General Assembly Session 57 meeting 29

Mr. Wehbe (Syria)

It seems that I am not lucky. As the first speaker on the list this morning, I will be talking to myself and to the handful of colleagues in the General Assembly Hall.

My delegation would like to extend its thanks to Ambassador Martin Belinga-Eboutou, President of the Security Council for this month, for his presentation of the report of the Security Council to the General Assembly. We also wish to extend our warm thanks to the staff of the Secretariat for the considerable efforts that they have made in preparing this report.

Today, we are discussing the report of the Security Council to the General Assembly under paragraph 1 of Article 15 and paragraph 3 of Article 24 of the United Nations Charter. I would like to mention the great importance attached to the General Assembly's discussion of the report in order to hear the views of Member States on the performance of the Security Council and its follow-up of its responsibilities in the maintenance of international peace and security.

In that context, we would like to state that one of the significant changes to the report was a brief analytical introduction. Resolution 51/193, adopted by the General Assembly in its fifty-first session, aimed, inter alia, at making the report of the Council more analytical. Thus, this report complies with that resolution, as it contains an analytical introduction.

More than 10 months have passed since Syria joined the Security Council, following its election in the General Assembly by an overwhelming majority of Member States. We should like to express once again our most sincere thanks to the States that supported us. Syria brought to the Council many issues and areas of concern that attracted the interest of many representatives of Member States, including the issue of improving the mechanisms by which the Council deals with the various matters of discussion before it.

Today, we see changes in substance and form in the report of the Security Council, thanks to the cooperation of all members of the Council. As far as substance is concerned, the report now contains an introduction that includes a brief analysis of political actions undertaken by the Council -- a change that Member States had requested for many years. With regard to form, the report's volume and its number of pages have been reduced. As a result, it is both more useful and more economical.

Here, we should like to express our special thanks to Ambassador Mahbubani and to the Mission of Singapore for their strenuous follow-up efforts during the past period, which produced the desired result. However, we believe that much work remains to be done by the Council to make the report an actual reflection of the actions that the Council has taken, regardless of the extent of their success.

During the period under consideration, the Security Council achieved remarkable progress in making its work more transparent. There was participation by non-Council members, which were able to express their views on the political issues being discussed and on finding solutions to them. The Council held final meetings in which members and non-members frankly evaluated its work. Under the presidency of Syria in June, the Council held a great number of meetings in which it discussed issues related to various regions -- whether to the Middle East, Africa, Asia or Europe -- or specific issues such as combating international terrorism or promoting the role of the Security Council or of the Counter-Terrorism Committee, at various levels. In addition, a final meeting was held to evaluate the Council's work in terms of the principle of transparency.

One of the first issues presented by Syria -- to which the Council responded last January -- was the conducting of a monthly briefing on the Middle East. One of these briefings was presided over by Mr. Farouk Al-Shara', Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Syrian Arab Republic, and in others, the Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan, and other high-level United Nations officials discussed developments in the Middle East. It has become clear that such briefings represent an advanced step in the way in which the Council deals with one of the most tense regions in the world. They also place on the shoulders of Member States the requisite responsibility to put an end to Israeli practices and Israeli occupation, with a view to finding a comprehensive and just solution to the Middle East problem, based on the relevant Security Council resolutions and on the Madrid terms of reference, as well as on the Arab initiative adopted at the Beirut Summit, held in March.

During the period under consideration, the Council undertook intensive efforts to address the sensitive problems in Africa with a view to settling the disputes and wars on the continent. In that connection, we should like to refer to a number of open Council meetings that included the participation of concerned States -- in particular African States -- and of Member States in general to restore peace and security to the African continent, which urgently needs the concerted efforts of the international community and its unlimited support to achieve development and to eradicate the root causes of conflict. Syria has left no stone unturned in participating in Council deliberations and in adopting resolutions that reflect the views of concerned States, with a view to finding consensus on positions that would end conflicts and serve lasting peace.

We should like to state that the Council's dispatch of missions to areas of tension and conflict was very important, because it enabled us to gain firsthand knowledge of the situation on the ground. For example, one mission was sent to Eritrea and Ethiopia, another visited the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and a workshop was held on the Mano River Union. A mission will soon visit Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo and Belgrade.

Also during the past period, the Security Council discussed many substantive matters, including in the areas of peacekeeping operations, the protection of women and children in armed conflict and terrorism. The Council was successful in addressing many of those issues. It made tangible progress, and we are trying our best to improve the Council's work in that direction. Yet we should like to state that, in the period under consideration and the preceding period, the Council could not follow up on the implementation of the resolutions it had adopted. That encouraged certain parties -- especially in the conflict areas in Africa and in the Middle East -- not to respond to Council resolutions. They have ignored those resolutions. As conflicts become more protracted, the matter becomes more sensitive, especially when they relate to resolutions adopted by the Security Council, under the provisions of the Charter, for the maintenance of international peace and security. In such situations, the Council has been unable to maintain international peace and security.

We believe that lack of follow-up on the implementation of the Security Council's resolutions will have a negative effect on the Council's role and on the international community's view of the Council. All of us know, for instance, that Israel has rejected, ignored and refused to implement the Council's resolutions -- resolutions that should have been implemented with the Council's insistence. If the resolutions had been implemented during the past few decades, peace and security would have prevailed in the Middle East.

The Council has adopted 29 resolutions regarding Israel, none of which have been implemented. Some members insist on the implementation of certain resolutions, but not of others. We would like to state that all Security Council resolutions and positions should be implemented on an equal footing, with no double standards. We call for complete respect for the Charter's articles, underscoring the obligatory need for implementation of all Security Council resolutions by all States, without exception.

Here we would like to point out the important role played by the Council's 10 elected States and the need to foster its work and input. This is particularly relevant when we take into account the fact that the non-permanent member States represent many views relating to the updating of the Council's mechanisms, thus making its modus operandi more responsive and more transparent in dealing with the political and security challenges affecting today's world.

In the middle of this week, beginning tomorrow, the Security Council will discuss the situation between Iraq and Kuwait. This problem has taken on increasing international dimensions and interest. We have listened to a number of statements indicating that, in spite of the sensitive nature of this matter, the Council has thus far not discussed the question in open meetings, as the international community has expected.

Elected States have so far are not been given a chance to voice their views or express their positions on draft resolutions being circulated in the mass media some days ago. Such media-circulated draft resolutions were the main reference to those 10 elected States of the Council. I would like to emphasize the need to deal with this question within the framework of international law and to resolve the problem peacefully, in particular since Iraq has, on more than one occasion and in more than one official document, stated its readiness to implement the relevant resolutions to allow United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) inspectors and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to return to Iraq in order to carry out their mission without conditions or restrictions.

We believe that beating the drums of war and the issuance of threats does not in any way conform to the United Nations Charter. Nor does it serve the aspirations of the international community, which desires justice and peace.

Once again, we call upon Iraq to implement all Security Council resolutions relating to the Iraqi question.

We have already expressed in the Open-ended Working Group our observations on the issue of equitable representation in the Council and an increase in its membership. During the Group's meeting, we expressed our views in numerous statements, and our delegation participated actively in the Group. Our delegation believes that this Group still constitutes a viable rostrum for deliberations in order to reach consensus on those two sensitive issues.

Although the Working Group achieved somewhat commendable progress in improving the working methods of the Council, it has, regrettably, so far been unable to achieve any noticeable progress in other fields, given the difficulties within the Council. The Syrian delegation, which participated actively in all the previous meetings, will exert all efforts to achieve the desired progress along the line of the positions adopted by the Arab Group and the Non-Aligned Movement countries. And we will continue our work to build on the positive steps taken, and on the views and drafts presented to the Working Group, which has discussed these ideas quite seriously with the aim of achieving more democratization in the Council whether in the area of expanding its membership or in achieving transparency in its working methods.

All proposals and views put forward by delegations on this important topic will be respected and appreciated by our delegation. As a non-permanent Council member, we will do our best to build on the achievements made in the past period. We will demonstrate full cooperation with the other Council members, so as to enable the Council to shoulder its responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, in accordance with the United Nations Charter.

The Acting President

I now give the floor to the representative of Iraq.

Mr. Aldouri (Iraq)

The international community has been working for 57 years to strengthen the United Nations and to bring it into line with today's realities. In that context, reform of the Organization is a programme of vital importance, and Security Council reform represents one of the main aspects of its modernization.

Our world has changed a lot, particularly over the past 10 years. That is why is would be naive to believe that the Council -- which was created in 1945 as a reflection of the economic, political and demographic interests of the victorious States of the Second World War -- I repeat, it would be naive for us to believe that with its present structure and practices, the Council would be in keeping with present circumstances.

The new threats to international peace and security, such as terrorism and the threat to occupy States and change regimes, have ushered us into a new age that requires that decision-making be a collective responsibility rather than serve the interest of a single great Power. The Council has a real need for true leadership based on objectivity, team spirit and unity of purpose, to contribute to establishing a world where peace, understanding, equality and respect will prevail.

The report under consideration, much as it reflects objective realities, also points out real dangers. The Council did not respond to the voices of the Member States calling for its reform and for the modernization of its work so that it can be more representative, legitimate, democratic and effective and can accommodate greater participation in its work. It is clear that what is lacking does not concern submitting proposals, because that is not an impossible matter. What is important is the political will necessary to achieve the modernization I have referred to.

For the past 12 years, the Security Council has devoted much of its time to discussing the situation in my country, Iraq, which is not in keeping with the Charter or with anything relevant to international peace and security. Rather, it is in keeping with the wish and interests of two individual States that practise hegemony, I regret to say, without any consideration for the humanitarian and legal standards enshrined in the Charter or in established rules of international legitimacy.

Despite the fact that the resolutions adopted by the Security Council against my country have been unjust, denying the rights of Iraq and of the Iraqi people, as established in the Charter, Iraq has, nonetheless, implemented all those resolutions. Yet the Security Council remains firm in its position. It continues to discuss the Iraqi case behind closed doors, not only at closed meetings or informal discussions at the United Nations, but also in the capitals of the permanent members of the Council, completely sidelining Iraq and the non-permanent members of the Council from any discussion involving Iraq.

The Council has become a special tribunal on Iraq, acting secretly as judge and witness at the same time. And it has not stopped there. It has also disregarded everything that Iraq has been subjected to in terms of violations of its sovereignty, independence and security as a founding Member of this international Organization, even though the Council has affirmed its respect for all its relevant resolutions adopted since 1990.

Iraq has met all its commitments pursuant to the relevant Security Council resolutions, particularly those related to disarmament. Yet, the American Administration has carried out an aggressive campaign against Iraq, accusing Iraq, in a series of lies bandied about by highly placed authorities of the American Administration, of possessing and developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, and threatening international peace and security, and has issued statements by a number of authorities, including President Bush, threatening to occupy Iraq on the pretext that it is a threat to the United States and to international peace and security.

In the light of my Government's sincere wish to fully implement Security Council resolutions, and in response to the calls of the Secretary-General of the United Nations and Arab nations and friends, including the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, the Government of Iraq has agreed to allow the unconditional return of the inspectors -- a step which was widely welcomed by the Secretary-General, the members of the Security Council and the international community.

When the United States realized that that would deny it the opportunity to invade and occupy Iraq, it prevented the inspectors from returning to Iraq and began to discuss a draft resolution preparing the grounds for another war, a resolution which would be difficult to implement and thus pave the way for aggression against Iraq.

A few days ago, the American Senate and the House of Representatives adopted a resolution authorizing President Bush to use armed force against Iraq, an independent State and a Member State of the United Nations, without referring to the United Nations. Immediately after that, a military build-up began inside and outside the region. The intentions of the American Administration became even more evident when it began to discuss, explicitly and blatantly, military aggression and appointing an American military governor in Iraq.

Is that not a blatant violation of the Charter and the system of international relations that has been forged over the past 50 years? Should we not consider such an American measure a threat to and a blatant violation of international peace and security by a permanent State member of the Security Council -- the body responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security? Does that not undermine the very basis of international relations, in keeping with the Charter? Does it not constitute a monopoly of international legitimacy? I leave it to the Assembly to answer those questions.

The very serious nature of the measures that the American Administration is putting in place in order to invade Iraq makes it necessary for the Security Council to adopt counter-measures to guarantee respect for the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Iraq. If the Council disregards such threats, many other States will become the target of occupation aimed at overturning their regimes. The legality of the measures undertaken by the Security Council emanates from the mandate given to the Council by the Member States, which expect the Council to act on their behalf in maintaining international peace and security, as is made clear in paragraph 1 of Article 24 of the Charter.

The United States of America and the United Kingdom seem to be trying -- through their relations with Iraq -- to establish a precedent for terrorizing other States by adopting measures that violate the Charter. My country places great hope in the collective wisdom of the members of the Security Council and the international community in dealing with this very serious matter. We hope that they will do so with a sense of responsibility and courage and prevent the United States and the United Kingdom from undertaking further acts of aggression against Iraq, threatening its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The tragic development of relations between Iraq and the Security Council over the past 12 years has been determined by two permanent members of the Council -- perhaps even by one. This has greatly weakened the credibility of the Council and its capacity to maintain international peace and security and to prevent conflict.

The Council is acting in accordance with the wishes of parties that exercise hegemonic control over its decision-making. The Council is not acting on behalf of the Member States. We blame the Council for its selectivity in dealing with issues. Such selectivity is evident not only in the Council's relationship with Iraq but also in the blatant example of the Council's approach to the Palestinian question. In that respect the Council has adopted a nonchalant position, given the massacres perpetrated daily by the Israeli occupation forces against the Palestinian people and the disregard shown for their inalienable rights, especially their right to self-determination.

The Security Council has paid no attention to the tragic situation of the Iraqi people resulting from the continued unjust economic embargo that has led to the death of more than 1.7 million Iraqi citizens -- I call the attention of the international community to that figure -- most of them from vulnerable groups, including women, children and the elderly. They have died for no other reason than lack of medicine and food.

The United States of America claimed that it wanted to improve the situation of the Iraqi people, and called for the adoption of a resolution in that respect. Resolution 1409 (2002), which was recently adopted, was aimed -- so the United States and Britain claimed -- at alleviating the suffering of the civilian population of Iraq. Yet the resolution provided for measures that place further obstacles in the way of implementing contracts for the purchase of medicines and food. The new mechanisms require the contracts for obtaining foodstuffs, including rice and flour, and pharmaceuticals, including chronic and heart-disease medicine, to be submitted to disarmament experts from the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency. I do not know what expertise such individuals have in flour, rice and medicine such that they can determine whether we should be able to buy them or not. All the civilian needs of the Iraqi people, such as machinery and equipment for social and economic development, are also submitted to those experts.

The Security Council has neglected to address many of the matters submitted by my Government to the Council that fall within its mandate and its resolutions. The Council has not considered such issues, even though they go to the very heart of its responsibilities under the Charter. The no-fly zones are not legal; they have been imposed by the United States and the United Kingdom without having been provided for in any Security Council resolution. Indeed, they contravene the ceasefire conditions of the notorious resolution 687 (1991), as do the continuous raids by American and British aircraft in those and other zones and the daily violation of Iraqi airspace. Raids, destruction, bombings and killings are taking place on a daily basis before the very eyes of the Security Council, and no one lifts a finger.

Such neglect is not limited to the Security Council, but also extends to the bodies that the Council has established. Even the United Nations Iraq-Kuwait Observation Mission, which is operating in the demilitarized zone between the two countries and whose mandate is to record and report any violations, has not informed the Security Council of the violations of that zone committed by American and British planes on a daily basis, although it has admitted that that such violations are taking place. It acknowledges that there are such planes, but says that it does not know and cannot determine their identity. Such planes fly in that zone and even in Iraqi airspace around the clock.

Those actions do, indeed, constitute a violation of Security Council resolutions and blatant aggression against a State Member of the United Nations. They represent a violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Iraq as well as of the integrity of a United Nations peacekeeping operation.

As for the sanctions, the topic of the age, even though we are fully convinced that they are neither legal nor legitimate, my country regrets the fact that the Security Council does not at least periodically assess the nefarious consequences of these inhuman measures on the civilian population.

No time frame has been established for the sanctions, and Article 50 of the Charter has not been made operative, and therefore some States are adopting unilateral measures to punish States that may not agree with their stance, such as the Sudan, Libya, Iran and others.

The notorious Committee established pursuant to resolution 661 (1991) continues to work very secretly, not allowing any participation by Iraq in its work, either directly or indirectly, even though the Committee deals only with the basic needs and livelihood of the Iraqi people -- food and medicine. The Committee takes its decisions on the basis of the political interests of some States; everyone knows this.

Where is the justice, the transparency and the credibility in the Committee's work? We are still waiting for approval of the lists prepared by the Office of the Iraq Programme, in consultation with the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which are referred to as the "blue lists". They used to be called the "green lists". We are now waiting for the "red lists". They have been greatly delayed because of the objections of the American and British representatives.

In addition to what those two representatives have done in dealing with the memorandum of understanding on oil for food, they have also delayed contracts and priced Iraqi oil retroactively, which has led to a reduction in export rates and consequently to a decline in programme revenues, with more than 1,240 contracts left unimplemented.

The Security Council has not devoted sufficient attention to peace and security, which form the very core of its mandate, in keeping with the Charter and with international law. That is why we say sincerely and explicitly that the Council has failed dismally.

One single member of the Council has made the Palestinian question impossible to resolve, even from the humanitarian point of view. The Palestinian people are struggling to free their land and to recover their rights. If the Council cannot offer them any humanitarian protection, how can the international community have faith that the Security Council will find a political solution to the Palestinian problem in accordance with the Charter and international law?

Iraq's position concerning the reform of the Security Council can be summed up as follows. First, the veto right should be limited and then phased out, because it is not in keeping with the principle of equality among States as embodied in the Charter.

Second, the non-permanent members of the Council have been totally marginalized, and their presence is often but a formality. They must be allowed to play an effective role, because they represent most of the peoples and the regions of the world, and they must participate in all the negotiations and deliberations of the Council as well as in decision-making.

Third, rules and measures should be adopted that would guarantee transparency and justice as well as respect for the rights of States.

Fourth, the Council's membership should be expanded so as to ensure a democratic representation of the international community.

Fifth, the Council, as an executive political organ, should not take decisions of a legislative nature. This is the mandate of the General Assembly.

Sixth, the International Court of Justice should be the one to interpret the Articles of the Charter, and its mandate should also include monitoring and interpreting the Council's resolutions.

Seventh, the collective international responsibility of the Council as one of the institutions of the United Nations should be affirmed; and the Council should not be used to implement special policies that serve the interests of a single State.

Eighth, States that are not members of the Council should be informed of Council debates on resolutions that pertain to peace and security, and the Council's deliberations be held in the open, without exception, in order to ensure transparency.

Ninth, members of the Council should not vote on any conflict to which they are a party.

Tenth, there should be resort to Chapter VI of the Charter in the process of conflict resolution as well as taking up preventive diplomacy as much as possible and employing all possible peaceful means to resolve conflicts between States.

Finally, I should like to congratulate the representatives of Pakistan, Germany, Spain, Chile and Angola on their countries' election as non-permanent members of the Council as of 1 January 2003. We wish them every success in carrying out their important responsibilities.

Mr. Al-Otaibi (Kuwait) --> -->

<type 'exceptions.UnicodeEncodeError'>

Python 2.6.6: /usr/bin/python Tue May 21 08:55:22 2013

A problem occurred in a Python script. Here is the sequence of function calls leading up to the error, in the order they occurred.

/data/vhost/www.undemocracy.com/docs/trunk.py in ()

194 if __name__ == "__main__":

195     pathpart = os.getenv("PATH_INFO")

196     maintrunk(pathpart)

197

198

maintrunk = <function maintrunk>, pathpart = '/generalassembly_57/meeting_29'

/data/vhost/www.undemocracy.com/docs/trunk.py in maintrunk(pathpart='/generalassembly_57/meeting_29')

131     elif pagefunc == "gameeting":

132         LogIncomingDB(hmap["docid"], hmap["gadice"] or "0", referrer, ipaddress, useragent, remadeurl)

133         WriteHTML(hmap["htmlfile"], hmap["pdfinfo"], hmap["gadice"], hmap["highlightdoclink"])

134     elif pagefunc == "agendanumexpanded":

135         LogIncomingDB(pagefunc, hmap["agendanum"], referrer, ipaddress, useragent, remadeurl)

global WriteHTML = <function WriteHTML>, hmap = {'docid': 'A-57-PV.29', 'gadice': '', 'gameeting': 29, 'gasession': 57, 'highlightdoclink': None, 'htmlfile': '/home/undemocracy/undata/html/A-57-PV.29.html', 'pagefunc': 'gameeting', 'pdfinfo': <pdfinfo.PdfInfo instance>}

/home/undemocracy/unparse-live/web2/unpvmeeting.py in WriteHTML(fhtml='/home/undemocracy/undata/html/A-57-PV.29.html', pdfinfo=<pdfinfo.PdfInfo instance>, gadice='', highlightth=None)

322         if dclass == "spoken":

323             if not gadice or agendagidcurrent == gadice:

324                 WriteSpoken(gid, dtextmu, councilpresidentnation)

325         elif dclass == "subheading":

326             if agendagidcurrent and (not gadice or agendagidcurrent == gadice):

global WriteSpoken = <function WriteSpoken>, gid = u'pg007-bk01', dtextmu = u'<h3 class="speaker"> <span class="name">Mr. Al-O... facing the challenges of the new millennium.</p>', councilpresidentnation = None

/home/undemocracy/unparse-live/web2/unpvmeeting.py in WriteSpoken(gid=u'pg007-bk01', dtext=u'<h3 class="speaker"> <span class="name">Mr. Al-O... facing the challenges of the new millennium.</p>', councilpresidentnation=None)

69     print '</cite>'

70

71     print dtext[mspek.end(0):]

72

73     print '</div>'

dtext = u'<h3 class="speaker"> <span class="name">Mr. Al-O... facing the challenges of the new millennium.</p>', mspek = <_sre.SRE_Match object>, mspek.end = <built-in method end of _sre.SRE_Match object>

<type 'exceptions.UnicodeEncodeError'>: 'ascii' codec can't encode character u'\xe0' in position 5065: ordinal not in range(128)
      args = ('ascii', u'\n\t<p id="pg007-bk01-pa01">The General Assembly i... facing the challenges of the new millennium.</p>', 5065, 5066, 'ordinal not in range(128)')
      encoding = 'ascii'
      end = 5066
      message = ''
      object = u'\n\t<p id="pg007-bk01-pa01">The General Assembly i... facing the challenges of the new millennium.</p>'
      reason = 'ordinal not in range(128)'
      start = 5065