Syria

I take pleasure in congratulating the President on his election to preside over the fifty-second session of the General Assembly and to congratulate his friendly country on his election to that high international office. We are confident that his wide-ranging expertise will facilitate his task and lead the deliberations of this session to a successful end. I should also like to thank his predecessor, His Excellency Mr. Razali Ismail, for his wise leadership of the previous session of the General Assembly. On this occasion I cannot fail to renew my congratulations to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and to Africa, his great continent. I wish him full success in discharging his tasks in accordance with the principles and purposes of the Charter. Although more than 50 years have elapsed since the adoption of the Charter of the United Nations, and although States have since committed themselves to peace in their international relations, many regions of the world, particularly in the Middle East, continue to suffer occupation, aggression and the threat of aggression to a point where the sounds of war have begun to drown out that of peace. It has now become clear to most of those concerned with peace and security in various corners of the Earth that the peace process initiated at the Madrid Conference six years ago has reached a dead end. This is due to the volte-face by the current Israeli Government vis-à-vis that process, including the commitments, agreements and pledges stemming from it. It is also due to its cynicism towards all the strenuous international efforts seeking, for the first time in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict, to achieve a comprehensive solution to this conflict. Perhaps many of us, Governments as well as peoples, cannot foresee the extent of the serious repercussions that will result from that Israeli reversal on the peace process, particularly since it is taking place in the post-cold-war period, when wars and armed confrontations have taken ugly and barbaric forms and have often raged out of control. Syria, which has opted for the achievement of peace in the Middle East on the basis of justice and dignity as a strategic choice, finds that it is duty bound to train a spotlight from this important international rostrum on some facts concerning the positions of the current Israeli Government. This should enable the international community, with the sponsors of the peace process foremost among them, to beware of any serious developments in the future leading to undermining the security and stability of the Middle East region and beyond. As a preliminary observation, I must point out that in our reading of the policy of the Israeli Government we do not proceed from the perception widely held around the world which classifies it as an extremist Zionist Government bent on negating the other party to the conflict rather than making peace with it. We proceed merely from an objective description of declared positions of the Israeli Government and from its practices on the ground, which — at a minimum — aim at gradually backtracking from the commitments and agreements reached by the parties during the peace talks and ultimately at completely eradicating the peace process launched at the Madrid Conference. 20 It seems to us that the method now employed by the Israeli Government to reach that objective is not the usual one of one step forward, two steps back. It is now a new practice, a tactic of one step back, then two steps back, followed by a threat of a further step backwards which cannot be abandoned, even provisionally, until the other side accepts new conditions it had already rejected. Thus, the peace process regresses until it ultimately cancels itself out. In this context, some may find it unfairly prejudicial to the Israeli Government to characterize its practices in such terms. They would, however, be surprised to learn that the Head of the Israeli Government himself boasts to his inner circle of employing such a tactic, which he believes is a very astute means of ending the peace process as unobtrusively as possible. This does not stop at the modus operandi alone, but extends to the details of the very fundamental issues underpinning the peace process. While acknowledging the applicability of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) to the occupied Syrian Golan, he also simultaneously rejects the results reached on the Syrian track, with the participation of the United States as sponsor, on the basis of those resolutions and relating to withdrawal to the line of 4 June 1967. He further rejects the resumption of negotiations from the point at which they were halted. It is also strange that the Israeli Government rejects the formula of land for peace, though it is at the very core of the United States initiative and has always enjoyed international unanimity. Instead of accepting this formula, the head of the Israeli Government advances others that neither common sense nor logic could entertain and that cannot stand the test of time, such as the formula of peace for peace or peace for security. It is clear that accepting these two Israeli formulas would be tantamount to surrender and to becoming an instrument at the service of Israel’s security. It is indeed true that security issues are of the utmost importance to all States, peoples and individuals. That is not in doubt. However, security is the fruit of peace; the achievement of peace brings security and not vice versa. Proceeding from that, we believe that the Israeli Government, in giving priority in its policy to security over peace, runs counter to all the concepts defined by societies and warring States throughout history. It is no exaggeration to say that the insistence of the Israeli Government on its erroneous concept of achieving security before ending occupation will turn the peace process into a bloodletting process, a cycle of killing that will obtain neither security nor peace for Israel and may return the Arab-Israeli conflict to its tragic beginnings. The Charter of the United Nations states that the efforts of the peoples of the world must be concerted in order to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war. Respect for the commitments proceeding from the principles of international law and its sources lies at the very heart of the Charter. It is regrettable that the Israeli Government does not realize that its failure to respect the commitments reached with the previous Government on the Syrian track, based on the principles of international law and relevant Security Council resolutions, does not represent a mere legal violation. First and foremost, it casts doubt on the credibility of any previous Israeli Government, and such doubts thus apply to the commitments made by the current Administration when it is replaced. Since coming to power, the Israeli Government has not limited its positions to undermining the peace process. It has chosen the exact opposite path to that of peace. It has increasingly diversified its attacks against Lebanon; it has bombed cities teeming with civilians and has planted explosive devices in many parts of southern Lebanon in order to incite enmity among the Lebanese and cast aspersions on the role of the Lebanese resistance. However, such attempts, contrary to Israel’s objectives, have only solidified unity among the Lebanese. They have strengthened the resolve of the Lebanese resistance to confront Israeli occupation more than ever before. In the occupied Palestinian territories, the pace of settlement activities has escalated, including a sharing of roles between the Israeli Government and extremist settlers, in order to expropriate more land, destroy homes and maintain the drive to judaize East Jerusalem. In our occupied Syrian Golan, the policy of entrenching Israeli occupation has also been escalated to the point that the Israeli Knesset recently voted on a bill entrenching the occupation and impeding withdrawal from the Golan, in clear defiance of Security Council resolution 497 (1981). This has been accompanied by an intensification of Jewish settlement activity with the aim of swelling the numbers of settlers in the Golan and undermining the chances for peace. That is a flagrant violation of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the first additional Protocol thereof. The Golan is Syrian land — it always was and always will be. The Israelis will have to leave it sooner or later. 21 We, the Arabs, have championed just and comprehensive peace and consider it a strategic choice. For such a choice to be realistic and supported by the people, it requires full Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Syrian Golan to the line of 4 June 1967, as well as from southern Lebanon and the western Bekaa, in implementation of Security Council resolution 425 (1978). It must guarantee the legitimate national rights of the Palestinian people, including those to self-determination and their own independent State. Syria has always stressed its keen wish to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East. Syria once again expresses its grave concern at the serious obstacle that Israel has placed on the road to that goal in order to prevent the establishment of the zone by refusing to adhere to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). This intransigent Israeli position does great harm to the credibility and universality of the Treaty. We believe that the measures and arrangements to establish a nuclear- weapon-free zone in the Middle East, as called for by United Nations resolutions, require Israel, the only State in the region possessing nuclear facilities and stockpiles, to adhere to the NPT and place all its nuclear establishments under the full-scope safeguards regime of the International Atomic Energy Agency. It must further destroy its entire stockpile of nuclear weapons. At a time when the urgent need to intensify international efforts towards a just and comprehensive peace in the Middle East is very clear, some States of the region are engaging in military cooperation similar to an alliance and have recently declared their intention to conduct military manoeuvres in the eastern Mediterranean. Such manoeuvres would be a threat to the peace and safety of neighbouring States as well as to the stability of the region. Syria supports all the efforts being made to eliminate tension in various regions of the world and to resolve standing problems. In this context, Syria underlines its concern for the unity and territorial integrity of Iraq. Syria calls for easing the suffering of the brotherly people of Iraq, while Iraq is required to implement the remaining Security Council resolutions in a manner ensuring a just solution to the issue of Kuwaiti prisoners. We also hope that there will be a positive response to the initiatives of the League of Arab States and the Organization of African Unity, as well as towards the flexibility shown by the Libyan Government to resolve the Lockerbie crisis. We would also like to see the embargo against Libya — a fellow Arab country — lifted, as well as an end to the suffering caused to the brotherly Libyan people by that embargo. Syria supports measures to guarantee peace and security in the Korean peninsula. We also wish to express our support for the aspirations of the Korean people for reunification. We further hope that serious efforts will be made to provide assistance to the Korean people to overcome its economic crisis. Syria stresses the need to take the necessary steps as soon as possible to lift the economic, trade and financial embargo which has been imposed on Cuba for more than 30 years. Syria is following with concern the severe conflicts afflicting some African countries. We call on the international community to make the necessary efforts and to endeavour to find solutions to these disputes, in close cooperation with the Organization of African Unity, in order to promote peace and stability on the African continent. The international community is further called upon to provide assistance of all kinds to enable African States to eradicate the scourge of poverty and achieve development. Among its primary purposes, the Charter of the United Nations provides for the maintenance of international peace and security; the fostering between nations of international relations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples; international cooperation in the economic, social, cultural and humanitarian fields; and the promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all. It also calls for non-interference in the internal affairs of States. The Charter encouraged the establishment of specialized agencies in the field of international cooperation. It entrusted the General Assembly with setting out regulations governing the appointment by the Secretary- General of the employees of the international Organization. Syria underlines the importance of strict adherence to the purposes and principles of the United Nations during the process of reform of the Organization in order to enable it to respond to the needs and aspirations of its Members in the twenty-first century. We believe that promoting development is among the first priorities of the United Nations. There is therefore a need to underscore the right to development. 22 Syria expresses its concern about any weakening of the role and working methods of the General Assembly. We call upon the General Assembly to perform its effective role in accordance with the Charter. In this context, we believe that the changes in the international arena and the significant increase in the number of Member States of the United Nations call for a review of the composition and working methods of the Security Council. Checks and criteria must be put in place to prevent the arbitrary use of the veto power. Thus the democracy and transparency which are required in its decision-making would be enhanced, thereby leading to more fairness and balance, as well as to non-selectivity in the implementation of the Council’s resolutions. Although this is an urgent matter, we believe that, in order to reach general agreement on this question, the reforms of the Security Council must not be subjected to a specific time- frame. The Secretary-General recently presented his proposals to reform the United Nations. We appreciate the efforts he made in preparing his proposals. However, proceeding from our concern to strengthen the United Nations capacity to shoulder the responsibilities entrusted to it, we would have wished to have seen in the proposals more attention given to the fundamental role of the Organization in promoting international cooperation for development. We would have liked the proposals to exclude any measures likely to affect those programmes and activities related to development issues and poverty eradication in developing and least developed countries. Human rights are a very important issue, which we believe must continue to be pursued as an independent issue in order to avoid any overlap with other United Nations activities. Such an amalgamation of issues would only further the opportunities to politicize human rights issues and their use as a means to exert specific pressures, to impose preconditions or to intervene in the internal affairs of States. Humanity has pinned great hopes on the United Nations, an Organization born of a world war which was destructive to great hopes. Humanity entertained the expectation that the Organization would succeed in outlawing war, ending all forms of aggression and championing the right of peoples to self-determination. It further expected it to succeed in achieving development and in eradicating poverty and underdevelopment. Today, as we stand at the threshold of a new century, we all face great challenges which require us to find the appropriate enabling environment for future generations to live in peace, security and cooperation within the context of international relations free of violence and confrontation. This is the hope of our peoples and this is what we must strive to reach as we look forward to a better future that is more just and more humane for the benefit of all mankind.