YouSaid · the spoken record

Velayati

lines on the record
17
first
1994-04-27
most recent
1996-09-27
sittings or episodes
2
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

  1. “The worst it can expect in the face of its continued illegal behaviour is simply calls on both sides for restraint. Consequently, the real outcome of the actions of Israel and the muted reactions of the international community has been the consecutive consolidation of the old agenda of further expansion, further settlement and further de-Islamization and de-Arabization of Al-Quds al-Sharif. It is incumbent upon the Security Council to react resolutely and decisively in the face of crimes being perpetrated by Israel against innocent Palestinians in the occupied territories. Anything less will not only be interpreted by Israel as a green light for more aggression, but will also further undermine the credibility of the Security Council. It is high time for the Council to act.”

    1996-09-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3698Resumption1 (1996) · source

  2. “The reneging by Israel on its commitment to land for peace, the revival of the illegal settlement policy, and now this blatant attempt to change the character of the Holy City of Al-Quds al-Sharif cannot be seen independently. They are elements in the general policy of continued occupation and expansion and the step-by-step imposition of faits accomplis. These policies have met with the indignation of individual members of the international community. However, in the face of these consecutive acts of intransigence, the international community as a whole, particularly as represented in this Council, has been prevented from reacting effectively by certain members motivated by their own domestic agenda. Such double standards and blind support have given a sense of impunity to the Israeli regime.”

    1996-09-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3698Resumption1 (1996) · source

  3. “It shows a complete disregard by Israel for the basic rules of conduct, to say nothing of the obligations it has undertaken during the past few years. The indiscriminate killing of almost 100 Palestinian civilians, who were protesting blatant acts of aggression against their beliefs and values, constitutes a further illustration of the real face of the Zionist regime disguised behind the facade of peace. These developments represent yet another step in the long series of intransigent acts on the part of the new Israeli Government that have undermined the very foundations of the so-called peace process, while at the same time exposing the inherent deficiencies of a plan that did not aim to address the real issue in a realistic manner.”

    1996-09-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3698Resumption1 (1996) · source

  4. “Nothing - not even the distorted logic of Zionists and their supporters - can justify this inhuman atrocity and assault on the entire Muslim world. No one can conveniently label peaceful worshippers as terrorists. No one can question the fact that it is a crime against humanity to use helicopter gunships to attack and murder in cold blood those who had taken refuge in the House of God. The recent developments in the occupied territories, particularly in Al-Quds al-Sharif and the Islamic sanctuaries, represent the most dangerous escalation of Israel's inhuman behaviour against the Palestinian people. The deliberate attempt of Israel to undermine the holiest Islamic sites, held in highest reverence by the entire Muslim world, represents an affront to the people of Palestine and the Muslim world in general.”

    1996-09-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3698Resumption1 (1996) · source

  5. “At the outset, let me congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council. I wish to express my condolences to the Palestinian people and the bereaved families over the loss of life of the innocent people who have been killed by the Zionist army during the past few days. Today is a day of mourning for the entire world of Islam and, indeed, for humanity at large. We all witnessed the desecration of Islamic holy places and the indiscriminate massacre of those whose only fault was their religious devotion. Several Muslim worshippers - elderly people, women and children who had gathered in one of the most sacred places in the Islamic world - were murdered just today.”

    1996-09-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3698Resumption1 (1996) · source

  6. “It is our contention that such an approach will provide the necessary incentives and inducements for all to return to the negotiating table to find a peaceful, just and lasting settlement based on the United Nations Charter and international law. These negotiations should be transparent and governed by international law, and should provide for the participation of all concerned, particularly the Islamic Countries. Arbitrarily excluding certain countries, which has been the practice in this case in the past, will add further obstacles to a just settlement.”

    1994-04-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3370 (1994) · source

  7. “Under the Charter, the Council has had the clear obligation, in this blatant case of aggression and war crime, to invoke Article 42 and take collective measures to restore Bosnia's sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity. It should at least recognize explicitly, as it has done in another case, the right of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and of those willing to provide military assistance to it to collective self-defense. Simultaneously, it should take every measure to ensure that war crimes not remain unpunished and that those responsible be held individually accountable for their atrocities.”

    1994-04-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3370 (1994) · source

  8. “We have tried the prescription of those in the Council who, resisting the expressed will of the overwhelming majority of the United Nations membership as indicated in General Assembly resolutions 46/242, 47/121 and 48/88, insisted on depriving the Bosnians of their minimum right to self-defence. But the patient is near death. The international community is outraged. The Muslim world is frustrated. Why not try now to respect the will of the majority in this age of democracy by choosing the legal, moral and practical interpretation of resolution 713 (1991) and lifting the unjust arms embargo against the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina? This would constitute the first step required for the discharge of the Security Council's responsibilities.”

    1994-04-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3370 (1994) · source

  9. “It is also impractical, because it has failed to achieve the stated objectives. These objectives were the prevention of further escalation of the conflict, the preservation of the lives of United Nations personnel, and the establishment of 12 an atmosphere conducive to peaceful negotiations and settlement. None of these has been achieved, not to mention the fact that the embargo has been broken time and again, unfortunately by the wrong side. It is thus time for the Security Council to bring its interpretation of resolution 713 (1991) into line with logic, law and reality, and once and for all clarify that the arms embargo does not apply to the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.”

    1994-04-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3370 (1994) · source

  10. “It is our contention that the arms embargo against Bosnia and Herzegovina is non-applicable, illegal, immoral and impractical. It is non-applicable because resolution 713 (1991) was adopted before the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina came into being, before it was recognized by the United Nations as a sovereign independent State, and before a war of aggression started to be waged against it. It is illegal because it deprives a Member of the United Nations of its right not only to self-defence against armed attack but also to self-preservation in the face of total annihilation. It is immoral because it has further aggravated the military balance in favor of the aggressors, allowing them to conduct genocide and ethnic cleansing with impunity and without any resistance.”

    1994-04-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3370 (1994) · source

  11. “It is a campaign against the total being of a State, aimed at its complete removal from the face of the Earth as a sovereign, viable entity, a campaign marked by genocide against its entire population. Here, self-preservation against total annihilation - and not simply self-defence against armed attack - would apply. This right is synonymous with sovereignty and inherent in all States, a right that cannot be denied by any organ. Resolution 713 (1991), adopted under totally different circumstances and before the existence of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, cannot be interpreted now in a manner that would run counter to the Charter of the United Nations or to the principles of jus cogens. Such an interpretation would obviously render the resolution itself invalid and illegal.”

    1994-04-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3370 (1994) · source

  12. “And the responsibility will be borne by those who have so blatantly applied double standards and put their perceived strategic interests before the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent human beings, calling it a balanced approach. 11 Dealing with the victim and the aggressor on the same footing is not a balanced approach. Such an approach would be most desirable for aggressors and an encouragement for them and future aggressors. The situation in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina has gone far beyond any classic interpretation of the right of self-defence, recognized by Article 51 of the Charter, which can be invoked following a simple armed attack. But the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina is not simply a case of one's territory being attacked or even partially occupied.”

    1994-04-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3370 (1994) · source

  13. “However, offers by a number of Muslim countries to provide peace-keepers were brushed aside. The justification here was that these troops were not sufficiently neutral, yet troops from a well-known supporter of the Serbs were deployed in a most critical area around Sarajevo. All of this has created the impression, particularly in public opinion throughout the Muslim world, that a strong bias against Muslims is prevalent in the Security Council; that in the heart of Europe, people are being slaughtered, and no one, not even the European claimants to be human rights supporters, is reacting in any meaningful fashion, just because the victims are Muslims. This frustration has obvious consequences: people are losing confidence in the United Nations, in the Security Council and in the office of the Secretary-General.”

    1994-04-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3370 (1994) · source

  14. “And not only that: its only implemented resolution is the one that has helped the Serbs maintain their totally disproportionate superiority in this one-sided slaughter. And, ironically, it is a resolution that did not apply, by any extension of law or logic, to the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Worse yet, in places such as Srebrenica, the United Nations supervised the disarming of the Muslim victims, while the Serbian aggressors remained heavily armed on the outskirts of the city. Other resolutions of the Security Council, particularly those regarding safe areas, have remained dead letters. The "heavy option", which had been recommended by the United Nations military experts as the only meaningful approach, was abandoned for a "light option". The justification offered was lack of manpower and resources.”

    1994-04-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3370 (1994) · source

  15. “The question is not whether the Security Council has fulfilled its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. The answer to that is obvious and negative. The question is whether the Security Council has even moved in that direction. To answer that, we need to examine the situation on the ground and the actions of the Security Council. Since the Council became seized of the matter the Serbs have gained more territory, slaughtered more innocent human beings, "ethnically cleansed" more towns and villages and intensified their campaign of genocide. Meanwhile, they have sat at the negotiating table with the United Nations only in order to stall and buy time to make more of the same atrocities possible. While all this is common knowledge, the Council is sitting on its hands.”

    1994-04-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3370 (1994) · source

  16. “Whether some in the Council like it or not, the fact is that we are not facing a civil war; we have never faced a civil war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It has been a blatant act of aggression, which continues to be perpetrated against a Member of the United Nations. This Member State has been arbitrarily deprived of its inherent right of self-defence. The world has come to recognize the Serbian army as a calculating, well-organized and externally supported military force, which is engaged in a classic campaign of aggression, genocide, extermination and destruction. The burned houses and the destroyed water-treatment facility of Gorazde stand as the latest example of this strategy in a tactical retreat. It is time for the Security Council to catch up with the rest of humanity, to recognize the obvious and act accordingly.”

    1994-04-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3370 (1994) · source

  17. “At the outset, I would like to congratulate you, Sir, on assuming the presidency of the Security Council for this important meeting. Let me also express the hope that under your able leadership the Council will take serious and constructive steps to mitigate the grave suffering of innocent human beings in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which has continued for too long on the Council's watch. The tragic events of the past two years, particularly the last two episodes around Sarajevo and Gorazde, have made the underlying flaw in the Security Council's treatment of this crisis abundantly clear. That fundamental problem is the inability or unwillingness of the Security Council, for whatever reason, to come to terms with the real cause of the tragedy, which is the first step in addressing and settling the crisis.”

    1994-04-27 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3370 (1994) · source