State of Palestine, 2004

Let me begin by

congratulating you, Mr. Ping, on your election as

President of the General Assembly during its fifty-

ninth session. We are confident that you will conduct

the proceedings of this session with great competence.

I would like to pay tribute to your predecessor,

Mr. Julian Robert Hunte, who so ably presided over the

fifty-eighth session of the General Assembly.

I would like to express at this time my deep

appreciation for the efforts of the Secretary-General to

harmonize international relations and ensure respect

for the principles of the Charter and international law,

with a view to strengthening international peace and

security. His statement before this Assembly marks a

26

landmark in the quest for the rule of law and respect

for the role of the United Nations in international

conflicts.

In my statement, I will focus on the turbulent

situation in the Middle East and, more specifically, on

the core of the conflict in the Middle East. The

situation in the region of Western Asia — or the

Middle East — is in turmoil. The occupation of Iraq

was founded on false pretexts, further damaging the

already grave situation resulting from Israel’s policies

and practices in occupied Palestinian and other Arab

territories. A total absence of law and order is now the

general pattern of life in occupied Iraq. This continued

occupation is wreaking havoc on the economic and

social aspects of life there. We urge the competent

institutions, namely the United Nations General

Assembly and the Security Council, to take the

necessary and appropriate measures to ensure Iraq’s

independence and sovereignty as soon as possible.

Israel is the only nuclear Power in the Middle

East. It has approximately the fourth most powerful

army in the world and is a sophisticated arms

developer and dealer with no ethical or moral

constraints and no concern for human rights. The

Israeli Government can therefore do anything it

wishes, and it acts like a high-tech military expert and

rogue State. It has become tremendously useful for the

United States, since it has strategically placed itself in

the centre of the global arms industry. Counting on the

support of the United States, Israel breaks moral and

international laws with impunity.

The daily assaults on peaceful Palestinian towns

and villages — the demolition of homes and houses,

the bulldozing and uprooting of age-old fruit-bearing

olive and citrus trees, the targeted killings and

assassinations, the closures, the imposition of a state of

siege and curfews and the use of excessively

disproportionate firepower, which has resulted, so far,

in more than 3,200 deaths and thousands of injuries —

are common knowledge. We completely reject the

allegation by Israel that this is carried out in self-

defence. The Palestinians under occupation, with their

meagre means of combat, are the party exercising the

right to self-defence. Almost 8,000 Palestinians are

being held without trial under merciless conditions,

and when they protested against those conditions, an

Israeli minister boasted, and I quote, “let them go on a

hunger strike until they die”.

In addition to all the other methods Israel uses to

obstruct peace, it holds our democratically elected

President, Yasser Arafat, in confinement and has

announced that they can find no partner with whom to

negotiate peace. With whom are the negotiations for

settlement and peace to be negotiated, if not with the

democratically elected President? Israel, and others of

the same mind, must wish to see a continuation of the

status quo or to deal with an imposed — and not

democratically elected — group or person.

The performance-based road map was

unanimously backed by Security Council resolution

1515 (2003). We have accepted the road map since, in

our opinion, it augured well. The road map envisaged a

two-State solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,

and stated that the solution of the conflict

“will only be achieved through an end to violence

and terrorism, when the Palestinian people have a

leadership acting decisively against terror and

willing and able to build a practising democracy

based on tolerance and liberty, and through

Israel’s readiness to do what is necessary for a

democratic Palestinian state to be established”.

The Palestinians, through their representative, the

Palestine Liberation Organization, embraced the road

map and believes it offers another opportunity to end

the conflict. We hope that the Quartet will seriously

assume the noble task of implementing the objectives

of the road map.

Acts of State terrorism were Israel’s response to

the performance-based road map. To be more specific,

a 2,000-pound bomb was dropped after the Palestinians

scrupulously observed an unofficial ceasefire. Israel

still adheres to the 14 reservations it had regarding the

road map. The nebulous ideas and intentions revealed

in the exchange of letters between President Bush and

Prime Minister Sharon on the matter of the

commitment to the road map are far from encouraging

and keep the road map and Security Council resolution

1515 (2003) in limbo if not completely neglecting and

rejecting them.

In his letter of assurance dated 14 April 2004 to

Prime Minister Sharon, President Bush reiterates that

“the United States supports the establishment of a

Palestinian state that is viable, contiguous,

sovereign, and independent, so that the

Palestinian people can build their own future in

27

accordance with … the path set forth in the

roadmap”.

However, when President Bush addresses the

reality on the ground, he assures Israel that “it is

unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status

negotiations will be a full and complete return to the

armistice lines of 1949”.

He admits that as part of a final peace settlement,

Israel must have secure and recognized borders, which

should emerge from negotiations between the parties in

accordance with United Nations Security Council

resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). However,

Mr. Bush and Mr. Sharon do not topographically

identify the secure and recognized borders of Israel.

In the aforementioned letter of assurance,

President Bush stresses that the United States is

strongly committed to Israel’s security and well-being

as a Jewish State. He does not concern himself with the

security of the so-called provisional State of Palestine.

He seems to be oblivious to the fact that 20 per cent of

the citizens of Israel are non-Jewish and that Israel has

not as yet defined who is a Jew. This concept will

inevitably lead to the creation of a racist society within

the Israeli political entity.

To ensure the success of the road map and the

achievement of its goal — a final and comprehensive

settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by 2005 —

the plan also requires that Israel “freezes all settlement

activity” and “withdraws from Palestinian areas

occupied from 28 September 2000”.

Commenting on the meeting between

President Bush and Prime Minister Sharon,

Javier Solana, European Union High Representative for

the Common Foreign and Security Policy, stated on

15 April 2004:

“The EU remains firmly committed to a

negotiated settlement resulting in two viable,

sovereign and independent States … as the only

way to achieve a permanent peace and an end to

the occupation that began in 1967, in the

framework of a comprehensive peace in the

Middle East.

“EU heads of State or Government recently

indicated that they would not recognize any

change to the pre-1967 borders other than those

arrived at by agreement between the parties. A

permanent settlement must also include an

agreed, just, fair and realistic solution to the

refugee issue”.

In order further to deviate from the direct route to

the targeted destination, Sharon declared that he was

absolutely determined to carry out disengagement in

Gaza despite the political problems within his own

party, the Likud. Indeed, the party believes that

disengagement conflicts with the Zionist aim of the

creeping annexation of Palestinian territory. Sharon’s

plan creates a situation in which Israel will have to

leave the settlements but will still control everything

that enters and exits Gaza. It will tightly seal off Gaza

and block the only outlet that allows Palestinians in

Gaza to cross into and from neighbouring Egypt.

All of this is a source of concern for the

international community, as reflected in the number of

meetings held by the General Assembly. Israel did not

heed the request by the Assembly in resolution

ES-10/14, which, by necessity, called for an advisory

opinion by the International Court of Justice on the

following question:

“What are the legal consequences arising

from the construction of the wall being built by

Israel, the occupying Power, in the occupied

Palestinian territory, including in and around East

Jerusalem, as described in the report of the

Secretary-General, considering the rules and

principles of international law, including the

Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, and relevant

Security Council and General Assembly

resolutions?”

The General Assembly, by an overwhelming

majority of 150 votes, acknowledged the Court’s

advisory opinion of 9 July 2004. The representatives of

the Governments of the United States of America and

of Israel were among the six countries that voted

against.

I wish to avail myself of this opportunity to

express our great appreciation for the learned opinion

of the judges. I wish to quote from the opinion, as it is

of direct relevance to the General Assembly:

“All States are under an obligation not to

recognize the illegal situation resulting from the

construction of the wall and not to render aid or

assistance in maintaining the situation created by

such construction;

28

“… The United Nations, and especially the

General Assembly and the Security Council,

should consider what further action is required to

bring to an end the illegal situation resulting from

the construction of the wall and the associated

regime, taking due account of the present

advisory opinion.”

In order to restore faith and confidence in the

effectiveness of the United Nations and its Charter, I

would appeal that the opinion of the Court be heeded

and that action-oriented resolutions, including concrete

mechanisms for implementation, be adopted and

carried out.

The Palestinian people and leadership have

demonstrated goodwill and accepted in good faith the

provisions of the road map and other proposals leading

to the termination of the Israeli occupation of our

Palestinian territory, so that we in the Middle East can

all live in peace and security and stability. What is

needed is for the other party, Israel, to commit itself to

respond, in word and in deed.