YouSaid · the spoken record

Peres

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS PERES

lines on the record: 98
first: 1987-09-24
most recent: 2001-09-24
sittings or episodes: 5
sources: un-general-debate

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“I am speaking for an Israeli Government that has firmly made up its mind and seeks the expeditious implementation of this proposal. In negotiations, the parties tend to scrutinize every letter, every dot. I hope that the Palestinians will also perceive the spirit of our intent, which is to extricate ourselves from the position of domination over another people. We have never in our history as a people sought domination over others. We wholeheartedly seek a future where the children of both peoples will escape the agonies of a distorted past and live under a clear sky of security and hope. With the Syrians, we have begun a dialogue in full daylight for the first time in 44 years.”
1992-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 47 (1992)
“The opportunity to select, through democratic political elections, a Palestinian administrative council will enable the Palestinian people to exercise a double measure of freedom: the freedom to govern their own lives and to do so politically and democratically. But instead of attempting to draw a map of a self-governing territory and it is doubtful that this could be achieved now we have suggested a definite timetable. So, while this proposal lacks the clarity of a map, it provides the commitment of a calendar. This proposal is clearly a departure from the present situation. It has the dynamics of a voyage to a new destiny, a bridge which begins at one shore and reaches another. I know it will not be an easy choice for either side. But neither the existing situation nor the foreseeable future contains a more promising alternative.”
1992-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 47 (1992)
“We are looking for a bridge to cross the gulf of bitter memories, painful hatreds and emotion-laden suspicions. We have offered to negotiate an interim or transitional goal. There is no difference between the two. In fact, one can note with satisfaction that the Palestinians have agreed to this gradual approach. The direction is clear, even if the bridge will be built slowly. The suggested path is an interim self-government arrangement, as conceived at Camp David. We know that this proposal is imperfect in some respects. Self-government is less than independence. But it offers the flexibility of an arrangement that will last no more than five years. During this limited period of time, Palestinians in the territories will enjoy self-government.”
1992-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 47 (1992)
“In the bilateral negotiations, we are negotiating with the Jordanians, the Palestinians, the Syrians and the Lebanese. The committed leadership of the United States has played a central role in bringing all the parties into face-to-face negotiations. With the Jordanians, the solutions are awaiting the parties. We face common problems we must confront together, including the possible Jordanian connection to Palestinian self-government and beyond. Our relations with the Hashemite Kingdom have seen open hostilities but also tacit efforts to overcome these hostilities. We look forward to a complete peace with the Kingdom of Jordan in the near future. With the Palestinian people, our conflict has been long and painful. We seek to end this conflict.”
1992-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 47 (1992)
“In an age of long-range missiles, national defence must be a collective effort. To provide our people with modern standards of living we must have open borders and mutually beneficial exchanges. For too long the Middle East has been caught up in national conflicts and national rivalries for the glorification of national leaders. We need to build a new Middle East of, by and for the people. In our effort to build this new future for the Middle East, Israel does not ignore its still existing disagreements with our neighbours. The record shows that we are working to solve them humanely, honourably and, wherever possible, permanently. We are currently engaged in bilateral negotiations to bring an end to the conflicts of the past and multilateral negotiations to lay the foundation for the future.”
1992-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 47 (1992)
“But where there were once evil empires, we now see only the desire for a peaceful world. Russia has changed. The United States has emerged from the cold war with renewed respect from the world for its democratic drive for peace. The third world is changing, with many nations ending old hostilities and building new economies. In Africa, the forces of racism are being gradually driven out. In the Middle East itself let's face it the peace between Israel and Egypt is attaining the respect of age. There is a fresh atmosphere in our time. The time is now upon us for the nations of the Middle East to come to terms with the new realities, to make a living on their own. We can learn to benefit from peaceful coexistence. If we are to survive, we must understand that the dangers and opportunities we face are regional rather than national.”
1992-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 47 (1992)
“The United Nations must be the headquarters for an all-embracing struggle to safeguard the environment against new threats. It must be a powerhouse to arrest starvation. It must develop the institutions and the ability to intervene when necessary to stop otherwise insoluble civil wars. The United Nations must reorganize to face these problems in a global capacity. In our own region, we must understand that even if our geography and people have not changed, the world has changed. No longer can we live on disappearing premises. For generations, the conflicts in the Middle East were nurtured by global conflicts by the cold war and hot competition. Within the context of super-Power rivalry, the belligerents in the Middle East were generously supplied with shining armour.”
1992-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 47 (1992)
“In this new era, the era of knowledge, the governing principles are those of democratic structures, market-based economies, open borders, demilitarized international and regional relations, and respect for human rights. But while all nations should embrace these new principles, national traditions and identities retain their power. Nation-States will remain the focus of allegiance and social pride. To reconcile national identity, regional cooperation and universal solidarities is the central issue of contemporary life. The United Nations was established in an era that no longer exists. Yet its ideals and structures can meet the challenges and dangers of this new age. We support the "Agenda for Peace" offered by the Secretary-General. We support and will participate in the attempt to build a global protection system.”
1992-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 47 (1992)
“The cost of maintaining a significantly large army can deplete the resources of the richest countries, even if the weaponry remains unused. Around our changing world, the flow of knowledge has superseded military might as the source of real strength and social stability. The flow of knowledge no longer stops at national frontiers. It is not possible in the age of modern communications to shield peoples from truth and reality. Eventually, even dictators must face the fact that the best censors cannot block the free flow of ideas. But knowledge cannot be acquired without the right to doubt, the readiness to change. Knowledge is not available without freedom, and so democracy is prevailing throughout the world.”
1992-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 47 (1992)
“Let me begin by congratulating you, Sir, and the nation of Bulgaria, on your assumption of the presidency of the United Nations General Assembly. May I also congratulate the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros-Ghali, on his leadership in the struggle for peace. I wish him success in his endeavours. Today I speak for an Israel that has chosen to step out of the shadows of the past to prepare for the invitation of a new future. The world is alive with the impulse for change. The end of conflict is no longer a Utopian fantasy. It is the dictate of realism and of universal self-interest. We look to the future in a world that wants peace. Like a hidden Samson, the forces of change have pushed aside the pillars of conventional wisdom, which proclaimed that military power is the source of national strength and prestige. This is no longer true.”
1992-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 47 (1992)
“Most appropriately, this week our people celebrate the holiday of Succoth, the Feast of Tabernacles, as we pray together "Spread over us the Tabernacle of Thy peace ..." "He who maketh peace in heavens, may He make peace for us ..." We need it; we can help to achieve it.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“Forty years ago the founder of our State, David Ben-Gurion, against the background of the turmoil of war and revival, introduced our Declaration of Independence, which stated: "We extend our hand in peace and neighbourliness to all the neighbouring States and their peoples, and invite them to co-operate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all." Israel at 40, proud of its accomplishments at home, confident about its future, today reiterates that very call; we extend our hand in peace to all our neighbours, peoples and States, as we stand ready to alter the course of Middle East history. At the all-too-familiar crossroads of hope and despair we are convinced that the choice is ours to make.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“Before I conclude I wish to refer again to yet another issue that is very close to our hearts. As we have pointed out so often in the past, in Yemen, in Syria, in Iran and elsewhere our brethren are today permitted neither the free pursuit of our common heritage nor free departure to Israel. We call upon the Governments of those countries to respect basic human rights. We also call upon the Governments to reject the shameful assertion that Zionism is racism, a statement that shows no understanding of Zionism and a dangerous misunderstanding of racism.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“In order to prepare the ground for the launching of our region on the long road to peace, may we suggest that all relevant parties undertake the following: those interested in the promotion of peace and stability in the Middle East undertake a moratorium on all threats or acts of violence; those interested in promoting Arab-Israeli peace negotiations undertake to encourage and facilitate the early convening of such negotiations in a non-coercive setting, free of a renewed arms race and free of external pressure; and those committed to the cause of peace in the Middle East reaffirm their adherence to ,the only commonly accepted basis for such negotiations - Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) - the renunciation of violence and terror and recognition of the right of all peoples and States in the region to freedom, dignity, peace and security.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“As we watch with wonder and respect the People's Republic of China rearrange its own destiny, we hope it will find this the occasion to support a non-coercive setting for Arab-Israeli negotiations, as well as to normalize its relations with the State of Israel. There is nothing in our region's history or in its present that rules out a different future. In an era of peace and co-operation, the industrial dynamics of the Far Fast, the Economic Community of Europe, the free enterprise and the enterprise of freedom of the United States, and the Soviet capacity to introduce an air of glasnost can all apply to the Middle East. We can draw on the experience of others. We can add that which is unique to us and offer our young generation the dawn of prosperity in peace.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“The number of Jewish emigration permits has grown. Consular groups have been stationed in the Soviet Union and Israel respectively. We have taken note of statements from Moscow calling on all sides in the Middle East to adopt realistic positions with the objective of demilitarizing international relations. I wish to express the hope of my people that the cultural autonomy announced by the Soviet leadership will enable our Jewish brethren to pray to our Lord in their own synagogues, to teach their children the history of the Jewish people, to express themselves in the language of their forefathers, and to set sail to the shores of the promised land.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“This initiative, which provides for direct negotiations launched in a non-coercive international setting - remains available for consideration. When we had an opportunity to review the prospects for peace earlier this week we were reassured by the unanimity among the host. President Reagan, and his guests from Egypt and Israel that there is no substitute for an ongoing, uninterrupted effort towards peace, and that all those attending are resolved to fill the next few months with relevant content. I wish to express my hope that the policies adopted by the Soviet Onion under the leadership of Mikhail Gorbachev will lead to a world of more ploughshares and fewer swords. Moscow has undertaken some steps, which, though partial and limited, are yet of importance. Zionist prisoners have been released.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“We hope that the Palestinians will not postpone the prospects of peace; and we hope that Jordan, regardless of its relations with them, will not postpone negotiations either. I wish to express the gratitude of my people to the United States, its leaders and its institutions for their firm and consistent support. The United States has enabled us to guarantee our security. It has encouraged us, as it has our neighbours, to enter into political negotiations. The Shultz initiative calling upon the parties to enter into direct negotiations and negotiate a just and fair solution calls also on the permanent members of the Security Council to avoid imposing solutions, refrain from applying pressure and serve as supporters of peace.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“In those negotiations, Jordanians and Palestinians, much like ourselves, may present expectations and demands as they labour to balance contradictory aspirations so as to answer the call of peace. We are ready to enter into negotiations with Jordan and with authentic representatives of the Palestinian people who ate men of peace and not men of violence, in order to solve our differences with Jordan and to resolve the Palestinian problem in all its aspects. We are ready to negotiate with a joint Jordanian-Palestinian delegation. Yet, as peace is unlikely to be achieved in one leap, we are prepared to start negotiations without prior conditions with a Jordanian delegation or a Palestinian one.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“Any attempt to add to or subtract from the only commonly accepted basis for negotiations is bound to destroy the existing framework without creating a new one. Fuelled by a commitment to no war and no violence, no terrorism and no pressure, we can travel the distance towards accommodation. To the Palestinians I must say with candour that violence does not pay off. By avoiding negotiations they are depriving themselves of their hope. For there is hardly a chance for a compromise to emerge in the absence of, or prior to, a free negotiating process. Although we cannot agree in advance on the outcome of negotiations we can agree on the process by which to go forward - negotiations as an open-ended effort, free of pressure, imposition or threat.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“That which was rejected when offered, that which was doomed by war, that which could have been possible, belongs to the past. In the realities of 1988 the lines of 1947 no longer exist. After the Six-Day War Israel should not be expected to return to the lines from which it attacked. Readiness for a territorial compromise does not include readiness to compromise security. A breakthrough requires the understanding that peace is a matter of choice; it is the outcome of decisions; it is the product of a historic compromise. No vague formulation can replace a clear strategy to part with the past. The turn to a so-called Government-in-exile, the return to General Assembly partition resolution 181 (II), represents yet another escape to the realm of self-illusion.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“For how long can a desire for peace be treated as a secret password as though we were living in clandestine surroundings? Commitment to peace must emerge loud and clear, for sceptics to witness, for the hopeful to respond. We expect the Arab world to realize that there is no indirect peace. Peace is meant to reinforce, not to undermine, freedom and security for all involved. We expect the Arab world, including the Palestinians, to do away with the contradiction of sweet promises and bitter violence. A policy of "no war, no peace", much like a policy that claims to combine both, is an exercise in evasion. A choice must be made: to pay the price of peace or to be resigned to the costs of war. All of us must recognize changing realities.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“We are prepared to conduct negotiations on the basis of the only framework, reaffirmed this week in the trilateral meeting chaired by President Reagan, with the participation of the Egyptian Minister for Foreign Affairs, and accepted by Arab countries as well as by all permanent members of the Security Council - that is. Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), calling for a territorial compromise and secure borders. They are the only existing common ground. As we stand ready to live up to these commitments, we shall be as clear in addressing our expectations of our neighbours. For there can be peace, but not unilaterally; there can be accommodation, but only by mutual effort. We expect from the Arab world a clear voice for peace.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“In peace negotiations we shall stand firm on our security interests. Yet we stand ready for a historic compromise with our neighbours. For 40 years we have built our strength so as not to negotiate out of weakness. Today we are strong enough to negotiate for peace. Israel has no intention of harming the Palestinian people. Israel has no desire to dominate their lives or to hurt their pride. We are prepared to negotiate with them, fairly, freely, as equals, a meeting-ground of needs, where Palestinians can enjoy their identity and Israelis security in peace.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“Sadly, the absence of progress was accompanied by an outbreak of violence. Wrongly, the Palestinians chose to knock on the door of the future with stones in their hands. Knocking with a message of peace would have triggered an entirely different situation. Indeed, the Palestinians must recognize that it is possible to secure their legitimate rights - but not at the expense of Israel's security. Palestinian aspirations and Israeli security are not necessarily incompatible. Peace is an Israeli national interest. While we have confidence in the capacity of the Israeli Defence Forces to defend our country, by deterring any aggression and defeating it if need be, we consider the achievement of peace through diplomacy the greatest victory of all. My country has never surrendered to the pressures of war and will never yield to violence.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“In the south, we have revived our relations with Egypt, which has since restored full diplomatic representation in Israel. We have witnessed Egypt, under the steady leadership of President Mubarak - dedicated to progress at home and peace in the region - reassume its central role in the Arab world without parting with its peace strategy. In the east, we have experienced hope and frustration. Until less than a year ago, before things went awry, the West Bank turned from the centre of violent debate to the focus of diplomatic efforts. Most significantly, in April 1987, energetic and creative diplomacy produced a framework for negotiations. Known as "the London Document", it provided a non-imposing internationally supported setting for direct negotiations. Unfortunately, while still viable, the effort has not yet reached fruition.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“We have to do our utmost to ensure that never again will a young man or woman die in a war we failed to prevent. What should be done to achieve this goal? I shall start with Israel. Three years ago Israel stood before this Assembly and pledged to dedicate its efforts to the pursuit of peace. That pledge rested not only on resolve, but also on a conviction: that in the north, war can be brought to an end; in the south, peace can be salvaged and nourished and, in the east, the ground can be laid to start meaningful negotiations. In all three directions we laboured to fulfil the commitment. In the north, we put an end to our involvement in Lebanon. We are out of Lebanon, its land and politics. Our sole concern is to see that Lebanon no longer serves as the base for hostile activities against us.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“It is a vision of a region whose stability is inviting, whose dwelling is hospitable, whose creativity is encouraging, whose needs are seriously addressed by those seeking to invest in promoting stability and in expanding economic potential. It is a vision of a region come of age, a region cognizant of global rapprochement, a region ready to tackle the heretofore seemingly insoluble in order to offer a better future for all - Jews and Arabs alike - a region ready to respect differences among peoples without discriminating against any. It is a vision that is a necessity. It is a vision that is within reach. Yet the smoke of old fires is still in the air and new ones threaten to darken the horizon. Unless we take decisive action to change course belligerency will not be overcome.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“We are preparing for a better tomorrow. We are prepared with a vision of peace. It is the vision of an end to a futile, economically devastating arras race now sliding in the inhumane direction of chemical and biological warfare. Ballistic missiles know no boundaries, chemical warheads do not distinguish young from old. Those senseless enough to employ them must recognize that they are creating a danger to themselves as well. It is a vision of an opportunity to concentrate on scientific and technological breakthroughs on Earth and in space, on civilian requirements rather than military needs where resources wasted on armaments are invested in creative enterprises from the greening of the land to the clearing of the waters, from educating young children to caring for the senior citizen.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“Mr. President, I should like at the outset to congratulate you on your election to the esteemed post of President of the forty-third session of the General Assembly. I feel sure that the possibility of restoring to the United Nations the spirit of conciliation and peace for which it was founded will depend, in no small measure, on your wise and experienced guidance. In a discussion of the Middle East, history should precede diplomacy. The region has known epochs of war and golden ages, military conquests and spiritual greatness. It was in the Middle East that an invisible divide saw frustration and promise prevail in an unpredictable, seemingly uncontrollable, cycle. Yet it was man who triggered waves of hope and despair. Thus it was man who determined the course of history. Today, once again, the region faces a moment of human choice.”
1988-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 43 (1988)
“On the very first day of our independence I learned from my mentor, David Ben-Gurion, who said this time and again, that peace is the highest degree of security·, and that the moral call is the highest degree of wisdom. I shall remember it forever.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“I welcome the forthcoming visit of Secretary Shultz to our region as an opportunity to negotiate on the remaining obstacles. I am convinced that there are no conflicts for which there is no hope for solution, only people who have best hope in their search for solutions. I am convinced that the real conflict in the Middle East today is not between Jew and Moslem·, Arab and Israeli; Palestinian and Zionist. The conflict is between "past-oriented" leadership and "future-oriented" leadership; between those resigned to the fatalism of belligerency and those determined to alter this fate. For the future of our children, for a better tomorrow, we must all stand up to the preachers of war. To the advocates of destruction, United we have to say there are no holy wars, only holy human lives.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“Such a conference, composed of those having a stake in regional stability and the capacity to contribute to it, could offer a most Imaginative plan for regional development. To those who preach indecision, to those who take shelter in the illusion of a tranquil status quo, we say: this is our moment of choice; decisions of today will determine the fate of our people for decades to come. Our choice is between hatred and dialogue, suspicion and hope. Our choice is between investment in an arms race and investment in the well-being of our people, of our children. Our choice is between extremism and moderation, between fundamentalism and reason. It is our choice to prevent the next war. It is up to us to make the months to come a time for reason.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“For the past 40 years our ancient region has become - not by choice - a testing ground for the technology of war. Thousands of human lives, Arab and Jewish, have been tragically lost and billions of dollars have been spent to no avail. We are unable to change the past but we can design a future in which our region will be able to develop into a testing ground for mobilizing science and technology, to offer a new source of growth; a future in which peace attracts economic investment; a future in which resources saved by restraining the arms race are invested in basic and higher education. It is this vision of an alternative future that has given birth to the suggestion that in the wake of the opening of political negotiations an economic conference, without political strings attached, should take place.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“To both Moscow and Beijing we say candidly that diplomatic relations are not the prize for peace but a channel for communication. Those wishing to participate in bringing peace cannot confine their relations to one side in the rivalry alone. I should like to address myself to the Palestinian people. The time for recrimination and blame is past. They have brought only violence and terror. Now is the time to turn from violence to dialogue and to travel jointly towards a different destiny. There, your children, like ours, will live in self-respect, exercise self-expression and enjoy freedom and peace. We, who have experienced domination by others, do not wish to dominate others. We, who sought justice and security, do not wish to deny them to others.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“Unless the permanent members of the Security Council respect the current consensus, rather than insisting on their old preferences, the international conference may remain just a slogan. We call upon the Soviet Union to credit us with the same good faith in our efforts towards peace as we credit it within its readiness to make glasnost a way of life. The Soviet Union is not our enemy. It must be aware of our historical and family attachment to our brethren living in its land. We appeal to the new leadership in Moscow to allow the Jewish people to express their identity freely and to reunite with their destiny in the land of their ancestors. We call upon the People's Republic of China, a great country that we respect, not to be timid or one-sided in its support for negotiations.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“Eighth, the five permanent members of the Security Council would serve as the matchmakers, entrusted with bringing the parties together and legitimising the process whereby the parties would negotiate freely and directly, without uninvited - and occasionally divided - external involvement. This would not be a ceremonial role but an essential one in facilitating negotiations. Israel is United in its search for peace, in our desire to negotiate directly with our neighbours. We differ over how best to move the process forward. The idea of an international conference raises opposition in some Israeli quarters, while others see it as a real opening. The Israeli Cabinet is divided on the issue and has yet to make a decision. Much depends on the nature of the conference.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“Sixth, negotiations would be conducted independently in three bilateral-geographic committees: a Jordanian-Palestinian delegation and an Israeli delegation in one·, a Syrian and an Israeli delegation in another·, and a Lebanese and an Israeli delegation in the third. All delegations, as well as an Egyptian one, would be invited to participate in a fourth, multilateral, committee. Seventh, whereas the bilateral committees would be engaged in solving the conflicts of the past, the multilateral committee would deal with the charting of opportunities for the region's future.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“That document reflected a meeting of minds, Arab and Jewish, on the basis of eight principles. First, the goal is peace and direct negotiations are the way to reach it. Second, an international conference is the door to direct negotiations. Once convened it should lead immediately to face-to-face bilateral negotiations. Third, the conference would not impose a settlement or veto agreements reached bilaterally. Fourth, those who would attend the conference must accept Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) and renounce terrorism and violence. Fifth, negotiations would be aimed at solving the Palestinian problem in all its aspects. This would be done in negotiations between the Jordanian-Palestinian delegation and the Israeli delegation.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“There is a real readiness to negotiate in a joint Jordanian-Palestinian delegation to solve a problem that all of us need, and would like, to solve; the Palestinian problem. We have all matured politically with the repeated failure of attempts to produce peace plans for our region. We have realized that none can be acceptable as a pre-condition of negotiation, for it is the object of negotiation to produce solutions that are otherwise unattainable. Hence, over the past three years efforts have focused on the most promising plan; to begin negotiations without pre-planning their outcome. Five months ago those efforts crystallized and found expression in a document worked out with the support of American emissaries, whose tireless and creative efforts should be credited with much of what has been accomplished.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“We have found President Mubarak to be a builder of a better life for his people and of bridges for comprehensive peace in the region. At the cedar groves of the mountains of Ifrane, we met courageous leadership; King Hassan of Morocco calling for peace, aloud, and clearly. Across the Jordan River, rich in history and poor in water, we hear the echo of the voice of King Hussein, an experienced leader who wishes, like us, to bring our peoples out of the darkness of old hostility into the new greenhouses of peace, security and development. In the West Bank and Gaza, we notice an unannounced change. Many Palestinians seem to have concluded that violence leads nowhere, that dialogue should not be postponed.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“Present crises - in the Persian Gulf or Lebanon - may take unexpected turns; disillusionment with the absence of progress may produce new coalitions of hostility. Thus, in the absence of a vibrant peace process, the political skies may become capricious again, bringing drought to a thirsty region. Against these prospects of uncertainty stands the unprecedented if vulnerable reality whereby relevant parties to the conflict see a way to begin negotiations. Indeed, two years ago both Arabs and Israelis announced from this podium support for the current initiative for peace. Moreover, since then further progress has been made. We have rekindled our peace with Egypt and intensified the dialogue with its leaders and its people.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“We admitted his inability to provide them with adequate clothing and fresh bread, and he offered them the right of choice; "I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore, choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live". (Deuteronomy, 30:19) I speak with a sense of urgency, as the coming few months may be crucial. During this brief period we may begin negotiations on one of the most important issues of our day, or miss the ark of hope. This brief period may produce the long-sought-after breakthrough or be absorbed by political paralysis. Confidence that was built carefully, almost tacitly, among several parties in the area may evaporate. A coalition for peace held together by fragile links may fall apart with uncertain likelihood of revival.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“The historical analogy is inspiring: For 40 years our people wandered in the desert before Moses brought them to the promised land. Today again, after 40 years in the wilderness of belligerency, we stand at the gates of a new promise to our children and to the children of our neighbours: to live in understanding despite the differences; to determine their own fate without interference by armed forces triggered by hate. Can we offer them a Middle East where the intellectual challenge is man's conquest of nature, free of man's conquest of man? In brief, can we bring peace? We remember the last words of Moses before he parted from his people at the gates of the promised land.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“Our actions today can either unleash forces of yet untold destruction, or they can launch us on a course of a new promise. Israel is celebrating its fortieth anniversary; four decades studded by hostility and war. From the memories of the Holocaust we have had to build a new life, as tragic biographies merged into a history of hope. We have returned to the birthplace of our faith, to the cradle of our biblical values. The language of the Prophets now echoes with the joy of children in the mountains and valleys where it began. Deserts were turned into gardens, human talent into industries. No emergency has delayed the growth of the democratic spirit; no war has prevented the construction of a just society and a modern economy.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“Never before was the menace of extremism so perilous; never before were the moderate forces of the Middle East, on both aides, closer to an understanding than today. Both Arabs and Israelis can be at peace with themselves only if they reach peace with each other. Fundamentalism threatens moderation. Belligerency requires resources that can help contain extremism. Arabs are troubled by the thrust of fundamentalism as they struggle with an impossibly expensive arms race and the need to address the just expectations of a rapidly growing population. Israelis are troubled by a demography wrought by war and the need to sustain a defence posture of "the few against the many". That is the heavy toll of the region's flames. They can be further fuelled; they can also be put out.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“While on the global level the parties seem to edge slowly towards accommodation, on the regional level passion still endure. Today, threatening mines in international waterways are symbols not of the modernity of warfare but of its persistence. In our region, mines of extremism lurk just beneath the surface; they may explode when least expected. Thus, we support the attempt to introduce a durable cease-fire in the Persian Gulf. In the vicinity of the world's most significant source of oil, two flames send dark clouds that obscure the horizon: the flame of fundamentalism launched to overpower moderation, and the flame of belligerency, residue of the Arab-Israeli dispute, seemingly calm, yet hardly extinguished. Each flame may reinforce the other.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“Permit me, Sir, to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the General Assembly. I wish to take this opportunity to express our support for the relentless efforts of the emissary of peace and goodwill, the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar. In a world grown cynical of the super-Powers increased arms competition and fearful of the technologies it has unleashed, the people of Israel appreciate the readiness of the United States and the Soviet Union to begin a process of nuclear disarmament. This is not just a technical accord. It is a political dictum: no longer can we find military answers to political problems. What is necessary are political answers to the military menace. The world remains divided.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)