Syria, 1995

It is my pleasure at the outset to express my

congratulations to Mr. Freitas do Amaral personally, and to

his friendly country, Portugal, upon his election to the

presidency of the General Assembly. We are confident that

his experience, wisdom and statesmanship will contribute

to the success of this session’s deliberations. May I assure

him of the cooperation of the Syrian delegation in achieving

the desired objectives. May I also extend the expression

of our thanks and appreciation to his predecessor,

Mr. Amara Essy, for his untiring efforts during his

presidency of the previous session.

On this occasion, we should like to express our

appreciation to the Secretary-General of the United

Nations for his efforts to enhance the standing and role of

the United Nations and to focus the international

community’s attention on the most outstanding issues of

our times.

This session of the General Assembly has great

significance in the life of the United Nations, as it

coincides with the fiftieth anniversary of the founding of

this international Organization which remains,

notwithstanding any criticisms, an unequalled organization

in the history of international relations. It is the house

under whose roof the representatives of all the world’s

States meet each year: friends and foes, adversaries and

allies, on the basis of commitment to the purposes and

principles of the United Nations Charter, foremost among

which are: maintenance of international peace and

security; respect for the fundamental rights of men and of

States, both small and large; affirmation of equality under

those rights; non-interference in the internal affairs of

States, and standing up to aggression in accordance with

the principles of justice and international law.

The problem facing the United Nations, in our

belief, does not lie in the purposes and principles of the

Charter, but rather in the decision-making mechanism in

the United Nations and in the selective manner of

implementing those decisions. Furthermore, the grave

financial crisis afflicting this international Organization is

in fact but the reflection of a political crisis fundamentally

centred on the identity of the United Nations and its role

in the post-cold- war period. The question that arises in

this context is: does this international Organization truly

represent the aspirations of its Members’ peoples, as

stated in the preamble of its Charter, namely, “We the

peoples of the United Nations”? Is it not surprising to

hear even the State with the largest population and the

largest surface area complain, despite its permanent

membership in the Security Council, of interference in its

internal affairs?

Given such a situation, will it be feasible to

introduce meaningful democratic reforms of the United

Nations structure that would be acceptable and agreeable

to the Organization’s Member States, both large and

small, rich and poor, of the North or of the South? Or is

15

it that the democracy of the majority by which national

decisions are taken is not valid for decision-making in the

United Nations or in international relations?

In any case, we do not live in an ideal world, even if

we aspire after such a world. We are convinced that it is

essential to promote constructive international dialogue and

cooperation if we are to achieve the introduction of reforms

that, both in substance and in form, would realize the

aspirations of Member States and address the issues and

needs of developing countries. Top of the list of those

needs is the alleviation of the developing countries’ debt

burdens, encouraging investments in their economies,

opening markets to their products and lifting any

restrictions on the transfer to them of sophisticated and

nuclear technologies for peaceful purposes.

Over and above all this, what the developing countries

need is that their political, humanitarian and cultural issues

should be dealt with by dialogue on a basis of mutual

respect and non-interference in their internal affairs. That

indeed would be the most appropriate and correct means of

laying the foundations of an international cooperation with

a human face, which would guarantee the interests of all

and, thereby, lead to a more secure, stable and prosperous

world.

The changes which the world has been witnessing in

the international area since the beginning of the 1990s, no

matter how tremendous their impact and their results could

be, will never alter the fundamental principles and values

that humanity has struggled to attain and adhere to since the

dawn of history. Right cannot be turned around overnight

to become wrong, just exactly as equality cannot be turned

around to become hegemony, racism cannot be made a

virtue and the occupation of the land of others by force

cannot be legitimized.

We live in a region which is the birthplace of the three

revealed religions and of human civilizations. Our roots in

the region go very deep. We read, hear and, indeed, feel

how Israel attempts to falsify the history and geography of

this region as well as the achievements of its peoples. We

see how it attempts to mislead public opinion into the

conviction that its democracy and its laws shall determine

the fate of the occupied Arab territories, and not the

principles of international law and the resolutions of the

United Nations. Those resolutions consider as null and void

Israel’s annexation of Al-Quds and the application of its

laws to the Golan, and require Israel to withdraw from all

the occupied Arab territories in order for a just and

comprehensive peace to be achieved in the region.

The fact that Israel does not heed the resolutions of

the United Nations, regardless of the negotiations that

have been going on for four years, is an act of defiance

not only vis-à-vis the Arabs, but also of the entire

international community and, especially, of the Security

Council and its relevant resolutions.

The latest developments in the peace process have

shown that Israel’s rulers are not interested in seeking a

genuine, just and comprehensive peace that would put an

end to strife, occupation and colonial settlement and

guarantee security and stability to all. Their main concern

has been to extract from those who negotiate with them

signatures on hundreds of pages and maps which shackle

the Palestinian people, after all the great sacrifices it has

made, and thrust that people on an endless road of loss

and agony, not on any road that would lead to liberation

and independence.

In our view, agreements of this type, which will lead

to yet another endless series of negotiations and

agreements, will never pass the test of the final solution,

simply because each and every one of them carries within

it the seeds of tension and conflict.

Since the Oslo agreement, Syria has made it clear,

from this rostrum, that it neither supports nor seeks to

obstruct such agreements. Today, while we reiterate this

position, we must point out that if such agreements are

used to cause harm to Syria’s national and pan-Arab

interests and rights, we shall be compelled to reconsider

that position.

The American initiative, on the basis of which the

Madrid Conference was convened, asserted that its aim

was to achieve a just and comprehensive peace in the

Middle East on the basis of Security Council resolutions

242 (1967) and 338 (1973) and the principle of land for

peace. Furthermore, among the guarantees given to Syria

by the United States of America was that the United

States would not agree to the annexation by Israel of one

single inch of the Golan territory occupied in 1967. It was

on that basis that Syria opened the door of peace in the

Madrid Conference. Syria will continue to hold fast to

these foundations, which in substance signify a continuing

American commitment to Syria’s fundamental rights and

interests. The force of this American commitment is not

altered by the deviation by some Arab parties from the

Madrid formula, whose staunchest advocate ought to be

the United States, a sponsor of the Conference.

16

Contrary to Israel’s claims, the Madrid formula and

the American initiative did not call for secret negotiations

and did not provide for a specified level of negotiators. Had

it been otherwise, there would have been no need

whatsoever to hold the Madrid Conference. Syria and the

Arab States expect the United States, as a sponsor of the

peace process, to fulfil its commitments towards Syria and

Lebanon and to seek to eliminate the obstacles that Israel

continues to put on the road to a just and comprehensive

peace in the region that would lead to Israel’s complete

withdrawal from the Golan to the line of 4 June 1967 and

also from Southern Lebanon, in implementation of Security

Council resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973) and 425 (1978).

Syria reaffirms its commitment to peace on the basis

of the foundations which launched the peace process and on

no other bases or other formulae, whose only aim would be

to satisfy Israel’s arrogance and entrench its hegemony and

not to bring to the peoples of the region the security,

stability and dignity after which they aspire.

Israel can fool some people some of the time, but it

cannot fool all people all the time. The negotiations

between Syria and Israel over the past four years have

shown that Israel wishes to negotiate only for the purpose

of equivocating and backpedalling from the requirements of

peace or for the purpose of using the negotiations as a

means of imposing its conditions, which contradict the

letter and spirit of the relevant Security Council resolutions.

This is the real reason why the negotiations on the Syrian

track have faltered.

In any case, a false peace will never find its way into

any Syrian home, regardless of the challenges and the

obstacles created by Israel. All our Syrian citizens know

that Arabs, Muslims and all peoples who put their faith in

justice and peace stand steadfastly by Syria and its leader

in the battle for a just and comprehensive peace, a genuine

peace that the people can embrace with dignity.

Armed conflicts and devastating wars continue to rage

in various parts of the world. Those conflicts which inflict

great human and material losses on the peoples of the

States they afflict have begun to cast lengthening dark

shadows on regional and world peace and stability.

The indescribable suffering of the people of Bosnia

and Herzegovina makes it necessary for the international

community to intensify efforts to achieve a just settlement

that would guarantee the unity and territorial integrity of the

Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and safeguard the

security and stability of the Balkan region.

Syria reaffirms its attachment to safeguarding the

unity of the territory and people of Iraq and its rejection

of any attempt at dividing Iraq or at interfering in its

internal affairs. Syria believes that a speedy

implementation by the Iraqi Government of the remaining

Security Council resolutions, side by side with resolving

the issue of Kuwaiti prisoners, would facilitate working

for lifting the embargo and mitigating the suffering of the

brotherly Iraqi people.

Syria calls also for responding to the initiative of the

League of Arab States regarding the Lockerbie crisis.

This initiative would lead to a solution to the crisis and

thereby put an end to the embargo imposed on brotherly

Libya.

Syria hopes that a peaceful solution will be reached

to the three-island crisis between the United Arab

Emirates and the Islamic Republic of Iran, through direct

dialogue, in the interests of cooperation and good-

neighbourliness between the two countries. Settlement of

the issue will guarantee the rights of both parties and

uphold the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the

States of the region.

Syria calls on all the warring factions in Somalia to

end the infighting and to overcome their differences in the

interests of national reconciliation, which is indispensable

for restoring security and stability to that country and for

stimulating efforts to reconstruct the country and restore

its Arab and international role.

My country, Syria, had the honour of participating

in the founding of this international Organization, whose

fiftieth anniversary is now being celebrated. While the

pages of history mention other organizations which did

not rise to the expectations of the world’s peoples, the

survival of our organization for the past five decades is

testimony to the loftiness of the purposes and principles

of its Charter. Despite the conflicts and challenges faced

by today’s world, we look to the future with optimism.

History does not march backwards and every stage of

development and change cannot but be better than the one

before. Wars that have flared up in more than one part of

the world cannot but recede gradually, then peter out and

exist no more.

This is our hope. Peace which is not achieved today

will dawn tomorrow. This is what we shall try to achieve

17

looking forward to a better life of justice and humaneness

in that it will be built on cooperation between our nations

in the political, economic and cultural fields, in the interests

of all mankind.

Let us hope that the fiftieth anniversary of the

founding of the United Nations will be a bright beacon of

change in the history of mankind.