Syria

The United Nations General Assembly is again in session. In the past, we have had eight regular and two special sessions. On each and every occasion, we have assembled in honourable ceremony and dispersed in a distinguished fashion. On each and every occasion, we have begun the session with a minute of prayer or meditation, and we have ended with a warm exchange of best wishes. On each and every occasion, we have recited the Charter in the plenary meetings, we have consulted rules of procedure in committee meetings, and we have been occupied with resolutions, motions, points of order and voting, all in an atmosphere charged with the heat and dust of controversy. But at the end of the day we have cooled down at social gatherings where we have enjoyed intellectual and liquid refreshment. On each and every occasion, we have presented the world with ringing speeches, with promising resolutions, and with eloquent appeals. Yet, on each and every occasion, one single question, a star question, a brutal question, has arisen in the minds of the peoples all over the world: what has become of our Charter? 65. One fact we know beyond any shadow of doubt, and I beg to state it before you with every expression of apology. In the cornerstone of this magnificent building we placed a magnificent copy of the Charter in a magnificent ceremony. But the whole reality should be told not in metaphor, but in vibrant truth. 66. To begin with, international security has not been secured; it is still precarious. It is still exposed to the dangers of threats and intimidation. It is true that wars have ceased, but the art of war is flourishing in a wild race. The reduction of tension that marks our day has not been achieved by this Organization. The credit should go where it belongs: it should go to those who laboured day and night to achieve what has been achieved. But it is still true that whole peoples in every corner of the globe are trembling, literally trembling, under the plague of fear, suspicion and restlessness. Nine years ago, our Organization was established by the United Nations, which were united in their efforts to achieve peace and to achieve justice and democracy. The prospects now are neither dim or grim; but we should not deny that the Organization now stands with the nations disunited. 67. We cannot legitimately claim that we are bent, heart and soul, will and action, on upholding the objectives and purposes of our sublime Charter. Nine years ago we pledged ourselves, in the very first words of our Charter, “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind”. That was our first and foremost pledge, yet at certain intervals during the life of our Organization, the danger of universal war has been imminent, and highly imminent. This General Assembly can be sure that such a war would not bring untold sorrow to mankind, for no one may survive to suffer any feeling of sorrow. 68. It is no secret that certain Members of this Organization have in their possession sufficient atomic energy to destroy all human and inhuman energy. In an attempt to conquer nature, man’s genius has brought into existence a weapon capable of terminating our existence, a weapon ready to undo what human genius has done since time immemorial. But the picture is not entirely gloomy. We feel a certain degree of confidence. The great Powers stand in a state of uncertainty, a state of ignorance regarding each other’s capacity to produce this devastating weapon. Short of any effective means of control and supervision, it seems that the salvation of mankind at this very moment rests upon this fortunate state of uncertainty and ignorance. Perhaps it is without precedent that mankind enjoys the blessing of a state of ignorance. 69. But a further gleam of hope has found its way into the deliberations of this session. We feel that we have been given a breathing space by the additional item inscribed on the agenda of this session which envisages a scheme for international co-operation in developing the peaceful uses of atomic energy. Let us hope that this will be adopted unanimously, not by vote as usual, but by unanimous will and action. Silent action, after all, is louder than the loudest words. 70. In the field of regional stability, the Middle East has shown marked signs of improvement. The longstanding Anglo-Egyptian dispute is drawing to an end. It is true that the negotiating party is Egypt; but the Problem, by its nature, is a major Arab problem that has long deeply disturbed the Arab world. States members of the Arab League have not failed to seize every opportunity to support Egypt’s national aspirations. The success of the Cairo talks can be of great significance. Egypt is a leading Arab State. It holds an intermediate position in the Arab world. It is, therefore, imperative that Egypt should be met all the way, not halfway. The security of the region, to say nothing of other legitimate reasons, leaves no room for bargaining or hesitation. 71. But one aspect of the Anglo-Egyptian negotiations must be revealed, and it is worthwhile to pause for a moment of recreation, at least. Ever since the beginning of these negotiations, a subversive endeavour has been going on to undermine them. The task here fell upon Israel. Israel spared no efforts to obstruct, the negotiations at various stages. At last, when it found that the negotiations were continuing and proceeding towards a successful end, Israel discovered that it was necessary to call upon its last reserve. Israel decided to disturb the negotiations. Israel decided to disturb the waters and to go fishing for trouble and dissension. Here are the facts. 72. On 28 September 1954, the S.S. Bat Galim, an Israel vessel of 500 tons, entered the territorial waters of Egypt, approached the harbour of Suez and immediately opened fire on two Egyptian fishing boats. One of the boats sank, and two Egyptian fishermen were lost. In simple words, this is nothing but aggression; this is nothing but an act of lawlessness. 73. But that is not the whole story. One other step was necessary, and Israel took that step yesterday — and only yesterday. Israel lodged a complaint with the Security Council, and the item now awaits the Council’s consideration. The story as a whole is typical of Israel’s conduct — I would not say misconduct. In an attempt to halt the Anglo-Egyptian negotiations, Israel found it expedient to transfer the whole problem to the Security Council. But the Security Council, after all, requires a complaint; a complaint, after all, requires an incident. Israel finds no difficulty in meeting all these requirements. Thus, an incident was engineered and a complaint was lodged. It is now in the archives of the Security Council. 74. Israel certainly can produce another entirely different version. I would not for a moment doubt the ability of Israel to produce any story it likes. Israel may unfold its thousand and one grievances, its sacrifices, its state of siege and whatnot. Israel may as well unfold the record of its heroism and how it attained its liberty and independence through blood, sweat and tears. Certainly Israel has attained its independence through blood, sweat and tears; with this I would not disagree except for one, and only one, qualification — except for one, and only one, exception. The tears are Israel’s; that is quite certain. The blood belongs to the adventurers, the military mercenaries of Europe; and the sweat, eventually and finally, belongs to the taxpayers of the United States. And this is Israel. 75. I now move to another objective of the Charter, which, without any introduction whatsoever, readily presents itself to the mind of the world. It is the principle of self-determination. I am afraid that on more than one occasion we have betrayed this international obligation. This charge is sufficiently corroborated by a lengthy line of examples. Millions of people all over the world are denied their sacred right to self-determination. Nations that have recently exercised that sacred right were able to do so only as a result of a bitter struggle, a struggle to fight for that right, a struggle to capture that right. It seemed as though the principle of self-determination had to be fought for with resolute determination. The world would have hoped very much that the right of self-determination should be exercised on its own merits and on its own values — not by war, but by demand and desire, simple desire. In the Charter each and every right stands as of right, without might. But it is to our deep regret that a tendency is growing in the United Nations to resist with great determination the right of self-determination. Outside the United Nations this tendency expresses itself in wholesale repression, imprisonment and acts of tyranny. Many people in Asia and Africa are endeavouring to achieve their national aspirations by their sweat, by their blood and by their tears — but never by the Charter. No doubt, at this very moment, thousands of men and women of various creeds and colours are suffering death, torture and untold hardships for no fault of theirs, for no guilt and for no reason whatsoever except their desire to live free, unmolested and with human dignity. The evidence is overwhelming. A few illustrations might suffice to establish our contention. We shall confine ourselves to problems that are fresh in our minds and alive in our hearts. 76. Let us take the problem of North Africa under French rule. I shall speak with restraint, I shall speak with moderation — offending nobody and respecting everybody. Those territories were the site of brilliant civilization and the seat of outstanding Arab dynasties of wide name and fame. In the nineteenth century their life was integrated in the chapter of European imperialism. Dismemberment and direct rule soon followed. Ever since, the whole area has known no peace or tranquillity. In the two World Wars, the soldiers of North Africa won the admiration of Europe for their feats of indescribable bravery. Their contribution to the cause of freedom has broken every record. But their countries remained under the heel of foreign rule. Thus, the irony of fate has decreed — look what it decreed! — that they should live without freedom and die for liberty. It is undeniable that the peoples of North Africa have an inherent right to self-determination. They are entitled to their national aspirations. But nothing as yet has been achieved. Consequently, these crucial questions arise. Have these people the right to self-determination? Are they entitled to free and democratic institutions? Are they entitled to develop their national culture, economy and social life as they please and as they need? I venture to say that your answer is in the affirmative. So let us practise what we preach. Let us recognize the rights of these peoples to freedom and liberty. So far, our Organization has only recognized a right attained by might. So far, our Organization has only recognized liberty after a struggle, but it does not itself struggle to achieve liberty. 77. A ray of light, however, is stealing toward the continent in darkness. Negotiations between France and Tunisia have started. We rejoice in this beginning — I am addressing myself to the chief representative of France — we hope to rejoice at the end. We are following the talks with interest and sympathy. Those territories are part and parcel of the Arab world. Those peoples are our kith and kin. Their liberty is the cornerstone of the structure of peace in that area. We hope that the Paris negotiations will prepare the ground for freedom and friendship. We should, however, note with appreciation and satisfaction the fact that the French delegation has not opposed the inclusion of the problems of Tunisia and Morocco in the agenda of this session. 78. The head of the French delegation made a remarkable statement yesterday [487th meeting]. With exemplary eloquence and clarity, he insisted that the United Nations should stop presenting two faces and speaking with two voices. This is really an admirable approach. The failure of the United Nations is due precisely to its appearing before the world with two faces and two voices. However, two — that is, the number 2 — is only a very humble and mild enumeration. The United Nations should stop presenting two faces and speaking with two voices. The only face should be that of the Charter, and the only voice should be that of freedom and liberty. 79. We therefore hope that France, at the forthcoming session of the United Nations, will find its way to include an item entitled, “The independence of the peoples of North Africa and their admission to the United Nations”. France would be making history. It would be another French Revolution, with all its glory and with all its honour. 80. This is our stand on the principle of self-determination. This was our attitude in previous sessions. We shall continue to take this attitude at the present session and at every session to follow. When we are called upon to make a choice, our choice will always be for the cause of freedom, liberty and democracy. This explains our stand in respect of the items on West Irian and Cyprus. A nation in its fatherland is entitled to self-determination. I say “in its fatherland” with emphasis and full meaning. Peoples not in their fatherland are not entitled to sovereignty. Occupation and invasion, no matter how remote, are not valid grounds for sovereignty. It is not proper at this stage to express the view of my delegation conclusively and finally on the questions of West Irian and Cyprus. But one thing is final and conclusive: once we are convinced in fact and in law that the peoples in Cyprus and West Irian are in their homelands in full legitimacy, we are prepared to recognize with no hesitation their right to self-determination. 81. I now propose to deal with the Palestine problem, which is the last question on which I shall speak. This is a rather chronic item. It is almost as old as the Organization itself. No one knows with certainty which will survive the other. The problem became a United Nations concern in the middle of 1947. In eight sessions, the question has been subjected to hairsplitting examination. The relevant records and documents in the United Nations by themselves constitute a voluminous library; the resolutions alone, up to this very moment, on careful enumeration amount to fifty-five. What a record! It breaks every past record. 82. Broadly speaking, these resolutions deal with the partition of Palestine, the internationalization of Jerusalem, the repatriation of the refugees and the general security of the country. 83. It is not my intention to unfold the tragedy that began with the Balfour Declaration on 2 November 1917. Nor is it my intention to portray the lamentable record of British policy in its endeavour to establish the Jewish National Home upon the Palestine population. Likewise, I shall not endeavour to place before you a bloody picture of Zionist atrocities before and after Israel, atrocities committed against the defenceless and innocent population of Palestine. I shall only confine myself to the outstanding facts of the problem, not in their frame of history, but as they stand now, and only now. 84. To begin with, the United Nations, as you all know, recommended the establishment of a Jewish State on Arab soil with almost an Arab majority of population. To preserve its sanctity and tranquillity, the Jerusalem area was to be neutralized, demilitarized and internationalized. It was to be administered by a Governor with full authority from the United Nations. The Trusteeship Council, after laborious effort, adopted a comprehensive Statute for the administration of the Jerusalem area [A/1286]. As to the Palestine refugees, the Assembly decided on every occasion that the refugees wishing to return to their homes should be allowed to return, while the others choosing not to return should be adequately compensated. These are the facts with nothing added and nothing taken away. 85. But what is the present situation? It speaks for itself. Regarding the territorial question, it is a fact that Israel now holds 5,000 square kilometres of land in excess of that allotted to it under the partition scheme of the United Nations. In this area there exist, tens of Arab cities and villages where thousands and I thousands of refugees could be readily settled. Israel I claims that it has won the area on the battlefield. Israel I declares that what it has taken by war can only be surrendered by war. What a peace-loving Member of your Organization! 86. As far as the Jerusalem area is concerned, internationalization has not been effected. The Statute of the Trusteeship Council lies at rest in the archives of this Organization. Israel has declared this city to be its eternal capital. As a second Berlin, a Berlin in the Middle East, Jerusalem is resigning itself to destiny. Its holy shrines; sacred to millions of believers of every creed and denomination, could be reduced to smoke and ashes before the matter could be placed on the agenda of the Security Council. It could be reduced to ruins before the Security Council is able to place the item on its agenda. 87. With regard to the refugees, the problem is growing, in number and in gravity. A whole nation was uprooted from its fatherland. This is the eighth year of its life in exile, life in tents, in caves, in shattered buildings, with a deeply rooted longing to go back to the homeland that has been handed down to them from their fathers and grandfathers. So far, not a single refugee has been repatriated. Arab property, the assets of generations, the sweat of generations, the toil of generations since time immemorial, is now seized by Israel for the benefit of Israel. 88. What is the net result? It is a fact beyond controversy that Israel rejects the resolutions of the General Assembly. Israel refuses to abide by the demarcation lines in the partition plan. Israel refuses to repatriate the refugees. Israel refuses to internationalize Jerusalem. On these three major issues, Israel ignores the wishes of the international community. Time and time again this honourable Assembly has urged Israel to implement those resolutions. International conciliation and mediation have failed to prevail with Israel. Mediation has met with the same fate as the martyr himself, Count Bernadotte. The Palestine Conciliation Commission, meeting in every capital and in every climate, could not dislodge Israel from the obstinate Position it has taken in rejecting the resolutions of the General Assembly. 89. The matter, therefore, now stands crystal clear. Israel refuses to implement your resolutions. Your mediation has failed. Your conciliation has been frustrated. We humbly submit that the deadlock could be broken. I say that with all honesty and with all sincerity. It could be broken by the establishment of a Palestine commission with wide powers to give effect to the resolutions of the General Assembly. The processes of implementation require that Jerusalem should be the headquarters of that, commission. The question of membership in this commission would be of paramount importance. We believe the commission should be composed of the United States, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom, France and China — the five permanent members of the Security Council. Ultimately, responsibility for international peace and security rests in the hands of this supreme organ. As to priority of action, we believe that the repatriation of the refugees must come first and foremost, the Jerusalem question and the territorial question to follow in due course. After all, we are not suggesting solutions. These suggestions are nothing but your resolutions. 90. Should Israel fail to give the necessary co-operation and support to this commission, Israel would have to stand squarely before the penalties of the Charter. Political and economic sanctions and loss of membership are sufficient guarantees to reduce rebellion to acquiescence and obedience. Israel, after all, as you all know, lives not from within but from without. Israel’s body is in Palestine, but its veins and arteries lie far abroad. 91. Acting on these lines, the General Assembly, we believe, would be faithful to its resolutions and would act in keeping with the principles of the Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 92. In closing, allow me to address myself to each and every delegation and to the whole world at large. Here is the high road to peace, leading to the land of peace. The establishment of a Palestine commission with full power and support can make your resolutions a living reality. Let us act, and act with sincerity and honesty, before the situation gets out of hand.