YouSaid · the spoken record

Razali

lines on the record: 122
first: 1993-04-19
most recent: 2022-10-28
sittings or episodes: 14
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

“Malaysia also supports the work of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East in providing assistance to Palestinian refugees, including through predictable funding. We remain committed to providing the necessary means to securing the safety, protection, and well-being of the Palestinian people. It is high time for the international community to recognize the statehood of Palestine, with full membership of the United Nations. The unfair treatment and injustice have persisted too long. The 74 years of suffering have to end. The Palestinian people deserves to live freely in peace and dignity as a rightful member of this community of nations.”
2022-10-28 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9174Resumption1 (2022) · source
“Malaysia calls on the Security Council to urge Israel to end its illegal settler-colonial occupation and apartheid regime, in accordance with international law and relevant Council’s resolutions, including resolutions 904 (1994) and 2334 (2016). Malaysia is fully committed to the plight of the Palestinian people and will continue to work towards the realization of their inalienable rights to self- determination, national independence and sovereignty. We firmly believe that the way forward out of this endless conflict is the realization of a two-State solution based on the pre-1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as the capital of the State of Palestine.”
2022-10-28 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9174Resumption1 (2022) · source
“It must assume its responsibility and ensure protection to the Palestinian people, as well as hold the perpetrators accountable. Israel’s continued impunity, including that of its illegal settlers, is untenable and undermines the great strides of past international efforts to ensure accountability against war crimes and crimes against humanity. The occupying Power’s continued dereliction of its obligation not only dishonours and disrespects the Council, but further undermines the political horizon. Its intractable attitude also reflects an unwillingness to work towards a just solution for lasting peace in the region.”
2022-10-28 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9174Resumption1 (2022) · source
“I thank you, Madam, for convening this open debate. Malaysia would also like to thank the Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process for his briefing. Malaysia aligns itself with the statement delivered by the representative of Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference. This has been one of the most horrific years for the Palestinians in the occupied Palestinian territory, especially in recent weeks. Today, we have heard more reports of the merciless killing of innocent lives, including children, forcible evictions, the demolition of houses and the confiscation of lands. This is absolutely appalling, and the message is clear. The situation on the ground continues to worsen, without a durable resolution in sight. The Security Council cannot remain silent or indisposed.”
2022-10-28 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9174Resumption1 (2022) · source
“At this juncture, when the situation is delicate and fragile, every effort must be made to consolidate the peace process. The continued strangulation of the Palestinians would certainly hamper the course towards peace. The attacks in Lebanon have put Israel on a collision course. The leaders who have been courageous enough to forge a historic breakthrough for peace must not allow extremism or a short-sighted policy to prevail.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652Resumption1 (1996) · source
“In the words of the Palestinian leader, "Peace is not the quest of the Palestinians alone, but is a pressing need and a basic quest for the international community, for Arabs and for Israelis equally." Malaysia would like to reaffirm our total commitment to and unwavering support for the Palestinian people and its leadership in the attainment of all its inalienable rights, to exercise self-determination and to establish an independent State. We equally support the need for peace and security in Lebanon and an end to the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon. The Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon not only violates the sovereignty of Lebanon but is becoming militarily indefensible. The way to protect Israeli security is through a political compact with neighbours, and the integrity of Lebanon must be part of that compact.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652Resumption1 (1996) · source
“Only a few months back, the Malaysian delegation joined in the universal acclaim at the signing of the Israeli-Palestinian Agreement. We then envisaged prospects for peace and stability in the Middle East, in particular in the occupied Palestinian territories. Both sides - the Palestinians and the Israelis - had shown their strong commitment to further foster their understanding to work together to achieve peace. Now more than ever, these commitments to peace should not be allowed to be derailed by extremists, or by the temptations of domestic politicking.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652Resumption1 (1996) · source
“These measures, which include the demolition of homes, the confiscation of land, the expansion of settlements, and severe restrictions on the movement of persons and goods within as well as into and out of the Palestinian territories, are a blatant strangulation of the Palestinian people and their economy. Mounting resentment brings about restiveness and retaliation, producing hotbeds of discord and desperate action. It would be a fatal mistake if Israeli retaliatory action, as a result of suicide bombings by extremists, were to bring about a serious rift in the joint commitments between Israeli, Palestinian and other Arab leaders, and were to divide Israelis and Palestinians. The continuing support of both the Palestinian and the Israeli peoples is necessary to move the peace process forward.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652Resumption1 (1996) · source
“Yasser Arafat took the right step by petitioning this Council for a debate, due to the serious hardships being undergone by Palestinians as a result of the Israeli general security blockade, which is also damaging the nascent Palestinian economy. Given the current structure of the Palestinian economy, any restrictions imposed on the mobility of Palestinians would exacerbate the hardship of the population living in those areas. The Israelis' closure of Palestinian territories has resulted in rampant unemployment and has had an adverse effect on the Palestinians' income derived from agricultural exports. The harsh measures adopted by the Israeli authorities represent grave violations of the relevant provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652Resumption1 (1996) · source
“The Malaysian Government is deeply disturbed by the worsening situation in the Middle East. Like others in the international community, we feel let down that Israel should play into the hands of extremists, allowing events, as if inexorably, to bring everything back to a circle of violence, where, distressingly, both Governments and extremist groups terrorize and maim people to achieve their political ends. The major Powers, including the United States, and important countries of the Middle East must take steps to arrest this slide, which could undo the historic achievements made to this point with courage and sacrifice.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652Resumption1 (1996) · source
“Even if we are uncertain about the effect of the Council's debate today, the Malaysian delegation sees it as a necessary response to the plea made by Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to this Council to address the policy of blockade and closure being pursued by the Government of Israel, and also to the escalating Israeli military attacks in Lebanon, which have brought death and misery to innocent people and which are playing into the hands of those who oppose reconciliation and stability in the Middle East. The combined effect of Israeli action in Palestine and Lebanon at a time of political volatility in Israel itself has reinforced the position of those exploiters in Israel who want to derail the peace process and of those extremists outside Israel who would like to undermine the fragile foundations of peace in the Middle East.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652Resumption1 (1996) · source
“It is a pleasure to see you presiding over the work of the Council, Sir, whatever the circumstances. You are presiding over a debate on an issue that must command the priority attention of this Council, given recent disturbing developments. If these developments are not comprehensively addressed, they will have serious repercussions further affecting international peace and security.”
1996-04-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3652Resumption1 (1996) · source
“The international guarantees so necessary to ensure fulfilment of the Dayton Agreement must ensure that Srpska remains part of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Security Council cannot ignore the issue of succession. It is a complex issue with implications not just for the Balkan parties at Dayton but also for the parties that were not there. The issue of succession can be resolved only through negotiations, and not by any one party seeking to unilaterally assume the position of successor. Finally, I want to reiterate that the international community must stand behind President Izetbegovic and the Bosnians as we try to give peace, however imperfect or fragile, a chance to take root.”
1995-11-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3595 (1995) · source
“Of all the challenges confronting Bosnia and Herzegovina, the most immediate and fundamental is reconstruction - reconstruction of its economy and its infrastructure, as well as its society. The people of Bosnia and Herzegovina must find reason to believe once again in the region in which they live and in a multilateral system and vehicle that will not let them down. We must help to ensure that it remains pluralistic and enjoys economic growth and social development. The Muslim community in Bosnia and Herzegovina must enjoy the right to development and to an environment free of coercion and threat. It is equally important that the entity of the Republic of Srpska adhere to the spirit and substance of the Agreement and not attempt to undermine the territorial integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina.”
1995-11-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3595 (1995) · source
“In the consideration of the relationship between IFOR and the Security Council, it will be necessary to clarify all aspects of the issue, both military and non-military, political and humanitarian alike. Malaysia has conveyed to NATO its intention to participate in the international force. We expect specific details pertaining to the involvement of non-NATO forces to be resolved expeditiously. We cannot but emphasize the importance of the involvement of non-NATO forces, including those from countries of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), in securing the full and balanced implementation of the Dayton Agreement. For those not part of NATO, we especially look to the United Nations to define its role as an overall authority for overseeing the full implementation of the Framework Agreement.”
1995-11-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3595 (1995) · source
“The Council today has debated two relevant resolutions, one dealing with the arms embargo and the other with economic sanctions. The arms embargo must be lifted immediately to ensure that the Bosnians are adequately prepared to defend themselves, an inherent right recognized in Article 51 of the Charter. Malaysia continues to oppose the lifting of economic sanctions without verifiable actions showing that the Serbs are honouring their part of the Agreement. These two resolutions are important steps in the implementation of the Agreement. The Council would also have to be involved in the implementation of the international force to be led by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The Council has also to decide formally on the future of the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR).”
1995-11-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3595 (1995) · source
“This vacuum in the enforcement of security leading up to, during and just after the first elections is highly unsatisfactory since it provides the opportunity for intimidation, duress and fear. Finally, the Dayton documents have sidestepped the obligation to arrest suspects and hand them over to the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia to be tried for the atrocities they have committed. These concerns raise the question of whether the outcome of Dayton has served the cause of lasting peace and a just settlement. One can also ask whether "ethnic cleansing" has been legitimized and whether aggression has been rewarded, and whether the issue of crimes against humanity has been put aside. The full and timely implementation of the Agreement and its Annexes will help dispel these serious concerns.”
1995-11-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3595 (1995) · source
“We note that the Annexes to the Agreement address important issues such as agreement on military aspects of the settlement, stabilization, boundaries, elections, the Constitution, human rights, and refugees and displaced persons, to name only some. At the same time, we note that certain critical issues have not been clarified. These include the arming and training of Bosnian Government forces so as to equalize force strength. Further, there is no provision to ensure safe and secure elections. Neither the international implementation force (IFOR) nor the international police task force has been entrusted with this task, which therefore becomes the responsibility of the respective police forces of the entities.”
1995-11-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3595 (1995) · source
“Important lessons have also been learned. Containment and ambivalence of policies, as well as uncertainties in the mandate coming out of a dominated Security Council, leading to a blurring of commitment to universal values, have resulted in untold tragedies. In the long term, the Framework Agreement provides opportunities to rectify and redress; to rededicate, to re-establish a commitment to values and to take steps to re-establish faith in the United Nations. On paper, the Framework Agreement and all its Annexes provide a formula for the peaceful return to normalcy of the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina.”
1995-11-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3595 (1995) · source
“Malaysia has consistently maintained that a clear application of political and military resolve would force even aggressors to the negotiating table. My delegation wishes to single out the courageous decision of President Alija Izetbegovic, who represents the aggrieved party and the victim of aggression, which experienced brutalization and devastation, the horrors of which remain a blot on our conscience. It takes monumental conviction and abiding faith to be able dispassionately to choose priorities and invest in a chance for peace instead of demanding redress and retribution. We pray that events of the months ahead will prove that that faith was justifiably placed, that the Dayton Agreement will be fully honoured and that the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina will be able to embark on the long road to healing and reconciliation.”
1995-11-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3595 (1995) · source
“The Malaysian delegation is very happy, Sir, to see you presiding over the Security Council, especially at this particular time, when the Council is taking very important decisions on the issue of the former Yugoslavia. My appreciation and respects are extended also to your predecessor, the representative of Nigeria. The Malaysian delegation joins in the universal relief at the initialling of the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina. All the parties and participants who worked indefatigably during the 21-day proximity peace talks deserve appreciation for their perseverance and for making the fateful choice for a chance for peace instead of sending soldiers back to the front lines. The role of the United States has been pivotal to the outcome. Others too, including the Russian Federation, have made contributions.”
1995-11-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3595 (1995) · source
“The adoption of this draft by the Council cannot absolve the nuclear-weapon States from their obligation to negotiate complete nuclear disarmament, in addition to fulfilling the commitments elaborated above.”
1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source
“Any amendment to the NPT, as reflected in paragraph 2 of its article VIII requires, among other things, the concurrence of all five nuclear-weapon States. In other words, the nuclear-weapon States already have a veto. Strict adherence to the letter of the Treaty, therefore, is the only guarantee that we will be able to prevent proliferation and move decisively towards nuclear disarmament. Having said this, my delegation would like to state here that we are equally concerned about proliferation and unregulated access to nuclear materials. We are still hopeful that, despite the clear discrimination in the NPT, improvements can somehow be made which could influence the small group of countries that are not party to it. Finally, the draft resolution is at best a first step towards the institution of a legally binding instrument.”
1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source
“More importantly, they fail to address the question of nuclear disarmament, which is closely linked to the question of assurances. That the five declarations vary in terms of structure and content and remain devoid of legal force does not provide any measure of comfort at all. They amplify the need for an internationally negotiated, legally binding instrument whereby all the nuclear-weapon States would be obligated to apply the same provisions and meet the same conditions. My delegation must conclude that the five declarations do not provide a high degree of confidence. My delegation is committed to the need to implement fully all the provisions of the NPT. This is particularly important, since the Treaty cannot be improved upon.”
1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source
“Nevertheless, we welcome the transfer of a preambular paragraph of the penultimate draft to the operative part as its paragraph 8 and the acknowledgement in the new last operative paragraph that the issue raised in the draft resolution remains a continuing concern of the Security Council. My delegation had studied the individual statements made by each of the nuclear-weapon States and contained in documents S/1995/261, 262, 263, 264 and 265. Of the five, only the declaration by China contains the position that the non-nuclear-weapon States had envisaged, which is straightforward and contains no conditions. The declarations by all the other four nuclear-weapon States contain specific conditions. They also say nothing on the question of the threat of use of nuclear weapons.”
1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source
“Caucus, on behalf of non-nuclear-weapon States, had tried to propose language that addressed our concerns on this matter. We note with appreciation that some of those proposals have been accommodated in the draft. However, our concerns to the effect that the draft resolution should affirm the belief that the only sure assurance against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons is the elimination of nuclear weapons and that, pending that objective, such assurances should take the form of a legally binding instrument, were rejected. Accordingly, the draft resolution in its present form does not satisfy our call regarding security assurances.”
1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source
“My delegation also cannot support the inclusion of operative paragraph 9 of the draft resolution. This paragraph sidesteps the question of the legality of the use of nuclear weapons because it justifies the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons in cases of "self-defence". Given the fact that all the nuclear-weapon States are also permanent members of the Security Council, and that the Council has the power to determine whether or not a threat is an act of aggression or of self-defence, the assurance contained in the draft is at best questionable, if not hollow political expedience. In essence, in no way can Council substitute that assurance for an obligation assumed under a treaty, especially a Council where many political factors and imperatives are brought to bear. The NAM.”
1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source
“The relevant paragraphs which should address this issue are weak and so vague that they can be interpreted in several different ways. My delegation has worked with the Caucus of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) to introduce amendments to the draft to address this concern, but the proposals of the NAM Caucus were not accepted. My delegation would like to remind the Council that obligations such as coming to the assistance of non- nuclear-weapon States in the event of aggression are already stipulated by Articles 39, 41 and 42 of the Charter, regardless of the types of weapons used. Aggression is aggression, and to discriminate against States non-Parties to the Treaty in giving assistance on the basis of the type of weapons used is against the fundamental provisions of the Charter for the maintenance of international peace and security.”
1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source
“The positive security assurances envisaged in the draft resolution do not break new ground. The draft includes elements which are already covered by the Charter and in resolution 255 (1968). The only new element in the draft that is different from resolution 255 (1968) concerns the elaboration of the types of assistance that the Security Council might offer if a non-nuclear-weapon State is the victim of nuclear aggression. This does not offer us any comfort, as the language used is weak and, in the event of a nuclear attack, no assistance would be able to undo the irreversible death and destruction. The draft resolution before the Council should have included language committing the nuclear-weapon States to take action, in the event of a threat of the use of nuclear weapons, to suppress that threat.”
1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source
“Now that the 1995 Review and Extension Conference of the NPT is just a week ahead, the nuclear-weapon States seem to have realized that they have to do something about this long-standing obligation. Their solution has been to submit a draft resolution on positive security assurances and to make individual declarations on negative security assurances. This initiative can best be described as too little too late, an effort whose motives are patently clear. The draft resolution deals exclusively with positive security assurances and says nothing regarding negative security assurances beyond taking note of the fact that all five nuclear-weapon States have given such assurances, either individually - as in the case of China - or collectively - as in the case of the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Russia.”
1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source
“Malaysia and other members of the Non-Aligned Movement have consistently called for assurances in the context of a legally binding international instrument from the nuclear-weapon States, pending the attainment of the objective contained in Article VI of the Treaty on the Non- Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Regrettably, there have been no results. It should be recalled that disagreement over this issue was one of the reasons for the failure of the two NPT Review Conferences, in 1980 and 1990, to adopt Final Declarations. This is ironic given the fact that the nuclear- weapon States have agreed to such a binding instrument in the protocol to the Treaty of Tlatelolco, which established the nuclear-weapon-free zone in South America.”
1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source
“The Malaysian delegation would like to recall with appreciation China's presidency of the Security Council in March. We also express our confidence, Sir, in your presidency this month. The Malaysian delegation requested to participate in the debate today to share our views on this very important issue. Let me state it bluntly: we believe, over the long run, in a time-bound period, in the total and complete elimination of nuclear weapons as the only definitive assurance we can live with. Until this can be achieved, any assurance, whether positive or negative, whether given jointly or severally, will merely constitute an interim measure.”
1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source
“For countries looking at Israel, encouraged by the signing of the Declaration of Principles, efforts to join in the momentum for peace by normalizing relations with it remain in abeyance, given the uncertainty over its commitment and sincerity to move critically on the remaining central issues, including the settlement issue.”
1995-02-28 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3505Resumption1 (1995) · source
“The leaders who were bold enough to forge a historic breakthrough for peace must not allow extremism or a shortsighted policy to prevail. The international community opposes all forms of extremism and the recourse to terror tactics by extremists. For Israel in particular, it would be delusory to conclude that an improvement of relations, even cooperation, with some other Arab countries would permit it to equivocate on the settlement issue. The hard, critical choice has to be made in a timely, decisive manner, or the conflict will continue and worsen.”
1995-02-28 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3505Resumption1 (1995) · source
“It was a Security Council resolution that rejected the Israeli policy and practice of establishing settlements; it was this Council which called upon Israel to respect the Geneva Convention and reaffirmed that settlements in the occupied territories were illegal and an obstacle to peace. The Council is being called upon again to live up to its responsibilities on this 1ssue. It is the View of my delegation that the successful progress of the peace process very much depends on the sincerity and willingness of both parties to implement all the provisions that they have agreed to. At this very critical juncture, when the situation is delicate and fragile, it is vital for the success of the peace process to make every effort to remove the climate of distrust and suspicion.”
1995-02-28 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3505Resumption1 (1995) · source
“My delegation is of the View that a resolution from the Council reaffirming its earlier decisions as reflected in the resolutions that I have mentioned would be timely and would facilitate the peace process. The argument by some that the United Nations has no role to play on central issues such as the legality of Israeli settlements, the status of Jerusalem, Palestinian refugees and Palestinian sovereignty is unjustifiable and unacceptable. The United Nations - in particular this Council, which is charged with primary responsibility for international peace and security - has an important role to play in the peace process in the light of current developments.”
1995-02-28 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3505Resumption1 (1995) · source
“Members will recall that one of those resolutions, resolution 465 (1980), was unanimously adopted. Politically, the settlement issue would further complicate and undermine the peace process. The Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories reported to the General Assembly late last year that the existence of the settlements, the persistently violent behaviour of the settlers and the presence of the Israeli Defence Forces constituted the principal source of tension in the occupied territories. Furthermore, it violates the spirit and letter of the Declaration signed in Washington on 13 September 1993.”
1995-02-28 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3505Resumption1 (1995) · source
“Legally, such a policy and practice of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in the occupied territories constitute a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949. Article 49 of that Convention, among other things, stipulates that "The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies." The policy also violates numerous resolutions of the Security Council - resolutions 446 (1979) and 452 (1979) and 465 (1980), which, among other things, called upon the Government and people of Israel to cease the establishment, construction and planning of settlements in the occupied territories, including Jerusalem.”
1995-02-28 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3505Resumption1 (1995) · source
“This represents an overall settler increase of 50,000, or about 20 per cent over two years since July 1992. The report also indicated that the settler population was increasing faster than the rate anywhere in Israel itself. The expansion of Israeli settlement policy is also substantiated by facts and figures provided by the representative of Palestine in his letters to the Chairman of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People and to the Secretary-General (S/49/50 and S/1995/95). Given the importance of the issue for the future of the peace process itself, my delegation would like to urge the Israeli Government immediately to cease such a policy and practices for the following obvious reasons.”
1995-02-28 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3505Resumption1 (1995) · source
“The lack of political will and commitment on the part of the occupying Power to implement the provisions of the peace accord complicates and delays the peace process. My delegation is deeply concerned about the continuing policy and practices adopted by Israel regarding its settlement activities in the occupied territories, especially in the West Bank. My delegation is disturbed to learn from official sources and media reports that the Israeli Government is still actively pursuing its settlement policy in the occupied territories. According to the November issue of Settlement Report, a Washington-based bi-monthly publication of the Foundation for Middle East Peace, the settler population of the West Bank and Gaza Strip has increased by 28,000 - from 112,000 to 140,000 - while that of Jerusalem has grown by 22,000- from 148,000 to 170,000.”
1995-02-28 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3505Resumption1 (1995) · source
“One of the salient characteristics of the peace process so far has been its apparent disregard of deadlines: although the Declaration of Principles was signed on 13 September 1993, the implementation agreement, known as the Cairo Agreement, was not concluded until 4 May 1994; although the implementation accord was signed last May, the Palestinian National Authority, scheduled to be put in place in December 1993, did not actually happen until July of last year, while troop redeployment, and the elections in the rest of the West Bank due last July, have yet to have any credible timetable. While recognizing that there has been some progress in some areas, we have to say that the situation on the ground remains far from satisfactory.”
1995-02-28 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3505Resumption1 (1995) · source
“At the outset, let me congratulate you, Mr. President, on the very able way in which you have presided over the affairs of the Council during the month of February. The last time the Security Council pronounced on this issue was in 1980 - almost 15 years ago. Many milestone events and developments have taken place in that time, but the issue of illegal Israeli settlements has remained an obdurate stumbling-block to the many initiatives for a durable solution to the Middle East problem. Eighteen months ago, many believed that the signing of the Declaration of Principles marked a fresh beginning in the efforts to resolve this conflict. Regrettably, this has not come to pass. The international community has yet to see the seeds of peace take deep root in the Middle East - in particular, in the occupied Palestinian territories.”
1995-02-28 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3505Resumption1 (1995) · source
“These observations are not exhaustive. My delegation would be ready to examine further, in the Council or General Assembly, the issues raised in this report, in an effort to bring about collective responsibility on this important issue.”
1995-01-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3492Resumption1 (1995) · source
“On the issue of a rapid reaction force, referred to in paragraph 44, we would like to seek clarification, considering that a number of countries have agreed to have stand-by arrangements for peace-keeping. In fact, I wish to take this opportunity to announce the decision of the Malaysian Government to participate in the stand-by arrangements. Finally, the request, as reflected in paragraph 32, for a certain amount of discretion in the use of a proposed contingency provision of $25 million per biennium would seem to indicate a desire to act independently. This proposal has come at a time when audit reports have revealed instances of serious financial mismanagement in the various United Nations peace-keeping operations. Hence, Member States may find it difficult to allow for this discretionary flexibility, given the poor management record.”
1995-01-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3492Resumption1 (1995) · source
“The Permanent Five, which enjoy special powers in this very Council on issues of international peace and security, are also the world's leading arms traders. They have it within their power to promote genuine and complete disarmament - nuclear and weapons of mass destruction. A recent issue of the Harvard International Review has catalogued the various issues relating to the arms bazaar, which constitutes a major threat to international peace and security. It has also further catalogued the role of the major Powers in this context. Overall, the impression is created that the Secretary-General has, on this issue, shied away from his own stated desire for hard decisions.”
1995-01-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3492Resumption1 (1995) · source
“On the issue of consultations between troop- contributing countries and the Council, the report should spell out further means to enhance the consultations as well as to implement Article 44 of the Charter. This is an issue on which advance work has been done and we hope that the process of consultations between the troop- contributing countries and the Council will be institutionalized. On disarmament, the Secretary-General admits that he has chosen to "concentrate on what might be called 'micro-disarmament'" (S/1995/J, para 60). Although he has endeavoured to elaborate on "micro-disarmament", generally a euphemism for light weapons, he has not highlighted the important role of the key producers and exporters of these so-called light weapons.”
1995-01-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3492Resumption1 (1995) · source
“This situation has arisen primarily as a result of the preponderant influence of some powerful members of the Council as well as the excessive reliance on the financial contributions of some of these members. Lessons should be learned from this situation. As for the Secretariat itself, we have high regard for the competence and professionalism of the senior officials dealing with peace-keeping. At the same time, with an annual budget of more than $3 billion the Secretary-General must put his house in order, just as the Council must discharge its responsibilities consistently without resort to double standards and selectivity. At the end of the day, it is important that leadership be provided in partnership from the General Assembly, the Security Council and the Secretariat.”
1995-01-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3492Resumption1 (1995) · source
“Taking into account the fact that all these conflicts continue to take place in areas of the developing world, the role of the General Assembly should not be marginalized. After all, the first United Nations peace-keeping operation was set up by the General Assembly, which has the power to establish peace-keeping operations as well. Accordingly, the report should spell out specific measures in which the General Assembly could be involved, not only in peace- keeping but also in the larger question of international peace and security. On the observation by the Secretary-General, contained in paragraph 39, that the Security Council increasingly tends to micro-manage peace-keeping operations, Malaysia holds the view that this is a reflection of the dysfunctional relationship between the Council and the Secretariat.”
1995-01-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3492Resumption1 (1995) · source
“Similarly, sanctions serving the specific political agenda of a few Council members should not be condoned. Sanctions of the United Nations cannot be seen as a political vendetta in promotion of special interests. If the Council's action is to represent a genuine process of collective opprobrium, its implications, proportionality and reasons for continued enforcement must bear the result of a continuing collective examination. In this regard, the recommendation contained in paragraph 75 of the report of the Secretary-General deserves the full support of all Member States. The report of the Secretary-General is excessively centred on the Security Council and has limited comments involving the important role of the General Assembly, a point highlighted in resolution 47/120 B.”
1995-01-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3492Resumption1 (1995) · source
“I would like to make a few comments on the Secretary-General's paper: First, the members of the United Nations will no doubt be relieved that, unlike the first report, the current report underlines the importance of the principle of consent, a principle strongly advocated by developing countries. Secondly, the current report also addresses in a forthright manner the issue of sanctions. The call to take appropriate measures to address the impact of sanctions on third parties enjoys widespread support within the membership of the United Nations. While the sanctions regime has often been vigorously enforced in the context of specific instances and some countries, the need to address on an urgent and priority basis the needs of those adversely affected by sanctions has not been resolved.”
1995-01-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3492Resumption1 (1995) · source