France, 2011

When we

met in this very place in September last year, who

among us could have imagined that in barely one year

the world, already shaken by an unprecedented

economic crisis, would undergo such change? Within a

few months, the Arab Spring gave rise to immense

hope.

The Arab peoples, too long crushed by

oppression, were able to raise their heads and claimed

the right to be free at last. They fought back against the

violence and brutality with their bare hands. To those

who proclaimed that the Arab Muslim world was by

nature hostile to democracy and human rights, the

young Arabs produced the most cogent denial.

We do not have the right to disappoint the hope of

the Arab peoples. We do not have the right to destroy

their dreams. For shattering the dreams of those

peoples would vindicate the fanatics who have not

stopped pitting Islam against the West by stirring up

hatred and violence everywhere.

That appeal for justice shook the world, and the

world cannot respond to that call for justice by

perpetuating an injustice. That miraculous spring of the

23 11-50692

Arab peoples imposes on us the moral and political

obligation at last to find a solution to the Middle East

conflict. We cannot wait any longer. The method used

to date — I weigh my words carefully — has failed. So

we must change the method.

We must stop believing that a single country —

whether the largest or a small group of countries — can

resolve so complex a problem. Too many large actors

have been sidelined for our efforts to succeed. I mean

that no one can believe that the peace process can

succeed without Europe, without all the permanent

members of the Security Council and without the Arab

States that have already chosen peace. A collective

approach has become indispensable in order to create

trust and to provide guarantees to each of the parties.

Peace will indeed be made by the Israelis and the

Palestinians, and by no one else. No one can expect to

impose it on them. But we must help them.

The method no longer works. Let us together

acknowledge that setting preconditions for negotiation

is to condemn ourselves to failure. Preconditions are

the opposite of negotiation. If we wish to enter into

negotiation, which is the only possible path for peace,

there must be no preconditions.

Let us change the method. All the elements of a

solution are known — the Madrid Conference of 1991,

President Obama’s speech of 19 May, the Road Map,

the Arab Peace Initiative and the parameters agreed by

the European Union. So, let us stop endlessly

discussing the parameters and allow negotiation to

begin in line with a concrete and ambitious timetable.

Sixty years without one centimetre’s progress — does

that not compel us to change the method and time

frame to one month to resume discussions, six months

to reach agreement on borders and security, and one

year to reach a definitive settlement?

As of this autumn, France proposes hosting a

donor conference so that the Palestinians can complete

the construction of their future State. France wishes to

say that we must not immediately seek the perfect

solution, because there are no perfect solutions. Let us

choose the path of compromise, which is neither

renunciation nor repudiation, but which allows us to

move forward, step by step.

Thus, for 60 years the Palestinians have been

waiting for their State. Has the time not come to give

them hope? For 60 years, Israel has suffered from not

being able to live in peace. For 60 years, the question

of the peaceful coexistence of the two peoples —

Palestinian and Israeli — has continued to fester. We

can no longer wait to take the path of peace. Let us put

ourselves in the place of the Palestinians. Is it not

legitimate that they claim their State? Of course it is.

And who does not see that creating a democratic,

viable and peaceful Palestinian State would be, for

Israel, the best guarantee of its security?

Let us put ourselves in the place of the Israelis. Is

it not legitimate that, after 60 years of war and attacks,

they demand guarantees of that peace, so long awaited?

Of course it is. I say that forcefully. If anyone

anywhere in the world were to threaten the existence of

Israel, France would immediately and wholeheartedly

stand alongside Israel. Threats made against a State

Member of the United Nations are unacceptable, and

they will not be accepted.

Today, we are facing a very difficult choice. Each

of us knows — and let us stop with hypocrisy and one-

off diplomacy — that full recognition of the status of a

State Member of the United Nations cannot be attained

at once. The first reason for that is the lack of trust

between the main parties. But let us tell the truth: who

can doubt that a veto in the Security Council will

engender a cycle of violence in the Middle East? Who

can doubt that?

Must we therefore exclude an intermediate stage?

Why not envisage offering Palestine the status of

United Nations Observer State? That would be an

important step forward. After 60 years of immobility,

which has paved the way for extremists, we would be

giving hope to the Palestinians by making progress

towards final status.

To show their determined commitment to a

negotiated peace, the Palestinian authorities should, as

part of that approach, reaffirm Israel’s right to exist

and to its security. They should commit to avoiding

using this new status to resort to actions that are

incompatible with the pursuit of negotiations.

We have but one alternative — immobility and

negotiations that go nowhere or an intermediate

solution that would give hope to the Palestinians with

the status of an Observer State.

In parallel, Israel must observe the same restraint.

It must abstain from any actions that would prejudge

the final status.

11-50692 24

The ultimate goal must be mutual recognition of

two nation-States for two peoples established on the

basis of the 1967 lines with agreed and equivalent

exchanges of land.

The General Assembly, which has a power to do

so, should decide to move ahead, leave behind the fatal

trap of paralysis, missed appointments and short-lived

attempts to relaunch the process. Let us change our

approach. Let us change our state of mind. Each should

try to understand the reasoning, sufferings and fears of

the other. Each must open its eyes and be ready to

make concessions.

In conclusion, I would like to say to the

Palestinian people with the deep and sincere friendship

I hold for them: “Think of the Israeli mothers grieving

for their family members killed in terrorist attacks.

They feel the same pain as the Palestinian mothers

confronted with the brutal death of one of theirs”.

I would like to say to the Israeli people with the

deep and sincere friendship I hold for them: “Listen to

what the young people of the Arab Spring are saying:

‘Long live freedom!’ They are not crying ‘Down with

Israel’. You cannot remain immobile when this wind of

freedom and democracy is blowing in your region”.

I say with deep and sincere friendship for these

two peoples who have suffered so much that the time

has come to build peace for the children of Palestine

and for the children of Israel. But it would be a great

shame if the General Assembly did not seize the

opportunity of the reawakening of the Arab peoples to

democracy to settle a problem that brings unhappiness

to these two peoples, who are in any event condemned

to live alongside each other. If we take a compromise

solution, we will rebuild trust and we will give people

hope.

I say that with the utmost gravity to the

representatives of all nations. We must assume an

historic responsibility. It is the General Assembly of

the United Nations that must keep this appointment

with History.

Let us reassure Israel and give hope to the

Palestinian people. The solution is on the table. Let us

take this compromise solution over deadlock. Deadlock

might satisfy everyone here, but it will create violence,

bitterness and opposition that will imperil the

resurgence of the Arab peoples. To that, France says

that the tragedy must cease for a simple reason: it has

gone on for too long.