COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS DEBATES REPORT ON THE SITUATION IN THE OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES

Commission on Human Rights
57th session
21 March 2001
Morning






High Commissioner for Refugees, Foreign Affairs Officials Also Speak


The Commission on Human Rights heard varying reactions this morning to continuing disturbances in the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel, with the Organization of the Islamic Conference calling for an international monitoring presence and the United States and the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Israel charging that the Commission's actions to date had been one-sided and did not reflect the complex causes of the situation.

The spur for the discussion was a report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, who visited the region in response to a resolution passed by the Commission at a Special Session last fall.

The Commission also heard an address this morning from Ruud Lubbers, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, who said that respect for human rights -- or the lack of it -- was perhaps the main driving force in the cycle of forced displacement, and that the international community could help ease refugee problems by advocating human-rights standards, monitoring conditions and assisting Governments in protecting their citizens.

Foreign affairs officials from the Russian Federation, Slovenia, Israel, and Japan spoke as well.

Serguei A. Ordzhonikidze, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, said, among other things, that the Government's response to an "aggressive enclave of bandits and terrorists" in Chechnya had been successful, that life was returning to normal in much of the region, and that investigations into all human-rights violations there would be carried out but that the process required time.

Ignac Golob, State Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Slovenia, told the Commission, among other things, that it was essential to prevent future gross and flagrant violations of human rights under the guise of State sovereignty, and that the option of intervention into the internal affairs of countries should be used when necessary as a way of cutting short such massive violations.

Michael Melchior, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Israel, said, among other things, that if the core of the conflict in the occupied territories was the Palestinians' desire to determine their own future, responsible negotiations would be needed to achieve those aims; the hand of peace was still extended by Israel, but painful compromises on both sides would be needed.

And Kaori Maruya, Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs of Japan, said a single across-the-board approach to human rights would not work, but on the other hand, differences in economic, historic or cultural situations should never be used by a country to excuse failure to improve a human rights situation.

Contributing statements under the Commission's agenda item on the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and follow-up to the World Conference on Human Rights were Representatives of the United States, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, India, Pakistan (on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference), and Egypt.

Officials of Cyprus, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Palestine, Lebanon, Israel, and Turkey spoke in exercise of the right of reply.

The Commission will reconvene at 3:30 p.m. and is expected to begin discussion over the course of the afternoon of its agenda item on the right to self-determination.


Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and follow-up to the World Conference on Human Rights

Under this agenda item, the Commission has before it the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on her visit to the occupied Palestinian territories, Israel, Egypt and Jordan (E/CN.4/2001/114). The report indicates that since late September there has been a dramatic deterioration of the human rights situation in the occupied territories. The report notes that the most persistent was that Israeli security forces have engaged in excessive force, disproportionate to the threat faced by their soldiers. A high percentage of the injuries sustained by Palestinians have been to the upper part of their bodies, including a large number of eye injuries, some caused by the firing of rubber bullets at close range. The report notes that an aspect of particular concern is the allegation that the medical condition of many of the victims has suffered, with some deaths, as a consequence of their being denied access to timely medical assistance. The reports continues that very serious allegations were made of attacks by Israeli security forces on medical personnel and ambulances.

Other issues addressed by the report include settlements, the closure imposed on the occupied territories and its economic impact on the Palestinian population as well as the situation of Arab Israelis. In her concluding remarks, the High Commissioner indicates that she came away from her visit deeply concerned about the serious deterioration of the human rights situation in the occupied territories and Israel and at the terrible cost in terms of human lives and she calls on both parties to renew efforts to halt the current dangerous escalation.

The Commission also has before it the response of Israel (E/CN.4/2001/133) to the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. The document addresses what it regards as the shortcomings of the High Commissioner’s report, its disregard of context, fundamental flaws, one-sidedness and politicized assertions. It also addresses the general aspects of the current violence, including the causes of the violence, what it terms as Palestinian hostile propaganda and incitement to violence and the nature of the conflict. The document continues to review Palestinian policies and practices, including what it considers as the exploitation of children and their military training, violence directed against Israeli civilians, the use and failure to confiscate illegal weapons, the unwarranted release of terrorist detainees, attacks on and the destruction of Jewish holy sites, the abuse of protective symbols and of accepted principles relating to the relief of the wounded.

The document concludes, inter alia, that the Palestinian resort to violence from late September 2000 was in significant measure the result of an orchestrated campaign by the Palestinian leadership. The immediate objective of this action was to neutralize and counteract the widely held appreciation in the international community of Palestinian responsibility for the failure of the Camp David negotiations and the virtual uniform international reaction in the run-up to Mr. Arafat's 13 September 2000 deadline for the unilateral declaration of a Palestinian State which counselled against such a step.


Statements

SERGUEI ORDZHONIKIDZE, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, said the interpretation of the universality of human rights must be based on a solid foundation of respect for the sovereignty of States and should be free of "double standards". In the Middle East, it was important to break the circle of violence and to resume meaningful negotiations; the isolation of the Palestinians and the economic blockade of the territories should be ended. In the Balkans, events had shown Russia to be right -- the NATO operation against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had not solved a single humanitarian problem and in fact had served as a catalyst for further violations; "humanitarian interventions" of that kind were contrary to true efforts to protect human rights.

The upcoming World Conference against Racism should devote particular attention to contemporary problems, including ethnic and religious intolerance, language apartheid, historical and cultural arrogance, and discrimination against foreigners and stateless persons, Mr. Ordzhonikidze said.

In the Russian Federation, he said, efforts to build and promote democracy and human rights were far-advanced. Various international human-rights bodies, however, had on numerous occasions discussed the situation in the Chechen Republic and a lot had been said that was not objective and was in fact bluntly falsified. The Russian Federation's appraisal of the situation remained accurate: an aggressive enclave of bandits and terrorists had threatened the stability of Russia's regions and neighbouring countries and decisive measures had been taken within the law to counter this threat; the structure of the terrorist regime was destroyed and major bandit formations were dispersed, and recently much of the Republic had been able to resume everyday life. Local authority bodies had been established on most Chechen territory, administrative and

Government systems were created, a member of the State Duma was elected to represent the Republic, and local elections were being prepared. The presence of the United Army Group in Chechnya had been reduced to reflect the relative stability of the situation. If all that was not proof of progress of a political settlement of the crisis, what was?

President V.V. Putin of the Russian Federation had promised that all those responsible for human-rights violations would be brought to justice, and the Government was struggling to accomplish this goal, the Deputy Minister said, but professional and exhaustive investigations required time and resources, and these were being allocated to Chechnya as a matter of priority.

RUUD LUBBERS, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, said that respect for human rights - or the lack of it - was perhaps the main driving force in the cycle of forced displacement. Human rights abuses created refugees and UNHCR's mandated role was to protect the human rights of refugees during flight and asylum. The protection of internally displaced people remained the sovereign responsibility of their national governments. But the international community could and should help by advocating human rights standards, by monitoring conditions and by assisting governments to build the capacity to protect their own people. With the World Conference against Racism approaching in September, the link between forced displacement and racism, xenophobia and intolerance should be emphasized.

Racism and related forms of ethnic and religious intolerance were often at the root of tension and conflict in society, the High Commissioner for Refugees said. The most chilling forms of persecution - such as "ethnic cleansing" - resulted when the government itself took sides. If discrimination and inequality went without redress - or were exploited by irresponsible political leaders - conflict could erupt and displace masses of people. For a decade now, UNHCR had been grappling with a chain reaction of ethnic persecution, conflict and displacement in the Balkans. Within the past few weeks, the violence had finally reached the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia - threatening the stability of the entire region once again.

Mr. Lubbers said refugees in search of asylum faced uncertain welcome today. The communities where they fled might be hostile, seeing refugees as a threat to security, social stability and jobs. Such pressures created fertile ground for racism, xenophobia and intolerance. In many parts of the world, the entanglement of migration and asylum further complicated the picture. Governments had created a daunting array of obstacles aimed at preventing migrants from reaching their territories. As a consequence, many asylum seekers resorted to unscrupulous criminal trafficking and smuggling networks - becoming victims yet again. Today, refugees and economic migrants had become seriously confused - even assimilated - in the public mind - stereotyping refugees as economically motivated, a burden, a danger to public health and a social threat. Irresponsible media often joined the chorus.

The deteriorating public discourse on asylum and migration issues in some European countries had been accompanied by a rise in violent attacks on foreigners, including refugees, Mr Lubbers said. These cowardly acts had included firebombing, beatings and murders. Many of the victims were visibly not ethnic Europeans - making the racial element of these hate crimes clear. The human rights community had an important responsibility to push for tough sanctions against those who incited racial hatred, intolerance and xenophobia.

In some of the most challenging returnee situations today - such as East Timor and Kosovo - the international community must create basic institutions of national protection that never before existed. National human rights institutions - with support and encouragement from the international community - must encourage the development of solid institutions and the rule of law and should help returnees realize their rights in practical ways - by recovering their homes and property, obtaining documents, collecting pensions and getting their children back to school.

The fiftieth anniversary of the Refugee Convention was a time for serious reflection, not only on past achievements, but on the work needed to ensure the relevance of the refugee protection regime for the next half century.

IGNAC GOLOB, State Secretary at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Slovenia, said Slovenia recently had signed the optional protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women and was considering the applicability of Article 14 of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination. It also strongly supported efforts to draft an optional protocol to the Convention against Torture.

Slovenia thought it was essential to prevent future gross and flagrant violations of human rights under the guise of State sovereignty, Mr. Golob said; the option of intervention into the internal affairs of countries as a way of cutting short such massive violations was an important advance in the right direction.

Slovenia was promoting the protection of ethnic minorities in south eastern Europe through the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe, Mr. Golob said; it was sponsoring a task force on human rights and minorities and was co-chairing a working table on democratization and human rights; and a month ago it had hosted a Conference on Democracy, Human Rights and Protection of Persons Belonging to Ethnic and Religious Minorities in South Eastern Europe.

Slovenia was concerned about the deterioration of inter-ethnic relations in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Mr. Golob said, and resolutely rejected the extremist acts of ethnic intolerance which were endangering important achievements by the Republic in avoiding ethnic and religious conflict.

The Slovenian Government also felt concern about the plight of migrants and refugees in the region, the State Secretary for Foreign Affairs said, and felt that further international cooperation was sorely needed to avoid lone desperate actions by countries most affected by migratory flows; it was concerned about the situation of children in conflict situations and had contributed to efforts to rehabilitate children affected by armed violence in Kosovo; and it was especially involved in de-mining efforts, having established the International Trust Fund for Demining and Mine Victims' Assistance, whose seat was in Slovenia and which operated with support from the United States, the European Union, and other contributors.

MICHAEL MELCHIOR, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs for the State of Israel, said he believed there was no contradiction between religion and peace, and that ethnic and cultural diversity was a source of internal strength, not division and strife. Israel was proud of its democratic and pluralist society and the significant role of its civil society in the field of human rights. The establishment of a National Commission for human rights was planned and the Israeli Supreme Court played a central role in enhancing the rule of law and individual rights. He expressed deep disappointment over the developments since the meeting between the Israelis and Palestinians at Camp David last year. The Israeli Government was applauded at that time for the compromises it had offered. But the Oslo Process had been fundamentally breached and Israel had been forced to assume an abhorrent role in defending its citizens by military means.

Mr. Melchior assured the Commission that Israel was not indifferent to any suffering. Any attempt to turn the conflict into an eternal, religious conflict was an extremely dangerous strategy. Religion had been perverted into a source of divisiveness, hatred and death. A rejection of the right of Jewish self-determination and the existence of a Jewish State would lead to no compromise because no people compromised their own survival. If the core of the conflict was the Palestinians' desire to determine their own future, responsible negotiations were needed to achieve their aims. The hand of peace was still outstretched, but painful compromises on both sides were needed for peace.

Several anti-Israeli items featured on the Commission's agenda. Israel's withdrawal from Southern Lebanon had apparently gone unnoticed. A balanced, positive approach in which violence was renounced and negotiations restored was needed. There had been attempts to politicize the World Conference against Racism and to exclude Israel. Proposed attempts to isolate Israel politically were counterproductive and distracting. The Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs concluded by noting that his own cousins, three children, had been injured in an attack on a school bus only weeks ago. He prayed for the sense to avoid future situations where parents needed to bring their children to the grave.

KAORI MARUYA, Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs of Japan, said that the international community was facing urgent concerns to tackle, as various forms of human rights violations became evident, along with newly emerging problems of refugees and internally displaced persons. As history made its twists and turns, human rights were constantly confronted by new challenges, calling for both comprehensive and specific approaches. The common duty of the international community today was to ensure respect and observance of international standards of human rights, in particular the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenants on Human Rights.

Ms. Maruya said that while the primary responsibility for guaranteeing human rights belonged to each State, continued efforts should be made also at the United Nations' human rights fora, so as to assist all countries in their efforts to improve human rights situations. Human rights were a universal value, but when it came to individual cases, there existed different approaches that reflected each country's history, culture and tradition, as well as its economic and political system. Accordingly, effective and practical approaches were required for the alleviation of human rights violations since a single across-the-board approach would in no way be conducive to the improvement of human rights. On the other hand, it could not be denied that differences in economic, historic or cultural situations should never be used as an excuse to justify the failure to improve a human rights situation.

Japan considered it essential to combine the following three approaches, Ms. Maruya said: promotion of mutual understanding through dialogue on each country's specific situation; international cooperation with a view to enhancing human rights protection through an effective and practical approach; and resolute disapproval of serious violations of human rights, whenever required. By combining these three approaches in good proportion, the international community might be able to solve problems, without politicization.

SHIRIN TAHIR-KHELI (the United States) said that in October, the Commission's Special Session on the Middle East situation narrowly adopted a resolution over the objections of the United States. As the United States made clear at the time, the resolution was one-sided and did not contribute to the search for a just, lasting and comprehensive peace. The United States firmly believed that the parties needed to take the steps necessary to reduce the violence, restore confidence, and resume negotiations. The United States was deeply disturbed at the breakdown of the peace process and the surge in violence. The causes of this situation were many and complex and no one should be under any illusion that they stemmed from just one side. The United States believed that the High Commissioner could have made this point much more clearly in her report. She was absolutely right, however, when she said that the only path to lasting peace and stability was through peaceful negotiations.

The United States remained deeply committed to achieving a just and lasting peace in the Middle East based on UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, including the principle of land for peace. The violence must end, and the Palestinians must be able to resume their normal economic activities. The Commission had a responsibility to do what it could to encourage a halt to the violence and encourage peace in the Middle East, for this was the only way to advance the human rights for Palestinians and Israelis alike.

JORGE FERRER RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said that the Cuban Delegation appreciated the differences within and among societies as a wealth of humanity. A larger number of meetings of rapporteurs needed to be open to the participation of States. The special procedures and bodies of treaties were not entities with intrinsic autonomy and, therefore, needed an intergovernmental mandate granted by the corresponding bodies of this organization to which they were subordinate. The Secretariat and the Commission were responsible for supervision of the strict fulfilment of the decisions adopted by the General Assembly and the Commission. States' capacity to determine their priorities were damaged by the linking of rapporteurs' monitoring activities with projects of technical cooperation.

An approach based on the promotion of the right to development was necessary. A fourth branch within the Office of the High Commissioner and devoted exclusively to the promotion and protection of the right to development needed to be established. Equal geographic distribution of the personnel of the Office was needed as well as neutrality in the discharge of the Secretariat's work. The contributions of donors needed to be provided without conditions.

ABDULWAHAB ATTAR (Saudi Arabia) said that Saudi Arabia was participating for the first time as a full member of the Commission. It considered human rights to be very important. International conventions on human rights had been ratified by Saudi Arabia. The work of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, during her visit to the occupied Palestinian territories, and the tenor of her report were appreciated. The Commission needed to implement the recommendations for resolving the situation of the Palestinian people contained within the report.

RAHA NUSHIRWAN (Malaysia), speaking on behalf of the Like Minded Group of Countries (LMG), said that human rights should no longer be seen as the monopoly of some States to the exclusion of others. The LMG believed that efforts to rectify the imbalances that existed between, on the one hand, economic, social and cultural rights, and civil and political rights on the other hand, should be strengthened. The LMG believed that balance needed to be brought not only between the number of mandates assigned to each of these two categories of rights, but also financial and manpower resources dedicated to them. In this connection, the LMG believed that the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights should continue to strengthen its own research and analytical capacity on economic, social and cultural rights and the right to development.



Secondly, the Like Minded Group of Countries also believed that reflecting the diversity of social, political and legal traditions, especially in the Office of the High Commissioner's staffing policies, was of paramount importance if the Office was to continue to enjoy the support of all States. Thirdly, the LMG was of the opinion that the Office should find new ways and means of making the best use of available human rights expertise from different regions. Fourthly, technical cooperation and advisory services provided at the request of Governments with a view to developing national human rights capacities constituted the most effective and efficient means of promoting and protecting human rights.

NAJAT AL-HAJJAJI (the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya) said it seemed to be difficult for Commission Special Rapporteurs and mechanisms to visit the occupied territories as requested by last October's Special Session, and even more a matter of concern was that a number of Rapporteurs and mechanisms did not apparently intend even to try to visit. Israel had told the Special Rapporteur on religious intolerance when he applied for a visa that it would not cooperate with the relevant operative paragraphs of the Commission's resolution. The Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances had concluded that there were insufficient facts to warrant a mission to the occupied territories; and the Special Rapporteur on violence against women had sent a letter asking to meet with relevant Government officials and was still awaiting a reply, while other Rapporteurs and working groups seemed to have no real plans or ambitions to visit the region.

Did these mechanisms not believe that the situation in the occupied territories was serious? That it was dangerous? Had they not reviewed the information that had come from reputable sources? The Commission must look into this lack of cooperation by its own mechanisms.

SAVITRI KUNADI (India) said the primary aim of the World Conference against Racism should be to build a better future free of racism and racial discrimination. It was important for the international community to discourage forces that sought to promote disorder and violence and undermine multi-religious and multi-ethnic democratic States in the name of religious or ethnic chauvinism; equally dangerous were forces that promoted discrimination against minorities. Policies of countries towards migration should not be motivated by considerations of racism or racial discrimination and if they were, they should be condemned.

The mass media and information technologies such as the Internet should not be used to spread racist ideas. In India's view, poverty and economic disparities around the world significantly contributed to the persistence of racist attitudes, and it was important therefore to ensure that globalization, which had such tremendous positive potential, did not lead to the accentuation of such conditions. Finally, it was important to combat racial prejudices through education, culture and information programmes.

MUNIR AKRAM (Pakistan), speaking on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), said that decisive steps to prevent gross violations of human rights needed to be adopted. Human rights were essential for full human development and human development was important for the universal enjoyment of all human rights. The human rights of Muslim people had been abused and visits to incipient crisis situations had not been taken. The portrayal of Islam as a religion with lesser safeguards for women concerned the OIC. The summary on Human Rights for Women and Review of the Fourth World Conference on Women failed to list crimes committed in the name of passion, mercy killings or sexual orientation as equally despicable crimes against women. Islamophobia had been an unfortunate and widespread phenomena.

The High Commissioner's report on the situation in the occupied Palestinian territories helped to explain that Israel had defied the implementation of key UN General Assembly resolutions and had evaded its responsibility for the right of return of refugees. The Palestinians had no choice but to rely on their own strengths and coherence to uphold their fundamental human rights and, therefore, the use of the term "violence" equated the aggressor with the victims. An international monitoring presence needed to be established and Israeli military resources should be withdrawn. A report on the implementation of resolution S-5/1 of 19 October 2000, adopted at the Fifth Special Session, was requested.

FAYZA ABOULNAGA (Egypt) said the tasks of the Office of the High Commissioner were growing, which was a good thing, but the process required better coordination to avoid overlap and waste. The report on the visit by the High Commissioner to the occupied Palestinian territories was laudable and helped somewhat to restore the United Nations' credibility on issues related to the Middle East; in no way could anyone accept the contradictory logic coming from some quarters that responsibility for the situation there should be placed on the people who were occupied, rather than on the occupiers.

Israeli aggression was known to all, and could not be defended in any way. There were serious problems with Israeli settlements, with compensation of Palestinians for lost land and damage to their properties, as well as with the violence. How the Commission responded to the desperate and illegal situation in the occupied territories was a prime test of its credibility; the Commission could not be said to respect human rights if it did not take serious, unambiguous action to help the Palestinians.


Rights of Reply

A Representative of Cyprus, speaking in right of reply, took the floor to respond to a statement made by Pakistan on behalf of the OIC under agenda item 3. The isolation of the Turkish Cypriots was a result of the non-recognition of the illegal entity set up on occupied Cypriot territory. This illegal regime had been condemned and declared invalid. Everyone was aware of the efforts of the Government which was involved in the process aimed at the reunification of the island which was the only way to put an end to the isolation of Turkish Cypriots.

A Representative of Armenia, speaking in right of reply, said in response to a statement made by Pakistan under agenda item 3 that the allegations of Armenian aggression against Azerbaijan were unfounded and did not reflect the reality on the ground. Armenia continued to participate in all efforts to find a peaceful solution to the Nagorno-Karabach conflict.

A Representative of Azerbaijan, speaking in right of reply, said the Representative of Armenia must know that the United Nations Charter protected the territorial integrity of States. Armenia had invaded the territory of Azerbaijan, and had done so aggressively; the Parliament of Armenia had even acted to annex formally territory that belonged to Azerbaijan.

A Representative of Palestine, speaking in right of reply, said that when the Representative of Israel spoke of his Scandinavian origins, he had summed up the entirety of the Palestinian tragedy. The Palestinian Representative, born in Jaffa, had been evicted by force and was not allowed to return to his home city, but a foreign-born person had settled there. The Israeli Minister was not even aware of this problem. The Israeli Minister had said that Israel was democratic and respected and defended human rights. The Israeli State was based on murder, eviction and occupation by force. The reality was exactly the opposite of what was heard this morning. The Commission had condemned Israel for thirty years. The Israelis’ right of return prohibited Palestinians from returning to Palestine, but allowed those from elsewhere to settle freely.

A Representative of Lebanon, speaking in right of reply, wondered how Israel could contend that it had applied resolution 425 in full and express perplexity that the question of violations of human rights in southern Lebanon was still on the Commission's agenda when it continued to violate Lebanon's airspace and encroach on its water resources on a daily basis.

A Representative of Israel, speaking in right of reply, said some delegations had overlooked the message of peace, tolerance, and dialogue brought by the Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister. Perhaps those speakers did not understand how law and Government worked in a democracy, and did not understand the role played by Israel as a haven for those who had been persecuted in the past. As for the matter of responsibility for the disturbances in Palestine, that responsibility lay with those who planned and carried out the riots -- it had became more and more clear, based on statements made by Palestinian officials, that the riots were not spontaneous but had been planned. As the Deputy Foreign Minister had said, when the violence stopped, the Israeli response to it would stop. Negotiations would be necessary, based on painful compromise, to resolve the issues of contention between Israel and Palestine.

A Representative of Palestine, speaking in second right of reply, said he was astonished and bewildered to hear what the Israeli delegate had said about the pre-planned nature of the Intifada. The visit of Ariel Sharon to the Al Aqsa mosque had led to peaceful Palestinian objection. The Israelis had opened fire. The violence was triggered by the Israeli use of force. The Palestinians had a legitimate right to resist. He requested that the Chairman acknowledge that right. Israel wanted to occupy Palestine by the right of arms. Palestinians planned never to give in to Israeli demands.

A Representative of Lebanon, speaking in second right of reply, said that Lebanon did not need advice on how to comply with international law. The one who needed pressure brought to bear on it was Israel who occupied other peoples' territory and flouted international law. Israel had left 13,000 landmines in southern Lebanon, inflicting suffering on the Lebanese population. Further, it had not given Lebanon any maps indicating where these mines were located. Lebanon therefore appealed for the international community for help.

A Representative of Turkey, speaking in right of reply, said that in reference to the accusation of "occupation" in Cyprus, the record had to be put straight. There was no occupation in Cyprus but intervention based on international agreements. The intervention had been fully legal.

A Representative of Cyprus, speaking in second right of reply, said this was not the time to respond to specific points of the previous speaker, but she wanted to recapitulate the earlier statements. The isolation of the Turkish Cypriots was the result of the setting up of an illegal regime, condemned and declared invalid by the UN Security Council. A just, comprehensive solution was planned and the Government of Cyprus was involved in this effort.


* *** *