General Assembly Session 54 meeting 67

Mr. Lancry (Israel)

As we approach the end of the twentieth century, it can be said that the Arab-Israeli conflict is finally drawing to a close. With our largest neighbour, the Republic of Egypt, Israel has enjoyed peaceful relations since the ground-breaking Peace Treaty between our two States, reached in 1979. We have also concluded a Treaty of Peace with the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, and recently celebrated its fifth anniversary. As I stated here yesterday, we have been steadily moving forward in our negotiations with the Palestinians, and hope to achieve an agreement on permanent status within a year, an agreement that is to put an end to the conflict between us.

The Middle East is witnessing an era of unprecedented diplomatic momentum. The positive atmosphere was reinforced recently by the new diplomatic ties established between Israel and Mauritania. We have, moreover, been expanding our economic and other ties with States in the region from the Maghreb to the Nile and up to the Gulf.

Now, in order to complete this ever widening circle of peace, we must also achieve progress with our northern neighbours, Syria and Lebanon, each of which we equally hope to join in a peace agreement. However, we must also reiterate that as a democratic State, where parliamentary debate is an essential component of the decision-making process on issues of national security, Israel simply cannot accept a precondition for beginning the talks. This is especially true when it is a precondition that demands a prior acceptance of the final outcome in accordance with the views of only one party.

We believe that the history of Middle East peacemaking has shown that the forum best suited for presenting one's views is the negotiating room. Negotiations are the basic bridge to peace. I therefore reiterate the call made here by our Foreign Minister, His Excellency Mr. David Levy, in his address to the General Assembly on 29 September 1999, "to cease hesitating. It is time to talk" (A/54/PV.16, p. 14).

In these negotiations, Syria will find an Israeli partner willing to make the difficult decisions necessary to arrive together at a peace of the brave, a peace with honour. We envision this peace as containing a depth of territorial compromise commensurate with both the depth of peace and the quality of the security arrangements that we are able to achieve.

In addition, we wish to see Lebanon too joining the camp of peacemakers. I would like to take this opportunity to restate that Israel never had, nor do we now have, any territorial claims or disputes with Lebanon. Our one and only interest is to guarantee the safety and security of our citizens. The Government of Lebanon has failed in past years to enforce its sovereignty in the southern part of Lebanon. Unfortunately, it has yet to disarm the Hezbollah and to take back the free rein it has granted militants in southern Lebanon who call for Israel's destruction and who target its civilians with rocket attacks.

In the hope of improving this situation, Israel has repeatedly expressed its willingness to implement Security Council resolution 425 (1978) in its entirety, which calls not only for an Israeli withdrawal but also for the return of the effective authority of the Government of Lebanon in the area and for the restoration of international peace and security. It has now been close to two years since we formally extended to Lebanon our invitation to negotiate the implementation of Security Council resolution 425 (1978). Instead, the Government of Lebanon has regrettably chosen to allow the conflict to continue and the human toll to rise. Nevertheless, we call upon the Government of Lebanon to seize the present opportunity to change the situation, to meet us at the negotiating table and to join the tide of peace now emerging in the region.

In the drive towards regional stability, each State has both the power and the responsibility to ensure that its territory does not become a launching ground for terrorist attacks. It should be recalled that the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, contained in resolution 2625 (XXV) of 24 October 1970, makes clear that sovereignty carries a responsibility not to allow terrorist acts to be organized and prepared on one's territory, or to be launched from it.

The policies of Iran, like those of Lebanon, are in direct conflict with that resolution: Iran continues to sponsor and reinforce Hezbollah in Lebanon, and that group openly engages in a campaign against the existence of the State of Israel, backed by Iranian ammunition and Iranian funds. This is symptomatic of the threshold on which we currently stand in the Middle East: a new era of stability and regional cooperation is finally within reach, yet there remain those forces which would spoil consensus and pull us back into a cycle of threats and distrust.

Iran's continuing efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction and its adoption of a policy that does not recognize the right of every State to live in peace and security in the region constitute an alarming example. Iran has already tested a missile with a range of 1,300 kilometres, the Shihab-3, that can strike Israel from launch points within Iranian territory. Even longer range Iranian missiles are known to be under development.

Meanwhile, during the last eight years, Iraq has been under a most intrusive arms control and disarmament regime. Yet, that mechanism did not prevent Iraq from maintaining its clandestine programmes for developing chemical, nuclear and biological weapons of mass destruction. Iraq still remains a major threat to international peace and security. Indeed, Iraq directly threatened Israel with annihilation by chemical weapons and actually attacked Israel's civilian population with lethal missiles.

The peoples of the Middle East can become free of the threat of mass destruction, but only when nations first establish a foundation of trust, and the desire -- from within the region -- to end a state of war and replace the context of threats and terror with the context of peace and reconciliation.

We have witnessed tremendous progress with our Palestinian partners, through a process of direct talks that succeeded as long as it preserved the essential framework and timetable of Israeli-Palestinian agreements. In particular, it was agreed that issues such as Jerusalem would be resolved directly in the permanent status negotiations.

Nevertheless, in light of the draft resolution before us, I believe that it would be appropriate to restate at this time that Jerusalem is the united capital of the State of Israel, under Israeli sovereignty. King David established its standing as the capital of the Jewish nation over three thousand years ago. Since that time, Jerusalem has been at the heart and soul of the Jewish people, playing a central role in Jewish culture, history and religion.

The city, although holy to three major religions, has never been the capital of any other nation and, save for a 19 year period in this century, has never been divided. We are aware that our Palestinian partners do not share our views on this issue, yet we expect that they do share our commitment to a negotiated solution, to which both sides have obligated themselves in all Israeli-Palestinian agreements. With this commitment in mind, and with the negotiating process already under way, Israel feels that it is inappropriate for the United Nations General Assembly to prejudice, through its resolutions, the outcome of these talks.

Cooperation is the lifeblood of peace, the force that transforms a mere truce into a lasting reality of peace whose benefits flow to all the peoples of the region. In the spirit of this ideal, the multilateral peace process was born at the Madrid Conference as a parallel track to the bilateral talks, aimed at regional problems that transcend boundaries, so as to promote long-term regional development and security in a wide range of areas.

The five working groups established in the framework of the multilateral talks have met a number of times, but unfortunately their activities have been frozen in the past few years, due to irrelevant political considerations. This is the time to resurrect them. Any delay or imposed condition is liable to undermine the peace process and delay the assistance and cooperation so essential for the peoples of the region.

Along with its belief in the importance of multilateral regional cooperation, Israel is also committed to strengthening direct cooperation with the Palestinians and, bilaterally, with its Arab neighbours. I am pleased to report that such efforts have met with significant success.

The Israeli-Palestinian development cooperation programme, which we described at length in our statement on assistance to the Palestinian people, is now a top priority. Palestinian professionals make up the largest group of students in Israel-based training courses, while a growing working relationship has tied Israeli and Palestinian non-governmental organizations, governmental organizations, health clinics and academic institutions.

With our neighbour Jordan we have enjoyed a unique relationship of mutual goodwill and cooperation, from working together in development programmes to stimulating economic growth in our two States. In 1998, over 130 Jordanian professionals participated in professional training courses in Israel, in areas ranging from agriculture, medicine and public health to environmental conservation and community development. In addition, a variety of cooperative ventures have been launched between the two States, including projects on demining the Jordan Valley, agricultural development programmes and wide range of others that are making progress as I speak here today.

Since the signing of the peace treaty in 1979, Egypt and Israel have acquired much experience in the field of agricultural development cooperation, the success of which can be measured by the friendly relations enjoyed with Egypt's Ministry of Agriculture. Egyptian-Israeli collaboration has taken the form of on-site demonstration activities, professional training programmes, short- and long-term consultancies and research and development projects. This has coincided with the Mubarak Plan, the Government of Egypt's far-reaching plan to reclaim desert lands along the Nile for agricultural cultivation. In 1994, trilateral training programme between Denmark, Egypt and Israel was established, enabling thousands of graduates to participate in professional agricultural training courses conducted in Israel and in Egypt.

Peace between leaders must permeate the consciousness of their peoples. Overall perceptions must be changed, and a solid foundation for continued peaceful coexistence must be fashioned. Much to our dismay, however, we have come to witness a very common, yet disturbing, phenomenon. While direct negotiations are being carried out between the parties, a kind of diplomatic assault is being carried out by some of our Arab neighbours in every conceivable international forum. This situation is impacting negatively on our sincere efforts to gradually build confidence between the sides. We believe that all sides should take upon themselves to abide by a code of conduct appropriate for partners in negotiation and reconciliation. History has shown that peace negotiations are successful when they follow a set of established guidelines for peacemaking.

We cannot afford to lose the present opportunity to bring peace to our region. We owe it to our children, at the very least, to try with all our might to seize the potential for peace while it is within reach. From this podium I call on our Arab partners in peacemaking to continue strengthening the coordination between us, without expending our energies in outdated rhetoric. We will accomplish our common goals only if we all speak the same language, the language of peace. All of us gathered here know the language and the new reality it can bring us. We invite you to join us in embracing it.

Mrs. Al-Nadari (Yemen)

Once again, as for year after year for more than five decades, this Organization is discussing the question of the Middle East. Many resolutions on the Middle East have not been implemented as a result of Israeli intransigence, based on the logic of power and defiance and its non-response to the will of the international community. Thus, the Middle East has suffered from a feverish climate: wars, instability and tension. Regrettably, many opportunities for peace have been lost, especially since the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference and the agreements and understandings of the principle of land for peace. The whole world has been hoping that the peace process will be successful, despite its complexities, and that a lasting, just and comprehensive peace will be achieved. However, this hope has not been realized.

Now, we have a new chance. The parties and the relevant mediators have been trying to revive the peace process on all its tracks. Yet we see Israel, the occupying Power, exercising its expansionist policies by annexing lands, establishing settlements, appropriating water resources, creating hurdles for this peace and intensifying its policies of oppression and terrorism.

It is high time for the international community to force Israel to honour its commitments and respect international resolutions and the Charter of the United Nations, on the basis of which Israel was accepted as a Member of this Organization. Especially since the cold war and the circumstances for duplicitous positions are over, there is no justification for giving Israel special treatment that protects its illegal practices.

The whole world is now awaiting the implementation of the purposes and principles of the Charter, and expects a world of peace, justice and stability. The culture of peace for which this international Organization is calling is based on the values and ways of life of the international community. Peace starts in the minds of people. It is in the minds of people that the foundation for peace must be built. A just peace cannot be built unless the ideas of occupation, imbalances of power, political manoeuvring and the imposition of faits accomplis are relinquished. There must be the necessary political will to implement the resolutions of international legitimacy, to liberate the occupied Arab territories, including the Syrian Golan Heights and southern Lebanon, to force Israel to withdraw unconditionally from these territories and to restore the rights of the Palestinian people, including the right to establish their own independent State on their territory, with Al-Quds al-Sharif as its capital.

Will Israel agree to this? Yemen has lent its support to all efforts aimed at achieving peace and has always supported the Middle East peace process since it began. Like other countries we look forward to seeing an end to pessimism and political frustration; we look forward to the achievement of peace.

We hope that the Middle East will be made a zone free of all weapons of mass destruction. We call on all the parties to continue their work and to redouble their efforts in order to establish such a zone within the framework of international law and in accordance with the principles of justice and fairness. In this way the Middle East and its peoples will be able to enjoy stability, security and peace.

Mr. Krokhmal (Ukraine)

For more than half a century, the situation in the Middle East has remained a subject receiving the close attention and deep concern of the United Nations and the international community at large. The continuous international efforts aimed at assisting the peoples of the region to achieve a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East have resulted, at different periods, in progress and setbacks, in successes and failures. Today, at the threshold of a new millennium, there is a strong hope that this process is nearing fruition.

Ukraine has always been supportive of the Middle East peace process based on the principles laid down at the Madrid Peace Conference, in the Oslo agreements and in the relevant United Nations resolutions. We are convinced that all the parties to the process, both Arab and Israeli, have no alternative but to overcome their hostility and mistrust, to stop unilateral acts and to complete the implementation of the Madrid peace process formula, which is based on Security Council resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973) and 425 (1978), as well as on the principle of land for peace.

As the Assembly is aware, the Middle East peace process is progressing unevenly. Currently, different tracks of the Arab-Israeli negotiations are at different stages. While we have seen significant progress on the Israeli-Palestinian track, the Israeli-Lebanese and Israeli-Syrian tracks have been stalled for a long time.

Most recently, Ukraine welcomed the signing, on 4 September 1999 in Sharm el-Sheikh, of the Israeli-Palestinian Memorandum that broke the stalemate and uncertainty that had prevailed in the negotiations for more than eight months. The signing of this document reopened the way to talks on the most complex and sensitive issues related to the final status, such as the status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, the problem of Palestinian refugees, border and security arrangements, the sharing of water resources, and so forth.

Similarly, my country was encouraged by the steps that followed the signing of the Sharm el-Sheikh Memorandum. These included the resumption of the permanent status negotiations, the release of 350 Palestinian prisoners, the opening of the southern safe passage route, the understanding on the timetable for the conclusion of the framework agreement and the final settlement agreement, and further Israeli redeployment from parts of the West Bank. We believe that the Oslo summit of 2 November 1999 has also contributed to the revitalization of the peace process.

Ukraine commends the courageous efforts, political will and wisdom of President Arafat and Prime Minister Barak and their determination to pursue the challenging goal of concluding the permanent status negotiations within the agreed timeline. We also pay tribute to the enormous efforts of all international players who over the years have contributed to and continue to support the peace process.

At the same time, we are concerned by continued Israeli settlement activities in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and other Arab territories, despite the numerous resolutions of the General Assembly urging Israel to stop these practices. In this regard, we call on the parties to refrain from any unilateral actions that could prejudge the outcome of the ongoing direct talks and undermine the fragile atmosphere of peace. It is imperative for the parties to strictly follow the letter and the spirit of agreements signed to date and to abide by their commitments and obligations.

My country maintains that the achievement of a comprehensive settlement of the Middle East process will be impossible without bringing the Syrian and Lebanese negotiations back on track. In this regard, we would like to call on the Governments of Israel, Syria and Lebanon to resume their talks as soon as possible. It is indeed in the interests of all the peoples of the region to resume, without further delay or preconditions, their talks on the problem of the occupied Syrian Golan, as well as to resolve the problem of southern Lebanon and western Bekaa on the basis of the Security Council resolution 425 (1978).

It is common knowledge that international relations in the last decades have been largely dominated by reliance on military strength, the development of sophisticated weapons systems and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. All these characteristics have been observed in the region of the Middle East. We are convinced that the Middle East peace process could have been much more vigorous and irreversible if it had been supported by confidence-and security-building measures and agreements related to preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and to eliminating them.

In this regard, Ukraine believes that accession by all the States of the region to the international agreements on nuclear non-proliferation and the elimination of weapons of mass destruction remains of paramount importance for the peace process in the Middle East. We are also of the view that general support by the countries of the region for the implementation of the idea of establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region would favourably affect the Middle East peace process.

We are also of the view that, at this crucial period of the Middle East peace process, the international community should redouble its efforts to encourage all the parties to follow the path of negotiations and reconciliation with a view to moving forward towards finding compromise solutions to the existing problems. Undoubtedly, the United Nations continues to have a special responsibility in this effort.

In our view, the United Nations should continue to shoulder its primary responsibility for ensuring the exercise by the Palestinian people of its inalienable rights, including the right to self-determination and statehood. This Organization should remain a principal guarantor of international legitimacy with respect to the question of Palestine and a major headquarters of international support of and assistance to the Palestinian people.

I would like to emphasize the importance of economic assistance to the Palestinian people and to the entire region. We praise the commitment of the international donor community to assisting the Palestinian people in its economic development. This was confirmed once again at the latest donor meeting, held at Tokyo on 14 October this year. Ukraine lends its full support to the activities of the specialized bodies of the United Nations family, in particular the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), which marks this year its fiftieth anniversary, and the United Nations Development Programme in providing humanitarian aid to the Palestinian people.

We also hope that the recent appointment by the Secretary-General of his new Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process and Personal Representative to the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority will give new impetus to the United Nations involvement in that process.

The development of mutually beneficial and partnership relations, on both bilateral and multilateral bases, with all the countries of the Middle East and the facilitation of the peace process remain one of the pillars of my country's foreign policy. In this respect, I would like to reiterate Ukraine's interest in joining the activities of the multilateral working groups on Middle East economic cooperation and providing its military and civilian personnel to United Nations peacekeeping operations in the region.

Let me conclude by expressing Ukraine's sincere wish to see the Middle East soon become a region in which all its peoples can live in lasting peace and economic prosperity in a spirit of good-neighbourliness, friendship and cooperation. Ukraine reconfirms its strong commitment to achieving this noble goal.

Mr. Zackheos (Cyprus)

My delegation aligns itself with the statement of the European Union. I should like, however, in view of the special significance that Cyprus attaches to the issue, to make a few additional comments and observations.

Cyprus's long and rich history has always been heavily influenced by developments in the Middle East. Situated at the crossroads of Europe, Africa and Asia, Cyprus has, throughout the centuries, served as a bridge between the peoples of the Middle East and Europe. While focusing on strengthening our ties with the European Union, with which we are currently conducting accession negotiations, the promotion of relations with our neighbours in the Middle East remains a significant pillar of our foreign policy. As a neighbouring country having excellent relations with all the countries in the region, we see our role as one of facilitator of cooperation and understanding among the peoples of the Middle East.

We realize that peace will be the catalyst of positive developments of unprecedented scope. This is the reason why my Government supports all the initiatives aimed at finding a just and comprehensive settlement bringing lasting peace and security to the Middle East. We reaffirm our support for the implementation of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973) and 425 (1978), which provide the framework for a viable peace in the Middle East.

The Government of Cyprus remains committed to playing its part in a practical way towards the enhancement of the peace process. A fundamental element of our position in the Middle East -- and indeed in all situations of occupation -- is the withdrawal of foreign forces from occupied territories. We reaffirm our support for all the efforts that are being exerted to establish peace, security, stability and economic prosperity throughout the region. At the same time, we recognize the right of all States to exist in peace with their neighbours within secure and internationally recognized borders. In this context, we call for respect of this principle and denounce, in the strongest terms, terrorism and violence against innocent civilians.

While we consider the Palestinian problem to be the core issue of the Middle East conflict, we support the resumption of negotiations between Israel and Syria and the opening of talks between Israel and Lebanon, since we believe that only a comprehensive settlement will cement trust between the peoples of the Middle East, laying the foundations of security, stability, regional cooperation and prosperity for all.

On the occasion of the commemoration of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, the President of the Republic of Cyprus, Mr. Glafcos Clerides, reaffirmed the close bonds of friendship between the Cypriot and the Palestinian peoples and saluted the signing of the Sharm el-Sheikh Memorandum last September, since this constitutes a giant step forward towards peace.

The parties have set themselves a very ambitious timetable for completing both the framework and the final agreement. Everyone realizes that the road ahead will be a difficult one, requiring determination and political will in order to find a compromise meeting the interests of all and the demands of justice. Nevertheless, we do not underestimate the considerable obstacles that remain. The opponents of peace, irrespective of their motives, remain attached to the old enmities and prejudices. Acts of terrorism are still possible. The international community must remain vigilant in supporting the peace process and denouncing the forces of the past.

We owe it to all courageous leaders, both within and outside the region, to keep the vision alive of a peaceful and prosperous Middle East. Some, such as President Sadat of Egypt and Prime Minister Rabin of Israel, paid the ultimate price for their ideals. King Hussein of Jordan died without seeing a comprehensive peace, to which he so greatly contributed in various ways, including by signing the Jordanian-Israeli peace accords and by helping to overcome the final obstacles to arriving at the Wye River Memorandum in his final days, as he himself waged a courageous fight against cancer.

Prime Minister Barak and Chairman Arafat have our admiration and encouragement as they embark on the road of peace. This new impetus in the peace process demonstrates that the combination of political will on the part of the sides involved in sustaining international efforts and influence can successfully lead to the resolution of otherwise intractable conflicts that pose a threat to regional and international stability. We hold this to be true also in the case of the Cyprus problem. It is our earnest hope that the positive evolution of the peace process in the Middle East will have beneficial effects the world over, including on the question of Cyprus, which has continued unresolved for a quarter-century due to the failure in implementing Security Council and General Assembly resolutions.

The cold war is over, but antagonism and divergent interests persist and have manifested themselves in conflicts that we had hoped would only remain in some dark wayside of human history. The edifice of international relations is threatened and basic principles of international law are either ignored, challenged or selectively applied. Globalization cements the interdependence of our planet, while at the same time the gap between rich and poor continues expanding. Ethnic strife and political fragmentation are on the rise. In these circumstances, the international community is awakening to the need for reconciliation and welcoming any positive developments on the international scene. The settlement of the Middle East problem will send a strong message throughout the globe that there is still hope that diplomacy can succeed in reversing the dire consequences of hatred and conflict and securing peace, stability and prosperity well into the next millennium.