

First  since 1948 the Zionist movement has obstructed the work of the International Reconciliation Committee, which was formed by the United Nations to solve the Palestinian question.  The Zionists declared a State on part of Palestine, and the Israelis then assassinated the international mediator, Count Folke Bernadotte.

Second , since 1947 the Zionist movement has committed atrocities against Palestinian Arab citizens, leading to their expulsion from their homeland  atrocities such as the massacre  of Deir Yassin and other massacres.

The United Nations dealt with that situation in resolution 194 (III) of 11 December 1948, but Israel refused to implement that resolution.

Third, after 1948 Israel began a process of gradual annexation of Arab lands.  The aggression of 1956 was an important stage in that process of expansion.

Fourth, on 5 June 1967 Israel waged war on three Arab States and occupied the rest of Palestine and parts of the Syrian and. Egyptian territories.

Fifth, since 1967  the international community has made successive efforts to establish peace in the Middle East.  The following were the most important such attemptsthough they were hindered by Israel: the initiative of international envoy Gunnar Jarring, which was proposed to Egypt. Israel and Jordan and which Egypt and Jordan accepted, while Israel rejected it the initiative of the six African wise men, which was hindered by Israeli obstruction; the initiative of the United States Secretary of State, Mr. William Rogers, in June 1970, which was accepted by Egypt and rejected by Israel Security Council resolution 338 (1973)and the obstruction of the Peace Conference due to Israel’s refusal to accept the participation of the Palestine Liberation Organization in the Conference, and Israel’s insistence on a policy of expansion, thus refusing to abide by the United Nations resolutions: the obstruction of the movement towards a just and comprehensive peace in accordance with the United Nations resolutions,  because of the two Camp David Accords.

Sixth, Israel’s incessant attacks on Lebanon have led to the occupation and control of part of Lebanon‘s land.  Israel’s intensive bombardment of Lebanese cities and villages and the Palestinian camps is aimed at the displacement of the population from southern Lebanon.  Israel is now preparing for a new aggression against Lebanon and the Palestinian presence there., with the aim of occupying more land, and creating new situations within the framework of the Zionist policy.

Seventh  Israel has enacted a law to annex Jerusalem.

Eighth;. Israel has raided the Iraqi nuclear centre, which is an economic establishment for the purposes of development and progress.

Ninth, Israel!s latest measure is the decision to annex the occupied Golan territories.

After outlining these facts we should like to rose the following questions, is Israel a peaceful, peace-loving State? Do Israel’s acts conform to the United Nations Charter and resolutions?  Do those acts threaten peace and security m the region?

I am certain that we all have the same answer.  Even Israel’s friends- who are very few in the international community  are unable to justify and defend its aggressive, racist policy.

We must point out that this racist entity would not have been able to persist in those acts and commit those crimes had it not been for its feeling of growing military strength, provided by the United States – this super-Power which was entrusted by the United Nations Charter with a particular responsibility for the maintenance of International peace and security.  The United States, however, set aside its commitment to the international community and consigned its potentials and capabilities to an aggressive. racist entity whose only concern is expansion, aggression and the displacement of millions of Arabs,  This is exactly parallel to the United States support and. backing of the racist regime in South Africa.

In following that policy the United States not only fails to comply with its international commitments., but also stabs the heart of the Arab homeland and puts the future and interests of that part of the world in a critical situation which can neither be tolerated nor overlooked.  I believe it is high time that the United States realized that  pursuit of this hostile police – against the peoples will put America and its interests in a crucial position which it will have brought upon itself.   The American Administration will thus burden its citizens with problems and difficulties that will not serve their vital interests or their national security, both of which this Administration claims to cherish.

As I submit to the Assembly these historical facts exposing the continuous aggression by this State which has been imbued with an aggressive, racialist spirit from The very beginning of its existence, I ask what is to be done to face this situation?

I should like to remind the Assembly of the grave consequences of acquiescing In those conditions.  The best example in this respect was the acquiescence of the international community in the Hazi annexation of the Czech Sudetenland in 1938. The official recognition of that annexation in the Munich Agreement encouraged the Nazis to take further expansionist measures in the south and in the east.  Those measures led to the outbreak of the Second World War, the consequences of which we are still suffering.

Should Israel be allowed to behave like this with no international deterrent?

Should the only option open for confronting this abnormal situation be a serious conflagration in the region which could embroil the world at large?

Does anybody think that the Arabs will sit with their arms folded and continue to receive such blows?

Is there any doubt that the continuation of this situation will not impel the Arabs: whether Governments or peoples, to secure the minimum requirements for defending their existence? As for those who have interests in the region, do they believe that those interests could possibly continue to flourish under the impact of occupation and aggression?

If the Security Council has so far failed to take appropriate measures because of the attitude of the United States, should that failure extend to the General Assembly, thus jeopardizing international legitimacy obstructing its action, leaving only force and violence as the sole means of action in international relations?

I think that the world today faces a choice which nay be difficult but which should be adopted, namely, to seek effective means to deter the aggressor in order to safeguard the aims of the international Organization, the peace, security and interests of all the peoples of the world.

Herein lies the importance of adopting decisive resolutions to impose deterrent sanctions that would compel Israel to review all its policies, decisions and measures and to abandon the spirit of aggression and racism or to stay outside the international community in the limbo of its own aggressive acts and racist nature, The sanctions we propose are as follows.

First, in view of Israel’s violation of the United Charter and its failure to honour its obligations assumed before the General Assembly in the 1949 session, when it pledged to adhere to the Charter and to implement General Assembly resolutions l8l (II) and 194 (III), and since it has renounced those pledges and has continued to pursue a policy of aggression and war against the Arab countries, committing acts that jeopardize peace and security in the region, all the foregoing necessitates the adoption by the Assembly of a resolution to suspend its resolution 273 (III) of 1949 by which Israel was admitted to the United Nations.

Secondly, a resolution should be adopted in order to stop dealing with Israel in all military political economic and cultural fields.

Thirdly, the Government of the United. States should be called upon, for the sake of safeguarding the United Nations Charter and protecting right, justice and international peace and security to desist from offering support of all kinds to Israel.

The successive acts of Israel, the latest of which was the annexation of the Golan, are acts of sheer aggression, in the light of General Assembly resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 14 December 1974 which defines aggression.  Article 3 of the annex to that resolution states that the annexation of a territory or part of the lands of a State by the armed forces of another State qualifies as an act of aggression, whether or not the annexation was accompanied by a declaration of war.  Israel’s act falls within the scope of Article 39 of the Charter, which defines the kinds of acts that are dealt with by the Security Council.

The Security Council did review this dangerous situation, but the abuse of the veto paralyzed the Council and consequently this matter was referred to this Assembly the representatives of the peoples’ aspirations for freedom and justice for you to determine the truth expressing the world’s attitude to these acts of aggression.

If Israel thinks that it can provide itself with security and peace through military force, aggression and expansion, it will undoubtedly make the same mistake as the Nazis, who resorted to all kinds of violence and oppression.  That led to the end of both Nazism and its acts of violence and oppression.

In matters related to their national rights and interests peoples may remain patient but never oblivious. Throughout history the forces of injustice, oppression and aggression have never prevailed or survived. They have always committed suicide through their own acts of aggression, injustice, suppression and brutality.

Occupation never brings peace or security to the occupier, no matter how great his power may be because the power of freedom is always greater than that of all the forces of injustice and aggression.

The displacement of peoples, the violation of their rights and. interests never provide the aggressor with stable or continuous security.  Such acts rather lead the aggressor to a dark future in which he is doomed, as all aggressors have been doomed throughout history.

If there are certain quarters that believe that their protection of Israel in such acts of aggression will compel Syria to give up its own national rights or the national rights of the Palestinian Arab people, those quarters should realize that no part of Arab soil is subject to either compromise or blackmail. None of the Arab Palestinian rights can be a commodity for barter.  We shall never sell one iota of Palestinian rights to buy one iota of Syrian rights.  The Arab rights in the occupied Arab lands are not for sale, nor are those of the Palestinian territories, simply because the peoples, rights can neither be bought nor sold.  The greatest insult to a nation is to place its rights on the bargaining table, for sale or barter.

Those quarters should realize that this is not the path of peace. Their practices, whether in connexion with Camp David, Israeli acts of aggression or the huge military and economic aid they give to Israel, are in fact closing the doors on peace and putting out the flame of peace, in which the hopes and aspirations of all the peoples of the world are placed.

The search for peace cannot be conducted through sheer, brutal military force or through occupation, aggression or the threat of occupation and aggression.  This is a blocked path.  We should learn from the lessons of history.

Any peace imposed at the expense of the peoples’ rights is nothing but a surrender, whose fate will be exactly the fate of that deceptive peace signed by Henri Philippe Petain, the Marshal of France, who did not give peace to France.  Nor did the Nazis gain any security through that sort of peace.

Having outlined this dangerous situation  and bearing in mind that all Members have condemned the Israeli decision, considering it a grave act, and have called for it to be rescinded – we urge Members to shoulder their responsibilities to uphold the principles we all accepted and committed ourselves to when we joined this international Organization.  The  upholding of these principles requires practical stands and measures that are bound to deter the aggressor.

We are convinced of the wisdom of Members and of their loyalty to mankind and to the principles of right and justice.