YouSaid · the spoken record

Elaraby

lines on the record: 820
first: 1992-01-06
most recent: 2015-10-22
sittings or episodes: 83
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

“Mr. Elaraby (Egypt) (interpretation from Arabic): In January the Security Council unanimously adopted resolution 1044 (1996) to send a clear, unambiguous message to the Government of the Sudan that the international community, as represented in the Security Council, was taking a firm stand against the phenomenon of international terrorism, and to deter those contemplating supporting terrorism, including countries involved in such criminal acts. In this respect, we should recall that the Organization of African Unity (OAU) considered the assassination attempt against the life of President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt to be an attack on the whole of Africa, threatening regional stability and international peace and security.”
1996-04-26 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3660 (1996) · source
“We trust that the Security Council will shoulder full responsibility for the implementation of the resolution we have just adopted and that it will remain seized of the situation in Lebanon at this decisive turning point, so as to preserve some of its credibility, to ensure the triumph of justice and the purposes and principles of the Charter and to save the peace process in the Middle East, which has been seriously jeopardized.”
1996-04-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3654 (1996) · source
“The resolution adopted a few moments ago by the Security Council does not really cover the entire scope of the Israeli aggression against Lebanon and does not live up to our expectations for what the Security Council's reaction to the aggression should be. Our hearts are heavy and we suffer when we look upon the human tragedy that Lebanon has been undergoing in the last eight days in full View of the entire world. We trust that the adoption of this resolution will indeed lead to the cessation of the hostilities and the military actions.”
1996-04-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3654 (1996) · source
“The resolution does not clearly condemn Israel, and it does not deal with the question of the compensation to which Lebanon in is entitled for the loss of human life and the destruction of property. The resolution refers to Security Council resolution 425 (1978), within the context of relevant resolutions adopted by the Security Council. Resolution 425 (1978) is indeed still in force, but it has to be looked at as a whole. As I said, my delegation voted in favour of the resolution we have just adopted, for it calls for an immediate halt to hostilities and it reaffirms the need to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Lebanon.”
1996-04-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3654 (1996) · source
“Is it shameful to condemn aggression or to request compensation for Lebanon? It is indeed deplorable that the Council was not able to adopt this draft resolution. I should like to thank those States that supported the draft resolution, thus standing on the side of justice and law. Turning to the draft resolution contained in document S/1996/304, which was co-sponsored by a number of States, I would first of all like to extend my appreciation and sincere thanks to Ambassador Dejammet, Permanent Representative of France, for his tireless and sincere efforts on behalf of the French Government in the last few days, efforts which led to this draft resolution. Although the Egyptian delegation supported it, we should like to point out that it does not contain all of the principles which should apply with regard to the situation in Lebanon.”
1996-04-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3654 (1996) · source
“Those are the main elements of draft resolution S/1996/292, submitted by the Arab Group, which, as I have said, show the severity and scale of the Israeli aggression, aggression which cannot be tolerated or passed over in silence by the Council. The credibility of the Security Council is at stake here. The whole world is looking to the Security Council as the body responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security, pursuant to Article 24 of the Charter. In all frankness, I have to say that we find it very difficult to be convinced by the positions of those that opposed our draft resolution. What could prevent the Council from calling for an immediate cessation of military action and for strict respect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon?”
1996-04-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3654 (1996) · source
“The draft resolution co-sponsored by Egypt within the Arab Group reflects the following fundamental principles. First of all, it calls on Israel immediately to cease its military action and to withdraw forthwith its forces from all Lebanese territory; secondly, it calls for strict respect for the territorial integrity, sovereignty, and political independence of Lebanon; thirdly, it calls for the implementation of all relevant Security Council resolutions, in particular resolution 425 (1978); fourthly, it strongly condemns the Israeli aggression, which has brought about high tolls of civilian casualties, led to the displacement of civilians and a massive destruction of the country's infrastructure and of archaeological and cultural sites; fifthly, it calls for participation in the reconstruction of Lebanon and for help in meeting the humanitarian needs of the civilian population; and, sixthly, it calls for redress for Lebanon for the loss resulting from the Israeli aggression.”
1996-04-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3654 (1996) · source
“A very honest comparison of this case - in which Lebanon called on the Security Council to take the necessary measures under the Charter to protect it against aggression, to protect its people against raids, carnage and the forced displacement of thousands of innocent civilians - with that of minor aggression against a limited number of citizens of another State, when the Security Council adopted immediate, specific measures, strengthens the suggestion that the Security Council applies double standards, depending on the State that is the victim of aggression, its citizens and the country that launches the aggression. The draft resolution submitted by the Arab Group shows the severity and scale of the tragedy being experienced by the Lebanese people following the Israeli aggression.”
1996-04-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3654 (1996) · source
“Before turning to Egypt's position on the two draft resolutions, I should very briefly like to speak about the manner in which the Council has dealt with this matter since the Israeli aggression began. It has been marked by a negativism which will no doubt have unfortunate effects on the maintenance of international peace and security, particularly, in the Middle East region. Lebanon requested an emergency meeting of the Council on Sunday, 14 April, but differences in the positions of members of the Council led to a delay in a favourable response being made to the request. Deferring a decision by the Council for eight days has enabled the aggressor to continue its aggression, flouting the principles of international law and of the Charter of the United Nations.”
1996-04-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3654 (1996) · source
“Mr. Elaraby (Egypt) (interpretation from Arabic): At last, eight days after the beginning of the Israeli aggression against Lebanon, the Security Council has met to adopt a resolution calling for an immediate cessation of military operations which are a flagrant aggression against a country which was a founder Member of the United Nations. The Egyptian Government has stated, and repeats again today, that it absolutely rejects the Israeli aggression against Lebanon. The people and Government of Egypt support the brother people of Lebanon in their tragedy; we support them in all international forums, including the Security Council and the General Assembly, giving Lebanon our full support for the defence of its people, its territorial integrity and its sovereignty.”
1996-04-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3654 (1996) · source
“We hope that the Israeli Government will heed the will of the international community, as represented by the Security Council, and that it will put an end to its attacks against Lebanon, so that security and stability, for which the Lebanese people so bravely continue to strive, will return despite the difficulties the country now faces.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3653 (1996) · source
“The United Nations can play a pivotal role in implementing security guarantees in southern Lebanon, either through the Armistice Commission or through the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), which was created by the Security Council under resolution 425 (1978) to ensure complete Israeli withdrawal, to regain peace and security and to help the Lebanese Government to regain effective control over the south of the country. We hope that the United Nations will provide assistance to the Lebanese Government to deal with the humanitarian needs arising from the displacement of so many Lebanese from their homes, towns and villages.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3653 (1996) · source
“Today Egypt calls on the Security Council to shoulder its responsibility to put an end to those attacks through specific measures leading to an immediate cease-fire, an immediate end to military activities and a full Israeli withdrawal to the internationally recognized borders. The time has come for Israel to act in a civilized manner in its relations with Lebanon, recognizing Lebanon's sovereignty and satisfying the requirements of Security Council resolutions, particularly resolution 425 (1978), which calls on Israel to cease its military action against Lebanese territorial integrity and to withdraw its forces from all Lebanese territory. In this appeal, we do not set aside Israel's right - indeed, every State's right - to demand an end to attacks against its citizens.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3653 (1996) · source
“But, even if we were to take a step back to the nineteenth century we would find that the international community had agreed more than 150 years ago to specific terms for the use of self-defence. Daniel Webster, then Secretary of State of the United States of America, declared that the right of self-defence implied the instant and overwhelming necessity for self-defence, leaving no choice of means and no time for deliberation. Lacking these conditions, the use of military force is considered an act of reprisal prohibited by international law. The Security Council has had occasion to condemn such acts many times in the past. Egypt has repeatedly asserted the need to put an end to Israeli attacks against Lebanese territory and sovereignty.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3653 (1996) · source
“Secondly, the situation should have been put to the Security Council. Israel and Lebanon are parties to the peace process, and are negotiating directly on a peaceful settlement to their dispute on the basis of land for peace. During these negotiations Israel can raise such issues. Agreement may be reached between both parties on security guarantees based not on military hegemony, but on mutual confidence. Thirdly, self-defence by States is not a blank cheque to be used to wage aggression on others. An element of proportionality is involved. The scale, duration and objective of military activity must be proportionate to the reason for such activity. Nor can we consider that Israel was unable to invoke other means, such as the Security Council or other channels, to find the means to obtain security. This is contemporary international law.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3653 (1996) · source
“Any fair-minded observer will conclude that these raids have become an all-out war against an entire people, not simply against those few who have directed bombs against northern Israel. Any armed aggression against a neighbouring State, whatever the motive, constitutes prohibited aggression. Yet self-defence too has rules prescribed by the United Nations and contemporary international law. First and foremost, under Article 51 of the Charter, there must have been an actual armed attack. Firing Katyusha rockets across borders is indeed a proscribed act which must cease forthwith. This is clear. However, the armistice agreement between Lebanon and Israel continues officially to stand; the mechanisms provided for in the armistice should have been invoked to deal with these events.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3653 (1996) · source
“We must take a stand against such claims. The facts show that for the past two decades the Israeli occupation has not guaranteed security for Israel's citizens. On the contrary, it has led to further movement towards violent opposition by those who grew up under the heel of the occupation. All the evidence points to the fact that individuals have taken up opposition, extremism and violence as a means to end Israeli occupation. This is a direct, inevitable result of their oppression and suffering. Moreover, we can find no appropriate justification for these intense Israeli raids: the five-day bombardment of Lebanese population centres, towns and villages, leading to the death of dozens, the wounding of approximately 100 and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Lebanese.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3653 (1996) · source
“This is aggression against Lebanon's sovereignty and territorial integrity, aggression that extends from Tyre in the south, to Beirut, the capital, to Tripoli in the north. Dozens have died, and many more innocent unarmed civilians have been hurt. The Israeli Government claims that this aggression is self-defence and that it is merely a limited measure - or a "surgical operation" - to eliminate Hezbollah combatants. Israel has constantly justified its repeated aggression against Lebanon's sovereignty by invoking the right of self defence in the face of individual attacks from southern Lebanon. It has resorted to that rationale to invade Lebanon, to attack its sovereignty and territorial integrity, and to continue occupying part of southern Lebanese territory on the pretext of ensuring northern Israel's security.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3653 (1996) · source
“Mr. Elaraby (Egypt) (interpretation from Arabic): The mere fact that the Security Council is meeting twice in one day to consider Israeli measures against two Arab peoples is a source of grave concern. That concern is all the greater when we recall that there is an ongoing peace process to settle the Arab-Israeli conflict. This began in Madrid and has thus far resulted in an agreement on the principles of a historic reconciliation between Israel and the Palestinians as well as a peace treaty with Jordan. Any observer of the situation in the Middle East must realize the gravity of the dangers facing the region as a result of continuing Israeli attacks to the north, the east and the south. Israel is waging aggression by air, sea and land against Lebanon.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3653 (1996) · source
“The delegation of Egypt believes that the Security Council will consider all aspects of the issue, especially the consequences of the latest Israeli measures, within the framework of the peace process. The long-term repercussions of the breakdown of the peace process may lead to violence taking over from the logic of peace and cooperation. Finally, the delegation of Egypt reaffirms that a just and comprehensive peace will not be achieved unless all parties respect their international commitments in good faith. The Security Council's debate today will undoubtedly send a clear message to the Israeli Government about the need to end all measures which jeopardize the rights of the Palestinian people so that the peace process can continue progressing towards a just and comprehensive peace, which all peoples of the region are searching for.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652 (1996) · source
“Let us not believe that the continuing progress of the peace process will be automatic or that it is inevitable. Indeed, we believe that all parties concerned must give greater impetus to negotiations. The wide support for the peace process has until now been linked in the minds of all concerned with expectations of regaining land and rights, an end to bloodshed, and the beginning of regional cooperation towards arms control and the development of the economies of the States of the region in order to raise the living standards of the people. Such noble objectives must be obtained before true peace can prevail. Consequently, the Security Council must, in its deliberations today, deal with this problem as a source of destabilization in the security of the entire Middle East region.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652 (1996) · source
“That requires wisdom, courage and far- sightedness by all. The Palestinian and Israeli sides succeeded in achieving a historic reconciliation through the Declaration of Principles signed on 13 September 1993, in which it was agreed to take specific steps towards a peaceful settlement in the dispute between them. The settlement was based on Israel's withdrawal from the occupied territories under resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), as well as on the legitimate political rights of the Palestinian people. The Middle East has begun to move from a period of war and struggle towards a new stage which promises a just and comprehensive peace between the peoples of this important region of the world. This transitional period places further burdens on all the parties concerned with the well-being and stability of the peoples of the region.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652 (1996) · source
“We must agree to reject such means and to take all legitimate measures against them. While renewing our condemnation of such terrorist acts, we cannot accept the exploitation of those terrorist crimes by one side in order to impose collective punishment against the other. We call upon the Israeli Government to abide by the commitments it made with the Palestinian side. We call upon it to respect the agreed timetable to end the Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Palestinian territories and to be more positive in negotiations with both Syria and Lebanon. Perhaps the strongest response to those trying to kill peace in the Middle East is to accelerate the achievement of that peace. Violence does not lead to peace; it produces further Violence. Therefore this Vicious circle must be broken.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652 (1996) · source
“They denounced such acts of terrorism and expressed their firm intention to work against them. They called on all Governments to join in that condemnation and in their stand against terrorist acts. Despite the positive developments in the Middle East since the Madrid peace conference, we acknowledge the existence of threats to peace efforts in the Middle East, including those posed by terrorist acts. A number of Palestinian extremists have exploded bombs which have killed dozens of Israeli civilians. Before those attacks an Israeli extremist assassinated the late Israeli Prime Minister, Yitzhak Rabin, and before that, an Israeli extremist was responsible for a massacre at the Ibrahimi mosque in Hebron. All those offences remind us that the enemies of peace are prepared to use the utmost violence to achieve their ends.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652 (1996) · source
“The Summit of Peacemakers, held at Sharm El Sheikh under the co-chairmanship of Presidents Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and Bill Clinton of the United States, reaffirmed this essential interlinkage between peace, security and economic progress. In the final statement of the Summit, the two Presidents, laid out several steps designed to achieve three essential objectives: supporting the Israeli-Palestinian agreements; supporting continuing negotiations towards a comprehensive settlement; and working together to promote security and stability in the region through effective means, cooperation and further assistance. The Presidents severely condemned all acts of terrorism, whatever the motive and whoever the perpetrator, including the most recent terrorist attacks in Israel.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652 (1996) · source
“In the end, that will weaken the ability of the Security Council to deal with any potential act of violence in the future. In calling upon Israel to put an end to those measures that run counter to its commitments as the occupying Power - and are in Violation of its agreements with the Palestinian side, Egypt is not underestimating the threat of terrorism or the need for us to consolidate our efforts in the face of terrorism. However, we do not believe that demolishing homes and starving innocent Palestinians are ways to defend security. We believe that the ideal means to achieve security for all parties in the Middle East is to push the peace process forward towards a just and comprehensive peace and to help the countries of the region cooperate in order to raise the living standards of their peoples.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652 (1996) · source
“Furthermore, such Israeli policies undermine the efforts of those calling for peaceful negotiations as a means to settle the Arab-Israeli conflict - particularly between Israel and Palestinians - and strengthens the hand of those calling for extremism, violence and terrorism on both sides. The international community, represented in the Security Council, is called upon today more than ever before to reaffirm its position on the illegitimacy of the Israeli measures. The silence of the Security Council in the face of such measures would undoubtedly raise great questions as to the legitimacy of the measures and standards applied by the Security Council in dealing with different types of aggression and would point to double standards in the application of such rules and norms.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652 (1996) · source
“During years of occupation Israel used Palestinian workers as a source of cheap labour in order to double the gains of the Israeli economy. By preventing those workers from reaching their jobs now, Israel is shirking its responsibilities until a Palestinian economy can be built. Furthermore, such Israeli practices run counter to Israel's obligations as the occupying Power, under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949, as well as under Security Council resolutions and other international agreements.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652 (1996) · source
“Fourthly, Israel has closed the borders of the West Bank and Gaza with Jordan and Egypt, respectively, preventing the movement of people and goods that are imported legally by Palestinian businessmen. All links have been out between the Palestinian territory and the outside world. It has been truly isolated from neighbouring countries. This closure does great harm to the Palestinian economy. It is imposed, in most cases, against people and goods, even those goods going to or coming from third parties. This has resulted in great suffering and difficulties for a large sector of the population, particularly those Palestinian workers who rely on their jobs in Israel as the only source of support for their families.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652 (1996) · source
“Although Israel justifies such measures on the pretext of safeguarding its security, a quick overview of the Israeli measures listed in the Palestinian complaint to the Security Council belies those justifications. First, Israel has imposed limits on the freedom of movement inside the Palestinian territory. Israeli forces have surrounded some regions and prevented Palestinians from moving between cities, villages and towns. Secondly, Israel has imposed further restrictions on entry to occupied East Jerusalem. Thirdly, Palestinian borders are closed to Palestinian people and Palestinian goods from the West Bank and Gaza; no Israeli goods are allowed to enter the Palestinian territory or some parts of it. Furthermore, restrictions have been imposed on the movement of third-country nationals between Israel and Gaza.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652 (1996) · source
“Mr. Elaraby (Egypt) (interpretation from Arabic): The Security Council is meeting today to consider measures whose inherent dangers go beyond Israel's siege against the Palestinian people, and whose effects add another to a series of Israeli violations of the rules of international law, as well as of Security Council resolutions and commitments entered into by the Israeli Government itself. The situation is even more serious in View of the fact that the Security Council will later today consider the matter of Israel's new and repeated attacks against Lebanon. Egypt calls on Israel to put an end to those attacks and to withdraw forthwith from all Lebanese territories, in accordance with Security Council resolution 425 (1978).”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652 (1996) · source
“Finally, the international community must demonstrate political will; it must put this question on its list of urgent priorities. There is no doubt that efforts by all States, individually, or through a group of friends of Afghanistan, or through any other grouping of interested States, if coordinated by the representative of the Secretary-General, would contribute to the achievement of a just and comprehensive settlement of this question. My delegation hopes that this Security Council debate will provide the fresh impetus needed for the settlement of this question, beginning the process of adoption by the Council of effective measures to ensure serious steps to settle the problem.”
1996-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3650 (1996) · source
“In this regard, my delegation welcomes the decision to move the special representative's headquarters to Jalalabad, which will increase his personal interaction with the events and enhance the parties' sense of the United Nations desire to reach a political settlement to their problem as soon as possible. Resolution of this matter must be based on the presence of political will on three levels. First, the warring Afghan parties must demonstrate a will for peace. As the Secretary-General states in his report, the military option still seems the course of action preferred by those parties. Secondly, there must be political will on the part of States which, through their support for one or another of the parties to the conflict, are contributing to the persistence of the conflict and complicating the settlement process.”
1996-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3650 (1996) · source
“This proposal deserves careful consideration, since it could be an appropriate way to bring all the Afghan parties to the negotiating table. History provides many examples of other international problems in which the parties concerned were brought together to hold a dialogue for national reconciliation, as was the case in Lebanon, Cambodia and Yugoslavia. But the convening of such an international conference would require a great deal of preparation by the Secretary-General's special representative, whose task would be to narrow the differences between the parties before the conference in such a way as to ensure the successful adoption of a comprehensive settlement plan.”
1996-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3650 (1996) · source
“The Security Council issued a presidential statement on 15 February 1996 in which it expressed its deep concern that: "the continued conflict in Afghanistan provides fertile ground for terrorism, arms transfers and drug trafficking, which destabilize the whole region and beyond." (S/PRST/1996/6, fifth paragraph) The Security Council must now discharge its responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security by adopting clear and well-defined measures to limit the spread of consequences of Afghanistan's instability to other regions pending the achievement of a comprehensive political settlement there. The Secretary-General's report refers to the proposal to convene an international conference to address all aspects of the Afghan question.”
1996-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3650 (1996) · source
“If it is faithfully implemented and good will is evinced by all Afghan parties, this mechanism will put a halt to the bloodshed and the many years of civil war during which the Afghan people has been deprived of stability and peace. At present, the basic obstacle facing this mechanism is how to persuade the Afghan parties to accept it not in the manner perceived and desired by each faction separately, but rather from an inclusive and equitable viewpoint that transcends the individual interests of the parties in favour of the general and definitive interests of the people of Afghanistan as a whole. The continuation of the armed conflict in Afghanistan has become in itself a serious threat to the stability of the region. Its repercussions have been felt beyond the region and now threaten the stability of many others.”
1996-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3650 (1996) · source
“The mechanism should be mandated, inter alia, to perform the following tasks: first, the negotiation and supervision of an immediate cease-fire; secondly, the establishment of a national security force responsible for ensuring security throughout the country, supervising the collection of all heavy weapons in the country and stemming the flow of arms and related materiel to all parties; and, thirdly, the formation of an accepted provisional Government that could, inter alia, control the national security force pending the establishment of the conditions necessary for the holding of free and fair elections throughout the country, of course with the possibility of utilizing traditional decision-making structures.”
1996-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3650 (1996) · source
“The complete cessation of foreign interference, including an end to the provision of arms to the warring parties, would certainly help establish the climate necessary for the achievement of a comprehensive political settlement based first and foremost on the will of the people of Afghanistan. The delegation of Egypt has supported and continues strongly to support ongoing efforts to establish the expanded mechanism, referred to by the General Assembly in its resolution 50/88 B, of a fully representative and broad-based authoritative council as the most appropriate formula for opening the way towards national reconciliation in Afghanistan.”
1996-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3650 (1996) · source
“All this casts a pall over the prospects for the ultimate objective of a peaceful settlement and the way to achieve it. We share the Secretary-General's grave concern over the failure of the warring parties to respond to his appeals and to those of his special representative for an immediate cessation of hostilities and the unconditional initiation of peaceful dialogue. Our concern is all the greater in View of the active preparations for a new round of fighting in and around the capital, Kabul. In three paragraphs, the report refers to an important factor that not only increases tension between the warring factions but also complicates the peace process: increasing foreign interference, both political and military.”
1996-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3650 (1996) · source
“The delegation of Egypt would also like to seize this opportunity to express its great appreciation for the continued and important role played by the Organization of the Islamic Conference and its Secretary General, Mr. Hamid Algabid, in helping the United Nations promote a peaceful settlement in Afghanistan. This morning we listened with great interest to the wide-ranging statement made by the Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan. This statement, together with a careful reading of the Secretary-General's report, can only deepen our pessimism about the situation in Afghanistan. The consequences of the human tragedy there have affected a large segment of the population. The warring parties show no genuine desire for a serious dialogue to achieve peace.”
1996-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3650 (1996) · source
“My delegation wishes to express its thanks and appreciation to the Secretary-General for his report on the latest developments in the situation in Afghanistan. The valuable United Nations efforts to find a peaceful settlement and in the field of humanitarian assistance deserve all our support and gratitude. In this regard, a special word of appreciation is due to the United Nations Special Mission to Afghanistan, headed by Mr. Mahmoud Mestiri, for its ongoing efforts on behalf of a just, comprehensive and peaceful settlement of the Afghanistan question that would achieve the desired objectives of the friendly Afghan people - namely, the restoration of peace and stability through national reconciliation - and ensure the preservation of its sovereignty, territorial integrity and unity.”
1996-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3650 (1996) · source
“Mr. Elaraby (Egypt) (interpretation from Arabic): Allow me at the outset to congratulate you most sincerely, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Council. Your rich diplomatic experience and well-known leadership skills guarantee that the Council will discharge its responsibilities this month in the best possible manner. I also take this opportunity to express my deep appreciation to Ambassador Legwaila of Botswana for the remarkable efficiency that characterized his presidency of the Council last month. At the outset, the delegation of Egypt wishes to reaffirm the importance of the principle of the Council's holding public meetings in order to familiarize itself with the opinions of the States concerned on the various subjects before it.”
1996-04-09 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3650 (1996) · source
“In this context, my delegation wishes explicitly to reiterate that those arrangements are those referred to in paragraph 14 of resolution 687 (1991), which clearly states that actions taken by Iraq in accordance with that resolution in connection with the elimination of weapons of mass destruction represent steps towards the goal of establishing in the Middle East a zone free from weapons of mass destruction. Fifthly, Iraq accepted Security Council resolution 715 (1991), which provided for the export/import monitoring mechanism to be developed. In making its decision on the draft resolution, the delegation of Egypt took that Iraqi position into account, although the new mechanism regime imposes new and unprecedented commitments for States and their national institutions.”
1996-03-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3644 (1996) · source
“Thirdly, although the establishment of this new mechanism amounts in fact to a reinforcement of the current regime established under sections C and F of resolution 687 (1991), with the purpose of ensuring that Iraq does not require materials proscribed under that resolution, the concept is unprecedented for the Security Council in that no specific time-limits are set for the new mechanism. This is a matter of some concern for the Egyptian delegation. Fourthly, the mechanism approved under the draft resolution, as provided for in paragraph 3, is emphatically and clearly without prejudice to and shall not impair the operation of existing or future non-proliferation agreements or regimes on the international or regional level, including arrangements referred to in resolution 687 (1991).”
1996-03-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3644 (1996) · source
“Secondly, while this new mechanism would monitor Iraq's import and export of dual-use materials after sanctions are lifted, it is our understanding that this regime must be put in place as that stage approaches. In this context, we hope that Iraq will create the conditions and climate necessary for achieving this objective, through full cooperation with the Special Commission established to supervise the elimination of all Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, and through the provision, at the earliest possible date, of complete, comprehensive and final information on all elements of its proscribed programmes.”
1996-03-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3644 (1996) · source
“These efforts resulted in a report (S/1995/1017), submitted to the Security Council in December 1995, which gave rise in turn to intensive consultations within the Council with a view to giving due weight to the concerns of all delegations. My delegation, however, wants to reaffirm a number of points. First of all, no provision of the draft resolution must jeopardize the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Iraq. The provisions of paragraph 5 of the draft resolution must not prevent Iraq from exercising its legitimate right to import or export, for non-proscribed purposes, the technologies or materials it needs to promote its economic and social development.”
1996-03-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3644 (1996) · source
“Mr. Elaraby (Egypt) (interpretation from Arabic): The Security Council is meeting today to take action on the draft resolution contained in document S/1996/221, by which it would establish a mechanism for monitoring Iraqi imports and exports, pursuant to paragraph 7 of resolution 715 (1991), which called for cooperation between the sanctions Committee established under resolution 661 (1990), the Special Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in developing the necessary provisions. The Egyptian delegation pays a tribute to the sanctions Committee under the chairmanship of Ambassador Eitel, to the Special Commission and to the IAEA for their efforts, through a series of meetings and consultations, to prepare a draft resolution.”
1996-03-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3644 (1996) · source
“I wish in conclusion to emphasize that the basic responsibility for stability in Somalia lies with the people of Somalia; their leaders must shoulder this responsibility in the full View of the international community. At the same time, we must recognize the need for and the importance of action by the United Nations to help the Somali people overcome its ordeal.”
1996-03-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3641 (1996) · source
“The most important of these are: commitment by the international community not to recognize any authority in Somalia unless it represents all Somali communities and factions and enjoys general acceptance; continued application and strengthened monitoring of the international embargo on the supply of arms to Somalia; exerting all possible pressure on the Somali parties to get the process back on track, and putting the options before them so that they can choose those that are most suitable and acceptable; and last but not least, continued provision by the international community of development and humanitarian assistance of all kinds, even-handedly to all parts of Somalia.”
1996-03-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3641 (1996) · source
“At a time when some States were withdrawing their contingents, Egypt doubled its contribution, and has continued to this day to be fully prepared to participate. Progress by the United Nations or other international and regional organizations depends on a number of factors.”
1996-03-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3641 (1996) · source