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

“Some of the statements made, I regret to say, reflect entrenched national positions, surely not fully taking into account the positive and negative experiences at the United Nations on issues dealing with peace and security and the mechanism of peace-keeping and peace-making. I also regret to say that from their entrenched positions the few will try to continue to dictate the discourse on, and examination in the Council of, this multifaceted issue. My delegation believes that the Agenda for Peace and all attendant issues are better served by discussion in the General Assembly.”
1995-01-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3492Resumption1 (1995) · source
“We hope, too, that the introduction of this report at this point, during the work of the United Nations will not deflect attention from the urgent need to adopt an Agenda for Development. Indeed, resolution 47/ 120 A, among others, recognized - in its seventh preambular paragraph - that "An Agenda for Peace" would need to be complemented with "An Agenda for Development", "to strengthen the socio-economic development of Member States as one of the means of enhancing international peace and security." As we are all aware, the progress on an Agenda for Development has been limited and slow. This morning and for part of this afternoon we non- Council members, belonging to the general membership, have had the benefit of listening to the positions of Council members.”
1995-01-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3492Resumption1 (1995) · source
“The debate on the issues raised within the Agenda for Peace evoked, and in fact continues to evoke, mixed reactions within and outside the United Nations, developing into a continuing debate as the issues raised deal with questions of international peace and security, with substantial focus on the United Nations peacekeeping activities. In the General Assembly itself the debate culminated in resolutions 47/120 A and B, entitled "An Agenda for Peace." Yet reading the current report as contained in document A/50/60, entitled "Supplement to an Agenda for Peace", we are not sure that it is meant for the consideration of the General Assembly, particularly when it is noted that this report makes no specific reference to the General Assembly resolutions 47/ 120 A and B.”
1995-01-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3492Resumption1 (1995) · source
“Mr. President, you and your colleagues have begun the year on a promising note by initiating steps towards greater transparency in the work of the Council. The Malaysian delegation would like to commend you for these initiatives, which we hope will be institutionalized as part of the efforts to make the Council truly representative as well as being well placed to address the needs of the Member States. I would also like to record my deep appreciation to your predecessor, the Permanent Representative of Rwanda, for having steered the Council last month. We recall that the precursor to this report - namely, the Agenda for Peace - was in itself prepared in response to a request by the Council.”
1995-01-18 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3492Resumption1 (1995) · source
“My delegation appeals to the Council members to examine this argument clearly. As we have asked before in this Council, what further intensifications of fighting can be envisaged when there have already been thousands killed, the Bosnians are huddled pitifully in places of refuge and their territory has shrunk into divided pockets of survival? Bosnia and Herzegovina should not be unjustly deprived of its inherent right to self-defence as enshrined in Article 51. The General Assembly has sent a categorical message through resolution 49/10 that the unjustified arms embargo on Bosnia and Herzegovina must be lifted. The time has come for the Security Council, whose powers and special responsibility are derived from the general membership, to take similar action in fulfilling its Charter responsibility.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“While it has been stated that some nations that contribute to UNPROFOR would withdraw in the event of a lifting of the arms embargo, other troop-contributing countries, including Malaysia, have indicated their willingness to stay and provide additional troops in such circumstances. Indeed, we are of the view that UNPROFOR's mandate needs to be strengthened in the direction of peacemaking in order to confront the ongoing Serbian aggression and systematic violations of 17 humanitarian law and various United Nations resolutions and to give peace a real chance to succeed. There is an argument being promoted that a lifting of the arms embargo on the Bosnians will lead to a greater escalation of violence, affect humanitarian efforts and threaten the concept of "safe areas".”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“The Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina should not be faced with a new ultimatum of choosing between a lifting of the arms embargo and thereby gaining the means to defend all its population and country, or alternatively the continuing commitment of the Contact Group, through UNPROFOR or NATO, to protect the "safe areas". In this context, it is essential that the Contact Group execute its commitment to lifting the arms embargo and take other constructive steps, such as ensuring that the mission of UNPROFOR should reflect both a heightened concern for security and a necessary resolve for peacemaking. Furthermore, NATO, through the strategy of exclusion zones, could play an instrumental role in deterring attacks upon UNPROFOR or the existing or newly-defined "safe areas".”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“Have we not yet reached the point of last resort, given the intransigence of the Bosnian Serbs and the horrible sufferings inflicted on the Bosnians? The Bosnian Serbs' rejection of the peace plan and the triggering of certain measures as a consequence of that rejection cannot allow either the United Nations, the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR), the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) or the Contact Group to disassociate themselves from the political, humanitarian or military efforts to find peace. The Contact Group members, as well as the United Nations and NATO, should intensify their efforts to coordinate with the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina to have that peace plan accepted.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“While the Council decision has prevented the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina from protecting its own people, at the same time the Council has not fully discharged its responsibility under Article 24 of the Charter to take prompt and effective action to restore international peace and stability. The Council, as we are aware, has not fully enforced its own resolutions. The Bosnian Serbs have rejected the five-nation Contact Group's peace plan and my delegation will now insist that the Contact Group, through the Security Council, proceed with the measures to which it has committed itself, including and in particular the lifting of the arms embargo. The European Union, in its statement to the General Assembly last week, stated that the arms embargo should be lifted only as a last resort.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“The objective of Article 51 of the Charter - providing protection and the right of all to collective and individual self-defence - has been thwarted in the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The cost of that has been extremely high for that country. It has lost over 200,000 lives; 50,000 Bosnian women have been raped; the country is in ruins; and the aspirations and values of a multi-religious, multi-cultural society have been irreparably damaged. The application of the arms embargo on_ the Government of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina remains fundamentally flawed, as resolution 713 (1991) was adopted before the Republic joined as the 170th Member of the United Nations on 22 May 1992. In the view of my delegation, that arms embargo is invalid and illegal.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“The Council cannot remain oblivious, including the implication of continuing the arms embargo in Bosnia and Herzegovina, denying that country its inherent right to self-defence, one that is enjoyed universally by all other Members of the United Nations. No one can dispute that the arms embargo in reality has affected only the Bosnians, the victims of the war. That act of the Council, committed before Bosnia and Herzegovina was even a Member of the United Nations, has terminally undermined the ability of the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina to protect its own people against aggression and ethnic cleansing. In essence, at stake in our debate today is the right to life and survival when we debate the right of self-defence for Bosnia and Herzegovina.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“Malaysia wishes to welcome the initiative taken by the United States in the Council to lift the arms embargo on Bosnia and Herzegovina on the basis of the proposal made by President Alija Izetbegovic to the General Assembly on 27 September 1994. We totally support this effort and we come here before the Council to appeal to all its members to endorse the draft resolution. The recent adoption of General Assembly resolution 49/10 underlines the collective stand of the general membership that the Bosnians must be allowed to have recourse to arms to defend themselves. Council members have to give serious weight to the decision taken by the Assembly.”
1994-11-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3454 (1994) · source
“Most of the troop-contributing countries involved in the Ottawa meeting were also agreed on the need for the establishment of a subsidiary organ at an appropriate time. The task of this organ would be to coordinate consultations and the flow of information between the Council, the Secretariat and the troop-contributing countries in order to facilitate broad common understanding between troop- contributing countries, the Council and_ the Secretary-General on the objectives of a United Nations operation and on the range of measures to achieve them. Again, we would like to express our appreciation to you, Madam President, and to your colleagues for the adoption of this decision. Malaysia looks forward to building on this decision at the current session of the General Assembly.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“They stressed that such consultations should take place whenever one or more of the following situations arose: when the mandate of a new peace-keeping operation was being formulated; when the concept and/or plan of operation of a peace-keeping operation was being considered; when the extension of the mandate of a peace-keeping operation was being considered; when a substantive modification of the mandate of an existing peace-keeping operation, including the broadening or narrowing of its geographical scope, changes in rules of engagement, introduction of new functions or components and so forth, was being considered; when significant developments occurred which, in the opinion of the Secretary-General, of members of the Security Council or of troop contributors, were likely to affect materially the functioning of the operation or its ability to fulfil its mandate; or when the withdrawal of the operation in whole or in part was being considered.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“7) and that the Council "stands ready to consider further measures to enhance arrangements in the light of experience". (Ibid., p. 8) 17 The Malaysian delegation is ready to work with all parties to further elaborate steps to fully meet the needs of a comprehensive interaction between the Council and troop- contributing countries. We must make the point that the Council decision reflected in the statement did not address all the issues the troop-contributing countries had raised. In a paper entitled "Political Direction and Support", prepared following a meeting at Ottawa earlier this year, organized by the Canadian Government, the non-permanent members and troop-contributing countries outside the Council spelled out details pertaining to these consultations.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“That is why the troop-contributing countries have insisted on being more fully consulted by the Council, without prejudice to the exercise by the Council of its decision-making authority under the Charter. Frequent consultations and a steadier flow of information between the Council and troop contributors would also broaden the basis of support for Council resolutions, thus enhancing the prospects for their effective and successful implementation. An institutionalized system for consultation and communication could augment the political support for peace-keeping operations and increase the commitment of troop-contributing countries. We note the observations in the presidential statement that "the Security Council recalls that the arrangements described herein are not exhaustive" (S/PV.3448, p.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“Earlier this year, we formally communicated to the President of this Council the urgent need for direct consultations between the Council and troop- contributing countries. The demand for enhanced consultations has been reinforced by the fact that about two thirds of the troops serving in peace-keeping operations are contributed by non-permanent members and non-members of the Security Council. In Somalia, for example, the United Nations force is now composed almost exclusively of such troops. In that light, it would not seem logical, for both practical and political reasons, that a vast majority of the troop contributors should continue to depend only on ad hoc meetings, without any systematic routine for obtaining current information and for contributing to the formulation of policies on matters affecting their troops.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“the peace-keeping operations decided on by the Security Council provide no clear institutional structure for consultation, especially between non-Security-Council member troop-contributing countries and Security Council members." (Official Records of the General Assembly, Forty-ninth Session, Plenary Meetings, 1Sth meeting, p. 13). This indeed has been the crux of the problem which a number of troop- contributing countries have wanted the Security Council to address. Malaysia, which has been involved in United Nations peace-keeping operations since the Congo in the 1960s, has always maintained that troop-contributing countries must participate in the decision-making process of the Council. In fact, this is provided for in Article 44 of the Charter.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“We outside the Council would like to think that we have, in some measure, made a contribution, given our increasing calls for direct consultations between the Council and troop-contributing countries. We see this decision as an important step marking a positive change within the Council, fitting into the broader matrix of the necessary changes that this Council will have to undergo and undertake in the future. When he addressed the General Assembly on 5 October 1994, the Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister highlighted "...”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“Madam President, the delegation of Malaysia would like to thank your predecessor, Sir David Hannay, for steering the work of the Council during the month of October. My delegation would also like to support your efforts this month in the Council, fully aware of your capabilities and mindful of the role of the United States in the Council. The presidential statement adopted earlier today by the Council is relevant and timely; it is a good piece of work. It follows upon the joint initiative taken by Argentina and New Zealand, both non-permanent members of the Council, and efforts of the British Ambassador as President last month. The fact that meetings will be chaired jointly by the President of the Council and the Secretariat is a good innovation.”
1994-11-04 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3449 (1994) · source
“The adoption of the draft resolution on the easing of sanctions will be a mistake unless the international community is fully convinced, backed by incontrovertible verification, that Serbia and Montenegro is really serious and sincere in breaking off political and economic relations with the Bosnian Serbs for rejecting the peace plan.”
1994-09-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3428 (1994) · source
“Is it not a mockery and a travesty of justice that, while the so-called countries with influence remain ineffectual in assisting the victims, they would in turn want to rush to reward the aggressors? Malaysia wishes to express and underline its disagreement with the approach taken by the five-nation Contact Group. The Security Council should be guided by the views of the full membership before taking any step that would lead to the easing of sanctions. We wish to appeal to the Council to reconsider this action.”
1994-09-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3428 (1994) · source
“If the Security Council fails to fulfil its Charter responsibility, the recourse for the general membership is to request the convening of a special session of the United Nations General Assembly on Bosnia and Herzegovina. We are alarmed by the accelerated campaign of "ethnic cleansing" being implemented by the Bosnian Serbs despite international condemnation, the more recent examples being in Banja Luka, Bijeljina and Prejedor. We wish to call for the immediate cessation of such activity wherever it occurs and whoever commits it. As we talk, the strangulation of Sarajevo by the Serbs continues. The people of Sarajevo have been denied water and power and even the food supply-line has been cut.”
1994-09-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3428 (1994) · source
“The five-nation Contact Group has committed itself to undertake three steps on the basis of the rejection of the peace plan by the Serb side: intensifying sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro, enhancing the exclusion zones and lifting the arms embargo on the Government of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Yet what we are considering today is in sharp contrast to and a total reversal of what should have been done following the rejection of the peace plan by the Bosnian Serbs. If the Council is unable to deal effectively with Serbian aggression, how can the general membership have faith in the Council, the United Nations body entrusted with the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security?”
1994-09-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3428 (1994) · source
“The Security Council should lift the arms embargo on Bosnia and Herzegovina. The imposition of tougher measures as envisioned by Security Council resolutions - including resolutions 770 (1992), 771 (1992), 824 (1993), 836 (1993) and 913 (1994) should continue so long as "ethnic cleansing" persists. The drafters of the peace plan are obliged to undertake disincentive measures in the event of a rejection of the plan and to provide incentives to those that have accepted the plan. The Government of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina has already made numerous and painful concessions by accepting the plan. Yet the five-nation Contact Group has failed to stand by its commitments. The lack of firm action could be interpreted as a weakening of the commitment of the five-nation Contact Group.”
1994-09-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3428 (1994) · source
“Clearly, before the aggressor is rewarded, the victim must at least be simultaneously assisted and relieved of the very ominous humanitarian, military and political consequences of the aggression that persists. Malaysia is of the view that, before any easing of sanctions on Serbia and Montenegro is initiated, the international community should ensure the following. The border monitors should comprise a cross-section of the international community and be effectively deployed in sufficient force. Serbia and Montenegro must recognize the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina within its current borders. Serbia and Montenegro should fully cooperate with the International war crimes Tribunal, including the surrender of wanted suspects for trial. The current safe areas/exclusion zones must be effectively defended.”
1994-09-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3428 (1994) · source
“Malaysia is disappointed that important countries that have the capacity within the Council to apply judiciousness and proper consideration should permit such a precipitate action in furtherance of the objectives of a few which will only exacerbate the conditions of the Bosnians defending their country and trying to survive. We are as much intrigued as we are appalled by the haste to adopt this draft resolution. The international community cannot, in good conscience and judgement, ease sanctions on Serbia and Montenegro without taking simultaneous steps to relieve the difficult military and humanitarian handicaps that the Government of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina continues to face.”
1994-09-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3428 (1994) · source
“We are deeply concerned over recent reports that there have been gross violations of the relevant Security Council resolutions, such as_ the unauthorized flights by Serbian helicopters over northern Bosnia. The flights could be carrying military supplies to the Bosnian Serbs. It is clear that the present strength of international observers is inadequate. According to studies conducted earlier, the number of people needed to police the border would involve 4,000 soldiers and a more restricted enforcement would require another 800 civilians. We would need more time to verify the situation on the ground and should not take any hasty decision until we are fully convinced that there have been no violations or breaches at the border.”
1994-09-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3428 (1994) · source
“It is a source of satisfaction and pleasure for my delegation to see you, Sir, presiding over the Council. While Malaysia supports action to adopt the draft resolutions on "ethnic cleansing" and the tightening of sanctions against the Bosnian Serbs, we are opposed to the draft resolution on the easing of sanctions on Serbia and Montenegro. We believe that to ease sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro at this juncture would be premature, unbalanced and counter-productive. We are not convinced as yet that the border has been effectively closed, in the absence of an effective mechanism fully to verify such an action. We have strong doubts as to whether 135 observers stationed at the border have the capacity to monitor 300 miles of frontier.”
1994-09-23 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3428 (1994) · source
“While we should truly rejoice with the people of South Africa as apartheid is finally laid to rest there, we should not forget that the spectre of apartheid in another form may resurface elsewhere, given, for example, the horrible events being perpetrated in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Crimes against humanity, in all their manifestations, must be fought and eliminated, as has been done so successfully and gloriously in South Africa.”
1994-05-25 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3379 (1994) · source
“Nelson Mandela will be able to steer the country in the needed direction: that of justice, stability and prosperity for all. In this regard, may I take this opportunity to reiterate our Government's firm support and friendship for the new Government of South Africa. We look forward to working with them in their noble efforts to build their country. We also look forward to South Africa's taking its rightful place and contributing to all the important issues before the United Nations. This is a country long denied, but now proudly ready to make its mark on Africa, the developing world and the international community.”
1994-05-25 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3379 (1994) · source
“Perseverance and singleness of purpose, together with the unrelenting support of the international community, contributed, among other things, to the dismantling of apartheid. The transition from the struggle for independence to that for national consolidation during the early period of nationhood can be fraught with uncertainty and even danger. No country is wholly independent at the stroke of midnight of its independence day. The unfurling of the national flag marks the long and often arduous path to national development and reconstruction. The international community, for its part, should spare no efforts to support South Africa during this critical period. Malaysia is confident that the new Government under the able leadership of Mr.”
1994-05-25 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3379 (1994) · source
“Today brings another important event in the history of South Africa, as the Security Council sets about to adopt a draft resolution that calls on the international community to lift the arms embargo and other restrictions imposed on that country. My delegation welcomes this timely decision of the Council, which reflects and is consistent with the current changes that are taking place in South Africa. Given our deep aversion to and abhorrence of apartheid, Malaysia has actively worked within and outside the United Nations in contributing towards the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa. During our term in the Security Council from 1989 to 1990, Malaysia had the opportunity to chair the Sanctions Committee on South Africa. Those were tumultuous times, as efforts were galvanized to breach the walls of apartheid.”
1994-05-25 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3379 (1994) · source
“Mr. President, it is a special pleasure to see you chairing this meeting. The role played by Nigeria and by Ambassador Gambari in the struggle against apartheid is intertwined with the role of the United Nations. It is also symbolic and propitious that an important country, Nigeria, should preside over this meeting which, in essence, brings into our midst an equally important country, South Africa. Hardly a month ago, the international community witnessed the first democratic, non-racial elections in South Africa. The successful conclusion of the elections is without doubt one of the most positive and welcome developments in the post-cold-war era.”
1994-05-25 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3379 (1994) · source
“Malaysia wishes to reaffirm the legitimate national rights of the Palestinian people, including the inalienable right to self-determination, and reiterates the need for the withdrawal of Israel from the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and from the other occupied Arab territories. Without doubt, the violence in that part of the world underscores yet again the urgent need for the United Nations to continue to play an active role in the current peace process. Extremism and prejudice clearly pose serious challenges to the peace process. The hopes for peace which the September Declaration of Principles engendered have yet to be realized. Extremism and terrorism must not be allowed to derail these efforts, while Israel must implement fully the Declaration of Principles.”
1994-03-02 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3342 (1994) · source
“We share the Secretary-General's view that such an effort "could serve both to support the negotiating process and to help overcome the prevailing mistrust between the Palestinians and the Israelis in the occupied territories." If Israel is truly sincere in its efforts to find a lasting and peaceful solution to the Palestinian conflict, it should not reject the proposal for some kind of international presence in the occupied territories. In the meantime, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees must continue to help the victims and contribute towards the safety, security and well-being of all Palestinians.”
1994-03-02 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3342 (1994) · source
“My delegation would like to underline the necessity of a resolution on Palestine adopted by the Council without further delay. We want that resolution to send a clear message to Israel, the occupying Power in the Palestinian territory, of its responsibilities under the Geneva Convention regarding the protection of the Palestinian civilians in all occupied territories, including Jerusalem. We hope that the resolution would deter the recurrence of similar atrocities against the Palestinian people. My delegation supports the proposal of the Secretary- General to dispatch an envoy to Israel to discuss the possibility of the United Nations deploying observers in that region, as envisaged in the Declaration of Principles signed by the Government of Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organization on 13 September last.”
1994-03-02 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3342 (1994) · source
“Given the gravity of the situation and the urgent need to guarantee the safety of the Palestinians, the Council must take the necessary steps to ensure that all its relevant resolutions, in particular resolution 681 (1990), are implemented without delay. Resolution 681 (1990), which was adopted unanimously by the Council, strongly urged Israel to abide scrupulously by the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, which is applicable to all the territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem. The Israeli Government must therefore be reminded of and be held accountable to its obligations and responsibilities under the Convention. The weight and authority of the Council must be applied to guarantee that Israel is accountable and that the safety and protection of Palestinians are guaranteed by Israel.”
1994-03-02 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3342 (1994) · source
“This act of terrorism must be condemned unequivocally. The incident cannot be dismissed as the action of an alleged madman. Israel cannot escape responsibility for the killings. This massacre has once again highlighted, at terrible cost, the gravity of the situation in the occupied territories and the urgent need for Israel to change its policies and practices in the occupied territories, including the immediate disarming of its settlers. Malaysia is disappointed that the Security Council could not be convened earlier. On such a heinous act, the Council has a Charter obligation to pronounce early and swiftly condemnation on behalf of the international community. There can be no room for partisan interests impeding the work of the Council.”
1994-03-02 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3342 (1994) · source
“My delegation, Sir, would like to extend its felicitations on your assumption of the presidency for this month. We are confident that you will conduct the affairs of the Council with great integrity and dedication. The massacre at the Al-Haram Al-Ibrahimi mosque in Israeli-occupied Hebron on 25 February has deeply shocked and anguished people all over the world. The Malaysian Foreign Minister stated on 26 February that "Malaysia strongly condemns the brutal massacre at the Al-Haram Al-Ibrahimi mosque in Hebron and feels deeply saddened that such an incident has occurred in a holy place during the month of Ramadan." The Government and people of Malaysia extend their heartfelt condolences to the State of Palestine and to the families of the deceased, and share with them their grief and bereavement.”
1994-03-02 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3342 (1994) · source
“The most pressing issue before the Council, despite the obstacles placed by certain countries, is the lifting of the arms embargo on the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina.”
1994-02-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption1 (1994) · source
“The International Court of Justice, on 13 September 1993, declared itself "... not satisfied that all that might have been done has been done to prevent the commission of the crime of genocide in the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina ... ." (Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Provisional Measures, Order of 13 September 1993, I.C.J. Reports 1993, pp. 348-9) This raises the question again of whether the Security Council arms embargo on Bosnia and Herzegovina remains valid in the presence of evidence that maintaining the embargo favours or contributes to the commission of genocide. Resolution 713 (1991) of the Council cannot apply to Bosnia and Herzegovina in these circumstances.”
1994-02-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption1 (1994) · source
“At a recent meeting that took place during the non-aligned conference in Jakarta, the Foreign Ministers of the Organization of the Islamic Conference in the Contact Group called for the convening of an appropriately restructured international conference on Bosnia and Herzegovina in conformity with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly. It is their conclusion that the Geneva Conference has run its course and has deviated from the provisions of the resolutions of the Council. It is time for the negotiations to be held directly under the auspices of the Council, in New York. It is also the position of the Malaysian Government that the efforts so far have not taken fully into account the serious implications of the provisions of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.”
1994-02-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption1 (1994) · source
“Furthermore, to say now that the massacre gives more reason to negotiate is to pervert the overall negotiating process, especially if there are going to be actions and pressures to force the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina to come to the table to accept an unjust peace. At this point, all pressure should be directed at the Serbs, who hold 70 per cent of Bosnian territory. The Malaysian Government has always maintained that the central authority and responsibility for bringing about a comprehensive and honourable peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina lies with the Security Council, not the efforts in Geneva. It is our contention that the efforts in Geneva have deviated from the various relevant resolutions of the Council.”
1994-02-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption1 (1994) · source
“People are, in fact, passing verdicts on Governments for inaction and political callousness and are demanding that wanton acts of terrorism in Bosnia be stopped. The massacre in Sarajevo is a clear act of terrorism, and one would have wished that there had been immediate punitive action against those that committed that massacre. There have been terrorist bombings elsewhere when important countries have retaliated immediately and in full rage, but this time the perpetrators are being spared unless they strike again. There is an unpalatable element of inconsistency in this Situation, which, with all the earlier sins of inaction, makes the tragedy of the Bosnians even more distressing. An independent, multi-ethnic Member of the United Nations has been raped and mutilated.”
1994-02-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption1 (1994) · source
“The tragedy of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the tens of thousands that have died are to a large measure attributable to the actions of partisan European countries pushing and promoting one-sided interests, outside and inside the Security Council. Also, there can be no justification for preventing NATO from striking if the Serbs do not comply. The Secretary-General is fully armed and charged by resolutions 824 (1993) and 836 (1993) to proceed forthwith in the event that the Serbs do not comply within 10 days from the issuance of the ultimatum. There can be no equivocation on that score. We must not forget that many people from all over were outraged by what happened in the market-place in Sarajevo. It was this outrage in the United States, Europe and elsewhere that galvanized public opinion, bringing about the ultimatum.”
1994-02-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption1 (1994) · source
“This is a notion of which we must all be disabused, especially in the Security Council, or else this Council goes down the road of appeasement. If UNPROFOR is threatened, it must be sufficiently geared to resist and defend itself. If UNPROFOR cannot do the job, the Bosnians must be allowed to arm themselves and apply the right to self-defence and collective defence. There will be countries that will come to the aid of Bosnia and Herzegovina in that instance. My delegation is aware of certain efforts to question the ultimatum given to the Bosnian Serbs. The Malaysian Government strongly opposes such a position, including the idea of a United Nations administration in Sarajevo. Sarajevo is the political capital, symbol and heart of Bosnia and Herzegovina's resistance against genocide and aggression. Nothing should be done to undermine that.”
1994-02-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption1 (1994) · source
“If that is the fear, and if some countries are prepared to abandon commitments made in the Council, and pack up and go away, then why not give the Bosnians the right to defend themselves with arms that they desperately require to take on the Serbs in a more equal combat? Why not allow more Muslim and other countries to contribute troops? Malaysia already has troops in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and we do not intend to abandon our commitments. My delegation gives little respect to such arguments and manifestations of timidity. They only feed the Serbian war machine, making the Serbs appear invincible and unstoppable, intimidating the United Nations and threatening the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR).”
1994-02-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption1 (1994) · source
“The Malaysian Government would appeal to the United States and other members of NATO that the recourse to credible threat of force should not apply only to Sarajevo. The stiffening of NATO authority can be used as a weapon to bring about genuine negotiations. One is made aware of the argument that if NATO should undertake the air strikes there will be retaliation against troops of contributing countries, which may mean some countries' pulling up stakes and leaving the scene, as the lives of their soldiers are far too precious, even if there are others that will stay behind.”
1994-02-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption1 (1994) · source
“There are at least five "safe areas" other than Sarajevo that must be protected from Serbian assault. NATO's readiness to use force must apply to these areas, too. Of special concern is Bihac, where, with all eyes on Sarajevo, the Serbs threaten, at great peril to the people of Bihac. There is also the opening of Tuzla airport and the Srebrenica troop rotation, bogged down by Serbian intransigence. These objectives have to be pursued urgently, backed by the necessary firmness of authority that will make the Serbs calculate that it is in their best interest to comply. Given this first step, the countries of NATO must proceed even further for a just settlement. The Malaysian Government has always maintained that firmness of authority and commitment are necessary to make the Serbs respond positively or comply.”
1994-02-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption1 (1994) · source