{"id":205332,"date":"1993-12-31T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2019-03-12T18:57:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/?p=205332"},"modified":"2019-03-12T18:57:50","modified_gmt":"2019-03-12T18:57:50","slug":"auto-insert-205332","status":"publish","type":"document","link":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/document\/auto-insert-205332\/","title":{"rendered":"Yearbook of the United Nations 1993 (excerpts)"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

YEARBOOK<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

OF THE<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

UNITED NATIONS<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

1993<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Volume 47<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Department of Public Information<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

United Nations, New York<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n


<\/p>\n

\n

\n<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Middle East<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

United Nations efforts in 1993 focused on helping to bring about a comprehensive settlement of the complex Middle East conflict, while the parties to the conflict themselves were engaged in an ongoing peace process sponsored by the Russian Federation and the United States and aided by Norway. In its multilateral negotiations, the United Nations acted as a full participant. Those negotiations resulted in the signing, on 13 September in Washington, D.C., of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), a historic breakthrough that was welcomed by many States and international organizations. The handshake at that ceremony between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat provided a compelling symbol of the possibility of peace between former enemies. Prior to that, on 9 September, Israel and PLO had exchanged letters of mutual recognition, thereby paving the way to further political negotiations. The General Assembly expressed full support for the Declaration of Principles as well as the Agreement between Israel and Jordan on the Common Agenda, signed on 14 September, as an important initial step in achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, and urged all parties to implement the agreements (resolution 48\/58).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In addressing the question of Palestine, reaffirmed to be the epicentre of the Arab-Israeli conflict, the Assembly stressed the need for the United Nations to play a more active and expanded role in the current peace process and in the implementation of the Declaration of Principles. It urged Member States to provide economic and technical assistance to Palestinians and underlined that the realization of their legitimate national rights, primarily to self-determination, withdrawal of Israel from Palestinian territory; guaranteeing arrangements for peace and security of all States in the region and resolution of the refugee and settlements problems were elements of a comprehensive peace (48\/158 D). The United Nations system also addressed the Palestine question and the policies and practices of Israel in the occupied territory including Jerusalem, and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, while a variety of United Nations organizations and specialized agencies maintained their programmes of economic and social assistance to Palestinians throughout the year. The Assembly welcomed the results of the Conference to Support Middle East Peace, convened in Washington D.C., in October, and the Secretary-General's establishment in September of a high-level United Nations task force to support the economic and social development of the Palestinian people. It also urged Member States to provide economic financial and technical assistance to the Palestinians during the interim period (48\/58).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (Committee on Palestinian rights) continued to press for the implementation of its original (1976) recommendations—on Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Palestinian territory and on the rights of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property and to achieve self-determination, national independence and sovereignty in Palestine.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>To help keep the region's latent volatility in check, the Security Council twice extended the mandate of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon and that of the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force in the Golan Heights so that both peace-keeping forces remained operative during the year.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Israel's policies and practices in the Arab territories it occupied were monitored constantly by the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories (Committee on Israeli practices), whose findings in 1993 reflected a critically tense situation and a high level of violence engendered by the uprising and Israel's suppression of it by military force and collective punishment, including the closure of the territories in March and mass deportations of Palestinians despite political breakthroughs at the negotiation table between Israel and PLO. The refusal by Israel to ensure the safe and immediate return, as demanded by the Security Council in resolution 799(1992), of the 415 Palestinians whom Israel had deported in December 1992 to Marj al Zahour in southern Lebanon, challenged, in the Secretary-General's view, the Council's authority. It was not until 15 December 1993 that Israel heeded the Council's demand and allowed the return of all deportees.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Commission on Human Rights reiterated the Palestinians' right to self-determination and called on Israel to desist from human rights violations in the territories.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The United Nations Relief Works and Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East continued to provide a wide-ranging programme of education, health, relief and social services for the Palestine refugees. It appealed for increased contributions from Governments to meet the anticipated needs of a refugee population of 2.8 million (48\/40 A). By a series of resolutions, the Assembly addressed specific aspects of the refugee problem.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Economic and Social Council deplored Israel's confiscation of <\/i>land, appropriation of water resources and depletion of other economic resources, (1993\/52), while the Assembly reaffirmed the inalienable right of Palestinians to their natural and all other economic resources and regarded any infringement thereof as illegal (48\/212).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

_________________________<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Middle East peace process<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

_________________________<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Multilateral negotiations among Israel, Arab countries and other States, in which the United Nations acted as a full participant and which were sponsored by the Russian Federation and the United States and assisted by Norway, as well as bilateral talks between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), resulted in the signing, on 13 September in Washington, D.C., of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government between Israel and PLO (see below). In December, the General Assembly, by adopting resolution 48\/58, sponsored by 110 nations, welcomed the peace process started in 1991 at Madrid,(1) Spain, and supported the subsequent bilateral negotiations. It expressed full support for the achievements of that process thus far, in particular the Declaration of Principles and the Agreement between Israel and Jordan on the Common Agenda, which constituted an important initial step in achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. The Assembly urged all parties to implement the agreements reached and stressed the need to achieve rapid progress on the other tracks of the Arab-Israeli negotiations. Welcoming the results of the Conference to Support Middle East Peace (Washington, D.C., 1 October) and the establishment of a high-level United Nations task force to support the economic and social development of the Palestinian people, it urged Member States to provide economic and other assistance to Palestinians during the interim period. It finally considered that an active United Nations role in the Middle East peace process and in assisting in the implementation of the Declaration of Principles could make a positive contribution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Despite the large number of sponsors of the text, reflecting almost universal support for the Middle East peace process, it proved impossible to reach consensus on it, owing to the lack of a reference to Security Council resolution 425(1978) relating to Lebanon.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Effective January 1993, Chinmaya Rajaninath Gharekhan (India), as the Secretary-General's Special Representative, coordinated the role of the United Nations in the working groups on arms control and regional security, economic and regional development, environment, refugees and water, having been appointed in November 1992(2) after the United Nations was invited to be a full participant in the multilateral negotiations following the Madrid Peace Conference.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Declaration of Principles on Interim<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Self-Government Arrangements<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

between Israel and PLO<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Israel and PLO signed, on 13 September in Washington, D.C., the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements, which emanated from previous bilateral and multilateral negotiations. Prior to that, on 9 September, the two parties had exchanged letters of mutual recognition, whereby PLO recognized the right of Israel to exist in peace and security, accepted Security Council resolutions 242(1967) and 338(1973) and renounced terrorism and violence, while Israel recognized PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people. The signed Declaration, consisting of 17 articles, 4 annexes and agreed minutes, was transmitted to the Secretary-General on 8 October(3) by the Russian Federation and the United States, co-sponsors of the peace process. The Declaration, which was to enter into force one month after its signing, pertained to the aim of the negotiations (Article D, the framework for the interim period (II), elections (III), jurisdiction (IV), the transitional period and permanent status negotiations (V), the preparatory transfer of powers and responsibilities (VI), an interim agreement (VII), public order and security (VIII), laws and military orders (IX), a joint Israeli-Palestinian Liaison Committee (X), Israeli-Palestinian cooperation in economic fields (XI), liaison and cooperation with Jordan and Egypt (XII), the redeployment of Israeli forces (XIII), Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and Jericho area (XIV), the resolution of disputes (XV), Israeli-Palestinian cooperation concerning regional programmes (XVI) and miscellaneous provisions (XVII). Attached to the Declaration were protocols on the mode and conditions of elections (Annex A, on withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Gaza Strip and Jericho area (II), on Israeli-Palestinian cooperation in economic and development programmes (III), and on Israeli-Palestinian cooperation concerning regional development programmes (IV).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>By the Declaration, Israel and PLO agreed that it was time to recognize their mutual legitimate and political rights, to strive to live in peaceful coexistence and mutual dignity and security and to achieve a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement and reconciliation through the agreed political process. According to the text, the aim of the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations within the current Middle East peace process was to establish a Palestinian Interim Self-Government Authority as proposed by PLO in 1992,(4) as the elected Council for Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, for a transitional period of not more than five years, leading to a permanent settlement based on Security Council resolutions 242(1967)(5) and 338(1973).(6) It was understood that the interim arrangements were an integral part of the peace process and that the permanent status negotiations would lead to the implementation of those resolutions.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In order that the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza might govern themselves according to democratic principles, direct, free and general political elections would be held for the Palestinian Council not later than nine months after the Declaration's entry into force under agreed supervision and international observation, with the Palestinian police ensuring public order. The Council's jurisdiction would cover West Bank and Gaza territory, except for issues to be negotiated in the permanent status negotiations. The two sides viewed the West Bank and Gaza as a single territorial unit, whose integrity was to be preserved during the interim period. The five-year transitional period would begin upon Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza and Jericho areas. Permanent status negotiations between Israel and Palestinian representatives were to commence as soon as possible, but not later than the third year of the interim period, and were to cover remaining issues, including Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, and relations and cooperation with other neighbours.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The agreement provided that upon the entry into force of the Declaration and Israeli withdrawal, authority would be transferred from the Israeli military government and its Civil Administration to the Palestinians authorized for that task until the inauguration of the Palestinian Council. With a view to promoting economic development, authority would also be transferred to the Palestinians in the spheres of education and culture, health, social welfare, direct taxation and tourism. The Palestinian side was further to begin to build a Palestinian police force. Not later than the eve of elections for the Council, Israeli forces in the West Bank and Gaza were to be redeployed outside populated areas, in addition to the military withdrawal (see below).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>An interim agreement was to be negotiated specifying the structure of the Council, the number of its members, the transfer of powers to it from Israel, its executive and legislative authorities and independent Palestinian judicial organs. In order to promote economic growth, the Council would establish a Palestinian Electricity Authority, a Gaza Sea Port Authority, a Palestinian Development Bank, a Palestinian Export Promotion Board a Palestinian Environmental Authority, a Palestinian Land Authority, a Palestinian Water Administration Authority, and any other authorities agreed upon. After the Council's inauguration, the Israeli Civil Administration would be dissolved and its military government withdrawn. The Council was charged with establishing a strong police force to guarantee public order and internal security for Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, while Israel was to continue to bear the responsibility of defending against external threats as well as for the overall security of Israelis.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In order to ensure the smooth implementation of the Declaration and subsequent agreements pertaining to the interim period, a Joint Israeli-Palestinian Liaison Committee was to be established to deal with issues requiring coordination other issues of common interest and disputes. The Joint Liaison Committee was also to resolve disputes arising out of the Declaration's application or interpretation. Any disputes not settled through conciliation would be addressed by an Arbitration Committee to be established by the parties. The parties agreed to invite Egypt and Jordan to participate in establishing further liaison and cooperation arrangements between Israeli and Palestinian representatives on the one hand, and Egypt and Jordan on the other, including the constitution of a Continuing Committee which would decide by agreement on the modalities of admitting persons displaced from the West Bank and Gaza in 1967, together with measures necessary to prevent disruption and disorder. In addition, an Israeli-Palestinian Economic Cooperation Committee was envisaged to develop and implement economic and regional development programmes as provided for in Annexes III and IV to the Declaration.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Protocol on the Mode and Conditions of Elections provided Palestinians living in Jerusalem with the right to participate in the election process, while not prejudicing the future status of those registered as displaced on 4 June 1967 as a result of their being unable to participate in elections owing to practical considerations. In accordance with the Protocol on Withdrawal of <\/i>Israeli Forces from the Gaza Strip and Jericho Area, the two sides would conclude and sign an agreement on such withdrawal within two months of the Declaration's entry into force. Israel would implement an accelerated and scheduled withdrawal immediately after signing the agreement and complete it within four months. The agreement would include arrangements for a smooth and peaceful transfer of authority from the Israeli military government and its Civilian Administration to Palestinian representatives, the structure, powers and responsibilities of the Palestinian authorities in the two areas except for matters relating to external security, settlements Israeli citizens and foreign relations, and arrangements for the assumption of internal security and public order by a Palestinian police force consisting of locally recruited officers and officers recruited from abroad holding Jordanian passports or Palestinian documents issued by Egypt. The withdrawal agreement would also provide for a temporary international or foreign presence, establishment of a joint Palestinian-Israeli Coordination and Cooperation Committee for mutual security purposes; an economic development and stabilization programme, including an emergency fund, to encourage foreign investment and financial and economic support; and safe passage for persons and transportation between Gaza and Jericho.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Protocol on Israeli-Palestinian Cooperation in Economic and Development Programmes set out terms of reference for establishment of an Israeli-Palestinian Continuing Committee for Economic Cooperation, focusing on water, electricity, energy, finance, transport and communications, trade, industry, labour relations and social welfare issues, human resource development and cooperation, environmental protection, and communications and media. The Protocol on Israeli-Palestinian Cooperation concerning Regional Development Programmes outlined a two-part development programme for the region, including an economic development programme for the West Bank and Gaza and a regional economic development programme, to be initiated by the seven most powerful industrialized nations (Group of Seven). The West Bank and Gaza programme would deal with social rehabilitation, including housing and construction; small and medium business development; infrastructure development; and human resources. The regional programme might address the establishment of a Middle East Development Fund, to be followed by a Middle East Development Bank; a joint Israeli-Palestinian-Jordanian plan for coordinated exploitation of the Dead Sea area; the Mediterranean Sea-Dead Sea Canal; desalinization and water development; a regional plan for agricultural development and the prevention of desertification; inter-connection of electricity grids; transfer, distribution and industrial exploitation of gas, oil and other energy resources; and a regional tourism, transportation and telecommunications development plan.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Subsequent to the signing of the Declaration, Israel and Jordan agreed on 14 September in Washington, D.C., to a Common Agenda which searched for steps to arrive at a state of peace based on resolutions 242(1967) and 338(1973) in all their aspects, and regulated matters in the fields of security, water, refugees and displaced persons and borders, and explored potentials of future bilateral cooperation in natural and human resources infrastructure and economic areas, including tourism.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>By a decision taken on 4 November at Tunis, Tunisia, the PLO Executive Committee established the Palestinian Economic Council for Development and Construction, which was to define the priorities of development projects, as well as their implementation, control and management.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>During the General Assembly's consideration of the Middle East situation in December, Israel stated that the political breakthroughs represented by the signing of the Camp David Accords in 1978,(7) the Declaration of Principles and the Common Agenda must be accompanied by economic growth and development in order to build stable peace. Economic and human progress were twin pillars supporting the political achievements.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Israel noted that 46 countries and organizations had come together at the Conference to Support Middle East Peace (Washington, D.C., 1 October), pledging $2 billion over five years to finance social and economic development in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and that the United Nations had established a high-level task force to achieve the same goal. Israel further noted that it was making progress with the Palestinians and 13 other Arab delegations in the multilateral negotiations, thus creating opportunities for regional cooperation. Forty-seven countries and international organizations, including the United Nations, were participating in those multilateral talks, and five working groups were discussing refugees, arms control, regional economic cooperation, water and environment. For the first time, Israel went on to say, all States participating in the talks on regional economic development had agreed on a plan of action, which included 35 projects, workshops and studies in diverse areas. Also for the first time in the multilateral negotiations, talks about the Middle East were being held in the Middle East.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Israel said it sought a quiet and secure. border with Lebanon, on which it had no territorial claims. It looked forward to a peace treaty and hoped that the Lebanese Government would assert its sovereignty and disarm those who used its land as a base for attacks on Israel. It called upon King Hussein of Jordan to sign a peace treaty with it and expressed desire for a comprehensive peace, based on individual treaties with the Gulf States, the North African States and all other Arab and Muslim countries. It further called on its negotiating partners to lay down economic weapons and end the Arab boycott, which was an obstacle to peace, impeding prosperity and hurting all societies in the Middle East. Science, education, health and technology would advance as countries of the region diverted human energies and resources away from conflict and shifted funds from the military to the civilian sector.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Jordan termed the Israeli-Palestinian Declaration of Principles the first tangible step towards peace. Progress on the Israeli-Jordanian, Israeli-Lebanese and Israeli-Syrian talks would ensure movement towards the comprehensive peace which the countries of the region and the international community had longed for as a prelude to lasting regional peace and security. The multilateral track was no less important than the bilateral track, as it involved 13 Arab States and Israel, together with the two co-sponsors of the peace process—the Russian Federation and the United States—in addition to other participants from outside the region as well as the United Nations and the World Bank. So far, that track had yielded results which went beyond the exchange of abstract ideas to cover tangible matters, such as feasibility studies, training programmes and the establishment of a joint American-Israeli-Jordanian committee. Jordan maintained that the United Nations had a still more vital and larger role to play along two lines: it should continue acting as the baseline of international legality and conscience in its reaffirmation of Security Council resolutions 242(1967)(5) and 338(1973)(6) and all other relevant resolutions, and should explore ways to reinforce the two peace camps on the Arab and Israeli sides by providing support and assistance. The United Nations must continue to play an active role until the protagonists reach the stage of implementing resolution 242(1967)(5) and the Palestinians were able to exercise their inalienable right to self-determination on their national territory and establish an independent State of their own with Arab Al-Quds as its capital.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In the continuing debate, Lebanon said it understood that the Declaration of Principles would lead to the transfer from Israel to the Palestinians of authority over East Jerusalem and all of the cities, towns and villages of the West Bank and Gaza. Equally, it emphasized that the signing of the agreement in Washington would not achieve genuine peace unless there was substantive progress on the Lebanese and Syrian tracks of the Arab-Israeli negotiations, leading to full Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon and the Golan Heights. It stressed the need for the United Nations to play a more active role in the peace process, the success of which, it said, was dependent on implementing resolutions 242(1967), 338(1973) and 425(1978).(8) Lebanon expressed alarm at what it called Israel's opposition to internationally recognized principles central to the achievement of a comprehensive peace settlement, over which discussion had been postponed, and which included Israeli withdrawal from all occupied territory, including Jerusalem, the dismantling of all settlements in those lands and the repatriation of Palestinian refugees.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 14 December, Norway, introducing the draft resolution on the Middle East peace process,(9) noted that paragraph 4 stressed the need for achieving rapid progress on the other tracks of the Arab-Israeli negotiations, those between Israel and the Syrian Arab Republic, and between Israel and Lebanon. With regard to the latter, it said that though not mentioned in the text, resolution 425(1978) would be an important point of reference. Norway introduced the draft together with the Russian Federation and the United States on behalf of 87 additional sponsors,(10) who were joined later by 20 others.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Russian Federation underlined that, besides the mutual recognition by Israel and PLO and their signing of the Declaration of Principles, no less vital for a comprehensive and lasting settlement was the task of spurring talks between Israel and the Syrian Arab Republic and Lebanon. Success required stalwart diplomatic efforts through the framework defined by the Madrid process. The goals for settling the key problems, especially in southern Lebanon, were set out in resolution 425(1978). The Russian Federation was convinced that adoption of what it called the constructive, balanced and non-confrontational draft would open a new page in the history of United Nations consideration of the situation in the Middle East and enable the Organization to be more fully included in the agreements.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>According to the United States, the draft allowed the Assembly to record for the first time its support for the Middle East peace process inaugurated at Madrid and to speak, after decades of division and discord, with one voice about the imperative of a Middle East peace.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Before voting on the draft, Lebanon pointed out that it had not been a party to the wars of 1967 and 1973 and, as a result, neither resolutions 242(1967) or 338(1973) nor the "land for peace" formula was applicable to it. Therefore, resolution 425(1978) must be mentioned in the text if the Assembly was seriously to consider it as a show of support for the Madrid Conference and subsequent negotiations. Lebanon said that it and the entire Arab Group had worked hard to impress on the sponsors the imperative of including a reference to resolution 425(1978), without which the text could be misconstrued to mean that Lebanon had participated in the Madrid Conference and subsequent negotiations on the basis of Council resolutions 242(1967) and 338(1973). Although it was committed to continuing the bilateral negotiations based on all three resolutions, Lebanon would refrain from entering into the multilateral talks until there was real progress in the bilateral negotiations.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Similarly, the Syrian Arab Republic said it could not agree to a text on the Middle East peace process that failed to make reference to resolution 425(1978) concerning Lebanon, which had participated in the Madrid Conference and subsequent bilateral talks on the basis of that resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 14 December 1993, the Assembly adopted resolution 48\/58 <\/strong>by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Middle East peace process<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Stressing <\/i>that the achievement of a comprehensive, just and lasting settlement of the Middle East conflict will constitute a significant contribution to strengthening international peace and security,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>the convening of the Peace Conference on the Middle East at Madrid on 30 October 1991, on the basis of Security Council resolutions 242(1967) of 22 November 1967 and 338(1973) of 22 October 1973, and the subsequent bilateral negotiations, as well as the meetings of the multilateral working groups, and noting with satisfaction the broad international support for the peace process,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Noting <\/i>the continuing positive participation of the United Nations as a full extraregional participant in the work of the multilateral working groups,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Bearing in mind <\/i>the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements, signed by the Government of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization in Washington D.C., on 13 September 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Also bearing in mind <\/i>the Agreement between Israel and Jordan on the Common Agenda, signed in Washington, D.C., on 14 September 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Welcomes <\/i>the peace process started at Madrid and supports the subsequent bilateral negotiations;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Stresses <\/i>the importance of, and need for, achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Expresses its full support <\/i>for the achievements of the peace process thus far, in particular the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements signed by the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, and the Agreement between Israel and Jordan on the Common Agenda, which constitute an important initial step in achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, and urges all parties to implement agreements reached;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Stresses <\/i>the need for achieving rapid progress on the other tracks of the Arab-Israeli negotiations within the peace process;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Welcomes <\/i>the results of the Conference to Support Middle East Peace, convened in Washington, D.C., on 1 October 1993, and the establishment of the high-level United Nations task force to support the economic and social development of the Palestinian people, and urges Member States to provide economic, financial and technical assistance to the Palestinian people during the interim period;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>6.\t<\/span>Calls upon <\/i>all Member States also to extend economic, financial and technical assistance to States in the region and to render support for the peace process;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>7.\t<\/span>Considers <\/i>that an active United Nations role in the Middle East peace process and in assisting in the implementation of the Declaration of Principles can make a positive contribution;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>8.\t<\/span>Encourages <\/i>regional development and cooperation in the areas where work has already begun within the framework of the Madrid Conference.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/58<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

14 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 79\t<\/span>155-3-1 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

110-nation draft (A\/48\/L.32 & Add.1); agenda item 34.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Albania, Angola, Argentina Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cambodia, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Micronesia, Mongolia, Morocco, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marina, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Spain, Suriname, Sweden, Tajikistan, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela, Zambia. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: plenary 67, 68, 79.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Albania, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Chine, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Merino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>Iran, Lebanon, Syrian Arab Republic.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Proposed peace conference<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

under UN auspices<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>As requested by the General Assembly in 1992,(11) the Secretary-General submitted a progress report on 19 November 1993(12) on his continuing efforts and developments in regard to convening an international peace conference on the Middle East under United Nations auspices, which was first endorsed by the Assembly in 1983.(13) The report stated that no reply had been received from the Security Council to his request for its views. However, Israel and PLO had communicated their positions in response to a note verbale of 14 September seeking information on steps taken to implement the 1992 resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In its note of 12 October, Israel said it had long advocated direct negotiations as the only framework to advance peace in the Middle East, an approach vindicated by the negotiations currently taking place in the framework of the Madrid peace process and recent achievements in the Israeli-Palestinian and Israeli-Jordanian talks. The 1992 resolution on the conference ran counter to the principle of direct negotiations, Israel continued, stating that while the resolution referred to Security Council resolutions 242(1967)(5) and 338(1973),(6) it also offered a series of principles that prejudged and even predetermined the outcome of those negotiations. Israel said that the resolution was outdated and out of touch with reality, and that it continued to oppose it and believed such a text should not be adopted again by the Assembly in 1993.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Permanent Observer of Palestine stated in his note of 21 October that the most significant development emanating from the peace process, the recent signing of the Declaration of Principles between Israel and PLO containing agreement on mutual recognition, was an important and positive step towards a comprehensive, just and lasting peace. The most crucial elements yet to be negotiated included the final status of Jerusalem the illegal settlements, the rights of Palestinian refugees and border questions. Similar progress on other tracks of the peace process between the concerned Arab States and Israel was necessary for the process to proceed smoothly PLO strongly stressed the need for the United Nations to play a more active and expanded role in the peace process and called for the Organization's full engagement in it, as well as in the provision of assistance to Palestinians in their efforts to build their new life and own authority and effectively to implement the Declaration. It believed that the Assembly should reaffirm once more the principles for achieving a comprehensive peace and emphasized the permanent responsibility of the United Nations regarding the question of Palestine until its resolution in all aspects. PLO stood ready to cooperate fully with the Secretary-General to carry out his efforts to promote peace, as called for in the 1992 Assembly resolution, in an effective and successful manner.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Secretary-General observed that the United Nations had always supported a comprehensive just and lasting peace based on resolutions 242(1967) and 338(1973), taking into account the legitimate political rights of the Palestinians, including self-determination. In that connection, he welcomed the Declaration, hoping that it would lead to a peace acceptable to all parties concerned. The United Nations stood ready to support the peace process and had, over the past year, participated actively in the multilateral working groups established in the framework of the Madrid Conference in 1991.(1) To help sustain the momentum of the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations and in an effort to support the implementation of the Declaration of Principles, the United Nations had begun to enhance its economic and social assistance to the West Bank and Gaza. which would intensify in the months ahead.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

United Nations Truce Supervision Organization<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Three peace-keeping operations remained in place in the region: two peace-keeping forces—the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) (see below, under "Israel and the Syrian Arab Republic") and the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) (see below, under "Lebanon")—and an observer mission, the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO). Headquartered at Jerusalem, with liaison offices at Amman, Jordan, and Beirut, Lebanon, UNTSO’s 57 unarmed military observers continued to assist UNDOF and UNIFIL in performing their tasks. They manned five observation posts along the Lebanese side of the Israel-Lebanon armistice demarcation line and operated four mobile teams in the Israeli-controlled section of the UNIFIL area. Two observers were assigned to UNIFIL headquarters.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

REFERENCES<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

(1)YUN 1991, p. 221. (2)YUN 1992, p. 396. (3)A\/48\/486-S\/26560. (4)YUN 1992, p. 399. (5)YUN 1967, p. 257, SC res. 242(1967), 22 NOV. 1967. (6)YUN 1973, p. 213, SC res. 338(1973), 22 Oct. 1973. (7)YUN 1978, p. 327. (8)Ibid., p. 312, SC res. 425(1978), 19 Mar. 1978. (9)A\/48\/L.32. (10)A\/48\/755. (11)YUN 1992, p. 397, GA res. 47\/64 D, 11 Dec. 1992. (12)A\/48\/607-S\/26769. (13)YUN 1983, p. 278, GA res. 38\/58 C, 13 Dec. 1983.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

__________________<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Palestine question<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

__________________<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>During 1993, the question of Palestine continued to be of undiminishing concern to the General Assembly, which, aware of the mutual recognition between Israel and PLO and the signing between the two parties of the Declaration of Principles, reaffirmed the need to achieve a peaceful settlement. Following its consideration of the 1993 report of the Committee on Palestinian rights, the Assembly in December adopted four resolutions addressing the question.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>By resolution 48\/158 D, the Assembly stressed the need for the United Nations to play a more active and expanded role in the current peace process and in the implementation of the Declaration of Principles; urged Member States to provide economic and technical assistance to the Palestinian people; and reaffirmed the following principles for the achievement of a final settlement and comprehensive peace: realization of the legitimate national rights of Palestinians, primarily to self-determination; withdrawal of Israel from Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and from other occupied Arab territories; guaranteeing arrangements for peace and security of all States in the region within secure and internationally recognized boundaries; and resolution of the problem of the Palestine refugees and the illegal Israeli settlements. By adopting resolution 48\/158 A, it endorsed the Committee's recommendations on the Palestine question and, requesting it to keep the situation under review, to make suggestions to it and the Security Council, as appropriate. It once again requested resources for the Division for Palestinian Rights, as well as continued cooperation with it (48\/158 B); and further requested the Department of Public Information (DPI) to continue its special information programme on the question during the 1994-1995 biennium (48\/158 C). It again determined that Israel's 1980 decisions) to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on Jerusalem was illegal and therefore null and void; and deplored the transfer by some States of their diplomatic missions to Jerusalem in violation of Security Council resolution 478(1980)(2) (48\/59 A).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having reviewed the assistance provided by the United Nations system to Palestinians throughout the year, the Assembly (48\/213) and the Economic and Social Council (1993\/78) appealed for increased international assistance to the Palestinian people in cooperation with PLO. The Assembly urged States to open their markets to exports from the West Bank and Gaza on the most favourable terms.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In related actions, the Assembly demanded that Israel acknowledge the de jure <\/i>applicability of the 1949 Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (fourth Geneva Convention) to the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, and to comply scrupulously with that Convention. It determined that all measures and actions taken by Israel with respect to those territories in violation of the Convention were illegal and without validity, demanding that it desist forthwith from any such actions; called on Israel to respect all fundamental freedoms of Palestinians, including education; and reaffirmed that the Israeli settlements in the above territories were illegal and an obstacle to peace (see below, under "Territories occupied by Israel"). The Assembly again proposed the establishment of a university "Al-Quds" for Palestine refugees and called on Israel to remove the hindrances it had put in the way of its establishment (see below, under "Palestine refugees").<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 29 November, the Committee on Palestinian rights organized at the United Nations Headquarters and Offices at Geneva and Vienna observances of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian people.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Activities of the Committee on Palestinian rights. <\/strong>As mandated by the General Assembly in 1992,(3) the Committee on Palestinian rights, established in 1975,(4) continued to observe developments in the Israeli-occupied territories and actions by Israel which the Committee regarded as violations of international law or of United Nations resolutions. It brought such actions—including Israeli settlement activities, Israeli exploitation of Arab-owned land and human rights violations such as deportations and other matters affecting Palestinian rights—to the attention of the Assembly and the Security Council.(5) It continued to press for the implementation of its original (1976) recommendations(6)—on Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Palestinian territory and on the rights of Palestinians to return to their homes and property and to achieve self-determination, national independence and sovereignty in Palestine. The Committee considered that the principled position adopted by the international community on the Palestine question had begun to bear fruit due to the shift from confrontation to cooperation and a renewed determination to resolve long-standing regional conflicts.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Committee submitted a report on its activities to the Assembly in November 1993,(7) reiterating its invitation to all Member States and Permanent Observers, as well as PLO, to participate as observers in its work. It also re-established its Working Group to assist in the preparation and expedition of its work.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Committee and, under its guidance, the Division for Palestinian Rights, continued to expand cooperation with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in order to promote awareness of the Palestine question and create conditions favourable for the implementation of its recommendations. To that end, the Committee carried out its approved programme of regional NGO symposia and seminars for 1993. It affirmed the importance of the contribution of the NGO community to international efforts on behalf of the Palestinian people and considered that its support would become even more necessary during the future transition period.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Committee decided to devote its seminar for the European region to assistance to the Palestinian people (see below under "Assistance to Palestinians"). The North American regional seminar (New York, 28 and 29 June), the theme of which was priorities for United Nations action discussed the United Nations and the implementation of international human rights instruments and relevant Security Council resolutions, the role of the Organization in promoting economic development in the occupied Palestinian territories; and the United Nations and the peace process. It was followed immediately by an NGO symposium, which included several workshops and four panels: building for peace and Palestine: priorities for the second decade of the NGO movement; rights, resources, refugees: the need for protection; ending the occupation: a prelude to peace and security; and NGO priorities for the second decade. The African regional seminar (Dakar, Senegal, 30 August-3 September) was held jointly with an NGO Symposium and addressed Africa, the Middle East, and the question of Palestine. Discussions topics were: towards a just solution of the Palestine question; building peace in Jerusalem—the holy city of three religions; towards self-determination and statehood; and the need to revive the economy in the occupied territories, including Jerusalem. Two additional workshops for NGOs dealt with action by African NGOs to promote efforts to end Israel's violation of human rights of Palestinians; and mobilization and networking by NGOs to promote a just, comprehensive and lasting solution to the Palestine question. The European regional NGO symposium (Vienna, 23 and 24 August) was on the Middle East peace process: Palestinian rights and development—a challenge to Europe. It was immediately followed by an international NGO meeting (25-27 August), the theme of which was renewing the NGO commitment to Palestinian national and human rights.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In order to strengthen its programme of research, monitoring and publications, the Division for Palestinian Rights during 1993 continued work on the establishment of a computer-based United Nations information system on the question of Palestine (UNISPAL), as requested by the Committee and endorsed by the Assembly in 1992.(8) The Committee requested that provision for further development of the system be made in the 1994-1995 budget, stressing the importance and usefulness of UNISPAL for the work of the Committee, the United Nations and the international community.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In its 1993 recommendations, the Committee welcomed the peace process started at Madrid in 1991,(9) the exchange of letters of mutual recognition between Israel and PLO and the subsequent signing by the two sides of the Declaration of Principles as important steps towards a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in accordance with Security Council resolutions 242(1967)(10) and 338 (1973).(11) It called for intensified international support and assistance to Palestinians, with PLO as its recognized leadership, to ensure the successful implementation of the agreements reached. It further stressed the need for full United Nations engagement in the peace process and in building the forthcoming Palestinian National Authority as well as providing assistance to Palestinians in all fields.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Committee considered that the following priority tasks required immediate and sustained attention in its future programme of work: promoting support for the ongoing peace process and for the Declaration of Principles, and monitoring closely the situation to promote effective implementation of the agreements reached and full realization of Palestinian rights; promoting intensified assistance to the Palestinian people by the whole United Nations system and other donors, for  immediate relief and nation-building; and encouraging constructive debate of the major issues to be negotiated at a later stage with a view to promoting a final settlement based on international legitimacy. Finally, it attached greatest importance to the intensified mobilization of NGOs throughout the transitional period to monitor developments, promote the full exercise of Palestinian rights in accordance with United Nations resolutions and provide the assistance needed for institution-building.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Addressing the question of Palestine before the General Assembly in November, the Chairman of the Committee on Palestinian rights stated that the Declaration of Principles had opened a new chapter in the long history of that question, symbolized by the handshake between Israeli Prime Minister Rabin and PLO Chairman Arafat. The Committee supported those developments and strongly urged the parties to continue their efforts so as to ensure that the process led to a definitive peace, especially since many sensitive aspects relating to implementing the Declaration, such as Israeli withdrawal, permanent status arrangements regarding Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders and other issues remained to be negotiated. He stressed once again the need for full United Nations engagement in the peace process and in building the national Palestinian institutions as well as in providing broad assistance, in which regard he welcomed the Secretary-General's efforts to develop a concerted United Nations response to support implementation of the Declaration.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Observer of Palestine noted that the Declaration left for negotiations at a later stage issues of paramount importance, such as Al-Quds, settlements, refugees and boundaries. He emphasized that their solution and form of final settlement must be based fully on international legality, in particular on relevant Security Council and Assembly resolutions that conformed to international law in addition to providing a pragmatic and practicable solution. The Security Council in particular had a clear position on Israeli settlements, having in 1980(12) declared them to be a violation of the fourth Geneva Convention and a serious obstruction to peace, and calling for their dismantlement. He stressed that the settlements continued to be illegal regardless of any political developments.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Israel told the Assembly that, far from the limelight, Israeli-Palestinian committees were working hard to negotiate security arrangements and modalities of transferring authority in Gaza and Jericho. The Economic Cooperation Committee had begun its work in Paris, guided by the principles of reciprocity, equity and fair relationships, and exploring joint action in water, energy, industry and infrastructure, on which issues specific working groups were established. Commending activities of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), Israel appealed to the Secretary-General to double their budgets and the efforts of the United Nations.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Following consideration of the report of the Committee on Palestinian rights, the General Assembly, on 20 December, adopted four resolutions on the question of Palestine, all by recorded vote. Resolution 48\/158 D <\/strong>reaffirmed the need for a peaceful settlement of that question.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its relevant resolutions, the most recent of which was resolution 47\/64 D of 11 December 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the report of the Secretary-General of 19 November 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Stressing <\/i>that achieving a comprehensive settlement of the Middle East conflict, the core of which is the ques-tion of Palestine, will constitute a significant contribution to international peace and security,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Noting <\/i>the convening at Madrid, on 30 October 1991 of the Peace Conference on the Middle East and the subsequent bilateral negotiations, as well as meetings of the multilateral working groups,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Noting also <\/i>that the United Nations has participated as a full, extraregional participant in the work of the multilateral working groups,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Aware <\/i>of the mutual recognition between the Government of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, as the representative of the Palestinian people, and the signing between the two parties of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements in Washington, D.C., on 13 September 1993, as well as their subsequent negotiations,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Welcoming <\/i>the convening of the Conference to Support Middle East Peace in Washington, D.C., on 1 October 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Reaffirms <\/i>the need to achieve a peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine, the core of the Arab-Israeli conflict, in all its aspects;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Expresses <\/i>its support for the ongoing peace process, which began in Madrid, and the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements and expresses the hope that the process will lead to the establishment of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Stresses <\/i>the need for the United Nations to play a more active and expanded role in the current peace process and in the implementation of the Declaration of Principles;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Urges <\/i>Member States to provide economic and technical assistance to the Palestinian people;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Also stresses <\/i>the upcoming negotiations on the final settlement, and reaffirms the following principles for the achievement of a final settlement and comprehensive peace:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(a<\/i>)\t<\/span>The realization of the legitimate national rights of the Palestinian people, primarily the right to self-determination;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(b<\/i>)\t<\/span>The withdrawal of Israel from the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and from the other occupied Arab territories;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(c<\/i>)\t<\/span>Guaranteeing arrangements for peace and security of all States in the region, including those named in resolution 181(II) of 29 November 1947, within secure and internationally recognized boundaries;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(d<\/i>)\t<\/span>Resolving the problem of the Palestine refugees in conformity with General Assembly resolution 194(III)) of 11 December 1948, and subsequent relevant resolutions;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(e<\/i>)\t<\/span>Resolving the problem of the Israeli settlements, which are illegal and an obstacle to peace, in conformity with relevant United Nations resolutions;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(g<\/i>)\t<\/span>Guaranteeing freedom of access to Holy Places and religious buildings and sites;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>6.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to continue his efforts with the parties concerned, and in consultation with the Security Council, for the promotion of peace in the region and to submit progress reports on developments in this matter.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/158 D<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

20 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 85\t<\/span>92-5-51 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

12-nation draft (A\/48\/L.44 & Add.1): agenda item 35.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Afghanistan, Comoros, Cuba, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Malta, Pakistan, Senegal, Tunisia, Yemen. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: plenary 65, 66, 85.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Gambia, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Jordan, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>Dominican Republic, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belays, Belgium, Belize, Bulgaria, Canada, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uruguay.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In explanation of its vote, Israel asserted that the principles contained in the resolution prejudged and even predetermined the outcome of the ongoing negotiations, thus contradicting itself. On the one hand, the text claimed to support the peace process begun in Madrid, while on the other, it ignored the basic principle of direct negotiations without preconditions on which that very process was based. Israel had long advocated direct negotiations as the only framework for advancing Middle East peace, and recent achievements vindicated that approach. Any attempt to internationalize the issues or to perpetuate the existence of bodies which did so would lead nowhere.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The United States said that the resolution was greatly improved over its predecessor texts that called for convening an international peace conference on the Middle East; however, it spoke conclusively to issues under direct negotiation between the parties. Instead, the Assembly should support those negotiations without prejudice in order for all the parties to resolve their differences directly and avoid focusing on divisive and polarizing statements.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Russian Federation regretted that the text had retained the traditional array of principles for a Middle East settlement, which, it said, were an attempt to predetermine the bilateral Arab-Israeli negotiations and could complicate their course.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>A draft resolution(13) on the uprising (intifadah) <\/i>of the Palestinian people, which was tabled under the agenda item on the Palestine question, was withdrawn by its sponsors (Afghanistan, Cuba, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Malta, Senegal, Tunisia and Yemen). The text condemned those Israeli policies and practices which violated the human rights of Palestinians in the occupied territories, and requested the Security Council to examine with urgency the situation in the territories with a view to considering measures needed to provide international protection to Palestinian civilians.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>By adopting resolution 48\/158 A<\/strong>, the Assembly requested the Committee on Palestinian rights to keep under review the situation relating to the Palestine question.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Rights of the Palestinian People<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its resolutions 181(II) of 29 November 1947 194(III) of 11 December 1948, 3236(XXIX) of 22 November 1974, 3375(XXX) and 3376(XXX) of 10 November 1975, 31\/20 of 24 November 1976, 32\/40 A of 2 December 1977, 33\/28 A and B of 7 December 1978, 34\/65 A of 29 November 1979 and 34\/65 C of 12 December 1979, ES-7\/2 of 29 July 1980, 35\/169 A and C of 15 December 1980, 36\/120 A and C of 10 December 1981 ES-7\/4 of 28 April 1982, 37\/86 A of 10 December 1982, 38\/58 A of 13 December 1983, 39\/49 A of 11 December 1984, 40\/96 A of 12 December 1985, 41\/43 A of 2 December 1986, 42\/66 A of 2 December 1987, 43\/175 A of 15 December 1988, 44\/41 A of 6 December 1989, 45\/67 A of 6 December 1990, 46\/74 A of 11 December 1991 and 47\/64 A of 11 December 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the report of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Welcoming <\/i>the signing of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements, including its Annexes and Agreed Minutes, by the Government of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization on 13 September 1993 in Washington, D.C.,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Reaffirming <\/i>that the United Nations has a permanent responsibility with respect to the question of Palestine until the question is resolved in all its aspects in a satisfactory manner in accordance with international legitimacy,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Expresses its approval <\/i>to the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People for its efforts in performing the tasks assigned to it by the General Assembly;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/i>2.\t<\/span>Considers <\/i>that the Committee can make a valuable and positive contribution to international efforts to promote the effective implementation of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements and to mobilize international support for and assistance to the Palestinian people during the transitional period;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Endorses <\/i>the recommendations of the Committee contained in paragraphs 85 to 96 of its report;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Committee to continue to keep under review the situation relating to the question of Palestine and to report and make suggestions to the General Assembly or the Security Council, as appropriate;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Authorizes <\/i>the Committee to continue to exert all efforts to promote the exercise of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, to make such adjustments in its approved programme of work as it may consider appropriate and necessary in light of developments, to give special emphasis to the need to mobilize support for and assistance to the Palestinian people and to report thereon to the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session and thereafter;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>6.\t<\/span>Also requests <\/i>the Committee to continue to extend its cooperation to non-governmental organizations in their contribution towards heightening international awareness of the facts relating to the question of Palestine and promoting support and assistance to meet the needs of the Palestinian people, and to take the necessary steps to involve additional non-governmental organizations in its work;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>7.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine, established under General Assembly resolution 194(III), as well as other United Nations bodies associated with the question of Palestine, to continue to cooperate fully with the Committee and to make available to it, at its request, the relevant information and documentation which they have at their disposal;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>8.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to circulate the report of the Committee to all the competent bodies of the United Nations, and urges them to take the necessary action, as appropriate;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>9.\t<\/span>Also requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to continue to provide the Committee with all the necessary facilities for the performance of its tasks.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/158 A<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

20 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 85\t<\/span>106-3-40 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

14-nation draft (A\/48\/L.41 & Add.1); agenda item 35.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Afghanistan, Comoros, Cuba. India, Indonesia, Jordan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Malta, Pakistan, Senegal, Tunisia, Ukraine Yemen.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Financial implications. <\/i>5th Committee, A\/48\/787; S-G, A\/C.5\/48\/43.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 5th Committee 43; plenary 65, 66, 85.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour:<\/i> Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against<\/i>: Dominican Republic, Israel, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica, Estonia, Finland, France Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, United Kingdom.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Resolution 48\/158 B <\/strong>dealt with the Secretariat's Division for Palestinian Rights.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Division for Palestinian Rights of the Secretariat<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the report of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking note, <\/i>in particular, of the relevant information contained in paragraphs 46 to 68 of that report,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its resolutions 32\/40 B of 2 December 1977, 33\/28 C of 7 December 1978, 34\/65 D of 12 December 1979, 35\/169 D of 15 December 1980, 36\/120 B of 10 December 1981, 37\/86 B of 10 December 1982, 38\/58 B of 13 December 1983, 39\/49 B of 11 December 1984, 40\/96 B of 12 December 1985, 41\/43 B of 2 December 1986, 42\/66 B of 2 December 1987, 43\/175 B of 15 December 1988, 44\/41 B of 6 December 1989, 45\/67 B of 6 December 1990, 46\/74 B of 11 December 1991, and 47\/64 B of 11 December 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Notes with appreciation <\/i>the action taken by the Secretary-General in compliance with its resolution 47\/64 B;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to provide the Division for Palestinian Rights of the Secretariat with the resources it requires, including the continuing development of the computer-based information system on the question of Palestine, and to ensure that it continues to discharge the tasks detailed in paragraph 1 of resolution 32\/40 B, paragraph 2 (b<\/i>) of resolution 34\/65 D, paragraph 3 of resolution 40\/96 B, paragraph 2 of resolution 42\/66 B, paragraph 2 of resolution 44\/41 B and paragraph 2 of resolution 46\/74 B, in consultation with the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People and under its guidance;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Also requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to ensure the continued cooperation of the Department of Public Information and other units of the Secretariat in enabling the Division to perform its tasks and in covering adequately the various aspects of the question of Palestine;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Invites <\/i>all Governments and organizations to lend their cooperation to the Committee and the Division in the performance of their tasks;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Notes with appreciation <\/i>the action taken by Member States to observe annually on 29 November the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People and requests them to continue to give the widest possible publicity to the observance, and requests the Committee to continue to organize, as part of the observance of the Day of Solidarity, an annual exhibit on Palestinian rights in cooperation with the Office of the Permanent Observer for Palestine to the United Nations.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/158 B<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

20 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 85\t<\/span>107-2-41 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

14-nation draft (A\/48\/L.42 & Add.1); agenda item 35.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors. <\/i>Afghanistan, Comoros, Cuba, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Malta, Pakistan, Senegal Tunisia, Ukraine, Yemen.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Financial implications. <\/i>5th Committee, A\/48\/787; S-G, A\/C.5\/48\/43.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 5th Committee 43; plenary 65, 66, 85.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas,, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against<\/i>: Israel, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, United Kingdom.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>A fourth resolution, 48\/158 C, concerned United Nations information activities on the Palestine question.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Public information activities<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The Committee on Palestinian rights(7) followed up on the implementation of a 1992 General Assembly request( 4) that DPI continue its 1992-1993 special information programme on the Palestine question, with emphasis on public opinion in Europe and North America.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>DPI in 1993 accordingly continued to provide press coverage of all United Nations meetings relevant to the question, including those of the Security Council and the Committee, and issued 47 press releases in English and 43 in French containing statements by the Secretary-General relating to it and the situation in the occupied Arab territories. Ongoing coverage of United Nations activities on the question was provided by the United Nations Information Centres, which produced and distributed newsletters, press releases and television news programmes and regularly briefed media representatives. The UN Chronicle <\/i>continued to publish stories relating to Palestinian issues, while the Department's Public Inquiries Unit responded to 324 information requests on the topic. The issue was also included in the presentation made during the guided tour of Headquarters, and the Group Programme and Community Liaison Unit of DPI arranged briefings on Palestine.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Department continued to distribute its publications, including the booklet Building for Peace in the Middle East: An Israeli-Palestinian Dialogue <\/i>and a revised edition of For the Rights of Palestinians: The Work of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. <\/i>Cooperation with the French production company Point du Jour resulted in the production of a two-hour video documentary on the history of Palestine. DPI was currently editing a 30-minute version of that documentary to highlight United Nations involvement, as well as the struggle of Palestinians to achieve their national rights. It further provided feature coverage of various aspects of the question in its weekly radio news magazines, highlighting in particular the deportation of Palestinians. It produced feature programmes on assistance to the Palestinian people and on international protection of Palestinian refugees in Arabic, Bangla, English, French, Hindi, Indonesian, Kiswahili, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish and Urdu.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In cooperation with Greece, DPI sponsored an encounter for Greek journalists (Athens, 27 and 28 April) on the theme of Jerusalem: visions of reconciliation, that brought together 11 international expert panellists. The Department sponsored an international encounter for European journalists (London, 9-11 June) in cooperation with the United Kingdom and supported by The Guardian <\/i>on promoting a culture for peace in the Middle East. Based on those encounters, DPI initiated the production of three publications.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Among its recommendations, the Committee considered that the bulletins published by the Division for Palestinian rights should be expanded and restructured, and that the Division's studies, information notes, reports and other material should focus specifically on the main issues addressed by the Committee to enhance their usefulness. It believed that the information work of the United Nations related to the Palestine question would become even more important. Thus the information programme should follow and reflect the realities and experiences of Palestinians provide assistance to Palestinian media development and continue disseminating information about the just cause of the Palestinian people, in addition to supporting dialogue in the effort to build peace.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 20 December 1993, the General Assembly adopted resolution 48\/158 C <\/strong>by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Department of Public Information of the Secretariat<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the report of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking note, <\/i>in particular, of the information contained in paragraphs 71 to 84 of that report,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its resolution 47\/64 C of 11 December 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Convinced <\/i>that the world-wide dissemination of accurate and comprehensive information and the role of non-governmental organizations and institutions remain of vital importance in heightening awareness of and support for the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Aware <\/i>of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements, signed in Washington, D.C., on 13 September 1993 by the Government of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, and of its positive implications,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Notes with appreciation <\/i>the action taken by the Department of Public Information of the Secretariat in compliance with General Assembly resolution 47\/64 C;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Department of Public Information in full cooperation and coordination with the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, to continue, with the necessary flexibility as may be required by developments affecting the question of Palestine, its special information programme on the question of Palestine for the biennium 1994-1995, with particular emphasis on public opinion in Europe and North America, and in particular:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(a<\/i>) To disseminate information on all the activities of the United Nations system relating to the question of Palestine, including reports of the work carried out by the relevant United Nations organizations;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(b<\/i>)\t<\/span>To continue to issue and update publications on the various aspects of the question of Palestine in all fields, including all information relating to the recent events concerning this question;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(c<\/i>)\t<\/span>To expand its audiovisual material on the question of Palestine, including the production of such material;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(d<\/i>)\t<\/span>To organize and promote fact-finding news missions for journalists to the area, including the occupied territories;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(e<\/i>)\t<\/span>To organize international, regional and national encounters for journalists;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(f<\/i>) To provide, in cooperation with specialized agencies of the United Nations system, particularly the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, assistance to the Palestinian people in the field of media development.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/158 C<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

20 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 85\t<\/span>147-2-2 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

13-nation draft (A\/48\/L.43 & Add.1), agenda item 35.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Afghanistan, Comoros, Cuba, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Malta, Pakistan, Senegal, Tunisia, Yemen.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Financial implications. <\/i>5th Committee, A\/48\/787: S-G, A\/C.5\/48\/43.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 5th Committee 43; plenary 65, 66, 85.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi Cambodia, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China. Colombia, Comoros Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gambia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>Israel, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Georgia, Russian Federation.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Jerusalem<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>In October 1993,(15) the Secretary-General submitted a report containing the replies of two Member States to his request for information on steps taken or envisaged to implement a 1992 resolution of the General Assembly deploring the transfer by some States of their diplomatic missions to Jerusalem and calling on them to abide by the relevant United Nations resolutions.(16) Of those States, Ecuador pointed out that it maintained its embassy at Tel Aviv. Ghana stated that, since it had severed all relations with Israel in 1975, the resolution did not apply to it.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 14 December 1993, the General Assembly adopted resolution 48\/59 A<\/strong> by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Jerusalem<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling its <\/i>resolutions 36\/120 E of 10 December 1981, 37\/123 C of 16 December 1982, 38\/180 C of 19 December 1983, 39\/146 C of 14 December 1984, 40\/168 C of 16 December 1985, 41\/162 C of 4 December 1986, 42\/209 D of 11 December 1987, 43\/54 C of 6 December 1988, 44\/40 C of 4 December 1989, 45\/83 C of 13 December 1990, 46\/82 B of 16 December 1991 and 47\/63 B of 11 December 1992, in which it determined that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which had altered or purported to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, in particular the so-called "Basic Law" on Jerusalem and the proclamation of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, were null and void and must be rescinded forthwith,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling also <\/i>Security Council resolution 478(1980) of 20 August 1980, in which the Council, inter alia, <\/i>decided not to recognize the "Basic Law" and called upon those States that had established diplomatic missions at Jerusalem to withdraw such missions from the Holy City,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the report of the Secretary-General of 25 October 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Determines <\/i>that the decision of Israel to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the Holy City of Jerusalem is illegal and therefore null and void and has no validity whatsoever;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Deplores<\/i> the transfer by some States of their diplomatic missions to Jerusalem in violation of Security Council resolution 478(1980), and their refusal to comply with the provisions of that resolution;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Calls once more upon <\/i>those States to abide by the provisions of the relevant United Nations resolutions, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session on the implementation of the present resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/59 A<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

14 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 79\t<\/span>141-1-11 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

16-nation draft (A\/48\/L.34 & Add.1): agenda item 34.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors. <\/i>Afghanistan, Algeria, Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mauritania, Morocco, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sudan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: plenary 67, 68, 79.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Albania, Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gambia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Vet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>Israel.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining. <\/i>Botswana, Fiji, Ghana, Iceland, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Following the vote, the United States emphasized that, after the breakthroughs that changed traditional approaches to the Arab-Israeli conflict, it was important to avoid focusing on divisive or polarizing statements. It was convinced that Jerusalem must remain undivided, but that its final status should be decided through negotiations. Instead of addressing the issue in the manner of this resolution, the United States said that the parties had agreed that Jerusalem would be considered in the final status negotiations.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Assistance to Palestinians<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In an effort to support the momentum of the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, and in response to requests received from Israel and PLO, the Secretary-General on 8 September established a high-level United Nations task force on economic and social development of the Gaza Strip and Jericho. Members of the task force included UNDP Administrator James G. Speth, United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) Executive Director James Grant, UNRWA Commissioner-General Ilter Türkmen, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Eliasson, Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs James Jonah and Special Political Adviser to the Secretary-General Chinmaya Rajaninath Gharekhan. The priorities of the task force, whose work commenced immediately, were to establish an integrated United Nations approach towards development in Gaza and Jericho, with a particular focus on Gaza, where needs were greatest; to coordinate with other institutions, agencies and NGOs involved in ongoing development projects; and to mobilize international financial support.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Overall, the United Nations system in 1993 expanded its programmes of assistance to the Palestinian people, as requested by the General Assembly in 1992.(17) Summaries of the assistance activities undertaken by 10 bodies and 6 specialized agencies of the system were contained in a report submitted by the Secretary-General to the Assembly, through the Economic and Social Council, in September 1993,(18) and later updated.(19)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In early September 1993, when news of the breakthrough in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations became public, the Secretary-General established a high-level task force to identify new activities and projects that could be rapidly implemented by UNRWA, UNDP and UNICEF, and the United Nations agencies with an established presence in the occupied territories. Those activities would be carried out in addition to the agencies' regular programmes and would be launched as soon as funding was secured. The report of the task force which identified immediate additional needs for the Palestinian people at $138 million, was circulated to the Conference to Support Middle East Peace on 1 October. Conference participants acknowledged that, in view of its extensive operations in the area, the United Nations would be an effective channel for such assistance, especially in the short term.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In addition to implementing projects with an immediate impact on the economy of the West Bank and Gaza, thereby generating new employment, with a resulting multiplier effect, the Secretary-General was committed to strengthening Palestinian institutions, in particular those which would support the Palestinian Authority. On 14 September, the day after the signing of the Declaration of Principles, PLO Chairman Arafat, in a meeting with the Secretary-General, requested United Nations technical assistance in a variety of sectors, in particular for building the Palestinian administration to be entrusted with the tasks of Self-Government. He subsequently requested, in a letter of 10 December to the Secretary-General, United Nations assistance in training the Palestinian police force envisaged in the Declaration.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In response to those requests, the Secretary-General in October dispatched a technical mission to Tunis and the occupied territories, for consultation with the Palestinian leadership. The mission also met with officials in Egypt, Israel and Jordan. The parties welcomed the Secretary-General's intention to ensure a unified and coherent approach in the provision of economic, social and other assistance in the territories. The mission also met with representatives of the United Nations agencies and programmes in the West Bank and Gaza, as well as the World Bank team visiting the area at the time. In the light of the mission's findings, the Secretary-General was persuaded of the need to appoint a high-level personality who would serve as a focal point for all United Nations assistance to the Palestinians in the territories.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Conference to Support Middle East Peace. <\/strong>The Conference to Support Middle East Peace, co-sponsored by the Russian Federation and the United States, was held at the United States Department of State (Washington, D.C., 1 October). Forty-six attending States and international organizations, including the United Nations, pledged $2 billion over five years to finance social and economic development in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. At the occasion of the Conference, the UNDP Administrator stated that the United Nations system was in 1993 providing services and implementing special projects in the West Bank and Gaza that amounted to $250 million, a figure accounting for one third of all public expenditure in the West Bank and about one half in Gaza. The system employed more than 8,000 Palestinians and some 70 international staff. He estimated the cost of additional activities in economic and social infrastructure, education, health, public management and training, social services, agriculture, industry and emergency activities, that were to be carried out by UNDP, UNICEF and UNRWA, at $138,250,000.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In November, the Observer of Palestine welcomed before the Assembly the results of the Conference; meanwhile the Palestinian side had established the Palestinian Economic Council for Development and Reconstruction and had maintained constant contact with donor countries and international institutions. PLO expected more United Nations organizations to establish a presence in the Palestinian territory and further expected their close coordination under the direct supervision of the Secretary-General or his representative.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Secretary-General. <\/strong>According to the Secretary-General's June 1993 report,(8) United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat) prepared and submitted to the April\/May session of the Commission on Human Settlements a report on housing requirements of the Palestinian people(20) as part of a plan for the implementation of a shelter strategy for Palestinians to the year 2000. After consideration of the report, the Commission on Human Settlements on 5 May adopted a resolution by recorded vote, requesting the Secretary-General, in consultation with Habitat's Executive Director and in cooperation with PLO, to take all appropriate measures for implementing a national Palestinian housing strategy in accordance with the Global Strategy for Shelter to the Year 2000. It also requested the Executive Director to take all appropriate measures and conduct consultations with a view to facilitating the training and formation of the Palestinian technical cadres necessary to the secure national housing requirements for the Palestinians.(21)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In implementing its 1992-1994 programme of cooperation for the West Bank and Gaza Strip, UNICEF was committed to providing $2,175,000 from its general resources and was to seek an additional $2,175,000 from specific-purpose contributions, of which almost $1 million had been received during the programme's first year, with additional pledges under negotiation. Major objectives included the reduction of child and maternal mortality, the expansion and upgrading of early childhood development activities, educational improvements, and the extension of rehabilitation services for disabled children, while UNICEF’s overall strategy was to strengthen the implementation capacity of local organizations and promote cooperation among service providers through joint policy planning, information sharing and implementation. UNICEF was committed to providing support to 42 local clinics run by UNRWA to sustain and expand immunization coverage for 200,000 Palestinian children, aimed at controlling diarrhoeal diseases; reaching 500,000 mothers and children under the anaemia control project; strengthening the capacity of 200 local clinics to control acute respiratory infections; supporting 500 primary schools; providing training for 5,000 teachers as well as local physiotherapists and social and health workers; providing physiotherapy to 3,000 children and supporting the rehabilitation of children with psychological and social problems arising from exposure to conflict situations. UNICEF undertook those activities in close cooperation and coordination with international and national agencies, notably UNRWA and the Palestinian Red Crescent Society.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>UNICEF implemented specific programmes of assistance to Palestinian children in Jordan, Lebanon and the Syrian Arab Republic. The programme in Jordan, with annual funding of $200,000 from general resources and the same amount from specific-purpose contributions, was directed at the needs of Palestinians who resided not in camps but in squatter and poor areas of the Amman-Zarqa region and other major urban areas. To better reach this target group, the Fund cooperated with more than 40 international and local NGOs in carrying out the programme which included three components: child and maternal health, education and the urban family. The programme in Lebanon had an approved annual financing level of $350,000 from general resources and the same amount from specific-purpose contributions. Its objectives included the reduction of child and maternal mortality; promotion of early childhood stimulation opportunities and facilities; empowering women with education and vocational skills; and expanding and improving water supply and sanitation, primarily for displaced Palestinians. The programme in the Syrian Arab Republic was based on the same funding scheme as that for Jordan, and comprised three elements: child and maternal health, women's development and early childhood development, while special emphasis was placed on fostering community action and mobilizing the extensive network of NGOs in the Palestinian community.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA), in collaboration with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), fielded a joint project identification\/formulation mission to the occupied territories (10 February-2 March) in order to prepare a plan of action for the rehabilitation of the agricultural sector and to make recommendations for developing the institutional structure as well as to prepare priority project documents. Based on the mission's findings, ESCWA in November completed a study on the rehabilitation of the agricultural sector in the occupied Palestinian territories.(22) The study concluded that, since the beginning of occupation, the policy pursued by the Israeli military authority was to expedite the integration of the territories' economy with that of Israel, to discourage indigenous economic development and to ensure the suppression of any competition that could prove detrimental to Israeli interests. Now the territories were almost totally dependent on trade with Israel, and many Palestinians earned their income either by working as labourers in Israel or through subcontracting work with Israeli firms. The sharp reduction in remittances by Palestinians who worked in the Gulf States exacerbated that dependency. The outstanding issues facing the agricultural sector were defined as confiscations and restrictions, reduced services, lack of infrastructure, market constraints, particularly with respect to access to export markets, institutional handicaps and the absence of planning and coordination. Project documents on land reclamation and development, rehabilitation of deep wells for irrigation purposes, rehabilitation of springs and irrigation canals, establishment of a central laboratory for veterinary services and establishing a dairy production training centre in the West Bank were finalized and annexed to the study.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>At the conclusion of a mission fielded by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) to Egypt, Jordan, the Syrian Arab Republic and PLO headquarters at Tunis, it was noted that the establishment of environmental information systems for the occupied Palestinian territories was a necessary first step for assessing the environmental situation. The mission, which was unable to visit the occupied territories, recommended that such an information system be established with technical, financial and training support and a back-up system at an institution in the West Bank with a sub-centre in Gaza. The findings and recommendations of the mission were discussed by UNEP’s Governing Council, which, by a decision of 21 May,(23) expressed concern over the deterioration of the environmental conditions in the territories, stressed the need for protecting their environment and natural resources and requested UNEP's Executive Director to implement the recommendations. The Council also requested him to complete and update the report on the state of the environment in the territories for submission to the Council's 1994 session, and to provide the necessary technical assistance in Palestinian institutional and self-capacity building, including training (see PART THREE, Chapter VIII). UNEP further participated in a working group on environment (Tokyo, 24 and 25 May), which conducted discussions in the framework of the Middle East peace process.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In accordance with a General Assembly resolution of 1992,(17) the Committee on Palestinian rights devoted its 1993 seminar for the European region(24) to assistance to the Palestinian people. Held at the headquarters of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) (Paris, 26-29 April), the seminar considered assistance to the Palestinian people: priorities and needs and the role and experience of the United Nations system, regional organizations, countries involved in assistance projects in the occupied territories and of Palestinian and international NGOs. The seminar underlined the need for coordination between various donors and United Nations organizations and agencies on the one hand, and the Palestinian central authority on the other. In this connection, it welcomed the introduction of the Palestine Development Programme prepared by the Department of Economic Affairs and Planning of PLO. The seminar asked the Committee to recommend that the Secretary-General convene a meeting of representatives of the United Nations system and PLO officials to consider mechanisms for coordinating and channelling assistance, as well as for deciding on priorities. It finally called for urgent action by the international community to meet the emergency needs of Palestinians living under occupation. ESCWA contributed actively to the discussions at the seminar and gave a presentation that centred on its recent experience and priority areas and projects related to Palestinian development assistance. UNESCO itself granted Palestine under its Participation Programme for 1992-1993 financial aid amounting, in February 1993, to $93,000.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>UNRWA maintained an extensive programme of education, health and relief services and other humanitarian assistance to Palestine refugees (see below, under "Palestine refugees").<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>As to assistance by specialized agencies, the current projects of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) in the territories covered trade union training and vocational rehabilitation for handicapped persons. A continuation of activities was foreseen in other areas, with ILO attaching considerable importance to the extension of its technical cooperation programmes to assist Palestinians. A multidisciplinary ILO mission to the territories in October, which explored modalities of future ILO involvement, received logistical support from UNDP.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The World Health Organization (WHO) cooperated with the Union of Palestinian Medical Relief Committees in completing a study of rural health centres and services in the occupied territories to locate the infrastructure, analyze the services it offered and establish how that infrastructure could form the backbone of a cohesive primary health care system. Work financed by WHO to remodel a maternity wing in the Red Crescent Society hospital in Jerusalem was completed in late 1992. During the period under review, two donations totalling $230,000 were received from Belgium and Italy in response to an appeal for $3.5 million.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>UNDP activities. <\/strong>UNDP’s Programme of Assistance to the Palestinian People in 1993 achieved a substantially increased level of expenditures over previous years. Its overall objectives evolved in response to the rapidly changing political situation and especially the signing in September of the Declaration of Principles between Israel and PLO (see above). To help meet the challenge, UNDP formulated 34 capacity-building projects involving governance, agriculture, industry, urban development, trade promotion, statistics, water, sanitation and environment and gender in development. By the end of 1993, Governments had pledged more than one third of the $75 million required to complete those projects. During the year, UNDP investment in the occupied Palestinian territories totalled $15 million, bringing its total investment there to more than $50 million.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The programme strategy for 1993, formulated in full collaboration with Palestinian counterparts, focused on four primary development areas. The first of those represented a concerted effort to support the public sector, especially in the emerging central governance institutions, such as the Palestinian Bureau of Statistics, local public institutions, municipalities and water departments. UNDP extended assistance to the newly established Palestinian institutional structures to enable them to rise to their substantive challenges. The second area of focus stimulated and encouraged economic development, particularly in industry, commerce and trade, agriculture and tourism. Human development, the third area, sought to alleviate poverty and narrow the social, economic and gender gaps in the West Bank and Gaza. The fourth strategic development objective addressed environmental protection and development.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The programme launched a number of projects in 1993 aimed at economic expansion and employment generation. Six industrial companies benefited from the Business Development Centre revolving loan fund, which also provided technical cooperation to the Palestinian Chambers of Commerce and to vocational training institutions through advisory services. A modern irrigation project provided some 600 farmers in Gaza with irrigation equipment and training, enabling them to save water and increase productivity in a cost-effective manner. Under an integrated rural development project, two villages in the northern West Bank were selected on a pilot basis, with the aim of alleviating poverty, upgrading health and education services, and improving water and sanitation systems. The completion of the Princess Alia Hospital at Hebron and the start of construction on the Beit Jala Hospital brought expanded and improved health care facilities to the West Bank, while ambulances, medical equipment and assistance to the handicapped were provided to various health institutions. The construction of nine schools, mainly in rural areas, allowed better access to education facilities, particularly for girls, improved the physical classroom environment and reduced the teacher-student ratio. As the integration of women into the economy and their empowerment in governance structures continued to be a main thrust of the programme, UNDP launched a project that particularly targeted women and their promotion in the Palestinian society and economy. UNDP designed and began construction of water distribution networks to improve the quality and quantity of the water supply to 20,000 residents of the old city of Nablus and for nearly 100,000 residents of Rafah in the Gaza Strip. The completion of a project to deepen and upgrade the well at Ein Samia provided 200,000 residents with a better and more reliable water supply. Under the water resources action programme, launched by UNDP in 1993, the efforts of a task force of Palestinian professionals was coordinated to plan for and manage the region's water resources.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The World Food Programme launched, in close cooperation with UNDP, a $3.4 million project for emergency food assistance to Gaza's non-refugee population. A joint UNDP\/UNICEF\/UNRWA project was initiated in the context of the Middle East peace process's multilateral working group on refugees to expand community services serving children and youth. The programme provided considerable logistical and advisory support to World Bank missions fielded to the West Bank and Gaza throughout 1993. In July, UNDP published and widely circulated the second Compendium of Ongoing Technical Assistance Projects in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>By a decision of 18 June (25) the UNDP Governing Council took note of the Administrator's 1993 report on the programme of assistance,(26) recommending that it continue to address the serious economic and social situation of the Palestinians, and appealing to the international community, Governments and intergovernmental organizations to expand financial and other support for activities of the programme to cover the projected shortfall in resources available to UNDP’s fifth (1992-1996) programming cycle.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Report of the Mission to Review UNDP's Programme in the Occupied Palestinian Territories <\/i>(10-31 October 1992), which was published in March 1993 stated that Gaza's aquifiers were severely over-exploited and salinated to the extent that wells were going out of operation and water was becoming unpalatable or even unusable for irrigation. That was the core of Gaza's environmental problems, which were compounded by abundant waste water and solid waste throughout the urban landscape. Only 20 per cent of the refugee camp population and 40 per cent of those outside were served by sewers, which posed health risks. UNDP reported a life expectancy at birth of 65 years in the occupied territories as opposed to 76 years in Israel. While the estimated infant mortality rate ranged from 40 to 70 per 1,000 live birth in the occupied territories, it was 10 per 1,000 for Israel. The mission concluded that the constraints imposed by the Civil Administration, insecurity, civil strife and strikes created an extremely unfavourable climate for economic activities, while Israeli practices and the Arab economic boycott hampered exports. The suspension of concessional flows, especially from the Gulf countries, seriously threatened the functioning of public services, while the economic situation in Israel, combined with the inflow of new immigrants, reduced opportunities for Palestinian workers on Israel's labour market. Among its recommendations, the mission deemed it important that UNDP not wait for agreement in the peace process before it launched a more coherent programme, requiring increased financial resources. It should assist Palestinian efforts to draw up an initial development plan, as well as sector plans based on it. An economic adviser of international reputation should be sent to Jerusalem, to be attached to the Special Representative's Office for a period of three to six months. Those initiatives were to involve from the beginning major bilateral donors as well as interested neighbours such as Egypt andJordan, and be undertaken in close cooperation with the World Bank. The mission identified as the main objective of any development effort the strengthening of the self-reliance of the Palestinian economy and people and the gradual movement of Palestinians out of dependency into a phase of rehabilitation and revitalization. UNDP should thus, in accordance with Palestinian priorities, focus on three themes: human resources development, including institution-building at central and local levels; employment and income-generating projects; and infrastructural improvements. Within this context environment, water and sanitation were to receive priority attention. The mission finally recommended the strengthening of the Office of the Programme of Assistance to the Palestinian People in New York so as to facilitate a policy dialogue between Headquarters and the Of lice at Jerusalem on major issues and to ensure the provision of highly qualified technical advice.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>UNCTAD activities. <\/strong>Assistance to Palestinians by the secretariat of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) from March 1992 to March 1993 was intensified in four main areas: monitoring and analysis of Israeli policies and practices hampering Palestinian economic development; investigation of the impact of those policies and practices on the main economic sectors; development of a database on the economy in the territories and information dissemination; and coordination of activities with other United Nations organs. This assistance, including recent developments in the Palestinian economy, the status of the environment and measures to improve it, were reviewed in a July report of the UNCTAD Secretariat.(27) On 1 October, the Trade and Development Board(28) took note of the report.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Within the context of the intersectoral UNCTAD project investigating prospects of sustained economic and social development in the West Bank and Gaza, work was intensified on the preparation of 25 in-depth field studies covering the main economic and social sectors. As part of the project's requirements, work on the secretariat's database on the economy of the occupied Palestinian territory was intensified. A statistical series covering national income, population, labour and employment, balance of payments and external trade for the period 1968-1987 was standardized and classified along the lines of the economic time series in use in the secretariat and stored in its computer facilities for future reference. The series was also published(29) and widely disseminated to research and educational institutions so as to provide a uniform set of economic statistics on the West Bank and Gaza. In September, UNCTAD reported on the prospects for sustained development of the Palestinian economy in the West Bank and Gaza Strip,(30) whereby it assessed the main economic and social problems, identified needs and specific measures for immediate action and outlined prospects for sustained development.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In accordance with principle 23 of the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development,(31) stating that the environment and natural resources of people under oppression, domination and occupation shall be protected, the UNCTAD secretariat initiated an in-depth study of the environmental dimension of Israeli policies in the West Bank and Gaza and their impact on the economic and social situation of Palestinians. Another UNCTAD study on the agricultural sector of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, issued in October,(32) identified as strategic objectives of agricultural development generating the maximum number of employment opportunities; targeting the production process to cater for domestic consumption needs; maximizing the area of land under cultivation; expanding the irrigated farming area; and striving to improve the competitiveness of farmers as regards produce quality, production costs and level of auxiliary marketing services. The study recommended policies and projects in the planning of agricultural development, credit, education and research, land, water, agricultural trade, infrastructure and auxiliary services, diversification of cropping patterns, livestock, subsidiary components, and cooperatives.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>On 30 July 1993, the Economic and Social Council adopted resolution 1993\/78 <\/strong>by roll-call vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Assistance to the Palestinian people<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The Economic and Social Council,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recommends <\/i>to the General Assembly the adoption of the following draft resolution:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

"Assistance to the Palestinian people<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"Recalling <\/i>its resolution 47\/170 of 22 December 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"Taking into account <\/i>the intifadah <\/i>of the Palestinian people in the occupied Palestinian territory against the Israeli occupation, including Israeli economic and social policies and practices,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"Rejecting <\/i>Israeli restrictions on external economic and social assistance to the Palestinian people in the occupied Palestinian territory,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"Concerned about <\/i>the economic losses sustained by the Palestinian people as a result of Israeli closures and isolation of the Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, occupied since 1967,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>“Affirming <\/i>that the Palestinian people cannot develop their national economy as long as the Israeli occupation persists,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"Taking into account <\/i>developments in the peace talks and their implications for the Palestinian people,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"Welcoming <\/i>the United Nations Seminar on Assistance to the Palestinian People, held in Paris from 26 to 29 April 1993 in response to General Assembly resolution 47\/170,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"Aware <\/i>of the increasing need to provide economic and social assistance to the Palestinian people,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"1.\t<\/span>Takes note <\/i>of the report of the Secretary-General;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"2.\t<\/span>Expresses its appreciation <\/i>to the States, United Nations bodies and intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations that have provided assistance to the Palestinian people;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"3.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the international community, the United Nations system and intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations to sustain and increase their assistance to the Palestinian people, in close cooperation with the Palestine Liberation Organization;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"4.\t<\/span>Urges <\/i>the Government of Israel to accept de jure <\/i>applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, to all territories occupied by Israel since 1967 and to abide scrupulously by the provisions of that Convention;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"5.\t<\/span>Calls for <\/i>treatment on a transit basis of Palestinian exports and imports passing through neighbouring ports and points of exit and entry;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"6.\t<\/span>Also calls for <\/i>the granting of trade concessions and concrete preferential measures for Palestinian exports on the basis of Palestinian certificates of origin;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"7.\t<\/span>Further calls for <\/i>the immediate lifting of Israeli restrictions and obstacles hindering the implementation of assistance projects by the United Nations bodies and others providing economic and social assistance to the Palestinian people in the occupied Palestinian territory;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"8.\t<\/span>Reiterates its call <\/i>for the implementation of development projects in the occupied Palestinian territory, including the projects mentioned in its resolution 39\/223 of 18 December 1984;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"9.\t<\/span>Calls for<\/i> facilitation of the establishment of Palestinian economic and social institutions in the occupied Palestinian territory;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"10.\t<\/span>Suggests <\/i>that the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People consider, in its future programmes, convening seminars on economic and social assistance to the Palestinian people taking into account their assistance needs in the light of developments in the region;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"11.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to seek ways and means of mobilizing and coordinating assistance to the Palestinian people, taking into account the outcome of the United Nations Seminar on Assistance to the Palestinian People, held in Paris from 26 to 29 April 1993;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>"12.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session, through the Economic and Social Council, on the progress made in the implementation of the present resolution."<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Economic and Social Council resolution 1993\/78<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

30 July 1993\t<\/span>Meeting 46\t<\/span>   45-1 (roll-call vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

11-nation draft (E\/1993\/L.43 & Corr.1), orally revised, agenda item 4(b<\/i>).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors:<\/i> Algeria, Cuba, Iraq, Lebanon, Malaysia, Morocco, Senegal, Somalia, Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, Yemen.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>ESC 41, 43, 45, 46.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Roll-call vote in Council as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Cuba, Denmark, France, Germany, Guinea, India, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Nigeria, Norway, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The United States rejected the text on the grounds that it was political in nature as well as controversial and would not help to resolve the fundamental issues currently the subject of direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>On 21 December, acting on the recommendation of the Second (Economic and Financial) Committee, the General Assembly adopted resolution 48\/213 <\/strong>without vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Assistance to the Palestinian people<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its resolution 47\/170 of 22 December 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Welcoming <\/i>the signing of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements, including its Annexes and its Agreed Minutes, by the Government of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, in Washington, D.C., on 13 September 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Gravely concerned <\/i>about the difficult economic and employment conditions facing the Palestinian people throughout the occupied territory,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Conscious <\/i>of the need for improvement in the economic and social infrastructure of the occupied territory and in the living conditions of the Palestinian people,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Aware <\/i>that development is difficult under occupation and is best promoted in circumstances of peace and stability,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Noting, <\/i>in the light of the recent developments, the great economic and social challenges facing the Palestinian people and their leadership,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Conscious also <\/i>of the urgent necessity for international assistance to the Palestinian people, taking into account the Palestinian priorities,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Noting also <\/i>the convening of the United Nations Seminar on Assistance to the Palestinian People, held at the headquarters of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization from 26 to 29 April 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Stressing <\/i>the need for the full engagement of the United Nations in the process of building Palestinian institutions and in providing broad assistance to the Palestinian people,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Welcoming <\/i>the convening of the Conference to Support Middle East Peace, held in Washington, D.C., on 1 October 1993, and the establishment of the high-level United Nations task force to support the economic and social development of the Palestinian people,<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the report of the Secretary-General,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Takes note <\/i>of the report of the Secretary-General;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Expresses its appreciation <\/i>to the Secretary-General for his rapid response and efforts regarding assistance to the Palestinian people;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Expresses its appreciation also <\/i>to the Member States, United Nations bodies and intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations that have provided and continue to provide assistance to the Palestinian people;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Welcomes <\/i>the results of the Conference to Support Middle East Peace, convened in Washington, D.C., on 1 October 1993;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Urges <\/i>Member States, international financial institutions of the United Nations system international intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations and regional and interregional organizations to extend as rapidly and as generously as possible, economic and social assistance to the Palestinian people in order to assist in the development of the West Bank and Gaza, and to do so in close cooperation with the Palestine Liberation Organization and through official Palestinian institutions;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>6.\t<\/span>Considers <\/i>that an active United Nations role in assisting in the implementation of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements, including its Annexes and its Agreed Minutes, can make a positive contribution;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>7.\t<\/span>Calls upon <\/i>relevant organizations and agencies of the United Nations system to intensify their assistance in response to the urgent needs of the Palestinian people and to improve coordination through an appropriate mechanism under the auspices of the Secretary-General;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>8.\t<\/span>Urges <\/i>Member States to open their markets to exports from the West Bank and Gaza on the most favourable terms, consistent with appropriate trading rules;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>9.\t<\/span>Suggests <\/i>the convening in 1993\/94, under the appropriate United Nations auspices, of a seminar on Palestinian trade and investment needs in light of the new developments;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>10.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to ensure the coordinated work of the United Nations system for an adequate response to the needs of the Palestinian people and to mobilize financial, technical, economic and other assistance;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>11.\t<\/span>Also requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to submit a report to the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session, through the Economic and Social Council, on the implementation of the present resolution, containing:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(a<\/i>)\t<\/span> An assessment of the assistance actually received by the Palestinian people;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(b<\/i>)\t<\/span>An assessment of the needs still unmet and specific proposals for responding effectively to them;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>12.\t<\/span>Decides <\/i>to include in the provisional agenda of its forty-ninth session an item entitled "Assistance to the Palestinian people".<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/213<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

21 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 86\t<\/span>Adopted without vote<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Second Committee (A\/48\/715) without vote, 13 December (meeting 48); draft by Vice-Chairman (A\/C.2\/48\/L.90), based on informal consultations on 12-nation draft (A\/C.2\/48\/L.18); agenda item 12.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 2nd Committee 12-14, 45, 48; plenary 86.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Assistance to Palestinian women<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In response to the Economic and Social Council's 1992 request(33) that he review the situation of Palestinian women and children in the occupied territory and in the refugee camps, the Secretary-General submitted a report to the Commission on the Status of Women at its 1993 session.(34) In a later report(35) covering developments during 1993, the Secretary-General noted that during that year no missions of experts to the territory, requested by the Council in resolution 1993\/15 of July 1993 (see below), could take place in view of the changing political situation. He stated that despite positive developments and increased hope for peace after the signing of the Declaration of Principles(36) in September between Israel and PLO, no substantive or immediate improvement of living conditions of Palestinian women and children, whose status was profoundly affected by the political consequences of occupation, could be reported.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The number of fatalities and injuries, particularly among children, was significantly higher in 1993 than during the preceding year. UNRWA reported that Israeli security forces were responsible for the deaths of 80 Palestinians from the West Bank, including 8 children, and 120 persons from Gaza, among them 28 children. Approximately one fourth of all fatalities continued to be children under 16 years of age. Palestinian women similarly experienced violence and maltreatment caused by the unrest and armed conflict. In Gaza, 722 women reported serious injuries requiring medical treatment, as did 108 women in the West Bank. Eight of 48 female prisoners suffering from injuries and maltreatment were reportedly denied adequate medical treatment, and 9 Palestinian females were said to have been killed through actions of the Israeli security forces and settlers, among them three schoolgirls under 13 years of age and one 4-year-old girl. Women and children were especially affected by measures of collective punishment.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Israeli-ordered closure of Gaza and the West Bank on 30 and 31 March, respectively, resulted in a substantial rise in socio-economic hardship since some 130,000 Palestinians were suddenly cut off from their income sources, which in turn changed consumption patterns and nutritional habits. Concern was expressed that the percentage of growth-retarded children under three Years of age and the number of child deaths could rise, since protein-energy malnutrition was closely associated with infant and child mortality. The rapidly worsening dimension of environmental contamination and degradation in the territories especially in Gaza, which stemmed mostly from the over-exploitation by Israeli authorities and settlers of the available water resources, the lack of adequate waste management systems and destruction of thousands of olive and fruit trees, presented a direct health threat to the population, in particular to children.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The life of Palestinian families was characterized by frequent separations, and the absence of male family members due to detention, expulsion, imprisonment or death increased the number of female-headed households. That number was likewise high among the Palestinian refugee population since men tended to leave the camps in search of work. Thus, the camps' population consisted mainly of women, children and the elderly, women being the backbone of refugee camp life. According to UNRWA, some 30 per cent of households in the West Bank's refugee population and 20 per cent in Gaza were female-headed. A reported 22 per cent of families qualifying for UNRWA's special hardship programme were headed by women. In addition, family reunification laws led to the deportation of family members, including children, denying them the right to permanent return, while children were even denied registration.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Female-headed households were particularly vulnerable to poverty, as women had traditionally depended on men as providers. Impeded by lack of education, vocational training, skills and employment, and subject to socio-cultural restrictions in their freedom of movement, the majority of Palestinian women could not ensure a living for their families. The condition of widows was exceedingly difficult, not having received sufficient attention regarding de jure <\/i>headship, property rights and guardianship of the children. Social and legal pressures often forced single women and their children to join the household of their kin and give up independent living in the absence of a male head of family. Thirty-seven per cent of the female population married under the minimum legal age of 17, with the increase in such early marriages reportedly linked to long-term school closures and the deteriorating economic situation, which discouraged parents from continuing their daughters' education.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Secretary-General anticipated, however, that the implementation of the Declaration of Principles would have an impact on the situation of Palestinian women as it transformed the region's political perspective. With political developments entering a new phase, the concerns of women could be considered part of the development agenda. All areas addressed in the Agreement, starting from direct, free and general elections for the Palestinian Council to human resources development, environmental protection and communications and media, could benefit from the scrutiny of women. Development projects in agriculture and the setting up of infrastructure, housing, education and health facilities could best be elaborated with the participation of female experts. At the outset, it was of paramount importance to strive for de jure <\/i>equality for women.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Secretary-General stated that the Palestinian Federation of Women's Action recognized the urgent need for women's equality to be enshrined in the constitutional declaration of the national authority and for women's participation in the drafting of laws and regulations and in the new legislature and community life to be guaranteed. The Federation asked for the participation of leading female professionals in the formation of the transitional national government and for a larger proportion of women in principal and subsidiary organizations and institutions dealing with social, economic, educational, administrative and other matters. Its request covered civil rights, education, health provision, the planning and implementation of growth and development and the media.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Adequate funds and resources should be given to women-in-development programmes, and female personnel of sufficient authority should be included in all policy, planning and programming activities, the Secretary-General continued. Appropriate quantitative and qualitative national targets needed to be identified, and while a national machinery for the advancement of Palestinian women was already in place, it was in need of recognition, authority and influence at the highest political level. Women needed to participate in future governance structures and existing development institutions and, most importantly, be involved in the formulation of development strategies. Skills training and gender awareness were important tools for achieving those goals. The most important programme, besides providing adequate health services and improving education, the Secretary-General concluded, was the development of sustainable income-generation activities for women, which required the identification of realistic, feasible possibilities and basic support facilities, as well as support from the international community, NGOs and donor agencies.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>On 27 July, the Economic and Social Council, on the recommendation of its Social Committee, adopted resolution 1993\/15<\/strong> by roll-call vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Situation of and assistance to Palestinian women<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The Economic and Social Council,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered with appreciation <\/i>the report submitted by the Secretary-General on the situation of Palestinian women in the occupied territory and previous reports concerning the situation of Palestinian women inside and outside the occupied Palestinian territory,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>the Nairobi Forward-looking Strategies for the Advancement of Women, in particular paragraph 260 thereof,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling also <\/i>its resolution 1992\/16 of 30 July 1992 and its other relevant resolutions,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Deeply concerned <\/i>about the additional suffering of women and children living under occupation,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Expresses special concern <\/i>about the tragic situation of the Palestinian women in the occupied Palestinian territory, which has been dangerously deteriorating at all levels,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Deeply alarmed <\/i>by the deteriorating situation of Palestinian women and children in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, as a result of the continued Israeli violation of Palestinian human rights and oppressive measures, including collective punishments, curfews, demolition of houses, closure of schools and universities, mass deportation, confiscation of land and settlement activities and denial of family unification, which are illegal and contrary to the relevant provisions of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Reaffirms <\/i>that for Palestinian women, equality, self-reliance and integration in the national development plan can be achieved only through the termination of the Israeli occupation and the attainment of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Demands <\/i>that Israel, the occupying Power, accept the de jure <\/i>applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, to the occupied Palestinian territory including Jerusalem, and to respect the provisions of the Convention;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Appeals <\/i>to Governments, financial organizations of the United Nations system, non-governmental organizations and other relevant institutions to provide financial assistance to Palestinian women towards the creation of specific projects for them, in support of their attempts to achieve full integration in the development process of their society;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Commission on the Status of Women to continue monitoring the implementation of the Nairobi Forward-looking Strategies for the Advancement of Women, in particular paragraph 260 concerning assistance to Palestinian women;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to assist in the review of the situation of Palestinian women using all available resources, including missions of experts to the occupied Palestinian territory, and to submit to the Commission, at its thirty-eighth session, a report on the implementation of the present resolution, containing recommendations and a programme of action aimed at improving the situation of Palestinian women under Israeli occupation.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Economic and Social Council resolution 1993\/15<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

27 July 1993\t<\/span>Meeting 43\t<\/span>   32-1-11 (roll-call vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Social Committee (E\/1993\/105) by recorded vote (31-1-11), 14 July (meeting 9); draft by Commission on women (E\/1993\/27); agenda item 19.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Roll-call vote in Council as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Belarus, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Cuba, Guinea, India, Kuwait, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Nigeria, Peru, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Norway, Poland, Romania, United Kingdom.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

REFERENCES<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

(1)YUN 1980, p. 399. (2)Ibid., p. 426, SC res. 478(1980), 20 Aug. 1980. (3)YUN 1992, p. 401, GA res. 47\/64 A 11 Dec. 1992. (4)YUN 1975, p. 248, GA res. 3376(XXX) 10 Nov. 1975. (5)A\/47\/874-S\/25136, A\/47\/893-S\/25311, A\/47\/911-S\/25464, A\/47\/959-S\/25862. (6)YUN 1976, p. 235. (7)A\/48\/35. (8)YUN 1992, p. 402, GA res. 47\/64 B, 11 Dec. 1992. (9)YUN 1991, p. 221. (10)YUN 1967, p. 257, SC res. 242(1967), 22 Nov. 1967. (11)YUN 1973, p. 213, SC res. 338(1973), 22 Oct. 1973. (12)YUN 1980, p. 427, SC res. 465(1980), 1 Mar. 1980. (13)A\/48\/L.45. (14)YUN 1992, p. 403, GA res. 47\/64 C, 11 Dec. 1992. (15)A\/48\/522. (16)YUN 1992, p. 403, GA res. 47\/63 B, 11 Dec. 1992. (17)Ibid., p. 406, GA res. 47\/170, 22 Dec. 1992. (18)A\/48\/183-E\/1993\/74 & Add.1. (19)A\/49\/263-E\/1994\/112. (20)HS\/C\/14\/2\/Add.1. (21)A\/48\/8 (res. 14\/9). (22)E\/ESCWA\/AGR\/1993\/9. (23)A\/48\/25 (dec. 17\/31). (24)A\/48\/168- E\/1993\/62 & Corr.1. (25)E\/1993\/35 (dec. 93\/19). (26)DP\/1993\/19. (27)TD\/B\/40(1)\/8. (28)A\/48\/15. (23)UNCTAD\/RDP\/SEU\/6, UNCTAD\/DSD\/SEU\/1. (30)UNCTAD\/DSD\/SEU\/2. (31)YUN 1992, p. 672. (32)UNCTAD\/DSD\/SEU\/Misc.5. (33)YUN 1992, p. 876, ESC res. 1992\/16, 30 July 1992. (34)E\/CN.6\/1993\/10. (35)E\/CN.6\/1994\/6. (36)A\/48\/486-S\/26560, annex.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

___________________________________<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Incidents and disputes<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

involving Arab countries and Israel<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

___________________________________<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Iraq and Israel<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>By decision 48\/436 <\/strong>of 20 December 1993, the General Assembly deferred consideration of the item on armed Israeli aggression against Iraqi nuclear installations and included it in the draft agenda of its forty-ninth (1994) session. The item had been inscribed yearly on the Assembly's agenda since 1981,(1) following the bombing by Israel of a nuclear research centre near Baghdad.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Israel and Lebanon<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The overall situation in Lebanon improved at a steady pace during 1993 following the election of a new Government, which put national reconciliation and reconstruction at the top of its agenda. The extension of governmental authority throughout the country progressed further, and the security situation improved as political stability returned after nearly 16 years of conflict. However, continued military and civil violence characterized a tense security situation in the southern part of the country, which remained under Israeli occupation. The area north of the border with Israel and the western Bekaa were theatres for frequent armed confrontations between Israeli and South Lebanon Army (SLA) troops on the one hand and Islamic guerrilla resistance groups, most notably Hezbollah, on the other. Sporadic fighting also occurred involving Israeli troops and SLA personnel. In July, Israel launched an unprecedented week-long military campaign into southern Lebanon, which erased entirely dozens of villages, left some 130 people dead and many hundreds wounded and caused an exodus of an estimated half a million people fleeing towards Beirut and northern areas of the country.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Following the establishment of a cease-fire on 31 July and after consultations with the United Nations, the Lebanese Government, on 9 August, sent an army unit to the area of operation of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) for the purpose of maintaining law and order. The unit, which comprised some 300 personnel of all ranks, remained deployed in garrisons at Qana, Jwayya, Arzun and Bir as Sanasil.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Lebanon continued in 1993 to press for the withdrawal of Israel from that part of southern Lebanon proclaimed a "security zone" by Israel and manned by the Israel Defence Force (IDF), with the assistance of the so-called South Lebanon Army, referred to as the de facto forces (DFF). The boundaries of the Israeli-controlled Lebanese territory—an area along the armistice demarcation line—were determined by the forward positions of DFF and IDF. As of July 1993, the two forces maintained 72 military positions. Within the Israeli-controlled area, Israel maintained, in addition to DFF, a civil administration and a security service with broad powers to pursue suspected opponents of the occupation. Movement between that area and the rest of Lebanon was strictly controlled, and the area remained largely dependent on Israel for economic assistance. An estimated 3,000 jobs in Israel were held by Lebanese from that area, and access to them was controlled by DFF and the security services. In justification of its refusal to withdraw, Israel maintained that its presence was in self-defence against attacks on northern Israel by what it claimed were several terrorist factions, particularly the Shiite Muslim group Hezbollah, which used Lebanese territory as their staging area.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The situation in Lebanon, as well as Israel's and Lebanon's positions on issues related to it, were reflected in the Secretary-General's reports on UNIFIL (see below), as well as in a number of communications addressed to the Secretary-General and the President of the Security Council during the year.(2)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In connection with its requests to the Security Council to further extend UNIFIL's mandate, which was due to expire on 31 January and 31 July (see below), Lebanon reported on positive developments in the country. They included, according to a letter of January,(3) the formation of a new Government headed by Prime Minister Rafic Hariri, which commenced its agenda to broaden and strengthen national reconciliation, accelerate reconstruction and development, and promote national stability and security through social, economic and administrative reform and the liberation of occupied Lebanese territory. In spite of those developments and contrary to the participation of both countries in the peace talks, Israel intensified its efforts to destabilize Lebanon by perpetuating its occupation of the south. Recently, it had uprooted 415 Palestinians from their homes and deported them to Lebanon in violation of Lebanese sovereignty and territorial integrity and the principles of the Charter (see below, under "Expulsion and deportation of Palestinians").<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Throughout 14 months of negotiations, Lebanon worked to secure implementation of resolution 425(1978),(4) which Israel, however, refused to implement. The time had come for the Security Council to demonstrate its clout as the ultimate guarantor of Member States' compliance with international law and invoke Chapter VII of the Charter. In this context, the presence of UNIFIL remained of utmost necessity to provide assistance and international support to the civilian population facing occupation. However, this assistance could not be substituted for the fulfilment of UNIFIL's original mandate as stipulated in resolution 425(1978) to ensure Israeli withdrawal and assist the Lebanese Government in reestablishing its authority.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In July,(5) Lebanon reported that major positive developments had accelerated the establishment of national peace, stability and security on its territory. The Lebanese army and internal security forces deployed throughout the country, with the exception of the Israeli-occupied area, were constantly being upgraded. Law and order were rigorously enforced and travel throughout the country was safe and unrestricted. Those achievements allowed the Government to focus on its reconstruction and development plans, for which the World Bank had approved a $175 million loan. Concurrently, Lebanon was exerting great efforts to resettle thousands of civilians displaced by civil strife, two Israeli invasions and the sustained occupation of the south. Despite the ongoing bilateral peace negotiations which had commenced in Madrid, Israel continued to perpetuate its occupation irrespective of Lebanon's significant achievements in consolidating national unity and central authority. As long as Israel continued its occupation, hostilities and bloodshed on Lebanese soil would persist, while its people would exercise their legal right, as sanctioned by the Charter, of individual and collective resistance until Israel withdrew all its forces in accordance with resolution 425(1978). Lebanon reaffirmed UNIFIL's valuable international commitment to its sovereignty and population which, however, could not substitute for its original mandate as stipulated in resolution 425(1978).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Committee on Palestinian rights(6) expressed alarm at those persistent Israeli air, naval and ground assaults against vast areas of Lebanon in July, which caused the displacement of and high numbers of casualties and suffering among Palestinians living in refugee camps of Beddawi and Nahr el-Bared in northern Lebanon, and Ein el-Hilweh, Mieh Mieh and Rashidieh in the country's southern part.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>During the General Assembly's debate on the Middle East situation in December, Lebanon called it unfortunate that in the face of optimistic developments, it remained crippled by a painful thorn in its side, the Israeli occupation of parts of southern Lebanon and the western Bekaa valley. The international community had permitted that ordeal to continue for 15 years in spite of Security Council resolutions 425(1978)(4) and 426(1978).(1) As Israel and Lebanon were sitting at the conference table at Madrid in 1991, shells came raining down on Lebanon. In Washington, Lebanon was presented with vague promises for future withdrawal, while being subjected on the ground to bombardment for the slightest "provocation", which was, in fact, Lebanese resistance against occupation as sanctioned under Article 51 of the Charter. Such was the case in July and August, when Israeli military, in retaliation for the killing of seven of its soldiers on Lebanese soil, killed 140 civilians, levelled scores of villages and caused the exodus of half a million people in response to Prime Minister Rabin's announcement that a major objective of his so-called "operation accountability" was the displacement of the civilian population and the flooding of Beirut with refugees.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

UNIFIL<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The Security Council twice extended the mandate of UNIFIL during 1993, in January and July, each time for a six-month period.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Established by the Council in 1978,(4) following Israel's invasion of Lebanon in March of that Year,(8) UNIFIL was entrusted with confirming the withdrawal of Israeli forces, restoring international peace and security, and assisting the Government of Lebanon in ensuring the return of its effective authority in the area. A second Israeli invasion launched in dune 1982,(9) radically altered the situation in which UNIFIL had to function. Shortly thereafter, the Council authorized the Force to carry out, in addition to its original mandate, the interim tasks of providing protection and humanitarian assistance to the local population, while maintaining its positions in its area of deployment,(10) which tasks it continued to carry out during 1993. The Force was assisted by the Observer Group Lebanon, composed of 57 unarmed military observers organized from the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization and under the operational control of the UNIFIL Commander.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Composition and deployment<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong><\/i>As at January 1993,(11) UNIFIL had a strength of 5,250 military personnel provided by 10 countries: Fiji, Finland, France, Ghana, Ireland, Italy, Nepal, Norway, Poland and Sweden, reflecting a 10 per cent reduction in its military strength, as requested by the Security Council in 1992.(12) In addition, UNIFIL had reduced the number of internationally recruited civilian staff by 17 per cent. Civilian support was provided by a staff of 524 of whom 155 were recruited internationally and 369 locally. By July,(13) at the beginning of the second mandate period, the numbers had changed to 526, 161 and 365, respectively, while troop strength had decreased slightly, to 5,247.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>UNIFIL remained deployed in southern Lebanon in six sectors: the Fijian, Finnish, Ghanaian, Irish, Nepalese and Norwegian battalion sectors. The entire Norwegian battalion sector was within the Israeli-controlled area, as were parts of the other five sectors. In accordance with operational requirements, the Force adjusted the boundaries of the battalion sectors and relocated a number of positions. In mid-February, the headquarters of the Ghanaian battalion was moved from Marakah to Al Qaranis near Bir as Sanasil. On 16 February, UNIFIL handed over to the Lebanese army an area comprising the villages of Marakah, Jinnata and Yanuh, including the former Ghanaian headquarters complex. Work continued on the new Irish battalion headquarters near Tibnin. Military logistic support was provided by the Swedish logistic battalion, elements of the French composite battalion, the Norwegian maintenance company, the Ghanaian engineer company, the Italian helicopter unit and some civilian staff, especially in communications and vehicle maintenance.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Force Mobile Reserve, a composite mechanized company consisting of elements from seven contingents (Fiji, Finland, Ghana, Ireland, Nepal, Norway and Sweden), frequently reinforced UNIFIL battalions when serious incidents occurred and during rotations. One platoon of the Reserve was deployed in the Nepalese battalion sector.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>As proposed by the Secretary-General and agreed to by the Security Council in 1992,(14) Major-General Trond Furuhovde (Norway) took over as Force Commander on 22 February to succeed Lieutenant-General Lars-Eric Wahlgren (Sweden), who had been appointed in 1988.(15)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Activities<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong><\/i>Report of the Secretary-General (January). <\/strong>The Secretary-General gave an account of developments in the UNIFIL area between 22 July 1992 and 22 January 1993(11) During that period, UNIFIL suffered two casualties due to firing (Ireland, Nepal), while 12 others were injured as a result of firing or explosions. This brought the number of soldiers who had died since UNIFIL's inception to 190 and the wounded to 292.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>UNIFIL continued to oppose attempts by armed elements to enter or operate within its area of deployment, which at times led to friction or violent incidents at its checkpoints. During the review period, 19 operations by resistance groups against IDF\/DFF were recorded by the Force, and other attacks against IDF\/DFF were reported north of the Litani River, in which armed elements employed rockets, mortars, rocket-propelled grenades and AT-3 anti-tank missiles. The use of roadside bombs continued, especially in the Israeli-controlled area. In responding to such attacks or initiating action themselves, IDF\/DFF employed artillery, mortars, tanks and aircraft, often firing into villages. Over 6,000 rounds of artillery mortar and tank fire were recorded as being fired by IDF\/DFF during the reporting period, and 242 instances of their firing at or close to UNIFIL positions, which marked a 67 per cent increase over the previous six months. UNIFIL carried out 180 controlled explosions in connection with a programme to clear its deployment area of various types of unexploded ordnance. It continued to extend humanitarian assistance to the civilian population in the form of food, fuel, water, electricity, clothes, medical supplies, engineering work and repairs to buildings damaged as a result of fighting, as well as providing escorts to farmers. From resources made available by troop-contributing countries, it provided water projects, school materials and equipment, and supplies for social services. UNIFIL medical centres and mobile teams rendered care to an average of 2,000 patients a month, and a field dental programme was established. Its personnel contributed some $11,000 for humanitarian work.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Secretary-General observed that during a period of high tension, volatility and unpredictability, UNIFIL continued to prevent its area from being used for hostile activities and to protect its inhabitants. In carrying out its tasks, the Force was again severely hampered by the amount of fire directed against it, in which respect he appealed to all parties concerned to respect UNIFIL's international and impartial status. In view of UNIFIL's contribution to stability in such a volatile area, the Secretary-General recommended that the Council accept Lebanon's request(3) for an extension of the UNIFIL mandate for another six months, until 31 July 1993.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

SECURITY COUNCIL ACTION (January)<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The Security Council met on 28 January 1993 to consider the Secretary-General's report and the request by Lebanon, following which the Council unanimously adopted resolution 803(1993).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Security Council,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its resolutions 425(1978) and 426(1978) of 19 March 1978, 501(1982) of 25 February 1982, 508(1982) of 5 June 1982, 509(1982) of 6 June 1982 and 520(1982) of 17 September 1982, as well as all its resolutions on the situation in Lebanon,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having studied <\/i>the report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon of 22 January 1993 and taking note of the observations expressed therein,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking note <\/i>of the letter dated 18 January 1993 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Responding <\/i>to the request of the Government of Lebanon,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Decides <\/i>to extend the present mandate of UNIFIL for a further interim period of six months, that is, until 31 July 1993;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Reiterates <\/i>its strong support for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Re-emphasizes <\/i>the terms of reference and general guidelines of the Force as stated in the report of the Secretary-General of 19 March 1978, approved by resolution 426(1978), and calls upon all parties concerned to cooperate fully with the Force for the full implementation of its mandate;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Reiterates <\/i>that the Force should fully implement its mandate as defined in resolutions 425(1978), 426(1978) and all other relevant resolutions;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to continue consultations with the Government of Lebanon and other parties directly concerned with the implementation of the present resolution and to report to the Security Council thereon.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Security Council resolution 803(1933)<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

28 January 1993\t<\/span> Meeting 3167\t<\/span>Adopted unanimously<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Draft prepared in consultations among Council members (S\/25180).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Following adoption of the resolution and consultations among Council members, the President made a statement(16) on behalf of the Council:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>"The members of the Security Council have noted with appreciation the report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) submitted in conformity with resolution 768(1992).\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>"They reaffirm their commitment to the full sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries. In this context, they assert that any State shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>"As the Security Council extends the mandate of UNIFIL for a further interim period on the basis of resolution 425(1978), the members of the Council again stress the urgent need for the implementation of that resolution in all its aspects. They reiterate their full support for the Waif Agreement and for the continued efforts of the Lebanese Government to consolidate peace, national unity and security in the country, while successfully carrying out the reconstruction process. The members of the Council commend the Lebanese Government for its successful efforts to extend its authority in the south of the country in full coordination with UNIFIL.\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>"The members of the Security Council express their concern over the continuing violence in southern Lebanon, regret the loss of civilian life and urge all parties to exercise restraint.\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>"The members of the Security Council take this opportunity to express their appreciation for the continuing efforts of the Secretary-General and his staff in this regard and commend UNIFIL's troops and troop-contributing countries for their sacrifices and commitment to the cause of international peace and security under difficult circumstances."\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n
\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Secretary-General (July). <\/strong>In his report to the Security Council on developments during the six-month period from 23 January to 20 July 1993,(13) the Secretary-General noted that one Nepalese soldier had lost his life as a result of firing and two others had suffered injuries. This brought the number of UNIFIL's accumulated casualties to 192 and of those wounded to 294.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In continuing to oppose attempts by armed elements to operate in its area of deployment, UNIFIL noted an increase in dangerous confrontations between them and the Force. It recorded 63 operations by resistance groups against IDF\/DFF—44 more than in the previous six-month period. Altogether, there were 168 instances of firing at or close to UNIFIL positions, for which the Irish and Finnish battalion sectors accounted for more than 70 per cent. The Force carried out 44 controlled explosions to clear undetonated remnants of war. The Secretary-General observed that during the reporting period, attacks by armed elements against Israel and associated military targets on Lebanese territory were generally more effective than in the past, and the severity of Israeli retaliation rose concomitantly. Despite repeated appeals, the highly escalatory practice of firing into populated areas continued, causing casualties among men, women and children. Meanwhile, UNIFIL ensured to the best of its abilities the peaceful character of its operation area, limited the conflict to the extent possible and protected the inhabitants from the effects of violence. He stressed again that respect by all concerned for the Force's international and impartial status was essential for its effective functioning. He noted with satisfaction the improvement of the situation in other parts of Lebanon, which made it possible to use Beirut's international airport for the rotation of UNIFIL's contingents. The hand-over of a part of UNIFIL's area of operation to the Lebanese army was another step forward. Referring to UNIFIL's contribution to stability and protection in the area, he recommended that the Council accept Lebanon's request of 14 July(5) for an extension of the Force for a further six months, until 31 January 1994.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

SECURITY COUNCIL ACTION (July)<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>On 28 July 1993, the Security Council, having considered the Secretary-General's report and by Lebanon's request, unanimously adopted resolution 852(1993).<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The Security Council,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its resolutions 425(1978) and 426(1978) of 19 March 1978, 501(1982) of 25 February 1982, 508(1982) of 5 June 1982, 509(1982) of 6 June 1982 and 520(1982) of 17 September 1982, as well as all its resolutions on the situation in Lebanon,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having studied <\/i>the report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon of 20 July 1993, and taking note of the observations expressed therein,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking note <\/i>of the letter dated 14 July 1993 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Responding <\/i>to the request of the Government of Lebanon,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Decides <\/i>to extend the present mandate of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon for a further interim period of six months, that is, until 31 January 1994;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Reiterates <\/i>its strong support for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Re-emphasizes <\/i>the terms of reference and general guidelines of the Force as stated in the report of the Secretary-General of 19 March 1978, approved by resolution 426(1978), and calls upon all parties concerned to cooperate fully with the Force for the full implementation of its mandate;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Reiterates <\/i>that the Force should fully implement its mandate as defined in resolutions 425(1978), 426(1978) and all other relevant resolutions;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to continue consultations with the Government of Lebanon and other parties directly concerned with the implementation of the present resolution and to report to the Security Council thereon.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Security Council resolution 852(1993)<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

28 July 1993\t<\/span>Meeting 3258\t<\/span>Adopted unanimously<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Draft prepared in consultations among Council members (S\/26177).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Following the vote and consultations among Council members, the President made the following statement(17) on behalf of the Council:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>"The members of the Security Council have noted with appreciation the report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) submitted in conformity with resolution 803(1993) of 28 January 1993.\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>"They reaffirm their commitment to the full sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries. In this context they assert that any State shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>"As the Security Council extends the mandate of UNIFIL for a further interim period on the basis of resolution 425(1978) of 19 March 1978, the members of the Council again stress the urgent need for the implementation of that resolution in all its aspects. They reiterate their full support for the Waif Agreement and for the continued efforts of the Lebanese Government to consolidate peace, national unity and security in the country, while successfully carrying out the reconstruction process. The members of the Council commend the Lebanese Government for its successful efforts to extend its authority in the south of the country in full coordination with UNIFIL.\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>"The members of the Security Council express their concern over the continuing violence in southern Lebanon, regret the loss of civilian life and urge all parties to exercise restraint.\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>"The members of the Security Council take this opportunity to express their appreciation for the continuing efforts of the Secretary-General and his staff in this regard and commend UNIFIL's troops and troop-contributing countries for their sacrifices and commitment to the cause of international peace and security under difficult circumstances."\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n
\n

Financing<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong><\/i>A report of the Secretary-General on the financing of UNIFIL(18) indicated that as at 31 October 1993, assessments totalling $2,152.3 million had been apportioned among Member States from UNIFIL's inception on 19 March 1978 to 31 January 1994, against which contributions of $2,044.9 million had been received. Additional commitments were authorized in the amount of $146.3 million less applied credits of $22.2 million. The resulting outstanding balance due of $231.5 million included an amount of $19.6 million due from China, transferred to a special account in accordance with a 1981 General Assembly resolution,(19) leaving $211.9 million due as at 31 October 1993. The budget performance for the period from 1 February 1993 to 31 January 1994 reflected estimated savings of $1,194,000.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Voluntary contributions in services and supplies continued to be received from Switzerland. Cash contributions to the Suspense Account, created in 1979,(20) amounted to $9.8 million as at 31 October 1993, of which $1.4 million was received from Switzerland.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>As at 31 October 1993, amounts due to former and current troop-contributing States for troop costs stood at $65.6 million, and an additional $6.2 million was owed to Governments for contingent owned equipment. Unpaid assessed contributions to the UNIFIL Special Account for the period since its inception amounted to $228.1 million as at 31 January(11) and to $228.7 million as at 31 July.(13) Reimbursements due were met only up to 31 January 1991. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In a December report on the financing of peacekeeping operations,(21) the Secretary-General proposed that the General Assembly authorize monthly commitments for UNIFIL for the period beginning 1 February 1994 at the current level of $12,190,000 gross ($11,931,500 net), should the Security Council decide to continue the Force beyond 31 January 1994. Based on those estimates, the amount required for the period from 1 February to 30 April 1994 would be $36,570,000 gross ($35,403,000 net).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) recommended(22) that the Secretary-General be authorized to enter into commitments for the Force in an amount up to $24 million gross ($23.5 million net) for the period 1 February to 31 March 1994, and that that amount be assessed to Member States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In a second report,(23) ACABQ noted that its recommendations were for commitment authority rather than appropriation in view of the fact that the relevant budgets had not been considered and approved; however, consistent with past practice, amounts authorized by the Assembly for commitment could be assessed and apportioned. The Committee further pointed out that in a number of instances its recommendations related only to periods up to 31 March 1994 rather than 30 April. The amounts it would recommend in the future would take into account the performance during the initial months, thereby effecting a de facto adjustment as necessary to the amounts now being recommended.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>In December 1993, acting on the recommendation of the Fifth (Administrative and Budgetary) Committee, the General Assembly adopted decision 48\/464 <\/strong>without vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Financing of the United Nations<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Interim Force in Lebanon<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>At its 87th plenary meeting, on 23 December 1993, the General Assembly, on the recommendation of the Fifth Committee in accordance with the framework set out in its resolution 48\/227 of 23 December 1993, having considered the report of the Secretary-General on the financing of seventeen peace-keeping operations and the related reports of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions, and concurring with the observations of the Advisory Committee:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(a<\/i>)\t<\/span>Authorized the Secretary-General, on an exceptional basis, to enter into commitments up to the amount of 24 million United States dollars gross (23.5 million dollars net) for the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon for the period from 1 February to 31 March 1994 should the Security Council decide to extend the Force beyond 31 January 1994;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(b<\/i>) Decided at that time to apportion, as an ad hoc arrangement, the amount of 22,876,000 dollars gross (22.4 million dollars net) among Member States in accordance with the composition of groups set out in paragraphs 3 and 4 of Assembly resolution 43\/232 of 1 March 1989 as adjusted by the Assembly in its resolutions 44\/192 B of 21 December 1989, 45\/269 of 27 August 1991, 46\/198 A of 20 December 1991 and 47\/218 A of 23 December 1992 and its decision 48\/472 of 23 December 1993, and taking into account the scale of assessments for the years 1992, 1993 and 1994 as set out in Assembly resolutions 46\/221 A of 20 December 1991 and 48\/223 A of 23 December 1993 and its decision 47\/456 of 23 December 1992;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(c<\/i>)\t<\/span>Also decided that, in accordance with the provisions of its resolution 973(X) of 15 December 1955, there should be set off against the apportionment among Member States, as provided for in subparagraph (b<\/i>) above their respective share in the Tax Equalization Fund of the estimated staff assessment income of 476,600 dollars for the period from 1 February to 31 March 1994.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly decision 48\/464<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>Adopted without vote<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Fifth Committee (A\/48\/813) without vote, 22 December (meeting 46): draft by Chairman (A\/C.5\/48\/L.16), orally revised; agenda item 130 (b).<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 5th Committee 44, 46; plenary 87.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Israel and the Syrian Arab Republic<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The General Assembly in 1993 continued to call for Israel's withdrawal from the Golan Heights, a part of the Syrian Arab Republic near its borders with Israel and Lebanon, which came under Israeli occupation in 1967. Israel effectively annexed the area when it decided to extend its laws, jurisdiction and administration to the territory towards the end of 1981,(24) and the annexation was confirmed by a decision of the Israeli Knesset in November 1991.(25)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The issue of Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the population in the Syrian Arab Golan was continuously monitored by the Committee on Israeli practices and was the subject of resolutions by the Commission on Human Rights and the General Assembly (see below, under "Territories occupied by Israel").<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Secretary-General. <\/strong>Pursuant to a 1992 General Assembly resolution(26) calling on the international community to urge Israel to withdraw from the Syrian Golan Heights, the Secretary-General in October 1993 submitted a report(27) on steps taken or envisaged by Member States in implementing that resolution. As at 1 October, replies from Ecuador and Ghana had been received in reply to his notes verbales of 16 August requesting information in that regard.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 14 December, the General Assembly adopted resolution 48\/59 B<\/strong> by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Syrian Golan<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the item entitled "The situation in the Middle East",<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking note <\/i>of the report of the Secretary-General of 25 October 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>Security Council resolution 497(1981) of 17 December 1981,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling also <\/i>its resolution 3314(XXIX) of 14 December 1974, in the annex to which it defined an act of aggression, inter alia, <\/i>as "the invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof" and provided that "no consideration of whatever nature whether political, economic, military or otherwise, may serve as a justification for aggression",<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Reaffirming <\/i>the fundamental principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Reaffirming once more <\/i>the applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, to the occupied Syrian Golan,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Noting <\/i>that Israel has refused, in violation of Article 25 of the Charter of the United Nations, to accept and carry out Security Council resolution 497(1981),<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Deeply concerned <\/i>that Israel has not withdrawn from the Syrian Golan, which has been under occupation since 1967, contrary to the relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Noting with satisfaction <\/i>the convening at Madrid of the Peace Conference on the Middle East on the basis of Security Council resolutions 242(1967) of 22 November 1967 and 338(1973) of 22 October 1973, but regretting that a just and comprehensive peace has not yet been achieved after two years of negotiation in Washington, D.C.,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Declares <\/i>that Israel has failed so far to comply with Security Council resolution 497(1981);<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Declares once more <\/i>that Israel's decision to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the occupied Syrian Golan is illegal and therefore null and void and has no validity whatsoever;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Declares also <\/i>that the Knesset decision of 11 November 1991 annexing the occupied Syrian Golan constitutes a grave violation of Security Council resolution 497(1981) and therefore is null and void and has no validity whatsoever;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Declares further <\/i>all Israeli policies and practices of, or aimed at, annexation of the occupied Arab territories since 1967, including the occupied Syrian Golan, to be illegal and in violation of international law and of the relevant United Nations resolutions;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Determines once more <\/i>that all actions taken by Israel to give effect to its decisions relating to the occupied Syrian Golan are illegal and invalid and shall not be recognized;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>6.\t<\/span>Reaffirms its determination <\/i>that all relevant provisions of the Regulations annexed to the Hague Convention IV of 1907, and the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 <\/i>August 1949, continue to apply to the Syrian territory occupied by Israel since 1967, and calls upon the parties thereto to respect and ensure respect for their obligations under those instruments in all circumstances;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>7.\t<\/span>Determines once more <\/i>that the continued occupation of the Syrian Golan since 1967 and its de facto annexation by Israel on 14 December 1981, following Israel's decision to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on that territory, constitute a continuing threat to peace and security in the region;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>8.\t<\/span>Firmly emphasizes once more <\/i>its demand that Israel, the occupying Power, rescind forthwith its illegal decision of 14 December 1981 to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the Syrian Golan, and its decision of 11 November 1991, which resulted in the effective annexation of that territory;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>9.\t<\/span>Demands once more <\/i>that Israel withdraw from the occupied Syrian Golan in implementation of the relevant Security Council resolutions;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>10.\t<\/span>Calls upon <\/i>the international community to urge Israel to withdraw from the occupied Syrian Golan and other occupied Arab territories for the establishment of a just, comprehensive and lasting peace in the region;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>11.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session on the implementation of the present resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/59 B<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

14 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 79\t<\/span>65-2-83 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

11-nation draft (A\/48\/L.46 & Add.1): agenda item 34.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Bahrain, Cuba, Indonesia, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Qatar, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, United Arab Emirates, Yemen.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: plenary 67, 68, 79.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Algeria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Bolivia, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Chad, China, Comoros, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Egypt, El Salvador, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Myanmar, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>Israel, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gambia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Micronesia, Monaco, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Venezuela, Zambia.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>After adoption of the resolution, the United States expressed disappointment and indicated that it had already outlined its position on the status of the Golan Heights by voting in favour of Security Council resolution 497(1981).(28) Israel and the Syrian Arab Republic would again soon engage in bilateral negotiations, and it was important not to prejudge or prejudice the outcome of those talks.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

UNDOF<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF), established by the Security Council in 1974,(29) as called for by the Agreement on Disengagement of Forces between Israel and the Syrian Arab Republic concluded that year,(30) was charged with supervising the observance of the cease-fire between the two countries in the Golan Heights area and ensuring the separation of their forces. Assisting the Force as required were observers from UNTSO.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The UNDOF mandate was renewed twice in 1993, in May and November, each time for a six-month period.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Composition<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/i>In November 1993, UNDOF had a strength of 1,110 military troops (reduced from 1,124 in May) from Austria, Canada, Finland and Poland, plus five observers from UNTSO. In addition, it was assisted by 85 UNTSO observers assigned to the Israel-Syria Mixed Armistice Commission.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>UNDOF, under the command of Major-General Roman Misztal (Poland), remained deployed within and close to the area of separation, with most of the military component of its headquarters located at Camp Faouar and some elements deployed in Camp Ziouani. Its civilian administrative staff operated at Damascus, while the Force Commander maintained offices at both Camp Faouar and Damascus. The Austrian battalion, based at Camp Faouar, maintained 16 positions (reduced from 18 in May) and 9 outposts (up from 7 in May) in the northern operational area, conducting 26 patrols daily at irregular intervals on predetermined routes. In the southern area, the Finnish battalion, which was based at Camp Ziouani, manned 14 positions and 8 outposts (16 and 6, respectively, in May), patrolling 19 times daily. The military police had detachments at Camps Faouar and Ziouani, in addition to Checkpoint C.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Damascus international airport served as UNDOF's airhead; the Tel Aviv airport was also used. The seaports of Latakia, Ashdod and Haifa were used for sea shipments, while in-theatre air support was provided by UNTSO on request.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 2 August,(31) the Secretary-General informed the Security Council that the Finnish infantry battalion would be replaced by a Polish unit and that logistic support for the Force would be consolidated in the Canadian logistic unit. The Council took note of the foregoing on the same date.(32) The Canadian logistic unit was reinforced on 1 October by 26 men. In addition to its previous functions, it commenced to perform second-line general transport tasks, ration transport, and control and management of goods received by UNDOF, as well as maintenance of heavy equipment, for which reason part of the unit was deployed to Camp Faouar. The Polish logistic unit ceased to function on that date, leaving behind a team of 25 for hand-over and preparations for the arrival of the Polish infantry battalion, whose advance party arrived on 1 November, the full unit being scheduled to replace the Finnish battalion by mid-December.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>A restructuring of the Force was put into effect following Finland's withdrawal of its battalion on 9 December, at which time its operational responsibilities were handed over to the Polish battalion. As a consequence of the restructuring, UNDOF’s authorized military strength was reduced by 88.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Activities<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong><\/i>Reports of the Secretary-General (May and November). <\/strong>Before the expiration of the mandate of UNDOF on 31 May and 30 November 1993, the Secretary-General reported to the Security Council on UNDOF activities for the mandate periods, covering 20 November 1992 to 21 May 1993(33) and 22 May to 22 November 1993.(34) UNDOF suffered one fatality due to natural causes, bringing the number of deaths to 32 since its inception, 19 as a result of hostile action or accidents and 13 from other causes.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The reports noted that the Force continued to perform its functions effectively with the cooperation of Israel and the Syrian Arab Republic. The cease-fire was maintained and the operational situation in UNDOF's area of supervision remained calm. To ensure that no military forces were deployed in the area of separation, UNDOF supervised it from permanently manned positions and observation posts and by foot and mobile patrols operating day and night at irregular intervals on predetermined routes. Temporary outposts were set up and additional patrols were conducted as necessary. In the Wadi Ar Raqqad, new patrol paths were created enabling UNDOF to operate more easily on the difficult terrain. Through frequent patrolling and the establishment of standing patrols, it continued its efforts to prevent incidents involving Syrian shepherds who grazed their flocks close to and west of the A-line. UNDOF conducted fortnightly inspections of armaments and force levels in the area of limitation, accompanied by liaison officers from the two parties. As in the past, both sides restricted the movement of inspection teams, denying access to some positions.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Syrian authorities continued to lay mines and replace old ones along the eastern edge of the separation area. As reported in May, the Polish mine-clearing teams cleared a total area of 21,965 square metres and destroyed a number of other explosive devices. UNDOF assisted the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) with mail facilities and safe passage of persons—a total of 533 between May and November. It also provided medical treatment to the local population within available means.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In his observations, the Secretary-General cautioned that despite the relative quiet in the Israel-Syrian Arab Republic sector, the situation as a whole remained potentially dangerous, unless and until a comprehensive Middle East settlement was reached. Stating in each report that he considered UNDOF'S continued presence in the area to be essential, the Secretary-General, with the Syrian Arab Republic's assent and Israel's agreement, recommended that its mandate be extended for a further six months, until 30 November 1993 in the first instance and until 31 May 1994 in the second.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

SECURITY COUNCIL ACTION (May and November)<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Meeting on 26 May 1993, the Security Council, without debate, unanimously adopted resolution 830(1993).<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The Security Council,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Decides:<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(a<\/i>) To call upon the parties concerned to implement immediately its resolution 338(1973) of 22 October 1973;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(b<\/i>)\t<\/span>To renew the mandate of the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force for another period of six months, that is, until 30 November 1993;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(c<\/i>)\t<\/span>To request the Secretary-General to submit, at the end of this period, a report on the development in the situation and the measures taken to implement Security Council resolution 338(1973).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Security Council resolution 830(1993)<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

26 May 1993\t<\/span>    Meeting 3220\t<\/span>   Adopted unanimously<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Draft prepared in consultations among Council members (S\/25838).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 29 November, the Council, also without debate, unanimously adopted resolution 887(1993)<\/strong>.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Security Council,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Decides:<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/i>(a<\/i>)\t<\/span><\/i>To call upon the parties concerned to implement immediately its resolution 338(1973) of 22 October 1973;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(b<\/i>)\t<\/span>To renew the mandate of the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force for another period of six months, that is, until 31 May 1994;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(c<\/i>)\t<\/span>To request the Secretary-General to submit, at the end of this period, a report on the development in the situation and the measures taken to implement Security Council resolution 338(1973).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Security Council resolution 887(1993)<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

29 November 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 3320\t<\/span>  Adopted unanimously<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Draft prepared in consultations among Council members (S\/26808).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Following the adoption of each resolution, the President stated that he had been authorized to make the following complementary statement on behalf of the Council:(35)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>"As is known, the report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force states, in paragraph 19 [21 in the May report]: 'Despite the present quiet in the Israel-Syria sector, the situation ["in the Middle East as a whole" added in the May report] continues to be potentially dangerous and is likely to remain so, unless and until a comprehensive settlement covering all aspects of the Middle East problem can be reached.' That statement of the Secretary-General reflects the v few of the Security Council."\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n
\n

Financing<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong><\/i>In a December report on the financing of UNDOF,(36) the Secretary-General indicated that assessed contributions apportioned to Member States in respect of the Force—from its inception in 1974(37) to 30 November 1993—and of the United Nations Emergency Force II (UNEF II) (from its inception at the end of 1973 to its liquidation in 1980)—totalled $1,034.1 million, against which $968.3 million had been received as at 31 October 1993. The resultant outstanding balance of $58.6 million included $36 million due from China, which was transferred to a special account pursuant to a 1981 General Assembly resolution,(19) leaving $22.6 million in unpaid contributions.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>UNDOF's performance record for 1 December 1992 to 30 November 1993 showed estimated savings of $706,000 gross ($640,000 net), which the Secretary-General recommended to the Assembly for credit to Member States against their assessments for future mandate periods.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The unaudited UNDOF\/UNEF II financial statement, as at 30 June 1993, covering the 12 months from 1 December 1991 to 30 November 1992, showed a "surplus" balance of $5,109,799, representing excess of income (including assessed contributions, irrespective of collectibility) over expenditure and consisting of interest income ($1,309,685) and other accrued miscellaneous credits including savings from liquidation of prior obligations. The Secretary-General proposed that, until the level of $22.6 million unpaid contributions was reduced, that surplus, which otherwise would be surrendered as credits to Member States under certain provisions of the Financial Regulations, be entered into the Suspense Account set up by the Assembly in 1978.(38)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>For the 12-month period beginning 1 December 1993, the average Force strength would be reduced, due to the Finnish withdrawal, by 88, from 1,124 to 1,036 troops, for an overall reduction of 7.8 per cent in military personnel. Likewise, the civilian staff was to be reduced by 6 to 120, including 84 recruited locally, in line with a proposed 6.7 per cent reduction in local-level posts. On this basis and assuming continuation of its existing responsibilities, the Secretary-General estimated the cost of maintaining UNDOF at $32,160,000 gross ($31,188,000 net) for the 12-month period from 1 December 1993 to 30 November 1994, which equalled $2,680,000 gross ($2,599,000 net) monthly. Accordingly, subject to the renewal of UNDOF's mandate, he requested the Assembly to make appropriate provision for UNDOF's expenses for the period from 1 December 1993 to 30 November 1994.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>ACABQ, in December,(39) concurred with the Secretary-General in his December report on the financing of peace-keeping operations,(21) and recommended that he be authorized to enter into commitments for UNDOF up to $13,400,000 gross ($12,995,000 net) for the period from 1 December 1993 to 30 April 1994 inclusive. However, no assessment on Member States would be necessary in this connection since the cash balance available to UNDOF as at 13 December stood at $30,700,000.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In a second report,(23) ACABQ, pointed out that its recommendations were for commitment authority rather than appropriation in view of the fact that the relevant budgets had not been considered and approved; however, consistent with past practice, amounts authorized by the Assembly for commitment could be assessed and apportioned.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>On 23 December 1993, acting on the recommendation of the Fifth Committee, the General Assembly adopted decision 48\/463 <\/strong>without vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Financing of the United Nations<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Disengagement Observer Force<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>At its 87th plenary meeting, on 23 December 1993, the General Assembly, on the recommendation of the Fifth Committee, in accordance with the framework set out in its resolution 48\/227 of 23 December 1993, having considered the report of the Secretary-General on the financing of seventeen peace-keeping operations and the related reports of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions, and concurring with the observations of the Advisory Committee:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(a<\/i>)\t<\/span>Authorized the Secretary-General, on an exceptional basis, to enter into commitments up to the amount of 10,720,000 United States dollars gross (10,396,000 dollars net) for the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force for the period from 1 December 1993 to 31 March 1994;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(b<\/i>)\t<\/span>Decided that no assessment on Member States would be necessary in the light of the current cash balance in the Special Account for the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly decision 48\/463<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t\t\t\t\t<\/span><\/strong>Adopted without vote<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Fifth Committee (A\/48\/812) without vote, 22 December (meeting 46); draft by Chairman (A\/C.5\/48\/L.15); agenda item 130 (a<\/i>).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 5th Committee 44, 46; plenary 87.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

REFERENCES<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

(1)YUN 1981 p. 275. (2)A\/47\/891-S\/25308, S\/25352, S\/26151, S\/26152, A\/47\/988-S\/26165, A\/47\/992-S\/16192, A\/47\/994-S\/26196, A\/47\/995-S\/26202, A\/47\/996-S\/26221, A\/48\/284-S\/16191, A\/48\/287-S\/26201. (3)S\/25125. (4)YUN 1978, p. 312, SC res. 425(1978), 19 Mar. 1978. (5)S\/26083. (5)A\/48\/35. (7)YUN 1978, p. 312, SC res. 426(1978), 19 Mar. 1978. (8)Ibid., p. 296. (9)YUN 1982 p. 428. (10)Ibid., p. 450, SC res. 511(1982), 18 June 1982. (11)S\/25150 & Add.1. (12)YUN 1992 p. 411, SC res. 734(1992), 29 Jan. 1992. (13)S\/26111. (14)YUN 1992, p. 410. (15)YUN 1988, p. 220. (16)S\/25185. (17)S\/26183. (18)A\/48\/841. (19)YUN 1981, p. 1299, GA res. 36\/116 A, 10 Dec. 1981. (20)YUN 1979, p. 352, GA res. 34\/9 D, 17 Dec. 1979. (21)A\/C.5\/48\/40. (22)A\/48\/770. (23)A\/48\/778. (24)YUN 1981, p. 309. (25)YUN 1992, p. 415. (26)Ibid., GA res. 47\/63 A, 11 Dec. 1992. (27)A\/48\/522. (28)YUN 1981, p. 313, SC res. 497(1981), 17 Dec. 1981. (29)YUN 1974, p. 205, SC res. 350(1974), 31 May 1974. (30)Ibid., p. 198. (31)S\/26225. (32)S\/26226. (33)S\/25809. (34)S\/26781. (35)S\/25849, S\/26809. (36)A\/48\/700. (37)YUN 1974, p. 205, SC res. 350(1974), 31 May 1974. (33)YUN 1978, p. 323, GA res. 33\/13 E, 14 Dec. 1978. (39)A\/48\/769.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

______________________________<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Territories occupied by Israel<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

______________________________<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The Palestine territory and other Arab territories occupied by Israel as a result of previous armed conflicts in the Middle East comprised the West Bank of the Jordan River, including East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip and the Golan Heights in the Syrian Arab Republic. The inhabitants of those territories, which in 1993 had been under Israeli occupation for more than a quarter of a century, continued to reject the occupation as a permanent fact, which was manifested by the widespread uprising (intifadah) <\/i>that persisted during the year. Israel's policies and actions in the territories remained under constant monitoring by the Committee on Israeli practices, whose reports in 1993 reflected a critically tense situation and a high level of violence engendered by the uprising and Israel's suppression of it by military force and collective punishment, including mass deportations of Palestinians despite political breakthroughs at the negotiation table between Israel and PLO.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Transmitting the report of the Committee, the Chairman stated that the civilian population of the occupied territories continued to suffer a heavy toll of casualties due to the disproportionately harsh and violent methods employed by the Israeli authorities to repress the popular Palestinian uprising. Those measures resulted in an increased loss of life and severe injuries among civilians, including small children who clearly represented no security threat.(1) According to the report of the Committee on Palestinian rights,(2) the total number of Palestinians killed as a result of shooting, beating and tear-gas from the beginning of the intifadah <\/i>in December 1987(3) up to August 1993 had risen to 1,240, approximately 25 per cent of whom were children under 16 years of age.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The continued deployment of Israeli undercover units, a further relaxation of the rules for opening fire and the use of live ammunition as well as rubber and plastic-coated bullets led to a greater than 180 per cent increase in fatalities among children alone. At the end of 1992, IDF started to carry out a new form of collective punishment, which consisted of destroying entire neighbourhoods with heavy artillery fire during searches for wanted persons. A number of such operations aimed at capturing a single fugitive left scores of innocent people homeless.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The increase in violence in both the territories and Israel, specifically the killing of an Israeli in the Nissanit settlement in Gaza on 28 March and the killing of two Israeli policemen inside Israel on 30 March, led Israeli authorities to impose a complete closure of the territories on 31 March which virtually divided them into five distinct areas, namely: Gaza, the northern West Bank, the southern West Bank, Jerusalem and-the Syrian Golan Heights. The closure created unprecedented hardship to the population of the territories, the majority of whom already lived below the poverty line. It also deprived approximately 120,000 persons of their means of livelihood, as they were suddenly cut off from $2.75 million per day in wages previously earned in Israel. As special permits were required for entry into Jerusalem and Israel as well as for travel between the West Bank and Gaza and within the West Bank itself, the measure had a seriously negative impact on commerce, medical care, education and access to services, including those provided by UNRWA, according to the Secretary-General's report on assistance to the Palestinian people.(4) In some areas, roadblocks created enclaves, depriving Palestinians living in them of access to their families, work, schools, medical facilities, utility services and places to worship in Jerusalem.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Commerce was rendered virtually impossible, and agriculture was similarly affected by the drop in consumer income, the closure of external markets and the division of the territories itself. Unemployment rose to nearly 60 per cent in Gaza and to almost that level in the West Bank during April and May, as noted in the annual report of the Commissioner-General of UNRWA.(5) Palestinians began liquidating savings and selling personal belongings to purchase food, pay debts and cover rents.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Freedom of movement was further restricted by the continued practice of imposing prolonged curfews on refugee camps and entire localities. Many families requested urgent food aid. In addition difficulty and delay in obtaining permits to circulate from one area to the other prevented numerous farmers from reaching the markets for their products. The closure had a negative bearing on the health situation in the territories, since the most important medical facilities serving Palestinians were located in Jerusalem. It was felt in the education sector as students were prevented from attending classes in areas in which they did not reside, with more than 25 per cent of them unable to register in schools and universities despite the prolongation of registration periods. Those limitations furthermore negatively affected access to both Christian and Muslim holy sites.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Restrictions regarding freedom of expression continued as the Israeli authorities, on 31 March 1993, closed the Hebron-based Al Zahra Press Service for six months on charges that seditious material had been found on its premises. Journalists were often harassed, beaten or arrested when covering confrontations between Palestinians and Israeli soldiers. On the positive side, however, military authorities in June issued licences for a new Palestinian weekly and a new daily to be distributed in Jerusalem and the West Bank.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The administration of justice continued to be a source of concern, as it was characterized by a lack of due process of laws and the frequent absence of basic legal safeguards for the Arab population. In addition, the practice of torture and ill-treatment during interrogation and even after sentencing continued. It was revealed that physicians were required to examine prisoners for the purpose of determining whether they were physically fit for certain types of interrogation practices.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The General Assembly, in four resolutions adopted in December, demanded that Israel desist from taking any measures or actions in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, that were in violation of the fourth Geneva Convention, determining them to be illegal and without validity; demanded that Israel facilitate the return of all deported Palestinians and accelerate the release of all Palestinians arbitrarily detained or imprisoned; and reaffirmed that the Israeli settlements were illegal and an obstacle to peace (48\/41 C). It demanded that Israel accept the de jure<\/i> applicability of the fourth Geneva Convention in those territories, including Jerusalem, and other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967 (48\/41 B), and expressed the hope that, in the light of the recent positive political developments, those policies and practices of Israel which violated the human rights of Palestinians and other Arabs there would be brought to an immediate end (48\/41 A). The Assembly also condemned Israel's persistence in changing the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure and legal status of the occupied Syrian Golan, in particular the establishment of settlements, and determined that all measures and actions by Israel purporting to alter the character and legal status of the Syrian Golan were null and void (48\/41 D). In addition, both the Economic and Social Council (1993\/52) and the Assembly (48\/212) recognized the economic and social repercussions of the Israeli settlements on Palestinians and deplored Israel's confiscation of land, appropriation of water resources, depletion of other economic resources and displacement and deportation of the population of the territories, reaffirming the inalienable right of the Palestinian people and the population of the occupied Syrian Golan to their natural and all other economic resources, any infringement thereof being without legal validity.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Earlier, in February, the Commission on Human Rights adopted five resolutions relating to the occupied territories, specifically on: the situation in occupied Palestine,(6) Israeli settlements,(7) human rights violations(8) and human rights in the Syrian Golan(9) (see PART THREE, Chapter X).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Numerous communications addressed to the Secretary-General throughout 1993 drew attention to an escalation of Israeli acts of repression that caused many casualties and resulted in a dangerously deteriorating security situation in the occupied territories. The reported incidents involved the killing and wounding of Palestinians, including women, youth and children, by Israeli armed forces and settlers. In those communications, the Permanent Observer of Palestine(10) as well as the Chairman of the Committee on Palestinian rights(11) appealed urgently and repeatedly to the Security Council to ensure the protection of Palestinians in accordance with resolution 681(1990).(12)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In view of the serious situation, Egypt, chairing the Group of Arab States, on 22 March(13) requested a formal meeting of the Security Council.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Israel, on the other hand, on 29 March(4) stated that militant Islamic fundamentalist groups, such as Hamas and the Islamic Jihad, as well as PLO, had blazed a trail of bloodshed and violence as a diversion away from the road towards reconciliation and peace. Meanwhile, Palestinians, resorting to stabbings, shootings and stonings, had stepped up their campaign of iniquity. It noted that Palestinians were also targeted, 864 of them having been killed since the start of the intifadah <\/i>and 2,242 injured by fellow Palestinians. On 2 July,(15) Israel, giving an account of an attack against a bus at the northern entrance to Jerusalem, expressed its commitment to doing its utmost to promote the peace process, despite provocations and terrorist attacks.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Reports of the Committee on Israeli practices. <\/strong>As requested by the General Assembly in 1992,(16) the Committee on Israeli practices in 1993 presented three periodic reports—in April,(17) August(18) and November(1)—covering developments in the occupied territories between 27 August 1992 and 27 August 1993. The reports incorporated excerpts or details of written information from various sources, including individuals, organizations and the Israeli and Arab press; oral testimonies of 42 persons with first-hand experience of the human rights situation in the territories, obtained through hearings conducted between 28 April and 7 May at Damascus (Syrian Arab Republic), Amman (Jordan) and Cairo (Egypt); and official Israeli statements reflecting Israel's policies in the territories, as well as reports on measures taken to implement them.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On the basis of the information placed before it, the Committee concluded(1) that the situation of basic human rights and fundamental freedoms for Palestinians and other Arabs in the occupied territories continued to be critical. In violation of its obligations as a State party to the fourth Geneva Convention, Israel continued to implement its policy based on the consideration that the territories it had occupied since 1967 constituted a part of the State of Israel, and persistently imposed its laws, jurisdiction and administration on them. It pursued a policy of annexation which resulted in the expropriation of land, the diversion of water resources, the uprooting of trees and the building of an infrastructure of roads linking settlements. Although Israeli authorities suggested a shift in budget allocations away from settlements, the expansion of existing ones continued.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Detailing its observations, the Committee noted that Israel had been implementing unproportionally harsh measures to quell the uprising and resistance to occupation. It was concerned by the increasing fatalities of innocent civilians, particularly small children, as the result of indiscriminate and random shooting by Israeli troops. Numerous persons who were killed had not been involved in violent actions but were simply bystanders. According to B'tselem, the Israeli Information Centre for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, 125 Palestinians were killed during the first nine months of the new Israeli administration of Yitzhak Rabin, as opposed to 79 during the last nine months of the Shamir Government. The number of children killed during the first six months of the current Government represented a 180 per cent increase in comparison with the corresponding period of the previous administration. In a report published in the Jerusalem Post <\/i>on 18 May, B'tselem maintained that more youths under 16 (a total of 34) had been killed between 9 December 1992 and 16 May 1993 than in any corresponding period during the past five years. The pronounced increase in the number of deaths among the civilian population was attributed to an additional modification of instructions issued to soldiers regarding rules for opening fire. On 31 March, Ha'aretz <\/i>and the Jerusalem Post <\/i>reported the implementation of new measures by the army which included the opening of fire without warning at armed Palestinians. According to instructions issued by the IDF Judge Advocate-General's office, soldiers and other security personnel were now authorized to shoot Palestinians carrying guns even if they did not actually threaten to open fire at them, and in all cases of riots.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>During the reporting period, Israel implemented on a large scale new and particularly harsh measures of collective punishment. Entire blocks of houses and apartments in which wanted persons were suspected to be hiding were destroyed in the search for such persons. Those measures were completely disproportionate to the alleged offence, as they affected several unrelated houses or neighbourhoods at a time. At incidents in both Gaza and the West Bank, the army shelled entire neighbourhoods with heavy artillery fire, including anti-tank missiles and attacks from helicopters. The reason invoked was to avoid Israeli soldiers' finding themselves in a life-threatening situation while searching for fugitives. Many houses were looted during those operations or destroyed by mistake.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Proclaiming the closure of the territories on 31 March, Israel denied all Palestinian-owned vehicles the right of entry into them. Palestinians were forbidden to stay overnight and were subject to a $358 fine if caught. Those restrictions had particularly severe repercussions on health services, since the principal hospitals serving the territories were located in East Jerusalem. In April, Palestinians were reportedly denied access to the only hospital for registered refugees (August Victoria), to the largest and most advanced hospital in the territories (Makassed) and to the area's only ophthalmological hospital (St. John's), all of which were located in East Jerusalem. The closure left approximately 120,000 Palestinians and Arabs without work, and numerous Palestinians who used to work inside Israel were not remunerated for their work during March, compounding an already serious economic situation resulting from the replacement of Arab workers in Israel by new immigrants and the significant decrease in transfers of funds from Palestinians abroad in the aftermath of the Gulf war. The loss of earnings for the population of the territories was estimated at $100 million for April alone. In June, 50,000 residents of Gaza reportedly received food and financial aid from the Israeli Civil Administration. The dire circumstances caused the European Union on 9 July to announce that it would send $2.82 million worth of urgent food aid to Palestinian families in Gaza.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Deliberate economic pressure, which included the uprooting of trees, tax raids and administrative harassment, continued to be applied. The uneven application of laws and preferential treatment of Israeli companies reduced the competitiveness and number of Palestinian enterprises and factories. Unlike settlers, the population of the territories was systematically denied access to water resources and permission to repair old artesian wells and drill new ones. The systematic diversion of water led, especially in Gaza, to its scarcity. The problem of insufficient water was often tied to its excessive use by settlers who were not subjected to any quantitative restrictions, which resulted in an ecological imbalance and increased water salinity, making it unfit for domestic consumption and unsuitable for the cultivation of certain crops.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In view of these policies, the Committee on Israeli practices once again stressed the need for urgent measures to ensure effective protection of the basic rights and freedoms of the inhabitants of the territories. Pending a comprehensive, just and lasting settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict, it recommended: full application by Israel of the fourth Geneva Convention, the main international instrument of humanitarian law applicable to the territories; full compliance with all resolutions relevant to the Palestine question adopted by the United Nations and by ILO, UNESCO and WHO; full Israeli cooperation with ICRC in its efforts to gain access to and protect detained persons; full support by member States of ICRC activities on behalf of the unprecedentedly increasing number of detained persons, as well as of UNRWA activities on behalf of the refugee population; and full respect by the Israeli authorities of UNRWA's privileges and immunities. The Committee further recommended renewed efforts by Member States to convince Israel of the need for increased human rights protection through international monitoring, inter alia by granting it access to the territories; and full recognition of the need to give priority consideration in the peace negotiations to protection of the population's basic rights.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Consideration by the Committee on Palestinian rights. <\/strong>The Committee on Palestinian rights,(4) while welcoming the positive developments between Israel and PLO, remained greatly concerned at the continued grave situation in the occupied Palestinian territories and called on Israel to recognize the applicability of the fourth Geneva Convention, implement its provisions immediately, and restore respect for human rights. In particular, it called on Israel to end the shooting of unarmed demonstrators by IDF and its undercover activities, which had resulted in many summary executions; to release all political prisoners and detainees; and to end the imposition of collective punishments such as curfews, closures of the territories, the destruction or sealing of houses and the deportation of Palestinians, calling for the return of all those deported since 1967. It further called on Israel, pending its complete withdrawal from the territories, including Jerusalem, immediately to end its confiscation of Palestinian land and its settlement activities, including the building of roads and control over water resources, and to repeal military orders restricting political, economic and social activities by Palestinians.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Reports reaching the Committee left no doubt that the continuation of occupation, buttressed by armed force, increasingly endangered the very fabric of Palestinian society and its livelihood, and resulted in grave human rights violations. In this context, the Committee welcomed the appointment by the Commission on Human Rights of a Special Rapporteur mandated to investigate Israel's violations of the principles and bases of international law, international humanitarian law and the fourth Geneva Convention (see PART THREE, Chapter X). Also reported was the continuation of repressive measures by the occupation forces and armed settlers despite the ongoing peace process and the election of a new Israeli Government in 1992. The Committee expressed great concern that the number of Palestinians killed by the armed forces or their agents following the killings of Israelis had risen sharply in the year under review. Since the beginning of the intifadah<\/i>(3) until August 1993, the total number of Palestinian casualties by shooting, beating or tear-gas had risen to 1,240, while 130,000 were estimated to have been injured.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Committee noted an intensification of the campaign by the previous Israeli Government to pursue persons declared as "wanted" by the authorities, primarily through increased harassment of their families, increased use of large-scale military operations using excessive force and the application of Israel's military order No. 1076 of April 1992, which permitted a seven-year prison term without trial for failure to respond to a summons, as well as the widespread use of undercover units engaged in extrajudicial killings. Military assaults against the homes of fugitives, using large-calibre machine-gun ammunition, anti-tank missiles and dynamite, took place in February and April in Gaza, thereby rendering hundreds of Palestinians homeless. The Committee furthermore deplored that in October, after the signing of the Declaration of Principles, a similar attack took place, in which the homes of another 18 families in Gaza were blasted. Human rights organizations reported that from the intifadah's <\/i>beginning to August 1993, more than 2,400 homes had been demolished or sealed, over 166,000 trees had been uprooted, and curfews had been imposed in more than 12,000 instances.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>According to the Committee, the closure in March of the West Bank, including Jerusalem, and Gaza had a particularly negative effect on the Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem, who became almost totally isolated and deprived of any freedom of movement.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Committee also observed with the greatest concern the rapid worsening of the environmental situation in the territories, due mostly to over-exploitation by Israeli authorities and settlers of the water resources, the lack of an adequate waste management system and the destruction of thousands of olive and fruit trees. Contamination and degradation of the environment reached especially severe proportions in the overpopulated Gaza Strip, where the problem acquired crisis dimensions representing a direct health threat to the population, especially children.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Secretary-General. <\/strong>The Secretary-General reported to the General Assembly in October 1993(19) that Israel had not replied to his July request for information on steps taken or envisaged to implement a 1992 Assembly resolution(16) demanding inter alia <\/i>that Israel allow the Committee on Israeli practices access to the occupied territories and condemning certain Israeli policies and practices there. He also drew the attention of States and international organizations, including the specialized agencies, to the Assembly's call not to recognize any changes carried out by Israel in the territories and to avoid actions, including those in the field of aid, that might be used by Israel in its annexation or other policies.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Secretary-General noted that, in response to the resolution's request that he ensure the widest circulation of the reports of the Committee and of information on its activities and findings, DPI continued to provide press coverage of all meetings of the Special Committee on Israeli practices and of the Commission on Human Rights, published stories relating to Palestinian issues in the UN Chronicle, <\/i>covered various aspects of the Palestine question in weekly radio news and feature programmes, continued distributing its booklet Life of Palestinians under Israeli Occupation<\/i>(20) and publicized the Committee's 1993 mission to the Middle East. (For further details on DPI activities, see above, under "Public information activities".)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Following consideration of the report of the Committee on Israeli practices and acting on the recommendation of the Fourth (Special Political and Decolonization) Committee, the General Assembly, on 10 December 1993, adopted resolution 48\/41 A <\/strong>by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Guided <\/i>by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Guided also <\/i>by the principles of international humanitarian law, in particular the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, as well as international standards of human rights, in particular the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenants on Human Rights,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its relevant resolutions, including resolution 2443(XXIII) of 19 December 1968, and relevant resolutions of the Commission on Human Rights,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling also <\/i>relevant resolutions of the Security Council,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Aware <\/i>of the uprising (intifadah) <\/i>of the Palestinian people,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Convinced<\/i> that occupation itself represents a primary violation of human rights,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the reports of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories and the relevant reports of the Secretary-General,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Noting <\/i>the signing of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements, including its Annexes, and its Agreed Minutes, by the Government of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization at Washington, D.C., on 13 September 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Commends <\/i>the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories for its efforts in performing the tasks assigned to it by the General Assembly and for its impartiality;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Demands <\/i>that Israel cooperate with the Special Committee in implementing its mandate;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Deplores <\/i>the policies and practices of Israel violating the human rights of the Palestinian people and other Arabs of the occupied territories, as reflected in the reports of the Special Committee covering the reporting period;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Expresses the hope <\/i>that, in the light of the recent positive political developments, those policies and practices will be brought to an end immediately;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Special Committee, pending complete termination of the Israeli occupation, to continue to investigate Israeli policies and practices in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, and other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, to consult, as appropriate, with the International Committee of the Red Cross according to its regulations in order to ensure that the welfare and human rights of the peoples of the occupied territories are safeguarded and to report to the Secretary-General as soon as possible and whenever the need arises thereafter;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>6.\t<\/span>Also requests <\/i>the Special Committee to submit regularly to the Secretary-General periodic reports on the current situation in the occupied Palestinian territory;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>7.\t<\/span>Further requests <\/i>the Special Committee to continue to investigate the treatment of prisoners in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, and other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>8.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(a<\/i>)\t<\/span>To provide all necessary facilities to the Special Committee, including those required for its visits to the occupied territories, so that it may investigate the Israeli policies and practices referred to in the present resolution;<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t\t<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(b<\/i>)\t<\/span>To continue to make available such additional staff as may be necessary to assist the Special Committee in the performance of its tasks;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(c<\/i>)\t<\/span>To circulate regularly to Member States the periodic reports mentioned in paragraph 6 above;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(d<\/i>)\t<\/span>To ensure the widest circulation of the reports of the Special Committee and of information regarding its activities and findings, by all means available, through the Department of Public Information of the Secretariat and, where necessary, to reprint those reports of the Special Committee that are no longer available;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>(e<\/i>)\t<\/span>To report to the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session on the tasks entrusted to him in the present resolution;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>9.\t<\/span>Decides <\/i>to include in the provisional agenda of its forty-ninth session the item entitled "Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories".<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/41 A<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

10 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 75\t<\/span>93-2-65 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Fourth Committee (A\/48\/647) by recorded vote (81-2-52), 8 December (meeting 27); 16-nation draft (A\/C.4\/48\/L.32); agenda item 86.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors. <\/i>Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Cuba, Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mauritania, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 4th Committee 20, 21, 27; plenary 75.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Cape Verde,* Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Gambia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Pens, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zaire, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>Israel, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Canada, Central African Republic, Congo, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Grenada, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Finland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Samoa, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Swaziland, Sweden, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, United Kingdom, Uruguay.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>*Later advised the Secretariat it had intended to abstain.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On the same date, the Assembly adopted resolution 48\/41 C<\/strong>, as recommended by the Fourth Committee, also by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Bearing in mind <\/i>the relevant resolutions of the Security Council,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its relevant resolutions and the resolutions of the Commission on Human Rights,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Aware <\/i>of the responsibility of the international community to promote human rights and ensure respect for international law,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Reaffirming <\/i>the principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Gravely concerned <\/i>about the violations of the human rights of the Palestinian people, as described in the reports of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories, especially in the fields of collective punishment, closure of areas, annexation, establishment of settlements and mass deportation,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Gravely concerned also<\/i> about the situation in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, and the other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, resulting from the measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, designed to change the legal status, geographical nature and demographic composition of those territories,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Concerned <\/i>about the dangerous situation resulting from actions taken by the illegal, armed settlers in the occupied territory,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Convinced <\/i>of the positive impact of an international presence in the occupied Palestinian territory to ensure compliance with the provisions of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Reaffirming <\/i>the applicability of the Convention to the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem and the other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Welcoming <\/i>the signing of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements, including its Annexes, and its Agreed Minutes, by the Government of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, at Washington, D.C., on 13 September 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Determines <\/i>that all measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, in violation of the relevant provisions of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and contrary to the relevant resolutions of the Security Council are illegal and have no validity, and demands that Israel desist forthwith from taking any such measures or actions;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Demands <\/i>that Israel, the occupying Power, facilitate the return of all Palestinians deported from the occupied Palestinian territory since 1967;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Calls upon <\/i>Israel, the occupying Power, to accelerate the release of all Palestinians arbitrarily detained or imprisoned;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Calls <\/i>for complete respect by the occupying Power of all fundamental freedoms of the Palestinian people, such as the freedom of education, including the free operation of schools, universities and other educational institutions;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Reaffirms <\/i>that the Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, and the other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967 are illegal and an obstacle to peace;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>6.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session on the implementation of the present resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/41 C<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

10 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 75\t<\/span>106-248 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Fourth Committee (A\/48\/647) by recorded vote (96-2-36), 8 December (meeting 27); 16-nation draft (A\/C.4\/48\/L.34); agenda item 86.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Cuba, Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mauritania, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 4th Committee 20, 21, 27; plenary 75.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Afghanistan, Algeria, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, France, Gambia, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Leo People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Omen, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zaire, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>Israel, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Barbados, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Central African Republic, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kenya, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Netherlands, Norway, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Merino, Slovakia, Slovenia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, United Kingdom.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In the Fourth Committee, Israel said the draft resolutions based on the report of the Committee on Israeli practices, though somewhat modified, ignored the recently signed Declaration of Principles and disregarded the understandings reached. Moreover, they touched on the subjects of boundaries, settlements and Jerusalem, which should properly be discussed only in the negotiations stipulated in the Declaration. The resolutions under consideration prejudged the outcome of the negotiations. Since the Committee on Israeli practices was established in 19608 in an atmosphere of open hostility, it should be disbanded and the resolutions based on its reports discontinued.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Fourth Geneva Convention<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Committee on Israeli practices. <\/strong>In its November 1993 report,(1) the Committee on Israeli practices underlined that the fourth Geneva Convention stipulated that military occupation was to be considered a temporary, de facto situation giving no right whatsoever to the occupying Power over the territorial integrity of the territories it occupied. The Israeli authorities, however, continued to pursue their policy of annexation, which resulted in the expropriation of land, diversion of water resources, uprooting of trees and building of an infrastructure of roads linking its settlements, in violation of the Convention. Thus, the Committee recommended full application by Israel of the Convention as the main international instrument of humanitarian law applicable to the territories, which had been repeatedly reaffirmed by the Security Council, the General Assembly and other relevant United Nations organs.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Secretary-General. <\/strong>In October 1993,(21) the Secretary-General informed the Assembly that Israel had not replied to his April request for information on steps taken or envisaged to implement a 1992 Assembly resolution(22) demanding that it accept the de jure <\/i>applicability of the fourth Geneva Convention and comply with its provisions in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, and other Arab territories it had occupied since 1967.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 10 December 1993, on the recommendation of the Fourth Committee, the General Assembly adopted resolution 48\/41 B<\/strong> by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Bearing in mind <\/i>the relevant resolutions of the Security Council,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its relevant resolutions,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the reports of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories and the relevant reports of the Secretary-General,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Considering <\/i>that the promotion of respect for the obligations arising from the Charter of the United Nations and other instruments and rules of international law is among the basic purposes and principles of the United Nations,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Stressing <\/i>that Israel, the occupying Power, should strictly comply with its obligations under international law,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Reaffirms <\/i>that the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, is applicable to the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, and other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Demands <\/i>that Israel accept the de jure <\/i>applicability of the Convention in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, and other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, and that it comply scrupulously with the provisions of the Convention;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Calls upon <\/i>all States parties to the Convention, in accordance with article 1 common to the four Geneva Conventions, to exert all efforts in order to ensure respect for its provisions by Israel, the occupying Power, in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, and other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session on the implementation of the present resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/41 B<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

10 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 75\t<\/span>152-1-6 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Fourth Committee (A\/48\/647) by recorded vote (130-1-7), 8 December (meeting 27); 17-nation draft (A\/C.4\/48\/L.33); agenda item 86.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Cuba, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mauritania, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 4th Committee 20, 21, 27; plenary 75.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Afghanistan, Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marina, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zaire, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>Israel.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Central African Republic, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Russian Federation, Samoa, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Expulsion deportation of Palestinians<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>As the latest incident in a series of expulsions and deportations, Israel had, on 17 December 1992,(23) expelled on alleged security grounds 415 Palestinians, in violation of article 49 of the fourth Geneva Convention, from the occupied territories to Marj al Zahour in its so-called security zone in southern Lebanon, apparently in punishment for the recent killing of an Israeli soldier. The deportation was to be for a period of two years. On the following day, the Security Council adopted resolution 799(1992),(24) by which it demanded the immediate return to the territories of all those deported. It was not before December 1993 that Israel heeded the Council's demand and allowed the return of the last remaining deportees.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Secretary-General. <\/strong>Pursuant to resolution 799(1992), the Secretary-General on 25 January submitted a report(25) on developments in the deportation case. He had informed Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres of his decision to send the Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, James Jonah, to the region, and expressed hope that a solution would be achieved in conformity with the position unanimously adopted by the Security Council.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Under-Secretary-General visited the area from 27 to 30 December 1992. While in Israel, he held extensive discussions with Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and the Foreign Minister. In Jerusalem, he met with a group of Palestinians, led by Faisal Husseini, the head of the Palestinian delegation to the peace talks with Israel. In Lebanon, he convened with President Elias Hrawi and Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, as well as with the Minister of Health and Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs, Marwan Hamadieh. Although he was prevented from meeting with the deportees themselves, the Under-Secretary-General met with representatives of their families, at their request, as well as with Israeli families who had suffered from acts of terrorism. In addition, he was briefed by representatives of UNIFIL and UNRWA, it being noted that 16 of the deportees were UNRWA staff members.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 2 January 1993, Mr. Jonah briefed the Secretary-General in Addis Ababa on his discussions in the region, which had been inconclusive because it had not proved possible to persuade Israel to fulfill its obligations under resolution 799(1992). The Secretary-General subsequently informed Prime Minister Rabin of his intention to deploy a second mission, led by his Special Political Adviser and representative to the multilateral Middle East talks, Under-Secretary-General Chinmaya Gharekhan, in order to achieve a solution in accordance with the will of the Security Council. On 4 January, the Secretary-General conveyed to the Council President that an important principle was at stake, as Israel's deportation of 415 Palestinian civilians was illegal under international law, in contravention of the fourth Geneva Convention and in fundamental disregard of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights,(26) as well as of repeated Council resolutions, most recently resolution 799(1992). The Secretary-General regretted that Mr. Jonah's mission had been unsuccessful, which was attributable to Israel's non-compliance with that resolution. Recalling the unanimous and unequivocal position taken by the Council in that resolution, he said there was no alternative to the safe and immediate return to the territories of all those deported. If Israel did not recognize the need to comply with resolution 799(1992), he might have to recommend that the Council consider taking further steps to ensure respect for its decision.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Secretary-General briefed Mr. Gharekhan at Cairo on 6 January about his renewed mission, stressing that, in his discussions with Israel, he should focus solely on implementation of resolution 799(1992). While the United Nations was concerned over the humanitarian plight of the deportees, this aspect was not addressed by the Council. Rather, it was appropriate for ICRC, which under the fourth Geneva Convention had special responsibility for civilians under occupation, to address the humanitarian needs of the deportees.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Visiting Israel from 7 to 12 January, Under–Secretary-General Gharekhan conferred extensively with Israeli authorities, including the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister. The Prime Minister emphasized that the "temporary expulsion" could not be rescinded. The decision had been taken in the light of acts of violence by supporters of the Hamas and Islamic Jihad movements against Israeli citizens, which had culminated in the kidnapping and murder of an Israeli border policeman. He mentioned that a number of petitions had been filed with the Israeli High Court of Justice, including one that challenged the legality of the deportation decision which, unlike previous ones, did not stem from the British Mandatory Emergency Regulations of 1945. Should the High Court rule that the decision was illegal, the deportees would be returned. Otherwise, each expelled individual had the right to appeal. In Israel's opinion, the expulsion orders were not inconsistent with the position taken by the Security Council. All those deported would be permitted to return, as requested by the Council; the only difference was regarding the timing. Each deportee had been informed, at the time of his expulsion, of the period he would have to remain away. If the Council were to adopt measures against Israel, it might lead to a collapse of the peace process, for which the Council would be held responsible.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>For his part, Mr. Gharekhan underlined that the objective of his mission was to find a solution in accordance with resolution 799(1992). If Israel failed to fulfil its obligations under that resolution, the Secretary-General would have no choice but to submit an unambiguous report to the Security Council as a follow-up to his 4 January communication to its President. He firmly rejected the view that the Council could be held responsible for a collapse in the Middle East peace process. Should such an eventuality arise, Israel alone would be responsible. Israel could place the deportees in prison or under administrative detention, which, at least, would not violate the fourth Geneva Convention. During his visit to Jerusalem, Mr. Gharekhan met, at their request, with a representative group of Palestinians led by Faisal Husseini, who said that unless the deportees were permitted to return, the Palestinian delegation would not resume peace talks with Israel.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>While his mission did not concern humanitarian matters, the Under-Secretary-General conferred twice with the head of the ICRC delegation at Tel Aviv, who briefed him on the visit of ICRC to the deportees on 9 January, which had been agreed to on a one-time basis by Lebanon, Israel and UNIFIL. The ICRC delegate and the medical doctor conducting the visit had decided, and were given permission by Israel, to evacuate two deportees on humanitarian grounds. One, a 16-year-old boy, had been expelled "by mistake", while the other was evacuated for medical reasons.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 13 January, the Secretary-General met in Paris with the Israeli Foreign Minister, reiterating to him the need for Israel to comply immediately with the Security Council decision. On the following day, agreement was reached with the Prime Minister to send Mr. Gharekhan again to Jerusalem in a further effort to secure implementation of resolution 799(1992).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>During the Under-Secretary-General's return trip to Israel, from 19 to 22 January, he again met with the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister. In the meantime, the Israeli High Court, on 17 January, had begun consideration of the appeal challenging the deportation order's legality. As at the date of the present report, the Court hearings were continuing. Mr. Gharekhan again received a group of Palestinians who expressed support for the efforts of the Secretary-General and demanded implementation of resolution 799(1992) without delay. The Palestinians reiterated their position that they could not take part in the peace talks unless the deportation issue was resolved.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Summing up his observations, the Secretary-General underlined that in order to understand fully the gravity of the situation addressed in resolution 799(1992), it was important to recall that the deportations of 17 December 1992 were only the most recent in a series of Israeli violations of the fourth Geneva Convention. To ensure the safety and protection of Palestinian civilians under Israeli occupation, he intended to initiate discussions with Israel regarding the establishment of a United Nations monitoring mechanism in the occupied territories, as suggested by the Council in resolution 681(1990).(12) The Palestinians' need for safety and protection had to be met regardless of progress in the peace talks.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Israel's refusal to ensure the safe and immediate return of the deportees challenged, in the Secretary-General's view, the authority of the Security Council. Additionally, there was a growing perception throughout the international community that the Council, by not pressing for Israeli compliance, did not attach equal importance to the implementation of all of its decisions. In these circumstances, he would be failing in his duty by not recommending that the Council take whatever measures were required to ensure that its unanimous decision, as set out in resolution 799(1992), was respected. The developments outlined above underscored the need to achieve a comprehensive, just and lasting Middle East peace, and the international community should spare no effort in its pursuit of a settlement. For his own part, the Secretary-General remained committed to doing everything possible to help in that endeavour.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Committee on Israeli practices. <\/strong>The Committee on Israeli practices(1) reported that, as at August 1993, 396 deportees still remained at the Marj al Zahour tent camp.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 28 January, Israel's High Court of Justice had ruled the expulsion order to be invalid but indicated that Israel was not obliged to return the deportees and allowed the order to remain in force because of an emergency mandatory regulation providing for individual deportations. The judges concluded that the deportations amounted to 415 individual expulsions, with each man deported on the basis of evidence brought against him. The Committee emphasized, however, that under article 49 of the fourth Geneva Convention, individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not were prohibited, regardless of their motive. On 1 February, the Israeli Government voted unanimously to allow some 100 selected deportees to return and reduced the duration of expulsion of those remaining by half. The deportees refused this "package deal", and 396 remained at the Marj al Zahour camp; but in August, they accepted Israel's offer to allow them to return from exile in two stages.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In another case, Israel announced on 28 April that it would allow 30 long-term Palestinian deportees to return to the territories, of whom the first 15 returned on 30 April, with the rest returning on 3 May.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Consideration by the Committee on Palestinian rights. <\/strong>The Committee on Palestinian rights, extremely concerned by the deportation of the 415 Palestinians, on 21 January adopted a statement(27) by which it strongly condemned that action as contrary to the fourth Geneva Convention and numerous Security Council resolutions. The Committee noted that the deportees were enduring extremely harsh conditions, being exposed to winter weather and lacking adequate food, water and medical care. They also faced the threat of possible violent actions, including artillery shelling, from Israeli or Israeli-controlled forces. The Committee called on the Security Council to take all necessary measures, including the application of Chapter VII of the Charter, to bring about the implementation of resolution 799(1992). It again urgently appealed to the Council to provide protection to Palestinians in the territories, including Jerusalem, in accordance with the fourth Geneva Convention, and in particular with resolution 681(1990).(12)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In its November report,(2) the Committee expressed the view that in spite of having permitted some of the deportees to return to their homes Israel had yet to implement resolution 799(1992).(24)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Communications. <\/strong>In a memorandum(28) of 8 January to the Secretary-General on the December 1992 deportations by Israel and Israeli deportations as a whole, the Permanent Observer of Palestine stated that, as the deportees, who had been blindfolded and bound and driven in buses to Israel's northern border, tried to return on foot, they were prevented from doing so by shooting and shelling directed at them by the Israeli army. Such shelling was repeated several times at later dates. He noted that the situation of the deportees was deteriorating due to the harshness of weather and a lack of all essentials, including water, medicine and foodstuffs. A number of them had become sick and several were injured. Meanwhile, Israel rejected a formal request by ICRC to provide the deportees with the essential materials through Israel's borders. According to the memorandum, Israel had deported some 2,500 Palestinian civilians since 1967. The Permanent Observer concluded that the deportation was illegal under international law and the fourth Geneva Convention, in violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights(26) and all other human rights instruments and standards, as well as applicable domestic law. The deportation of December 1992 also constituted a form of collective punishment, which had a detrimental effect on the peace process and which could not succeed as long as that situation was not brought to an end. He emphasized that the Security Council was duty-bound to compel Israel to abide by its obligations under Article 25 of the Charter and to guarantee respect for international law. PLO called on the Council to adopt a new resolution under Chapter VII of the Charter to ensure Israel's acceptance and implementation of resolution 799(1992).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 4 February,(29) the Permanent Observer brought to the Secretary-General's attention statements reportedly made by Prime Minister Rabin to the Israeli Parliament to the effect that an "agreement" had been negotiated between Israel and the United States on the deportation issue. The New York Times <\/i>had quoted the Prime Minister as saying that "his agreement with the United States to bring back a quarter of the 400 Palestinians banished to Lebanon had preserved his right to deport hundreds of more people in the future". Such an "agreement", PLO said was not in accordance with resolution 799(1992), and its acceptance would be tantamount to legitimizing deportation. It called on the Council to consider immediately the Secretary-General’s January report(25) on the matter and keep it actively under review, a demand which was reiterated on 16 February.(30)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Israel informed the Secretary-General on 9 February(3) of a government decision of 1 February which allowed the return of 101 Palestinians to the locations from which they had been temporarily deported. Those returning would be persons whose circumstances surrounding their temporary deportation were relatively less severe in comparison to others. Also, the military commanders would be instructed to reduce by one half the term of deportation of those still remaining under the deportation order. With regard to them, the decisions of the Supreme Court were to be carried out, including their right to appeal before an advisory committee and contact with an attorney, in addition to a review of the security information concerning those who did not appeal. The delivery of necessary humanitarian provisions to the deportees would be allowed by helicopter. Israel noted that this decision provided for the return of all excluded persons before the end of 1993.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Accordingly, Israel reported, on 20 December,(32) the phased return of the deportees during the year. In January and February, 19 deportees who were either ill or mistakenly expelled were returned. On 1 February, Israel decided to allow the return of 101 Palestinians to their original locations; and to reduce by one half the term of exclusion for those against whom the deportation orders remained in force. However, the deportees whose exclusion was lifted chose not to return at that time. On 9 September, 181 persons were allowed to return, and on 15 December, the remaining 215 deportees were allowed to do so, of whom 197 returned while 18 chose not to.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Secretary-General. <\/strong>The Secretary-General informed the General Assembly in October 1993(33) that no reply had been received from Israel to his note verbale of April requesting information on steps it had taken or envisaged to implement the 1992 Assembly demand(34) that Israel rescind the illegal deportation of Palestinians and facilitate their immediate return.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Palestinian detainees<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Committee on Israeli practices. <\/strong>The Committee on Israeli practices in November(1) reported that the status and treatment of Arab prisoners in Israeli custody continued to be critical. Detainees were still subjected in a systematic manner to various forms of both physical and psychological torture and ill-treatment, such as long periods in isolation cells, uninterrupted interrogation sessions, food and sleep deprivation, denial of use of sanitary facilities, having to remain in uncomfortable positions for long periods, confinement in refrigerated rooms with cold water poured over them and having their heads covered with sacks. According to statistics on 500 local residents, over 96 per cent reported having been subjected to various forms of torture while in prison or detention, for periods ranging from 6 months to 10 years (Ha'aretz <\/i>and Jerusalem Post, <\/i>9 June). It was revealed that doctors examining security detainees had to sign a form declaring that prisoners were medically fit to be chained and blindfolded (Jerusalem Post, <\/i>14 June).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Deaths in custody and suicides of prisoners continued to occur. Ayman Nasser, a 23-year-old member of the Fatah Hawks, died on 3 April in Barzilai Hospital as a result of lung damage and septic shock reportedly caused by smoke inhalation and injuries sustained during his arrest on 20 March and the ensuing extensive interrogation. He was said to have been beaten, handcuffed, hooded and subjected to food and sleep deprivation and did not receive adequate medical care in time. On 15 February, a 34-year-old security prisoner was found hanging in his cell in Beersheba prison after having served almost eight years of his 18-year sentence.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Consideration by the Committee on Palestinian rights. <\/strong>The Committee on Palestinian rights in November(2) noted with concern that approximately 14,000 Palestinian political prisoners were still being held in Israeli prisons and detention camps, many of whom were in administrative detention without having been brought to trial. Reports of inhuman conditions in jails and mistreatment of prisoners included beatings and torture. The Committee observed with alarm that 14 Palestinians had died in custody since the beginning of the intifadah in 1987.(3)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Secretary-General. <\/strong>The Secretary-General reported to the General Assembly in October 1993(35) that Israel had not replied to his April request for information on steps taken or envisaged to implement an Assembly resolution of 1992(36) calling on it to release all Palestinians and other Arabs arbitrarily detained or imprisoned.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Israeli measures<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

against educational institutions<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Committee on Israeli practices. <\/strong>In November,(1) the Committee on Israeli practices reported that the closure on 31 March of the occupied territories by Israel had had adverse consequences on education since more than 25 per cent of the students there were unable to register at universities or attend classes. Students living in a location different from that of their educational facility were denied permits to commute, while many were unable even to register despite the extension of registration periods. Children whose parents were residents of different localities were at times denied education altogether. The Committee was also informed of the persistent lack of appropriate educational infrastructure, manifested in a severe shortage of classrooms, buildings that failed to meet the requisite standards and extremely short teaching hours due to overcrowding and inadequate teaching conditions.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Committee was informed of the closure on 21 November 1992 by IDF of the UNRWA Technical Training Centre in Gaza for one month because its students were celebrating the declaration of independence of the Palestinian State. The Gaza Secondary School was ordered closed for the same reason. On 5 April 1993, the Hashimiya Secondary School for Boys was closed for two weeks following student protests. As a positive development the Committee noted the opening on 4 October 1992 of the first four-year college in Gaza.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Secretary-General. <\/strong>The Secretary-General informed the General Assembly in October 1993(37) that no reply had been received from Israel in response to his note verbale of April requesting information on steps it had taken or envisaged to implement the 1992 Assembly demand(38) that it rescind all actions and measures against educational institutions, ensure their freedom and refrain from hindering their effective operation.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Golan Heights<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Committee on Israeli practices. <\/strong>The Syrian Arab Republic provided the Committee on Israeli practices(1) with information on the situation in the occupied Syrian Arab Golan Heights. It referred to the lack of most health and educational services and the neglect of public utilities, which had led to a constant deterioration of the situation in the villages. Israeli settlements were given names derived from the Torah, and Arabic signboards were replaced with Hebrew and English ones, which revealed attempts to endow that territory with a Hebrew identity and the intention to perpetuate the Israeli occupation. Many archaeological sites were reportedly destroyed as a result of military manoeuvres by IDF, which used various types of explosives and armour-piercing shells. Israeli agricultural exploitation continued to be characterized by the expropriation of land and the seizure and exploitation of water resources. While the Arab population was prohibited from drilling new wells or even using old ones, Israeli authorities drilled numerous wells for the benefit of the settlements. As to educational affairs, Arab students were forced to learn Hebrew as a basic subject and therefore had to study three languages, to the detriment of scientific and social subjects. In health services, there was a shortage of all types of first-aid facilities and of medical specialists. Israel furthermore did not abandon its attempts to impose compulsory conscription on young Arabs and enlist them in the ranks of the very army which occupied their land.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Committee also observed the pursuance by Israel of its policy of annexation and settlements in the Golan Heights. In addition to the expropriation of land, its inhabitants were coerced into selling land at prices considerably lower than its real value.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Secretary-General. <\/strong>In October 1993,(39) the Secretary-General informed the General Assembly that no reply had been received from Israel to his April request for information on steps it had taken or envisaged to implement a 1992 Assembly resolution(40) condemning the persistence of Israel in changing the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure and legal status of the occupied Golan and calling on it to desist from repressive measures against the population there.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>On 10 December 1993, the General Assembly, on the recommendation of the Fourth Committee, adopted resolution 48\/41 D <\/strong>by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong><\/i>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Deeply concerned <\/i>that the Arab territories occupied since 1967 have been under continued Israeli military occupation,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>Security Council resolution 497(1981) of 17 December 1981,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling also <\/i>its resolutions 36\/226 B of 17 December 1981, ES-9\/1 of 5 February 1982, 37\/88 E of 10 December 1982, 38\/79 F of 15 December 1983, 39\/95 F of 14 December 1984, 40\/161 F of 16 December 1985, 41\/63 F of 3 December 1986, 42\/160 F of 8 December 1987, 43\/21 of 3 November 1988, 43\/58 F of 6 December 1988, 44\/2 of 6 October 1989, 44\/48 F of 8 December 1989, 45\/74 F of 11 December 1990, 46\/47 F of 9 December 1991 and 47\/70 F of 14 December 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the report of the Secretary-General of 29 October 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling further <\/i>its previous resolutions, in particular resolutions 3414(XXX) of 5 December 1975, 31\/61 of 9 December 1976, 32\/20 of 25 November 1977, 33\/28 and 33\/29 of 7 December 1978, 34\/70 of 6 December 1979 and 35\/122 E of 11 December 1980, in which, inter alia, <\/i>it called upon Israel to put an end to its occupation of the Arab territories,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Reaffirming once more <\/i>the illegality of the decision of 14 December 1981 taken by Israel to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the occupied Syrian Golan, which has resulted in the effective annexation of that territory,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Reaffirming <\/i>that the acquisition of territory by force is inadmissible under the Charter of the United Nations,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Reaffirming <\/i>the applicability of the Convention to the occupied Syrian Golan,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Bearing in mind <\/i>Security Council resolution 237(1967) of 14 June 1967,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Condemns <\/i>Israel, the occupying Power, for its refusal to comply with the relevant resolutions on the occupied Syrian Golan, and in particular Security Council resolution 497(1981), in which the Council, inter alia, <\/i>decided that the Israeli decision to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the occupied Syrian Arab Golan was null and void and without international legal effect and demanded that Israel, the occupying Power, should rescind forthwith its decision;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Also condemns <\/i>the persistence of Israel in changing the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure and legal status of the occupied Syrian Golan and in particular the establishment of settlements;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Determines <\/i>that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken or to be taken by Israel, the occupying Power, that purport to alter the character and legal status of the occupied Syrian Golan are null and void, constitute a flagrant violation of international law and of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and have no legal effect;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Denounces <\/i>attempts by Israel forcibly to impose Israeli citizenship and Israeli identity cards on the Syrian citizens in the occupied Syrian Golan, and calls upon it to desist from its repressive measures against the population of the occupied Syrian Golan;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Deplores <\/i>the violations by Israel of the Convention;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>6.\t<\/span>Calls once again upon <\/i>Member States not to recognize any of the legislative or administrative measures and actions referred to above;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>7.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session on the implementation of the present resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/41 D<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

10 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 75\t<\/span>85-1-68 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Fourth Committee (A\/48\/647) by recorded vote (74-1-55), 8 December (meeting 27); 8-nation draft (A\/C.4\/48\/L.35); agenda item 86.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Cuba, Indonesia, Lebanon, Malaysia, Syrian Arab Republic.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 4th Committee 20, 21, 27; plenary 75.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Afghanistan, Algeria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, Ghana, Guinea, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Niger, Oman, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zaire, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>Israel.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bulgaria, Canada, Central African Republic, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kenya, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Swaziland, Sweden, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Israeli settlements<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Committee on Israeli practices. <\/strong>In its November 1993 report,(1) the Committee on Israeli practices noted that, although Israel had pledged not to build any new settlements, the expansion of existing ones was pursued. At the settlements of Asfad, Enab, Kfar Sifar, Kiryat, Kiryat Sefer, Ma'aleh Adumim, Ma'ali Amos, Moshav Ganai Tal, Ofra, Sweish and Takoa, the construction of 1,800 new housing units reportedly began on 6 July. According to Al-Tali'ah <\/i>of 11 March, 43 settlements were being expanded with those activities being especially intensive in the district of Bethlehem, followed by Nablus and Tulkarm. Although the Committee received no evidence that new settlements had been established since the new Rabin Government took office, Al-Tali'ah <\/i>reported on 1 July that work was under way for the construction of a new settlement to be named Talmoun 4. The Council of Jewish Communities in the West Bank and Gaza indicated that 127,000 Jews were already living in settlements. Ha'aretz <\/i>and the Jerusalem Post <\/i>reported on 1 December 1992 that according to a demographic study by the Peace Now movement, 144 settlements existed in the territories. Another survey indicated new settlement activities under the Rabin Government, in addition to the pledged completion of 11,000 housing units. Some 277,000 dunums of land were confiscated during the first five years of the intifadah <\/i>and the total of confiscated land amounted to 3,700,944 dunums. Those figures represented, at the end of 1992, 63 per cent of the total land surface in the West Bank and 44 per cent in Gaza.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The period under consideration was marked by frequent acts of violence and aggression by settlers against Palestinians and other Arabs in the territories. Jewish settlers engaged in and on occasion stepped up indiscriminate attacks against individuals and raided villages and refugee camps, wantonly destroying Arab-owned property, as well as places of worship, and uprooting trees. According to witness testimony before the Committee, Israeli settlers stormed the Al Akkad Mosque in Khan Younis on 29 March and burnt it down. On 11 April, the mosque of Al Bureij was desecrated and four days later the mosque of Al Isslah in the Shejaya district was profaned.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Consideration by the Committee on Palestinian rights. <\/strong>The Committee on Palestinian rights noted in November(2) that construction in the critical area of greater Jerusalem proceeded apace, with the Government considering ambitious plans to link the city centre with the southern block of settlements. Among those plans was completing the Jerusalem-Efrat highway, an estimated $42 million project intended to link the Jerusalem suburb of Gilo with the Etzion block of settlements and to benefit the economic development of Jerusalem's so-called "bedroom suburbs". The Committee reaffirmed that those settlement policies and practices were in violation of the fourth Geneva Convention.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Secretary-General. <\/strong>The Secretary-General informed the General Assembly in October 1993(41) that no reply had been received from Israel to his April request for information on steps it had taken or envisaged to implement the 1992 Assembly demand(42) that it desist from taking any action that would result in changing the legal status, geographical nature or demographic composition of the territories.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Economic and social<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

repercussions of Israeli settlements<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>In a report of July 1993,(43) the Secretary-General, highlighted the economic and social consequences of the establishment of settlements by Israel in the Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, as well as in the Syrian Golan. Prepared in response to a General Assembly request of 1992,(44) the report was submitted to the Assembly through the Economic and Social Council.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>According to the report, settlers were encouraged to settle in the territories through financial and tax incentives offered by the Government. Loans were more concessionary, infrastructure was provided free of charge and taxes were substantially discounted. The New York Times <\/i>had reported in 1990 that settlers who built their own houses received the land virtually for free, while more than 50 per cent of the mortgage was interest-free. In addition, the Jewish Agency reported that the Government provided contractor subsidies that included interim financing for construction, a grant of 50 per cent of the cost of development (some $20,000 per housing unit), and a government guarantee of partial purchase of apartments not sold. The Government also provided buyer subsidies, under which the average mortgage for a family of three in development areas amounted to $32,000.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>A report by UNCTAD(45) was cited as stating that the new "Stars Plan" settlement programme envisaged the establishment of a dozen new settlements, including many in the northern West Bank along its pre-1967 border with Israel. Another important plan under implementation was the continued expansion of Maaleh Adumin, which recently became the first Israeli "city" in the occupied territories. Its extension was intended to link up with settlements encircling East Jerusalem and with other settlements planned for construction west of the Palestinian city of Jericho. Israeli officials reportedly said that their settlement activity until mid-1992 was aimed at boxing in Palestinian areas, establishing Palestinian "islands of autonomy" and preventing Palestinian territorial congruity. It was estimated that by 1993 an additional 50,000 Israelis might reside in those settlements under construction. By the end of 1992, around 247,000 to 290,000 Jewish settlers lived in the following areas: East Jerusalem (120,000-140,000 settlers and 8 settlements); West Bank (110,000-130,000 settlers and 156 settlements); Gaza (4,000-5,000 settlers and 18 settlements); and Golan Heights (13,000-15,000 settlers and 33 settlements).<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Since mid-1992, two main political issues affected the pace of Israeli settlement: the formation of a Labour coalition Government in July 1992 and American loan guarantees which were approved in October 1992. Those loan guarantees, as requested by Israel and approved by the President of the United States, stipulated that Israel would receive up to $2 billion annually in United States guarantees for fiscal years 1993-1997, but could not use them for activities outside its pre-1967 borders, and that the United States President retained the right to suspend or terminate the loans if their terms or conditions were violated. He was also entitled to reduce the loans by the amount Israel had spent in previous years on settlement construction and other activities deemed inconsistent with the agreements. However, it was nearly impossible to determine the source of funding of settlements, since the Israeli Government and the Jewish Agency could free funds for use in the territories by using money obtained under the United States loan guarantees for projects inside Israel.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>As to the policies of the new Labour coalition Government, it had announced a change of national priorities by giving more attention to the absorption of immigrants, and had declared its intention to curtail its housing programme in the occupied territories. A careful review of that new policy revealed, however, that settlement construction was not frozen since the Government remained committed to continuing the construction of 11,000 housing units in the territories, while it simultaneously intended to halt construction of 6,681 units approved by the Shamir Government in the 1992 budget. According to the Minister of Construction and Housing, it was decided to complete 9,850 units in settlements throughout the West Bank, and 1,200 each in Gaza and the Golan Heights. Of those units approved for the West Bank, 1,700 were in greater Jerusalem 2,150 were located throughout the area and were in the framing stage; 5,000 were near completion; while 1,000 were being constructed by individual settlers. As at September 1992, Israeli settlements in the Greater Jerusalem region had a population of 184,878, and 16,235 housing units were under construction.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Land, the mainstay of the territories' economy continued to be subject to expropriation and confiscation for the purpose of establishing new settlements and expanding old ones. A total of 19,145 dunums were confiscated during 1992, and 3,381 dunums were confiscated for settlements during the first four months of 1993.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Along with land confiscation, water continued to be one of the most sensitive issues affecting economic and social development. A series of military orders established rules and regulations on water extraction, consumption, sale and distribution; control of water use; sharing and rationing construction of water installations; drilling of wells, and granting of permits, making it easier for Israeli authorities and settlers to seize and utilize the resource. They regulated all matters regarding water resources, whether groundwater or surface water, including springs, ponds, streams and rivers, as well as price-setting and quantities allowed for use by Arab inhabitants and farmers. As a result, Israeli authorities continued to gain control over water resources. Settlements were often established on sites with good quality and quantity of groundwater as well as fertile land. Many existing Arab wells were blocked or sealed by the occupation authorities to protect the wells drilled for Israeli settlements. Other wells had dried up owing to over-exploitation of the groundwater reservoirs in upstream areas by new wells drilled for settlements. Out of the total annual water supply of 700 million cubic metres in the West Bank and 60 million cubic metres in Gaza, between 515 million and 530 million cubic metres were transferred for use by Israel and its settlements. About 30 per cent of the total water used in Israel was taken from resources of the West Bank, representing 80 per cent of its groundwater potential. This water distribution policy, combined with over-pumping in some areas, severely strained the availability of Palestinian water resources and their ability to meet growing needs. Palestinians' access to water resources remained far less than that afforded to settlers, whose allowance per capita for agricultural use was 13 times greater than that for Palestinians in the West Bank and 7 times the entitlement of those living in Gaza. Private water consumption among Palestinians in the West Bank amounted to approximately 35 cubic metres per year per person, compared to 100 cubic metres for settlers. Deep wells drilled by Israeli authorities affected the level and quantity of water in Arab wells, resulting in a reduction in their productive capacity and the drying up of some wells and, consequently, of agricultural land that depended on them for irrigation water. Additionally, over-exploitation of groundwater in Gaza and the great increase in water use by settlers augmented salinity due to sea-water intrusion. As in the West Bank and Gaza, continued arbitrary Israeli practices of land confiscation and water control reduced the cultivation area, curtailed local development and lowered the local level of income from agriculture in the Syrian Golan.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Agriculture was also heavily affected by such Israeli policies as curfews, military orders, uprooting of trees, land confiscation and the establishment of new settlements, under which circumstances it operated on the basis of a decreasing cultivated area and limited water supply, coupled with low productivity, cyclical fluctuations, insufficient diversification and often unequal competition with Israeli exports to the territories, which received generous government subsidies. With the justification of "security requirements", Israeli authorities engaged in an unprecedented practice of uprooting olive and fruit trees, thereby depriving farmers of their main source of income and forcing them to leave their land. During the first four months of 1993, approximately 3,180 trees were uprooted in the territories. The occupation authorities followed the same policy in the Syrian Golan by uprooting tree seedlings planted by Arab farmers for their failure to obtain permits for planting from the so-called Israel Land Administration.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Curfews imposed by Israel brought hardship to all spheres of daily life in the territories and halted all economic activities, sometimes being the first step which enabled settlers to establish new settlements or expand existing ones. After curfews were lifted, those settlements became "de facto" and gained the protection of the military authorities. Fishing in Gaza was also affected by curfews and Israeli seaside settlements. reducing the area allowed for fishing.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Consideration by the Committee on Palestinian rights. <\/strong>It was noted by the Committee on Palestinian rights in November(2) that the Palestinian economy, which witnessed significant structural changes over 26 years of Israeli occupation, was made dependent on and inferior to the highly capitalized and technologically advanced Israeli economy. Continued human rights violations by Israeli authorities, control of water resources, the demolition of houses and other property and the destruction of olive trees and crops further exacerbated the living conditions of the Palestinian population.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>On 29 July, the Economic and Social Council, on the recommendation of its Economic Committee, adopted resolution 1993\/52 <\/strong>by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Economic and social repercussions of the Israeli<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

settlements on the Palestinian people in the<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem,<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

occupied since 1967, and on the Arab population<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

of the occupied Syrian Golan<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong><\/i>The Economic and Social Council,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking note <\/i>of General Assembly resolution 47\/172 of 22 December 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its resolution 1992\/57 of 31 July 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Guided <\/i>by the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, affirming the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force and recalling Security Council resolutions 242(1967) of 22 November 1967 and 497(1981) of 17 December 1981,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling also <\/i>Security Council resolution 465(1980) of 1 March 1980 and other resolutions affirming the applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, to the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, and other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Expressing its concern <\/i>at the establishment by Israel, the occupying Power, of settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including the settlements of new immigrants therein,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Welcoming <\/i>the Middle East peace process started at Madrid on 30 October 1991 and recognizing that a complete freeze of settlement activity would significantly enhance the prospects for progress in that process,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Takes note <\/i>of the report of the Secretary-General on the economic and social consequences of the establishment of settlements by Israel in the Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, occupied since 1967, and the Syrian Golan;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Deplores <\/i>the establishment of settlements by Israel in the Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, and the other Arab territories occupied since 1967, and regards the settlements as illegal and an obstacle to peace;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Recognizes <\/i>the economic and social repercussions of the Israeli settlements on the Palestinian people in the Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, occupied by Israel since 1967, and on the Arab population of the occupied Syrian Golan;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Strongly deplores <\/i>Israel's practices in the occupied Palestinian territory and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, in particular its confiscation of land, its appropriation of water resources, its depletion of other economic resources and its displacement and deportation of the population of those territories;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Reaffirms <\/i>the inalienable right of the Palestinian people and the population of the occupied Syrian Golan to their natural and all other economic resources, and regards any infringement thereof as being without any legal validity;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>6.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to submit to the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session, through the Economic and Social Council, a report on the progress made in the implementation of the present resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Economic and Social Council resolution 1993\/52<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

29 July 1993\t<\/span>Meeting 45\t<\/span>    41-1-3 (roll-call vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Economic Committee (E\/1993\/114) by roll-call vote (40-1-3), 26 July (meeting 15); 18-nation draft (E\/1993\/C.1\/L.4), orally revised following informal consultations; agenda item 16. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Algeria, Angola, Cuba, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Egypt, Iraq, Madagascar, Malaysia, Morocco, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, Yemen.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Roll-call vote in Council as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Angola, Argentina, Australia, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Belarus Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Cuba, Denmark, France, Germany, Guinea, India, Italy, Kuwait Madagascar, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Nigeria, Norway, Peru, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Romania, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Japan, Poland, Russian Federation.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In the view of the United States, the text was politically inflammatory and could compromise the peace process. The Economic and Social Council, which was not the appropriate body to settle political questions, should not compete with the negotiations that had been initiated.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>On 21 December, the General Assembly, acting on the recommendation of the Second Committee, adopted resolution 48\/212 <\/strong>by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Economic and social repercussions of the Israeli<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

settlements on the Palestinian people in the<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem,<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

occupied since 1967, and on the<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Arab population of the Syrian Golan<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling its <\/i>resolution 47\/172 of 22 December 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking note <\/i>of Economic and Social Council resolution 1993\/52 of 29 July 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Reaffirming <\/i>the principle of the permanent sovereignty of people under foreign occupation over their national resources,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Guided <\/i>by the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, affirming the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force, and recalling Security Council resolutions 242(1967) of 22 November 1967 and 497(1981) of 17 December 1981,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>Security Council resolution 465(1980) of 1 March 1980 and other resolutions affirming the applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, to the occupied Palestinian territory including Jerusalem, and other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Aware <\/i>of the negative and grave economic and social repercussions of the Israeli settlements on the Palestinian people in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and on the Arab population of the Syrian Golan,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Welcoming <\/i>the ongoing Middle East peace process started at Madrid, and in particular the signing of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements, including its Annexes and its Agreed Minutes by the Government of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, in Washington, D.C., on 13 September 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Takes note <\/i>of the report of the Secretary-General on the economic and social consequences of the establishment of settlements by Israel in the Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, occupied since 1967, and the Syrian Golan;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Reaffirms <\/i>that Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 are illegal and an obstacle to economic and social development;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Recognizes <\/i>the economic and social repercussions of the Israeli settlements on the Palestinian people in the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem, and on the Arab population of the Syrian Golan;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Reaffirms also <\/i>the inalienable right of the Palestinian people and the population of the Syrian Golan to their natural and all other economic resources, and regards any infringement thereof as being illegal;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to submit to the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session, through the Economic and Social Council, a report on the progress made in the implementation of the present resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/212<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

21 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 86\t<\/span>143-3-13 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Second Committee (A\/48\/715) by recorded vote (113-2-13), 10 December (meeting 47); 13-nation draft (A\/C.2\/48\/L.17), orally revised following informal consultations; agenda item 12. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Algeria, Cuba, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mauritania, Morocco, Sudan, Tunisia, Yemen.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 2nd Committee 12-14, 45, 47; plenary 86.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gambia, Germany, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>Israel, Marshall Islands, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Belarus, Botswana, Central African Republic, Croatia, Dominican Republic, Kenya, Micronesia, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, Russian Federation, Samoa, Turkmenistan, Uruguay.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Speaking before the vote, Israel said the resolution ran counter to the modalities envisaged in the Declaration of Principles signed on 13 September between Israel and PLO and prejudged the outcome of the negotiations, which were the proper forum in which to resolve such issues as the settlements.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Living conditions of Palestinians<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The Secretary-General informed the Economic and Social Council by a note of May 1993(46) that a progress report on the implementation of a 1991 General Assembly resolution(47) concerning the living conditions of Palestinians was being finalized for submission directly to the General Assembly. On 29 July, by decision 1993\/309, <\/strong>the Economic and Social Council deferred the issue to its resumed substantive 1993 session, since the report was not yet available.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>By a letter of 11 March,(48) Israel brought to the Secretary-General's attention steps it had taken to improve the welfare and standard of living of Palestinians in the territories. According to that communication, emphasis was recently placed on expanding employment opportunities and developing the local economy. This policy was pursued through legislation to encourage private initiative and local industry in order to promote investment and provide jobs, and through improvement of the general climate in the territories in order to create an attractive environment for investment. As a means of encouraging investment and employment, Israel had recently introduced income tax reform, encouraged capital and foreign investments and legislated labour rights for Palestinians working in Israel. Under those provisions, every Israeli employer was required to record officially employees from the territories to ensure that they received appropriate wages and social benefits As a result, 70 per cent of those employed in Israel were legally registered, compared to 30 per cent in the past. All restrictions on the transfer of funds to the territories were rescinded. Israel also encouraged: the establishment of new banks and financial establishments, exports; new factories; conversion of agricultural land to increase profitability; and industrial parks It rescinded or reformed legislation dealing with arrest, detention and legal procedures in security-related cases. Additionally, the automobile surtax was abolished, all universities were reopened, and the opening of new polytechnic colleges at Khan Younis and Gaza was approved. Elections were conducted for chambers of commerce in all municipalities except Bethlehem; the age below which persons required a permit to enter Israel was lowered from 60 to 50 years, houses sealed for security reasons over five years ago were reopened on a case-by-case basis; and the distribution of Arabic newspapers was expanded to include el-Ittihad, Sabah al-Hir, el Khateb and Kol el-Arab.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

REFERENCES<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

(1)A\/48\/557. (2)A\/48\/35. (3)YUN 1987, p. 296. (4)A\/48\/183-E\/1994\/74\/Add.1. (5)A\/48\/13. (6)E\/1993\/23-E\/CN.4\/1993\/122 (res. 1993\/4). (7)Ibid. (res. 1993\/3). (8)Ibid. (res. 1993\/2 A & B). (9)Ibid. (res. 1993\/1). (10)A\/47\/888-S\/25282, A\/47\/892-S\/25309, A\/47\/909-S\/25458, A\/48\/253-S\/26045, A\/48\/263-S\/26078. (11)A\/47\/893-S\/25311, A\/47\/911-S\/15464, A\/47\/959-S\/25862. (12)SC res. 681(1990), 20 Dec. 1990. (13)S\/25460. (14)S\/25485. (15)S\/26029. (16)YUN 1992, p. 425, GA res. 47\/70 A, 14 Dec. 1990. (17)A\/48\/96. (18)A\/48\/278. (19)A\/48\/537. (20)DPI\/1192. (21)A\/48\/538. (22)YUN 1992, p. 427, GA res. 47\/70 B, 14 Dec. 1992. (23)Ibid., p. 429. (24)Ibid. p. 429, SC res. 799(1992), 18 Dec. 1992. (25)S\/25149. (26)YUN 1948-49, p. 535, GA res. 217 A(III), 10 Dec. 1948. (27)A\/47\/874-S\/25136. (28)A\/47\/858-S\/25075. (29)A\/47\/882-S\/25242. (30)A\/47\/890-S\/25294. (31)S\/25258. (32)S\/26907. (33)A\/48\/541. (34)YUN 1992, p. 431, GA res. 47\/70 E, 14 Dec. 1992. (35)A\/48\/540. (36)YUN 1992, p. 432, GA res. 47\/70 D, 14 Dec. 1992. (37)A\/48\/543. (38)YUN 1992, p. 433, GA res. 47\/70 G. 14 Dec. 1992. (39)A\/48\/542. (40)YUN 1992, p. 434, GA res. 47\/70 F. 14 Dec. 1992. (41)A\/48\/539. (42)YUN 1992, p. 436, GA res. 47\/70 C, 14 Dec. 1992. (43)A\/48\/188-E\/1993\/78. (44)YUN 1992, p. 439, GA res. 47\/172 22 Dec. 1992. (45)Ibid., p. 407. (46)E\/1993\/64. (47)YUN 1991, p. 265, GA res. 46\/162, 19 Dec. 1992. (48)A\/48\/112.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

__________________<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Palestine refugees<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

__________________<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The number of Palestine refugees registered with UNRWA as at 30 June 1993, was 2,797,179.(1) They lived in and outside camps in the Israeli-occupied West Bank (479,023) and Gaza Strip (603,380), Jordan (1,072,561), Lebanon (328,176) and the Syrian Arab Republic (314,039). By the end of 1993, UNRWA put the total number of refugees at over 2.9 million.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The various aspects of the Palestine refugee problem, as well as the activities of UNRWA, were addressed by the General Assembly through 10 resolutions, adopted in December, concerning: assistance to Palestine refugees (48\/40 A) and to displaced persons (48\/40 C); the Working Group on the Financing of UNRWA (48\/40 B), scholarships for higher education and vocational training (44\/40 D); refugees in Israeli-occupied territory (48\/40 E); return of displaced population and refugees (48\/40 F), revenues from refugees' properties (48\/40 G); refugee protection (48\/40 H); proposed University of Jerusalem "Al-Quds" for Palestine refugees (48\/40 I); and protection of Palestinian students and educational institutions and safeguarding of UNRWA facilities (44\/40 J). In addition, the Assembly adopted a decision on the participation of Palestine in the Advisory Commission of UNRWA (48\/417). <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

UN Agency for Palestine refugees<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The UNRWA Commissioner-General observed in the Agency's report covering the period 1 July 1992 to 30 June 1993(1) that the exchange of letters on recognition and the signing of the Declaration of Principles between PLO and Israel marked a turning point in the region. It was clear that the political developments would have an impact on UNRWA's operations and programmes. Because of the scale of its presence in the area, its largely Palestinian staff and its historical experience, UNRWA was predestined to be a major contributor to a combined effort to assist in the economic and social development of the West Bank and Gaza. At the same time, the need for continued assistance to Palestine refugees in Jordan, Lebanon and the Syrian Arab Republic should not be overlooked. He noted that, unfortunately, the negotiations had not been accompanied by an improvement in the political, security and economic environment affecting Palestinians. On the contrary, there had been a serious deterioration in the situation, culminating in the highest fatality figures recorded in Gaza since the beginning of the intifadah and an unprecedented worsening of economic and social conditions. A new dimension was introduced by the closure of the occupied territories on 31 March, with UNRWA responding to the resulting hardship by distributing food to nearly 80,000 persons. The closure, accompanied by stern security measures, including an intensified military presence in refugee camps, severely disrupted the Agency's efforts to render medical and educational services, particularly in Jerusalem.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against this background of setbacks, UNRWA in 1993 provided a wide-ranging programme of education, health, relief and social services for Palestine refugees in its five areas of operation. The Agency also continued to undertake extraordinary measures of assistance for Lebanon and the occupied territories. Following the signing of the Declaration of Principles, UNRWA on 6 October launched a new initiative, the Peace Implementation Plan (PIP), to enhance services and infrastructure for Palestine refugees, as well as to create new job opportunities through expanded project investment. Under the plan, which was developed in close consultation with UNRWA's Advisory Commission, major donors and the Palestinian leadership, the Agency began to undertake special construction and development projects that addressed the needs of Palestine refugees in education, environmental health, primary health care, income generation and social services. Its projects responded to objectives identified by the Secretary-General's Task Force on Economic and Social Development of the Gaza Strip and Jericho and formed part of the United Nations' integrated approach in support of the transition period. As at 31 December, total pledges for PIP amounted to over $30 million.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The 2.8 million registered refugees had access to UNRWA schools and training centres and specialist clinics, as well as to basic food and clothing if they had no resources of their own. Agency-wide, more than 392,000 pupils were enrolled in 641 elementary and preparatory schools, and more than 5,000 in eight training centres. Refugees had guaranteed access to primary health care through the Agency's health centres and clinics. Social services, increasingly provided with the active participation of Palestine refugee communities, were available through 71 women's programme centres, reaching 12,800 women. Eighteen locally run community rehabilitation centres provided services for disabled persons and their families, including 1,500 disabled refugee children and adolescents, with technical assistance from UNRWA. Agency-wide, 6.5 per cent of the refugee population were registered as special hardship cases, qualifying them for basic food rations, children’s clothing, shelter rehabilitation and preferential access to vocational training centres.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The education programme, UNRWA's largest activity, grew substantially during the reporting period as a result of adding a tenth year to the basic education cycle in Jordan in conformity with that Government's reform programme. A total of 392,757 elementary and preparatory pupils attended 641 schools, 18,350 more than in the previous year. Vocational training, comprising two-year post-preparatory trade courses and post-secondary technical courses, expanded as well, with the number of training places increasing to 4,496 from 4,296. The number of education staff benefiting from the in-service training programme increased to 1,075 from 857, while university scholarships for outstanding students rose to 746 from 661. The education programme followed the host Government's curricula, in close cooperation with UNESCO, which seconded 12 of its staff to UNRWA. To meet the changing educational needs of the Palestine refugee community and to provide more technical support to the five fields, the Agency reorganized its department of education by integrating all divisions into the UNRWA Institute of Education at Amman and by moving the office of the Director of Education from Vienna to the UNRWA Headquarters Branch at Amman effective 1 July. Another aspect of education reform in Jordan was the raising of minimum qualifications for certification of basic-education-cycle teachers to include possession of a four-year university degree. In line with UNRWA's decision to phase out its 130 medical and nursing staff in planned parenthood education and family planning. In cooperation with the Jordan University of Science and Technology, the Agency held a workshop for its staff from all fields (Irbid, Jordan, January). UNRWA continued with its project to construct, equip and commission a 232-bed hospital in Gaza at a cost of $35 million, $20 million of which represented capital cost and $15 million operating cost for the first three years.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The demand for relief and social services grew beyond the Agency's financial capacity. The drastic curtailment in Palestinian economic activity in the occupied territory and continued restrictions on obtaining work permits in Lebanon further reduced self-reliance. Deteriorating socio-economic conditions, especially in the Gaza Strip, led to increased insistence by refugees that UNRWA provide sustained direct relief for larger numbers. By 30 June, the number of refugees qualifying for special hardship assistance rose to 180,647 from 178,323 one year earlier. The difficulties were exacerbated through the increase of registered refugees to 2.8 million from 2.65 million one year earlier, partly as a result of refugees' requesting the updating of their files. Palestinians remaining in Kuwait were particularly concerned with ensuring that their records were correct. During the year, 1,102 of those families requested and received certification of their status as registered refugees. A major effort was directed at building up the community's capacity to provide social services of its own, with technical support and additional funding from UNRWA. By the end of the reporting period, 5 of the 71 women's programme centres were managed by committees of Palestine refugee women themselves. Locally run community rehabilitation projects for disabled refugees increased to 18 from 14, with growing attention to home-based intervention and vocational rehabilitation. The number of active self-support projects for the poorest refugees, assisted by grants or, increasingly, loans, rose to 672, of which 593 were ongoing.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>For the sixth successive year, UNRWA ran a programme of extraordinary measures for refugees in Lebanon and the occupied territory (EMLOT) to alleviate the difficulties experienced as a result of the intifadah <\/i>and the Israeli response to it. The programme provided assistance to refugees in Lebanon, where the socio-economic conditions remained precarious despite the improved security situation. The measures included a refugee affairs officer programme, a legal assistance scheme, emergency food distribution, cash grants to families in distress and a variety of emergency health services, including increased hospitalization subsidies. During the five-year period ending December 1992, expenditures on EMLOT totalled more than $139 million. For 1993, $2.6 million in cash and in kind was budgeted for Lebanon, $8.8 million for the West Bank and $14 million for Gaza. To meet the demands for emergency food distribution during the review period, food commodities amounting to 14,270 tonnes in Gaza and 7,237 tonnes in the West Bank were budgeted at a cost of $7.7 million. However, curfews and closures and the resulting lack of income meant that the demand for emergency food aid greatly exceeded those amounts. In May, the Agency began distributing available stocks and issued an urgent appeal for special donations of flour, rice and sugar for 120,000 families in Gaza and 39,000 families in the West Bank. UNRWA provided $1,044,000 in cash plus tents and blankets worth $46,000 for emergency assistance to needy refugee families whose breadwinners were detained, deported killed or injured, or whose shelters had been damaged or demolished by military orders. In response to the severe damage to 58 homes, 26 of which were rendered uninhabitable, caused by military operations between February and April, the Agency expended $10,000 for immediate in-kind emergency assistance. An additional $60,250 in emergency cash assistance was disbursed to the affected families. Among other extraordinary measures, UNRWA maintained, in cooperation with UNICEF, six physiotherapy clinics in the West Bank and six in Gaza. It also provided $895,000 from emergency funds to infants considered to be nutritionally at risk as well as to school-age children and pregnant and nursing mothers.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In Lebanon, flour, rice, sugar, oil, skim milk and other commodities were distributed to 15,700 families, totalling 81,000 persons, and financial assistance amounting to $461,000 was provided to assist refugees with repair or reconstruction of their shelters. The Agency subsidized hospital expenses for registered as well as needy non-registered refugees in the amount of $104,000. In the initial period following the deportation of 415 Palestinians from the occupied territory to southern Lebanon, a group that included 16 UNRWA staff members, the Agency provided medical care and relief assistance, including water, food, tents, blankets, heating oil, medical supplies and other essential items.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Under the expanded programme of assistance (EPA), set up in 1988 with a target of $65 million, some $54 million had been received or pledged by mid-1993. The objectives of the programme were to improve living conditions in camps and upgrade the infrastructure through which Agency services were delivered. EPA also included specific objectives such as promoting sustainable employment, upgrading Agency installations, rehabilitating infrastructure and improving sanitation in the camps. In October, with the introduction of the Peace Implementation Plan, it was decided to phase out EPA. Projects under implementation would be completed, but no additional funding would be sought.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Under a revolving loan fund set up in 1991 to assist the local Palestinian economy in the aftermath of the Persian Gulf war, 105 loans amounting to over $2 million had been disbursed in Gaza by the end of June. In the West Bank, 37 projects had received loans amounting to $1.3 million, including some $250,000 which had been repaid by borrowers and disbursed as new loans. The Agency disbursed 28 loans totalling $180,000 in Jordan and 13 loans totalling $82,000 in Lebanon. By the end of the reporting period, donors had contributed or pledged $4.2 million specifically for revolving loan funds.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Approximately $10.7 million was allocated to address environmental conditions in refugee camps through sewerage schemes, water supply projects and improved refuse disposal systems. Some $3.6 million was budgeted for housing improvement in camps in the occupied territory and Jordan. As at 30 June, 45 projects with a value of $27.7 million were under negotiation with potential donors, and 142 projects amounting to $46.1 million were being implemented. The Agency employed approximately 20,800 staff, the majority of whom were themselves Palestine refugees, and was thus one of the largest employers in the Middle East.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Introducing the report to the Fourth Committee, the UNRWA Commissioner-General pointed out that the establishment of a Palestinian authority would put the Agency in a radically different position, for it would continue its activities to the extent requested by that authority, in close coordination and consultation with it. PLO had indicated its desire to see UNRWA continue its programmes of assistance to Palestinian refugees and had asked the Agency to expand them to promote social and economic development. Notwithstanding the above, UNRWA was coming to the end of a task entrusted to it 40 years earlier, and its main concern was to complete that task as successfully as possible.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 10 December 1993, on the recommendation of the Fourth Committee, the General Assembly adopted resolution 48\/40 A <\/strong>by recorded vote. Passed in the wake of the signing by Israel and PLO of the Declaration of Principles, its text was amended from that of recent years. In broadening UNRWA's role, it called on the Agency to make a decisive contribution towards giving a fresh impetus to the economic and social stability of the occupied territories.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Assistance to Palestine refugees<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling its <\/i>resolution 47\/69 A of 14 December 1992 and all its previous resolutions on the question, including resolution 194(III) of 11 December 1948,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking note <\/i>of the report of the Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East covering the period from 1 July 1992 to 30 June 1993, and, in particular of the hope expressed by the Commissioner-General "that this report covers an era which is gone forever",<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Welcoming <\/i>the signature by the Government of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements, including its Annexes and its Agreed Minutes, at Washington, D.C., on 13 September 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Notes with regret <\/i>that repatriation or compensation of the refugees, as provided for in paragraph 11 of General Assembly resolution 194(III), has not yet been effected and that, therefore, the situation of the refugees continues to be a matter of concern;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Expresses its thanks to <\/i>the Commissioner-General and to all the staff of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, recognizing that the Agency is doing all it can within the limits of available resources, and also expresses its thanks to the specialized agencies and to private organizations for their valuable work in assisting the refugees;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>that the headquarters of the Agency be transferred as soon as practicable to its area of operations;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Notes with regret <\/i>that the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine has been unable to find a means of achieving progress in the implementation of paragraph 11 of General Assembly resolution 194(III), and requests the Commission to exert continued efforts towards the implementation of that paragraph and to report to the Assembly as appropriate, but no later than l September 1994;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Notes <\/i>that the new context created by the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government, including its Annexes and its Agreed Minutes, signed by the Government of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, will have major consequences for the activities of the Agency, which is henceforth called upon, within the framework of strengthened cooperation with the specialized agencies and the World Bank, to make a decisive contribution towards giving a fresh impetus to the economic and social stability of the occupied territories, and notes also that the functioning of the Agency remains essential throughout its area of operations;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>6.\t<\/span>Welcomes <\/i>the results of the Conference to Support Middle East Peace, held in Washington D.C., on 1 October 1993, concerning urgent financial and economic assistance in support of the Israeli-Palestinian accord, and urges all Member States to extend aid and assistance with a view to the economic development of the occupied territories;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>7.\t<\/span>Directs attention <\/i>to the continuing seriousness of the financial position of the Agency, as outlined in the report of the Commissioner-General;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>8.\t<\/span>Notes with profound concern <\/i>that, despite the commendable and successful efforts of the Commissioner-General to collect additional contributions, the increased level of income to the Agency is still insufficient to cover essential budget requirements in the current year and that, at the currently foreseen levels of contributions, deficits will recur each year;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>9.\t<\/span>Calls upon <\/i>all Governments, as a matter of urgency, to make the most generous efforts possible to meet the anticipated needs of the Agency, and therefore urges non-contributing Governments to contribute regularly and contributing Governments to consider increasing their regular contributions.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/40 A<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

10 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 75\t<\/span>159-0-2 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Fourth Committee (A\/48\/646) by recorded vote (137-0-2), 8 December (meeting 27); 12-nation draft (A\/C.4\/48\/L.20); agenda item 85.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, United Kingdom.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 4th Committee 18, 19, 23-27; plenary 75.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldovia, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marina, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zaire, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>None.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Israel, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On the proposal of the Chairman of the Fourth Committee, the Assembly, also on 10 December, agreed to the understanding that the Advisory Commission of UNRWA would establish a working relationship with PLO (decision 48\/417).<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

UNRWA financing<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The UNRWA Commissioner-General, in his report to the General Assembly,(1) stated that the financial outlook for 1993 was critical, with a deficit of $28.5 million projected at the beginning of the year: $17 million in the regular budget and $11.5 million in the EMLOT budget. Despite concerted efforts to expand the donor base, particularly among countries in the region, and secure additional contributions from the Agency's traditional major donors, only $6.5 million was provided to UNRWA by the end of June. Merely to maintain a constant level of services, the Agency's budget had to increase by 5 per cent per annum to accommodate population growth and rising costs. However, more than at any other time in recent years, UNRWA's financial needs competed with shrinking donor aid budgets and the large increase in emergencies worldwide. Exchange rate losses incurred as a result of the fluctuating currency markets further exacerbated the Agency's financial situation. In anticipation of the shortfall, the Agency was forced to implement austerity measures, which had an immediate impact on the quality of its services.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The General Fund budget approved for 1992-1993 amounted to $572 million, of which $297.2 million represented the 1993 portion. With the additional sums earmarked for EMLOT, EPA and the Gaza Hospital project, the grand total for the biennium amounted to $644.7 million.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In 1992-1993, a total of $473.4 million (including $34.4 million in late arrivals) was received under the UNRWA General Fund ($443.5 million in cash and $30 million in kind). An additional $52.5 million (including $3.9 million in late arrivals) was received for funded ongoing activities ($18.7 million in cash and $33.8 million in kind). Expenditures for the biennium totalled $476.5 million under the General Fund and $50.7 million for funded ongoing activities. For the 1994-1995 biennium, expenditures under the General Fund were estimated at $632.3 million (including $79.4 million in food donations), representing an increase of $60.3 million, or about 10 per cent, over the approved General Fund budget for 19921993.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The regular budget was not completely funded for 1993, and substantial amounts were still required for EMLOT, EPA and the Gaza Hospital project. Only limited success was achieved in broadening the Agency's donor base. None the less, donor and host government support remained strong, as Agency services alone were not sufficient to maintain even basic life-sustaining needs.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Working Group on UNRWA financing<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/i>The Chairman of the Working Group on the Financing of UNRWA, by a letter dated 7 April 1993,(2) expressed concern at the Agency's critical financial situation, as the budget constraints faced by it could not have come at a worse time. With efforts under way to invigorate the Middle East peace process, a reduction in services by the Agency charged with providing for the basic human needs of Palestine refugees would send the wrong signal. The peace process should at all stages be accompanied by socio-economic measures to increase confidence in the negotiations. The UNRWA Commissioner-General had issued three appeals to major donors, most recently in February, and followed up with visits to the capitals of Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to increase their hitherto limited contributions. A special meeting of the UNRWA Advisory Commission was held at Vienna in March, followed by a briefing to major donors. The Chairman added the voice of the Working Group to those appealing for increased financial support to the Agency's vital humanitarian programme.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Working Group held two meetings in 1993, on 9 September and 22 October.(3) In its report to the General Assembly, the Working Group noted that UNRWA ended the first year of the 1992-1993 biennium with a deficit of $10.2 million. This included a shortfall of $2.6 million in its General Fund, which reduced its working capital by the same amount, from $33.7 million to $31.1 million. The working capital was sufficient only to cover expenditures for the Agency's regular operations for about five or six weeks. In addition to that working capital, $6.5 million remained set aside for emergencies and other contingencies. The total 1992 deficit also reflected an accumulated deficit of $6.4 million, which was related to major funded ongoing activities that were a core part of the Agency's regular programmes.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The EMLOT fund also showed a negative balance—$1.2 million—at the end of 1992, which remained a matter of serious concern. In addition to the shortfalls in the Agency's regular and emergency programmes, the Agency's Fund for capital and special projects, which was budgeted at $12.8 million for 1992, was only partially funded by special contributions. Consequently, the implementation of a number of construction projects had to be deferred to 1993 or even later.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>UNRWA's financial prospects for 1993 were unfavourable due to the fact that growth in the level of contributions was not keeping pace with the combined factors of growth in the number of beneficiaries of its programmes and their rising costs. At the beginning of the year, the Commissioner-General informed donor Governments of the projected cash shortfall for 1993 of $28.5 million. To avoid further serious deterioration of the financial situation, he decided to introduce a number of austerity measures amounting to some $13.5 million, aimed at reducing planned expenditures, particularly in travel and recruitment. Those measures, while reducing expenditures in the immediate term, would be difficult to sustain beyond 1993. The Working Group felt that the negative cumulative impact such measures had on the level and quality of the services could adversely affect the region's overall situation at a critical time. In view of the above, the Commissioner-General appealed in February to Governments and intergovernmental organizations for increased funding to compensate for the anticipated cash budget deficit. Another appeal for additional food donations for emergency distribution was issued after Israel's closure in March of the occupied territories, but responses fell far short of the Agency's requirements.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The report also noted that in response to recent political developments and in order to support the peace process, UNRWA had introduced PIP to cover an improvement in, and expansion of, ongoing programmes and services, as well as short-term projects related to the infrastructure of basic and social services. Although the initial focus of the latest development towards peace was on the West Bank and Gaza, it was important that the needs of the 1.7 million refugees in Jordan, Lebanon and the Syrian Arab Republic not be overlooked. Therefore, UNRWA had to maintain and improve the services that it provided in all five fields of operation.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Sharing the Commissioner-General's concern about the funding prospects for 1994, the Working Group strongly urged Governments to continue making generous contributions and consider making additional contributions in support of both emergency-related programmes and special projects, as well as to expanded programmes planned by the Agency in response to the peace process and special contributions for construction projects.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>On 10 December 1993, on the recommendation of the Fourth Committee, the General Assembly adopted resolution 48\/40 B<\/strong> without vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Working Group on the Financing of the<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

United Nations Relief and Works Agency<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

for Palestine Refugees in the Near East<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its resolutions 2656(XXV) of 7 December 1970, 2728(XXV) Of 15 December 1970, 2791(XXVI) Of 6 December 1971, 47\/69 B Of 14 December 1992 and the previous resolutions on this question,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling also <\/i>its decision 36\/462 Of 16 March 1982, by which it took note of the special report of the Working Group on the Financing of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the report of the Working Group,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking into account <\/i>the report of the Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, covering the period from 1 July 1992 to 30 June 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Deeply concerned <\/i>about the critical financial situation of the Agency, which has affected and affects the continuation of the provision of the necessary Agency services to the Palestine refugees, including the emergency-related programmer,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Emphasizing <\/i>the continuing need for extraordinary efforts in order to maintain, at least at the present minimum level, the activities of the Agency, as well as to enable the Agency to carry out essential construction,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Commends <\/i>the Working Group on the Financing of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine in the Near East for its efforts to assist in ensuring the financial security of the Agency;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Takes note with approval <\/i>of the report of the Working Group;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Working Group to continue its efforts in cooperation with the Secretary-General and the Commissioner-General, for the financing of the Agency for a further period of one year;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to provide the necessary services and assistance to the Working Group for the conduct of its work.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/40 B<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

10 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 75\t<\/span>Adopted without vote<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Fourth Committee (A\/48\/646) without vote, 8 December (meeting 27); 25-nation draft (A\/C.4\/48\/L.21); agenda item 85.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Indonesia Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers: <\/i>GA 48th session: 4th Committee 18, 19, 23-27; plenary 75.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Legal matters<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

UNRWA staff<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The Commissioner-General reported that for the period from 1 July 1992 to 30 June 1993,(1) there was a substantial increase over the preceding year in the number of staff members arrested in the occupied territory and held in detention without trial. The number of staff arrested and detained in Jordan and Lebanon decreased, while three new cases were reported in the Syrian Arab Republic. The total number of staff detained during the reporting period was 71, of whom 40 were arrested and released without charge or trial, 3 were charged, tried and sentenced, and 28 remained in detention. Of the 415 Palestinians who were deported into southern Lebanon in December 1992,(5) 16 were UNRWA staff members. None of them were among those who returned with Israeli permission in the subsequent months; the Agency's protests against those deportations were to no avail.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Two UNRWA staff members were killed by Israeli security forces in Gaza. In February, a 28-year-old nurse was shot in the back of the head while rendering assistance to a wounded youth in Rafah. In March, a 47-year-old teacher was shot and killed outside a wake house, also in Rafah. One locally recruited staff member was killed by Palestinians in Gaza for alleged collaboration with the Israeli authorities.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In spite of the Agency's frequent approaches to the relevant authorities, it was not provided with adequate and timely information on the reasons for the arrest and detention of its staff members. It could thus not determine whether their arrest and detention arose out of their official duties. However, it had access to 18 staff members from Gaza and 11 from the West Bank who were in prisons and detention centres in the occupied territory and in Israel. The treatment of staff members in detention remained of major concern, with staff members upon their release complaining of ill treatment, including beatings and psychological abuse. Despite efforts on the part of the Agency, it was unable to visit staff in detention elsewhere. In the performance of their duties, both international and locally recruited staff continued to be subjected to various forms of mistreatment by Israeli security forces, including beatings, threats insults, intimidation and temporary detention. Thirty-nine such cases of mistreatment were recorded in Gaza and 64 in the West Bank.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Difficulties related to the movement of locally recruited staff in and out of the West Bank increased substantially. There were lengthy delays in clearance by the Israeli authorities of staff members for travel on official duty. These included difficulties in obtaining entry for locally recruited drivers to Ben Gurion international airport in Israel, despite assurances from the authorities that such entry would be facilitated. The freedom of movement of staff members was further impeded by frequent curfews and the continued insistence of Israeli authorities that locally recruited staff members be in possession of curfew permits. The Agency's efforts to obtain curfew permits for such staff in Gaza were subjected to lengthy bureaucratic delays, and the number made available consistently fell short of that requested by the Agency. The arbitrary designation of closed military areas also impeded the legitimate movement of staff members, including international staff.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

UNRWA services and premises<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/i>The Commissioner-General reported(1) that between 1 July 1992 and 30 June 1993 Israeli security forces made 77 incursions into UNRWA installations in the West Bank and 186 in Gaza, at times resulting in injury to staff and damage to property. There were 78 recorded intrusions into health clinic premises, and Israeli security forces on occasion also used Agency premises during military operations. Particularly in Gaza, UNRWA schools were at times used as temporary interrogation centres. The Agency protested such actions as a violation of its privileges and immunities.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Interference by the security forces with UNRWA ambulance and medical services became more frequent. In Gaza, 61 incidents were recorded in which ambulances were stopped, searched and on occasion shot at, and ambulance drivers and accompanying medical personnel were at times beaten and had their identity documents confiscated. There were 11 such incidents in the West Bank. Israeli authorities continued to object to the Agency's reconstruction of demolished camp shelters, despite assurances by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs that there would be no objection to it. Construction projects were also subjected to detailed and time-consuming procedures. At least 105 homes in the West Bank and 38 in Gaza were demolished by Israeli authorities on the grounds that proper building permits had not been obtained by the owners. Restrictions were imposed on the quantity of items imported for the Agency's essential operations, and incoming goods were often subjected to delays at the port of entry.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>As from 1 January 1992, Israel resumed payment of current charges for clearance, warehousing and transport of UNRWA supplies, for which it was responsible under the 1967 Comay-Michelmore Agreement and which it had suspended from 1988 to 1991. Israel also agreed to reimburse the Agency 4.2 million, which it had advanced to cover payments during the suspension, in three equal instalments, the first of which was paid in April 1993.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In resolution 48\/40 J <\/strong>(see below), the General Assembly condemned the repeated Israeli raids on UNRWA premises and installations and called on Israel to refrain from such acts.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Compensation claims<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/i>In 1993, UNRWA reported(1) that no progress had been made with regard to its claims against the Governments of: Israel (for loss and damage to UNRWA property during the 1967 Middle East hostilities, Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1982 and its military action before then); Jordan (arising from the 1967 hostilities and the disturbances of 1970 and 1971), and the Syrian Arab Republic (relating mainly to the levy of certain taxes from which UNRWA believed it was exempt under existing agreements). Those claims had been reported in 1986.(6) The Secretary-General, in September 1993,(7) also stated that there had been no progress with regard to UNRWA claims against Israel resulting from its 1982 invasion of Lebanon.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In resolution 48\/40 <\/strong>H (see below), the General Assembly called on Israel to compensate UNRWA for damages to its property and facilities resulting from its invasion of Lebanon, without prejudice to Israel's responsibility for all damages resulting from that invasion.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Other aspects<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Displaced persons<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/i>During the reporting period, the future of displaced Palestinians and the need to provide housing for them became an even larger concern to UNRWA. Among the displaced in Lebanon were some 6,000 Palestinian families, or about 30,000 persons, who were identified by UNRWA as requiring assistance. The return of property to the lawful owners involved evicting displaced Palestinians squatting on those sites. By June, more than 1,000 Palestinian families had been served with official eviction notices. The situation of 315 displaced families living along the coastal road between Beirut and Saida was the focus of discussions between representatives of Lebanon, UNRWA and the Palestinians. Many displaced families continued to live in intolerable conditions, having taken refuge years earlier in shacks which lacked decent sanitary facilities and access to safe water supply. The Agency reprogrammed funds for the reconstruction of damaged shelters, but those amounts fell far short of what was required for rehousing.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Humanitarian assistance<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>In 1993, in addition to providing relief in the form of basic food commodities, blankets, clothing, shelter repair and cash grants, UNRWA continued to provide a small measure of humanitarian assistance to persons who had been displaced as a result of the June 1967 war and subsequent hostilities in the Middle East but who were not registered with UNRWA as refugees.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>On 10 December 1993, the General Assembly, on the recommendation of the Fourth Committee, adopted resolution 48\/40 C <\/strong>without vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Assistance to persons displaced as a result of<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

the June 1967 and subsequent hostilities<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its resolution 47\/69 C of 14 December 1992 and all its previous resolutions on the question,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking note <\/i>of the report of the Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, covering the period from 1 July 1992 to 30 June 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Concerned <\/i>about the continued human suffering resulting from the hostilities in the Middle East,<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Reaffirms <\/i>its resolution 47\/69 C and all its previous resolutions on the question;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Endorses, <\/i>bearing in mind the objectives of those resolutions, the efforts of the Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East to continue to provide humanitarian assistance as far as practicable, on an emergency basis and as a temporary measure, to other persons in the area who are currently displaced and in serious need of continued assistance as a result of the June 1967 and subsequent hostilities;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Strongly appeals <\/i>to all Governments and to organizations and individuals to contribute generously for the above purposes to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East and to the other intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations concerned.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/40 C<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

10 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 75\t<\/span>Adopted without vote<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Fourth Committee (A\/48\/646) without vote, 8 December (meeting 27), 25-nation draft (A\/C.4\/48\/L.22); agenda item 85.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors:<\/i> Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Canada, Comoros, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France Germany, Greece, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan. Philippines, Sri Lanka, Sweden, United Kingdom.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 4th Committee 18, 19, 23-27; plenary 75.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Repatriation of refugees<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/i>The Secretary-General reported in September 1993(8) on compliance with the General Assembly's 1992 call on Israel to take immediate steps for the return of all displaced inhabitants and to desist from measures obstructing their return.(9) By a note of 15 June, Israel had stated that its position on the matter had been detailed fully in successive annual replies, the latest of which was included in a 1992 report by the Secretary-General.(10) Because of Israel's continued effort to review individual cases of resettlement based on the merits of each case, 94,439 persons had returned to the administered territories.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Secretary-General also included information from UNRWA on the return of refugees registered with it. Since the Agency was not involved in arrangements for either refugees or displaced persons not registered as refugees, its information was based on requests by returning registered refugees for the transfer of their service entitlements to their areas of return; UNRWA was not necessarily aware of the return of registered refugees who had not made such requests. Its records indicated that, between 1 July 1992 and 30 June 1993, 275 registered refugees had returned to the West Bank and 65 to the Gaza Strip. Some of them might not have been displaced in 1967 but might be family members of a displaced registered refugee whom they had accompanied on return or later joined. Displaced refugees known by UNRWA to have returned to the occupied territories since June 1967 numbered about 12,740. The Agency was unable to estimate the total number of displaced inhabitants who had returned, as it kept records only of registered refugees, and even those records, particularly with respect to the location of registered refugees, might be incomplete.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>On 10 December 1993, on the recommendation of the Fourth Committee, the General Assembly adopted resolution 48\/40 F <\/strong>by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Return of population and refugees<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

displaced since 1967<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>Security Council resolution 237(1967) of 14 June 1967,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling also <\/i>its resolutions 2252(ES-V) of 4 July 1967, 2452 A (XXIII) of 19 December 1968, 2535 B (XXIV) of 10 December 1969, 2672 D (XXV) of 8 December 1970, 2792 E (XXVI) of 6 December 1971, 2963 C and D (XXVII) of 13 December 1972, 3089 C (XXVIII) of 7 December 1973, 3331 D (XXIX) of 17 December 1974, 3419 C (XXX) of 8 December 1975, 31\/15 D of 23 November 1976, 32\/90 E of 13 December 1977, 33\/112 F of 18 December 1978, 34\/52 E of 23 November 1979, ES-7\/2 of 29 July 1980, 35\/13 E of 3 November 1980, 36\/146 B of 16 December 1981, 37\/120 G of 16 December 1982, 38\/83 G of 15 December 1983, 39\/99 G of 14 December 1984, 40\/165 G of 16 December 1985, 41\/69 G of 3 December 1986, 42\/69 G of 2 December 1987, 43\/57 G of 6 December 1988, 44\/47 G of 8 December 1989, 45\/73 G of 11 December 1990, 46\/46 G of 9 December 1991 and 47\/69 G of 14 December 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the report of the Secretary-General,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having also considered <\/i>the report of the Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, covering the period from 1 July 1992 to 30 June 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking note of <\/i>the relevant provisions of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements including its Annexes and its Agreed Minutes, signed in Washington, D.C., on 13 September 1993 by the Government of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Reaffirms <\/i>the inalienable right of all displaced inhabitants to return to their homes or former places of residence in the territories occupied by Israel since 1967;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Calls upon <\/i>Israel to accelerate the necessary steps for the unimpeded return of all displaced inhabitants;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General, after consulting with the Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, to report to the General Assembly, before the opening of its forty-ninth session, on the compliance of Israel with paragraph 2 above.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/40 F<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

10 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 75\t<\/span>152-2-5 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Fourth Committee (A\/48\/646) by recorded vote (127-2-6), 8 December (meeting 27); 10-nation draft (A\/C.4\/48\/L.26\/Rev.1); agenda item 85.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Cuba, Indonesia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Pakistan.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 4th Committee 18, 19, 23-27; plenary 75.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In<\/i> favour: <\/i>Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldovia, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zaire, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>Israel, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Central African Republic, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nigeria, Russian Federation.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Food aid<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Secretary-General reported in September 1993(11) that UNRWA continued to provide food assistance to the neediest of the refugee population, known as special hardship cases, who had numbered 179,397 persons in December 1992. It also continued emergency distributions of basic commodities, such as flour, rice, sugar, animal protein and skim milk to the needy, including non-registered Palestinians, in the occupied territory and Lebanon. In 1992, 15,036 tons of those commodities were distributed in Gaza, 7,970 tons in the West Bank and 3,202 tons in Lebanon. Given the lack of additional resources, it had not been possible for the Commissioner-General to consider resuming the interrupted general distribution of basic food rations to all refugees, as requested by the Assembly in several resolutions, most recently in 1992.(12)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 8 December, the Fourth Committee decided not to take action(3) on a draft resolution on the resumption of the ration distribution to Palestine refugees,(4) which was therefore not considered by the General Assembly at its 1993 session. Introducing the draft on behalf of the sponsors (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Cuba, India, Indonesia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Pakistan), Indonesia stated that they would not insist on a vote on the understanding that UNRWA and the Commissioner-General would respond positively within the available resources should the need for ration distribution arise.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Education and training services<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Protection of Palestinian<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

students and educational institutions<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>In September 1993,(15) the Secretary-General reproduced Israel's reply of 15 June to his 18 February note verbale referring to a 1992 General Assembly resolution(16) calling on Israel to open immediately all closed educational and vocational institutions, a large number of which were operated by UNRWA, and to refrain from closing them thereafter.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Describing the resolution as unbalanced, Israel reiterated its position that it distorted the Government's role and policy, which had always been to encourage development of the educational system in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza District. During its administration, the level of education and literacy in those territories had markedly improved and many new institutions of learning had been established. Since December 1987, however, the schools had frequently been exploited as centres for organizing and launching violent activities. Measures taken by the authorities were in reaction to activities having nothing to do with education. Those measures had enabled Israel to permit the reopening of all educational institutions including all seven institutions of higher education, as recently recognized by UNESCO.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Secretary-General also quoted reports of the UNRWA Commissioner-General to the effect that of 77 cases of unauthorized entry into UNRWA premises in the West Bank during the period 1 July 1992 to 30 June 1993, 34 related to schools; of the 186 such cases in Gaza, 86 related to schools. During the same period, two deaths and 39 cases of injury among students and trainees occurred at UNRWA educational institutions in the West Bank, and 20 deaths and 1,077 injuries occurred at institutions in the Gaza Strip, all of which were attributable to beatings, tear-gas inhalation, rubber bullets and live ammunition. In addition, 76 students and trainees in the West Bank and 159 in Gaza were detained, of whom 53 and 94, respectively, had been released by 30 June 1993.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>During the 1992\/93 academic year, an average of 21 per cent of training time was lost at the Kalandia and Ramallah men's and women's training centres in the West Bank due to general strikes, curfews and severe weather conditions. The Gaza training centre lost 29 per cent of days as a result of military closure orders and 10 per cent owing to general strikes and curfews. Of the 361 students from Gaza attending the three training centres in the West Bank, 33 did not receive permits to study there after the March closure. Between September 1992 and June 1993, 8 per cent of school days were lost in the West Bank and 16.8 per cent in the Gaza Strip, owing primarily to military closures, general strikes and curfews. Alternative places were used for teaching classes from schools closed by military order. The Agency provided students in the territories with distance education and self-learning materials, but such measures could only partially compensate for lost classroom time, which had a detrimental effect on educational performance.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 10 December, on the recommendation of the Fourth Committee, the General Assembly adopted resolution 48\/40 J<\/strong> by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Protection of Palestinian students and educational<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

institutions and safeguarding of the security<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

of the facilities of the United Nations Relief<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Near East in the occupied Palestinian territories<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong><\/i>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>Security Council resolution 605(1987) of 22 December 1987,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling also <\/i>its resolutions 43\/21 of 3 November 1988, 43\/57 I of 6 December 1988, 44\/2 of 6 October 1989, 44\/47 K of 8 December 1989, 45\/73 K of 11 December 1990, 46\/46 K of 9 December 1991 and 47\/69 K of 14 December 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking note <\/i>of the report of the Secretary-General dated 21 January 1988, submitted in accordance with Security Council resolution 605(1987), the report dated 31 October 1990, submitted in accordance with Council resolution 672(1990) of 12 October 1990, and the report dated 9 April 1991, submitted in accordance with Council resolution 681(1990) of 20 December 1990,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the report of the Secretary-General,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having also considered <\/i>the report of the Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, covering the period 1 July 1992 to 30 June 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking not, <\/i>in particular, of section IV of that report, especially paragraphs 88 and 89,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Concerned <\/i>about the situation in the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Condemns <\/i>the repeated Israeli raids on the premises and installations of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, and calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to refrain from such raids;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Deplores <\/i>the policy and practices of Israel, the occupying Power, which have led to the prolonged closure of educational and vocational institutions, a large number of which are operated by the Agency, and the repeated disruption of medical services;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session on the implementation of the present resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/40 J<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

10 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 75\t<\/span>159-2 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Fourth Committee (A\/48\/646) by recorded vote (136-2), 8 December (meeting 27); 9-nation draft (A\/C.4\/48\/L.30); agenda item 85.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Cuba, Indonesia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Pakistan.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 4th Committee 18, 19, 23-27; plenary 75.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, Near Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Pens, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Deter, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldovia, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Son Merino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia Slovenia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zaire, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>Israel, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Proposed University of Jerusalem "Al Quds"<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In keeping with a General Assembly request of 1992(17) the Secretary-General reported in October 1993(18) on the establishment of a university for Palestine refugees at Jerusalem. The proposed university first considered by the Assembly in 1980,(19) had since been the subject of annual reports by the Secretary-General with regard to measures taken towards its establishment, including a functional feasibility study.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>To assist in the preparation of the study and at the Secretary-General's request, the Rector of the United Nations University made available the services of a highly qualified expert, Dr. Mihaly Simai, who would visit the area and meet with competent Israeli officials. By a note verbale of 16 August, the Secretary-General had requested Israel to facilitate the expert's visit at a mutually convenient time. Recalling the position of Israel on the proposed university and the questions it had raised, as well as the clarifications already given by the Secretariat, the Secretary-General expressed the opinion that those questions could best be discussed during the proposed visit.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Israel had replied on 23 August that its position remained unchanged, and recalled its note of 15 June underscoring its consistent vote against the Assembly resolutions calling for the establishment of the proposed university, whose sponsors sought to exploit higher education in order to politicize issues extraneous to genuine academic pursuits. In Israel's opinion, a visit by the expert would serve no useful purpose, and so it was unable to assist in taking this matter further.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Secretary-General thus concluded that the feasibility study could not be completed as planned.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>On 10 December 1993, on the basis of the Fourth Committee's recommendation, the General Assembly adopted resolution 48\/40 I <\/strong>by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

University of Jerusalem "Al Quds" for Palestine refugees<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its resolutions 36\/146 G of 16 December 1981, 37\/120 C of 16 December 1982, 38\/83 K of 15 December 1983, 39\/99 K of 14 December 1984, 40\/165 D and K of 16 December 1985, 41\/69 K of 3 December 1986, 42\/69 K of 2 December 1987, 43\/57 J of 6 December 1988, 44\/47 J of 8 December 1989, 45\/73 J of 11 December 1990, 46\/46 J of 9 December 1991 and 47\/69 J of 14 December 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the report of the Secretary-General,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having also considered <\/i>the report of the Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, covering the period from 1 July 1992 to 30 June 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Emphasizes <\/i>the need for strengthening the educational system in the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel since 5 June 1967, including Jerusalem, and specifically the need for the establishment of the proposed university;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to continue to take all necessary measures for establishing the University of Jerusalem "Al-Quds", in accordance with General Assembly resolution 35\/13 B of 3 November 1980, giving due consideration to the recommendations consistent with the provisions of that resolution;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Calls once more upon <\/i>Israel, the occupying Power, to cooperate in the implementation of the present resolution and to remove the hindrances that it has put in the way of establishing the University of Jerusalem "Al-Quds";<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Also request <\/i>the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session on the progress made in the implementation of the present resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/40 I<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

10 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 75\t<\/span>156-2-2 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Fourth Committee (A\/48\/646) by recorded vote (133-2-2), 8 December (meeting 27); 11-nation draft (A\/C.4\/48\/L.29); agenda item 85.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Cuba, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Pakistan.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 4th Committee 18, 19, 23-27; plenary 75.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldovia, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zaire, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>Israel, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Central African Republic, Russian Federation.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Scholarships<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The Secretary-General reported in September 1993(20) on responses to the General Assembly's 1992 appeal(21) to augment special allocations for scholarships and grants to Palestine refugees, for which UNRWA acted as recipient and trustee.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In the 1992\/93 academic year, Japan offered 23 vocational fellowships for study in that country to Palestine refugees in UNRWA's employ. Under the UNRWA university scholarship programme for secondary school graduates, 135 Palestine refugee students received scholarships funded by Japan's contribution of $1 million in 1989, to be spread over five years. An additional 68 Palestinian students participated in the programme in 1992\/93 under another five-year grant of $400,000 made by Japan in 1992, and 169 Palestinians were awarded scholarships made possible by a contribution from Switzerland of 5197,300 in 1992. Twenty-nine applications from Palestine refugee students were referred to Iranian authorities, whose Government had offered 30 university scholarships in 1992. Those awards, while not specifically in response to Assembly resolutions, were in keeping with their spirit. In addition, 119 Palestinian students at Egyptian universities benefited from a 1992 contribution from the Netherlands, which granted $426,533 to cover their tuition.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>During the 1992\/93 academic year, UNESCO awarded 13 scholarships to Palestinians from its regular programme and budget, and four under its Participation Programme. Four Palestinians were awarded international fellowships under the WHO postgraduate fellowship programme aimed at developing technical and managerial skills of UNRWA's Department of Health staff and at meeting future replacement needs under various health disciplines.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 10 December, on the recommendation of the Fourth Committee, the General Assembly adopted resolution 48\/40 D by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Offers by Member States of grants and scholarships<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

for higher education, including vocational<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

training, for Palestine refugees<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its resolution 212(III) of 19 November 1948 on assistance to Palestine refugees,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling also <\/i>its resolutions 35\/13 B of 3 November 1980, 36\/146 H of 16 December 1981, 37\/120 D of 16 December 1982, 38\/83 D of 15 December 1983, 39\/99 D of 14 December 1984, 40\/165 D of 16 December 1985, 41\/69 D of 3 December 1986, 42\/69 D of 2 December 1987, 43\/57 D of 6 December 1988, 44\/47 D of 8 December 1989, 45\/73 D of 11 December 1990, 46\/46 D of 9 December 1991 and 47\/69 D of 14 December 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Cognizant <\/i>of the fact that the Palestine refugees have, for the last four decades, lost their homes, lands and means of livelihood,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the report of the Secretary-General,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having also considered <\/i>the report of the Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, covering the period from 1 July 1992 to 30 June 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Urges <\/i>an States to respond to the appeal in its resolution 32\/90 F of 13 December 1977 and reiterated in subsequent relevant resolutions in a manner commensurate with the needs of Palestine refugees for higher education, including vocational training;<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Strongly appeals <\/i>to all States, specialized agencies and non-governmental organizations to augment the special allocations for grants and scholarships to Palestine refugees, in addition to their contributions to the regular budget of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Expresses its appreciation <\/i>to all Governments, specialized agencies and non-governmental organizations that responded favourably to its resolutions 41\/69 D, 42\/69 D, 43\/57 D, 44\/47 D, 45\/73 D, 46\/46 D and 47\/69 D;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Invites <\/i>the relevant specialized agencies and other organizations of the United Nations system to continue, within their respective spheres of competence, to extend assistance for higher education to Palestine refugee students;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Appeals <\/i>to all States, specialized agencies and the United Nations University to contribute generously to the Palestinian universities in the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel since 1967, including, in due course the proposed University of Jerusalem “Al-Quds" for Palestine refugees;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>6.\t<\/span>Appeals <\/i>to all States, specialized agencies and other international bodies to contribute towards the establishment of vocational training centres for Palestine refugees;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>7.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Agency to act as the recipient and trustee for the special allocations for grants and scholarships and to award them to qualified Palestine refugee candidates;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>8.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session on the implementation of the present resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/40 D<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

10 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 75\t<\/span>161-0-1 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Fourth Committee (A\/48\/646) by recorded vote (139-0-1), 8 December (meeting 27); 12-nation draft (A\/C.4\/48\/L.23); agenda item 85.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Cuba, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Pakistan.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 4th Committee 18, 19, 23-27; plenary 75.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldovia, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Merino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zaire, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>None.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Israel.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Property rights<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/i>Report of the Secretary-General. <\/strong>In response to a 1992 General Assembly resolution,(22) the Secretary-General, in August 1993,(23) submitted a report on the status of steps taken to protect and administer Arab property, assets and property rights in Israel and to establish a fund for income derived therefrom, on behalf of the rightful owners. The Secretary-General indicated that he had transmitted the resolution to Israel and to all other Member States for their comments, as well as to the Chairman of the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>According to Israel's reply of 15 June, reproduced in the report, the 1992 resolution demonstrated misuse of the Assembly for an ongoing propaganda campaign against Israel. Its position had been set out in statements to the then Special Political Committee on three occasions and in a 1992 report of the Secretary-General.(24) Israel again asserted that there was no legal basis for taking the steps proposed, as property rights within the borders of a sovereign State were subject exclusively to that State's domestic laws, the rights of States to regulate and dispose of property within their territory (and income derived from that property) was a generally accepted principle. Significantly, the resolution's sponsors had not proposed that similar steps be taken regarding the confiscated Jewish property in Arab countries—suggesting that Israel's sovereignty was limited or restricted by some provision that did not apply to other States Members of the United Nations. The property left behind by approximately 800,000 Jewish refugees who resettled in Israel as a result of the 1948 war, estimated to be in the billions of dollars, was expropriated by the Arab countries in which they had lived. Israel stressed that there could be no difference in law, justice or equity between the claims of the Arab and Jewish property owners.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Secretary-General added that no reply had been received from any other Member State regarding implementation of the resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Report of the Conciliation Commission. <\/strong>The United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine, in its report covering the period from 1 September 1992 to 31 August 1993,(25) stated that it had nothing new to report since the submission of its September 1992 report,(24) in which it had noted that the circumstances which unfortunately limited its possibilities of action regarding compensation for Palestine refugee properties remained unchanged.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>On 10 December, on the recommendation of the Fourth Committee, the General Assembly adopted resolution 48\/40 G <\/strong>by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Revenues derived from Palestine refugees' properties<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its resolutions 35\/13 A to F of 3 November 1980, 36\/146 C of 16 December 1981, 37\/120 H of 16 December 1982, 38\/83 H of 15 December 1983, 39\/99 H of 14 December 1984, 40\/165 H of 16 December 1985 41\/69 H of 3 December 1986, 42\/69 H of 2 December 1987, 43\/57 H of 6 December 1988, 44\/47 H of 8 December 1989, 45\/73 H of 11 December 1990, 46\/46 H of 9 December 1991, 47\/69 H of 14 December 1992 and all its previous resolutions on the question, including resolution 194(III) of 11 December 1948,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking note <\/i>of the report of the Secretary-General,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking note also <\/i>of the report of the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine, covering the period from 1 September 1992 to 31 August 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the principles of international law uphold the principle that no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his or her private property,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Considering <\/i>that the Palestine Arab refugees are entitled to their property and to the income derived therefrom, in conformity with the principles of justice and equity,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling in particular <\/i>its resolution 394(V) of 14 December 1950, in which it directed the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine, in consultation with the parties concerned, to prescribe measures for the protection of the rights, property and interests of the Palestine Arab refugees,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking note <\/i>of the completion of the programme of identification and evaluation of Arab property, as announced by the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine in its twenty-second progress report, and of the fact that the Land Office had a schedule of Arab owners and file of documents defining the location, area and other particulars of Arab property,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to take all appropriate steps, in consultation with the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine, for the protection of Arab property, assets and property rights in Israel and to establish a fund for the receipt of income derived therefrom, on behalf of the rightful owners;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Calls once more upon <\/i>Israel to render all facilities and assistance to the Secretary-General in the implementation of the present resolution;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Calls upon <\/i>the Governments of all the other Member States concerned to provide the Secretary-General with any pertinent information in their possession concerning Arab property, assets and property rights in Israel which would assist the Secretary-General in the implementation of the present resolution;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session on the implementation of the present resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/40 G<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

10 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 75\t<\/span>114-2-44 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Fourth Committee (A\/48\/646) by recorded vote (91-2-43), 8 December (meeting 27); 9-nation draft (A\/C.4\/48\/L.27), orally revised; agenda item 85.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Cuba. Indonesia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Pakistan.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 4th Committee 18, 19, 23-27; plenary 75.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Australia,* Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada,* Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, France, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon. Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, New Zealand,* Nicaragua, Niger, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zaire, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>Israel, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Central African Republic, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica. Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldovia, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Swaziland, Sweden, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, United Kingdom.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>*Later advised the Secretariat they had intended to abstain.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Refugee protection<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/i>The Secretary-General reported in September 1993(26) on implementation of a 1992 General Assembly resolution(27) holding Israel responsible for the security of the Palestine refugees in the occupied territory, including Jerusalem, and calling on it to compensate UNRWA for the damage to its property and facilities resulting from Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon and its policies and practices in the occupied territory.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The report reproduced Israel's note verbale of 15 June 1993 to the Secretary-General's request for information on steps taken or envisaged to comply with the resolution. Israel said that it had fully set forth its position on the subject in statements to the then Special Political Committee and in a 1992 report of the Secretary-General.(28) The note stated that adopting the resolution was hypocritical, anachronistic and out of place. Despite its withdrawal from Lebanon in 1985, Israel was still being blamed for the "suffering" of Palestinians there and, not surprisingly, for Arab persecution of Palestinian refugees. In recent years thousands of Palestinians had been killed and wounded in Lebanese refugee camps in vicious fighting totally unconnected with Israel; likewise, Palestinian refugee camps in Jordan and the Syrian Arab Republic were the scenes of considerable human misery. The selective and distorted presentation of the Palestinian refugees' situation in Arab countries clearly illustrated the resolution's double standards and its blatant disregard for the refugees' general welfare. Israel emphasized that, in keeping with international law, it alone was competent to ensure full protection to all inhabitants of Judaea, Samaria and the Gaza District.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Secretary-General went on to cite the UNRWA Commissioner-General's report for the period 1 July 1992 to 30 June 1993,(1) to the effect that the Commissioner-General had continued his efforts in support of the Palestine refugees' safety and legal and human rights, as called for in the 1992 Assembly resolution. UNRWA international staff, in particular the refugee affairs and legal officers, continued to help reduce tension and prevent maltreatment of refugees, especially vulnerable groups such as women and children. The Commissioner-General also protested to Israel against the excessive use of force and collective punishments, such as the punitive demolition and sealing of shelters, as a failure on Israel's part to uphold standards required under international humanitarian law. As part of the Commissioner-General's efforts in that regard, legal advice and financial assistance were provided for refugees seeking to assert their legal rights.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>On 10 December, on the recommendation of the Fourth Committee, the General Assembly adopted resolution 48\/40 H <\/strong>by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Protection of Palestine refugees<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling in particular <\/i>Security Council resolutions 605(1987) of 22 December 1987, 607(1988) of 5 January 1988, 608(1988) of 14 January 1988, 636(1989) of 6 July 1989, 641(1989) of 30 August 1989, 672(1990) of 12 October 1990, 673(1990) of 24 October 1990 681(1990) of 20 December 1990, 694(1991) of 24 May 1991 and 726(1992) of 6 January 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>its resolutions ES-7\/5 of 26 June 1982, ES-7\/6 and ES-7\/8 of 19 August 1982, ES-7\/9 of 24 September 1982, 37\/120 J of 16 December 1982, 38\/83 I of 15 December 1983, 39\/99 I of 14 December 1984, 40\/165 I of 16 December 1985, 41\/69 I of 3 December 1986, 42\/69 I of 2 December 1987, 43\/21 of 3 November 1988, 43\/57 I of 6 December 1988, 44\/47 I of 8 December 1989, 45\/73 I of 11 December 1990, 46\/46 I of 9 December 1991 and 47\/69 I of 14 December 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking note <\/i>of the report of the Secretary-General dated 21 January 1988, submitted in accordance with Security Council resolution 605(1987), the report dated 31 October 1990, submitted in accordance with Council resolution 672(1990), and the report dated 9 April 1991 submitted in accordance with Council resolution 681(1990),<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having considered <\/i>the report of the Secretary-General,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having also considered <\/i>the report of the Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, covering the period from 1 July 1992 to 30 June 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Concerned <\/i>about the situation in the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Taking into account <\/i>the need to consider measures for the impartial protection of the Palestinian civilian population under Israeli occupation,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Referring <\/i>to the humanitarian principles of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and to the obligations arising from the regulations annexed to the Hague Convention IV of 1907,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Deeply distressed <\/i>that, notwithstanding the improved security situation owing to the deployment of the Lebanese army, the Lebanese and Palestinian populations are still suffering from continuing Israeli acts of aggression against Lebanon and from other hostile acts,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Holds <\/i>Israel responsible for the security of the Palestine refugees in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, and calls upon it to fulfill its obligations as the occupying Power in this regard, in accordance with the pertinent provisions of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949;<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Calls upon <\/i>all the High Contracting Parties to the Convention to take appropriate measures to ensure respect by Israel, the occupying Power, for the Convention in all circumstances, in conformity with their obligation under article 1 thereof;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Urges <\/i>the Security Council to remain seized of the situation in the occupied Palestinian territory;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Urges <\/i>the Secretary-General and the Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East to continue their efforts in support of the upholding of the safety and security and the legal and human rights of the Palestine refugees in all the territories under Israeli occupation since 1967;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>5.\t<\/span>Calls once again upon <\/i>Israel to desist forthwith from acts of aggression against the Lebanese and Palestinian populations in Lebanon in violation of the Charter of the United Nations and the norms of international law;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>6.\t<\/span>Demands <\/i>that Israel, the occupying Power, release forthwith all arbitrarily detained Palestine refugees, including the employees of the Agency;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>7.\t<\/span>Calls once again upon <\/i>Israel to compensate the Agency for damages to its property and facilities resulting from the invasion of Lebanon by Israel in 1982, without prejudice to the responsibility of the latter for all damages resulting from that invasion, as well as for other damages resulting from the policies and practices of Israel, the occupying Power, in the occupied Palestinian territory;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>8.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Secretary-General, in consultation with the Commissioner-General, to report to the General Assembly, before the opening of its forty-ninth session, on the implementation of the present resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/40 H<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

10 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 75\t<\/span>153-2-6 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Fourth Committee (A\/48\/646) by recorded vote (134-2-2); 8 December (meeting 27); 9-nation draft (A\/C.4\/48\/L.28); agenda item 85.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors. <\/i>Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Cuba, Indonesia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Pakistan.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 4th Committee 18, 19, 23-27; plenary 75.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Ghana, Greece Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduran Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldovia, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent end the Grenadines, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zaire, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>Israel, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Abstaining: <\/i>Canada,* Central African Republic, Georgia, Kenya, New Zealand,* Russian Federation.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>*Later advised the Secretariat they had intended to vote in favour.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Removal and resettlement of refugees<\/strong><\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/i>In a September 1993 report,(29) the Secretary-General reproduced Israel's reply of 15 June to his note verbale of 18 February referring to a 1992 General Assembly resolution(30) demanding that Israel desist from removing and resettling Palestine refugees in the Palestinian territory occupied by it since 1967 and from destroying their shelters. The reply stated that Israel's position had been made known in successive annual replies to the Secretary-General in recent years, the latest of which was contained in his 1992 report on the subject.(31)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Israel considered the resolution unbalanced and distorted in that it intentionally ignored the improved living conditions in Gaza since 1967. Nothing could be more indicative of that approach than the resolution's condemnation of refugee rehabilitation projects. By initiating community development projects in Gaza, Israel had enabled some 20,000 families (approximately 150,000 persons) to leave the refugee camps on a voluntary basis and relocate to nearby residential areas. Its vital role in planning and implementing those housing projects had been recognized in 1985 by both the Secretary-General(32) and the Commissioner-General. Israel continued to do as much as it could to improve living conditions of Palestinians in the territories; it had outlined recent steps to the Secretary-General in March(33) (see above, under "Living conditions of Palestinians").<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The resolution's request that the Secretary-General resume issuing identity cards irrespective of the refugees' need for them was yet another indication of its patent political bias. Notwithstanding subversive efforts to the contrary, Israel was determined to pursue the task of improving the refugees' living conditions through projects such as the refugee housing programmer, welcoming all assistance from the international community in that regard.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Secretary-General stated that, according to information from UNRWA, Israeli authorities continued to inflict collective punishment through punitive demolition and sealing of refugee shelters in the West Bank and Gaza. As at 30 June 1993, of the 87 refugee families affected by the 1971 demolition of shelters in Gaza,(34) 12 continued to live in conditions of hardship and 19 remained in unsatisfactory housing. Despite assurances by Israel that those families would be rehoused, no progress had been made.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The situation of the families living on the northern perimeter of Jabalia camp,(35) who had been told to remove some of their shelter extensions, remained the same: no demolitions had taken place but the shelters remained isolated by the bulldozing of sand around them. Of the 35 families whose shelters on the perimeter of Beach camp were demolished in 1983,(35) 18 had been allocated plots of land at the Sheikh Radwan and Beit Lahiya housing projects, one was housed in a vacant shelter at Beach camp, and the other 16 remained in the same situation as previously reported in temporary shelters near the camp site. Of the 12 families at Rafah camp who had agreed, at the request of the Israeli authorities, to relocate to the Israeli-sponsored Tel-es-Sultan housing project,(37) two had moved there, leaving the remaining 10 shelters isolated by sand ramparts. Thirty families (150 persons) from Canada camp in Egypt had returned to Gaza to accommodations at Tel-es-Sultan.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Israeli authorities had to date allocated approximately 3,914 plots of land in the Gaza Strip for housing projects. A total of 2,605 plots had been built on by 3,714 refugee families comprising 22,946 persons; buildings on 236 plots were under construction, while 936 plots were still vacant and 137 had been built on by non-refugee families. In addition, 3,034 refugee families, consisting of 18,823 persons, had moved into 2,666 completed housing units consisting of 5,893 rooms.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>As to the Assembly's request that he address the acute situation of the refugees, the Commissioner-General advised that UNRWA, in addition to extending to refugees its regular services plus emergency food, medical and other assistance, also pursued its long-term programme to upgrade infrastructure, especially in the camps, and, in general, to improve the economic and social welfare of the refugees.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>The Secretary-General regretted his inability to comply with the Assembly's request that he resume issuing identification cards to all Palestine refugees and their descendants in the occupied territory, whether or not they were recipients of UNRWA rations and services. Under an arrangement in effect for 40 years, all families registered with UNRWA were in possession of Agency-issued registration cards indicating the number of family members and their eligibility for services. However, the Commissioner-General did not have the means to issue identity cards as such. He would keep the matter under review to see whether appropriate documentation regarding the registration status of individual members of refugee families could be issued.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>On 10 December 1993, on the recommendation of the Fourth Committee, the General Assembly adopted resolution 48\/40 E<\/strong> by recorded vote.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Palestine refugees in the Palestinian territory<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

occupied by Israel since 1967<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span><\/strong><\/i>The General Assembly,<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>Security Council resolution 237(1967) of 14 June 1967,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling also <\/i>its resolutions 2792 C (XXVI) of 6 December 1971, 2963 C (XXVII) of 13 December 1972, 3089 C (XXVIII) of 7 December 1973, 3331 D (XXIX) of 17 December 1974, 3419 C (XXX) of 8 December 1975, 31\/15 E of 23 November 1976, 32\/90 C of 13 December 1977, 33\/112 E of 18 December 1978, 34\/52 F of 23 November 1979, 35\/13 F of 3 November 1980, 36\/146 A of 16 December 1981, 37\/120 E and I of 16 December 1982, 38\/83 E and J of 15 December 1983, 39\/99 E and J of 14 December 1984, 40\/165 E and J of 16 December 1985, 41\/69 E and J of 3 December 1986, 42\/69 E and J of 2 December 1987, 43\/57 E of 6 December 1988, 44\/47 E of 8 December 1989, 45\/73 E of 11 December 1990, 46\/46 E of 9 December 1991 and 47\/69 E of 14 December 1992,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having <\/i>considered the report of the Secretary-General,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Having also <\/i>considered the report of the Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, covering the period from 1 July 1992 to 30 June 1993,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Recalling <\/i>the provisions of paragraph 11 of its resolution 194(III) of 11 December 1948, and considering that measures to resettle Palestine refugees in the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel since 1967 away from their homes and property from which they were displaced constitute a violation of their inalienable right of return,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Alarmed <\/i>by the reports received from the Commissioner-General that the Israeli occupying authorities, in contravention of the obligation of Israel under international law, persist in their policy of demolishing shelters occupied by refugee families,<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>1.\t<\/span>Demands once again <\/i>that Israel desist from the removal and resettlement of Palestine refugees in the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel since 1967 and from the destruction of their shelters;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>2.\t<\/span>Requests <\/i>the Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East to address the acute situation of the Palestine refugees in the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel since 1967 and accordingly to extend all the services of the Agency to those refugees;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>3.\t<\/span>Requests<\/i> the Secretary-General, in cooperation with the Commissioner-General, to resume issuing identification cards to an Palestine refugees and their descendants in the occupied Palestinian territory, irrespective of whether or not they are recipients of rations and services of the Agency;<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>4.\t<\/span>Also request <\/i>the Secretary-General, after consulting with the Commissioner-General, to report to the General Assembly, before the opening of its forty-ninth session, on the implementation of the present resolution and, in particular, on the compliance of Israel with paragraph 1 above.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

General Assembly resolution 48\/40 E<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

10 December 1993\t<\/span>   Meeting 75\t<\/span>157-2 (recorded vote)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Approved by Fourth Committee (A\/48\/646) by recorded vote (135-2), 8 December (meeting 27); 9-nation draft (A\/C.4\/48\/L.24\/Rev.1); agenda item 85.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Sponsors: <\/i>Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Cuba, Indonesia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Pakistan.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Meeting numbers. <\/i>GA 48th session: 4th Committee 18, 19, 23-27; plenary 75.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>In favour: <\/i>Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldovia, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zaire, Zimbabwe.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t<\/span>Against: <\/i>Israel, United States.<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

REFERENCES<\/i><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

(1)A\/48\/13 & Add.1 & Add.1\/Corr.1. (2)A\/48\/132. (3)A\/48\/554. (4)YUN 1992, p. 1042, GA res. 47\/211, 23 Dec. 1992. (5)Ibid., p. 429. (6)YUN 1986, p. 342. (7)A\/48\/376. (8)A\/48\/375. (9)YUN 1992, p. 446, GA res. 47\/69 G, 14 Dec. 1992. (10)Ibid., p. 446. (11)A\/48\/374. (12)YUN 1992, p. 447, GA res. 47\/69 F, 14 Dec. 1992 . (13)A\/48\/646. (14)A\/C.4\/48\/L.25. (15)A\/48\/377. (16)YUN 1992, p. 448, GA res. 47\/69 K, 14 Dec. 1992. (17)Ibid., p. 449, GA res. 47\/69 J, 14 Dec. 1992. (18)A\/48\/431. (19)YUN 1980, p. 443, GA res. 35\/13 B, 3 Nov. 1980. (20)A\/48\/372. (21)YUN 1992, p. 450, GA res. 47\/69 D, 14 Dec. 1992. (22)Ibid., p. 452, GA res. 47\/69 H, 14 Dec. 1992. (23)A\/48\/275. (24)YUN 1992, p. 451. (25)A\/48\/474. (26)A\/48\/376. (27)YUN 1992, p. 453, GA res. 47\/69 I, 14 Dec. 1992. (28)Ibid., p. 452. (29)A\/48\/373. (30)YUN 1992, p. 455, GA res. 47\/69 E, 14 Dec. 1992. (31)Ibid, p. 454. (32)YUN 1985, p. 367. (33)A\/48\/112. (34)YUN 1971, p. 198. (35)YUN 1985, p. 366. (36)YUN 1983, p. 358. (37)YUN 1986, p. 351.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

YEARBOOK OF THE UNITED NATIONS 1993 Volume 47 Department of Public Information United Nations, New York Middle East United Nations efforts in 1993 focused on helping to bring about a comprehensive settlement of the complex Middle East conflict, while the parties to the conflict themselves were engaged in an ongoing peace process sponsored by the […]<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"country":[897,933],"document-category":[2645],"document-source":[1897],"committee-meeting":[],"document-subject":[2209,2281,1741,1961,2181,1749,2577,1745],"entity":[1985,1729],"document-language":[6542],"class_list":["post-205332","document","type-document","status-publish","hentry","country-israel","country-lebanon","document-category-yearbook","document-source-united-nations-department-of-public-information-dpi","document-subject-expulsions-and-deportations","document-subject-history","document-subject-human-rights-and-international-humanitarian-law","document-subject-jerusalem","document-subject-negotiations-and-agreements","document-subject-palestine-question","document-subject-peace-conference","document-subject-refugees-and-displaced-persons","entity-state","entity-united-nations-system","document-language-english"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document\/205332","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/document"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document\/205332\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=205332"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/country?post=205332"},{"taxonomy":"document-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-category?post=205332"},{"taxonomy":"document-source","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-source?post=205332"},{"taxonomy":"committee-meeting","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/committee-meeting?post=205332"},{"taxonomy":"document-subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-subject?post=205332"},{"taxonomy":"entity","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/entity?post=205332"},{"taxonomy":"document-language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-language?post=205332"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}