Question of Palestine - Establishment of CEIRPP/debate- Verbatim records

CONTENTS
President: Mr. Gaston THORN (Luxembourg).
AGENDA ITEM 27
Question of Palestine: report of the Secretary-General (continued)
Mr. MALIK (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (interpretation from  Russian):  The  Assembly has undertaken the consideration of an important and urgent international problem, the question of Palestine. This question is one of the most important of the problems to be solved in any Middle East settlement. Unless it is solved there can be no lasting settlement in the Middle East or any just and durable peace in that area. The solution to the Palestine problem is an inalienable part of a general political settlement in the  Middle East. It is axiomatic to the contemporary international situation in the Middle East and we cannot leave it out of account.
The question of Palestine has a long history. Within the framework of the United Nations alone, dozens of various decisions on this problem have been taken and hundreds of speeches and statements made on the subject. However, the question is still unsettled. At the same time, the demand to put an end to the tragedy of the Arab people of Palestine has grown ever greater and more insistent. There is a wholly abnormal and inadmissible situation in which, as a result of the aggression of Israel, 3 million Palestinian inhabitants have for more than a quarter of a century been deprived of the opportunity of enjoying their inalienable right to self-determination which is enshrined in United Nations resolutions. The Middle East conflict itself was to a considerable degree the result of the flouting of the lawful rights of the Palestinians. The Palestinian people have been deprived of the fundamental rights that are acknowledged as belonging to all peoples of the world in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and of contemporary international law. As a consequence of the Israeli aggression, these long-suffering people have been reduced to the status of destitute refugees, stripped of their rights and forced to wander about in various countries far from their homeland, while their homeland and the national resources of their country have bee plundered and destroyed and their once-flourishing towns and villages wrecked and reduced to ruins and wiped from the face of the earth by the Israeli occupiers.
For many years attempts have been made to consider this question of Palestine solely from the standpoint of its humanitarian aspect, that is to say, as a refugee problem. We have never shared that view and we have stressed that only in circumstances of a radical solution to the Middle East problem and the elimination of all the consequences of Israeli aggression would it be possible to ensure the lawful rights of the Arab people of Palestine. On the basis of this position of principle, the Soviet Union, at the twenty-ninth session of the  General Assembly,  actively  supported  the initiative taken by the Arab countries to raise the question of Palestine for discussion in the United Nations.   By  approving that  initiative  the  United Nations acknowledged that the Palestine problem was not only a humanitarian one, but above all an acute political one. And this was a clear indication of the quality of the new approach on the part of the United Nations to the question of Palestine.
The decision of the Assembly itself in inviting the Palestine Liberation Organization [PLO] to participate in the discussion of the Palestine question at its twenty-ninth session [resolution 3210 (XXIX)] was striking evidence of the broad international recognition of the justice and legitimacy of the cause of the Palestinian people. Only those who are particularly blind—and that is not only those in Israel—can still go on consoling themselves with the hope that, by pretending not to notice the existence of the PLO, they can brush aside the whole problem of Palestine itself.
The foes of the Palestinian people, and the foes of the United Nations, despite the fierce and hostile campaign they have launched against the PLO, against the Arab countries and their friends, and against the United Nations as a whole, and in spite of the direct threats of attack against members of the PLO delegations, have not succeeded in undermining or impeding constructive discussion in the General Assembly of the substance of the problem of Palestine.
In the  resolution adopted at the  twenty-ninth session of the General Assembly,  resolution 3236 (XXIX), it is clearly and distinctly stated that the Palestinian  people  have  inalienable  rights,  which include the right of self-determination without foreign interference, the right to national independence and sovereignty, and the right of the Palestinians to return to their ancestral lands from which, as is pointed out in the resolution, they were displaced and expelled by the Israeli aggressors. The resolution emphasized that without the granting of these rights to the Palestinian people no solution to the problem of Palestine is possible. The resolution includes one more provision of fundamental principle, and that is that the Palestinian people are one of the principal parties involved in the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East.
At its twenty-ninth session the General Assembly also adopted resolution 3237 (XXIX), granting the PLO observer status at the United Nations, with the right to participate in the meetings and work of the General Assembly and of all international conferences convened under the aegis of the General Assembly and other United Nations bodies. This was a positive affirmation and an official international legal recognition of the PLO as the sole representative of the Palestinian people.
The adoption by the Assembly of those historic decisions, so important to the Palestinian people in support of their just and lawful demands, was made possible primarily by the constructive participation in the discussion of the Palestine problem of the delegation of the PLO, led by Mr. Yasser Arafat, and by the united position taken at that time by the Arab countries, actively   supported  by   the   overwhelming  majority of States Members of the United Nations, chief among them the socialist and non-aligned countries. 
The results of the discussion of the Palestine problem at the twenty-ninth session were a major victory for the Palestinian people and for all their friends who support their just struggle.
By  taking these historic decisions confirming the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, the Assembly demonstrated that the Israeli aggressors, who had brutally and flagrantly violated the rights of the Palestinian people and pursued a policy of total denial of all rights to which they were entitled, were now totally isolated in the Assembly and were, as it were, prisoners in the dock, having committed an international crime.
The decisions taken at the twenty-ninth session further strengthened the international authority of the PLO and increased the significance and the role of the question of Palestine in settling the whole of the Middle East problem. But in the tragic fate of the Arab people of Palestine little has changed since that session. Unfortunately, we have to note that, as clearly emerges from the report of the Secretary-General, in document A/10265, and from the extremely detailed and cogent statement of the head of the PLO delegation, Mr. Kaddoumi [2390th meeting], the provisions of General Assembly  resolution 3236  (XXIX),  supporting  the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, remain unfulfilled, and practically no genuine steps have been taken towards the implementation of that resolution.
Now, wherein lies the reason for this continuing deadlock? Primarily, it lies in the aggressive policy of Israel, in the stubborn refusal of the Israeli leaders and their protectors to acknowledge the rights of the Palestinian people affirmed in that resolution and in other decisions of the United Nations or to recognize the  PLO  as  the  representative  of the  Palestinian people. The reason, too, lies in the sabotaging by Israel of the resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly on the Middle East and in its refusal to hold constructive talks on a Middle East settlement, including a settlement of the Palestine problem, within the framework of the Geneva Peace Conference on the Middle East and with equal participation of the PLO as the acknowledged representative of the Palestinian people.
While   making   statements   on  every  possible occasion about the rights of Israel to an independent and secure existence, the leaders of Israel at the same time have been flagrantly flouting the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people to their own independent existence. Israel's policy of aggression and expansion directed against the Arab countries and peoples and pursued by those leaders and their Zionist protectors has been represented to us as, so to speak, an international good deed, while the legitimate struggle of the Palestinian people for their inalienable rights is portrayed by them as what they describe as terrorist activity.
But this is deliberate slander. The irrefutable fact is the stubborn resistance of Israel and its protectors to the implementation of the historic resolutions of the General Assembly on the question of Palestine. This has been arousing growing indignation throughout the world. The just struggle of the Palestinian people and their heroic vanguard, the PLO, headed by that distinguished son of the Palestinian people, Yasser Arafat, is enjoying increasing sympathy and support from the overwhelming majority of States Members of the United Nations and their peoples. An additional proof of this can be found in the general debate at this session of the General Assembly.
Almost all representatives who spoke emphasized that no lasting settlement in the Middle East, no just and durable peace, is possible in the absence of an equitable solution to the Palestine problem in accordance with the terms of resolution 3236 (XXIX) of the General Assembly.  Thus the  Minister for Foreign Affairs of Algeria, Mr. Bouteflika, speaking at this session stated: 
"The recognition and satisfaction of the rights of the Palestinian people are the fundamental elements in any true solution to the Middle East crisis. It took a long time for international opinion to accept this truth, and the General Assembly finally enshrined it in its resolution 3236 (XXIX)." [2382nd meeting, para. 165.]
Many representatives have pointed out that the PLO has adopted a properly responsible attitude to the  decisions  of the  twenty-ninth  session and  has manifested a readiness to co-operate constructively with the United Nations.
This was not true of Israel and its supporters. 
The consistent position of principle of the Soviet Union on the question of a settlement in the Middle East, including the question of Palestine, has been repeatedly expounded and is well known.
The General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Mr. L. I. Brezhnev, expressing the essence of the Middle East policy of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Soviet Government, stated: 
"The Soviet Union has been, still is and will continue to be vitally interested in the earliest possible achievement of a lasting and just peaceful settlement in the Middle East."
He also stated that the Soviet Union would strive to attain this goal in contact and in close joint action with brother socialist countries, Arab friends, jointly and co-operatively with all States which display the sincere wish to make their contribution to the attachment of this extremely important goal for the cause of universal peace.
The Soviet Government has repeatedly stressed that, in order to establish a just and lasting peace in the Middle East in the interest of all States of the area and the peoples inhabiting it, Israeli armed forces must be withdrawn from all the Arab territories they occupied in 1967; the legitimate rights of the Arab people of Palestine including their right to establish their own State, must be ensured, and the rights of all countries of the Middle East to independent existence and development must be guaranteed.
As was stressed by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the USSR, Mr. Gromyko, in his statement in the general debate at this session:
"A Middle East settlement cannot make headway if those crucial problems are left unsolved. Without their solution a settlement in the Middle East can only be delayed indefinitely, with increasing dangers for the situation. No palliative measures or camouflaging can change the substance of the matter." [2357th meeting, para. 161.]
For the consideration of all the questions involved in a Middle East settlement, there is, as we know, an appropriate mechanism: the Geneva Peace Conference on the Middle East. The Soviet Union favours the resumption of its work with the participation of all interested parties, including, of course, the representative of the PLO.
In its desire to eliminate hotbeds of war and to prevent new crises arising, and in its desire to strengthen and spread the process of detente to all parts of the world, the Soviet Union has been making and is still making consistent efforts to bring about a just settlement and the establishment of lasting peace in the Middle East.
Friendly and fraternal relations have been established between the Soviet Union and the Palestine Arab people. The USSR is affording the Arab people of Palestine comprehensive support and help in their struggle for the restoration of their lawful rights, and for their development through national independence and progress. The development of these relations has recently become particularly active.
The firm and consistent support of the Soviet Union for the legitimate interests of the peoples of Arab countries has met with profound gratitude on the part of their public opinion and leadership. A telegram from the Chairman of the Executive Committee of the PLO, Yasser Arafat, addressed to Mr. L. I. Brezhnev, stated:
"Our people will never forget the position of principle taken by you and the people of the great Soviet Union in our support at this time which is so difficult and troublesome for us, when we must withstand the blows of imperialism and Zionism, which are striving to liquidate our national existence."
A very deep appreciation of the comprehensive assistance given by the Soviet Union to the Arab peoples, including the Palestine Arab people, is contained in an official communique issued on the occasion of the visit to the USSR of Yasser Arafat this spring. 
The delegation of the USSR would also like to express its gratitude to the head of the Palestinian delegation at this session of the General Assembly, Mr. Kaddoumi, for his very deep appreciation of the support given by the Soviet Union to the PLO.
The  Soviet  Union believes that,  in order to bring about a settlement in the Middle East, there must be joint efforts on the part of all those who cherish the fate of the peoples of the Middle East, and above all the solidarity and joint efforts of all Arab countries and their peoples.
The duty of the United Nations, and of the General Assembly at its thirtieth session, is to come out decisively in favour of the immediate and unconditional implementation of the fundamental resolutions of the United Nations on the Palestine problem and the question of a Middle East settlement as a whole, and to compel Israel to comply with those resolutions and thus provide support for the just struggle of the Palestinian people for their rights and the struggle of all Arab peoples for the elimination of the consequences of Israeli aggression.
To summarize the position of the Soviet Union on the Palestinian problem and on the question of a Middle East settlement as a whole, the Soviet delegation would like to stress the following.
The Soviet Union firmly and unwaveringly supports the struggle of the Arab peoples, including the Palestinian people, and is in favour of the elimination of the consequences of Israeli aggression and the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East in accordance with the well-known resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly.
In order to establish a just and lasting peace in the Middle East in the interests of all States and peoples of the area, it is essential to solve three fundamental problems:  first,  Israeli forces  must be withdrawn from all the Arab territories they occupied in 1967; secondly, the lawful rights of the Arab people of Palestine, including their inalienable right to establish their own State, must be ensured; thirdly, the rights of all the countries of the Middle East to independent existence and development must be guaranteed.
This position of the USSR with regard to the Middle East settlement and its support for the just struggle of the Palestinian people for their inalienable rights was once again confirmed in the course of a reception on 30 October by the President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, Mr. N. V. Podgorny, in connexion with the visit to the Soviet Union of the Special Representative of the President of the Republic of Iraq, the Iraqi Minister of Information, Mr. Aziz. In the course of that meeting, both States confirmed their intention of continuing to grant comprehensive support and assistance to the Palestinian resistance movement, which they view as a constituent element of the Arab national liberation movement. They also stressed the need to strengthen the unity of Arab countries in the interests of their just struggle for the common cause.
Now, obviously, no one has any doubts about the fact that the question of the restoration of the national rights of the Palestinian people can be resolved only within the framework of efforts to bring about a general political settlement in the Middle East and only with the full, unreserved participation of representatives of the Palestinian people at all stages of talks concerning the Palestine problem. The representatives of the Palestinian people, in the persons of the delegation of the PLO, must take an independent part in the efforts to bring about a peace settlement in the Middle East on an equal footing with all other participants in the Geneva Conference.
It is impossible to achieve a lasting settlement in the Middle East by means of partial measures, behind the backs of the Palestinian people and circumventing their interests.
It is the duty of the United Nations not only once again to confirm the national rights of the Palestinian people, including their right to self-determination and the creation of their own State, but also vigorously to condemn those who are sabotaging and undermining the implementation of United Nations resolutions on this question.
The Soviet Union and other countries of the Socialist community have consistently based themselves firmly on the premise that aggression should be resolutely combated, that countries which have been the victims of aggression should have restored to them the lands which lawfully belong to them and that every State and every people has the right to a free, independent  existence  and  development.   And this is not only a question of the Middle East; it is a question of international principle.
Mr. HUANG Hua (China) (interpretation from Chinese): Over the past year the Palestinian and other Arab peoples, holding high the banner of united struggle in the war of October 1973, have continued to march forward in their struggles against Israeli Zionism and hegemony.   Defying brute force,  the Palestinian people have persevered in armed struggle under difficult conditions and have dealt incessant blows to the Israeli aggressors. At its twenty-ninth session, the General Assembly adopted a resolution by an overwhelming majority, reaffirming the Palestinian people's right to self-determination without external interference and the right to national independence and sovereignty [resolution 3236 (XXIX)].This was a heavy blow to the super-Powers and the Israeli Zionists who are conspiring to strangle the liberation cause of Palestine in disregard of the rights of the Palestinian people. It forcefully shows  that the Palestinian people are gaining increasingly extensive support in their just struggle for the restoration of their national rights. Supporting and assisting each other and strengthening their co-operation, the Arab countries have also scored marked successes in defending their national independence and state sovereignty, developing their national economy, increasing their national defence capabilities and getting rid of super-Power control and interference. The historic initiative of the Arab countries in using oil during the October war as a weapon to inflict heavy blows on hegemony and Israeli Zionism has continued to exert a far-reaching influence. The  super-Powers have never succeeded in their scheme to divide and undermine the unity between the Arab countries and other oil-exporting countries by a combination of hard and soft tactics and of inducement and duress. Meanwhile, the Gulf States have been strengthening their unity against super-Power infiltration and expansion. The mutual support between the Palestinian and other Arab peoples and the rest of the third world has been further strengthened in their struggles against imperialism and hegemony. A series of important international conferences, such as the Sixth Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers, held at Jeddah in July, the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the Organization of African Unity, held at Kampala this year, and the Conference of Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Non-Aligned Countries, held at Lima in August this year, have given further support to the just struggle of the Palestinian and other Arab peoples. Certain' second-world countries have also started a dialogue with Arab countries. The above facts vividly show that the whole situation is developing in a direction favourable to the Palestinian and other Arab peoples and unfavourable to Israeli Zionism and the super-Powers.
The question of Palestine is an important and integral part of the whole Middle East question. The Chinese delegation has pointed out on many occasions that the essence of the Middle East question lies in the Israeli Zionist aggression and the two super-Powers' contention for hegemony in the Middle East versus the struggle of the Palestinian and other Arab peoples against aggression and hegemony. The crucial reason why this question has remained unsolved over a long period lies in the frenzied contention between the two super-Powers in this region. Developments in the Middle East over the past two years have further confirmed the correctness of this analysis.  Since the October war, the Middle East has reverted to a state of "no war, no peace". This is something imposed forcibly on the Arab and Palestinian people by the two super-Powers for their own selfish interests. Despite the existing disengagement agreements of one kind or another, the Middle East question is far from being settled. One super-Power proposed a "comprehensive solution" and the other a "step-by-step solution", yet in fact neither of them has any intention of sincerely bringing about a comprehensive settlement of the Middle East question. What each of them has in mind is only to boost itself and denigrate the other. Both of them need to maintain a state of "no war, no peace" in the Middle East—in other words a period of brief fighting followed by a period of truce, with both war and peace kept under control in a State of, to use their words, "tension under control". Merely the maintenance of such a state of affairs will facilitate their contention for spheres of influence, for places of strategic importance and for oil resources in the Middle East; their sale of munitions will enable them to reap fabulous profits and alleviate their own economic difficulties while they test their new weapons in preparation for a new war on a larger scale. All this is done at the expense of the fundamental interests of the people of the Middle East.
The focus of contention between the two super-Powers is in Europe. Situated on the flank of Europe, the Middle East abounds in natural resources and constitutes an important link in the contention of those Powers for world hegemony. Even they themselves could not help admitting openly that whoever controlled the Middle East would be able to control Europe and then the rest of the world. This has driven each of them to do everything to overpower the other in their contention over the Middle East.
One super-Power has thus far refused to recognize the national rights of the Palestinian people and has kept on sending large quantities of advanced weapons and other aid to Israel to boost the Israeli Zionists.
And that super-Power which styles itself the "natural ally" of the Arab people is even more sinister in its designs, with honey on its lips and a dagger in its heart. In its attempt to control the Arab countries and expand its spheres of influence, it has even surpassed the other super-Power in bullying and blackmailing others and in playing tricks and manoeuvres. It has been daily talking about how sincere it is in supporting the just struggle of the Arab and Palestinian people. However, it may be recalled that, when the October war in the Middle East was at its most critical juncture and afterwards, it withheld the shipment of arms it had already promised the Arab country and people who were fighting courageously and who were even pressed for the repayment of debts. While professing its opposition to the Israeli policy of aggression, it sent large numbers of emigrants to Israel to supply Zionism with sources of military recruitment when Israel was facing a great shortage of manpower, a most timely assistance which earned the gratitude and applause of the Israeli aggressors. During the twenty-ninth  session of the  General Assembly,  it sanctimoniously declared its readiness to give resolute support to the Palestinian people's struggle for regaining their national rights, but in the twinkling of an eye, it issued a joint statement with the other super-Power, altering the words "national rights" of the Palestinian people to "legitimate interests". Subsequently, it has openly stressed on many occasions the need to guarantee the so-called security of Israel. Public opinion in some Arab countries has solemnly pointed out that in the present circumstances, in which Israel is still occupying large tracts of Arab territories and wantonly trampling the national rights of the Palestinian people, the treacherous nature of the above words and deeds of the said super-Power has become all the more transparent. Furthermore, after the October war, many third-world countries one after another severed their diplomatic relations with Israel, thus placing Zionism in unprecedented isolation. But it was precisely at this juncture that this super-Power, motivated by its need to contend for hegemony, made frequent contacts with the Israeli Zionists, ranging  from covert flirtation to open exchanges and from contacts between the so-called "people's" representatives to official contacts and even  secret talks between  the  Foreign  Ministers. Are these irrefutable facts not sufficient to reveal the true nature of the double-faced and perfidious manoeuvring employed by this super-Power against the Arab and Palestinian peoples? How can one expect such a country to support in earnest the Arab peoples in their just struggle for the recovery of the lost territories  and   the   restoration   of Palestinian   national rights? As a matter of fact, Arab opinion and some Arab leaders have lucidly exposed and sternly condemned it.
The perverted acts of the super-Powers in the Middle East have educated the Palestinian and other Arab peoples by negative example, enabling them to realize that the contention between the super-Powers is the root-cause of the prolonged situation of "no war, no peace" in the Middle East and the continued ascendancy of Israeli Zionism. For the Palestinian people to regain their national rights and recover their lost territories, it is imperative to link the struggle against Zionism closely with that against hegemony. Only by firmly removing super-Power meddling, intervention and contention, will it be possible for the Arab and Palestinian peoples to win final victory in their just struggle.
History is made by the masses of the people. The future of the Middle East can be determined only by the great Palestinian and other Arab peoples and by their unity and struggle, not by Israeli Zionism or by one or both super-Powers or by a United Nations resolution. The victory achieved in the October war and the application of the oil weapon constitute a brilliant example of the Arab and Palestinian people triumphing over the enemy through their close unity and co-ordinated endeavours. It eloquently proves that unity is strength and that victory can be won by perseverance in struggle. The super-Powers are most afraid of the unity and awakening of the people. What calls for close attention and vigilance now is that a super-Power is taking advantage of the present situation to sow discord and undermine Arab unity in order to serve its purpose of contending for hegemony in the Middle East. We are convinced that the Palestinian and other Arab peoples who have been tempered through the test of protracted struggles will see through the disruptive schemes of the super-Powers and refuse to be taken in and that they will heighten their vigilance, bear their over-all interests in mind and persevere in unity and struggle.
The Chinese Government and people have always supported the just struggle of the Palestinian and other Arab peoples. We are firmly opposed to the contention and expansion of the two super-Powers in the Middle East. We hold that the restoration of Palestinian national rights is closely and inseparably linked with the struggle for the recovery of lost Arab territories. Israel must withdraw from the Arab territories it has occupied, and the Palestinian people must regain their national rights.  Although the struggle will be long and tortuous and the Arab and Palestinian people   will   encounter   temporary   difficulties   and obstacles of one kind or another on their road of advance, we are deeply convinced that so long as the heroic Palestinian and other Arab peoples grasp their destiny firmly in their own hands, persevere in unity and in their struggle, they will certainly carry through to the end the struggle against aggression and hegemony and bring their just cause to victory with the support of the people of the world. 
Mr. DE GUIRINGAUD (France) (interpretation from French): The Permanent Representative of Italy, who is the current President of the European Economic Community, has put forward on behalf of the nine member countries—among them France—the position of the Community on the problem which the Assembly has before it [2393rd meeting, paras. 78-82]. Given the importance of this debate, I should like, however, to add to that statement the special comments that the French delegation wishes to make. 
It is certainly not the French representative who would dare question the fact that the question of Palestine is at the very heart of the Middle East problem. Have not the highest French authorities repeatedly declared that an over-all settlement should take into account the legitimate interests of all the parties concerned, and particularly the right of the Palestinian people to a homeland? Nothing, then, could be more natural or logical than that the question should be examined in this forum, where the international community listens and speaks. Is it not a fact that for close to 30 years the United Nations has been seized of the question of the situation in the Middle East as a whole, in all its aspects, whether specific or circumstantial? The United Nations has delayed far too long its consideration of the Palestine question, which everyone now agrees calls for a truly just and lasting settlement.
The action taken last year by the United Nations responded to the efforts of the Palestinians themselves to make the world aware of the fact that they constitute a people with a natural desire for a homeland. We responded to that effort symbolically and strikingly by offering the head of the PLO an opportunity to speak to us from this high rostrum.1 
Speaking as the emissary of a sorely tried people still beset by frustrations, exile, and the memory—or for many the hard reality—of the camps, Mr. Yasser Arafat told us his "dream". No doubt we all understood where that dream differs from what has been done or decided by the United Nations in an endeavour to settle the Israeli-Arab conflict. But between the dream and its realization it seems to us that the people concerned could not embrace combat as an end in itself, but rather that it should embark upon a new course. We realized that it was incumbent upon us, without delay, to take hold of the "olive branch".
And it is thus that, recognizing its legitimate rights, we have decided to help it to achieve the exercise of those rights. But it goes without saying that any action by the United Nations must take  into account all the elements involved in the situation and that such action is defined in the resolutions adopted by the United Nations.
We see from press reports, from the statements of a large number of world leaders and from our own statements that the Palestine question is with each passing day acquiring growing significance within the context of that situation. But that situation encompasses also the rights of all States in the region and, in particular, those of Israel.
On the other hand, from among the series of resolutions adopted during the last 28 years by the Assembly and the Security Council we must especially take into account those which have responded to the more  recent  events  in  the   Middle  East,  namely, Security Council resolution 242 (1967), which subordinates the settlement to the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the occupied territories and to peace arrangements giving all the States in the region the right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries. We must also  take into account Security Council resolution 338 (1973), which established a specific-procedure for the search fora settlement. It is precisely because resolution 3236 (XXIX), adopted last year by our Assembly, did not sufficiently place the problem within its over-all context that my delegation was unable to support it, although we associate ourselves with the affirmation of the rights of the Palestinian people contained therein.
That attitude of ours remains unchanged today, all the more so since prevailing circumstances require, more than ever in the past, that we avail ourselves of this opportunity to embark on a search for a settlement and to launch the dynamics of peace. But peace is inevitably at the junction between those legitimate aspirations and the realities of today. We appeal to Israel to recognize in turn this major political fact, namely, the rights of the Palestinian people to a homeland. But we also call on all the other parties to recognize the rights of Israel as a State, just like all the other Members of our Organization. Our duty here is to reconcile positions, while taking into account, as I already stated last year in the course of the debate on the question now before us, the human and historic legitimacy of a Palestinian homeland, while at the same time ensuring that the State of Israel may exist peacefully with all its neighbours. That coexistence must naturally be based not only on the enjoyment of all such rights, but also on respect for all the obligations recognized by the Charter.
There are many signs of impatience in this debate, for which no one can be blamed as long as the prospects of a settlement remain dim and uncertain. Yet one conclusion can be drawn, namely, that only the formula of an over-all or general settlement is likely to reconcile the interests of all the parties. 
To begin with, such a global settlement would undoubtedly facilitate the solution of other problems in the region, at the head of which we have the present situation in Lebanon. France earnestly hopes that that country, to which it is bound by so many ties of every kind, may find a solution capable of serving to restore civil peace, which can only be founded on concord and understanding between the communities. It is our hope that Lebanon may become once again what it was in the past in the eyes of the international community, that is to say, a model of coexistence.
Next, the formula of a general or global settlement has the merit of not separating the elements of the problem. Similarly, on this point we do not believe it possible to commit our Assembly or any other United Nations organ to a task which would cover only one of those elements but would not take account of the others. This is the principle that we shall keep in mind when the time comes for us to state our views on the proposals before us.
In this tragic Middle East question, what strikes one first is the very long history of frustrations, injustices,  violence,  resentments  and  misunderstanding of which the Palestinian people has been one of the main victims. We must certainly help to redress those injustices. But we must not do so at the expense of further excesses which would risk nurturing the ever-present danger of unleashing a new war. The time has indeed come to tackle the real problems and to urge all the parties to seek together and responsibly a road to a settlement which will heal the old wounds without opening new ones. In that settlement, the Palestinian people can and should be assured that their legitimate rights, including their right to a homeland, will be respected.
Mr. MARTYNENKO (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) (interpretation from Russian): The discussion of the Palestinian problem in the General Assembly indicates the deep concern aroused in the countries of the world by the dangerous situation in the Middle East. At the same time, it demonstrates the desire of peace-loving States to make their contribution to the solution of one of the most crucial problems which has resulted from a conflict prolonged for many years. The situation in the Middle East has been touched upon by many speakers at this session of the Assembly, both in the course of the general debate and in the course of the discussion on the strengthening of international security, as well as under many other items of the Assembly's agenda connected in one way or another with the Middle East conflict and its consequences. We cannot overlook the fact that an overwhelming majority of the participants in this session have given different views of the individual settlement measures being carried out at the present time in the Middle East. But they all agree that the Palestine problem is an inseparable element in the general struggle for a just peace in the Middle East.
It is quite clear, however, that verbal  statements on the need to satisfy the legitimate rights of the Arab people of Palestine must be supported by concrete measures to bring about the exercise of these rights; and the United Nations is obliged to give its full support to satisfying the national aspirations of the Palestinian people. This, in our view, should be the fundamental goal of this discussion of the Palestine problem.
At the twenty-ninth session, a qualitatively new step was taken in this direction. First, the Palestinian problem—a problem not only of the fate of the refugees but also of the future of the whole Palestinian people, who have been deprived of their lawful rights—was placed at that session on its real basis and was included in the agenda as a political problem and an important element in a general Middle East settlement. Secondly, the United Nations recognized the PLO as the only lawful representative of the Arab people of Palestine and granted it the status of observer at the United Nations. All this shows that the legitimacy of the demands of the Arab people of Palestine for respect of its national rights is obtaining ever-wider international recognition—and this is something that has been reflected, inter alia, in General Assembly resolutions. United Nations resolutions on the Palestine problem have been influenced by a number of important factors, which are as valid today as ever. 
First, there is the extremely important factor that the Palestinian resistance movement has now acquired considerable political authority and has an organization of its own, that is, the PLO, able successfully to conduct the struggle against the Israeli occupiers for the freedom of their people. This movement is developing in circumstances where the position of the forces of socialism and peace throughout the world is being strengthened, forces which in their consistent and stubborn struggle have brought about a halt to the cold war and the taking of important steps towards international detente within the framework of the policy of the peaceful coexistence of States with different social systems. In the circumstances, there has been a considerable deepening of the progressive social content of the Palestine liberation movement. The consistent struggle of the Arab people of Palestine had led to a consolidation of the movement and of considerable growth of its prestige in international affairs. The PLO has opened up prospects for and instilled faith in the future for hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who, herded into refugee camps, have often lost hope and given way to despair.
A second and no less important factor is the fact that the overwhelming majority of States have confirmed that it was necessary to have a comprehensive solution to the Middle East problem on the basis of the total liberation of the Arab lands occupied as a result of the aggression of June 1967, the safeguarding of the rights of the Arab people of Palestine to self-determination, the creation of their national statehood and the guaranteeing of the rights of all countries of the Middle East to independent existence and development.
That attitude of the majority of States was determined, we are firmly convinced, by the fact that the struggle of the Palestine Arab people was an organic element of the national liberation movement of all Arab peoples, as well as a part of the common actions of peace-loving forces aimed at a settlement of the Middle East conflict on a just basis, because we cannot count on a settlement of the Middle East conflict without finding a solution to the Palestine problem on the basis of the interests of the Palestinians themselves.
Thirdly, the Palestine resistance movement enjoys broad support in the Soviet Union and all the other countries of the Socialist community, as well as in many other peace-loving countries and in those Western States where there is a realistic approach to the analysis of the Middle East situation. All that goes to ensure for the representatives of the Arab people of Palestine, and particularly the PLO, headed by its experienced leader, Yasser Arafat, the necessary international support in their struggle for a Middle East settlement, including the diplomatic aspect of that struggle.
In that regard, the delegation of the Ukrainian SSR welcomes warmly and with deep feelings of solidarity the authoritative delegation of the PLO, which has come here to take part in the discussion at this session, and we wish it all success.
The criminal acts of Tel Aviv in the occupied Arab territories have been repeatedly condemned by the United Nations. In resolutions adopted by its organs it has been stressed that the policy of annexation pursued by Israel contradicts the purposes and principles of the United Nations and that Israel's occupation of Arab territories is a serious obstacle to a genuine Middle  East settlement. That has been confirmed by Israel's failure to comply with the United Nations decisions on the Middle East, and in particular, with General Assembly resolution 3236 (XXIX), adopted last year by an overwhelming majority of votes. It is borne  out  also  by  the  Secretary-General's  report in document A/10265, submitted in accordance with that General Assembly resolution.
In  continuing  its  aggression against the  Arab people of Palestine and the Arab peoples of other countries, Israel is refusing to recognize the PLO, thus demonstrating its policy of continuing to occupy Arab lands and to maintain tension in the Middle East. Last February the Commission on Human Rights adopted  a  resolution  which  stressed  that  Israel's occupation of Arab territories created "a grave threat to international peace and security and is in itself a violation of the Charter of the United Nations and of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights."2
In refusing to recognize the lawful rights of the Arab people of Palestine, Israel and its allies are attempting to discredit the Palestinian people and are trying to convince us, for example, that the Palestinian people is not a nation, that it is an entity that "does not need" statehood and should live within the confines of other Arab States. Now, when the Palestine resistance movement has become a recognized political force, one of the units of the Arab national liberation movement, the slander of the Zionists has been focused on the assertion that the whole Palestine movement consists  of terrorists  and  extremists.  In  order to justify that slander the Israeli authorities have continued to act arbitrarily in the occupied territories. They are driving Arabs from their homes and carrying out mass arrests and repression. Tens of thousands of Palestinian patriots are languishing in Israeli gaols, many of them on the routine charge of having violated the so-called occupation laws, which are themselves nothing but sheer lawlessness.
Such propaganda and such slander against the Palestinian people are designed to discredit the very idea of Palestinian statehood and the right of the Arab people of Palestine to determine their own fate. More' over, underlying this propaganda and slander we find an attempt to deprive the Palestinians of the support of Arab countries and to drive a wedge into the ranks of those fighting against Israeli aggression. 
On the other hand, in increasing its military potential and obtaining ever more sophisticated weapons from its allies, Israel is demonstrating to the whole world that the current unresolved situation in the Middle East is playing precisely into its own hands because it enables Tel Aviv illegally to hold on to the ancestral Arab lands it occupied in 1967.
All that goes to show that Israel, disregarding United Nations resolutions and world public opinion, is continuing to entrench itself in the occupied territories and is continuing its repression of the Arab people of Palestine. In pursuit of its expansionist policy, Tel Aviv is impeding the establishment in the Middle East of a just and lasting peace.
The facts of life, however, teach us beyond any doubt that it is now high time for the Israeli leaders to heed the voice of reason and to throw out the political dogma—which has long since outlived its relevance and is detrimental to Israel itself—that only the expansionist policy pursued with regard to the Arab nations can ensure peace on the borders of the Israeli State. Israel hopes that, in the final analysis, the Arabs will agree with that policy of fait accompli, with Israel's policy of piracy and brigandage. But those hopes are illusory.
The  Ukrainian  SSR confirms  its position  of principle in support of the struggle of the Arab peoples for the return of all the Arab lands occupied by Israel in 1967 and for the granting of the lawful, inalienable national rights of the Arab people of Palestine, including the right to self-determination and the creation of their own State. Unless the Palestine problem is solved in a way that is in keeping with the interests of the Arab people of Palestine there can be no peace or calm in the Middle East. We are convinced also of the need to ensure the independent existence and development of all States and peoples of the Middle East, with reliable international guarantees.
The delegation of the Ukrainian SSR believes that the consideration of all^aspects of a Middle East settlement, as well as the adoption of appropriate resolutions on a mutually acceptable basis, should be carried out within the framework of the Geneva Peace Conference on the Middle East, with the participation of all parties directly involved in the conflict, of the Co-Chairmen of the Conference—the USSR and the United States—and of the PLO, on an equal footing with the other participants.
The delegation of the Ukrainian SSR believes that the constant tension in the Middle East makes it imperative for us to take active measures and make constructive efforts in the United Nations to achieve genuine peace in that area.
The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): I now give the floor to the representative of the Palestine Liberation Organization.
Mr. AQL (Palestine Liberation Organization): In his statement of 3 November [2390th meeting], the Israeli representative condescendingly declared that the Israelis were aware of the existence of a Palestine Arab problem. But is he not, then, aware that his Government adamantly refuses to recognize the very existence of the Palestinians, whose right to national self-determination has already been endorsed by the United Nations in numerous resolutions? His newly acquired awareness of the existence of a Palestine problem has apparently inspired him to suggest that the solution to that problem lies in a Jordanian-Israeli agreement because part of our people happen to live in Jordan by virtue of the 1948 and 1967 expulsions from Palestine. This Israeli solution not only ignores the crux of the Palestinian problem but insults the intelligence of the States represented in this Assembly and defies the principles of the Charter. The crux of the problem is the liberation of geographic Palestine, which is now totally under Israeli occupation.
The Palestinians, both in exile and under occupation, number today approximately 3,500,000. About 53 per cent carry Jordanian passports, which enable them to travel, seeking employment or education in the Arab world or elsewhere. It would have been impossible for them to  survive economically otherwise. Since 1967, approximately one half of this population has lived on the West Bank, in addition to 13 per cent who have endured the wretched conditions of life in the Gaza Strip. Therefore, approximately 1,300,000 Palestinians are at present under the brutal military occupation of Israel.
As a population under military occupation, the Palestinians are being subjected to unique forms of oppression and exploitation. On the one hand, the ideology of the occupier is Zionism, a form of racism which has been condemned by the Third Committee of the General Assembly but which, since its incursion into our region, the Palestinians have recognized as such and have combated. On the other hand, that regime is  an arrogant, foreign military occupation which is fully confident of the superior culture it represents and utilizes superior might to subdue the Arab population. It is a law of history that the relationship of the occupier and the occupied is a relationship of conflict. The occupier endeavours, ultimately without success, to coerce the occupied to submit; whereas the occupied struggle to free themselves and obtain their independence.
In the Palestinian case, the occupied are governed according to the notorious defence regulations initially promulgated by the British Mandate to oppress the Palestinians, both Arabs and Jews, in the 1930s to prevent them from obtaining their independence. Ironically, the Israeli military authorities are using those same regulations to oppress the Arab population. They bulldoze houses at will and erase entire villages in the same way as the Nazis erased Lidice; they imprison Palestinians without trial and, according to a reporter for The New York Times, more than 5.000 Palestinians were in Israeli prisons in August 1974; they expel Palestinians from their land and dump them on the Jordanian or Lebanese frontiers. Their aim is to depopulate Palestine and populate Israel, thus creating a State which was racially conceived from its start to be "as Jewish as England is English". Land is expropriated, and intimidation and coercion are used to compel the occupied people to give up their land and property. Moreover, an economic situation resulting from military occupation is imposed in order to create a dependent cheap source of labour to work in construction, factories and farms in a State based on apartheid. Gradually but systematically, the Israeli military authorities are transforming the West Bank and the Gaza Strip into systems of production subordinate to the Israeli economy. In doing so, they are creating the same system of production as that developed by South Africa. Wage differentials based on colour, religion and ethnic background, with the result that a Jewish worker earns 10 times more than his Arab co-worker in an identical job; work in the factories in the daytime in Israeli areas which must not "be contaminated" at night by the continued presence of Arabs; transport of labourers back and forth—these are only some of the realities governing the Palestinian labour conditions in Israel and the occupied territories. Israel's ultimate policy is to create and maintain a bantustan where the Palestinians will be transformed into the food-gatherers and the proletariat of the master race. This, in essence, is a copy of the South African experiment.
These and many other vicious practices are also extended to so-called Arab citizens of Israel who are not by law allowed to buy certain lands, because they are not Jews, who may not by law live in the area of their birth and who are not by law permitted to return to their villages, as was evident in the cases of Birim and other villages. Meanwhile the Israeli representative claims that the Palestinian population is able to participate in elections and even to send representatives to the Knesset. It is well known that Israel's Arab citizens normally vote for Government-approved lists. Just as Europe had its Quislings, the United States had its Uncle Toms, Algeria had its Beni Oui Oui, so, regrettably, the Israelis have created some Arab puppets who sit in the Knesset or with Israel's delegations. Shamelessly, the Israeli representative speaks of "free" and "democratic" elections under its occupation regime. 
These Israeli practices stem logically and directly from Zionism. Zionism is a form of racism because as an ideology, in thought and in practice, it makes a sharp distinction between Jews and non-Jews. It is a movement which aims at the establishment by outright conquest of a national Jewish homeland on non-Jewish territory. It cannot profess to be a liberation movement for the Jews. Before 1948, over 94 per cent of the land of Palestine was owned by Palestinian Arabs, who had lived there from time immemorial. After the establishment of the State of Israel against the wishes of the majority of the Palestinian Arabs, whom it expelled, Zionism became the State's political philosophy. Arabs were declared nonentities before the law, both because they were Arabs and because they were non-Jews. All rights and powers in the State were and still are held by Jews, only because they are Jews. Conversely, if rights are denied, if privileges are withheld from any group in the State, the rationale given is that that group is not Jewish. That sin, the sin of not being Jewish, is the sin for which Arabs in Palestine are punished by Zionism. This has resulted not only in the mass expulsion of non-Jews from Palestine, but also in the oppression of Palestinian Arabs living under Israeli occupation since the wars of 1948 and 1967 and in the denial of repatriation and compensation for those Palestinian Arabs expelled by Israel continuously since 1948. And all this takes place "legally" because Zionism stipulates explicitly that non-Jews do not have equal human and civil rights with Jews.
All non-Jews in Israel are so identified on their identity cards. Only Jews may travel at will in all of Israel; only Jews may buy and sell certain lands; only Jews may benefit completely from the State's institutions; only Jews can be members of kibbutzim; only Jews are free of the threat of administrative detention; only Jews are not subject to laws governing their choice of residence, settlement and occupation; only Jews are fully represented in the institutions and activities of the State. Moreover, the Law of Return enables any Jew anywhere, so long as he can prove his Jewishness in ways satisfactory to Israel, to be entitled to immediate Israeli citizenship and residence. Thus a Palestinian Arab, even if he and his family can prove generations of uninterrupted settlement in Palestine, must remain in exile, allowed neither compensation for what was forcibly taken from him nor repatriation to what by any minimal civilized standard was his national land, whereas an American, French or Russian citizen can claim repatriation to a land he has never seen or has no connexion with, simply because Zionism says he is a Jew and therefore entitled to displace non-Jews from Palestine.
According even to the narrowest interpretation of what human rights are, this is racism. Zionism is not simply the expression of Jewish aspirations for liberation, since it expresses itself forcibly against non-Jews in Palestine. One must understand that, when Palestinians support the draft resolution identifying Zionism as a form of racism [see At 10320, draft resolution III], they do so on very strict grounds, having themselves suffered the injustices of Zionism in the most acute way possible. For them Zionism means, not non-Jews in general, but a political ideology and system designed to oppress—and actually oppressing—non-Jews in Palestine. Zionism, so far as non-Jewish Palestinians are concerned, is not a general idea about Jews; it is a very specific form of discrimination practised against anyone in Palestine who does not happen to be Jewish. It is exactly what apartheid is in Africa, and since it has become impossible for a white South African to claim that apartheid expresses the liberation of the white man in Africa, so too it must become impossible for the Jew in Palestine to say that Zionism is only his liberation. If this is liberation, if apartheid and Zionism are liberation, oppression and racism as words have no meaning whatever.
No one must be distracted from these facts, even if Israel and the United States proclaim the draft resolution against Zionism to be a form of anti-Semitism. If some individuals want to associate Zionism with Judaism, that is their problem. The draft resolution says no such thing and makes no such association. And Palestinians say no such thing. They say that Zionism is not Judaism so far as they are concerned. Zionism is a political ideology which in theory and practice discriminates against non-Jews in Palestine by identifying all political, economic and social rights with Jews, and the absence of these rights with non-Jews—as simply and as directly as that.  Such an ideology and such a State can neither be called democratic nor, in the sense in which Israel and the United States have been arguing, Jewish. So far as the Palestinian sufferer from Zionism is concerned, he is being punished for not being a Jew, not because he is opposed to Jews in general. That is the absolute core of the problem.
Zionism decrees that in Palestine only Jews are first-class citizens; every non-Jew—and it does not matter whether he is Christian or Muslim—is a fourth-class citizen. Even if he has lived on the land forever, because he is a non-Jew, he has no real rights in Israel. This is what Zionism says to the non-Jew in Palestine, and it says all this because it digs a racial trench between Jews and non-Jews; thus the former belong to the right race, the latter to the wrong race. It is not possible to be more racist in one's ideology. Zionism says curtly that regardless of how many non-Jews lived in Palestine as an absolute and overwhelming majority for uncounted years—only Jews as a race, and not as members of a religious group, are entitled both to unusual and usual rights in Palestine. All non-Jews are denied these rights on racial grounds. This is what racism is. And this is why Israel follows racist political, economic and social policies identical to those in Southern Rhodesia and South Africa based on the Afrikaaner's apartheid.
It is against this background, against this thoroughgoing  racial exclusiveness inherent in Zionist ideology, against  the injustices inflicted upon our people ever since the inception of Zionism, against the enslavement of the Jew by the oppression of Zionism, that we shall continue to offer our programme of a democratic non-sectarian Palestine, where Arabs and Jews could live in peace without racial or religious prejudice.
Mr. HUMAIDAN (United Arab Emirates) (interpretation from Arabic): What the United Nations did at its twenty-ninth session was indeed a very great thing. It placed the question of Palestine as a separate item on its agenda, discussed it and adopted two historic resolutions concerning that question, denoting the recognition of the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to their nation, the right to return to their homeland and their properties, and the right to exercise self-determination [resolution 3236 (XXIX)] —as have all the peoples of the world—and providing the PLO with the right to participate, as an observer, in General Assembly sessions and the committees and other conferences emanating from it [resolution 3237 (XXIX)].
This event was preceded by indifference on the part of this international Organization, a denial of those rights, in fact a denial of the very personality and existence of the Palestinian people. At that time they were considered as a group of people whose land was given to strangers and who were doomed to exile from their land. Their cause was dealt with year after year as a group of refugees requiring welfare and aid through charity given by some States Members of the Organization and other countries.
From the very start, the heroic Palestinian people rejected this fate imposed on them by others. They were determined that their fate and destiny should be governed by the sacrifices of their sons and the blood of their martyrs. The march of the Palestinian people, in forming this destiny and in achieving it, was long and arduous, full of difficulties, and impeded by the efforts of Zionism in collusion with imperialism, and the material and manpower as well as the destructive weapons that they had at their disposal. Nevertheless, and in spite of all this, the Palestinian people, in their struggle and efforts, with their sacrifices and their blood, with their determination and will-power, proved their existence to those who did not want to heed this presence and affirmed that their rights could not be  usurped. This was proof to those who wanted to ignore and insult those rights.
During the twenty-ninth session, this international Organization, faced with the will-power and determination of the Palestinian people expressed through their struggle and sacrifice, could do no less than recognize their rights. This international Organization had to place this item on its agenda and adopt those two resolutions. It had no alternative, since the balance and the very equation that had prevailed in the past, namely the domination and supremacy of the powers of evil and imperialism, was changed to supremacy of the forces of liberation and good after countries of the third world had joined it, and after other countries had become open-minded towards the truths and realities of the Palestinian presence and the justice of its cause.
The inclusion of this item and the adoption of those two resolutions was an application of the principles of the United Nations and an act of implementation of the purposes and principles stipulated in the Charter, a compensation for the sins committed by the Organization against the Palestinian people, and a form of restitution to the Palestinians. Those actions of the international Organization served to confirm its own raison d'etre and its efficacy in responding to the hopes and aspirations of the peoples of the world in setting up a world system based on justice and equality among all the peoples of the world. 
The militant march of the Palestinian people and the support given by the third world and the liberated countries in the international Organization o the Palestinian position produced a change in the conduct of the United Nations and in its treatment of the cause of the Palestinians not solely as a refugee problem, but as the cause of a people that has an inalienable right to its property and homeland. Today the question is the same as that asked by the head of the delegation of the PLO after the passage of one whole year since the adoption of the historic resolution which reflected that just and new conduct, namely, the recognition of the right of the Palestinian people to return to their homes and to exercise their right to self-determination. That question is, Has the international will been fulfilled with regard to the return of the Palestinians? Similarly, have the resolutions of the General Assembly in creating suitable conditions for the Palestinian people to exercise their right to self-determination been implemented? Since it is very obvious that the answer is in the negative, the question is then, Who is responsible for this and what measures must be taken for the implementation of what the international Organization has adopted? 
We all know that Israel is responsible for preventing the Palestinians from returning to their homeland and properties. Israel is also responsible for not permitting the Palestinians to exercise their right to self-determination. Faced with this flagrant violation of its resolutions by Israel, it is not possible or conceivable for the General Assembly to remain with its hands tied, unable to do anything to carry out measures which would impose its will or to implement previously adopted resolutions. Perhaps the General Assembly will be guided in this context by the decision taken by the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Non-Aligned Countries at the conference held recently at Lima to the effect that consideration should be given to the possibility of suspending Israel's membership in the United Nations and of applying sanctions against it as stipulated in Chapter VII of the Charter [A/10217 and Con.], annex, paras. 56-57].
If at this session the General Assembly does not approve and give effect to the resolutions of the Lima Conference [ibid., resolutions VIII and IX], we for our part consider that it should take positive action for the implementation of its resolution 3236 (XXIX). We believe that a committee should be set up under the aegis of the Assembly and given full competence as stipulated in the Charter to work out a comprehensive plan for the implementation of the return of the Palestinians and the exercise of their right to self-determination. The committee should also be charged with contacting all countries and organizations and agencies, including the PLO, to sound out their opinions and to make use of their viewpoints with regard to the programme we have just mentioned. We consider that the committee should also contact Israel in order to determine the extent of its response to the programme for the return of the refugees and the exercise of their right to self-determination. We also consider that if Israel should refute to co-operate with the committee or to respond to its programme for the return of the Palestinian people and the exercise of their right to  self-determination,  we  should  make definite recommendations under the pertinent Articles of the Charter for the applications of sanctions against Israel, including the suspension of its membership.
We also feel that the Security Council, as the principal organ charged with matters threatening peace and security in the world, should consider the question of Palestine. I do not think I need to explain the danger to peace and security in our region and in the entire world inherent in the Palestine problem. I need not cite chapter and verse to show that the main reasons for the successive wars that have broken out in our region of the Middle East since 1947 are related to the question of Palestine, the dispersal of its people, and the refusal to let them return to their property and homeland, as well as to the deprivation of their right to self-determination. That is why we consider that, when the Security Council meets, it should give these two aspects—the return of the refugees and the exercise of their right to self-determination—particular attention in its deliberations.
We are giving away no secrets by saying that the setting-up and establishment of a committee and the consideration of the question of Palestine by the Security Council are the two main points in a draft resolution which the countries of the non-aligned world are examining and studying at the present stage. My delegation will support this draft resolution, and we look forward to seeing it adopted by a majority of States when it is submitted to the Assembly. 
At this time, I should like to repeat what the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the United Arab Emirates said in the general debate, concerning the major weapons of destruction that are being provided to Israel. He said:
"The recent press reports on the pending acquisition by Israel of highly sophisticated weapons of great destructive capability, to be added to its arsenal, are of great concern to us … [further aggrandizement] would cause apprehension and alarm in all parts of the Arab world. Needless to say, the supplying of the Israeli war machine with such weapons could only lead to the threatening of international peace and security." [2367th meeting, para. 25.] The people and Government of the United Arab Emirates, supported by the peoples and Governments of the other Arab States—and, in fact, with the support of the peoples and Governments of all peace-loving States—accord to this matter extreme importance and attention. We consider that this supply of arms to Israel is a principal factor in its intransigence and its refusal to respect the resolutions of the United Nations.
The representatives of the PLO, Mr. Yasser Arafat, at the twenty-ninth session, and Mr. Farouk El-Kaddoumi, at this session, offered a settlement involving the establishment of a secular, non-sectarian State of Palestine in which all citizens, Jewish, Muslim and Christian, would be equal. We have heard, at this session and at previous sessions, the rejection of such a settlement by the representative of Israel, and in fact a denial of the very existence of a Palestinian people. Comparing these two attitudes, we find that the first shows humanity and tolerance on the part of those who hold it, who are the original, indigenous inhabitants of Palestine; they offer to co-operate and share, as citizens of the land of Palestine, with aliens and foreigners who have come from outside Palestine, on a basis of total equality of rights and duties. On the other hand, those who hold the second attitude, namely those who are foreigners and aliens in Palestine, refuse to co-operate with the original inhabitants of that country within any framework; in fact, they refuse even to admit or recognize their very existence. Is this not astonishing? Is this not surprising? Does this not prove who is responsible for the persistence of the Palestine question? Is this not sufficient evidence of the racist character of Zionism, the basic ideology of Israel? Is this not sufficient proof to convince those who refuse to see the light with regard to the draft resolution that describes Zionism as a racist movement?
We believe that the Palestinian people, represented by the PLO, is the principal party in any settlement of their problem and what is called the Middle East problem. We therefore consider that the PLO must take part in any endeavour to solve these two problems; and the sole basis for the participation of the PLO in such efforts must be the recovery of the national and inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. 
Mr.   MAKKI (Yemen) (interpretation  from Arabic): Last year, in this same month of November, the entire world was looking towards the  United Nations and listening to the words of the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, who set out before this  Assembly the facts of the Palestinian question and explained the legitimate demands of the noble, the true Palestinian people, the people whose country and whose rights have been trampled upon by international world Zionism in complete disregard of their dignity when, through force and aggression, it seized their properties and expelled the Palestinians from their land, and threw into prison and tortured their militant defenders. Israel did so in violation and defiance of the Charter and the just resolutions of the United Nations, as well as of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and all the other just resolutions of the international community. 
For the very first time in the history of the consideration of this subject within the framework of the United Nations, our international Organization responded to those countries that are committed to the objectives of the United Nations and the principles of human rights by adopting on 22 November 1974 the  historic  resolution 3236  (XXIX), by an overwhelming majority that could almost be called unanimity. It is to be noted that that resolution clearly and precisely defined the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination without external interference, and the right of that people to national independence and sovereignty. In that historic resolution, the General Assembly  reaffirmed,  also,  in  paragraph  2,  "the inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes  and property from  which  they  have been displaced and uprooted", and called for their return.
That historic resolution not only affirmed the usurped rights of the Palestinian people; it went even further, when it called upon all States and international organizations to extend their support to the Palestinian people in its struggle to restore its rights in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. 
Since the international community as represented in our Organization thought that there might be opposition and defiance by the usurping Israel and those who aid and abet it in its defiance, violation and flouting of the resolutions of the United Nations, the General Assembly, in paragraph 8 of that resolution, requested the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its thirtieth session on the implementation of resolution 3236 (XXIX).
A whole year has passed since that resolution was adopted and since the participation of the PLO as an observer at all the sessions and conferences convened under the auspices and within the framework of the United Nations in compliance with resolution 3237 (XXIX) as well as all the international conferences which were held outside the framework of the United Nations.
The questions now are the following: What results have the Palestinian people achieved in their legitimate struggle to restore those rights which were usurped by Israel? What is the extent of the support of Member States for the struggle of these people? Has Israel responded and respected the desire of the international community as expressed by its overwhelming majority? Has it taken a single step at least towards respecting the rights of the Palestinian people, which  were recognized and affirmed very clearly and very obviously by our international community?
These are the questions. And the answers to these questions were stated by the head of the delegation of the PLO [2390th meeting], from this very forum, in a clear portrayal of Israel's violation and defiance of this resolution, its rejection and refusal to implement it. In fact, Israel plots to prevent this resolution from having any operative value, while fighting it by every illegal means, relying on the support of some countries which provide it with increasingly destructive weapons which can do serious harm to the international community. 
We refer here to the report that the Secretary-General prepared in implementation of the aforementioned General Assembly resolution [A/10265]. My delegation noted that the Secretary-General gave only two and a half lines in explanation of how he implemented the great task entrusted to him by the General Assembly in accordance with paragraph 7 of resolution 3236 (XXIX). This is exactly what we have in his report:
"In accordance with the request addressed to him by the General Assembly, the Secretary-General established contacts with the PLO and the Secretariat has been in touch with representatives of the PLO as occasion has required." [A/10265, para. 2.]
My delegation knows full well the extent of the difficulty  that  the  Secretary-General  met with  in implementing this resolution, which affirmed the rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination without outside interference, because my delegation and all other delegations know how much Israel and the parties that support it defy the resolutions of the United Nations, a defiance of rights, justice and the Charter of the United Nations, with the support of some countries which do not hesitate to back openly this usurping racist country, against the will of the international community. 
Thus, the General Assembly must find practical means of implementing resolution 3236 (XXIX) within the framework of the United Nations and according to the means provided by our Charter to compel those who ignore the resolutions of the United Nations to respect the determination of the international community, which is based on justice and law, in order to preserve peace and security in every part of the world.
Briefly, the question of Palestine that we are dealing with this year, once more within its natural framework and in the General Assembly, is a question defined by resolution 3236 (XXIX), which confirmed the Palestinian people in their unconditional right to self-determination, to national sovereignty and independence, and to return to their homes. Therefore, it is the absolute duty of the Assembly to do everything in its power to implement its resolution without delay by adopting practical measures whereby these rights can be lawfully restored, as stipulated and provided by the Charter and the just resolutions of the United Nations.
To this end, my delegation urges and calls upon the international community to maintain by all available means its concern for the implementation of resolution 3236 (XXIX) or those which may be adopted by the General Assembly this year and to overcome the difficulties that have so far impeded the implementation of this resolution, namely the arrogant and intransigent who do not respect the resolutions of the United Nations unless they coincide with their desires and their purposes. However, they consider as arbitrary the just resolutions emanating from respect of the Charter as affirmed by the overwhelming majority of Member States—even  when  those  resolutions  are in keeping with the Charter and human rights—if they are against their own desires, ambitions and intentions.
My  delegation,  I  believe,  like all  Member States, is of the opinion that any efforts, measures or endeavours taken within or outside the framework of the United Nations to find a solution to the Middle East problem should be undertaken with the participation on an equal footing of the PLO, which is the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people and whose delegation is officially participating in our work as an observer under resolution 3237 (XXIX). All efforts, measures and endeavours should concentrate on implementing the letter and spirit of resolution 3236 (XXIX), which placed the Palestinian question in its true perspective and dimensions, because the question of Palestine undoubtedly constitutes the core of the Middle East crisis, and no steps or measures should be taken, and no final solution adopted, in connexion with this grave crisis except with the full approval of the PLO, which is the sole representative of the Palestinian people. If not, then the problem of the Middle East will continue to threaten the entire area and may well cause a regional, or even perhaps a world, explosion.
We call  upon world  public opinion and all Member States to support the cause of the Palestinian people as affirmed by the United Nations and the international community on every occasion. We also call upon them to confront all those who disregard the right of peoples to self-determination, and to oppose and struggle against all those who support the principle of domination based on military force or on racial or ideological discrimination. Here we refer to Zionism,  which  has  recently  been condemned in the Third Committee by an overwhelming majority. If this expansionist, racist movement had not dominated the concepts of the rule over the occupied territory of Palestine, then the question of Palestine, or the Palestine cause, or the crisis known as the Middle East crisis would not have arisen.
A short while ago, the General Assembly heard the valuable statement made by the representative of the PLO, which clearly shows how the racist principle is being inhumanely implemented in the usurped land of Palestine by the racist Zionist regime in the name of a racist ideology which, as we said and as was affirmed by the United Nations, is similar to the policy of apartheid in South Africa.
My delegation once more affirms that it differentiates between Judaism, which is a religion we respect, and Zionism, which is based on racism, discrimination, expansion and domination.
We had hoped that some countries would use their great influence, after the adoption of resolution 3236 (XXIX) by the international community, to bring pressure to bear upon Israel, which is rebelling against the Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to respect the will of the international community, instead of supporting Israel and providing it with all means of destruction and with political support which weakens the United Nations and the rule of international law. These actions would return the world to the law of the jungle instead of respecting the Declaration and the rights of peoples to self-determination.
Mr. PAPOULIAS (Greece): For the second consecutive  year the General  Assembly is called upon to discuss, as a separate item, the question of Palestine,  a highly explosive  question, as amply demonstrated in the sad record of three wars and other belligerent activities that have  left hecatombs of victims, not to speak of a deeply rooted hatred between the peoples involved, which divides them at a time when understanding and co-operation are essential for the restoration of peace and progress in the area of the Middle East.
I need not here enumerate the reasons why Greece is so deeply interested in a just, lasting and peaceful solution in this sensitive area. No matter how each one of us looks upon the substance of the problem and the ways of reaching a solution, it is, I believe, essential to acknowledge that a high degree of good will and statesmanship is needed in order to approach the Palestine question effectively. We shall be debating in vain for months without any constructive result unless we decide to face the real issue, which is the problem of the Palestinian people—and I submit that there can be no doubt about that. Therefore, any failure or unwillingness on our part to see this reality, which goes to the heart of the crisis itself, would mean paying only lip-service to world peace, and would certainly offer no relief to all those who are suffering from the perpetuation of the present abnormal situation. It is in this context that my delegation favoured the inclusion on the agenda of a separate item on the question of Palestine, and we share the hope that the kind of spirit that will enable the Assembly to reach the desired settlement will prevail.
As regards the substance of the problem, I need hardly  repeat  that  my  delegation  looks  upon  the Palestinian drama—that has involved the uprooting of hundreds of thousands of people from their homes and entailed far-reaching demographic changes and that has set the pattern for similar recent practices in the tragic case of nearby Cyprus—with the utmost sympathy and solidarity, not only because of its humanitarian aspect, to which the Greek people are particularly sensitive, and not only because of the bonds of friendship that unite Greece with the great Arab nation, part of which is the Palestinian people, but also because we have stood from the very beginning, and we continue to stand, for the fundamental principles of the Charter of the United Nations. Greece stands, specifically, for the recognition and exercise of the legitimate and inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, including their right to self-determination, while maintaining that all States in the area are entitled to live within secure and recognized borders. We also defend the principle that any acquisition of territory by military force is totally inadmissible in international relations and should be condemned. We advocate Israel's withdrawal from all the occupied Arab territories.
These are the main lines along which a solution of the Middle East problem should be sought. But what is also being asked of the Assembly at this stage, in order to pave the way to such a solution, is that it provide  the parties concerned with the necessary direction. This has been done inasmuch as the Palestinians have been invited by the General Assembly to participate in the deliberations of their case. Nevertheless it remains to give the Palestinian representatives the opportunity to carry out the mission entrusted to them; and this is exactly what we are going to decide. By recognizing the right of the Palestinian people to be represented on an equal footing at the talks to be held with the other parties involved, we remain consistent with ourselves. The Palestinians are simply being given the chance of defending their just case, without depriving anybody of the same chance.
The General Assembly has before it a draft resolution   submitted   by   the   Egyptian   delegation [A/L.768]. That draft lies well within the framework of the highly commendable  initiative taken by  the President of Egypt, Mr. Anwar El-Sadat, when he recently addressed the Assembly [2388th meeting]. We feel that our Organization should offer its encouragement and help in order that that initiative may bear fruit. My delegation is considering the Egyptian draft resolution favourably and will cast a positive vote for it, not only because it is a means of expression of the well-known friendship between Egypt and Greece, but also because we see in that draft resolution a genuine will to contribute effectively to the settlement of the Palestinian problem and the problem of the Middle East in general.
We earnestly hope that, in this context, the parties will display a high degree of responsibility, given the vital interests involved and the grave dangers in case of failure. The world community has already had sufficient experience to know well enough that there is an imperative need to put an end to the tragedy of the Palestinian people and to bring about a just and lasting solution to the over-all problem of the Middle East.
The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): Before calling on the next speaker, I should like to remind representatives that the General Assembly decided this morning [2393rd meeting] to set the time-limit for the submission of draft resolutions under item 27 at noon on Thursday, 6 November. However, the group of non-aligned countries is meeting tomorrow to work out the text of a draft resolution and have requested an extension of the time-limit. I therefore propose, with the consent of the Assembly, to postpone the deadline for the submission of draft resolutions to 10.30 a.m. on Friday, 7 November. 
It was so decided.
Mr. EL HASSEN (Mauritania) (interpretation from French): Once again, the Mauritanian delegation, in response to amoral and political imperative, believes it its duty to participate in this debate which is so important for international peace and security. Although we are taking part in this debate after most aspects of the Palestinian problem have been dwelt upon at length by previous speakers, we still feel justified in so doing by reason of the high stakes involved in the Palestinian cause.
I say that the Palestinian question is important for  international  peace  and   security  because   this question itself is at the root and is the initial cause of the crisis which has gripped the Middle East for more than a quarter of a century. This truth, undeniable today, more than ever, should long ago have been recognized. But if today the international community has become clearly aware of the Palestinian situation, and if it is now convinced that no solution to the distressing problem of the Middle East can be valid or final if we bypass the Palestinian question, it is because the people of Palestine have risen and have mobilized, like all those who want to live in liberty or at least die in dignity. 
How could it be otherwise when we are aware of the grave, the terrible injustice done to the Palestinian people? A backward glance and a simple comparison will show us how justified the Palestinian people is in its determination, and how final that determination is.
The Palestinians had been living in peace and security on their own land and in their own country, a country which was the very symbol of friendship, tolerance and fraternity. There was nothing to suggest that there would be any obstacle to the continuation of such a harmonious, such a peaceful, such a promising  existence   until, one day, an international conspiracy rooted in a racist theory, Zionism, appeared on the horizon of the land of Palestine. Gradually this land was overrun by the advocates of that theory, and, on the basis of an ownership claim whose fallacious nature we shall never cease to denounce, has served to salve a European conscience in search of a new victim.
The  consummation of this process occurred in 1948 with the creation of Israel, which, in pillaging Arab territory and expelling its people, could not fail to create a source of crisis—a crisis which has ceaselessly grown until it has assumed its present-day proportions. Thus the Palestinian people, whose life and existence had emerged, over the centuries, with the very geography—with the very land—of Palestine, were driven from their homeland, deprived of their dignity and reduced to wandering in exile, living on international charity.
The soil of Palestine itself was disfigured, not by real development, as is sometimes said, but by a policy of violent change and by the implementation of a policy of continuous aggression which progressed in stages according to the immutable process of settlement by force. Entire villages were destroyed and the most holy places of all religions became the object of sacrilege. This situation was not limited to Palestine; it was extended to neighbouring Arab countries whose territories were and are to this day occupied by force. 
As we can see then, the Palestinian question is a fundamental element of the problem which has been a matter of concern to the United Nations since 1948. No valid solution has so far been found for this problem simply because the proper importance has not been attached to what constitutes its essential element, namely, the Palestinian question. But it is obvious to anyone who wishes to look the facts in the face that the injustice committed against the people of Palestine could not, and cannot, be forgotten. And that is the root of the evil which undermines all peace efforts in the Middle East. The fact that the international community is becoming ever more aware of this truth led the General Assembly, in resolution 3236 (XXIX), to recognize the inalienable national rights of the Palestinian people, its rights to independence and sovereignty. It was also the realization of this same truth that led the Assembly in resolution 3237 (XXIX) to grant the status of observer in the United Nations to the PLO, the only legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. Those two resolutions are already irrefutable proof of the fact that the Palestinian cause has now begun to be better understood and that the global problem of the Middle East is now better understood in terms of its origins, its nature and its diverse implications.
Since the adoption of those two resolutions, the support enjoyed by the Palestinian people and its authentic representative, the PLO, has constantly grown and been strengthened. All the international economic or political conferences that have been held since the twenty-ninth session have reaffirmed the legitimacy of the struggle of the Palestinian people and the inalienability of its national rights.
The remarkable success that has been won by the Palestinian people flows from a number of factors, which grow clearer every day because they become more obvious every day.
First, the Palestinian people, who from the very beginning placed their hopes in the United Nations, became aware in the final analysis that at one and the same time they had to prove their existence and their determination to make all the sacrifices necessary to recover their national rights and dignity. No one can now disregard that determination or call into question the strength of the feelings which inspire it. 
Also, the sophisticated system of propaganda which made it possible for so long for the Zionist authorities to mislead a certain sector of international public opinion by presenting lies as truth, the victim as the aggressor or the aggressor as the victim, exploded under the pressure of facts which became more obvious with every passing day. That system, indeed, was unable to stand up to the joint action of the Arab peoples and all peoples who love peace and justice, who have given the Palestinian people their unswerving support.
Finally, the number of really independent countries increased considerably in such a way that those which are today in a position to take a stand freely on such an important question as that of Palestine, constitute a vast majority of the international community. It is quite clear, today, that no country can be indifferent to a problem so distressing and so explosive, one which may at any moment jeopardize peace in the region and indeed peace in the whole world.   No  country can  remain  indifferent to  the injustice committed against the Palestinian people and to the tragedy in which a whole people is living today. 
While the Palestinian people have gained considerable success because of these different factors, it none the less remains a fact that the Palestinian question is still totally unresolved.  It is certainly better understood now, and it is now being accorded its essential place within the framework of a settlement of the Middle East problem, but the Palestinian people have not yet recovered their national rights, they still remain victims of the same injustice, and they still do not participate in the search for a solution to the Middle. East problem, of which they are the principal element. The duty of the General Assembly with regard to the Palestinian people remains essential and fundamental. It can by unanimously adopted resolutions make the Zionist authorities and all those who support them understand that there will never be peace in the Middle East without justice and that there will never be justice without the restoration of the inalienable national rights of the Palestinian people. It would in any case be Utopian to try at any price to find a solution to the Middle East problem without bringing in the PLO, and through it the Palestinian people. 
We know, and we have already said, that the Palestinian factor was not brought to bear without difficulties and that Zionism and its supporters are continuing to create difficulties by every possible means and to raise obstacles to what is undeniably the  internal  and  international  endorsement of the Palestinian people. This blind policy on the part of the Tel Aviv authorities, which is doomed to failure, is demonstrated  very  concretely  today  in   Lebanon, where an attempt is being made to pit brother against brother, and to sow dangerous confusion, with the risk of jeopardizing peace in the region. But we are convinced that the ambitions of Zionism are doomed to resounding failure, and we are convinced that the joint determination of the two peoples, the Lebanese people and the Palestinian people, will overcome the difficulties and that they will make a common front against these Israeli manoeuvres. 
It is not wishful resistance by Tel Aviv which can now block an irreversible process, of which the principal element is the Palestinian factor. Until Israel understands and bows to this evidence, which is so obvious, it will be able to live and survive only by permanent recourse to force. If it is true that one can do anything with the bayonet, it is also true that one cannot sit comfortably on it.
140.	In conclusion, I should like to express to the Palestinian people the unwavering support of the Government and people of Mauritania in the lawful struggle they are waging to ensure the exercise of their inalienable national rights and to bring victory to the cause of justice, the cause of mankind.
Mr. PAWLAK (Poland): In debating the question of Palestine, the General Assembly is fulfilling its great responsibility vis-a-vis the Palestinian people, who years ago were expelled from their homeland and thus deprived of their inalienable right to self-determination. Although for more than 25 years the Assembly has dealt with the problem in one way or another, it is only for the second time in this Hall that we have had a chance to listen to the true voice of the legitimate representatives of the people of Palestine. At the twenty-ninth session, Mr. Yasser Arafat, the Chairman of the Executive Committee of the PLO, explained to the Assembly the entire complexity of the Palestine problem. This year [2390th meeting] Mr. Farouk Kaddoumi, on behalf of the PLO, has convincingly presented to us the views of his people and informed us of their grave experiences in the struggle to have their own homeland.
The Polish delegation has listened to Mr. Kaddoumi's speech with great interest and understanding, because we believe that the very core of the Middle East conflict rests with the implementation of the just aspirations of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to regaining their right to national independence and sovereignty. This is indeed the fundamental issue, short of which there can be neither lasting peace nor justice in the Middle East.
Poland has raised its voice many times in support of the struggle of the Palestinian people for its national rights. Only recently, our steadfast position was determinedly reiterated by Mr. Stefan Olszowski, Minister for Foreign Affairs, during the general debate of the current session [2361st meeting]. Mr.  Algard (Norway),   Vice-President,   took  the Chair. 
The Polish delegation shares the satisfaction expressed by many speakers who have so far participated in the discussion on this item that last year the United Nations finally changed its attitude towards the  Palestine  question  from  that of the  so-called humanitarian approach to one of political significance. Indeed, this new approach has found its expression in General Assembly resolution 3236 (XXIX). Poland voted in favour of that resolution and deems it an important step towards the realization of the fundamental goals of the Palestinian people. The resolution recognized and reaffirmed three basic national rights of the Palestinian people: first, the inalienable right to self-determination without external interference and the right to national independence and sovereignty; secondly, the inalienable right to return to their homes and property; and, thirdly, the right to regain their rights by all means in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
Resolution 3236 (XXIX) should be viewed as an historic achievement of both the United Nations and the people of Palestine. In fact, it has given new dimensions to the Palestinian question and placed the Palestinian cause in a new and more fitting political context. 
That very same cause was likewise served by the Assembly's adoption of another   resolution, namely, resolution 3237 (XXIX), which granted to the PLO observer status at the United Nations, thus allowing representatives of the PLO—the sole representative of the Palestinian people—to participate in the sessions and work of the Assembly and all international conferences convened under its auspices. Since that time the PLO has greatly contributed to the activities of the United Nations and its specialized agencies.
We are happy to note that the international position of the PLO has been substantially increased. The world has recognized the PLO as the only legitimate representative of the people of Palestine. That has been reaffirmed, inter alia, in the Political Declaration of the Lima Programme for Mutual Assistance and Solidarity of 30 August 1975, in which we read the following:
"The Conference reaffirms its satisfaction on the recognition by the General Assembly of the United Nations of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the sole representative of the Palestinian people, and welcomes the resolutions which grant the PLO the status of observer in the United Nations Organization and reaffirm the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, which must be taken into account in any solution of the Middle East problem. It welcomes the admission of the PLO as a full member of the Movement of Non- Aligned Countries, which constitutes a new expression of the firm solidarity of the non-aligned countries with the heroic struggle of this people for its inalienable national rights." [A/10217 and Corr.l, annex, para. 59.]
Poland has direct and friendly contacts with the PLO. The Chairman of its Executive Committee visited our country and was warmly received by both the Polish people and their leaders. The approach we take to the question at issue—indeed, one of the fundamental problems of the Middle East conflict—is prompted by the fact that it actually determines the entire course of action in the region. It determines the pace of efforts towards a just peace and security for all countries and peoples in the area in accordance with   the   well-known resolutions of  the Security Council. Without the participation of the PLO as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, there can be no successful international conference on the Palestine problem.
We believe, therefore, that any comprehensive solution as provided for in Security Council resolutions can be achieved in the framework of the Geneva Peace Conference on the Middle East only with the full participation of the PLO. Any fragmentary approaches which ignore the whole complexity of the Middle East problem will only complicate the situation in the region and deprive the Palestinian people of their national rights, and are bound to reward the Israeli aggressors, who continue their occupation of the Arab territories.
We remain convinced that changing world realities will compel Israel and its supporters to comply fully with United Nations resolutions on the Middle East and the Palestinian problem.
The policy of aggression, intolerance and occupation of Arab lands cannot be tolerated and must be terminated. That is also why Poland raises its voice in support of the legitimate aspirations of the people of Palestine, as represented by the PLO.
Mr. IDRIS (Indonesia): In the light of the fact that the views of the Indonesian Government concerning the question of Palestine have often been reiterated in many different forums in the past, there is no need for me to set them forth once again at length. The intractability of this problem, however, and the unfortunate lack of progress toward its solution to date cause my delegation to feel that it would be useful to point out once more the major elements of our basic position concerning the issue.
Indonesia is convinced that the conflict in the Middle East can be resolved only when the rights of the Palestinian people are recognized and upheld. Basic to those rights is the right of self-determination, guaranteed to the Palestinians as to ail other peoples by the Charter, and reaffirmed by the decisions taken by the international community.
The General Assembly last year made a historic decision by adopting resolution 3236 (XXIX), whereby full recognition was given to the basic and inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination, national independence and sovereignty. That resolution furthermore reaffirmed the right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property, from which they had been expelled. Even more important, resolution 3236 (XXIX) affirmed the undeniable fact that the Palestinian people is a principal party to the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East.
It is in that light that Indonesia deems it absolutely necessary that the Palestinian people should be present and take part, on an equal footing with all other parties concerned, in all efforts and deliberations dealing with the problem of the Middle East in order to establish a just peace in the area. It is for the same reason that Indonesia, together with a number of other States, has become a sponsor of draft resolution A/L.768.
I should like to confirm Indonesia's view that it is also clearly a prerequisite to peace that the Israeli troops should be withdrawn from the occupied Arab territories, an occupation which is the fruit of Israel's aggressive policies towards its neighbours. Such a withdrawal from the occupied territories would create the climate of good will necessary to true security for all States in the region and would be much more effective   than   mere  armaments  in  preserving  the existence of Israel.
To be sure, my delegation recognizes that the path to peace is a very difficult one to traverse. We nevertheless hope that the implementation of these measures can cut through the obstacles that still block the way. We are convinced that such actions alone represent the means by which true peace can be attained in the Middle East.
Mr.  KAMANA (Zambia):  For almost three decades the United Nations has been seized of the Palestinian problem. Many resolutions have been passed on the question under various agenda items. They have all gone unheeded. There is still no permanent solution to the problem. Israel has for that period defied the United Nations and has continuously treated its resolutions with contempt.
In that time the problem of Palestine has been one of the greatest challenges to the authority of this world body. More human and material resources continue to be lost at the expense of peace and development in the Middle East. More time and material resources are being spent by the international community in seeking a meaningful and just solution to the problem of Palestine. The Palestinians remain dispersed and homeless as a result of the occupation of their homeland by force. Their fundamental human rights are negated; their inalienable right to  self-determination and freedom is still denied them. 
In recent years, the just cause of the Palestinian people has gained a great deal of support internationally. The problem started as a humanitarian one. But today the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to   self-determination,   national   independence   and sovereignty  is recognized by the United Nations. This body has reaffirmed the right of the Palestinians to return to their homeland, from which they were forcibly expelled. We have recognized the fact that the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, national independence and sovereignty is indispensable to the permanent solution of the whole question of the Middle East. Furthermore, we have recognized and supported the just struggle of the people of Palestine for independence and sovereignty by all means at their disposal. The majority of the Members of the United Nations are today committed to the just cause of the Palestinian people.
The problem of Palestine is to us the basic cause of the persistent crisis in the Middle East. As long as it is not solved the general problem of the Middle East will persist. Peace will not return to the area. Therefore the dispersed Palestinians must regain their identity and sovereignty. A political solution to the problem of Palestine is imperative; it is the surest guarantee of the solution of other related problems,  including the humanitarian ones.
Zambia's position on the whole question of the Middle East remains the same. As I have said, in our view there is an urgent need to solve the problem of Palestine. Moreover, we believe that Israel must withdraw immediately from all the Arab territories which it occupied by force. On the other hand, we recognize Israel's right to continue to exist as a sovereign State.
We in Zambia have always opposed and will continue to oppose any occupation or usurpation of land or territory by force. Therefore we consider the Israeli presence in the occupied Arab territories to be illegal and inadmissible. Numerous resolutions have been passed by the General Assembly and the Security Council demanding the immediate withdrawal by Israel from all occupied territories and the recognition by Israel of the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, national sovereignty and territorial integrity. Israel, instead, persists in defying that international public demand. It persists in denying the Palestinian people their inalienable rights, contrary to the letter and spirit of the United Nations Charter.
While we welcome the Sinai Agreement as a first and positive step towards a lasting peace in the Middle East, it is our firm view that peace can be achieved only if Israel withdraws and disengages its troops from all the other Arab territories it occupies illegally. That is the only way it can secure its sovereignty and territorial integrity in the area. Its continued refusal to withdraw from all Arab territories, its refusal to recognize the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and national sovereignty only further aggravate the already explosive situation in the Middle East. Israel must accept its obligation as a Member State under the Charter and  respect the  relevant  decisions of the  United Nations on the Middle East.
The adoption by the General Assembly of its resolution 3237 (XXIX) to allow the PLO, the authentic representative of the Palestinian people, to participate actively in its deliberations concerning the all-important problem of Palestine and the Middle East was wise and long overdue. It is testimony to our realization of the gravity of the situation as well as the indispensability of the role of the Palestinian people in the search for a solution to the whole question of the Middle East. It is our belief that any peace effort that takes no cognizance of the political aspect of the Palestinian people is bound to yield no lasting peace in the area. A lasting peace based on justice must of necessity be achieved in the Middle East at the earliest possible time.
We believe that the early realization of the lawful rights of the Palestinian people in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter is a prerequisite for achieving that peace in the area. The Geneva Peace Conference on the Middle East should be reconvened in the immediate future, with the participation of all the parties concerned, to deal with the problem of the Middle East in all its aspects, including the Palestinian question, in order to achieve a just and permanent settlement. 
In that regard, my delegation fully supports the draft resolution submitted by the delegation of Egypt on behalf of many other delegations, including my own [AIL.768], calling for the invitation of the PLO, the authentic representative of the Palestinian people, to participate fully in the work and deliberations of the Conference, on an equal footing with other participants in a conference held under the auspices of the United Nations with a view to ensuring the attainment of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. It is the hope of my delegation that the draft resolution will be adopted unanimously by the General Assembly.
The PRESIDENT: The representative of the Soviet Union has asked to speak in exercise of the right of reply. Members will recall that the General Assembly, at its 2353rd plenary meeting, decided that statements in exercise of the right of reply should be limited to 10 minutes. I now call on the representative of the Soviet Union in exercise of his right of reply. 
Mr. MALIK (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (interpretation from Russian): I had no intention of speaking in exercise of the right of reply, but the representative of China has said so many slanderous things about the position of the Soviet Union that—as Leo Tolstoy said—" I cannot keep silent".
Naturally I regret very much the fact that my statement has to be limited to 10 minutes; I should like to have a little more time.
I should like to advise the representative of China to wake up. I regret that he is not here, but his deputy will convey my remarks. Apparently he must have dozed off when the head of the Palestinian delegation, Mr. Kaddoumi, spoke—and perhaps this is why he did not hear what the latter said. He said the following:
"We are not alone in our militant struggle against Zionism and imperialism. Our friend the Soviet Union . . . maintains a responsible and constructive stand in opposition to Israeli aggression; the Soviet Union has consistently endorsed the national rights of our Palestinian people and the struggle of our Arab nation for freedom and progress." [2390th meeting, para. 61.]
That was the assessment of the head of the delegation of the organization which is leading a sacred fight for the rights, freedom and independence of the Palestinian people. That is as far removed as heaven is from earth from the Chinese babble and the slanderous statements against the Soviet Union.
I shall quote from the communique issued by the Soviet Union and the Syrian Arab Republic, which was signed in October this year:
"The leaders of the Soviet Union and Syria declare their unswerving will to further strengthen the friendship between the two States and their peoples. It was stressed that no one will be allowed to shake it or to bring it harm." 
Neither will the Chinese slanderers be allowed to do so.
I shall also quote a statement made by Mr. Arafat, the outstanding leader of the Palestinian people:
"The Soviet Union is the true ally of the Palestinian revolution in the international arena. It will support our fight and the whole cause of the Arabs in general and is on our side against the attack of Israel upon our people. It fights for the withdrawal of the Israelis from our land and in favour of the international recognition of the rights of the Palestinians. Our Soviet friends support us at all levels and we value this very highly."
That was the high assessment of the Arab side, whereas the libel from the Chinese side has been heard , by all representatives. All you have to do is to compare' the two elements.
Please stop the slanderous attacks on the Soviet Union, you people from China, because the representatives here in the Assembly are laughing at you. You seem to be like a cracked record, constantly repeating   your   slanderous   attacks   on   the   Soviet Union. You have not offered anything concrete, and in your impotence, in your refusal to support the proposal of the socialist and non-aligned countries on the Middle East and Palestine—you try to cover up your anti-Sovietism and engage in slander against the Soviet Union. This is not honest; it is infamous. It cannot  be  considered  anything  but  a  manoeuvre for the purpose of diverting attention from the sub-stance of the matter, the problem of Palestine, which we are discussing. You mention, in passing, your formula about the "two Powers", and you pass over in silence that Power which helps Israel. All the slander is directed against the Soviet Union, the true and sincere friend of the Arab and Palestinian peoples. To whom is it of any help? And to whom is it advantageous? Only to the aggressor himself and to those who are assisting him. I will not be surprised if, in Tel Aviv, Israelis and Zionists erect a monument to Mr. Huang Hua while he is still alive, for his slander against the Soviet Union; doing so for the protection and aid of Israel and the defence of Israel and Israel's protectors.
You claim to be "part of the non-aligned countries", but again your position is as far removed as heaven is from earth from the position of the non-aligned countries. The non-aligned countries expend every effort in order to help the Arabs liberate themselves from Israeli aggression and to liberate their lands seized by the enemy. You do not support the resolution of the non-aligned countries, either in the Security Council or in the General Assembly. You are limiting yourself simply to infamous inventions and slander against the Soviet Union.
Your position in the United Nations does not accord with the position of the non-aligned countries on any question. On the question of non-use of force and the perpetual prohibition of nuclear weapons, you voted with the racists of South Africa and the racist regime of Portugal rather than with the non-aligned countries. As to the question of the convening of a conference on disarmament, you voted against the conference, whereas the non-aligned countries supported our proposal. On the question of the Middle East, we are voting together with the non-aligned countries, both in the Security Council and in the General Assembly, whereas you are voting, so to speak, "under the table". You have invented a fourth method of voting. Before you came into the United Nations there were three methods of voting: in favour, against and abstention. Now you have introduced a fourth, novel way, that is, "voting under the table".
This is your position.
Yet you claim to be a friend of the Arabs and on their  side.   The   United   Nations  resolutions  which have been adopted, thanks to the efforts of the non-aligned and  socialist countries, are called by you simply "scraps of paper". Well, if they are "scraps of paper" why do we have to adopt them, and why is it that you are so rabidly fighting a draft resolution based on a Soviet proposal? You seem to be stubbornly resisting the adoption of a draft resolution that was submitted on our proposal. If these are "scraps of paper", what does it matter then whether the draft resolution is adopted or not? But you are against the adoption  of this draft resolution.  Therefore,  it is hypocritical when you call the draft resolution on the Middle East just a "scrap of paper". You are insulting the United Nations, the General Assembly, the First Committee and the Security Council by calling the draft resolution on the Middle East a "scrap of paper". But these "scraps of paper", these drafts, have been drawn up by non-aligned countries with the active Participation and support of the socialist countries. You are insulting those countries which are sincerely striving to help the Arab peoples to fight aggression. That is your position. It is helpful only to Israel.
You spread slander in one of these statements by saying that the Soviet Union has sent Egypt "scrap"rather than armaments; I should say in passing that it is thanks to this "scrap" that Egypt was victorious in 1973. And today you state that the USSR is using the Middle East as a testing-ground for the most advanced weapons. What king of logic is this? What are we supplying then: scrap or the most advanced weapons? Well, the truth is this is Chinese logic. 
The PRESIDENT: The representative of the Soviet Union has already exceeded his time for the right of reply. I will give him two more minutes to finish his statement.
Mr. MALIK (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (interpretation from Russian): I need five minutes more. Is that all right?
The   PRESIDENT:   Three minutes; a  compromise.
Mr. MALIK (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (interpretation from Russian): The position of China with respect to the events in the Middle East reveals the strategy and tactics of the foreign policy of China as declared at the Tenth Congress of the Communist Party of China. China seems to put into the same basket the aggressor and the victim of aggression, demonstrating that the attitude of Peking, so far as the Middle East conflict is concerned, is that of great-Power politics. The political aims of the Chinese leadership in the Middle East are, as in the past, to use every possible situation to hamper the political settlement of the crisis, to maintain a hotbed of tension there, to provoke a direct American-Soviet confrontation there, and to break up the friendship between the USSR and the Arab countries. So far Peking has not proposed any concrete or effective programme for a Middle East settlement. It continues to reject all means of fighting aggression and liquidating its consequences except the military one. It moves away from supporting the fight of the Arab people in the United Nations and continues to oppose a just political settlement on the basis  of the  implementation  of Security  Council resolution 242 (1967). Having moved away from real solidarity with the Palestinian and Arab peoples, the Chinese leadership seems only to be using words in support of this fight. In fact, the stubborn unwillingness of China to support the resolutions of the Council and General Assembly on the Middle East envisaging 
a peaceful settlement of the conflict reflects the direct refusal of China to join all progressive and peace-loving forces in putting pressure on Israel within the framework of the international Organization. It is by no means an accident that for many, years Tel Aviv has abstained from criticizing the Middle East policy of Peking. The Zionists have not been criticizing Peking because the activities of the Maoists in this region seem to be favourable to Israel and further provocation seems to be encouraged. 
China makes  inflammatory recommendations to the Arab countries to continue military action, prompting them to a renewal of military activities in the Middle East, and this is by no means accidental. 
The policy of Peking in foreign affairs is based on the so-called "colossal perturbations" and "great schism". In keeping with this thesis, the Chinese press regularly provokes fresh "disorders", rendering the situation in the Middle East more acute, and seems to encourage a bitter confrontation between the USSR and the United States over "influence" in this region. Back in June 1974, Jen Min Jih Pao flatly stated that the so-called just and lasting peace in the Middle East was nothing but a lot of nonsense in the strict sense of the word.
China does not wish for peace in the Middle East, or for a peaceful settlement. That is its position. And in order to cover this position anti-Sovietism is necessary. This is the nub of the matter.
The PRESIDENT: I now call on the representative of China in exercise of the right of reply. I would remind him, too, that the time-limit is 10 minutes.
Mr.   LAI  Ya-li  (China) (interpretation from Chinese): Since Mr. Malik has made unwarranted provocations, we deem it necessary to say a few words in reply.
China's position on the Middle East question and on other important international issues has always been principled, open and above-board. No amount of slanderous attacks by Malik can change the true nature of things, nor can they do any harm to us. Mr. Malik has also done his utmost to sow discord in the relations between China and the non-aligned countries. Both China and the numerous non-aligned countries belong to the third world. Our friendship with them has been formed in the struggle against imperialism and hegemonism,  and such friendship can stand tests. All Malik's attempts to sow dissension are of no avail.
As usual, Mr.  Malik's attacks on us today contain nothing new. Many of his fallacious arguments have long been refuted by us. In order to save time, I shall not repeat our refutations here. What calls for attention is that for some time the Soviet representative has been nastily propagating the idea that China wants to provoke a world war and that China wishes to see a direct confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union in the Middle East, and so on and so forth. As is known to all, China is a developing, socialist country. Like other third-world countries, we need a favourable international environment in which to build our country. But as the Chinese saying goes, "The trees may prefer calm; but the wind will not subside." We cannot but face up to the stark reality of the present world, that is, the intensifying contention between the two super-Powers for world hegemony. Their contention has reached Europe, the Mediterranean, the Middle East, the Persian Gulf and even the Indian Ocean, Asia and the Pacific. Wherever they contend, there is no tranquillity as a result of their fierce contention, the danger of%new world war is growing. The danger comes-especially from Soviet social-imperialism which is engaged in the most frantic arms expansion and war preparations while chanting the loudest about "peace", "security" and "detente". While extolling the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe, the Soviet Union has greatly reinforced its troops and military equipment in Europe. Not long ago, it held an unprecedented large-scale naval exercise to show force in the oceans and seas. What is all this if not arms expansion and war preparations? People may recall that during the October War in 1973 in its contention with the other super-Power for hegemony over the Middle East, the USSR went so far as to confront the other Power with arms ready for a fight. We have pointed out these facts, stressing the need for the people of the world to get prepared in the hope that, while striving for a favourable international environment, they will make an adequate assessment of a sudden change in the situation so that they may be prepared and remain invincible. This has hit Mr. Malik where it hurts, that is, that the USSR is trying to cover up the true state of tension by "detente" and "peace" in order to deceive the people of the world. That is why it has resorted to the practice of a thief crying "Catch the thief!". Believing in Goebbels1 idea that "lies will become facts after they have been repeated a thousand times", it has wantonly slandered China in an attempt to confuse the public and cover up the truth hoping that people will be off guard before its honeyed words so that it can do whatever it pleases in committing aggression and expansion. However, the people of the world are politically conscious, and they will not be taken in by those tricks.
The evil and ugly things done by Soviet social-imperialism in the Middle East are too many to be enumerated. Since Mr. Malik is very fond of bragging, I should like to put two questions to Mr. Malik straightforwardly. The first is, You have been boasting about your "tremendous" and "selfless" aid to the Arab world; why then should you be engaged in enormous arms deals to reap fabulous profits from the war, and why should you withhold the supply of equipment to undermine the Arab people's war against aggression and intimidate the Arab countries into providing you with military bases and various privileges? Why should you press for the repayment of debts and exert crude pressure on an Arab country which was fighting at the front against Israeli Zionist aggression? The second question I address to Mr.  Malik is, When Israeli Zionism is obstinately pursuing its policy of aggression and expansion, why should you supply manpower to Israel in a steady flow? Why should you enter into overt and covert flirtation with Israel and even conduct secret talks between the two foreign ministers? Do you dare to answer these two very simple questions, Mr. Malik? I can predict that you dare not. You can only rely on slanders and abuse for a living, but this' can only reveal your guilty conscience. You are bound to fail in your practice of stuffing your ears when stealing a bell and of a thief crying "Catch the thief!". 
The PRESIDENT: I call upon the representative of the Soviet Union in exercise of the right of reply. The time-limit is still 10 minutes. 
Mr. MALIK (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (interpretation from Russian): Nothing new has been added by the representative of China in his slanderous statements. Not one single fact that I have set forth has been refuted. The reference to the Indian Ocean also belongs in the area of slanderous statements. The Soviet Union is not building any naval bases in the Indian Ocean. In accusing the Soviet Union of doing so China is only covering those who actually are building those bases, and, in acting in this way, is helping imperialism.
As to the debts, we sincerely give assistance if taken from the peoples' resources. We do not have any  Capitalists, or any monopolies, or any transnational corporations which plunder the whole world and can give assistance to their friends. This is money coming from the working people of our country and when we make loans to other countries we are perfectly justified sin expecting these debts to be repaid. If China has a possibility of giving billions of dollars to the Arab countries without asking for repayment, let the Chinese -go ahead and do it and set the example rather than "slander us. We do not have this possibility. We have to think about our own self-defence. We lost 20 million lives during the Second World War. We know that China is preparing a war against us and the North  Atlantic Treaty Organization is intensifying and strengthening its military-industrial potential. We have to be prepared to defend ourselves. We have to give billions in assistance to developing countries, but we also have to think of our defence—this is our first priority. China is preparing a war against us and some  others are also dreaming about a war. That is a fact.  And that is why we are perfectly justified in expecting  those who have contracted debts with us to repay them -because this money is the peoples' money and not capitalist resources.
The Chinese claim that they are friends of the non-aligned. Not at all. They are friends of the Chilean Fascist junta. They embrace it and will not part from it. They are friends of the revanchists  in Europe, especially of Mr. Strauss, whom in Peking they embrace as a friend. You Chinese have expended  every effort in order to sabotage detente in Europe and to obstruct the convening of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in  Europe.  You have  sent  your most outstanding emissaries, starting with Teng  Hsiaoping. You actually suffered a complete fiasco in attempting this, as 33 European States, as well as the United States and Canada, have rejected your  slander and your efforts to undermine the Conference and have signed a Final Act transforming Europe into  a continent of peace rather than a hotbed of war, as it was in the past. And you do not seem to like it. You are enraged by your failure. You are setting Europe against the Soviet Union. You are constantly setting the United States against the USSR. Why do you do this? So that we will confront each other in thermonuclear war and destroy each other. But your leader has put forward the theory: "Let 350 million Chinese perish, we will have 350 million left, and China will be a great Power." This is your policy. Let the Russians destroy the Americans, the Americans the Russians. Let the Russians destroy the Western Europeans and the Western Europeans the Russians. Then China will become the only super-Power. This is your coveted dream.
Peking considers that the USSR stands as an obstacle on China's path to hegemony, world domination and "super-Maoism". And this is why they slander us, considering that we are "enemy number one". But our Leninist policy of peace and friendship among Peoples, our Programme of Peace adopted by the Twenty-third Congress of the Communist Party has achieved  world-wide   recognition,   respect  and   approval.  We consistently strive for peace,  disarmament and friendship among peoples so that war can be eradicated for ever from mankind. But you are propounding the inevitability of war. You are a permanent member of the Security Council. But what do you do in order to avoid and prevent a war? Nothing. You provoke conflicts in all corners of the earth. You help the reactionaries in Africa. You are friends of the Fascist junta in Chile. You encourage the revanchists in Europe. You support the partisans of cold war in the United States, among whom are quite a few Zionists.
Thus, between Maoism and Zionism bonds are beginning to develop on an anti-Soviet basis; they become blood brothers in this respect. Both of these are racist ideologies. Zionism proclaims itself as "the people chosen by God", and the Maoist theory is "the Chinese above all". And here you find a common language with the Zionists and those who stand against detente and against peace and the strengthening of the security of the peoples. This is your policy. And everyone understands this, however much you try to heap slander on the Soviet Union.
The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative of Saudi Arabia on a point of order. 
Mr. BAROODY (Saudi Arabia): Far be it from me, Sir, to stop this exercise in the right of reply. However, we do not relish these calumnies that are being exchanged by two neighbours who belong to the same ideology. But please, Sir, let us all be patient and listen to what they have to say and do not exercise the rule of 10 minutes for a right of reply. Let them talk because if they get it off their chests they will perhaps purge themselves of hatred. So let them. I subscribe to the policy that words are much safer than bullets and that people who talk that much, I am sure, are peaceful. So please do not limit them. We are ready to listen.
The PRESIDENT: I have to remind the representative of Saudi Arabia that a decision was taken by the General Assembly to limit the right of reply to 10 minutes. I am a humble representative and a servant of the General Assembly. I call on the representative of China in exercise of the right of reply.
Mr.   LAI- Ya-li  (China) (interpretation from Chinese): As is expected, Mr. Malik did not dare at all to touch on the two questions I put to him. Instead, he has hurled abuse like a harridan in order to cover up his true behaviour. According to a Chinese saying, this is "an unsolicited confession", and "the more one tries to hide, the more he is exposed".
The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative of the Soviet Union in exercise of the right of reply.
Mr. MALIK (Soviet Union) (interpretation from Russian): I shall be very brief. I agree with the Chinese representative when he recalls a Chinese proverb about a smoke-screen — anti-Sovietism is the Chinese smoke-screen.
The meeting rose at 7 p.m.
Notes
Official Records of the General Assembly, Twenty-ninth Session, Plenary Meetings, 2282nd meeting, paras. 3-83.
Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, Fifty-eighth Session, Supplement No. 4, chap. XXIII, resolution 6 A (XXXI).
Agreement between Egypt and Israel, signed at Geneva on 4 September 1975. See Official Records of the Security Council, Thirtieth Year, Supplement for July, August and September 1975, document S/11818/Add.I.
Question of Palestine – Establishment of CEIRPP/debate- Verbatim records

Share This Page, Choose Your Platform!

Subscribe to our mailing list
