{"id":213799,"date":"1999-02-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2019-03-12T20:40:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/?p=213799"},"modified":"2019-03-12T20:40:55","modified_gmt":"2019-03-12T20:40:55","slug":"auto-insert-213799","status":"publish","type":"document","link":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/document\/auto-insert-213799\/","title":{"rendered":"Jerusalem\/Settlements – Conference on Fourth Geneva Convention to be convened – GA emergency session action – Press release"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

General Assembly Plenary<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Emergency Special Session<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

12th Meeting (PM)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

ASSEMBLY CALLS FOR PARTIES TO FOURTH GENEVA CONVENTION TO MEET ON<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

MEASURES TO ENFORCE ITS APPLICATION IN OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Resolution Adopted during Emergency Special Session<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Recommends That Conference Be Convened on 15 July in Geneva<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

  The General Assembly reiterated its call  for the High Contracting Parties to the  Fourth  Geneva Convention  to convene  a conference  on measures  to enforce  the Convention  in the  occupied Palestinian  territory,  including Jerusalem, by a resolution adopted this  afternoon during its resumed  tenth emergency  special  session  to  consider  illegal  Israeli  action  in  the occupied Palestinian territory.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  Adopting the text  by a vote  of 115  in favour to  2 against (Israel  and United States) with five abstentions (Australia, Bahamas, Cameroon,  Romania and Swaziland) (see annex), the Assembly  recommended that the conference be convened on 15 July  at the United  Nations Office at Geneva, and  expressed its confidence that Palestine would participate.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  By other  terms, the  Assembly reiterated  its recommendation  that Member States cease  all forms  of support  for illegal  Israeli activities  in the occupied   Palestinian   territory,   including  Jerusalem,   in  particular settlement activities.  It affirmed that  increased efforts must be  exerted to  bring the  peace  process back  on track  and  to continue  the  process towards the achievement  of a just,  comprehensive and lasting peace  in the region  on  the basis  of  relevant  Security  Council  resolutions and  the principle of land for peace. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  The Assembly  also  reiterated the  demands  it  had made  in  resolutions previously adopted during its emergency special  session.  It demanded  that Israel, as occupying Power,  accept the de jure  applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention  on the  protection of  civilians in  time of  war to  the territories occupied since 1967  and that it cease  and reverse all  illegal actions taken against the Palestinian Jerusalemites.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  In a statement  during the general debate which preceded the vote, Egypt's representative  said  Israel  was  seriously  violating  the  Fourth  Geneva Convention by actions including the continued and intensifying  confiscation of lands  and the closure of areas controlled by  the Palestinian Authority. As the  Convention itself  stated  that  parties to  it would  act in  cases of serious violation, the resolution was fully justified, he stressed.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  The  representative  of the  United States,  however, said  the resolution prejudged negotiations on  permanent status issues  and hampered the chances of  achieving  peace.   Like  past  resolutions,  the  text politicized  the Convention  which was primarily  humanitarian in  nature.  He  called on all Member States to vote against the text.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  There was no consensus  among States parties on convening a conference  of High Contracting  Parties to  the Convention, the  Observer for  Switzerland said.  Switzerland, the  depositary of  the  Convention,  could not  play an active role in convening the conference  unless States parties first defined procedures  to handle grave  violations, he  said.   Consultations, however, were ongoing.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  Statements  were  also  made  by the  representatives  of  Japan, Namibia, Jordan,  Qatar, Saudi  Arabia,  Brunei Darussalam,  Botswana,  Iran,  China, Morocco, Swaziland,  Israel, Cuba, Canada,  Australia, Norway, Uruguay,  The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and the Observer for Palestine.  <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  The Assembly will meet again at a date to be announced in the Journal.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

  Assembly Work Programme<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

  <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

  The Assembly this afternoon was scheduled  to continue its tenth emergency special session, which is considering "Illegal  Israeli actions in  occupied East  Jerusalem and the rest  of the occupied Palestinian Territory". It had before it a related draft resolution (document A\/ES-10\/L.5\/Rev.1).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  By  that  draft,  the  Assembly  would   express  grave  concern  at   the suspension, on  20  December  1998, by  the  Government  of  Israel  of  the implementation of  the Wye River  Memorandum, signed at  the White House  in Washington, D.C.,  on 23  October 1998,  including the  negotiations on  the final  settlement, which  should  be  concluded by  4  May.   It would  also reaffirm that all legislative and administrative  measures and actions taken by Israel,  which have  altered or  purport to  alter  the character,  legal status and demographic composition of Occupied  East Jerusalem and the  rest of  the  Occupied Palestinian  Territory,  are null  and  void and  have  no validity whatsoever.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  The Assembly  would reiterate,  in the  strongest terms,  all the  demands made  of  Israel in  earlier  resolutions  of  the  tenth emergency  special session (resolutions ES-10\/2 of  25 April 1997, ES-10\/3 of 15 July 1997, ES-10\/4 of  13 November  1997 and  ES-10\/5 of 17  March 1998).   Those  demands include the immediate and  full cessation of  the construction at Jabal  Abu Ghneim  and of all  other Israeli  settlement activities, as well  as of all illegal measures and actions in Occupied  East Jerusalem; the acceptance of the de jure applicability  of the Fourth Geneva  Convention of 1949,  on the protection  of  civilians in  time of  war to  all the  territories occupied since 1967, and  compliance with relevant Security Council resolutions; the cessation and  reversal of  all actions taken illegally  against Palestinian Jerusalemites; and  the provision  of  information about  goods produced  or manufactured in the settlements.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  It would also reiterate its previous  recommendations to Member States for the  cessation of all  forms of  assistance and support  for illegal Israeli activities in  the Occupied Palestinian  Territory, including Jerusalem,  in particular  settlement activities,  and  to actively  discourage  activities that  directly  contribute  to any  construction  or  development  of  those settlements.  The  Assembly  would  affirm  that,  in  spite  of  the actual deterioration of  the Middle East peace process  as a result  of the lack of compliance by  the  Government  of  Israel  with  the  existing  agreements, increased efforts must be exerted to bring the peace process back on track.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  Also by  the draft, the Assembly  would reiterate  its recommendation that the  High Contracting  Parties to  the  Fourth  Geneva Convention  convene a conference   on  measures   to  enforce  the  Convention   in  the  Occupied Palestinian Territory and  would further recommend that the High Contracting Parties convene the conference  on 15 July at  the United Nations  Office at Geneva.  The  Assembly would also invite  the Government of Switzerland,  in its capacity  as  the depositary  of  the  Geneva Convention,  to  undertake whatever preparations are necessary prior to the conference.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  The  Assembly would request  the Secretary-General  to make  the necessary facilities available to enable the High  Contracting Parties to convene  the conference  and would  express its  confidence  that  Palestine, as  a party directly concerned,  will participate in  it.  The Assembly  would decide to adjourn the tenth  emergency special  session temporarily  and to  authorize the President  of the  most recent  General Assembly  to resume  its meeting upon request from Member States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  The  draft  resolution is  sponsored  by  Afghanistan,  Algeria,  Bahrain, Bangladesh, Djibouti, Egypt, Jordan,  Kuwait, Malaysia, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia,  United Arab Emirates, Yemen  and Palestine.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

  Statements<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  YUKIO SATOH  (Japan) expressed extreme sorrow  at the  passing of Jordan's King  Hussein,  who had  been  a  universally  revered statesman.    He also expressed  sympathy  to  the  Government  and  people  of  Colombia  for the suffering were  experiencing as a  result of the  recent earthquake.   Japan had  dispatched  rescue   teams,  medical  personnel  and  disaster   relief<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

assistance.  <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  In January, Japan's  Minister of  Foreign Affairs,  Masahiko Koumura,  had visited Israel, the  Palestinian self-governing area, Lebanon, Egypt,  Syria and Jordan, he said.  He had called  for the full implementation of  the Wye River Memorandum,  and had advocated  guiding principles regarding  southern Lebanon.  Those four  principles were  as  follows:   Israeli  forces should withdraw from southern Lebanon as stipulated  in Security Council resolution 425  of 1978; that  withdrawal should  lead to  a comprehensive  Middle East peace; it  should not be  hindered and parties  should discuss its  concrete steps without preconditions; and the international community should  support the stabilization of southern Lebanon after Israeli withdrawal. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  He   said  Japan  had   already  contributed   $400  million   in  aid  to Palestinians, and,  at  the Conference  to  Support  the Middle  East  Peace Process and Development — held in November last  year — it had pledged  up to $200 million more over the  next two years.  Japan  wanted to play a more active role in ensuring  that assistance by donors was used effectively, and in  nurturing   an  environment   where  assistance   would  contribute   to confidence-building among  the parties concerned.   Japan was  ready to host the ad hoc liaison committee meeting in Tokyo this year. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  The parties  concerned must  be unrelenting  in their  efforts to  resolve problems  through  dialogue,  he  said.    Oppression  and violence  created further oppression  and  violence.   Unilateral  action  that could  amplify misunderstanding and  distrust should be avoided.   Japan  was determined to play a political role  by approaching the  parties concerned with a view  to stimulating political dialogue between  them.  Bearing  in mind the work  of the Government  of Switzerland  in its  capacity  as the  depositary of  the Geneva  Convention relative to  the protection  of persons  in time  of war, Japan was ready to support the draft resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  NABIL ELARABY (Egypt)  said the emergency session had resumed with the aim of fulfilling its responsibilities regarding Israel's illegal activities in the  occupied Palestinian  territory, at  the  forefront  of which  were the establishment and expansion of settlements.   Since the session had  adopted its  first resolution nearly  two years  ago, Israel  continued to implement and  intensify  settlement.   In  doing  this it  not  only ignored  General Assembly resolutions,  but  also  the  international consensus on the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention.   Daily, Israel announced its unwillingness  to  cease construction  and  expansion  of  settlements,  and challenged  the  will   of  the  international  community  by   confiscating territory after the signing of the Wye River Memorandum.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  A serious  question —  when the  international community  would cease  to allow Israel to  continue — was now raised,  he stated.  The  international community  must assert  its position  until Israel  complied and  retreated.  Measures Israel  took, such as confiscation  of civilian  lands, transfer of populations  and  construction  of  houses  and  infrastructure,  were all measures outlawed by the Fourth Geneva Convention.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  In 1997,  at  its resumed  emergency  special  session, the  Assembly  had recommended convening  a conference of the  high contracting  parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention, he  said.  It had adopted this recommendation by a clear majority.  The  Government of Switzerland  had responded  favourably to the  request, and  Egypt appreciated  its  efforts.   Two meetings  had been convened, one for Palestinians  and Israelis in June 1998, and the other for States parties at the expert level last October.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  The  Arab  side  had  lent  full support  to  those  meetings,  while  not believing they were alternatives  to the conference,  he said.  Almost  one-and-a-half years had elapsed since preparations  had begun for convening  the conference and the time had come to specify  a date for it.   The conference must  be  the  collective  responsibility  of  the  States  parties  to  the Convention.  This Assembly  resumption and  the draft  resolution before  it were based on  respect for international humanitarian  law and were aimed at preventing its erosion.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  The Convention itself stated  that the parties  agreed to act in cases  of serious  violations  in  cooperation  with  the  United  Nations,  he  said.  Serious  violations  were occurring,  including  continued  and intensifying confiscation of lands, construction  of the pass roads  and closure of areas controlled by the Palestinian Authority.   Those violations fully  justified the adoption of  the resolution and the setting  of a date, next April,  for the conference.  He invited the Assembly to accept its responsibilities  and adopt the draft resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  MARTIN ANDJABA (Namibia) expressed  sympathy to  the people  of Jordan on behalf of the people of Namibia.  He said that the  continuing violation and breach by Israel of relevant resolutions  and international human rights law could only delay  the peace.  The international  community had  to  exert pressure  on   Israel  to   resume  its   obligations  under   international agreements.     His   Government  appreciated   the  parallel   efforts   by Switzerland, which in October  1998 had convened a meeting of experts of the High  Contracting Parties  to  the Fourth  Geneva Convention,  where general problems concerning the Convention had been discussed.  It was convinced  of the urgent need for a  conference by the Parties on measures to enforce  the Convention's  provisions in  the  occupied Palestinian  territory, including Jerusalem. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  He expressed  his Government's continued  solidarity with the  Palestinian people, their achievement of self-determination and the establishment of  an independent  Palestinian  State.   The  draft  resolution was  an  important element  in the resolution of the question of Palestine, and his  delegation endorsed  it fully.   As a member  of the Committee  on the  Exercise of the Inalienable  Rights  of  the  Palestinian  People,  Namibia  supported   and endorsed the Bethlehem 2000  International Conference to be held in Rome  on 18 to  19  February.   He called  on Member  States to  support the  African meeting in  support of  the inalienable  rights of  the Palestinian  people, which would take place from 20 to 22 April in Windhoek, Namibia.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  AYMAN  AAMIRY  (Jordan) said  that  illegal  Israeli  practices  adversely affected  prospects for  peace  in the  region.   Some  had  questioned  the reasons for the resolution currently before the Assembly.   But was not  the peaceful  settlement of such  conflicts at  the core of  the United Nations? Was not the  promotion of healthy  international relations  the goal of  the Organization? he asked.  Had the peace process  that started seven years ago remained  on the  right  track,  there would  be  no need  for this  special session.   Jordan was  greatly concerned over the  paralysis that had struck the peace process.  The  peace process should not become  a slogan devoid of meaning.   Peace  meant  a  commitment to  respect justice,  as well  as the rights and legitimacy of others. The  current Israeli Government had  failed to respond to calls for peace.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  He said  the road  to security  entailed enhancing  mutual confidence  and setting aside  the practice  of making  illegitimate gains.   Peace did  not entail destroying  Palestinian homes just  because they  were built  without licences. It also did  not mean arbitrary practices  to depopulate the  land and prepare  land for  settlements.  Such  actions represented  a threat  to peace in the region  and hindered normal relations.   Israel had shirked its responsibility under the  Wye River Memorandum.   The late King  Hussein had made every effort to aid the creation of  an agreement at Wye River, yet the Israeli Government had decided to undermine it.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  ALI FAHED  FALEH  AL-HAJRI (Qatar),  speaking  on  behalf of  the  Islamic Group,  said  the  reason  for  today's  Assembly  session  was  to reaffirm previous recommendations,  notably the  recommendation on the  holding of  a conference of the High Contracting Parties  of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The  time  had  begun  to  prepare  to  hold  the  conference  as  had  been recommended.    The  Islamic  Group  was   greatly  dissatisfied  with   the activities of Israel in holy places.  The expansion of settlement  colonies, the  destruction of homes  and the  removal of  identification cards clearly defied the will of the international community. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  He demanded that  the international community shoulder its  responsibility to force  Israel to bow to  the international will  and return to  legality. Israel's measures  and activities  affected all peace-loving States  and the sensibilities of  the  Islamic world.    Qatar  called on  all  peace-loving countries to support the draft resolution  before the Assembly, to  help the Palestinians achieve freedom. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  ABDULRAHMAN AL-AHMED (Saudi  Arabia) said  the resumption of this  session of the  Assembly was  evidence that  the international  community took  keen interest  in meeting its responsibilities  to the Palestinian  people.  In a previous session, an  overwhelming majority had demanded that Israel  desist from creating  settlements and  other acts  that would  affect the  Occupied territories.   Israel's actions  negatively affected  the peace  process and created further complications.  Israel continued  to defy the  international community. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  Israel's behaviour had brought  the peace process to a dead end, he  said. The behaviour  of the current  Israeli Government did  not make Arab  States hopeful  that a peaceful  resolution of  conflict could  be achieved, unless Israel  upheld  agreements  and  entered  into  serious  negotiations   with Palestinians, with  Syria and with  Lebanon.   Saudi Arabia appealed  to the international  community, and to  the United  States in  particular, to take all necessary  steps  to  salvage the  peace  process  and  to  end  Israeli transgressions, particularly in holy Jerusalem. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  Saudi Arabia had supported  the peace process,  and Arab States, at  their summit in Cairo in June 1996, had adopted  a unanimously firm position  that peace was an  Arab strategic  choice, he  said.  There  would be no  retreat from this position, but they were concerned at continuing violations of  the Fourth  Geneva Convention.   Saudi  Arabia  called  on the  High Contracting Parties to convene  a conference to  enforce the convention in  the occupied Palestinian  territories  and  especially  in  Jerusalem.     It  hoped  the international  community  would  seriously  assume  its  responsibility   to address Israeli transgressions. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  JEMAT HAJI AMPAL (Brunei Darussalam)  said Israeli's policies  in occupied East  Jerusalem and  other occupied  territories  continued  to be  the main obstacle  to  real  progress  in  the   peace  process.    His  country  was particularly disappointed that construction of the  housing units in the new settlement of Jabal  Abu Ghneim and the by-pass  roads in the  West Bank was still ongoing.  Relevant Security Council resolutions  as well as the  "land-for-peace"  formula should  continue to  be  the  basis for  negotiations in order to arrive at a just, comprehensive and lasting peace in the region.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  He said his  country called on  all parties concerned  to continue  urging the Israelis to comply with all previous resolutions of the tenth  emergency special session  and to immediately  bring the peace process  back on track.  He stressed the importance  of ensuring  the continuity  of the process  so that durable peace and stability in the region could be achieved.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  TEBELELO A.  BOANG (Botswana)  conveyed condolences to the  Government and people of  Jordan on the  sad occasion of  the demise of  King Hussein.   He hoped that the people of the Middle East  would honour the King's memory  by transforming the region into a zone of peace. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  He said it  worried him that the timing  of pending national elections  in Israel,  which  made  it  impossible  for  the  Government  to  continue its implementation of the Wye River Memorandum,  took precedence over the search for peace.  Activities  which were contrary to the peace process did  manage to find space in Israel's calendar.   Expropriation of Palestinian lands and illegal  settlement construction  had  continued even  when  the  Memorandum remained frozen. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  He  called  on the  Israeli  Government to  live  up to  its  side  of the bargain.   Israel's  search for  a secure  environment for  its citizens was inseparable from the inalienable right of Palestinians  to a place of  their own.    Israelis from  all  walks of  life,  particularly  those  who really yearned for peace, should not  cease to work  tirelessly for a day when  all children of  Abraham could live  together.  Finally,  the time  had come for the dates  and  venue for the  conference of High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention to be determined.  <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  PETER BURLEIGH (United States)  said his country was working to achieve  a just,  lasting and comprehensive  settlement to  the conflict  in the Middle East,  which was a  goal shared by all.   Did the emergency special session, or the draft resolution, contribute to  that goal? he asked.  The answer was clearly no.   The draft resolution did not, in content or  tone, advance the cause of peace in the Middle East or even promise to  improve the lot of the Palestinians.   In  fact, the  text  was likely  to damage  the  environment between the  parties, precisely  when actions were  needed on both  sides to improve it.  The Palestinians  and  the Israelis  had agreed  to handle  the issues raised today in their negotiations.   Neither the United  Nations nor any other body should interfere in that discussion. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  The draft's call for a meeting of all the high contracting parties to  the Fourth  Geneva Convention  in  the  occupied territories  could  damage  the climate necessary for productive and ultimately successful negotiations,  he continued.   Its language and the  steps it  proposed prejudged negotiations on  permanent  status  issues  and  hampered   the  chances  for  eventually achieving the  goal of  peace.   Like  past  resolutions,  the text  was  an unacceptable assault  on the  basic uses  and meaning of  the Fourth  Geneva Convention.  It was  another step in politicizing that Convention, which was primarily  humanitarian.  The  draft was  redundant and  hortatory and would not advance the process even incrementally.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  The  international community should  not lose sight of  its goal, he said.  The United  States had  not  done so.    It wanted  to  see  the  Wye River Memorandum implemented in its entirety,  by both sides, as soon as possible.  It wanted to see  progress in the permanent  status negotiations.   That was why  the United States  would vote "no"  on the  draft, and  asked all other States to do the same.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  HADI NEJAD  HOSSEINIAN (Iran)  said the  four resolutions  adopted by  the tenth emergency special  session had explicitly condemned Israel for failing to comply with the decisions of the General  Assembly.  The resolutions  had also denied the validity  of the Israeli illegal actions.  The rejection and defiance  of those  and other  relevant  resolutions  of the  United Nations illustrated  the  intention  of  the  Israeli  Government  to  continue  its notorious policy of expansion and  forcible occupation of the land of others through aggression,  use of  brute force  and intimidation.  Such  unlawful policies  and inhumane  practices had  not  only  been directed  against the inhabitants of  the occupied  territories, but  had also  been conducted  to perpetuate  the  refugee  status of  4 million  Palestinians  who live  in a diaspora.    The  continuation  of  that  unjust  situation  would certainly prolong the suffering of Palestinians both  in the occupied territories  and in the refugee camps.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  It was  imperative for  the Assembly  to take  the lead in  condemning and rejecting illegal Israeli  policies and  practices, he said.   A meeting  of the  High Contracting  Parties to  the Fourth  Geneva Convention  would be a step forward in addressing  issues of a humanitarian nature at time of armed conflicts  or in occupied territories.   As the fiftieth  anniversary of the four  Geneva Conventions  approached,  momentum  would  be created  for  the international  community to  reaffirm  its determination  to  safeguard  and promote  the   principles  of humanitarian  law.   Iran  hoped that  such  a Conference would contribute to the restoration  of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  QIN  HUASUN  (China) expressed  sorrow  about  the  passing  away of  King Hussein and said the best way  to honour his memory would  be to advance the peace process  for which  he had worked  throughout his life.   The  Israeli Government had recently decided to suspend  implementation of the Wye  peace accord,  continue   building  settlements   in   the  occupied   Palestinian territories and  postpone the  second-phase troop withdrawal  from the  West Bank.  Those  actions,  which  sabotaged  the  peace  process  and created tensions in the region, should be ceased immediately.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  The  Palestine issue  was at  the core  of  the  Middle East  question, he continued.   Only after  it was  solved in a reasonable  and just manner and all  the legitimate rights  of the Palestinian people  were restored could a just and lasting  peace be  forged between Israel  and Palestine, and  peace and development in the  Middle East be realized.   A political settlement to the Middle East question should  be  based  on  relevant  United Nations resolutions and the principle  of "land for peace".   The Middle  East peace process was at a  crucial juncture.  All parties should cherish the hard-won peace, carry out their obligations, abide  by agreements already reached and advance the peace process flexibly and pragmatically.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  AHMED SNOUSSI (Morocco) said this emergency  session had been resumed four times.  At  those  meetings  the  Assembly  had  adopted  resolutions  which condemned   Israeli   policies,   particularly    those   on    settlements.  Unfortunately, it had  not been able to persuade  Israel to reason.   Israel continued  to  violate the  Fourth  Geneva  Convention  in  its policies  of confiscation of  property  and creation  of  settlements,  to cite  but  two examples.   As it  persisted in  shirking it  responsibilities, Israel  made this resumed session inevitable.  This  resumption was, however, designed to be  the  last  call. Morocco  supported  a new  recommendation  to the  High Contracting Parties to the  Geneva Convention to convene  a conference on 15 July.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  He wished  to take  the opportunity,  he said,  to make  a  new appeal  to Israel  to reconsider  its decision  to  suspend  the Wye  River Memorandum.  There could be no  peace without justice  and fairness.  Israel blocked  the peace process  for security  reasons, but  it could  only be  secure if  its neighbours were secure.  All people aspired  to security, and to  tolerance, equality, coexistence, development and  peace.  He hoped that the end of the century would see the close  of this sombre chapter in the Middle East.   He hoped that  future  generations would  recall the  conflict as  part of  the previous century.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  MOSES MATHENDELE DLAMINI (Swaziland) said the international community  had continued  to urge  both Palestinians and  Israelis to come  to a conference table.  The parties had  met on  a number of occasions,  including the Oslo conference, the  Washington  conference  and  most recently  the  Wye  River conference.  The Assembly had a responsibility  to produce a resolution that would call on all parties to live up to their commitments made in all  those conferences.  Time was  running out  to live up  to such  agreements.   His delegation, however, had yet  to see a resolution that set out a  time-frame for adherence to the peace agreements. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

    The  Fourth Geneva Convention did not address  political situations, but humanitarian ones,  he said.   The situation before  the Assembly  today was political.  In light  of that, his delegation  would abstain from  voting on the draft resolution.   When your brothers were  fighting, you took no side, but  stood  in  the  middle and  reminded  them of  their  responsibility to coexist and live peacefully, he said.  The solution to the conflict lay  at the conference table. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  JENOC.A. STAEHELIN, observer for Switzerland, said that as a State  party to  the Fourth Geneva  Convention, it  considered that  the Convention fully applied to the  occupied territories, including Jerusalem.  Switzerland  was concerned  at the   deterioration of  conditions in  the occupied territory, and made an appeal to parties to abide by the Convention.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  However,  Switzerland   also  played  the  role   of  depositary  of   the Convention,  he  said.    In resolution  ES-10\/3  of 1997  the  Assembly had recommended  States parties  convene a  conference on  measures to implement the Convention in the  occupied territories and  to ensure  respect for its provisions.  After the adoption of  that resolution, Switzerland had begun consultations  with States  parties, requesting  their  views on  holding a conference  and  its  possible outcome.   It  transpired  that there  was no consensus among States parties  on the timeliness of  such a conference.  In addition, the Convention itself did not  specify modalities.  A consensus of States  parties  would   have  made  convening  a  conference  possible as recommended.  But Switzerland  must construe  its  role  as depositary  in a restricted  sense,  when  rules  were  not  clearly  defined  or  action was controversial.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  Given repeated  recommendations of the  General Assembly, Switzerland  had continued  consultations,   he   said.     It  had   contacted  States   and organizations concerned  and sought  to  identify measures  that would  lend themselves to consensus and respect for  the Convention in the  Territories.  It had invited the  Palestine Liberation Organization and Israel to a closed meeting, in the  presence of the  International Committee  of the Red  Cross (ICRC), to examine  mechanisms for effective  implementation in the occupied territories.   The meeting had been held from 9 to 11  June 1998.  Views had been exchanged  and they  had agreed  to meet  again to  consider ideas  and suggestions.  The  hope of making a contribution  to a rapid improvement of observance  had not  yet been  realized,  but such  a meeting  could produce positive results as long  as the principle of respect for the provisions was not thrown into question.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  A second meeting had, regrettably, been  postponed several times, he said.  Unfortunately,  there was no  guidance in  the Convention  on modalities for enforcement or for dispute settlement.   Shortly, the Assembly would vote on a resolution  recommending the convening of  a conference  of States parties on 15 July.  The timing had been the subject of difficult negotiations.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  Switzerland had been  asked to take  action to convene the  conference, he said.   What would  Switzerland's role be,  he asked.   In transmitting  the report of  an expert  meeting it  had previously  convened, Switzerland  had announced  its intention to undertake new consultations with States parties, the  ICRC and other  organizations.   Those consultations  had already begun informally.  However, Switzerland could not play  an active role in convening such  a  conference  unless  States parties  first  defined  procedures  for handling grave violations.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

    DORE  GOLD  (Israel) said  the  Palestine  Liberation  Organization  had consistently violated the 1994 Oslo accords, where it had agreed to  address all issues  of permanent status through  negotiations.   This resolution did not support the  peace  process,  but  undermined  it.    The  call  for  a conference of High Contracting Parties to  the Fourth Geneva Convention  was a vulgar distortion of humanitarian law for  narrow political purposes.   No such conference had  been held in  the past,  and no  such conference  could have any relevance to  the situation in the West Bank and Gaza, where 97 per cent of Palestinians lived under Palestinian rule. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  He  said   international  political   reality  was  undergoing   Orwellian contractions  here  today.    Compliance  with  peace  agreements  had  been portrayed as illegality.   It also represented a  total abuse of  the United Nations  system.  Emergency special  sessions were only intended in times of threats  to peace  and international  security.   Given the problems  of the world, this  special session was  a waste  of international resources.   The resolution before the  Assembly would only encourage unilateral  Palestinian actions.   Israel hoped  that the  international community  would support  a negotiated settlement  and compliance with  past resolutions, not  encourage unilateral actions and anarchy.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  RAFAEL DAUSA CESPEDES  (Cuba) said his  delegation wished  to be added  to the list of co-sponsors of the draft resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

  Action on Text<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  The Assembly  then approved  the text  by a  vote of  115 in  favour to  2 against (Israel,  United States),  with 5  abstentions (Australia,  Bahamas, Cameroon, Romania and Swaziland).  (See annex.)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  MICHEL DUVAL  (Canada) said  his delegation  had voted  in  favour of  the resolution  because  of its  support for  the principles  contained therein. Canada remained greatly  concerned at  Israeli settlement activities in  the occupied territories.   Israel should  stop those  activities which violated international  law and were harmful  to the peace  process.  Canada's policy was that  the Fourth Geneva Convention  applied to  the territories occupied by Israel in  1967, including East Jerusalem.  He called on Israel to accept de jure applicability of the Convention in the occupied territories. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  However, Canada  regretted that the General  Assembly was  again using the emergency special session mechanism in an  unhelpful manner, he said.  Also, the resolution had been complicated by language which  would not benefit the peace process, and by  the inclusion of elements  which were not  germane to the  question of convening the conference on the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  As  a  High  Contracting  Party  to  the  Convention,  Canada  thanked the Government  of Switzerland for  its efforts  in organizing  the October 1998 meeting  of  experts  regarding  the  applicability  of  the  Fourth  Geneva Convention to occupied territories in general,  he said.  Canada's  decision about  the  merits of  convening  the  conference  called  for in  operative paragraph 6 of the  resolution  would be made after  a full examination of the  necessity  and  possible  outcome  of   such  a  conference;  the  cost implications of it;  and, of  course,  full  consultations with  other High Parties. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  Deeply  concerned by the  current impasse  in the  negotiating process and the lack  of  progress in  implementing  the  Wye River  Memorandum,  Canada called on both the  Israelis and the  Palestinians to implement in full  the agreements which  had been  concluded, he said.   He urged  both parties  to refrain  from any unilateral  action that  would jeopardize  or prejudge the outcome of the negotiations.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  JOHN H.  CRIGHTON (Australia)  said Australia  supported the  resolution's underlying  principle  that  the Fourth  Geneva  Convention  applied  to the occupied  territories,  so  it  regretted  not  being  able  to  support the resolution.  Settlement activity harmed the peace  process, and it had  grave concerns about  the current  state  of  that process.   However,  given  the current situation  in the  region, including  the elections  in Israel,  the timing  of the resolution  was not  appropriate and  Australia had therefore abstained.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  HANS  BRATTSKAR  (Norway)  said  it  was  the  obligation  of  the parties themselves to carry  the peace process  forward.   They should refrain  from unilateral actions and engage in final  status negotiations.  His delegation believed the emergency  session was not conducive  to the peace process  and also  disagreed with several elements  of the resolution.  However, while it had reservations to the resolution, it had voted in favour of it.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  JULIO  BENITES  SAENZ (Uruguay)  said that  violence between  Israelis and Palestinians  had  endangered  the  peace agreements.    The  United Nations should  comply  with  its  obligation  to  promote  international  peace and security.   His delegation  urged Israel  and the  Palestinian Authority  to restore the peace process.   Both parties should put an end to illegal  acts that  had brought  the process  to a  halt.    The resolution,  however, did prejudge issues that would  need to be discussed during a conference of High Contracting Parties.   Because of  that,  his  delegation entered  a formal reservation, but had voted in favour of it.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

  <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

  NASTE CALOVSKI (The former Yugoslav Republic  of Macedonia) said that, due to a mistake  by the  Secretariat, his  delegation had  been prevented  from voting.  He would have voted in favour of the draft.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  NASSER AL-KIDWA,  Permanent Observer for  Palestine, thanked all the States who had  co-sponsored the  resolution and who  had voted for  it in such  an overwhelming majority.   The  resolutions of  the United  Nations were  very important, especially those adopted by the tenth emergency special  session.  Today's  resolution  constituted a  step forward  because  it contained  the practical  measure to convene  a conference  of High  Contracting Parties to the  Fourth Geneva  Convention.   His  delegation looked  forward to  such a conference and to its important results. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

ANNEX<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Vote on Illegal Israeli Actions<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

  The  draft  resolution  on  illegal  Israeli   actions  in  occupied  East Jerusalem and  the rest  of the occupied  Palestinian territories  (document A\/ES10\/L.5\/Rev.1) was  adopted by  a recorded  vote of  115 in  favour to  2 against, with 5 abstentions, as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

In  favour:    Algeria, Andorra,  Angola,  Antigua  and  Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia,  Austria,  Azerbaijan,  Bahrain,  Bangladesh,  Barbados,   Belarus, Belgium,  Benin,  Bhutan,  Bolivia,  Botswana,  Brazil,  Brunei  Darussalam, Bulgaria,  Burkina Faso,  Canada,  Chile, China,  Colombia,  Comoros,  Costa Rica,  Cote d'Ivoire,  Croatia,  Cuba, Cyprus,  Czech  Republic,  Democratic People's  Republic of  Korea,  Denmark, Egypt,  Eritrea,  Estonia,  Finland, France, Gabon, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland,  India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan,  Kenya, Kuwait, Lao  People's Democratic  Republic, Latvia,  Lebanon, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg,  Malaysia,  Maldives,  Mali, Malta,  Mexico,  Monaco,<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Morocco,  Mozambique, Myanmar,  Namibia,  Nepal, Netherlands,  New  Zealand, Nigeria,  Norway,  Oman,  Pakistan,  Paraguay,  Peru,  Philippines,  Poland, Portugal, Qatar,  Republic of Korea,  Russian Federation,  Saint Lucia,  San Marino,  Saudi  Arabia,  Senegal,  Singapore,  Slovakia,  Slovenia,  Solomon Islands, South  Africa, Spain,  Sri Lanka,  Sudan, Suriname, Sweden,  Syria, Tajikistan,  Thailand,  Tunisia,  Turkey,  Ukraine,  United  Arab  Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania,  Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet  Nam, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Against:  Israel, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Abstaining:  Australia, Bahamas, Cameroon, Romania, Swaziland.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Absent:   Albania,  Belize, Chad,  Dominican Republic,  Ethiopia,  Federated States  of  Micronesia, Fiji,  Ghana,  Lesotho,  Malawi,  Marshall  Islands, Mauritius, Palau,  Panama, Papua New Guinea,  Saint Kitts  and Nevis, Samoa, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda, Uzbekistan, Zambia.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

* *** *<\/p><\/div>\n

\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

General Assembly Plenary Emergency Special Session 12th Meeting (PM) ASSEMBLY CALLS FOR PARTIES TO FOURTH GENEVA CONVENTION TO MEET ON MEASURES TO ENFORCE ITS APPLICATION IN OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY Resolution Adopted during Emergency Special Session Recommends That Conference Be Convened on 15 July in Geneva   The General Assembly reiterated its call  for the High Contracting Parties […]<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"country":[],"document-category":[2377,1329],"document-source":[1365,2345],"committee-meeting":[],"document-subject":[6156,1861,1961,2297,2185,2137],"entity":[1729],"document-language":[6542],"class_list":["post-213799","document","type-document","status-publish","hentry","document-category-multimedia","document-category-press-release","document-source-general-assembly","document-source-general-assembly-10th-emergency-special-session","document-subject-agenda-item","document-subject-fourth-geneva-convention","document-subject-jerusalem","document-subject-land","document-subject-legal-issues","document-subject-settlements","entity-united-nations-system","document-language-english"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document\/213799","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/document"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document\/213799\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=213799"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/country?post=213799"},{"taxonomy":"document-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-category?post=213799"},{"taxonomy":"document-source","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-source?post=213799"},{"taxonomy":"committee-meeting","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/committee-meeting?post=213799"},{"taxonomy":"document-subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-subject?post=213799"},{"taxonomy":"entity","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/entity?post=213799"},{"taxonomy":"document-language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-language?post=213799"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}