Permanent sovereignty over natural resources in the OPT and Golan – GA Second Cttee debate, vote – Summary record (extracts)

Second Committee 

Summary record of the 19th meeting 

Held at Headquarters, New York, on Monday, 26 October 2015, at 3 p.m. 

 Chair:  Mr. Logar …………………………………………………….   (Slovania)

 Later:  Mr. Krapp (Vice-Chair) ……………………………………. (Germany)  

Contents 

Agenda item 64: Permanent sovereignty of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and of the Arab population in the occupied Syrian Golan over their natural resources  (continued)

/…

The meeting was called to order at 3.05 p.m.   

Agenda item 64: Permanent sovereignty of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and of the Arab population in the occupied Syrian Golan over their natural resources (continued) (A/70/82-E/2015/13)

1. Mr. Ahmad Al-Kuwari (Qatar), speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that the allegations made against his country by the representative of Israel at the previous meeting had been baseless. By contrast, in his own statement he had relied on documented facts from United Nations reports. Israel, the occupying Power, was trying to divert attention from its illegal and immoral policies, its violations of the Al-Aqsa mosque compound and the actions of its extremist settlers. That approach would only incite more violence and block the path to peace. His delegation categorically rejected the accusations made against his country and reiterated its condemnation of terrorism in all its forms, which included the Israeli occupation.

2. Mr. Sedigh Mostahkam (Islamic Republic of Iran), speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that at the previous meeting, the delegation of the Israeli regime had pursued its usual tactic of attacking his country to divert attention from its own atrocities. Israel was using Iranophobia and Islamophobia as smokescreens to conceal its goal of keeping Palestinian land under occupation. In contrast to Israel’s apartheid regime, the political system of the Islamic Republic of Iran was based on respect for the rights of all citizens. The Israeli occupation was not only at the heart of the Palestinian question, but was responsible for the lion’s share of tension and conflict in the Middle East region, which would not rest until Israel ended its criminal behaviour.

3. Mr. Mounzer (Syrian Arab Republic), speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that the hypocrisy exhibited by the delegation of the occupation regime at the previous meeting had hardly been surprising. That regime perpetrated terrorism against the Arab populations of occupied Palestine and Syria, who continued to see their rights ignored, their homes destroyed, their land confiscated and their Muslim and Christian holy places violated. Countless United Nations reports had shown how Israel, the occupying Power, was ignoring the many resolutions calling for it to cease its occupation. Evidently, the representative of Israel had not been following his own media, which had recently featured interviews with terrorists from Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and the Nusrah Front, who were receiving medical treatment in Israeli hospitals. Anyone who subscribed to a culture of murder, terrorism, aggression, colonialism and occupation had no place in an Organization committed to peace, justice and development for all peoples.

4. Mr. Amer (Israel), speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that while the representative of Syria might have been following Israeli media, he himself had been following Syrian media, from which it appeared that the conspiracy against Syria included not only the entire Earth but possibly also the planet Mars. Israel was merely providing medical care in its hospitals to whoever needed it, including citizens of Syria. If the representative of Qatar wanted to hear documented facts, he should be reminded of the
1,200 foreign workers who had died in Qatar building stadiums for the 2022 World Cup. As for the representative of Iran, he had not even bothered to respond to the question posed to him. Israel was committed to the status quo in the Al-Aqsa mosque compound and would continue its efforts to restore calm.

5. Mr. Shawesh (Observer for the State of Palestine), speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that however much the occupation regime might complain about supposed lies in United Nations reports, the biggest lies had come from the Permanent Representative of Israel himself, who, at a recent press conference, had repeated the false allegation that the Palestinian school curriculum incited violence against Jews. He had even gone so far as to display an instructional diagram, which he claimed had appeared in a Palestinian textbook, on how to stab a Jew. That was typical of the sick and hateful rhetoric that the Permanent Representative of Israel had used to advance his standing with his settler constituency in Israeli politics. The curriculum in question had been developed by the European Union and approved by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, and was being used by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near Eastin its schools. It had even been found to be free of incitement by studies funded by the United States Congress.

6. In fact, Palestinians were proud that Jews had long been part of the Palestinian Arab social fabric. The representative of Israel had evidently forgotten that a prominent rabbi had served as a Palestinian minister, that the High Priest of the Samaritan Jewish community had been a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, that the representative of Palestine in the Socialist International had been a Jew, and that no fewer than two Jews had been members of the Revolutionary Council of the Palestine Liberation Organization. By the same token, his delegation condemned any Muslims or Arabs who supported the occupation, including the commander of Israel’s Golani brigade during the war against Gaza, who was a Druze and whom his Government hoped to see brought to justice as a war criminal. His delegation did not have a problem with Jews, but with the occupation.

7. Mr. Mounzer (Syrian Arab Republic), speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that what the representative of Israel had just admitted about hospitals in his country treating terrorists merely provided more proof of the conspiracy against the Syrian Arab Republic. No amount of lying propaganda could conceal the true nature of the occupation, which violated the land, resources and rights of the rightful inhabitants on a daily basis while encircling them with settlers. As long as Israel failed to comply with international resolutions calling for its immediate withdrawal from the occupied Syrian Golan and the other occupied Arab territories, the representative of Israel would need to be reminded that sustainable development was not compatible with occupation.

8. Mr. Ahmad Al-Kuwari (Qatar), speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that the false accusations levelled against his country by the delegation of Israel had demonstrated yet again that delegation’s utter lack of credibility. Israel had no business speaking about rights when it was depriving Palestinians of their most basic rights, including the right to life itself. He stressed that Qatar spared no effort in providing workers with proper care and working conditions.

/…