YouSaid · the spoken record

Al-Kidwa

lines on the record: 724
first: 1992-01-06
most recent: 2004-10-06
sittings or episodes: 59
sources: un-security-council

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

“The meeting last week of Prime Minister Sharon and United States President Bush and their exchange of letters and assurances took these attempts to impose a unilateral "disengagement" one step further. The content of those letters violates relevant provisions of international law, as reaffirmed in numerous Security Council resolutions, and violates the rights of the Palestinian people. It is an attempt to confer legitimacy on some of Israel's illegal settlements, to negate the rights of the Palestine refugees and to dilute international opposition to the catastrophic expansionist wall. The content is also a complete departure from the road map, its substance and the principle of achieving a peaceful settlement through negotiations between the two parties and without prejudgement or pre-emption of final status issues.”
2004-04-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4945 (2004) · source
“Failing that, those persons are entitled to, and should be accorded, international protection. Yet, time and again, the Security Council has failed to take the necessary measures to ensure the protection of the Palestinian civilian population in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, leaving them at the mercy of the brute force and illegal policies and practices of the occupying Power. Parallel to, and in conjunction with, its illegal actions against the Palestinian people, the Government of Israel has intensified its attempts to carry out unilateral actions intended to further entrench the illegitimate measures already taken by Israel on the ground in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem.”
2004-04-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4945 (2004) · source
“Unable to uphold its duties for the maintenance of international peace and security when it comes to the situation in the occupied Palestinian territory, the Security Council has allowed Israel to continue acting beyond the parameters of international law, permitting it to use the most oppressive measures and practices to impose more death and destruction and loss on the Palestinian people under its occupation. All of the atrocities being committed by Israel, the occupying Power, have been committed against an unarmed and defenceless civilian population that, according to the provisions of international humanitarian law governing military occupation, should be considered protected persons. The occupying Power is obligated to ensure the safety and well-being of those persons.”
2004-04-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4945 (2004) · source
“It is without a doubt that the recent failure of the Security Council to condemn the extrajudicial execution of Sheikh Yassin and to take urgent measures to address the deterioration of the situation - due to the veto cast by one of the Council's permanent members - has further emboldened the Israeli Government to continue carrying out such illegal actions with impunity. Without concern for reproach or punishment or for the consequences of its actions, Israel continues to behave as a State that is above the law.”
2004-04-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4945 (2004) · source
“This latest in a long series of war crimes committed by the occupying Power was carried out in fulfilment of the repeated threats of Israeli Prime Minister Sharon and of other Israeli Government and military officials to continue targeting Palestinian leaders for assassination, in flagrant violation of international law and in complete and total disregard for the international community's condemnation of such an illegal and barbaric policy and for its pleas and demands for the cessation of that policy. Indeed, following the attack on Saturday, Mr. Sharon and other high-ranking Israeli officials publicly boasted and congratulated themselves on the success of the operation and proceeded to declare more threats against Palestinian leaders.”
2004-04-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4945 (2004) · source
“While it has become common practice for the occupying Power to launch such military attacks against targets in densely populated civilian areas in the occupied Palestinian territory, endangering the safety and lives of thousands of civilians, it is by no means a legitimate or justified practice. The deliberate, excessive, disproportionate and indiscriminate use of force - including extrajudicial executions - being carried out by Israel against the Palestinian civilian population constitutes a grave breach of international law and of Israel's obligations as an occupying Power, as enshrined in international humanitarian law, particularly the Fourth Geneva Convention.”
2004-04-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4945 (2004) · source
“Two days ago, on Saturday, 17 April, less than four weeks after the extrajudicial execution of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin in Gaza City, the Israeli occupying forces committed yet another extrajudicial execution when they killed Mr. Abdel Aziz Al-Rantisi, a political leader of Hamas. The occupying forces fired missiles at the vehicle in which he was riding, killing Mr. Al-Rantisi and two other Palestinian men who were with him. This was, in fact, the second time that the occupying forces had targeted Mr. Al-Rantisi for assassination; the first attempt was in June of 2003, when seven missiles were fired at his car on a crowded street in Gaza City. Although he survived that attack, two Palestinians - including a woman - were killed and 25 other people were wounded.”
2004-04-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4945 (2004) · source
“To be more precise, Israel has never ceased its campaign of death and destruction in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, as the Israeli occupying forces have relentlessly, continuously and daily been committing war crimes, State terrorism and systematic human rights violations against the Palestinian people. As the majority of the international community watches in shock and disbelief, the occupying Power continues to carry out extrajudicial executions of Palestinian leaders and to kill, wound and maim defenceless Palestinian civilians - including women and children - in grave breach of international law, including international humanitarian law and human rights law.”
2004-04-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4945 (2004) · source
“Mr. Al-Kidwa (Palestine) (spoke in Arabic): Allow me to begin by congratulating you, Mr. President, and your friendly country, Germany, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for this month. I should also like to congratulate the Permanent Representative of France for the able manner in which he presided over the Council's work last month. At this meeting, I shall read out my statement in English. (spoke in English) We return to the Security Council, less than one month since this body last met to address the crisis in the occupied Palestinian territory, because Israel, the occupying Power, continues its reign of terror against the Palestinian people.”
2004-04-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4945 (2004) · source
“Israel is a terrible occupying Power that has never stopped violating all aspects of international law and international humanitarian law in particular. Israeli policies are not part of the battle against international terrorism; they are part of the problem of creating terrorism. Finally, we have had it, frankly, with Israel's actions outside this building against us. We have had it with Israel's statements outside this building against the Palestinian people. But in this Chamber, it is too much. Statements such as "the Palestinian people do not love their children" or "the Palestinian people send their children to die because of their hatred of Israel" are statements that are full of racism and that reflect a kind of attitude that should be rejected out of hand - and I am trying to do that now.”
2004-03-25 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4934 (2004) · source
“The real problem is that the Council has long tolerated and allowed illegal Israeli actions; it has tolerated and allowed foreign occupation for more than 36 years - occupation that has been transformed into blatant colonialism: colonizing Palestinian land, destroying the lives of a whole people and preventing the realization of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, including our right to exercise our sovereignty in our State, Palestine. That has been the problem, and nothing else. Secondly, we object to the low-level and, I would say, immoral attempts to link illegal Israeli practices and policies with the international fight against terrorism. Israel is not a passive, peaceful country that is subject to attacks from outside.”
2004-03-25 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4934 (2004) · source
“I promise that my further statement will be brief. Palestine, of course, is not yet a Member of the United Nations; it is obviously not a member of the Security Council; and it is not my intention to defend the Council against undiplomatic attacks - undiplomatic to say the least. However, I feel the need to make a few quick points. For the record, we believe that the problem with the Security Council has never been that the Council was anti-Israel.”
2004-03-25 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4934 (2004) · source
“Very modestly and humbly, we call upon the United States to reassess its position on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. We call upon the United States to adopt more neutral, objective and fair positions to enable it to assume its natural role as the sponsor of the peace process and a member of the Quartet, with a view to the implementation of the road map and the establishment of peace based on the principle of two States, Palestine and Israel. We would like to express our deep appreciation to Algeria, the Group of Arab States, the members of the Non-Aligned Movement, the members of the Council and, of course, all countries that voted in favour of the draft resolution today. Our Palestinian people express to all of them their thanks and deep appreciation.”
2004-03-25 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4934 (2004) · source
“Of course, we would have liked to have seen more countries voting in favour of the draft resolution in the Council, but, once again, proposals were made that we simply could not accept for various reasons, including legal aspects that were perfectly clear. Allow me to cite an example: there was an attempt to broaden the definition of terrorist attacks in a way that would not confine the definition to attacks against civilians. That is indeed bizarre and unacceptable, particularly in a case involving foreign occupation. All we hope for now is a clear stance in the near future that will make Israel, the occupying Power, understand that it cannot continue its illegal policies, especially extrajudicial killings. This will require a clear position, particularly - ifI may speak frankly - from the United States of America.”
2004-03-25 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4934 (2004) · source
“The Arabs have shown great flexibility in the past few days in a serious attempt to adopt a unanimous decision. Before today's action, we had considered a presidential statement that naturally, we had hoped to adopt by consensus. Again, the Arab side did this because we fully understood that the way in which the Council's work concluded was not in the interests of any responsible party or any party that is anxious to see peace prevail in the area. As the representative of Algeria stated earlier, the draft resolution, which has not been adopted, contained a very clear condemnation of all terrorist attacks against any civilians as well as all acts of violence and destruction. Regrettably, however, the super Power that voted against the draft resolution made suggestions that were impossible to accept.”
2004-03-25 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4934 (2004) · source
“Mr. Al-Kidwa (Palestine) (spoke in Arabic): Today's events are indeed regrettable. The Security Council was once again prevented, because of the twenty-eighth use of the veto by the United States on the question of the occupied Palestinian territories. I would say the Council was unable to assume its responsibilities in the maintenance of international peace and security. What is even more regrettable is that this action takes place amidst the very severe tension within the Middle East, including the negative effects that will be a consequence of the inability of the Council to adopt a measure as happened today. There is no doubt that millions of people will be unable to understand what happened today and this action will therefore not contribute to calming the situation or be a push towards moderation or dialog in the region.”
2004-03-25 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4934 (2004) · source
“We will push insistently and relentlessly for that, and we hope that the international community will respond. We reiterate our condemnation of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin's assassination and our appeal to the Security Council to take the necessary action in that regard.”
2004-03-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4929 (2004) · source
“Here, I should like to refer with grave concern to the occupying Power's continued building of the expansionist wall in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, even after the matter was submitted to the International Court of Justice, at the request of the General Assembly, for an advisory opinion. The wall is seen as the greatest war crime of all. It destroys the life and the future of our people. It represents an illegitimate annexation, as a fait accompli, of large areas of our land, and it renders impractical and impossible any implementation of the two-State solution. The wall is the central issue for the Government of Mr. Sharon; halting its construction and destroying it is a major issue for the international community.”
2004-03-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4929 (2004) · source
“What is even stranger is that certain parties who submitted the road map are considering giving Israel something in return for that step: the official destruction of the road map. Despite all that, our land - all of it - will continue to be ours. Aside from Sharon's plans, any Israeli withdrawal will inevitably mean that we will shoulder our responsibilities. But it will also mean that there will be no bilateral commitment on the part of the Palestinian Authority, which means that we would have the freedom to ask for an appropriate international presence. In fact, such an international presence - as has been consistently shown - could create a different and positive situation in all the occupied Palestinian territories, including East Jerusalem.”
2004-03-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4929 (2004) · source
“Sharon recently mentioned what he called unilateral disengagement in Gaza. A unilateral step, by its nature, cannot be part of the road map; disengagement, by its nature, cannot be part of a negotiated withdrawal; and Mr. Sharon, by his nature, will not voluntarily do something in the interests of the Palestinian people and in the interests of peace. That is probably the reason Sheikh Yassin was assassinated. If Mr. Sharon withdraws from Gaza, he wants to punish the Palestinian people by first making Gaza a huge prison, withdrawing only after causing maximum destruction and chaos in that poverty-stricken area. What is strange is that the Israeli Government wants something from certain parties in return for that step, perhaps in the form of acceptance of the expansionist wall it is building in the West Bank.”
2004-03-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4929 (2004) · source
“Sharon's Government would like to continue the escalation of the conflict and that it has constantly worked to destroy everything that has been achieved, including the truce reached last year. Now, his Government has taken another major step in that direction by committing this crlme. Clearly, the Sharon Government believes that continuing the violence and the terrorism will excuse it from the responsibilities of implementing the road map - including putting an end to the occupation and accepting an independent Palestinian State - and it considers such violence and terrorism to be in the country's interests. We have reiterated before the Council that Mr. Sharon's Government does not want and will work to bury the road map, as it buried the Mitchell Committee's recommendations and other initiatives. Mr.”
2004-03-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4929 (2004) · source
“Israel, the occupying Power, has occupied our territory for more than 36 years. It continues to colonize and illegally confiscate that territory. Israel has completely destroyed the life of our Palestinian people, deprived them of their national rights and violated all their human rights. Israel is an aggressive occupying Power, not a peaceful country that is defending itself. Israel's current policies are not designed to counter terrorism; in fact, they are one of the major reasons for the presence of terrorism in the Middle East and beyond. The assassination of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin does not serve counter-terrorism efforts. We have stated repeatedly before the Council that Mr.”
2004-03-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4929 (2004) · source
“Everyone is in our sights." Israeli Defence Forces Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon said that the responses of Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat and Hizbullah chief Hassan Nasrallah to the assassination showed that "they understand that their turn is drawing near". (spoke in Arabic) Is anything crazier than that? Can the Security Council fail to adopt a clear position on this issue? We must compel Israel, the occupying Power, to respect international law. And that is precisely the heart of the matter: Israel is an outlaw State. It regularly violates the relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, international law and international humanitarian law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention; it violates Security Council resolutions and other United Nations resolutions; it violates even the conventions it has signed.”
2004-03-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4929 (2004) · source
“Here, I should like to refer to statements made by three officials. (spoke in English) Mr. Shaul Mofaz said that other Hamas leaders would be targeted now that Israel had assassinated Hamas founder Sheikh Ahmed Yassin: "If we will continue, in a determined way, with our strikes against Hamas and other terror groups, with the means I outlined, including action against those leaders, we will bring more security to Israeli citizens." Public Security Minister Tzachi Hanegbi said that no Palestinian "terror leader" was immune from an Israeli attack: "Anyone who is involved in the Gaza Strip or the West Bank or anywhere else in leading a terror group knows from yesterday there is no immunity.”
2004-03-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4929 (2004) · source
“We value the readiness and the desire of the overwhelming majority of the members of the Security Council to take a clear position vis-a-vis what has happened, in accordance with the responsibilities of the Security Council and the United Nations Charter. Regretfully, the Council was not able to take an urgent position in the form of a presidential statement. We hope that the Council will be able, after taking more time to consider this, to adopt the draft resolution before you, which was submitted by the Arab Group. There is no doubt that this is a matter of the utmost importance. In this context, and to emphasize the importance of the Council taking a clear and decisive decision, allow me to point to the statements made by Israeli officials, which highlight a general Israeli policy in this area that must be confronted and halted.”
2004-03-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4929 (2004) · source
“Ariel Sharon, made statements indicating that he personally supervised this mad and brutal assassination and that he will continue this policy. We strongly condemn this new Israeli crime and hold the occupying Power and the Israeli leadership legally and politically responsible for committing this crime, as well as responsible for any consequences this crime may entail. We do, however, value the wide international condemnation of this crime. We also value the decisive calls made to Israel to refrain from perpetrating other extrajudicial executions and to commit themselves to the provisions of international humanitarian law.”
2004-03-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4929 (2004) · source
“Mr. Al-Kidwa (Palestine) (spoke in Arabic): Mr. President, allow me, at the outset, to extend my congratulations to you and your friendly country, France, for your presidency of the Council this month. I wish to pay tribute, at the same time, to the Permanent Representative of the People's Republic of China for his presidency of the Council last month. Allow me also to welcome the Secretary-General of the United Nations to this meeting. At dawn, on 22 March, Palestine time, Israel, the occupying Power, committed a new war crime by assassinating Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. Israeli helicopter gunships shot three missiles at the spiritual leader of the Hamas movement after he finished his prayers in a mosque near his home. He was killed instantly, as were six other Palestinians. Afterwards, the Israeli Prime Minister, Mr.”
2004-03-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4929 (2004) · source
“This is just a personal note; I want to put on the record that I am indeed disgusted at the low level of the interventions made by the Israeli representative, including the last one.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4842 (2003) · source
“Mr. Al-Kidwa (Palestine) (spoke in Arabic): What has happened today in their Chamber is very regrettable. The inability of the Security Council to take a firm stand on a matter of strategic importance - namely, the expansionist separation wall - is very alarming in the context of the fate of the region and the possibilities of achieving a Palestinian-Israeli peace. Consequently, we must urgently find a way to redress what has taken place within the framework of the United Nations system. Of course, with the help of our friends, we will try to do just that. Regardless of the outcome, we would like to express our thanks to the sponsors of the draft resolution that was voted on today, as well as to all the members of the Council who voted in its favour. They have indeed voted for peace.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4842 (2003) · source
“We hope, of course, that this will take place after the Council has been able to take a clear stand regarding the expansionist wall, so that there will be concrete meaning for the steps that follow. Secondly, we would like to express our appreciation to the sponsors of the draft resolution submitted to the Council today (S/2003/980). It is our hope that the Council will take action before the day is out and will act on the draft text, and it is our hope that it will be adopted so that the option of peace and the two-State option will remain viable.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“In effect, he rejected peace and declared that the crisis would last until the dissolution of the Government of war that he represents. That position must be strongly condemned, because with that position there will never be peace in the Middle East region. That is why there is a wall and settler colonialism on our lands. That is also why they reject the national existence of the Palestinian people. I wish finally to raise a couple of points with regard to another matter. First, the Palestinian side welcomes the two proposals put forward this morning by the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation. We are fully ready to cooperate with the delegation of the Russian Federation here at the United Nations regarding the idea put forward by the Russian Foreign Minister Mr. Ivanov, at the Quartet meeting.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“My fourth point, which is perhaps the most serious: the Israeli representative, after stating that the Green Line is not a border line and that there is no sovereignty over the West Bank and Gaza, touched on his central point - that he considers the Palestinian territories to be not occupied territories but disputed lands. That is precisely the essence of the problem. What has changed is that the Israeli representative had the audacity to declare that position before the Security Council, despite the norms of international law and international humanitarian law and scores of relevant resolutions. In effect, the Israeli representative declared the Government of Israel's rejection of peace, of the road map and of any basis for a peaceful settlement between the sides.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“The only correct and possible option, as indicated by several previous speakers, is that it be built either along the armistice line of 1949 or within Israeli territory. The Israeli representative failed to cite a single reason for building the wall deep inside Palestinian territory. My third point: the Israeli representative spoke of the wall as if it were another kind of wall, to the point that he denied the existence of any wall that isolates any portion of Palestinian society - as simple as that, right in front of the Council, even while the entire international community was looking at pictures of the wall. The city of Qalqilya alone - which has a population of 40,000 - is surrounded by the wall on all sides and has only one exit. That has not happened anywhere else in the world, even under the most horrendous circumstances.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Mr. Al-Kidwa (Palestine) (spoke in Arabic): This morning, the Security Council listened to a statement that represented a new standard - in terms of legal and political ugliness - in Israeli statements before the Council. Let me cite a few specific points to demonstrate that. The Israeli representative said (spoke in English) "killing the innocent is wrong." (spoke in Arabic) I should like to add that the killing of innocents is wrong, regardless of whether those innocents are Israelis or Palestinians. That is precisely the difference between the attitude of the Palestinian side and that of the Israeli side. There is the difference between him and me, and that is one of the reasons for the situation we are currently facing. My second point: the Israeli representative said that Israel has no choice but to build this wall.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Accordingly, the meeting of the Council and its decision this time have strategic and historic importance. We hope that the Council will rise to the level of this challenge.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“In addition, the Security Council, the Middle East region as a whole, and the entire international community are now approaching the moment of truth. Either Israel, the occupying Power, will be allowed to continue all that it has been doing illegally - that is, colonizing our land, conquering it and denying the existence of the State of Palestine, with all the consequent grave results, not least the demise of the two-State solution and the emergence of a more radical solution or the continuation of a perpetual conflict - or Israel is to be stopped. Settlements must be stopped. The wall must be stopped. And both must be reversed. That will rescue the potential for achieving peace and a final settlement based on the existence of two States, Israel and Palestine.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Apparently, for Israel taking over these lands instead of restoring them to their rightful Palestinian owners was not enough. It has actually moved to colonize the land left to the Palestinian people in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, once more as part of the biggest war crime of its kind in our contemporary history. Absolute madness and compounded crimes, the arrogance of power and the absence of morality, have all been sustained by illegitimate protection, by a huge influx of funds and unlimited armaments, all provided by basically one source. The Security Council clearly bears responsibility for the prevailing situation in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Even after the start of the Oslo peace process, the occupying Power continued in this regard, actually doubling the number of settlers since then, and it has continued since the launching of the road map. Israel is doing all of this when it has not even solved the issue of the ownership of land in Israel itself. There are 5.5 million dunums of land privately owned by Palestinian refugees. I speak here specifically about private ownership and not public ownership, all of which was accounted for and documented by the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine (UNCCP), composed of the United States, France and Turkey. In fact the UNCCP record was recently modernized in a way that has made it available for practical use. These 5.5 million dunums constitute almost half of the land of Israel if we exclude the Negev desert.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“In the war of 1948, immediately after declaring its existence, Israel conquered almost half the territory allotted by the United Nations to the Arab State when the United Nations partitioned Mandated Palestine in accordance with General Assembly resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, under the pretext that it was attacked by the Arab States. In the war of 1967, Israel occupied the remaining half allotted to the Arab State, which represents less than one-quarter of Mandated Palestine, and has refused to withdraw for more than 36 years. When the Palestinian leadership made the unparalleled historic concession to accept coexistence between the two States, with Palestine established only on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, Israel continued instead to colonize our land and to illegally transfer its nationals to that land.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“It is imperative to recall in this regard that in the past Israel repeatedly used the same meaningless security pretext before the Security Council to justify its illegal settlement activities throughout the territories it has occupied since 1967. Indeed, over the years the Council has repeatedly witnessed, as can be seen in the record, the actual colonization of our land while the Israeli side continued to repeat the argument that this was all just "a security measure". The transfer of 400,000 settlers was described before this Council as "a security measure". In reality, the entire issue has revolved around one thing, land, and Israel's plans to illegally expand and conquer more land at the expense of the rights of the Palestinian people.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“This is not only incredible and illogical, but a repetition of the same lie and pretext that has been used by Israel over the years to commit all of its crimes against the Palestinian people, particularly its campaign of expansionism and settler colonialism. Israel could build walls along the armistice line and could raise them to 80 metres instead of eight. It is true that this would be a bad thing in terms of coexistence between the two sides, but no one could say it is illegal. Indeed, Israel did that to some extent around the occupied Gaza Strip. If this were now the case with regard to the occupied West Bank and the armistice line, then it would be possible to believe that Israel is actually building the wall as a security measure.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“It may lack an act of annexation, as occurred in the case of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. But its effect is the same: annexation. Annexation of this kind goes by another name in international law - conquest." (E/CN.4/2004/6, para. 14) He goes on to say: "The right to self-determination is closely linked to the notion of territorial sovereignty. A people can only exercise the right of self- determination within a territory. The amputation of Palestinian territory by the Wall seriously interferes with the right of self-determination of the Palestinian people as it substantially reduces the size of the self-determination unit (already small) within which that right is to be exercised." (Ibid., para. 15) Israel claims that it is building the expansionist wall as a security measure to prevent suicide bombings.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“It is a combination that has drawn upon those two ugly phenomena, amounting to the lowest-level thinking of racist colonizers with regard to achieving expansion, colonization and negation of the indigenous people's national existence, which are all in grave breach of fundamental laws and values of the United Nations Charter, international humanitarian law and the relevant Security Council resolutions. Indeed, the Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights Commission, Professor John Duggard, in his report to the Commission on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, stated, inter alia, the following with regard to the issue of the wall: "Like the settlements it seeks to protect, the Wall is manifestly intended to create facts on the ground.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Israel has done all of this despite the fact that the Security Council has reaffirmed the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention in 26 resolutions, which demand that the occupying Power comply with its provisions and some of which specifically demand the cessation of settlement activities and declare the annexation of East Jerusalem to be null and void. How can these Israeli war crimes be appropriately described? Is this classic colonization? We believe it is worse than that. Is this a new apartheid system? We believe it is worse than that.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Now, with the building of its expansionist wall, the occupying Power is attempting to annex the Palestinian land on which half those settlers are living, while leaving enough room for the expansion of the rest of the settlements and, at the same time, destroying the Palestinian national existence. Israel has done all of this despite the absolute prohibition of such colonization under the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention and its Additional Protocol 1, which defines such action as a war crime, as does the Rome Statue of the International Criminal Court.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Israel, the occupying Power, has illegally transferred more than 400,000 Israeli settlers to the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, placing them in more than 200 settlements built on more than 8 per cent of Palestinian land, in addition to the land in their vicinities and the additional land they attempt to control. It has established a separate infrastructure and a complete network of roads for those settlers, and it has enabled them to exploit and abuse our natural resources, including our water, and to terrorize our people.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Thus, it is abundantly clear that the establishment of the expansionist conquest wall by the occupying Power is a war crime and, I reiterate, it is of the same magnitude as a crime against humanity. The establishment of this expansionist wall complements Israeli settlement activities. Their nature is the same in terms of the colonization, conquest and annexation of the land. The wall is another war crime that compounds the other war crime - the Israeli settlement of our land - in addition, of course, to the countless other war crimes committed by the occupying Power against the Palestinian people.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Its construction represents a violation of both Article 2, paragraph 4, and Article 1, paragraph 2 of the Charter of the United Nations. It violates the established principle of international law that prohibits the acquisition of territory by force. It violates article 47 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which bans any annexation by the occupying Power of the whole or part of the occupied territory. It also violates article 33 of the Geneva Convention, which prohibits collective punishment of protected civilians. Finally, it represents a grave breach of the Convention under article 147, as it involves extensive destruction and appropriation of property. All of that is in addition to its serious violation of relevant Security Council resolutions, including resolution 242 (1967), cornerstone of the peace process, and of the Oslo Agreements.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Once again, I invite the Council to review the map distributed with our statement, which illustrates the first and second phases, as well as the entire project. If the international community allows the implementation of this phase of such an Israeli crime, then the third and fourth phases will follow, making the length of the wall more than 500 kilometres, at a cost of more than $1 billion. After that, the establishment of the wall on the eastern side of the Palestinian territory will begin in order to isolate it from its international border with Jordan, allowing for the conquest of the Jordan Valley and the completion of the walls of the three or four bantustans on half of the occupied Palestinian territory. To restate the obvious, the expansionist wall of conquest - in its parts and in its entirety - is illegal.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“The city has been completely besieged, especially since the building of a wall 15 kilometres long north of the city - that is to say, south of Jerusalem. The wall is totally suffocating the city in an attempt to provide for the expansion of the Israeli settlements south of occupied Jerusalem. On 1 October, the Israeli Government adopted plans for the expansionist wall's second phase, which dwarfs the first phase in terms of the extent of the illegal expansion and conquest of Palestinian land, as well as other dangerous consequences in that regard. The second phase is to begin with the establishment of the wall east of the illegal Israeli settlements of "Ariel" and "Kedumim", which will cut more than 22 kilometres into Palestinian land. The consequences of that can only be imagined.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source