Mideast situation/Karameh – SecCo debate – Verbatim record

UNITED NATIONS

SECURITY COUNCIL

OFFICIAL RECORDS

TWENTY-THIRD YEAR

1401st MEETING: 21 MARCH 1968

NEW YORK

CONTENTS

S/PV. 1401

FOURTEEN HUNDRED AND FIRST MEETING

Held in New York on Thursday, 21 March 1968, at 12 noon.

President: Mr. Ousmane Soce DIOP (Senegal).

Present: The representatives of the following States: Algeria, Brazil, Canada, China, Denmark, Ethiopia, France, Hungary, India, Pakistan, Paraguay, Senegal, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States of America.

Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/1401/Rev.1)

l.  Adoption of the agenda.

2. The situation in the Middle East:

(a) Letter dated 21 March 1968 from the Permanent Representative of Jordan addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/8484);

(b) Letter dated 21 March 1968 from the Permanent Representative of Israel addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/8486).

Statement by the President

1. PRESIDENT (translated from French): The present meeting of the Security Council has been convened on very short notice following upon the requests addressed to me this morning, first by the Permanent Representative of Jordan, and then by the Permanent Representative of Israel. Those requests are contained in documents S/8484 and S/8486, which have been circulated.

Adoption of the agenda

The agenda was adopted.

The situation in the Middle East:

(a) Letter dated 21 March 1968 from the Permanent Representative of Jordan addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/8484);

(b) Letter dated 21 March 1968 from the Permanent Representative of Israel addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/8486)

2. PRESIDENT (translated from French): The representatives of Jordan, Israel, the United Arab Republic, Iraq and Morocco have asked to be invited to participate, without the right to vote, in the Council's deliberations on the question before it. In accordance with the usual practice of the Council, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite the representatives of those countries to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council Chamber, on the understanding that when one of them wishes to speak he will be invited to take a place at the Council table.

At the invitation of the President, Mr. Al. H. El-Farra (Jordan), Mr. Y. Tekoah (Israel), Mr. M. A. El Kony (United Arab Republic), Mr. A. Pachachi (Iraq) and Mr. A. T. Benhima (Morocco) took the places reserved for them.

3. The PRESIDENT (translated from French): I call upon the first speaker on my list, the representative of Jordan.

4. Mr. EL-FARRA (Jordan): It was never the intention of the Government of Jordan to come before the Security Council while the United Nations special representative was in the area carrying out a Security Council mandate aiming at an Israel withdrawal as well as a just solution and peace in the area, which has never enjoyed peace since the Zionist invasion. We wanted to wait and see, and give every attempt at a peaceful solution a chance. However, because of today's wicked Israel attack we cannot afford this luxury.

5. Instead of facilitating the task of the United Nations representative and showing acceptance of the Security Council resolution of 22 November [242 (1967)] and a genuine desire to implement it, Israel resorted to challenges, defiance and utter contempt for the authority of the United Nations. We kept the Council informed of most of the Israel violations and deliberate acts in the occupied territories, acts which were intended to undermine the mission of Mr. Jarring and serve aggressive Zionist designs.

6. When we received reliable information that the Israelis were contemplating a mass attack on the east bank of Jordan, we immediately informed the Council. I had the pleasure, Mr. President, of meeting you to bring to your attention this contemplated renewal of Israel aggression. An official document was made available to all members around this table. Within the twenty-four hours preceding the attack, three times we informed different United Nations organs of this planned invasion. However, despite all this, the Israelis carried out their premeditated plan, invaded the east bank of Jordan this morning and renewed their cowardly attacks' against innocent refugees and other citizens of Jordan.

7. We have therefore requested this urgent meeting and are coming before the Council seeking an adequate and really effective remedy.

8. The Israel policy of utter contempt for the world community continues to be the order of the day. On 5 June 1967 Israel committed a flagrant violation of the Charter. It later defied Security Council resolution 237 (1967) calling upon Israel to ensure the safety, welfare and security of the inhabitants of the areas now under Israel military control. It adopted the same policy of utter contempt for the will of the international community reflected in two Assembly resolutions regarding Jerusalem [2253 (ES-V), 2254(ES-V)], the will of ninety-nine Members which declared all Israel measures vis-à-vis Jerusalem invalid and requested the Israel authorities to rescind them. And relying on more arms, more encouragement and more political support, the Zionist leaders are viciously cham-pioning the slogan: "Winner keep all".

9. What is the background of today's mass attack? On Tuesday, 19 March, the Council was informed of the contemplated aggression [S/8478]. We warned that this Israel mass attack was likely to take place soon. We notified the Security Council, the big Powers and friendly States well in advance.

10. On 20 March-that is, only yesterday-we warned the Security Council and the General Assembly once more that the Israelis were fabricating allegations to create false impressions to mask their contemplated aggression. We said in our letter to the Council yesterday that these allegations 14 May well be, as they have often been in the past, a prelude to renewed Israel attacks against Jordanian citizens and Jordanian territories" [S/8482]. We have stated most emphatically that we have no responsibility for the events which Israel alleges are taking place in Arab areas now under military occupation.

11.  Mr. President, you were kind enough to convey the information to the Secretary-General, and while you were engaging in contacts an open act of contempt and complete disregard for the world community and for this highest organ of the United Nations took place on the part of the Israel authorities. Israel, by its criminal attack, will stand condemned before the world and is fully responsible for this act, prompted by the ugliest motive of aggression. It has been arrogantly confirmed that today's operation was larger than the usual retaliatory raid. Press dispatches explain the happiness of the Israelis, walking in the streets, celebrating their wicked crime, described to them through their transistor radios.

12. The refugees of the Karameh camp, located not far from the cease-fire area and target of this attack, together with the other citizens and soldiers in the neighboring area, struggled to defend their tents, dwellings and posts. Hand to hand fighting went on until early this morning in the refugee camp of Karameh. What is more, the Israel attack extended to other areas and places of the Jordan valley. Casualties are very heavy; damages are great. More information is coming in soon with more details of this vicious and premeditated attack. I shall have more to say about this at a later stage.

13. But I should like at this stage to say that Israel acts of lawlessness are dictated by irresponsible leadership. Let me make it very clear that this entire Israel campaign is intended to terrorize, intimidate and expel the inhabitants of that area. This, as well as the blowing up of houses is on the increase and is inflaming feelings in the area. All these acts undermine the commendable efforts and work of the special representative.

14. It must surely be surprising and disturbing to the Council to discover that now that the Council has adopted a resolution with hope for a settlement, now that all members of the family of nations are hoping that Mr. Jarring will succeed in his mission, Israel is intentionally undermining all those efforts. In order allegedly to modernize or improve parts of Arab old Jerusalem, the Israelis demolished completely the Arab quarter called the Maghrabi Quarter, displaced over 200 Arab families after giving them only a few hours' notice, and created a plaza before the Wailing Wall. Now a new planning scheme is under way. More arrangements are being made to uproot Arab inhabitants and wipe out the Arab national consciousness.

15. Recently the Israel authorities announced the expropriation of 838 areas of Arab land adjacent to the Old City of Jerusalem. The area expropriated is not even within the Old City of Jerusalem. With the exception of less than 250 dunams, it is 100 per cent Arab-owned. Only a small part of it is the property of the Government of Jordan. The remainder belongs to the Palestinian citizens of Jordan. The Israel authorities, in a clear attempt to mislead world public opinion, claimed that that was an act of expropriation. But the whole world knows that a military occupier has no legal right. By an illegal act no legal result can be produced, no right acquired-no fruits for aggression.

16. What about the Wailing Wall? The Zionists, through fabrication, misrepresentation and distortion, conveyed the impression that they had a title, a vested right in the Wailing Wall, a right of ownership which entitled them to bulldoze the Maghrabi Quarter to make room for a plaza and trees facing the Wall.

17. What right do the Israelis have to apply arbitrary measures to territories they do not even own? Indeed, what right do they have to destroy Arab lands and buildings and shrines? What right do they have to make Jerusalem, the Sacred, lose that air of holiness and spiritual prestige to become frozen and expressionless? What right do they have to the Wailing Wall itself, which is invoked as a pretext for all these violations?

18. The Security Council can form a clear opinion and come to a better conclusion when it becomes acquainted with the legal aspects of this crucial problem. The Council is entitled to know the truth about the Wailing Wall, which is the western part of the wall of Al-Haram Ash-Sharif. The Israelis, now that they illegally occupy Jerusalem, claim title to the Wailing Wall area. That claim is ground-less, as has been established by the special tribunal appointed by the British administration, with the approval of the League of Nations.1/ The findings of that tribunal show that the Jews were not allowed to visit the Wailing Wall until the Arabs liberated and regained their homeland from the Romans. They also show that the Israelis never claimed title to or possession of the Wailing Wall or the adjacent area.

19. If this Israel arrogance, undermining the authority Of the United Nations, and their savage attack against innocent Arab inhabitants are not condemned and checked and Chapter VII of the Charter invoked, then I am afraid that the entire concept of law and equity as embodied in our Charter will be jeopardized. When they attacked the village of As Samu in Jordan on 13 November 1966, the question came before the Security Council. The Security Council discussed the question, determined the facts, and then adopted a resolution; I am sure that my colleagues around this table remember that resolution-resolution 228(1966)-in which the Security Council deplored the “loss of life and heavy damage to property resulting from the action of the Government of Israel on 13 November 1966". In paragraph 2 of the resolution the Council censured Israel "for this large-scale military action in violation of the United Nations Charter and of the General Armistice Agreement between Israel and Jordan." In paragraph 3 the Security Council emphasized to Israel "that actions of military reprisal cannot be tolerated and that, if they are repeated, the Security Council will have to consider further and more effective steps as envisaged in the Charter to ensure against the repetition of such acts".

20. That was a Security Council resolution which stated in express terms that if more of these criminal attacks were committed, sanctions would be the answer, Chapter VII would be the answer, adequate steps as envisaged in the Charter would be the answer. Jordan, a small Member of the United Nations, is waiting to see the action of the Security Council on this most flagrant violation of the Charter and of the Security Council resolution. If no action is taken, that will be an invitation to disaster. Surely it is the task of this body, the Security Council, which has the primary responsibility to protect the Charter and ensure world peace and order, to take adequate measures to remedy this alarming situation.

21. The murderous Israel campaign and continued acts of aggression should be met with an effective Security Council response reflected in sanctions. The Security Council is the hope of mankind. Its inaction or submission to any pressure will frustrate that hope and consequently destroy the image of this great body. This is an organ of peace intended to check aggression and to bring order. As such, it is a great organ. However, it committed a grave mistake in our area when it did not call for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of Israel troops from Arab territories, when it did not insist on immediate Israel withdrawal. The new Israel defiance exposes the Security Council's grave mis-take, which is now threatening the destruction of the image of the United Nations.

22. If the Security Council accepts its mistake as final, it will in effect be accepting its defeat and its submission to Zionist conniving and intriguing pressure. It is in order to avoid defeat that the Security Council should act-act with determination, act with an awareness of the responsibility it is facing.

23. If the Israelis are intoxicated by their victory, the Security Council should not be frustrated by the Israel utter contempt for and disregard of Security Council authority.

24. In the report dated 21 March on this question presented by our able Secretary-General, it appears clearly that in order to prevent any further deterioration of the situation, the Jordanian delegate to the Mixed Armistice Commission wanted to meet with the Israel liaison officer, under the auspices of the United Nations, either in the offices of the Mixed Armistice Commission, the machinery created by the United Nations itself, or at Government House in Jerusalem. What was the answer which preceded the attack on Jordan? The Israel Major said that he would meet with the Jordanian side "at Allenby Bridge without United Nations presence". They do not recognize the United Nations, which created Israel and which gave Israel its birth certificate. The report continues: "In this connection Major Levinson stated that 'Israel's stand has always been that such talks should be direct without United Nations presence and that even in this particular case they would not be able to change their attitude'." Then the conclusion was reached by our able and competent Secretary-General that: "In the circumstances, Major Levinson's reply, rejecting any United Nations presence, seemed unnecessarily negative and rigid." [S/7930/Add. 64, para. 3.] This poses a challenge to the Security Council, the organ responsible for peace and security in the area, indeed in every area and every region.

25. It should be made clear to the Israelis that they are wrong to think that unconditional surrender is the answer. They should know that the war is not over. The whole Arab world would have to be occupied before they could win and call for unconditional surrender. We shall not sur-render, because we are right and we are determined to protect our rights. A temporary setback is not defeat. We are a patient people and this is not the first colonial invasion in our history. This is not the first colonial invasion of the Arab homeland. Let no one here in the Security Council forget this. The Arabs have lost one battle and can afford to lose more. So let those who are dreaming wake up.

26. I must say that the prestige of any Power which either by action or inaction helps Israel will suffer an additional blow. I do not think any Member can afford that at the present time. An act of aggression has been committed which should be treated on its merits regardless of who the culprit is.

27. Let me say one final word about this last point. Delay by the Security Council in taking action does not help. The passing of time does not take care of this injustice. It only makes the problem more explosive, more dangerous and more of a threat to world peace. Nor is continuous inaction the answer. Our legitimate right is stronger than the might which is intoxicating Israel. We want the mission of the United Nations special representative to succeed. It is for this reason that we have come before this body for action. Inaction on the part of this body will lead to further complications. If nothing is done immediately to stop this Israel action, then I am afraid that the international community in its efforts to build a lasting and just peace will be doing nothing but building castles on sand.

28. The PRESIDENT (translated from French): I now call upon the representative of Israel.

29. Mr. TEKOAH (Israel): I come to address the Security Council for the first time and I should like to take this opportunity to express to you, Mr. President, and to all the members of the Council my profound respect. I arrived from Israel only several weeks ago. I come from a land still in the throes of a twenty-year-old war. I come from a people longing desperately for peace. For thousands of years my people have prayed daily for peace. Today, even more than ever, we know how priceless it is.

30. In the war against the forces of darkness in which these United Nations were born the people of Israel, unlike most of its neighbors, fought in the ranks of those who rose to defend freedom and democracy. During that war a third of the Jewish people was mercilessly annihilated in. an orgy of genocide. When the war ended for the world, it continued for us. When all began to heal their wounds, to rebuild the ruins of their homes and to return to their fields and factories, we were confronted with further strife. First it was the struggle for national freedom. No sooner had we succeeded in gaining our independence then another ordeal of battle was forced upon us when the Arab States launched their war of aggression against Israel's existence.

31. This war still continues by the will of the Arab States. Despite United Nations decisions calling for permanent peace, despite Armistice Agreements which were to lead to a final peaceful settlement, in defiance of Charter obliga-tions, in violation of a Security Council resolution prohib-iting the exercise of belligerency, the Arab Governments went on and on with their warfare against Israel. It was waged through terror and sabotage, blockade and boycott. It was waged with persistence and malice. It ebbed at times, only to be resumed and pushed forward again in all its odious purposefulness. The publicly proclaimed aim re-mained unchanged: the total destruction of Israel.

32. The last concerted attempt by the Arab States to achieve their goal of ruin and death was made last June. Fifteen hundred tanks, hundreds of planes and hundreds of thousands of troops were massed on our borders ready for the kill. We can still hear reverberating in our ears the slogans broadcast in those days over the radio from the Arab capitals: "Kill, kill, kill the Jews. Butcher the Jews".

33. Then came the signal. The Strait of Tiran was blocked. Israel villages in the Gaza area were shelled. And on the morning of 5 June full-scale operations began. We repulsed the enemy, we thwarted their plan to raze an independent State, a Member of the United Nations, and to put its population to the sword.

34. The Security Council established a cease-fire and Israel pleaded again to be granted that elementary right not begrudged to other nations: the right to peace and security. Ten months have passed since then.

35. In a rare demonstration of unanimity the Security Council on 22 November 1967 adopted resolution 242 (1967) which called for a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. Nevertheless, it is still war that our neighbors are offering us. Peace is still being rejected openly and unabashedly. The cease-fire is ignored; armed attacks, sabotage raids and murder continue. The guns have not been silenced and that is why we are here today.

36.  I would be remiss in my responsibilities if in this first statement to the Council I did not bring before you certain misgivings which fill the hearts of the people of Israel and its Government as we engage in another debate in this Council. Time after time we turned to the Security Council- in appeal for action and assistance to preserve peace. In the somber hours of the last twenty years we have repeatedly come before the Council in plea, in hope and in expectation. The Council has failed us again and again. For the past fifteen years this organ has found itself paralyzed whenever Israel has had recourse to it. The "veto" was cast to avert a reaffirmation of Israel's right to free navigation. It was cast to torpedo even the mildest of requests to Arab States to cease their warfare against Israel. It crushed all attempts at evenhandedness and made resolutions recognizing Israel's rights a near impossibility. The people of Israel, indeed the entire world, watched in dismay and trepidation how the doors of the Security Council were in effect shut before Israel. As I survey the Council table, this situation appears today in rather dramatic form. Five of the members of the Security Council have no diplomatic relations with Israel. All five have identified themselves unreservedly with the position of the Arab States. Two of them deny Israel's right to exist. One has participated in the war against Israel and refuses to accept the cease-fire ordered by the Security Council.

37. In these circumstances it is not surprising that questions are being posed with regard to the Council's attitude in the Israel-Arab dispute. We hope that the Security Council will rise above these disabilities and be guided by the desire to bring peace and security at long last to the Middle East. We shall judge this debate in the light of its contribution to the attainment of these goals.

38. The Security Council has been called into session to examine the situation resulting from a series of Jordanian acts of aggression and violations of the cease-fire. Let us recall certain facts about the cease-fire, Jordan and its policy. Twenty years ago Jordan launched war against Israel in violation of the Charter of the United Nations and of resolutions adopted by its organs. For twenty years Jordan has refused to make peace with Israel in disregard of its international obligations and pursued its warfare by force and threat of force.

39. On 5 June last, Jordan again faced a choice between war and peace. It chose war. In the words of King Hussein:

"On 5 June, after the fighting had already started, Norwegian General of the United Nations, Odd Bull, handed me a communication from the Israel side to the effect that if we would refrain from attacking we would escape the consequences that otherwise would be inevitable. By that time, however, we had no choice."

40. The Jordanian army unleashed its attack against Israel along the entire front, but it reserved its most violent onslaught for Jerusalem, sparing neither the civilian population nor the City's Holy Places. The representative of Jordan referred to the situation in Jerusalem today. Once again the Security Council was treated to a chain of distortions and falsehoods. These falsifications, these distor-tions follow logically on the destructive attitude adopted by the Jordanian authorities towards the City of Jerusalem and its Holy Places it was Jordan which in defiance of the United Nations Charter, attacked the City in 1948, placed it under siege, and opened indiscriminate fire on its inhabitants and on its historical and religious sites. It was the Government of Jordan which then relentlessly set about destroying the Jewish quarter, including its synagogues and places of learning and the venerated cemetery on the Mount of Olives. Inhabitants of the Jewish quarter were uprooted, transformed overnight into refugees and forcibly prevented from returning to the homes inhabited by them and by their ancestors. It was Jordan which prevented free access to the Jewish Holy Places and the cultural and humanitarian institutions on Mount Scopus, in flagrant violation of its solemnly declared international undertakings. After the cease-fire had entered into force and normal civilian administration had been restored in Jerusalem last June, a shocking picture was unfolded of the results of this policy of wanton vandalism, desecration and violation perpetrated during the period of Jordanian occupation from 1948 onward. In the Jewish quarter, all but one of the thirty-five Jewish houses of worship that graced the old City of Jerusalem were found to have been wantonly destroyed; the synagogues had been razed or pillaged and stripped, and their interiors used as hen-houses and stables. In the ancient historic Jewish graveyard on the Mount of Olives, tens of thousands of tombstones had been torn up, broken into pieces or used as flagstones, steps and building material in Jordanian military installations and civilian constructions. Large areas of the cemetery had been leveled and convert-ed into parking places and petrol filling stations.

41. This record of Jordanian conduct in Jerusalem under-lines the true character and purpose of the allegations put forward today by the representative of Jordan. In effect, the Government of Jordan is complaining of steps that have had to be taken urgently in order to restore the atmosphere of sacredness, dignity and tranquillity proper to Jerusalem and its Holy Places, including the Western Wall, and to ensure elevation of its material and cultural life. The world knows what would have happened if Jordan had won last June. The world knows what was in store for the people of Israel had the Jordanian offensives succeeded. The Jordanian radio and Press did not conceal the aim: “O Arabs, wherever you are," called Radio Amman on 5 June "hit everywhere and hit till the last. The end of Israel is our hands". Israel's towns and villages were to be destroyed, their population massacred. This has been confirmed in military orders found in Jordanian army headquarters since then.

42. A cease-fire was established in accordance with Secu-rity Council resolutions, but Jordanian warfare against Israel continued. On 1 September 1967 the Jordanian Government became party to the infamous Khartoum decision: "No peace, no negotiation, no recognition of Israel. The Jordanian Government was quick in translating this policy into action. Armed attacks and sabotage raids and mine-laying forays continued in growing number and gravity. The numerous letters addressed by Israel during the last few months to the Security Council contain a grim record of Jordanian belligerency and aggression. The hostile acts directed against Israel from Jordan have reached a climax of ferocity within recent weeks. The cease-fire line had become a line of fire and death.

43. To illustrate this, it is sufficient to refer to the two letters submitted by me on 18 March 1968. In the first one I sum up the attacks, raids and murders perpetrated from Jordanian territory only since the beginning of March:

"(1) On 4 March 1968, at approximately 2345 hours local time, an Israel civilian was ambushed and attacked by marauders from Jordan on the Beit She'an-Samakh Road, about 1.5 kilometers north of Kibbutz Hamadiya and 3 kilometers west of the River Jordan. An Israel civilian was seriously wounded.

"(2) On 5 March, at approximately 1000 hours, Jor-danian positions opened fire on an Israel patrol 3.5 kilometers north of the Umm ash Shurat Bridge in the Jordan Valley. Fire was returned. At approximately noon, the Jordanian positions fired several mortar shells at Israeli forces in the same area. Fire was returned. Artillery and mortar fire was opened again by Jordanian positions in the same area later that night. Israeli forces returned fire.

"(3) On 7 March, approximately 2100 hours, infiltra-tors from Jordan ambushed and shot at an Israel army vehicle approximately 3 kilometers east of Kibbutz Magen, south of Lake Kinneret. Two Israel girl civilians and two soldiers were wounded. Fire was returned by Israel forces and as the marauders retreated, nearby Jordanian positions opened fire, which was returned.

"(4) During the night of 8/9 March, bands of infiltra-tors from Jordan attempted to carry out acts of sabotage in the Beit She'an Valley and attacks on Kibbutz Tirat Zvi. Israel forces repelled them. Jordanian positions opened mortar and machine-gun fire to cover the retreat of the marauders. Fire was returned. Two Israel soldiers were wounded. Two of the attacking marauders were killed. A rifle of the Klatchnikoff type, bazookas and several bombs and grenades were found in the area.

"(5) On 10 March, at 2200 hours, an Israel military jeep was hit by a mine laid in a track 2 kilometers south of Timna north of Eilat. Four soldiers were wounded. Tracks of four persons led from the scene of the mining eastward to the cease-fire line with Jordan.

"(6) On 11 March, at approximately 2300 hours, a band of five infiltrators from Jordan clashed with an Israel patrol approximately 2 kilometers north of Al Mundassa Bridge in the Jordan Valley. In the ensuing exchange of fire, three of the marauders were killed. As the gang withdrew, Jordanian positions across the Jordan River opened artillery covering fire. Fire was returned by Israel posts. The exchange of fire continued for ap-proximately two hours. Rifles of the Klatchnikoff type were found at the scene together with a bazooka, bazooka shells, demolition charges. Shooting from Jor-danian positions continued until 0230 hours. One Israel soldier was wounded.

"(7) On 12 March, at approximately 1100 hours, Jordanian positions opened fire across the Jordan River on Israel forces, 3.5 kilometers south of the Umm ash Shurat Bridge. Fire was returned. The exchange of fire lasted until 1215 hours.

"(8) On 12 March, at 1550 hours, Jordanian fire was opened across the Jordan River on Israel forces on the western bank, 3 kilometers south of the Al Mundassa Bridge. At approximately 1630 hours, small arms and mortar fire was again opened from the same positions in the same direction ….

"(9) On 14 March, at 1350 hours, an Israel civilian was killed in the Beit She'an Valley when his vehicle hit an anti-vehicle mine laid in a track 1.5 kilometers south of Beit Yosef. Tracks of three men were found to lead in an easterly direction to the cease-fire line on the Jordan River, 1 kilometer away.

"(10) On 15 March, at approximately 1030 hours, a military vehicle ran over an anti-vehicle mine which had been laid west of the River Jordan, north of the Al Mundassa Bridge. One soldier was wounded. Another mine which was found at the site was cleared.

"(11) On 15 March, at approximately 1620 hours, a tourist vehicle ran over a mine laid in the road near Be'er Ora north of Eilat. Three persons in the vehicle were wounded, two of them seriously. The tracks of three persons leading to the cease-fire line were found.

"(12) On 15 March, at approximately 2145 hours, an Israel army patrol encountered a group of saboteurs which had crossed the River Jordan about 15 kilometers north of the Damiya Bridge. The gang was repelled. In the ensuing clash, artillery and mortar fire was opened from Jordan territory to cover the withdrawing gang." [S/8470.]

Then on the night of 17 March:

"… at approximately 1900 hours a clash occurred between marauders from Jordan and Israel forces south of Tirat Zvi in the Beit She'an Valley. The marauders were supported by covering fire from Jordanian army positions which mortally injured two Israel soldiers." [S/8475.]

The next morning, on 18 March:

"A bus of school-children, on an excursion in the Negev, was blown up by a mine near Be'er Ora north of Eilat. A boy and a doctor were killed and twenty-eight pupils and their accompanying teachers were wounded, eight of them seriously." [Ibid.]

44. These acts of aggression have been openly acquiesced in and supported by the Jordanian authorities. On 19 February 1968, the Prime Minister of Jordan stated in the Parliament: "The Jordanian Government will not be able to prevent the fedayeen from using its territory on their way to the occupied area."

45. On 21 February, Minister of State Al-Rifa'i, the Speaker of the Senate, and other members of Parliament, took part in a meeting which decided to express its support for sabotage acts. All the speakers expressed the need of assisting the fedayeen terrorists.

46. On 27 February, the Al-Manar correspondent, in an interview with King Hussein, said that the King appreciated the fedayeen's activities but still hoped that they would be co-ordinated and become a part of a great and more general project. He said that Jordan's attitude in the crisis had not changed since June and would not change in the future.

47. Mr. President, this morning I requested you to convene an urgent meeting of the Security Council to examine the grave situation brought about by the continuous armed attacks, raids and murder actions emanating from Jordanian territory. I also informed you of the measures we were compelled to take to put an end to those acts of aggression and to avert their spread and increase.

48. Today, the Prime Minister of Israel made the following  statement in the Knesset:

"In recent months, terrorist and sabotage activities originating from across the River Jordan have spread. -Terrorist gangs were concentrated in this area, from where they crossed into Israel. Lately, the terrorist -organizations have established open bases near the cease-fire line which serve them as training bases from which they cross the border to carry out murder, mining and sabotage acts. From 15 February until last night these gangs carried out thirty-seven acts of sabotage, in which six civilians and soldiers were killed, and forty-four  civilians and soldiers wounded.

"On 18 March 1968, a bus full-of school children on a spring excursion hit a mine placed near Be'er Ora. Their accompanying doctor and another man were killed and twenty-eight school children wounded. The Jordanian Government has not acted to stem the terror acts which clearly contradict her international obligations to observe the cease-fire. The terrorist bases are well known to the Jordanian Government. Members of these gangs appeared openly wearing their uniforms and bearing arms in towns and villages and even invited representatives of the foreign  Press in order to demonstrate to them their training and activities and to boast of their murderous designs.

"According to highly authoritative information which has been thoroughly examined, a new wave of terror was about to take place which would have led to a highly dangerous aggravation of the security situation. Since the political contacts and efforts did not bring about the cessation of the murders we had no other choice but to act in self-defense to avert these dangers.

"The Government of Israel has instructed the Israel Defense Forces to act against terrorist concentration camps near the border. This morning at 0545 hours our forces began operations in two sectors: in the Karameh sector, north-east of the Allenby Bridge, the center of terrorist gangs which operated along the Jordan river, and in the Dead Sea plain, south-east of Sodom. In the Karameh sector our forces occupied the police stations of Dachal, Sissi and Mafi which gave shelter and fire cover to saboteurs. The police stations and other terrorist bases in the area were destroyed; about twenty saboteurs who tried to resist our forces were killed. Soldiers of the Israel Defense Forces were given strict orders not to harm civilians, women and children, Those orders were carried  out to the letter. Upon completion of the mopping-up operations, all our forces will return to their bases today as planned"

49 And I am now informed that our forces have already disengaged themselves from the enemy and our last units are now returning across the cease-fire line.

"In the course of the operation, about ten of our Soldiers were killed, and about fifty wounded. All the wounded were evacuated, and those requiring medical aide transferred to hospitals.

"Israel has respected and will continue to abide by the cease-fire agreement. We demand that Jordan do the same. The cease-fire obliges not only the abstention from any military activities by regular armies, but also the prevention of any acts of aggression and terrorism on the part of any factor present within the territory of those States which have agreed to the cease-fire.

"Jordan cannot expect that on her part she will be free to carry out aggressive acts against Israel of her own choice while Israel will not be entitled to enforce her right of self-defense. As long as Jordan will maintain the cease-fire, the border will remain quiet on both sides. If Jordan violates her obligations, the Government of Israel will fulfil its duty to defend the lives of the citizens, their security and their well-being."

50. Resolution 242 (1967) adopted by the Security Council on 22 November 1967 calls for the establishment of a just and lasting peace. Over three months have passed since then. The special representative of the Secretary-General, Mr. Gunnar Jarring, has been in the area for three months. The eyes of the world are upon the Middle East. People everywhere are anxiously awaiting a sign that the Arab Governments are at last ready for peace. So far they have waited in vain. It is still belligerency that guides Arab thinking. It is still war that dominates their action. Today the representative of Jordan confirmed this again, and in all defiance proclaimed: the war is not over.

51. Twenty years have elapsed since Jordan went to war against Israel. During these years we have never been able to advance beyond a truce, an armistice, and now a cease-fire. Israel is ready to end this war and to replace it by peace.  Until then it is ready to maintain and respect the cease-fire. It is not ready, however, to be subjected unilaterally to war. The cease-fire will not be a screen for unilateral warfare. It will give protection to both sides or to neither.  if Jordan chooses to disregard the cease-fire and persists in war, it must bear the consequences.

52. As in the past, the choice is Jordan's: between peace and war, between the continuation of hostilities and the maintenance of the cease-fire. Whatever the choice, it should not be one-sided. If the Government of Jordan desires peace, it will find Israel ready for it at all times. If Jordan prefers war against Israel, it must understand that it will not be immune from war itself.

53. The peoples of the Middle East are weary of war. We hope that the Security Council will encourage them in their hopes for peace by calling on the Government of Jordan to abandon its policy of war, to put an end to acts of aggression carried out from Jordanian territory against Israel, and to move forward 'on the path towards peace.

54. The PRESIDENT (translated from French): I now call upon the representative of Jordan who has asked to exercise his right of reply.

55. Mr. EL-FARRA (Jordan): Mr. President, I realize the hour is late. I am not going to dwell on every point raised or every distortion made in the statement of the Israel representative. I would simply like to refer to three points, reserving my right to discuss other points at a later stage.

56. The Israel speaker referred to the genocide committed in Europe. Certainly, acts of genocide were committed against Gentiles and Jews alike. Hitler did not discriminate in his behavior in Europe. We regretted the crimes committed by Hitler. But are we to pay for them? Are our refugees and citizens to pay for the crimes committed by a Nazi movement? Are we to be subjected to similar behavior by the Israelis in our area?

57. Only last month I was in Jordan. I was in Jordan when the Israelis attacked the very same camp, the Karameh camp. The following day I was in that camp attending the funerals. I was there picking up some of these pieces. These are fragmentation bombs thrown at the refugee camp of Karameh-the same camp mentioned this- morning. Killing, murdering without discrimination, committing genocide against children, men, women, aged and infants alike: it is this behavior which shows the motives of the Israel representative over here.

58. The next point is this. Who started the war? This is becoming an old record, because the Security Council knows and the United Nations knows who started the war. But maybe this will put an end to such continued distortions here. I have before me a record of the speeches made at the 1963 Round-Table conference, attended by the Israel leaders, some of them officials in the Israel Govern-ment. I shall name only a few. This is a round-table conference which took place in 1963-before 1967. Some of those who attended were Mr. Eliyahu Sasson-he was Minister of Posts at the time; Mr. Yigael Yadin-and you all know who Yadin is. At that time those two officials negotiated the General Armistice Agreement with Egypt; and there were others.

59. What did they say at this 1963 Round-Table confer-ence about their plans for the future? This is what one of the leaders of the Zionists said:

"What are we doing today? "-1963-"We are planning for a third conflict with the Arabs, and at the same time, we do not believe in this third conflict and are waiting for peace. In my opinion, the person who proves that peace will not come until after this third conflict will do a great thing, because a third conflict is inevitable and the most important thing is that in this third conflict we must fight, fight in the entire area"-compare that with 1967; I repeat-"we must fight, fight in the entire area. The conflict must be a new war of independence of some additional triangle independence of the Promised Land within her geopolitical borders. Only victory in such a war will give us the strength to establish peace"-only victory and occupation of more Arab lands, displacing more of our people; I go on-"only victory in such a war will give us the strength to establish peace in the entire area and to organize the region in one framework."

That is phase No. 1 of the 1963 plan.

60. Point No. 2. Those were the leaders in 1963-two of them negotiated in drafting the General Armistice Agree-ment. What do they say:

"The borders of the Armistice Agreement are by no means the borders which were created to feed the Jewish people."

The armistice borders, they said, are not the borders created to feed the Jewish people; therefore, we have to get more lands to feed the Jewish people. "For this purpose, God promised entirely different borders." God promised that the people of Palestine should be displaced, chased out, expelled, so that others can come from Europe and take their homes. God promised discrimination.

61. Then there is the third point:

"The State of Israel must declare before the entire world that the borders of the Armistice Agreement no longer fulfil the needs or the destiny of the Jewish people, and no peace pact"-I want the Council to ponder this-"based on these borders will be possible between Israel and the Arabs."

62. It is clear what the intention is. The new Israel representative comes and tells us who started the war. But this is history. No matter how many attempts are made to distort history, history is there. It is a stubborn thing. One cannot change it or rewrite it.

63. The next point is the question of incidents and mines. My Prime Minister said that we are not able-yes, we admit it-to control 600 kilometers of border. But what is causing this? Is it not because Israel is in the wrong and the people of Palestine are being wronged? Is that not the cause? Do not the, members of the Council think that we should look at the cause and not at the effect? Those who are crossing the border, without the knowledge of the authorities in Jordan, without their consent, without their being able to control them, are the people of the area. They are paying a high price to make their voice heard over here. Had the Security Council taken a decision befitting the great prestige of the Council and reflecting the great obligation of the Council, perhaps those people would be thinking differently.

64. Those people are young chaps. They are school graduates and under-graduates and young men who are paying a human price for the cause of justice. I do not think that they are waiting for a Jordanian green light to think in terms of a father chased out or a mother killed, or a woman expelled or an infant murdered. It is a natural reaction.

65. Mention was made of a cease-fire agreement. Let me make it very clear to the Security Council: There is an Armistice Agreement. Our Secretary-General has reminded us time and again that this Armistice Agreement is valid. It is still there. It is binding. Ignoring it does not mean that it will disappear. We also requested meetings under the Armistice Agreement. The Israelis refused to have anything to do with the United Nations, which gave a birth certificate to Israel.

66. Therefore, I am sure now that all the States which supported the creation of Israel will realize the moral responsibility which is theirs if Israel does not abide by the will of the United Nations.

67. The PRESIDENT (translated from French): I call again upon the representative of Israel who wishes to -exercise his right of reply.

68. Mr. TEKOAH (Israel): I am not surprised by the concoction served to the Council now by the representative of Jordan from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. After all, such books as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Mein Kampf by Hitler are still being openly sold in the bookstores of Jordan. I am, however, surprised by the sudden affection he has displayed for the Armistice Agreement and the armistice lines, because it was he who, on 31 May 1967, before this body, declared:

"To my knowledge the question of Palestine is still before the Security Council. The problem is not solved. There is an Armistice Agreement. The Agreement did not fix boundaries; it fixed a demarcation line. The Agree-ment did not pass judgement on rights-political, military or otherwise. Thus I know of no territory"-l repeat "I know of no territory"-"I know of no boundary; I know of a situation frozen by an Armistice Agreement." [1345th meeting, para. 84.]

69. The PRESIDENT (translated from French): I call again on the representative of Jordan who wishes to exercise his right of reply.

70. Mr. EL-FARRA (Jordan): I continue to maintain that the Armistice Agreement did not fix boundaries, did not fix borders. It only froze the situation. The line which is recognized by this body is the partition of 29 November 1947. It was never the intention-and what I am saying is taken from the Armistice Agreement itself-to fix borders. It did not fix boundaries. It simply froze the situation pending a final settlement. On 12 May 1949 the Israelis, signed the Protocol of Lausanne, by virtue of which they accepted partition as the basis for settlement. Therefore when this representative comes and says that I said this, I reply: Yes, I said it and I maintain it. The Armistice Agreement did not give you a border or a boundary. It simply froze the situation. And by might you cannot acquire right. This is a well-known principle which is our jurisprudence. Article 17 of the Charter of the Organization of American States, of which the United States is a member, is very clear on this.

71. The PRESIDENT (translated from French): After consultations I find that the majority of the members of the Council would like us to interrupt the debate now and me it at four o'clock this afternoon. The four o'clock meeting had, however, previously been scheduled for a continuation of the discussion on the question of Southern Rhodesia. In the same consultations, it was suggested that the discussion of the question of Southern Rhodesia be suspended and resumed only when we have concluded our consideration of the situation in the Middle East. The members of the Council would of course be informed of the day and hour when the Council would resume consideration of the question of Southern Rhodesia. As I hear no objection, I shall take it as agreed.

It was so decided.

The meeting rose at 1.50 p.m.

_______

1/ Report of the Commission appointed by His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, with the approval of the Council of the League of Nations, to determine the rights and claims of Moslems and Jews in connection with the Western or Wailing Wall at Jerusalem (London His Majesty's Stationery Office, 1931).