UNIFIL financing – Fifth Cttee debate – Press release

Fifty-fifth General Assembly

Plenary

86th Meeting (AM)

ASSEMBLY ADOPTS TEXTS ON ASSISTANCE TO AFGHANISTAN, UN HUMANITARIAN

DISASTER RELIEF, CENTRAL AMERICA, UN-OSCE COOPERATION, UNIFIL

/…

Regarding the financing of United Nations peacekeeping forces in the Middle East, the Assembly voted on a resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary), first on separate parts of that resolution — with 85 votes in favour, 3 against (Israel, Marshall Islands, United States) and 47 abstentions (see Annex III), and then on the whole — with 140 votes in favour and 3 against (Israel, Marshall Islands, United States) (see Annex VI).

The representatives of Israel, United States and Egypt spoke in explanation of their votes, while the representatives of Lebanon and Israel exercised their right of reply.

/…

Assembly Work Programme

The General Assembly met this morning to appoint members of the Committee on Conferences, and to take up consideration of the following issues:  the situation in East Timor during its transition to independence; emergency international assistance for peace, normalcy and reconstruction of war-stricken Afghanistan and the situation in Afghanistan and its implications for international peace and security; strengthening of the coordination of humanitarian and disaster relief assistance of the United Nations, including special economic assistance; the situation in Central America; cooperation between the United Nations and the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE); financing of the United Nations peacekeeping forces in the Middle East:  United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL); and the report of the Economic and Social Council.

/…

The Assembly also had a report of the Fifth Committee on the financing of the United Nations peacekeeping forces in the Middle East:  United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (document A/55/681), recommending that the Assembly adopt a draft resolution approved by the Committee in a recorded vote of 109 in favour and 3 against (Israel, Marshall Islands, United States).  By the terms of the draft, the Assembly would take note of the status of contributions to that Force as at 31 October 2000, including the outstanding contributions in the amount of $139.4 million, representing some 3.9 per cent of the total assessed contributions since the inception of the mission.  It would also note that some 21 per cent of Member States have paid their assessed contributions in full, and urge all others concerned, in particular, those in arrears, to ensure the payment.

Expressing its deep concern that Israel had not complied with resolutions 51/233, 52/237, 53/227 and 54/267, the Assembly would stress the need for that country to strictly abide by them.  It would also reiterate its request to the Secretary-General to take necessary measures to ensure full implementation of relevant resolutions, stressing that Israel must pay the amount of some $1.28 million resulting from the incident at Qana on 18 April 1996, and request the Secretary-General to report on this matter at the resumed fifty-fifth session.

Urging all Member States to make every possible effort to ensure payment of their assessed contributions to the Force in full and on time, the Assembly would also express concern about the financial situation with regard to peacekeeping, in particular, as far as reimbursements to troop contributors are concerned, and about the delay in deploying and providing adequate resources to some recent peacekeeping missions, in particular, those in Africa.  It would emphasize that all future and existing peacekeeping missions shall be given equal and non-discriminatory treatment and provided with adequate resources.  

The Secretary-General would be requested to ensure that the Force is administered with maximum efficiency and economy and to continue efforts to recruit local General Service staff for the Force.

The Assembly would decide to appropriate to the Special Account for UNIFIL the amount of some $86.76 million gross ($86.3 million net) for the expansion of the Force for the period from 1 July 2000 to 30 June 2001, in addition to the amount of some $146.83 million gross ($141.89 million net) already appropriated in resolution 54/267.  Taking into account some $61.18 million gross already apportioned for the period from 1 February to 30 June 2001, the Assembly would apportion among Member States an additional amount of some $36.15 million gross, subject to the decision of the Security Council to extend the mandate of the Force beyond 31 January 2001.

/…

Explanation of Vote after Vote

/…

AARON JACOB (Israel) said he supported the financing of UNIFIL, but was opposed to preambular paragraph 4 and operative paragraphs 2, 3 and 14 of the draft resolution.  What occurred in Qana was the result of the cynical tactics of Hezbollah, which used human shields.  His country had no way of knowing that civilians were there.  Furthermore, he pointed out that Hezbollah had engaged in the deliberate targeting of civilians by rocket attacks, which imperiled the safety of United Nations personnel in the area.  The decision to seek payment for the Qana attack was the first such initiative directed against a Member State.  Israel felt that such an introduction of political objectives was not appropriate; it would therefore vote against the draft resolution if preambular paragraph 4 and operative paragraphs 2, 3 and 14 were retained.

The report of the Fifth Committee (document A/55/681), entitled “United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon”, contained a draft resolution recommended to the Assembly.  A single separate vote had been requested on the fourth preambular paragraph and operative paragraphs 2, 3 and 14.

By a recorded vote of 85 in favour to 3 against (Israel, Marshall Islands, United States), with 47 abstentions, the Assembly adopted the fourth preambular paragraph and operative paragraphs 2, 3 and 14 of the text.

It then adopted the resolution as a whole in a recorded vote of 140 in favour to 3 against (Israel, Marshall Islands, United States), with no abstentions.

Explanation of Vote after Vote

Mr. SMITH (United States) said that his Government strongly supported UNIFIL’s efforts.  However, the use of General Assembly funding to pursue claims against a Member State was not procedurally correct.  The United States had opposed those kinds of resolutions in the past.  Using a funding resolution to legislate a settlement was inappropriate and politicized the work of the Fifth Committee, and should be avoided both now and in the future.

Mr. BEBARS (Egypt), speaking on behalf of the Arab Group, called on Israel to bear its responsibility for its aggression on the Lebanese town of Qana in 1996.  The Israeli Government must not be allowed to attack the United Nations peacekeeping mission in Lebanon and then expect Member States to bear the financial burden of that aggression.  The General Assembly must send a message to those who violated United Nations resolutions.  It must not allow them to justify their aggression against peacekeeping missions.  The Arab Group had acted in a responsible manner, but Israel had disregarded the Secretary-General’s letters, which demanded $1.336 million in compensation.  He hoped the Secretary-General would force Israel to pay for the damage it had caused.  The Arab Group closed by extending its thanks to UNIFIL for the positive role it had undertaken.

Rights of Reply

HOUSSAM ASAAD DIAB (Lebanon), exercising his right of reply, responded to the Israeli representative’s statement.  He reminded the delegates of the reason for adoption of the resolution as amended.  That resolution stemmed from the responsibility made incumbent on the Assembly by the regulations followed in the Fifth Committee concerning financing of peacekeeping forces.  The underlying principles were maintaining security of personnel working in peacekeeping forces, and protection of civilians in armed conflicts.  The resolution was not, as described by Israel, a reaction to an attack by Lebanon on Israel, but the opposite.  The Assembly had adopted the resolution on the basis of a letter of the Secretary-General dated 7 May 1966, in which he mentioned that he was concerned about the bombing of Qana.

United Nations reports had mentioned the deliberate nature of Israel’s bombardment of the United Nations centre, a massacre in which more than 102 Lebanese civilians were killed, most of them women, children and elderly people.  Playing with the principle of safety of United Nations peacekeeping forces would send the wrong message to the occupying power, which would lead to a threat to peacekeeping forces and the civilians they protected.  The implementation of the resolution was an imperative in enhancing the credibility of United Nations resolutions, since Israel, for the fifth year, had refrained from paying the costs of the aggression.  

Mr. JACOB (Israel) said that, in his previous statement, he had clearly clarified the incidents in Qana.  However, the Lebanese representative had also spoken about countries living up to their obligations.  He recalled that, in May, Israel had completed its withdrawal from Lebanon, confirmed by the Secretary-General and endorsed by the Security Council.  However, Security Council resolution 425 did not only call for Israeli withdrawal, but also the return of effective Lebanese government to the area in ensuring a calm environment in South Lebanon.  Israel had fulfilled its obligations.  The responsibility now primarily fell on Lebanon and its prevention of acts of aggression against Israel, the most serious being kidnappings and killings of Israeli soldiers.  

Mr. DIAB (Lebanon), exercising his right of a second intervention, noted that the pretexts of the representative of Israel were put forward to distract attention from the main discussion.  The Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon had nothing to do with the massacre at Qana.  He said that Israel must live up to its obligations.

Mr. JACOB (Israel), exercising his second right of reply, said the representative of Lebanon had referred to acts of aggression committed by Israel in 1996.  That statement should be seen against the recent record of Lebanon regarding encouragement of terrorist acts.  That would tell all about the credibility of the Lebanese delegation.

Turning to the report of the Fifth Committee dealing with those chapters of the report of the Economic and Social Council which were allocated to it (document A/55/662), the Assembly then adopted the draft decision recommended by the Committee without a vote, and decided to conclude its consideration of those chapters.

/…

ANNEX III

Vote on Preambular Paragraph 4, Operative Paragraphs 2, 3, and 14 of Draft Text A/55/681

The relevant paragraphs of the draft resolution on financing of the United Nations peacekeeping forces in the Middle East:  United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (document A/55/681) were adopted by a recorded vote of 85 in favour to 3 against, with 47 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Costa Rica, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Gabon, Gambia, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Myanmar, Nepal, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:  Israel, Marshall Islands, United States.

Abstain:  Andorra, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Tonga, Turkey, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Yugoslavia.

Absent:  Afghanistan, Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Estonia, Federated States of Micronesia, Georgia, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Mali, Mozambique, Namibia, Nauru, Nicaragua, Palau, Republic of Moldova, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Solomon Islands, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

ANNEX IV

Vote on Financing of UNIFIL

The draft resolution on financing of the United Nations peacekeeping forces in the Middle East:  United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) (document A/55/681) was adopted by a recorded vote of 140 in favour to 3 against, with no abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syria, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against:  Israel, Marshall Islands, United States.

Abstain:  None.

Absent:  Afghanistan, Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Cape Verde, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia, Federated States of Micronesia, Guatemala, Guinea, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Mali, Mozambique, Namibia, Nauru, Palau, Republic of Moldova, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Solomon Islands, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe.

* *** *