Syria, 2003

I should like at the outset to congratulate

Mr. Hunte on his election as President of the General

Assembly at its fifty-eighth session. I am confident that

his wisdom, as expressed in the policies of his friendly

country, will promote constructive dialogue among

Member States. In the final analysis, constructive

dialogue remains the most valid means of addressing

the complex problems currently facing the international

community.

It also gives me great pleasure to express to the

Secretary-General and his staff our sincere appreciation

for the effort they have made and the hardships they

have endured in preserving the status of this

Organization, and for not submitting to attempts to

marginalize it in the international arena. It is with deep

sorrow that we recall the great loss that the United

Nations in general, and the friendly country of Brazil in

particular, suffered as a result of the death of

8

Mr. Sergio Vieira de Mello and his colleagues in the

attack against the United Nations headquarters in

Baghdad last month.

Many leaders and other representatives of the

peoples of the world have gathered together at this

international forum. That in itself proves beyond any

doubt that this edifice of international legitimacy, and

the resolutions that are adopted here, remain the most

acceptable and respectable political recourse available

to the various countries of the world, be they large or

small, rich or poor. This is the only forum in which it

would be extremely difficult to pass an arbitrary or pre-

emptive war resolution that would result in the deaths

of innocent civilians and the destruction of their

property.

Our world today faces daunting challenges that

threaten the very foundation of the system of

international peace and security. World leaders are

therefore called upon to make a sincere and concerted

effort and to demonstrate unwavering political will to

commit themselves once again to the principles of

international legitimacy. Giving precedence to the logic

of force, violating the sovereignty of nations and taking

actions that affect people's future compromise

legitimacy and the principle of equality. Such policies

represent a miscarriage of justice and an abrogation of

the rule of law. They will open the door to widespread

chaos in international relations and to crises that might

be more dangerous than those we are currently facing.

My country believes that the failure to reap the

optimal benefits of the remarkable scientific and

technological advances that humanity has made in the

past two decades, coupled with the failure to achieve

globalization with a civilized, human face, have

alienated our peoples and heightened their

apprehensions. It has obstructed the dialogue among

civilizations and blocked further interaction with other

cultures. Attempts by some centres of power in the

world to manipulate the profound changes that have

taken place in the international balance of power in

pursuit of narrow national interests have added insult

to injury. Cards have been shuffled and premises have

been challenged. New concepts that are totally alien to

the Charter, such as pre-emptive war and unilateral and

illegitimate use of force, have been invented. In brief,

that course of action has turned the clock back

contrary to the superficial claims that new prospects

were actually being opened.

It is regrettable that in the twenty-first century

some think tanks provide decision-makers with

misleading or false information on the basis of which

wars are waged outside the context of international

legitimacy and blood is shed. Accusations are made

that completely lack credibility, and unbridled claims

are advanced in deliberate disregard of any logic

developed by States and peoples throughout their

history.

Our region the cradle of the divine religions

and the storehouse of two thirds of the world's oil

reserves has been victimized more than any other,

suffering greater injustice, being subjected to more

disinformation campaigns and enduring greater use of

force than any other region. It has to endure a great

many external threats that continually lay waste its

potential and its material and intellectual resources. No

sooner had the peoples of the region begun to enjoy

their freedom and independence than they found

themselves once again faced with violent and unjust

challenges challenges that are worse than any they

have known throughout their history.

The scourge of the Israeli occupation and

continued Israeli aggression has been the main reason

for the suffering of our region since the concept of

international legitimacy first emerge in the

international community. That is the concept on which

the Organization was founded and which it came to

epitomize. There is a profound paradox that has

become the hallmark of our region. Israel was the first

State to acquire its legitimacy through a resolution

adopted by the United Nations, yet Israel was also the

first State to ride roughshod over international

legitimacy and it has continued to do so to the

extent that Arabs and many others around the world

feel as if Israel were a country above the law, one that

enjoys the same veto power in the Security Council as

the United States.

It is regrettable that, after decades of occupation,

bloodshed and contempt for international legitimacy,

the representative of Israel has yet to realize that the

road to peace lies in Israel's implementation of the 37

Security Council resolutions on the Arab-Israeli

conflict and the nearly 600 General Assembly

resolutions on the same subject, all of which have so

far remained hostage to Israeli defiance of international

law.

9

It behoved the Israeli Foreign Minister to explain

in his statement to the international community in this

Hall a few days ago the reasons for his country's

refusal to implement this enormous number of

resolutions of international legitimacy on the Middle

East, instead of ignoring them, considering them null

and void, items of the past. Are the Syrians, the

Lebanese and the Palestinians unrealistic in their

demands, or are they asking for the impossible when

they stress that the only way out of the spiral of

violence and bloodshed is through ending the Israeli

occupation of the Arab territories occupied since June

1967, through negotiations to pursue a comprehensive,

just and lasting peace on the basis of implementing

United Nations resolutions and the Arab Summit peace

initiative adopted at Beirut in 2002?

The nagging core question here is how much

longer Israel continue can to mislead some into

believing that it is being victimized while it continues

to occupy the territory of others by force, lay siege to

Palestinians, destroy their homes, uproot their trees and

assassinate them in their occupied land. When did the

victims of occupation, settler colonialism and

population transfer become outlaws and terrorists

without a just cause, whose killing by fighter jets and

tank fire became sanctioned under the pretext of self-

defence?

Some people in Washington have asked Why do

they hate us?' Some authors with ulterior motives, or

self-proclaimed pundits writing for reputable American

newspapers or appearing on famous television

programmes, volunteer their answers: They hate us

because we have skyscrapers and noble values.' They

choose to ignore that what is hated are the flawed

policies, and not the country and its beautiful

landmarks and cherished cultural and humanitarian

values.

The grave situation in Iraq has become a source

of serious concern for our people, who are already

plagued by Israeli occupation and continued threats

against them. The situation is also a major cause of

concern for the international community due to the

threat it poses to international peace and security. The

credibility of our Organization suffered greatly when

the United Nations was unable to prevent the war

against Iraq, a war waged outside the context of

international legitimacy.

For weeks and months, the Security Council was

drawn into bitter strife, debating the war resolution

prior to the war. The marathon report of the inspectors

came out before the inspectors had accomplished the

tasks entrusted to them. That situation notwithstanding,

most of the members of the Council were able to stay

the course, upholding international legitimacy and the

Charter. The war was ultimately waged outside the

framework of international legitimacy and those

members chose not to its burden.

Along with other neighbouring countries, Syria

remained committed to the principles of international

legitimacy and the Charter. In an unprecedented

dÈmarche, our countries unanimously stressed their

common concern that, should this war break out, its

repercussions on regional security and international

peace would be more devastating than the precarious

situation prevailing in Iraq at the time.

That said, Syria does not base its foreign policy

on hatred, nor do we gloat over the misfortunes of

others. We do not redefine our policy in response to

threats either. The real challenge, we believe is how to

extricate Iraq from this predicament and mobilize all

efforts to win the battle for peace in post-war Iraq.

Our country is directly concerned with

developments in Iraq, given our historical and

geographic ties and our common national loyalties to

the Iraqi people. Syria affirms that finding the way out

of this predicament does not lie in focusing on

addressing the lack of security in Iraq, thereby

increasing the number of troops and using force to

bring about security, or on levelling accusations at

neighbouring countries. The way out lies in an

international commitment to the unity and territorial

integrity of Iraq, setting a clear timetable for the

withdrawal of the occupying forces from Iraq as soon

as possible, drafting a constitution accepted by the

Iraqis and establishing a Government that is

representative of the Iraqi people, provided that the

United Nations plays a pivotal role in Iraq in the

various political, security and economic fields.

This session of the Assembly has seen intensive

discussion among the permanent and elected members

of the Security Council on a new draft resolution on

Iraq. We must draw attention here to the requirement

that any draft resolution to be adopted by the Security

Council should allay the misgivings of the Iraqi people

in all their factions and affiliations. Therefore, the draft

10

resolution to be adopted by the Security Council must

be brought to full maturity, so as to reassure the Iraqi

people about their future and to guarantee their

independence and sovereignty over their land and

resources. The members of the Security Council should

unanimously accept such a resolution, and it must

enjoy the support of neighbouring States and the

international community.

Much has been said lately about the dangers of

the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction

paid by countries that already have different types of

such weapons. Some have even waged a war under the

pretext of eliminating such weapons. As is already

known, this danger is not confined to a particular

region in the world, but can be found in many other

regions. What is truly regrettable, however, is that

some international quarters selectively choose to level

false accusations against certain Arab and Islamic

States, but not against others, while ignoring the Israeli

arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, including

nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. Also

ignored have been the repeated appeals by all the

countries of the region, with the exception of Israel, to

make the Middle East a region free of all weapons of

mass destruction.

Syria this year translated its words into action by

submitting an integrated draft resolution to the Security

Council, calling for declaring the Middle East a zone

free of all weapons of mass destruction. It is not

surprising, however, that those who led the media

campaign against Syria stood in the way of adoption of

the Syrian initiative.

Syria is aware that its membership in the Security

Council is temporary. However, we appeal to the

international community to continue to support the

Syrian initiative calling for the elimination of all

weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East region.

Syria has condemned terrorism in all its forms

and manifestations. We have supported the Security

Council's efforts to counter international terrorism

throughout the time of our membership of the Council.

Syria has also acceded to the relevant international

conventions to combat terrorism, including the Arab

Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism and the

Convention of the Organization of the Islamic

Conference on Combating International Terrorism.

Both instruments define the crime of terrorism and

distinguish between terrorism and the legitimate right

of people under foreign occupation to resist

occupation, in accordance with international law and

the Charter of the United Nations.

Syria, which is not pursuing any political agenda,

believes that the international community's success in

its overall battle against terrorism depends, to a large

extent, on its success in addressing the root causes of

terrorism, which are often found in poverty, ignorance

and injustice. First and foremost, eliminating injustice

requires an end to foreign occupation.

As a member of the Security Council, Syria has

contributed to all the deliberations on the situation in

Africa. Syria has also presided over Council meetings

that were dedicated in full to finding solutions to the

predicaments of the friendly people of Africa. On more

than one level, the Council has succeed in providing

assistance to Liberia, the Democratic Republic of the

Congo, Rwanda, CÙte d'Ivoire, Guinea-Bissau,

Burundi, Angola and Sierra Leone. My county would

like to express its satisfaction at the positive

developments that have made it possible to find

peaceful solutions to African questions, which have

guaranteed the security, stability and territorial

integrity of the African States concerned. Syria

expresses its total solidarity with the African continent.

We call upon industrialized States and others able to do

so to provide assistance to the countries of that great

continent.

Syria also expresses its satisfaction with the

progress made in the Sudanese peace talks, with the

signing of the agreement on security and ceasefire

arrangements, and ultimately with the comprehensive

agreement that will end the conflict in that fraternal

country in a way that would preserve the Sudan's unity

and territorial integrity.

We call for a total lifting of the embargo imposed

on Cuba for decades outside the context of

international legitimacy.

We also welcome the international efforts to

defuse tensions on the Korean peninsula, and support

the Korean people's legitimate aspirations to unity and

prosperity.

Acting upon the collective responsibility of

Member States to promote the role of this international

Organization, Syria has actively participated in the

deliberations on the reform of the United Nations. In

that regard, the Millennium Declaration, which was

11

adopted three years ago, represented a good basis, all

things considered, to bring about that reform. We hope

that the reform will continue to be carried out in a

comprehensive, transparent and non-selective manner.

We believe that, in cooperation with the Secretariat,

Member States have a primary role to play in the

consultations on reform and in the decisions to be

taken accordingly.

In conclusion, our sense of the daunting

responsibility that we must shoulder together as

members of this international Organization should

prompt us to raise some rhetorical questions. Do we

have at our disposal a better option than to enhance the

purposes and principles of the Charter and to pursue

the goal of reforming the Organization for the

establishment of a more just and more democratic

international order? Should we not persevere to

safeguard the milestone achievements of international

law? Should we not aspire to a system that will not

accommodate the arrogance of power nor compromise

our fundamental principles? Should we not seek a

system that pursues fruitful cooperation among States

and encourages openness and a dialogue among

civilizations epitomizing the essence of a creative

human interaction?