C-7380 Transcription Eban, Abba. Address for peace ...collections.americanjewisharchives.org/ms/ms0763/c7380.pdfC-7380 Transcription Eban, Abba. Address for peace negotiations at the

C-7380 Transcription

Eban, Abba. Address for peace negotiations at the

United Nations. 13 July 1948.

Abba Eban:

[clears throat] [coughing in background] Mr. President,

members of the Security Council, there is not a single person in

this room, or outside it, who does not know in the depths of his

heart, that the Arab states, by resuming their attacks upon

Israel, have committed an act of aggression within the meaning

of Chapter 7 of the Charter. Their armed forces are operating

beyond their frontiers for purposes which the Charter

specifically forbids. They are using force against the

territorial integrity and political independence of the State of

Israel, in a manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United

Nations. Their object, which they openly confess, is to secure

the violent extinction of the State of Israel [01:00], the

establishment of which was recommended by the general assembly.

They have rejected the solemn appeal of the Security Council, to

agree to a prolongation of the truce agreement initiated by the

May 29th Resolution, with the result that that truce agreement

has become void and has no validity at this time. On the third

Rabbi Herbert A. Friedman Collection, C-7380. American Jewish Archives,Cincinnati, Ohio.

1

thee Security Councicil,,, thehere is not a singngle

or outside it, who dodooeees not know in the dep

the ArArArababab ssstatatatetetes,s,s, bbbyyy rereresumimimingngng tttheheheiririr aaatttacks

e commmmimimittededed ann n act ofofof agggggressssssiiionnn wiww thththinii the

7 of the ChCC ararartett r.r.r. Theeeirii armrmrmeddd ffforrrcecc s are op

r frontieieiersrsrs fffororor pppuruu popoposeseses whwhwhicicichhh thththe Charteer

y forbidsss. Thhheyyy aaarerere uuusisisingngng fooorccce agggainst ttthe

innntegrity ananand dd popopolililitititicacacalll ininindeeepepepennndence offf th

a manannner rr inconsisisistetetentntnt wwwititith ttthe purppposososeseses of

eir objbjjececect,t,t, which thehehey yy openly connnfeeessssss, is t

extinctiononon ooof ff thtt e StSt tate ofoff IIIsrsrsraeaeaell [01:00],

nt of which wasss rrrecececomomommememendeddd bbby the general

ejected the solemn appeal of the Security C

of July, the mediator appointed by the United Nations, appealing

to all governments concerned, for a prolongation of the truce,

made the following observations. “There is little doubt that a

decision to resume fighting would be universally condemned, and

that a party taking such a decision would be assuming a

responsibility which would be viewed by the world with the

utmost gravity.” Well, Mr. President, the Arab states have taken

that decision [02:00]. They have assumed that responsibility.

They have resumed fighting. Their violence is directed against

the recommendation of the general assembly, against the appeal

of the Security Council, against the call of the mediator,

against the principles of world peace, against the people and

the State of Israel. And the State of Israel, which is the

victim of this renewed aggression, now turns to this great organ

of the United Nations to ask, is that decision universally

condemned? Is that responsibility viewed by the world with the

utmost gravity? Does this Council condemn the decision to resume

fighting? Does this Council view with the utmost gravity? And if

so, what steps does the Council propose to take in order to

vindicate the Charter against flagrant aggression, to impose the

penalties [03:00] which aggression imperatively incurs and to

place moral and material support behind the state of Israel,


2

ityy.” Well, Mr. Preresisiidedd ntnt, the Arab statetes

on [02:00]. They haveee assumed that responsi

esumeeed d d fififighghghtititingngng. ThThTheieieirrr violololenenencecece iiisss dididirrected

ndationonon offf ttthee e geneeerararall asaassembmbmbllly,,, agaa aiaiainsnn t th

rity Counnncicc l,l,l, agagagainsttt the cccallll offf the media

ppprinciplplpleseses of f f wowoworlrr d d d pepepeaccce,e,e, aaagaaaininnststst the ppeo

f Israel... AAAnddd tttheee SSStatatatetete ooofff IIIsrrraelelel,,, which is

hisss reneweddd aaagggg rereresssss ioioion,nn nnnowowow ttturururnnns to thiisis g

ed NaNaationonons to asksksk,,, isisis ttthahahatt dddecisionnn uuunininivers

Is thattt rrresesespopp nsibilititity yy viewed by thhheee world

ity? Does ttthihihisss CoCC un icill condndndemememnnn thththe decision

oes this Counciciilll viviviewewew wwwith thththe utmost gravi

eps does the Council propose to take in ord

defending its integrity and independence against aggressive

attack? It should not be necessary at this stage, Mr. President,

to provide elaborate evidence in order to prove the aggressive

character of these warlike movements upon which the armies of

the Arab states have launched themselves with conspicuous and

welcome lack of success since Friday last. The Charter, which

its explicit distinction between the legitimate and illegitimate

use of force, provides a spontaneous response to those who would

question the aggressive character of these acts. Neither article

51, which allows to members of the United Nations of the right

of self-defense only if an armed attack [04:00] occurs upon

them, nor the preamble of the Charter which lays it down that

armed force shall not be used save in the common interest, can

possibly be invoked in support of these squalid attacks. For

Egypt, Transjordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Yemen

have not been individually or jointly attacked. And they have

certainly not been invited by the United Nations to storm into

territory not their own for purposes of havoc and murder.

Therefore the principals of the Charter themselves proclaim

these operations as acts of aggression, and the same result is

reached if we apply to these acts the commonly accepted

criterion of responsibility and initiative, for here we are in


3

t ddisi tinction betweweennn thehe legitimate and d il

e, provides a sponttannneeeous response to those

e aggggrereressssssiviviveee chchcharararacacacteteterrr of ttthehehesesese aaactctcts.s.s. Neith

llows ttto memememmmbererers offf ttthhe UUniteteteddd NaNaNatitt onononsss of t

ense onlyyy iff anaa aaarmeddd attacacack [0[0[04::0000 ] occurs

heee preambmbmblelele of f f thththeee ChChCharararteeerrr whwhwhicicch h h lalalays it do

sshs all nooot beee uuuseeedd d sasasaveveve iiinnn tttheee cccommmmon inttter

innnvoked innn sssupuu popoportrtrt ooofff thththesesese sqsqsquuualid atttatack

sjordrddan,,, Syria, Lebebebanananononon, Irrraq, Saudddiii ArArArabia

en indidiivivividududualaa ly or jojojoininintly attackkkeddd... And th

ot been invnvnvitititededed by ththe UUnitittededed NNNatatatioi ns to st

ot their own fofoorrr pupupurprprposososes ooofff havoc and murd

he principals of the Charter themselves pro

the unusual position of not being faced with any conflict of

views on the question of who began the fighting. [05:00] When

the first official phase of this aggression began on May the

15th, representatives of the Arab states showered documents upon

this Council as they have done again this week, asserting that

they had taken the initiative for using armed force outside

their frontiers with the purpose of overthrowing the political

independence and territorial integrity of a neighboring state

whose existence they dislike.

Under the Charter, they are, of course, entitled to dislike

the existence of the State of Israel. But under the Charter,

they are most emphatically and categorically forbidden to use

armed force against the political independence or territorial

integrity of that state, or indeed to use armed force against

anybody in Palestinian territory, for any purpose whatever, save

in the common interest of the United Nations, [06:00] or in

defense of their own territories, if those territories had been

unprovokedly attacked. Not one of the conditions which make the

use of armed force legitimate under the Charter exists or has

been claimed to exist in respect of these acts.

At the 302nd meeting of the Security Council,

representatives of the Arab states read statements similar in


4

ierrss with the purpoposeee of f overthrowing thehe p

e and territorial intntteeegrity of a neighborin

ence thththeyeyey dddisisislililikekeke...

the CChahahartererer,,, thththey aaarerere,, ofoof cououourse,e,e, entntntitii led

ce of theee Statatatett ooof Isssrrrael... Buuttt unnndedd r the Ch

sttt emphatataticicicalalallylyly aaandnn cccatatategggorororicicicalalallylyy ffforbiddden

aagagainst thhhe poooliiitititicacacalll ininindddepppenndn eeenccce or teeerr

f ttthat stattte,e,e, orrr ininindededeededed tttooo ussseee aaarmed forrrce

Palessstinininian terrirr tototoryryry, fofofor any purppposososeee what

on inteeererereststst of the UnUnUnititited Nationsss, [0[0[06:00]

their own ttterererririritott riies, ifif ttthohohosesese ttterritories

y attacked. Notott ooonenene ooofff the ccoconditions which

d force legitimate under the Charter exists

substance and tone to those which now lie before us, asserting

the political ambitions whereby they are animated, and the

violent means which they use in their support. On that occasion

the distinguished representative of the United States said of

those declarations, “Their statements are the best evidence we

have of the international character of this aggression. They

tell us quite frankly that their business in Palestine is

political, [07:00] and that they are there to establish a

unitary state. Therefore we have evidence of the highest type

concerning the international violation of the law, namely the

admission of those who commit this violation.”

On May the 28th, supporting a resolution submitted by the

distinguished representative of the Soviet Union, the

representative of the United States succinctly expressed the

purposes of Arab aggression in these words: “We, they say, are

there only for the purpose of overwhelming the government of

Israel. We are going to overwhelm it by power, and we are going

to determine an international question ourselves.” Continuing,

he said, “An existing independent government cannot be blotted

out in that way, it cannot be blotted out by just sitting at the

Security Council table and ignoring it. The Arab states are

taking the only course [08:00] that can be taken to blot it out,


5

te frf ankly that theheirirr bususiness in Palestitine

[07:00] and that thhheyyy are there to establis

te. TTTheheherererefofoforerere wwweee hahahaveveve eeevidededencncnceee ofofof ttthehehe highe

the intntnternananatttionononal vvvioioiollatittion ooofff thththe ee lalalaw,ww nam

f those wwwhohh cccomoo mimimit thhhisii vioioiolaatititionnn..”.

ttthe 28thhh, sususuppppppororortititinggg aaa resesesolololutututioioionnn suss bmittted

edd d represssennntaaatiiiveee oofff thththe SSSovvvieete Unnin on, thhhe

iveee of the UnUnUnitii ededed SSStatatatetetess sususuccccinininccctly exprrress

Arababb aggggggressionnn inii ttthehehesesese wwwords: “WWWe,e,e, ttthey

for thehee pppurururpopp se of ovovoverererwhelming tttheee ggovernm

are going tttooo ovovoveere whh lelm itit bbby y y popopowewewer, and we

e an internatioioonananalll quququesesestionnn oourselves.” Co

n existing independent government cannot be

and that is marching in with their armies and blotting it out.

That is a matter of international concern, a matter of so great

importance that we cannot sit here and say, ‘Oh, we wash our

hands of it. We shall not do anything about it to make it

effective.’ We know of course that this is a violation of the

Charter.” And finally, referring to the claim of the Arabs aimed

at the maintenance of peace, the representative of the United

States said, “This is equivalent in its absurdity to the legend

that these five armies are there to maintain peace and at the

same time are conducting a bloody war.”

Mr. President, during the earlier episodes of this

conflict, which began in December and took official form on the

15th of May, the aggressive character of the Arab invasion was so

clear to many members of the Security Council [09:00] that five

of them were already prepared, before any truce procedure or

investigation had taken place, without any intervention by an

agent of the United Nations to test the peaceful intentions of

the two parties, to determine on the basis of existing evidence,

even at that early stage, that there existed a threat to the

peace. Those other members of the Security Council who were

unable to view that drastic view at so early a stage, were not

prepared that such a threat to the peace or act of aggression


6

tennana ce of peace, tthehee repepresentative of tthe

, “This is equivalentntt iin its absurdity to t

five arararmimimieseses aaarerere ttthehehererere ttto mamamaininintatataininin pppeaeaeacce and

re coondndnductititinnng aaa bloooodododyy wawwar.”””

esident, dudd ririringnn ttthe eeeaaarliererer eepipipisooodedd s of thi

hiiich begagagannn iniin DDDecececemee bebeberrr annnddd tototookokok ooofffffficial fo

ttthe aggrrressss iivi eee chchcharararacaccteteterrr offf ttthehehe AAArab invvvas

ny members ofofof thehehe SSSecececurururititity y y Cooounununcccil [09:00000]

e alrlrreadydydy preparerered,d,d, bbbefefeforororee any truccceee prprproced

on had d tatatakekekennn place, wwwititithout any iiinttterererventio

e United NaNaNatititionononsss tott ttestt ththheee pepepeacacaceful inten

ties, to determmmininineee ononon ttthe bbbaasasis of existing

t early stage that there existed a threat

existed. Not one of them, except that member of the Security

Council whose government has been directly implicated in every

act of aggression that has taken place in the Near East for the

last six months, not one member of the Security Council, with

that obvious exception, was prepared to assert that the Arab

armies had any moral or legal justification [10:00] for the

military operations which they were carrying out. Those members,

however, wished to make sure, that all methods of pacific

settlement provided for in Chapter 6 of the Charter had been

tried and exhausted. They wished to give a final chance for the

counsels of moderation to assert themselves. To this end,

ceasefire resolutions were repeatedly sponsored, accepted by the

government of Israel, rejected by the Arab states, reexamined by

the Security Council, and eventually served up on May the 29th in

the form of a resolution which combined the call for a ceasefire

with the satisfaction with what the United Kingdom

representative called “the political demands which the Arabs

consider reasonable.” These demands were expressed in a

universal arms embargo, which denied arms equally to the State

of Israel engaged in its defense [11:00] and to the Arab states

bent upon a consider-...upon what a considerable body of

international opinion was already willing to label as


7

eraatit ons which theyey wwweree e e carrying out. ThThos

shed to make sure, ththhataat all methods of paci

proviiidededed d d fofoforrr ininin CCChahahaptptptererer 6 ooofff thththeee ChChChararartter ha

xhausteteted.d TTThhheyy y wishhhededed tooo giveveve a fffinii alalal chanc

moderatiiionoo ttto oo asasasserttt themsmsmselveveves.. To this e

esssolutionononsss wwwererere rrrepee eaeaeatetetedlllyy y spspsponnnsoooreeed, acccep

offf Israelll, reeejeeectttededed bbby yy thththeee AAAraaba sttat tes, rrree

y CCCouncil, ananand dd evevvenenentututualalallylyly ssserrrveveveddd up on MMaMay

a rereesolululution whihh chchh cccomomombibibineneeddd the caaallllll fffor a

tisfactttioioionnn wiww th whattt thththe United KKKinnngdgdgdom

ive called dd “t“t“thehehe pollititiic lal dddemememananandsdsds which the

asonable.” Thessseee dededemamamandndnds weeerrere expressed in

rms embargo which denied arms equally to t

aggression. This equation of principle between the defending

State of Israel and its attackers enabled the invading states to

maintain the preponderance of arms which they had built

up...through the long and uninterrupted exercise of their

sovereign rights and their military alliance with a great power.

We attach great significance to paragraph seventeen of the

mediator’s report, in which he describes Jewish and Arab

military activity in terms of defense and attack, respectively:

As a further inducement to the Arab states to refrain from the

use of armed force, encroachments were demanded upon the

sovereignty of Israel in that matter wherein its sovereignty is

most vital and cherished [12:00], the matter of immigration.

Unwarranted restrictions placed upon the state of Israel in this

regard were extended still further by the mediator’s assumption

of discretion and by the action of certain governments which

misinterpreted those immigration provisions beyond the limits of

the truce resolution and of the mediator’s interpretation. Of

these cases, Mr. President, the most striking is that of Cyprus,

to which the provisional government of Israel has drawn the

attention of the Security Council in document S 886. 11,000 men

of military age, many of them victims of persecution for over a

decade, are held on that island in captivity without elementary


8

repporo t, in which hehe dddesee crcribes Jewish and d Ar

tivity in terms of dedeefeffense and attack, resp

r inddducucucemememenenenttt tototo ttthehehe AAArararab stststatatateseses tttooo rerereffrain

d forrrcecece, enenencccroaoaoachmeeentntntss wewwere dddeeemananandedd d dd upuu on t

of Israeeelll ininn thahahat maaatttter wwwheererereinnn its sover

annnd cheriririshshshededed [[[121212:0:: 0]0]0], thhheee mamamattttttererr ooof immiigr

rrrestrictttiooonsss ppplaaacececeddd upupuponnn thhhe statatattet of Isssra

exxxtended ssstititillll fffurururthththererer bbby y y thhheee mmmediator’’s’s a

on anannd bybyby the actctctioioionnn ofofof cererertttain govvvererernmnmnments

ted thohoosesese iiimmmm igrationonon ppprovisions beeeyoyoyond the

esolution aaandndnd ooofff ththt e medidiatattororor’s’s’s iiinterpretat

, Mr. Presidentntt,,, thththeee momomost ssstrtrtriking is that

e provisional government of Israel has draw

human rights. The matter concerns the Security Council because

its name has been invoked to cover that injustice. [13:00] It

has been represented that the truce resolution justified these

detentions, yet we have learned here only this morning that the

only authority competent to interpret the recent truce

resolution considers that these detentions rest upon no

authority, no request, no interpretation, and no discretion on

his part. It is therefore an arbitrary, unilateral, and

dictatorial act.

I shall now read a telegram reaching me from Cyprus a few

hours ago, dispatched from Famagusta on the 12th of this month,

from the central committee of Cyprus refugees: “The army

authorities at Karaolos camp distributed the following on July

the 9th, quote, ‘The latest outbreak and demonstration will no

longer be tolerated and must cease. Henceforth, every attempt to

escape will be dealt with; with strongest...measures [14:00] if

necessary. Troops will fire with the aim not to wound but to

kill. In addition, all privileges such as free distribution of

cigarettes and special supplement of the American Joint

Distribution Committee will be stopped immediately. No further

warning will be given. Despite Sir Godfrey Collins’s assurance

to the Jewish Distribution Committee today, this is a mistake,


9

no rer quest, no inteterppprerr tatation, and no disiscr

t is therefore an arbrbbitiitrary, unilateral, an

act.

l noww rerereaddd aaa ttteele egrararammm reeeaachihiingngng mmmeee frrromomom Cypr

dispatcheeed dd frfrfromoo FFFamaggguuusta ooon thththe 1211 th of thi

ntttral comomommimimitttttteeeeee ooof ff CyCyCyprprprusss rrrefefefugggeeeees::: “The ar

aata Karaooolooos caaamppp dddisisistrtrtribibibuuuteeed thehehe followiiing

te,,, ‘The laaatetetest oooutututbrbrbreaeaeakkk aaand dededemmmonstratiiion

oleraraated d d and muststst cceaeaeasesese. HeHeHenceforthhh,,, evevevery

be deaaaltltlt wwwitii h; withhh stststrongest...meeeasasasures [

Troops willllll fffiririreee wiithth tthhe aaaimimim nnnototot to wound

dition, all pririivivivilelelegegegesss suchhh aas free distrib

and special supplement of the American Join

the army stands firm.’” That, sir, is how a military authority

addresses these innocent and unoffending people, detained

without trial, for no offense under any existing law. And I

raise the matter here not merely to register a protest, which I

do, but to elicit if we can from the United Kingdom

representative, whether he now agrees that there is not

resolution of the united Nations valid at this time which now

justifies, if it ever justified, which we deny, [15:00] the use

of force against their people and their detention in Cyprus

against their will. And also to enquire, as a matter of

principle, under what offense, in any existing law they are

penalized in this way, or what authority the government of

Cyprus possesses to influence their movement in any manner at

all. [coughs] Despite these difficulties, Mr. President, for a

period of four weeks an uneasy truce has existed, during which

time the mediator reports that no military advantage was gained

by either side. It was, of course, the mediator’s duty to

preserve that military equilibrium, but after the event, faced

as we are with open aggression, it does not comfort us to recall

that the party which has loyally accepted every honorable means

of avoiding bloodshed, and the party [16:00] which now stands

guilty of having broken forth into aggression, have for the past


10

of tht e united Natioionsss valalid at this timee wh

if it ever justifiedd, whhih ch we deny, [15:00

ainsttt tttheheheiririr pppeoeoeoplplpleee ananand d d theieieir rr dededetetetentntntioioionn in C

ir willllll. AnAnAnddd alalalso tttooo eenquqquire,e,e, asss a aa mamamatttt er o

under whaaattt ofofoffef nsnsnse, iiinnn anyyy exxisisistiiingngng law the

n this wawaway,y,y, orr r whwhwhataa aaautututhoooririritytyty ttthehehe gggovernmmen

essses to innnflllueeenccceee thththeieieir mmmovvvemmmentntnt in any ma

s] Despite thththesee ee dididifffffficicicululultititiesss, MMMr. Presiididen

our wwweeksksks an uneaeaeasysysy tttrururucecece hhhas existttededed, duri

diator rererepopoportrr s that nnnooo military aaadvvvananantage w

ide. It wasasas, ofofof course, tthehehe mmmededediaiaiatot r’s duty

at military equuuilililibibibriririumumum, buuuttt after the even

ith open aggression it does not comfort us

four weeks, been equally impeded in their preparations for

defense and attack, respectively. [clears throat]

Mr. President, I doubt whether the Council is concerned at

this moment to investigate the detailed history of the truce, in

all the phases of its application. Were it to do so, I doubt

whether it would come to endorse the Egyptian account in

Document S 883, portraying how the Arabs sat patiently by in

splendid and immaculate virtue, amidst an unceasing torrent of

Jewish violations. Indeed sir, if I were to give an account of

Arab violations, two of which were reported to this Security

Council, and fifty-five of which were yesterday communicated by

Mr. Shirtok to Mr. Reedman, I should detain the Council far

beyond the limits of utility and relevance. [17:00] It is

sufficient to state that this theme, that legitimate Arab

interests were adversely affected by this truce, is exactly the

opposite of the truth. Addressing the Security Council

five...the Security Council five weeks ago, I took leave, sir,

to enquire whether any state represented round this table would

willingly neglect opportunities for improving its defense for a

period of four weeks, if it had complete certainty that at the

end of those four weeks the armies of five neighboring states

would sweep upon it in converging aggression. We further


11

8833,, portraying howow ttthehh AArabs sat patientntly

d immaculate virtue, aaamiidi st an unceasing to

ationnns.s.s. IIIndndndeeeeeed d d sisisir,r,r, iiifff I wewewererere tttooo gigigiveveve an ac

ions, tttwo ooofff whwhwhich wewewerre rreporororttet ddd tott ttthihh s Se

d fifty-fffivii ee ofoo wwwhichhh wereee yeeestststerrrdadd y commun

ttto Mr. RRReeeeeedmdmdmananan,,, III shshshouououlddd dddetetetaiaiinnn thththe Counnci

liimi its offf uuutiiiliiityyy aandndnd rrreleleleeevaaanccce... [1[[ 7:00] It

to state thhhatatat thihihisss thththemememe,e,e, ttthaaattt lllegitimattete A

ere aaadvererersely affff ecececteteted dd bybyby ttthhhis truccce,e,e, iiis ex

the trrrutututh.h.h. Addressinining gg the Securiiityyy CCCouncil

Security CoCoCounununcicicilll fifif ve weekskss aaagogogo,,, II took lea

whether any stataatetete rrrepepeprereresentttededed round this ta

eglect opportunities for improving its defe

expressed doubt whether any state represented here would

willingly submit its immigration policy, based upon its own

right of internal jurisdiction, to the scrutiny or control of

anyone else. Yet the State of Israel did accept these

restrictive conditions, [18:00] which it believes should never

have been imposed upon it. It allowed its scanty defensive

resources to remain unaugment during the period which it knew to

be merely a prelude for further attacks upon its boundaries and

its political integrity. It allowed the hand of external control

to reach into the rights of immigration, which are the very

substance of its national purpose and ideal. It was able to

accept these limitations because they were imposed for a

specified period of very brief duration, and because the

government of Israel, borne out of a United Nations judgment and

recommendation, has been eager at all times to affirm its

fidelity to the principles and the processes of the Charter. In

later weeks, this government, establishing itself in the very

turmoil of war, revealed its ability to assert its internal

authority, and its respect for international obligations

[19:00], even in the cruelest and most poignant of

circumstances. Therefore, when we read documents emanating from

the Egyptian government and the Arab League, portraying that


12

o rreme ain unaugmentt duduurirr ngng the period whicich

prelude for further ataatttat cks upon its bound

al innntetetegrgrgrititity.y.y. IIIttt alalallololowewewed thththeee hahahandndnd ooofff eextern

to thhheee righghghttst ooof immmmimimiggrataation,n,n, whihihichcc aaarerr the

f its natttioii nananalll pupupurpossseee and d d idddeaeaeal.. It was ab

e limitatatatioioionnns bbbecececauaa sesese tttheeeyy y wewewereee iiimpmpmposed ffor

errir od of veeeryyy bbbriiiefefef dddurururatatatiiionnn, andndnd becauseee t

of Israel, bobobornrr ee ouououttt ofofof aaa UUUniiiteteteddd Nationsss ju

ion, hasss been eagagagererer aaattt alalall tttimes tooo aaaffffffirm

the prrrinininciciciplpp es and ttthehehe processesss ooofff the Ch

, this govevevernrnrnmemementnn , esttablblisisshihihingngng iiitst elf in t

war, revealed iiitststs aaabibibililility tttooo assert its int

and its respect for international obligatio

period of truce as one of Jewish advantage, we lose faith in the

integrity of those who formulated these documents, knowing as

they must that the main brunt of those restrictive conditions

fell heavily upon Israel alone. [clears throat] On the morning

of July the 9th, the period of the four weeks truce expired.

[clears throat] Owing to the Arab refusal to grant a

prolongation, it was not renewed. It is therefore no longer in

force, and no government, either in the United Nations or

outside it, is bound any longer by any of its provisions or

restrictions. In this connection, Mr. President, I draw

attention to document S 889, [20:00] submitted by the government

of Israel on the 12th of July, referring to an episode on the 15th

of June, when your predecessor as president of the Security

Council informed all member states and some non-member states

that a truce with certain terms and conditions existed and was

valid. We consider, sir, that it is now necessary, by the same

procedure, for all governments addressed by the Council on the

15th of June to be told that the period of the truce agreement

has expired and has failed of renewal. We consider that as a

matter of procedure, it would be sufficient simply to submit

that truthful information, without drawing any consequences from

the part of the Security Council. At any rate, the truce is


13

n, iti was not renewewededd... ItIt is therefore nono l

no government, eithhherrr iin the United Nations

is bbbouououndndnd aaanynyny lllononongegegerrr bybyby anynyny ooofff itititsss prprproovisio

s. In ttthisss ccconnnnnnectiiiononon,, MrMMr. PrPrPreeesidididenee t,t,t, I dra

o documennnttt SS 888 9,9,9, [2000:0:: 0] sssubbmimimittttedee by the

n the 1222ththth ooofff JuJuJulylyly,,, rererefefeferrrrinininggg tototo aaannn episodde

ennn your pppreeedeeeceeessssororor aaasss prprpreeesiiideeenttt oofo the SSSec

ormmmed all mmmememembebb rrr stststatatateseses aaandndnd sssomomomeee non-memmbmber

e wititth cececertain tett rmmsss anananddd cocoonditionsss eeexixixisted

onsiderrr, sisisir,rr that ititit iiis now neceeessssararary, by

for all govovovererernmnmnmeene tstt addddressssededed bbby y y tht e Counci

to be told thhhatatat ttthehehe pppeere iodd d of the truce ag

and has failed of renewal We consider tha

dead. The apparatus of observance and supervision has

disintegrated. [21:00] The readiness of the government of Israel

to agree to a four weeks continuation was most contemptuously

rejected on the Arab side, and in the absence either of

continuous validity or of mutual acceptance, that Jewish offer

belongs to the history of these recent weeks. In an admirable

last minute effort to keep war at bay while the next stage was

contemplated, the mediator turned to both parties and asked them

to agree to an unconditional ceasefire for a period of ten days.

Here, Mr. President, was a searching test of peaceful

intention...Here was a request the refusal of which could be

nothing but an avowal of aggressive purpose, for what legitimate

political objectives could anyone have which can be threatened

by the preservation of peace for ten days? What are the moral or

legal justifications on which such a refusal can be based?

[22:00] What are the national or political ambitions which rest

upon so flimsy a foundation that they cannot endure ten days and

ten nights of peace? The government of Israel accepted this

proposal. It is for research to determine whether this was the

seventh, or the eighth, or the ninth such acceptance. The Arab

governments rejected it. Before the previous truce had even

expired, Egyptian forces in the coastal sector of the Negev


14

efffof rt to keep warar aaattt babay while the nextxt s

d, the mediator turneeed dd ttot both parties and

an uuuncncncononondididitititionononalalal ccceaeaeasesesefirerere fffororor aaa ppperereriiod of

residddenenent, wwwaaas aaa seaaarcrcrchhingnng tesesesttt ofofof peaeaeacecc ful

.Here wasss a rrreqee ueueuest ttthehh refefefusalalal ooof ff which co

aaan avowawawalll ofofof aaaggggggrerr ssssssivivive pupupurprprpossse,e,, fffor whaat

bjejectivesss cccouuulddd aaanynynyonononeee hahahavvve whhih chchch can be th

ervvvation offf pppeaee cecece fffororor tttenenen dddayyys?s?s? What areee th

ficatattionsnsns on whhhicicich hh sususuchchch a rrrefusal cccananan bbbe ba

t are ttthehehe nnnataa ional ororor pppolitical aaambbbitititions w

msy a foundndndatatatioioionnn ththt tat tthhey yy cacacannnnnnototot endure te

of peace? The gggovovovererernmnmnmenenent offf IIsrael accepted

t is for research to determine whether this

launched their assault. Their commander was found on capture to

possess operation orders which show conclusively that his

government has planned not merely to avoid prolongation but even

to launch the aggression anew before the statutory period of the

existing truce had expired. [clears throat] In these

circumstances, anybody who will not determine these acts to

constitute aggression must be hard pressed to demonstrate that

the [23:00] word aggression can have any meaning at all. If

governments that are members of the United Nations use armed

force against- outside their frontiers, when they have not been

attacked, with the avowed aim of overthrowing the political and

territorial integrity of a state established by recommendation

of the General Assembly; when they do this in defiance of an

appeal by the Security Council and its accredited

representative; when they rekindle the flames of a war which the

whole world passionately wishes to see extinguished; when they

decline a respite of ten days during which devices of peace may

still be considered; when they do all this, how can you say that

they do not commit aggression, unless you are prepared the erase

the word aggression from the Charter and from the dictionary,

and to sign and advance certificate of impunity for any act of

aggression that future history may bring? [24:00]


15

agggrer ssion must bee hahaardrdr ppressed to demonsnstr

word aggression can hahhave any meaning at al

thattt aaarerere mmmememembebebersrsrs ooofff thththe UnUnUnitititededed NNNatatatioioionns use

st- ooutututsis dedede theheheir fffrororonntieiers,,, wwwhenenen thehehey yy have

ith the aaavovv wewewed dd aiaiaim offf overtrtrthrrowowowinnng g g the poli

iiintegrititityyy ofofof aaa ssstatt tetete eeestttababablililishshshededd bbby recoomm

raala Assemmmbllly;;; wwwheeenn n thththeyeyey dddooo ttthiisi iiinnn defiannnce

he Securityyy CCCouoo ncncncililil aaandndnd iitststs aaaccccccrrredited

ive; whenenen they rererekikikindndndlelele ttthehehe flames ofofof aaa war

passioioonananatetetelyll wishesss tototo see extinnnguuuisisished; w

espite of tttenenen dddayaa s ddu iring wwwhihihichchch dddevices of

nsidered; when thththeyeyey dddooo all thththis, how can yo

commit aggression unless you are prepared

It is obvious, Mr. President, that those who reject

proposals for ceasefire and commit their destiny to military

action must be prepared to take the full military consequences

of their acts. And this the Arab states are now doing in the

field. But surely if the Security Council wishes to retain its

authority in the eyes of both parties, it cannot pass over

aggression in silence and allow no political consequences to

flow from it. It is for that reason that the provisional

government of Israel, in its cable to the Secretary General,

Document S 871 concludes with the following words: “While its

armed forces are ready for the most determined action on all

fronts, the provisional government of Israel is most interested

to learn what the Security Council will decide in the present

emergency. [clears throat] We believe that this interest [25:00]

is most earnestly shared by peace-loving peoples throughout the

world, who with all respect to other provisions of the Charter,

regard it as the central function of the United Nations to

suppress threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, and acts

of aggression. It is therefore the considered view of the

government of Israel that the only action consonant with the

duty of the Security Council at this hour would be to determine

an act of Arab aggression, arising out of the Arab decision to


16

in sis lence and allolow nonn ppolitical conseququen

t. It is for that reaaassson that the provision

of Isssrararaelelel,,, ininin iiitststs cccababablelele tooo thththeee SeSeSecrcrcretetetaary Ge

871 cconononclc udududeees wwwith thththee foffollowowowiiinggg woww rdrdrds:ss “Wh

s are reaaadydd ffforoo ttthe mmmooost dededeteermrmrminnnedee action

ppprovisioioionananalll gogogovevevernrr memementntnt ooofff IsIsIsraaaelell iiis mostt i

attt the Seeecuuuriiityyy CCCouououncncncililil wwwiiillll dded cicicidded in thhhe

[clllears thrrroaoaoat]tt WWWeee bebebelililieveveveee thhhatatat this inttetere

nestltlly shshshared bbby yy pepepeacacace-ee lololoviiing peopllleseses ttthrou

with alalllll rererespss ect to oooththther provisiiionnnsss of the

s the centrtrtralalal fffuunu cttiion fof ttthehehe UUUnininitet d Nation

reats to the peeeacacace,e,e, bbbrerereacheeesss of the peace,

on It is therefore the considered view of

resume hostilities, and as a provisional measure under Article

40, to order that aggression immediately and unconditionally to

cease. We believe that to address further appeals to these

aggressor states, or to harness them again to truce proposals

imposing restrictions upon the defenders, or to look

pathetically for any unexplored shelter along the well-trodden

paths [26:00] of Chapter 6, would be entirely out of accord with

the new situation in which the May 29th truce has lapsed and has

been succeeded by open acts of aggression, which the Security

Council should without delay and without condition bring to an

end. The idea that any outbreak of violence after the expiration

of the truce would exhaust the methods of pacific settlement is

inherent in the very terms of the truce resolution itself, the

concluding paragraph of which reads, in the words of the United

Kingdom representative, ‘The Security Council decides that if

the present resolution, having been accepted, is subsequently

repudiated or violated, the situation in Palestine will be

reconsidered with a view to action under chapter 7 of the

Charter.’”

Mr. President, action under Chapter 7 cannot be a mere

repetition of measures previously taken under Chapter 6. The May

29th resolution was a typical instrument of action under Chapter


17

0] ofo Chapter 6, wowoululld dd bebe entirely out ofof a

uation in which the MMMaaay 29th truce has lapse

ded bbbyy y opopopenenen aaactctctsss ofofof aaaggggggressssssioioion,n,n, wwwhihihichchch the S

uld wwititithoututut delelelay aaandndnd witithoututut cononondidd tititionoo bri

ea that aaanynn oooutuu brbrbreak ofoo vioioioleencncnce afaa ter the

e would eeexhxhxhaaauststst ttthehh mmmetetethooodsdsds ooofff papapacicicific seett

ttht e veryyy ttterrrmsmss oooff f thththeee trtrtruuuceee rrresssollul tion iiits

parrragraph ooofff whww icicich h h rerereadadads,s,s, iiin thththeee words oofof t

resennntatititive, ‘TTThehehe SSSecececurururititity yy CCCouncil dededecicicides

resoluluutititiononon,,, having bbbeeeeeen accepteddd, isisis subse

or violatededed, thththeee siittu tatiion ininin PPPalalalestine wil

d with a view tttooo acacactititiononon undddeerer chapter 7 of

6. Now, however, we enter a field where the existence of

aggression, the determination of responsibility and initiative,

and a clear differentiation between aggression and defense, must

form an organic part of any resolution to which the Security

Council could lend its support. We need no repetition of a truce

with invading armies poised in suspended violence upon Israel’s

frontiers. We need a deterrent of aggression. We need those

invading armies to go home, so that the frontiers of Israel

become the frontiers of a durable peace. A truce, by its very

nature, [28:00] crystallizes aggression at the point which it

has reached at the time the truce comes into operation. It

therefore carries with it the seed of possibly renewed war. What

we have to ensure is that the whole tide of invasion is ordered

back to the territory from which it arose. With the permission

of the Council, I should like, sir, to pass a few reflections on

behalf of the government of Israel on the nature of the Arab

replies to the mediator’s proposals and on the important an

illuminating report which the mediator has submitted to the

Security Council in Document S 888. [clears throat] “Running

through the Arab answers there is a single theme, namely that

the Arab states harbor certain political ambitions, which they

regard as legitimate but which cannot be advanced if there is


18

We nen ed a deterrentnt ooofff agaggression. We neeeed

mies to go home, so ttthahhatt t the frontiers of I

frontttieieiersrsrs ooofff a a a dududurararablblbleee peacacace.e.e. AAA tttrururucecece, by i

:00] crcrcrysyy tatatallllizizizes aaaggggggrressssion n n aata ttthehh pppoioo nt w

at the tttimii ee thtt eee truccceee comememes ininintooo operation

arrrries wiwiwiththth iit t t thththeee seseseededed ooofff popopossssibibblylyly renewwed

ennnsure isss ttthaaat thhheee whwhwhololole tttiddde offf iini vasionnn i

teeerritory frfrfromoo wwwhihihichchch iiittt arararossseee. With theee pe

cil, I shshshould lllikiki e,e, sssiririr, tototo pass a fefefew w w refl

he goveveernrnrnmemementnn of Israraraelelel on the naaatuuurerere of th

the mediatototor’r’r’sss pprp opos lals annnd d d ononon tttheh importa

g report which h thththeee mememedididiatorrr hhhas submitted t

uncil in Document S 888 [clears throat] “R

peace.” [clears throat] [29:00] We ask the Council whether this

fact is not itself a reflection of those ambitions, and whether

political aspirations which can only be fostered by successful

war do not inherently disqualify themselves from the approval of

the liberal world, for we cannot admit that there is a natural

equation between the political aspirations of both sides. On the

one hand, there is the spectacle of a nation rising up from the

ocean of twenty centuries in which it had been submerged, and

founding a new unit of the human family, embodying a distinctive

tradition, spirit, and culture, the survival of which has not

been without significance to the life of mankind. This

resurgence takes place on the very soil on which that nation

first established its identity. It is accompanied with a hope of

personal deliverance [30:00] for the victims of the world’s

greatest tragedy, and this event which despite its small compass

has made an irresistible appeal to the chivalry and sentiment of

the world, rests upon the principles of a valid international

decision. This is one process, on one side. It can be carried

out in peace, though even war does not make it unfeasible.

On the other hand, there is the desire of a people, sated

and replete with an abundance of political and territorial

independence, to wipe this small nation off the face of the


19

herre e is the spectacacleee of f a nation risingg up

enty centuries in whihiichcch it had been submerg

new uuunininittt ofofof ttthehehe hhhumumumananan fffamililily,y,y, eeembmbmbodododyiyiyinng a d

spirit,t,t, andndnd cululultureee,,, ttheee survrvrviiivalalal offf whww ich

t signifiiicacc ncncnce ee tototo theee lifeee off mmmannnkikk nd. This

taaakes plalalacecece onn n thththeee veveveryryry sssoioioilll onnn wwwhihihich thaat

liisi hed ittts idddennntiiitytyty. ItItIt iiisss aaaccccommmpaaanied wiiith

livvverance [[[303030:0:: 0]0]0] fffororor ttthehehe vvviccctititimmms of theee wo

agedydydy, ananand this eveveventntnt wwwhihihichchch despiteee iiitststs sma

irresisiistststibibiblell appealll tototo the chivaaalrrryy y and se

rests uponnn thththe ee pprp inii ici lples ooof f f aaa vavavalil d intern

his is one procccesesess,s,s, ooonnn one sisiside. It can be

e though even war does not make it unfeasi

Earth, in repudiation of international judgment and will. That

is an ambition nurtured in the very spirit of war. To establish

the State of Israel, and to wipe it out by force, are not

political aims of equal legitimacy, certainly not under the

terms of the Charter.

[error in splice; jumps backward and repeats]...between the

political aspirations of both sides. [31:00] On the one hand

there is the spectacle of a nation rising up from the ocean of

twenty centuries in which it had been submerged, and founding a

new unit of the human family, embodying a distinctive tradition,

spirit, and culture, the survival of which has not been without

significance to the life of mankind. This resurgence takes place

on the very soil on which that nation first established its

identity. It is accompanied with a hope of personal deliverance

for the victims of the world’s greatest tragedy, and this event

which despite its small compass has made an irresistible appeal

to the chivalry and sentiment of the world, rests upon the

principles of a valid international decision. This is one

process, on one side. It can be carried out in peace, though

even war does not make it unfeasible.

On the other hand, [32:00] there is the desire of a people,

sated and replete with an abundance of political and territorial


20

spiirar tions of both h sisiidedd s.s. [31:00] On thee on

e spectacle of a natitiiooon rising up from the

uriesss iiin n n whwhwhicicich h h ititit hhhadadad bbbeennn sususubmbmbmererergegeged,d,d, and f

the huhuhumamm nnn fffamimimily, ememembbodyddying g g aaa dididistss inininctcc ive

culture,,, thehehe surururvivaaalll of wwwhichchch hhhasaa not bee

e to theee lililifefefe ooofff mamm nknknkininind... TTThihihis rereresuuurgencee t

ssoil on whhhiccch thhhatatat nnnatatatioioionnn fffirrrsttt eeestablissshe

t iiis accompppanananieii ddd wiwiwiththth aaa hhhopopope ofofof personalll de

tims of ttthe worldldld’s’s’s gggrerereatatatesesesttt tragedddy,y,y, aaand t

te its smsmsmalalallll compassss hahahas made an irrrrereresistib

alry and sesesentntntimimimeene ttt fof tthhe wwworororldldld,,, rests upon

of a valid inteteernrnrnatatatioioionananal deeecicicision. This is

one side It can be carried out in peace

independence to wipe this small nation off the face of the

Earth, in repudiation of international judgment and will. That

is an ambition nurtured in the very spirit of war. To establish

the State of Israel, and to wipe it out by force, are not

political aims of equal legitimacy, certainly not under the

terms of the Charter. And when the Arab states confess in these

documents that their political aspirations cannot be advanced

without resumed war, they do not thereby justify their war; they

merely invalidate their political aspirations.

It seems well, Mr. President, for all parties to this

dispute, and for all who hope to help bring it to an end, to

focus their attention, all the time, upon the central issue

[33:00]. That issue is the immovable determination of the State

of Israel to exist and survive. This state is the product of the

most sustained historic tenacity which the ages recall. Somehow

this people, in the very climax of its agony, has managed to

generate the cohesion, the energy and the confidence to bring

the third Jewish commonwealth into existence. This is no mean

heritage. It is not a heritage to be lightly surrendered. It is

not to be abandoned at the first smell of danger. The Jewish

people has not striven towards this goal for twenty

centuries...in order that having once been achieved, with the


21

hatt their politicalal aaaspss irirations cannot bebe a

umed war, they do notott tthheh reby justify their

lidattteee thththeieieirrr popopolililitititicacacalll aspipipirararatititiononons.s.s.

ms welelll,l,l, MMMr.r.r. PPPrrresidededentnnt, ffor alalall papapartttieieies to

d for allll whohoho hopopope tooo helppp brrinining itii to an e

aaattentioioion,n,n, allllll ttthehh tttimimime,,, uuupopopon thththe centraal

attt issue isss tttheee iiimmmmmmovovovababablelele deeeteeermimiminnnation ooof

o eeexist anddd sssuruu viviviveveve. ThThThisisis ssstaaatetete is the ppprod

ned hhhistototoric tenananacicicitytyty wwwhihihichchch the ageeesss rererecall

, in ththheee veveveryrr climaxxx ofofof its agonyyy, hahahas mana

e cohesion,n,n, ttthehehe energy anddd thththeee cococonfidence t

ewish commonweaaaltltlth hh ininintototo exiiistststence. This is

t is not a heritage to be lightly surrender

full endorsement of international opinion, it will not be

surrendered in response to an illegitimate and unsuccessful

campaign of aggression. Whatever else changes, [34:00] this will

not. The State of Israel is an immutable part of the

international landscape. To plan the future without it is to

build delusions on sand. Everything that contributes to an Arab

belief in the stability and the permanence of Israel brings the

prospect of harmony nearer. That is why every act of

recognition, every voice uplifted against aggression, every

manifestation of international concern for this small republic

in its most gallant defense is a milestone on the road which is

going to lead us to peace, perhaps more rapidly than we now

expect. Mr. President, the report of the mediator to the

Security Council reached my delegation late last night, and we

should like to reserve our right on a future occasion to comment

on what is obviously a most important contribution to a study of

this problem. [35:00] The observations of the government of

Israel on the suggestions tentatively put forward by the

mediator for a peaceful adjustment have already been submitted

to this Council as Document S 870. The policy of the government

of Israel is to seek relations of harmony with the neighboring

Arab states, on the basis of its own complete freedom and


22

he sts ability and ththe pepp rmrmanence of Israelel b

harmony nearer. Thhhatatt iis why every act of

, eveeeryryry vvvoioioicecece uuuplplplifififteteted d d agaiaiainsnsnsttt agagaggrgrgresesesssion,

on offf iiintererernnnatititionalll cccoonceccern fffooor ttthihh sss smss all

gallant dedd fefefensnn eee is aaa milesesestoonenene ooon nn the road

addd us tooo pepepeaaacee,e, ppperee hahahapspsps mmmorororeee raaapipipidldldly thann w

PPrP esidennnt,,, tttheee rrrepepeporororttt ofofof thhhe mededediiai tor tooo t

uncccil reachhhededed my y y dededelelelegagagatititiononon lllatatateee last niigight

to rrreserererve our rigigighththt ooonn aa fffuture oooccccccasasasion

obvioussslylyly aaa most impopoportrtrtant contriiibuuutitition to

m. [35:00]]] ThThThe ee oboo serv tatiionsss ooofff thththe governme

he suggestions tetetentntntatatativivively yy ppuput forward by t

r a peaceful adjustment have already been s

integrity. It was therefore compelled to reject certain

proposals, which encroached upon its sovereignty in a way that

had seldom been suggested in respect of any independent state.

It affirmed, and it now reaffirms, its inability to agree to any

encroachment upon or limitation of the free sovereignty of the

people of Israel in its independent state. It must be

particularly emphatic in its opposition to any infringement of

Israel’s independence and sovereignty as regards her

immigration, uh, policy [36:00]. In its reply to the mediator’s

proposals, the government of Israel made it clear, that there

can be no question of any Israeli government accepting the

slightest derogation in favor of any joint or international body

from Israel’s sovereignty as regards control of her immigration

policy. We stress this because in Paragraph 26 of the mediator’s

report, we regret to see again the unpromising appearance of a

suggestion for encroaching upon Israel in this, the most

sensitive point of its interest, principle, and conscience. It

is simply not accurate to say that unrestricted immigration into

the Jewish area over a period of years might give rise to a

population pressure such as would justify Arab fears of ultimate

Jewish expansion in the Near East. We would not shirk a

discussion of the demographic problems of the Near East. [37:00]


23

y eempm hatic in its oopppposoo itition to any infriring

dependence and sovereeeigiignty as regards her

, uh, pppolololicicicyy y [3[3[36:6:6:000000].].]. IIIn itititsss rerereplplply y y tototo the m

the gggovovovernmnmnmeeentt t of IIIsrsrsraaell madedede ittt clcc eaeaear,rr tha

uestion ooofff ananany yy IsIsIsraellliii govevevernnmemementtt accepting

errrogationonon iiinnn fafafavovovor rr ofofof aaanyyy jjjoioiointntnt ooor internnat

’ss sovereeeigggnttty asss rregegegararardsdsds cooonttrt ololol of her im

strrress thisss bbbecee auauausesese iiinnn PaPaParararagrrrapapaphhh 26 of tththe

regrereet tototo see agagagainii ttthehehe unpnpnpromisinggg aaappppppeara

for encccrororoacacachihh ng uponnn IsIsIsrael in thhhisss,,, the mo

oint of itststs iiintntnteere estt, p irincccipipiplelele,,, and consci

ot accurate to sasasayyy thththatatat unrrreesestricted immigr

area over a period of years might give rise

If we were embark upon it, we should have to plunge into the

works of Cleland and Warrener [?], and Bonnie [?], and Himade

and Isawi [?], and would certainly rise with a conviction that

the population difficulties of the Near East arise from the

pressure of excessive population in Egypt and the consequences

of an inadequate population throughout the entire area of the

fertile crescent. But to portray the possibilities of Jewish

immigration, drawing from a pathetically depleted reservoir of

Jewish remnants left alive in the world, to portray this State

of Israel approaching its first million of population as a

potential threat to the far-flung Arab empire, with its forty

millions of population, is to accept uncritically one of the

most unfounded of Arab contentions. If the fear is unfounded in

practice, it is even more illegitimate to uphold it in

principle. [38:00] We cannot, we cannot accept that Jewish

immigration into the Jewish area of Palestine, I quote the

report, “concerns the neighboring Arab world. We declare that

immigration into Israel is the business of Israel alone. The

governments of Egypt, Transjordan and Syria have no more

jurisdiction in this question than has the government of Israel

in any of their internal affairs. The suggestion that a

neighboring state might exercise a power of challenge or veto


24

sceentn . But to portrtrayyy thehe possibilities of

, drawing from a paththheteetiici ally depleted rese

ants leleleftftft aaalililiveveve iiin nn thththeee worlrlrld,d,d, tttooo popoportrtrtrray th

pproaaachchchinggg iiitsss firsssttt mmillllion n n ooof pppopoo ulululataa ion

hreat to thtt ee faf r-r-r-flunnnggg Arababab eempmpmpirrre,e,e with it

pppopulatititiononon,,, isisis tttooo acacaccececepttt uuuncncncririitititicaaally onne

deede of Arrrabbb ccconnnteeentntntioioionsnsns. IIIf thheh fffeeear is uuunf

t iiis even mmmororore ee ililillelelegigigitititimamamatetete tttooo uuuphold ittt in

[38:0000] WWWe cannototot,,, wewewe cccananannononottt accepttt ttthahahat Je

into ttthehehe JJJewee ish areaeaea ooof Palestinnne, III quote

ncerns theee neneneigigighbhh oriing AArababb wwworororldldld. We decla

into Israel isiss ttthehehe bbbusususinessssss of Israel alon

of Egypt Transjordan and Syria have no mo

against Israel’s immigration policy is to us as fantastic as it

would be to suggest that Canada should be able to influence the

immigration policy of the United States on the grounds of

geographical proximity and a mutual continental interest. For

this reason the government of Israel was compelled to reject the

mediator’s immigration proposal, which apart from these

questions of principle and practice, seemed to us to constitute

a double breach of the Charter. [39:00] It awarded the Economic

and Social Council a power of binding decision which it does not

possess under the Charter, and it constituted an undoubted

interference in the domestic jurisdiction of a state. We are

disappointed also to find which the horror which convulsed the

Jewish world at the suggestion that Jerusalem be incorporated in

the Arab state has not yet caused any revision of the mediator’s

view on this subject, for we find the idea of an Arab Jerusalem

recurring in paragraph 28. Here is a city with sacred

associations, all derived ultimately from its Jewish origin,

with a clear Jewish predominance in its population, its economy,

its social and intellectual life, with the closest ties of

national sentiment linking it to the state of Israel, and with

the status in international law deriving [40:00] from the

universal Christian interest in its destiny. It is suggested to


25

f pprir nciple and praracttticici e,e, seemed to us toto c

each of the Charter. [3[[399:9 00] It awarded the

Councccililil aaa pppowowowererer ooof ff bibibindndndinggg dededecicicisisiiononon wwwhhich i

er thhheee ChC arararttet r,r,r, anddd iiitt cocconstititittut teteted dd ananan undou

e in the dodd mememests icicic jurrrisii dictctctioonnn offf a state.

d also tototo fffiniind d d whwhwhicii hhh thththe hohohorrrrrrorrr wwwhihihich connvu

d at the suuuggggessstiiiononon ttthahahattt JJJerrrusssalelelemmm be incccor

ateee has nottt yyyetee cccauauausesesed dd ananany y y reeevivivisssion of tththe

s sububbjectctct, for wewewe fffininind dd thththee iiidea of ananan AAArab

n paragggrararaphphph 28. Hereee isisis a city wiiithhh ssacred

s, all deriririveveveddd uluu titit mattelly fffrororom m m ititits Jewish o

r Jewish predommminininananancecece iiin itttsss population, it

and intellectual life with the closest tie

hand over this city to the rule of one who has contributed

nothing to it but pillage and destruction. When we read of this

proposal, our mind goes back to the deliberations of the general

assembly, and to the urgent concern which was then expressed by

many representatives, perhaps most eloquently and persistently

by the representative of Sweden for the maintenance of Jerusalem

as a city held in international trust, combined with the freedom

of its population to come within the jurisdiction of the states

with which their sentiments and allegiance were bound up.”

Mr. President, the insistence by the state of Israel upon

its unrestricted sovereignty is by no means incompatible with

its vision of Arab-Jewish cooperation. Indeed the doctrine of

sovereign equality, which is the basis of the Charter, makes

political independence [41:00] the essential condition of

regional cooperation in the modern world. When we speak of an

independent, sovereign Israel, joining with its neighbors in

projects of regional development, we set no precedent, we depart

from no principle which is not based upon the Charter and

commonly accepted as the most advanced political ideal of the

contemporary world. We have previously invited the Council to

regard this problem in terms of other analogies. We have pointed

to the Bene-Lux union, to the Free Association of Independent


26

eldd in internationanal trtrt usust, combined withth t

lation to come withhhininn tthheh jurisdiction of t

theirrr sssenenentititimemementntntsss ananand d d alalallegigigiananancecece wwwererereee bbbound

esidenennt,t,t, ttthehehe iiinnnsistetetencnnce bby ttthehehe ssstatatateee ooof Isr

icted sovvveree eieiigngg tytyty is bybb nooo meeananans inii compatib

offf Arab-J-J-Jewewewisiish h h cococoopoo erereratatatiooonn.n IIIndndndeeeeeddd the dooct

quuuality, whhhiccch isss ttthehehe bbbasssiiis offf thththeee Charteeer,

ndeeependenceee [[[4144 :0:0:00]0]0] ttthehehe eessssssennntititiaaal condittition

operaraationonon in thhheee momomodededernrnrn worororllld. Whennn wwweee spea

, soverrreieieigngngn Israel, jjjoioioining with itttsss neighb

regional dddevevevelelelopoo me tnt, we sssetetet nnnooo precedent,

nciple which isiss nnnototot bbbasasased uuuppopon the Charter

cepted as the most advanced political ideal

Nations within the British Commonwealth, to regional cooperation

Eastern Europe and in South America between states possessed of

common principles and ideals, as indicating the typical, modern

synthesis of full political independence with close, regional

cooperation. We find the same story nearer home. [42:00] The

Arab league itself, little as it might have done in the sphere

of social and economic progress on a regional basis, at least

has the merit of respecting the sovereignty of its individual

members. And even two countries so akin as Syria and Lebanon,

and joined together by common economic interests in so many

enterprises, yet cannot envisage their cooperation except on the

basis of the free, unrestricted political sovereignty of each

one of them. How farfetched then it is to imagine that this

principle of political independence, which cannot be compromised

even between peoples of similar social and cultural background,

can be obscured in the relations of Israel with its neighbors.

We ask the mediator, we ask the ask the Arab states, we ask

the United Nations, to examine with greater care this formula

which is fundamental to our conception of Arab-Jewish relations,

the formula [43:00] of political independence combined with

regional cooperation, not the statutory unity of an artificial

confederation, but the spontaneous contracts of free and


27

nd ece onomic progresess onoo aa regional basis,s, a

it of respecting thhhe sssovereignty of its ind

d eveeennn twtwtwooo cococounununtrtrtrieieiesss sososo akikikin nn asasas SSSyryryriaiaia and L

togettheheher bybyby comomommon ecececoonomoomic iiinntn erereresee tststs in so

, yet cannnnonn tt enee vivivisageee theiririr ccoooooopeeerarr tion exc

e free, uuunrnrnreeestrtrtricicictett d d d popopoliiitititicacacalll sooovevevereigntty

. How farrrfeeetcccheeed thththenenen iiittt iiis tooo imimimaaagine thhhat

f pppoliticalll iiindnn epeppenenendededencncnce,e,e, wwwhiiichchch cannot bbebe c

n peooopleseses of siiimimm lalalarrr sososocicicialalal and cullltututurararal ba

ured ininn ttthehehe relationsnsns ooof Israel wwwittthhh its ne

the mediaaatototor,r,r, wwwe askk ththe asasaskkk thththeee Arab stat

Nations, to exaaamimiminenene wwwititith grgrgreeaeater care this

ndamental to our conception of Arab-Jewish

separate units. That is the vision which we uphold, and we

uphold it because it conforms with the essential facts of the

Near Eastern situation, the basic truth of separate national

aspirations and common economic interests. There is nothing

impossible about that solution. There is certainly nothing

ignoble about it. And nobody can possibly demonstrate that its

promise is less than that contained in the only alternative,

which is that of an unceasing, fruitless, and sterile war. We

know that once the formula of political independence with

regional cooperation is accepted, the objective conditions of

harmony will be achieved. The Near East does not need war.

[44:00] The Near East needs scientific agriculture. It needs

skilled industry. It needs modern methods of social cooperation.

It needs the application of scientific research to regional

problems of health and development. It needs the enriching flow

of human and material resources. Now these things, which by any

objective analysis, the Near East most requires for its own

welfare, are the very thing which are most characteristic of

Israel’s achievement in its regional environment. Therefor we

insist that an independent Israel, in free cooperation with its

neighbors cannot, by any stretch of fancy, be described as alien

to the genuine interest of the Near East. But in conclusion, Mr.


28

lessss than that contntaiaiinenn d d in the only altetern

at of an unceasing, fffrrruiiti less, and sterile

nce ttthehehe fffororormumumulalala ooof ff popopolililiticacacalll ininindededepepependndndeence w

operaaatitition iiisss acacacceptttededed,, thtthe obobobjjjectctctivii eee cocc ndit

l be achiiievee ededd. ThThThe Neeeaaar Easasast dododoesss not need

NNNear Easasasttt nnneedededsss scss ieieientntntiffficicic aaagrrricicculululture. It

ussts ry. Ittt nnneeeedsss mmmodododererernnn mememettthooodsss ofofof social co

e aaapplicatiiiononon offf scscscieieientntntififificicic rrreseseseeearch to reg

healallth aaand develelelopopopmemementntnt. ItItIt needs ttthehehe eeenric

d materrriaiaialll rerr sources.s.s. NNNow these ttthiiingngngs, whi

nalysis, thththeee NeNeNearaa EEastt moststt rrreqeqequiuiuires for it

e the very thininnggg whwhwhicicich h h are mmomost characteris

hievement in its regional environment Ther

President, I would say that these promising visions do not

begin to open up while aggression stalks through the land, for

this aggression is not merely a blow [45:00] against the

Charter, it is also hostile to the essential truth of Near

Eastern harmony. In the replies to the mediator by the Egyptian

government, and the political committee of the Arab League, we

find the unusual suggestion that while they proceed with their

aggressive onslaught, the mediator can still pursue his tasks of

peaceful adjustment. It is necessary that we entirely rule out

that illusion. While aggression is being committed against it,

Israel can hardly be expected to listen to Arab proposals

concerning a peace settlement. The Arab states cannot flout the

Security Council, reject the appeal of a mediator, launch into

naked aggression, and simultaneously expect that the organs of

the United Nations will deal with them about the satisfaction of

their political aims. You cannot put your faith simultaneously

in the arbitrament of war [46:00] and in the methods of peaceful

settlement. You must choose between them. It would be an

unprecedented anomaly if both of them were to be chosen at the

same time, and that is not going to happen. Only when this

aggression ceases is there a useful prospect of discussion

proposals for peaceful relations between independent Israel and


29

usuuala suggestion ththatatt whihile they proceed d wi

onslaught, the mediatattooor can still pursue hi

justmmmenenent.t.t. IIIttt isisis nnnecececesesessasasary ttthahahattt wewewe eeentntntiirely

on. WWhihihile aaaggggrereressiooonnn iis bbeingngng comomommimm ttttttedee aga

hardly beee expxpxpecee teteted tooo listeteten tototo AAArarr b propos

a peace sssetetettltltlemememenenent.tt TTThehehe AAArararab bb stststatatatesss cannoot

unnncil, reeejeeecttt tttheee aappppppeaeaealll ooof a mededediiai tor, lllau

ssiiion, and sisisimumm ltltltanananeoeoeousususlylyly eeexpppecececttt that thhehe o

Natioioons wwwill dealala wititith hh thththememm about ttthehehe sssatis

ical aiaiimsmsms. YoYY u cannototot ppput your faaaittthhh simult

trament offf wawawar rr [4[[ 66:0000]] anddd ininin ttthehehe methods o

You must choossseee bebebetwtwtweeeeeen thhheemem. It would be

ed anomaly if both of them were to be chose

its neighbors. And once aggression ceases, the only proposals

worthy to be discussed will be proposals for peace and amity

between an independent Israel with her independent neighbors, on

the basis of the closest possible collaboration in all fields.

We believe that the most significant phrase in the mediator’s

report is that contained in paragraph 36: “If armed force is

forbidden in the settlement of the problem, and it is made

prohibitively unprofitable for the Arab states to employ it,

there will be in Palestine [47:00] a Jewish community with a

separate cultural and political existence, a Jewish state whose

strength and prosperity and capacity for economic and social

development by the admission of its own leaders must largely

depend on its ability to cultivate friendly relations with its

Arab neighbors.”

Mr. President, the Preamble to that sentence determines its

conclusion. Only when aggression dies down, only when armed

force is forbidden in the settlement of this problem, only when

it is made prohibitively unprofitable for the Arab states to

employ it, only then does the prospect of any peaceful relations

emerge upon the horizon, beckoning the initiative and foresight

of both parties. We should be wrong to spend time considering a

final peace, unless we were sure that these obstacles could be


30

n ttheh settlement ofof ttthehh pproblem, and it iis

ly unprofitable for ttthehhe Arab states to empl

be innn PPPalalalesesestititinenene [[[474747:0:0:00]0]0] a JJJewewewisisishhh cococommmmmmuunity

lturaaalll anddd pppolililiticaaalll eexisistencncnceee, aaa Jewewewisii h st

d prosperrritii y y y anaa d d d capaaacicc ty ffforr eeecooononn mic and

bbby the aaadmdmdmisiissisisiononon offf ititits owowown nn leleleadadaderrrs mustt l

tss abilittty tooo cccullltititivavavatetete fffrrrieeenddld yyy rrrelationnns

orsss.”

esidddeene t,,, the Preeeamamblblbleee tototo tthahahat sentenenencecece dete

Only wwwhehehennn agaa gressiononon dddies down, onnnlylyly when

rbidden innn thththe ee sess ttttt lleme tnt ooof f f thththisisis problem,

prohibitively uuunpnpnprororofififitatatable fofofor the Arab sta

only then does the prospect of any peaceful

surmounted. It is for the Security Council therefore to forbid

armed force in the settlement [48:00] of this problem. It is for

the Security Council make it prohibitively unprofitable for the

Arab states to employ armed force. It is for the Security

Council, having seen aggression committed, to determine that

aggression, to specify its authors, and to demand its immediate,

unconditional and permanent cessation. [clears throat]

END OF AUDIO FILE [48:36]


31

al ana d permanent cecessssataa ioion. [clears throaoat]

ENENENDD D OFOFOF AAAUDUDUDIOIOIO FFFILEEE [4[4[48:8:8:36366]]]

Documents

C-7380 Transcription Eban, Abba. Address for peace ...collections.americanjewisharchives.org/ms/ms0763/c7380.pdfC-7380 Transcription Eban, Abba. Address for peace negotiations at the