Lebanon

It gives me great pleasure to congratulate Mr. Opertti on his election as President of the General Assembly at its fifty-third session. I would also like to commend the efforts of his predecessor, Mr. Hennadiy Udovenko, whom we recently welcomed to our country. I should also like to place on record our appreciation to the Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan. He has been working tirelessly to promote the authority of the United Nations, advocating respect for the international legitimacy for which it stands, especially in the area of finding peaceful solutions to the explosive conflicts that are raging in some parts of the world. The international community has recognized his great achievement when he succeeded a few months ago in defusing an ominous military confrontation in the Arab Gulf region. We hope that this will be followed by similar successes in other volatile situations plaguing different parts of the world. The hopes that are pinned on the United Nations assume a special meaning at this session, which coincides with the fiftieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, an instrument which Lebanon participated in framing. Today, human rights are a major pillar of the new world order. Respect for human rights has become the yardstick by which the democracy practised in countries is judged. Compliance with the provisions of the Declaration under all circumstances and conditions guarantees not only the peace, security and stability of societies but also the establishment of relations of cooperation and understanding among States. The United Nations is duty-bound to enhance its independence since it was liberated from the impact of the cold war and of the bipolarity which held sway over international relations in the post-Second World War era. Today, it is called upon to reactivate its role in making and consolidating peace. This task can be achieved primarily by addressing the root causes of conflicts, through preventive diplomacy and through various 18 technical and development assistance programmes in various fields. It is important here to refer to the fact that international institutions have an important role to play in providing the developing countries with the necessary technical assistance. Such assistance will enable them to take advantage of the accelerated pace of globalization in the field of trade and finance. It will also give these countries sufficient time to adapt and get ready to face the new challenges. This will help many developing countries avoid the negative effects of surging globalization, given the inadequacy of their production capabilities and the absence of a competitive edge. In this regard, Lebanon is effectively contributing to the establishment of a free trade zone specifically in the Arab region while continuing its commitment to the establishment of trade liberalization worldwide. On the eve of the twenty-first century, the United Nations role requires it to fulfil the tasks of reform and streamlining so that it can keep up with the fast pace of international relations. Thus the reform measures initiated by the Secretary-General must be completed. Furthermore, the reform of the working methods and streamlining of the Security Council to increase its membership and make it more representative should also be completed. Once reformed, different States, particularly small States, will be enabled to participate in the decision-making process relevant to the maintenance of international peace and security. We commend the efforts that went into the establishment of the International Criminal Court whose Statute was recently adopted in Rome. Lebanon supports the establishment of the Court and is determined to study its Statute positively. More than ever before, the international community is called upon to promote the peaceful settlement of disputes, especially in extremely sensitive regions of the world. We need also to address the root causes of the problems and thereby to defuse the crises before they turn into full-scale conflagrations. The time has come to solve pending problems, particularly those of the Middle East region. For instance, a settlement must be found to the question of the three islands in the Gulf disputed by the United Arab Emirates and Iran. Such a settlement should restore the disputed islands to their rightful owners and thus promote peace and stability among the States and the peoples of the region. If we are truly interested in the promotion of regional and international peace and security, we must work in all seriousness to build a world free from weapons of mass destruction. In this context, we aspire and call for the establishment of a zone free from nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. Five years ago, I was privileged to stand here before the General Assembly to speak about Lebanon and about its commitment to a just and comprehensive peace. From this very rostrum, I declared that Lebanon is committed to the principles of democracy, liberty and human rights, and that it has succeeded in safeguarding these principles even through its darkest moments. In this context, reference should be made to Lebanon?s firm position of condemning terrorism in all its forms and manifestations including political, cultural and economic. We condemn terrorism whether sponsored by States or by individuals. Lebanon condemns attacks against civilians, embassies and diplomatic missions, plane hijacking and any other act that jeopardizes the lives and property of civilians. However, we must stress the importance of distinguishing between terrorism and peoples? rights to resist the forces of foreign occupation in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and in its successive resolutions adopted by the international Organization and other fora, especially the Declaration of the Occasion of the Fiftieth Anniversary of the United Nations. Lebanon is fully committed to the role of the United Nations and is keen on furthering this role and on safeguarding the equilibrium and integrity of international relations. We therefore believe that it is important for all States, large and small, to commit to the principles of international legitimacy and refrain from undertaking unilateral measures that are driven solely by narrow interests and dictated by expediency. Today, as we reiterate these constant positions of principle, we can point with confidence to the originality of our experience in coexistence, which is based on moderation and tolerance, and our firm belief in both deserves to be a living model that should be emulated whenever solutions are sought to the problems of societies afflicted with wars, racial or factional strife all over the world. This is particularly true of societies that are trying to restore civil peace as part of their post-conflict peace- building efforts. 19 Lebanon, with an open and creative society, a society that is Arab by identity and orientation, has remained united in territory, population and institutions; Lebanon has remained a vibrant oasis of goodwill and beneficial interaction. As is well known, Lebanon has for the past few years embarked on a reconstruction plan following a protracted devastating war. It has been tirelessly working to regain the prominent cultural and economic position it once held in its region and in the world, depending on God Almighty, then on the will and resourcefulness of its own citizens and on the support of its brothers and the contributions of its friends all over the world. Throughout this period of reconstruction, Lebanon faced difficult circumstances caused first and foremost by the continued Israeli occupation of parts of its territories and by the continuity of its devastating attacks against its villages and peaceful citizens. These attacks have claimed the lives of many innocent civilians, men, women and children, and wounded many many more. I am confident that the international community still remembers very well the Qana massacre perpetrated by Israel in 1996. Lebanon has faced a critical stage of its history through the past few years while implementing the reconstruction plans. The only parallel to the intensity of this stage is the determination of the Lebanese people to face the various challenges on more than one front. Lebanon has succeeded in regaining the world?s confidence in its ability to play once more a distinguished and shining role in the cultural, economic, commercial and financial fields. Beirut is back to its position as the crossroads of various cultures and civilizations, a fact attested to by the many conferences and the regional and international meetings that were convened there. The United Nations building that Lebanon has recently completed as the focal point for United Nations activities in Lebanon and in the region is proof, if any was needed, of Lebanon?s keen interest in the return of international organizations to Beirut. As an indication of international confidence in our performance, the world financial markets traded in treasury bonds issued by the Lebanese Government and institutions of the private sector. This was made possible by the cooperation between the Lebanese financial institutions and their international counterparts. It is a demonstration of the confidence that the world has in the present and future of the national economy and of the confidence of the Lebanese themselves in their country and its future. But to date, Israel has not wanted to meet its commitments; it has not done what it promised to the Palestinians and to the international community; it does not want to resume the negotiations with Lebanon and with Syria from the point at which they left off. We invite the institutions of the international community to play a more effective role in securing compliance with the resolutions of international legitimacy. They must bring the necessary pressure to bear on the aggressor to remove the causes of this conflict and lay the foundations of a just and comprehensive peace. Israel cannot merely pay lip service to peace and expect to be considered a truly peace-loving State. Talking about peace is one thing; Israel?s actions on the ground are another. Israel?s claim that it is a weak country surrounded by hostile neighbours is one thing; Israel?s military might, based on weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons and state-of-the-art Western weaponry, is another. Israel has all those weapons and is the mightiest Power in the Middle East. But it does not want to implement or respect the resolutions of international legitimacy. We went to the Madrid Peace Conference with the other Arab parties sincerely hoping to achieve a just, permanent and comprehensive peace that would end the continued cycle of violence that has engulfed our region over the past 50 years. The negotiations on the Palestinian track remain in a vicious circle, and the repercussions of Israeli intransigence could very well shatter our hopes for peace; the negotiations on the Lebanese and Syrian tracks have come to a complete standstill as a result of the intransigent position of the Israeli Government. We reaffirm our permanent commitment to the noble objective of achieving peace. We have previously declared that the accomplishment of this goal lies in the full, immediate and unconditional implementation of United Nations resolutions. On this occasion, we reiterate our total rejection of any settlement of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon. We call upon the international community to increase its voluntary contributions to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) pending the implementation of international resolutions relative to refugees, particularly resolution 194 (III). As we repeat our commitment to a just, comprehensive and permanent peace, we declare that we 20 in Lebanon and in Syria are ready to resume the negotiations from where they were stopped. We are ready to sign a peace treaty with Israel within three months, on the condition that it withdraws from the South, from the West Beqaa, and from the Syrian Golan to the lines of 4 June 1967. Peace negotiations aimed at achieving a just and comprehensive peace — the peace that we always proclaimed our desire to achieve — can only be accomplished on the basis of the Madrid terms of reference, in accordance with the principle of land for peace. These should be pursued on two parallel, inseparable tracks with Israel: the Lebanese negotiation track and the Syrian negotiation track. The interdependence of the twin tracks was a strategic decision dictated by the supreme interests of both Lebanon and Syria. This interdependence enhances the prospects of a just, permanent and comprehensive peace. We have previously declared, and we repeat today before this assembly of nations, that neither Lebanon nor Syria will sign a separate peace agreement with Israel. Lebanon and Syria are committed to the resolutions of international legitimacy. We continue to be committed to peace as a strategic choice. Peace as we see it is a peace built on justice, a peace that will restore usurped rights to their rightful owners fully and without diminution. Any initiatives that ignore these principles and bases are nothing more than manoeuvres predestined to failure. They will only prolong the conflict with all that this implies in terms of squandering the human and economic resources of all concerned. They will further postpone the permanent, just and comprehensive peace which we still uphold and aspire to. To us, this will always be the only viable means to achieve the prosperity and progress of our people and of the other peoples of the region. The voices that were recently raised calling for the establishment of military alliances in the region on the pretext of confronting certain trends of thought can only be seen as attempts to bring the region back to the atmosphere of alliances and confrontation. Time and again, history has proven these to be harmful to the interests of peoples. They can only lead to negative results that will obstruct the peace process. So long as the Israeli occupation and assaults against our people continue, we shall continue to uphold our right to resist occupation and to use all legitimate means to which peoples who have had to endure the injustices and evils of occupation have resorted previously. The Lebanese resistance in southern Lebanon and the West Beqaa is in pursuit of a legitimate right supported and endorsed by the entire Lebanese people. The Lebanese people who, like other peoples whose lands have been occupied, have been resisting occupation, and appeal to the international community to spare no effort in helping to secure the release of its citizens who are incarcerated in Israeli prisons and in detention camps under Israeli control in the occupied Lebanese territories. Hundreds of our sons have been languishing in Israeli jails and detention camps for years. Some have already served the prison sentences handed down by Israeli courts, yet are still in custody for reasons unknown to anyone. Others have been in custody for years but have not yet been arraigned. Their incarceration continues under an arbitrary measure that Israel calls “administrative detention”. We have been trying to secure the release of all Lebanese detainees from Israeli jails with the assistance of friendly and brotherly States and with the active involvement of the International Committee of the Red Cross. We appeal to the United Nations and to other international humanitarian agencies to give this matter their utmost attention. We also call upon them to plead with Israel to improve the living conditions of these prisoners, who live in unbearable, inhumane circumstances that run counter to international laws and conventions. Lebanon finds itself today twice victimized. On the one hand, it has to endure continued devastating attacks by Israel, attacks that can be justified only under one rubric: Israel?s stubborn clinging to its occupation and to the flimsy pretext of security. On the other hand, Lebanon sees how the international community is incapable of doing what it takes to restore its legitimate rights through compliance with the just resolutions adopted by this international Organization, in particular Security Council resolution 425 (1978), which calls for unconditional Israeli withdrawal from the Lebanese territories. Lebanon, which for 50 years has dearly paid for the establishment of Israel, suffers from the double standards which have so far obstructed the implementation of Security Council resolution 425 (1978). The United Nations, which has made continuous efforts, and whose peacekeeping forces have made the ultimate sacrifice, in the South, remains the best witness to the indiscriminate nature and ferocity of the Israeli attacks against the Lebanese. The United Nations peacekeeping forces have repeatedly been the direct target of Israeli bombardment, including the 1996 shelling of the 21 headquarters of a battalion of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, in Qana, which was the scene of a heinous massacre in which scores of Lebanese lost their lives. Here we would like to pay tribute to the fallen soldiers of the United Nations who have died in Lebanon, victims of Israeli acts of aggression. Lebanon considers them to be its martyrs too. From this rostrum, we honour their memory. We salute each and every member of the United Nations peacekeeping Force stationed in Lebanon. We express special thanks and appreciation to the friendly States that have contributed troops to that Force. On the occasion of the departure of the Norwegian battalion that has worked in Lebanon for over two decades, allow me to express, on behalf of the people and the Government of Lebanon, our thanks and gratitude to the Norwegian people and Government for their enduring commitment to and participation in the Force. Many members of the Norwegian battalion sacrificed their lives in the line of duty. Lebanon has the right to demand that the international community and the United Nations, which represents international legitimacy, should make every effort to secure Israel?s compliance with international resolutions and its withdrawal from its territories. Lebanon, which believes in peace, will work with its brothers to consolidate this peace and make it a foundation for a new life in the Middle East region. Achieving this noble objective will not only translate just resolutions into tangible action, but it will also further the confidence of small States and nations in an authority that will guarantee their rights, their very existence and their future. In conclusion, I would like to address the Israeli people to tell them that the Arabs, specifically Lebanon and Syria, have taken a strategic decision, namely the peace option, which is the difficult choice. This is the strategic option which we uphold and for which we work in the interest of the future of our nation and that of our children. For peace to be realized, Israel also has to follow suit for the sake of the future of its children. Peace requires courage and a broad vision of the future. Lebanon and Syria have made their choice. Will Israel make the same choice?