Dinar Daily
Welcome to Dinar Daily Discussions.

Logging in with your USERNAME allows you to participate in discussions, see what has recently been posted, and other options. Guests can post but they do have limited abilities.

We are NOT a guru forum. We are a dinarian forum. The opinions expressed on the forum do not reflect the of opinion of Dinar Daily specifically, but rather reflect the views of the individual posters only.

Disclamer:

We are in compliance with, "Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use."


Get Daily Updates of the NEWS & GURUS in your EMAIL
CHECK YOUR EMAIL for VERIFICATION

Enter your email address:

The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level DinarDailyUpdates?bg=330099&fg=FFFFFF&anim=1

The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level

Go down

The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level Empty The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level

Post by claud39 on Sun Feb 02, 2020 9:34 am

[size=34]The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level[/size]


01/02/2020



The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level WhatsApp-Image-2020-02-01-at-2.06.52-PM






Foreign Minister Muhammad Ali al-Hakim chaired the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level to discuss the so-called (Deal of the Century) by President Trump.

The Wise Minister delivered a speech in Iraq in which he stressed the sensitivity of the current circumstance, and its seriousness after announcing the so-called (deal of the century), usually because it is based on understanding and coordination with one party, and the lack of coordination with the legitimate Palestinian Authority, Arab countries, regional and international bodies, especially the Security Council and the Quartet International.

Noting: The nature of the current circumstances necessitates us working on developing unusual solutions to the problems that the Arab region is going through, especially our central issue the Palestinian issue.

He expressed that Iraq urges its Palestinian brothers to commit to unity, cohesion and agreement to guarantee their legitimate right to a unified and viable state with occupied Jerusalem as its capital, and to guarantee the right of return of all Palestinians to their lands.

He stressed by saying: We must devise a strategy to work with friendly European Union countries, Islamic countries, non-aligned countries, Russia, China, and Japan to increase global awareness about the risks of this unfair deal on security and stability in our region.

He called on the member states of the League of Arab States to provide all forms of support to occupied Palestine, and the right of its people to build an independent state with its capital in occupied Jerusalem, and the restoration of all its lands.

He warned the world that the so-called deal of the century seeks to impose a fait accompli policy and exacerbate levels of violence and extremism in the region.

I articulate by saying: The solution to the problems of the region must go through ensuring the rights of the Palestinian people stipulated in international legitimacy resolutions, including Security Council resolutions, and its inalienable right. Foremost among them is the right to self-determination and the establishment of its independent, sovereign state, with occupied capital Jerusalem.

He expressed that Iraq’s position and commitment to its religious, political and tribal references all provide full support to the Palestinian cause, as well as the orientations and decisions taken by the Palestinian brothers.




The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level WhatsApp-Image-2020-02-01-at-2.12.46-PM


















https://www.mofa.gov.iq/2020/02/?p=8347
claud39
claud39
VIP Member
VIP Member

Posts : 12469
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level Empty The foreign minister meets his Saudi counterpart

Post by claud39 on Sun Feb 02, 2020 9:36 am

[size=34]The foreign minister meets his Saudi counterpart[/size]


01/02/2020





The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level 6E257F5B-1923-4A5D-A9C7-6DBCBAAB8810






Foreign Minister Muhammad Ali Al-Hakim met with Faisal bin Farhan, the Saudi Foreign Minister, and discussed the developments of the Palestinian issue and the so-called (deal of the century), and its effects on the Palestinian people and the region.

They also discussed the importance of the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council resulting in a united position to defend the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people.

Minister Al-Hakim affirmed Iraq’s steadfast stance on the Palestinian issue, and its support for the directions and decisions taken by the Palestinians, calling for supporting the Palestinian people’s right to build their independent state and its capital, occupied Jerusalem, and restore all its lands.




claud39
claud39
VIP Member
VIP Member

Posts : 12469
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level Empty Foreign Minister meets Yusef bin Alawi, Omani Minister of Foreign Affairs

Post by claud39 on Sun Feb 02, 2020 9:38 am

[size=34]Foreign Minister meets Yusef bin Alawi, Omani Minister of Foreign Affairs[/size]


01/02/2020





The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level CD373AA3-53B4-48F3-B34C-7A0D1F1858B8-1024x682




Foreign Minister Muhammad Ali al-Hakim met with Yusuf bin Alawi, the Omani Minister of Foreign Affairs, and at the meeting the joint Arab stance towards the so-called (deal of the century) was discussed, and their implications for the Palestinian people and the region as a whole.

This meeting comes in the context of the emergency meeting of the League of Arab States at the level of foreign ministers.




The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level 48ABF02A-568D-4244-8249-F886D4471646-1024x682



claud39
claud39
VIP Member
VIP Member

Posts : 12469
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level Empty Foreign Minister meets Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian Authority

Post by claud39 on Sun Feb 02, 2020 9:40 am

[size=34]Foreign Minister meets Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian Authority[/size]


01/02/2020





The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level IMG_2478-1






Foreign Minister Muhammad Ali al-Hakim met with Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian Authority, and views were exchanged on the so-called (Deal of the Century), affirming Iraq’s steadfast stance towards the Palestinian issue, achieving the Palestinian people their full rights, and establishing their independent state with Jerusalem as its capital.

This meeting comes in the context of the emergency meeting of the League of Arab States at the level of foreign ministers.




The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level IMG_2477-1




claud39
claud39
VIP Member
VIP Member

Posts : 12469
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level Empty The Arab League rejects the "Deal of the Century"

Post by claud39 on Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:27 am

[size=36][rtl]The Arab League rejects the "Deal of the Century"[/rtl][/size]


Saturday 01 February 2020





The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level Alsabaah-29584






Cairo / Israa Khalifa

, Foreign Minister Muhammad Ali al-Hakim stressed Iraq’s firm position in supporting the Palestinian cause, noting that Iraq urges its Palestinian brothers to commit to unity, cohesion and agreement to ensure their legitimate right to a united, viable Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital, and to ensure the right of return of all Palestinians to their lands and homes Whereas, the closing statement of the emergency meeting of the Arab foreign ministers headed by Iraq on Saturday in Cairo announced its rejection of the so-called "deal of the century". 

 The wise minister said in the Arab meeting, in the presence of the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas: “Iraq, the government and the people with all their religious, political and tribal references, affirms its steadfast stance to support the Palestinian cause, and supports the orientations and decisions taken by the Palestinian brothers, and we call on Arabs, Muslims and all the free world to support the right of the people The Palestinian in building his independent state and its capital is occupied Jerusalem, and the restoration of all its lands ».



He added, “We meet in an extraordinary session for the Council of the League of Arab States at the level of foreign ministers, which is exceptional in terms of its subject, timing and circumstances, as we face extremely delicate and sensitive circumstances, after declaring the so-called (deal of the century), which is based on understanding and coordination with one party and lack of coordination With the legitimate Palestinian Authority, Arab states and regional and international bodies, especially members of the Security Council and the International Quartet.



The wise minister called for the development of a (Arab) strategy to work with friendly European Union countries, Islamic countries, non-aligned countries, Russia, China and Japan to increase global awareness of the dangers of this unfair deal on security and stability in our region. He also called on member states of the League of Nations The Arab League to “provide all forms of support to occupied Palestine, and to show the world that the so-called deal of the century seeks to impose the policy of the fait accompli and exacerbates the levels of violence and extremism in the region.”



He added, “We believe that resolving the problems of the region must pass through ensuring the rights of the Palestinian people stipulated in international legitimacy resolutions, including Security Council resolutions, and its inalienable right, foremost of which is the right to self-determination and the establishment of its independent and sovereign state, with Jerusalem as its capital. Occupied ».
 

Arab League vision



For his part, the Secretary-General of the Arab League, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, stressed that "our urgent meeting was motivated by the need to formulate a collective Arab position on the American proposal for peace between Israelis and Palestinians as announced by President Trump, in the presence and participation of the Israeli Prime Minister."



He added, "We are sending a message to the whole world, that the Palestinians are not alone, and that the free Palestinian decision has an Arab backer, who is supportive in every case, and supportive at all times."



Aboul Gheit pointed out four observations, namely that "the Arabs take every proposal for peace, from any party with complete seriousness and in a spirit of responsibility, because ending the conflict with Israel is a confirmed Palestinian and Arab interest." He added, "The recent American proposal, backed by Israel, has ... He revealed a sharp shift in the stable US policy toward the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and how to settle it, and we see that this shift in the determinants of the American position does not serve the interests of peace or a permanent and just solution.



He added, “As for the second remark, the context in which the American plan was presented, and the timing of its launch raises question marks at the very least, in order not to say suspicion and skepticism. The plan was presented in this way as a negative message to public opinion that affected its reception of the plan and its content. As for the note Third, it is that even if I do not wish to discuss the details of the American plan, I am satisfied with only saying that we, as Arabs (are not convulsive or supporters of antagonistic positions), and we also have the right to accept or reject, otherwise the American proposal - in fact and substance - represents Dictations or offer cannot be rejected or even discussed, and it will be the mother In this case, contrary to the most basic principles of justice and fairness, and the last note, there is unfortunately indicating that the Israeli side understands the American plan in the sense of a gift or gift that must be seized and seized.



He pointed out that «these scenarios do not bring stability or establish peace, but put the seeds of another hundred years of conflict and suffering, and I see that the logical and safe alternative is still in our hands if the intentions are correct, the parties must negotiate by themselves in order to reach a solution that each of them can Living with and accepting it, the starting point for this negotiation cannot be the maximum demands of a party, and total disregard
To see the other side, the lines of the solution cannot be, but rather, its details are presupposed and prescribed, so what is the negotiation then, if the whole thing has been approved and the borders are drawn, and the details are resolved ?! ».



Aboul Gheit explained, “The challenges posed to us by the American plan must push the Palestinian brothers to work as quickly as possible to bridge the dangerous gap that continues to erode the national work structure, and strive in every way to bridge this rift that has been deducted from the Palestinian struggle for over Thirteen whole years of internal division. It is high time for this abhorrent division to separate us. The accelerating challenges confront all Palestinians and they should not face them divided and separated.
 

Abbas position



For his part, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said in his speech: "Netanyahu does not believe in peace, and there has been no progress in the three periods he spent in the government," noting that he rejects "any solution that says annexing Jerusalem to Israel and we are its guards and officials responsible for it."



Abbas also refused to accept the United States as a "sole mediator in any negotiations with Israel," calling for an "international mechanism for peace while refusing to be (the deal of the century) within any proposal," stressing that the Palestinian Authority "informed the Americans and Israelis that we have nothing to do with them, including This is in the security field. ”



At the end of the emergency meeting, the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, affirmed that «the final statement of the meeting, explicitly announced the rejection of the so-called deal of the century because it does not meet the minimum rights and aspirations of the Palestinian people».



For his part, Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad Al-Maliki affirmed that the Palestinians have received the necessary support in the Arab League to confront the so-called American peace plan in the Middle East known as the "Deal of the Century", indicating that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas will attend a meeting of the Security Council this month.
 

The closing statement



The following is the text of the final statement of the Arab League meeting on the "Deal of the Century": The Arab League Council concluded that what the US administration has provided, unfortunately, is not an appropriate plan to achieve a just, lasting and comprehensive peace based on international law and relevant international legitimacy resolutions, but a new setback in efforts Peace spanning over three decades, and that this deal that culminated in the unjust and unjust US decisions that violate international law regarding Jerusalem, the Golan, Israeli colonial settlement and the refugee issue; it will not succeed because it violates international references to the peace process, and does not The minimum aspirations and rights of the Palestinian people -gar negotiable Tsrv-, particularly the right to self-determination and the establishment of a sovereign independent state on the lines of June 4, 67 and its capital in East Jerusalem, the right of return on the basis of Assembly resolution United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194 of 1948.



The Council affirms all its decisions related to the Palestinian issue and the Arab-Israeli conflict at the level of the ministerial summit, particularly the last two summits, the Jerusalem Summit held in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, and the Tunis Summit, decides:



1- Emphasizing the centrality of the question of Palestine to the entire Arab nation, the Arab identity of occupied East Jerusalem, the capital of the State of Palestine, and the right of the State of Palestine to sovereignty over the entire land occupied in 1967, including East Jerusalem, its air and sea space, its territorial waters, its natural resources, and its borders with neighboring countries.



2- Rejecting the American-Israeli deal, considering that it does not meet the minimum rights and aspirations of the Palestinian people, contradicting the terms of reference of the peace process based on international law and the relevant United Nations resolutions, and calling on the American administration to adhere to the international references for a just, lasting and comprehensive peace process.



3- Emphasizing not to deal with this unfair deal or to cooperate with the American administration in implementing it in any way.



4- Emphasizing that the Arab Peace Initiative - as approved by its texts in 2002 - is the Arab minimum acceptable for achieving peace by ending the Israeli occupation of the entire Palestinian and Arab territories occupied in 1967 and establishing an independent and sovereign state of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital, and finding a just and agreed solution to the issue Palestinian refugees, in accordance with United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194 of 1948, and the assertion that Israel - the occupying power - will not enjoy normalization with Arab states unless it accepts and implements the Arab Peace Initiative.



5 - Emphasis on working with the international peace-loving and influential forces to take appropriate measures regarding any plan that would prejudice the rights of the Palestinian people and the terms of reference for the peace process, including going to the Security Council, the United Nations General Assembly, and other international organizations.



6- Warning that Israel - the occupying Power - will implement the terms of the deal by force, ignoring international legitimacy decisions, holding the United States and Israel fully responsible for the repercussions of this policy, and calling on the international community to address any measures undertaken by the occupying government on the ground.



7- Emphasizing full support for the struggle of the Palestinian people and its national leadership - headed by President Mahmoud Abbas - in the face of this deal and any deal that undermines the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people - and aims to impose facts contrary to international law, international legitimacy decisions, and the Arab peace initiative.
 

Wise meetings
The foreign minister, Muhammad Ali al-Hakim, had met, before presiding over the Arab meeting, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, and the two sides exchanged views on the so-called (deal of the century).



And the wise minister asserted - according to a statement by the Foreign Ministry - "Iraq’s steadfast stance towards the Palestinian issue, the Palestinian people's attainment of their full rights, and the establishment of their independent state with Jerusalem as its capital."



The Foreign Minister also met on the sidelines of the meeting, separately, with his Saudi counterparts Faisal bin Farhan and Omani Yusef bin Alawi, and the two sides discussed the developments of the Palestinian issue and the so-called (deal of the century), and its effects on the Palestinian people and the region ».



Al-Hakim called, according to a Foreign Ministry statement, to "support the right of the Palestinian people to build an independent state with its capital in occupied Jerusalem, and to restore all its lands."






http://alsabaah.iq/20970/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D8%A7%D9%85%D8%B9%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D8%B1%D9%81%D8%B6-%D8%B5%D9%81%D9%82%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%86
claud39
claud39
VIP Member
VIP Member

Posts : 12469
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level Empty The Defining Traits of Trump’s ‘Deal of the Century’ and How it Turns the Tables

Post by claud39 on Tue Feb 04, 2020 6:19 pm

The Defining Traits of Trump’s ‘Deal of the Century’ and How it Turns the Tables


What is it about the Trump Administration’s ‘Deal of the Century’ that makes it different than any previous proposal? What future implications does this deal possibly have? What is the intent of this proposal and can its goals be accomplished?


February 3rd, 2020



The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level Shutterstock_640346662


The Trump Administration’s recent release of the ‘Deal of the Century’ has caused a significant amount of speculation regarding its implications for the nation of Israel. Without question, there are certain characteristics within this plan that distinguish it from any other previous US proposal in the past; most notably, its clear favor of Jewish sovereignty. While the Jewish State is clearly given priority in this deal, how do we reconcile this with the fact that biblically, the land only belongs to Israel?


As you examine the distinguishing features of the deal, there are a few important things to keep in mind (not limited to this list):


1) The deal has been adamantly rejected by the Palestinians and therefore is NOT being implemented


2) The deal has been proposed in the context of land that is ALREADY divided


3) The deal recognizes Israel as sovereign over the land and grants the Arabs an OPPORTUNITY


Previous US administrations have put forth proposals that most often pushed Israel to surrender land and uproot settlements. Previous proposals have led to hardship for the Jews in the name of political correctness. Previous proposals have belittled Israel’s divine right to the land and sought to expand Arab control over it, somehow believing that by giving just enough land to the Arabs, there will be peace; a theory that has been proven wrong time after time after time. They will not be content until, as King David said, “the name of Israel is remembered no more.”


In some sense, this deal takes the offensive in emphasizing Israeli sovereignty over the land while giving the Arabs an opportunity to form a sovereign state; yes, inside the biblical confines of the land God has sovereignly given to the Jews. Bear in mind, again, that prior to Israel’s rebirth, the land was under what’s called the British Mandate for Palestine. In 1947, the land was divided into two states, one for Arabs and one for Jews, just before the official rebirth of the nation of Israel in 1948.


The Details


There’s no question that the city of Jerusalem is front and center on people’s minds. The Trump Administration’s proposal for Jerusalem is plain and simple, it will remain the undivided capital of Israel. While elaborating, President Trump stated that East Jerusalem could be recognized as the capital of Palestine in the future should they become a sovereign state. What did he mean by “East Jerusalem”? It’s an area outside of what the Jews recognize as Jerusalem today. It’s outside of municipal Jerusalem, consisting of Arab neighborhoods like Kafr Akab, Abu Dis, and part of Shuafat. This area is also blocked off from Jerusalem via a massive concrete wall. This proposal destroys any Arab hope to claim authority over the Jewish capital.


The proposal also highlights Israel’s right to protect its own borders as they’ll be responsible for security from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River. While the slight shift in borders found in the proposal has Israel losing a minimal portion of land south of the Gaza Strip so that a path can be created for the Arabs to have access between Gaza and the West Bank, the Israeli’s would still have free access to any settlements in the West Bank (Judea & Samaria). In essence, though the Arabs could eventually have a sovereign state in the territory of the West Bank, Israeli’s still have sovereign access to any of their existing settlements, as no one, Arab or Jew, will be uprooted in this plan. Additionally, the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) would have full access to the West Bank.


Something notably significant about this plan, as emphasized throughout this article, is the pro-Israel foundation it’s laid on. As with other moves this administration has made, Israel is recognized as the solo sovereign over the land. In fact, a “Palestinian” state would not even be recognized until they agree to the deal and meet the four-year mandate(s) of the deal-something that is not going to happen. This plan magnifies the Jewish State while giving opportunity to the Arabs, a complete switch from previous attempts. “Palestine” would be required to disarm Hamas and Islamic Jihad, stop funding terror, demilitarize Gaza, and perhaps the most difficult, recognize Israel as a sovereign state.


As for “Palestinian” refugees, a small percentage along with their family members will be able to reside in the “Palestinian” state. None of them will be able to reside in Israel.


In Summary


There’s no question that the ‘Deal of the Century’ is, in fact, a two-state solution like several previous attempts from past US administrations. What makes it unique is how the tide has changed in recognizing Israel as the priority, putting the ball in the court of the Arabs for the next step. As discussed, they immediately rejected this deal. The deal is not being implemented, at least not for now.


While the mission of the ‘Deal of the Century’ may very well be to bring peace to the Middle East, the student of the Bible knows that only Jesus will bring peace to the Middle East at His Second Coming. We must not put stock in the Trump Administration to deliver something it cannot deliver, but what we can do is look at this proposal through the lens of the Bible to try and understand its implications for the future. If there’s just one thing to take away from this event (and there is more than one), it’s that more than ever before, Israel is being recognized as sovereign over the land on a global scale despite the opportunity being given to the Arabs, i.e. access to their Muslim holy sites and a possible future state.


Does the proposal come short of how we, as believers, would want to see the land dealt with biblically? Absolutely it does, and we should expect nothing less until the King of Kings returns to carry out His will over the land. Does the land belong solely to the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? Absolutely it does (Genesis 17:8).


Jews are continuing to return to the land at an unprecedented rate because they’re finding it’s the safest place on earth for them to be! We are living at a time when we get to witness the Lord doing what He said He would do 2500 years ago!
We are the generation that is seeing the fig tree come back to life!


Matthew 24:32-36


“Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near-at the doors! Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away. But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only.”




https://beholdisrael.org/the-defining-traits-of-trumps-deal-of-the-century-and-how-it-turns-the-tables/
claud39
claud39
VIP Member
VIP Member

Posts : 12469
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level Empty Israeli-Palestinian conflict: President Abbas and the League of Arab States reject President Trump's "new Vision for Peace" before the Security Council

Post by claud39 on Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:15 pm

[size=36]Israeli-Palestinian conflict: President Abbas and the League of Arab States reject President Trump's "new Vision for Peace" before the Security Council[/size]




FEBRUARY 11, 2020





The Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks Iraq at the emergency meeting of the Arab League Council at the ministerial level SC%20slide






"Gruyère", "apartheid in the Holy Land", "Bantoustan". It is in these categorical terms that the President of the Palestinian Authority and the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States today rejected before the Security Council the "new Vision for Peace" that the President of the States - United unveiled on January 28, in Washington, alongside the Israeli Prime Minister. While the United States and Israel have defended the plan, other delegations noted that it deviates from internationally agreed parameters for a just and lasting peace.

The "New Vision for Peace," the United States defended, offers the Palestinian people a realistic prospect of seeing, in their lifetime, an autonomous and fully recognized state. It respects the special role of the Kingdom of Jordan and guarantees Muslims around the world access to the Al-Aqsa Mosque. Because a political settlement is not enough, the plan also offers "historic" levels of economic investment in the future state of Palestine, more than $ 50 billion.

It is not a proposal for peace in theory, it is a proposal for dignity, in practice, the United States continued. It's an opening offer and it's the beginning of the conversation, not the end. The fact that Israel accepted the concept map of the proposal is an "historic" step in the creation of a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital, said the United States, who urged Palestinian leaders to look at the plan. how lucky he is and to seize this opportunity to start a conversation with Israeli leaders. "If you choose peace, America and many other countries will be there for you!" "

The United States has announced the creation of a joint committee with Israel to develop a more detailed version of the concept map, said the Special Coordinator for the Middle East peace process. Nickolay Mladenov said he feared in this regard the recognition of the Israeli decision to apply its laws in specified areas of the West Bank. Such measures, he warned, would have a devastating impact on the prospect of a two-state solution and would close the door to negotiations with negative repercussions on the chances of regional normalization and peace.

"The Israeli-American proposal," ruled the President of the Palestinian Authority, questioning our legitimate rights, including the right to our independence in our own territory. Nothing in this proposal, said Mahmoud Abbas, can be considered as a basis for negotiations. He denounced a prescriptive plan which bars access to peace and withdraws East Jerusalem from Palestinian sovereignty. 

The proposal "would kill in the bud" any possibility of peace, insisted the President. We are offered "a Swiss cheese", he indignantly, brandishing a map showing the evolution of Palestine which in 2010 had only 9% of the territory approved in the 1947 Partition Plan. The "Israeli-American" proposal goes even further, he denounced. It is the consecration of the occupation, it is the annexation of territories, it is the hardening of an apartheid regime. It is also, he added, impunity for all crimes perpetrated against our people and their territories. 

To those who accuse the Palestinians of "missing no opportunity to miss an opportunity," President Abbas responded with a call to the Quartet and the Security Council to host an international peace conference. Any country can join the Quartet, but to be frank, he said, the United States can no longer be the only mediator. Abbas reached out to Israel to build a real peace, favorable to both Palestinians and Israelis, reiterating that the Palestinians are ready to enter into negotiations with Israel provided they are supervised by the Quartet. 

We will never progress as long as President Abbas is in power, "this is the reality," Israel responded. We have always been ready to negotiate and have given President Abbas this opportunity on several occasions. But each time he opposed us, said Israel, who praised the President's "healthy and pragmatic" approach. Amazement, this is the feeling that seized the Secretary General of the League of Arab States before the "very clear" call to the exclusion of President Abbas. This approach clearly shows a problem of "personalization". What the Palestinian President does not accept, said the Secretary-General, is what is "unacceptable" to all Palestinians.

The provisions of the American plan, he observed, contain new parameters which can be summarized as follows: grant the territories and the settlements and Jerusalem to Israel and get the Palestinians to be satisfied with a "Bantustan without real autonomy ". This plan does nothing for the two-state solution. On the contrary, he proposed creating a single state with two categories of citizens. It is an "apartheid in the Holy Land" plan.

While the other delegations were less categorical, most of them, like that of Germany, indicated that this plan deviated from internationally agreed parameters. The Belgian Minister for Foreign Affairs, who chaired the session, wanted to be an educator: a lasting solution implies a state of Israel with legitimacy recognized by all and an independent, democratic, unified, sovereign Palestinian state and viable, living side by side in peace and security. Respect for international legality is the only realistic solution to end the occupation and bring about a just and therefore lasting peace, added France. The plan is not ideal, but it is a first step, the UK conceded, encouraging the Palestinians to review and negotiate.

We will only accept an agreement deemed acceptable by both parties, warned the Russian Federation, satisfied that despite their differences, Israelis and Palestinians have spoken today about the importance of negotiating. She therefore invited them to use the platform offered by Moscow. China noted the intense consultations under way at the Security Council. Tunisia has indeed confirmed that with Indonesia, it has launched negotiations on a draft resolution reaffirming the need for a just and lasting solution and calling for an end to the Israeli occupation.

The time for dialogue, reconciliation and reason must come, the UN Secretary-General impatiently said. António Guterres urged the Israeli and Palestinian leaders to show the political will necessary to promote the cause of a just and lasting peace, with the support of the international community. Rest assured of the full commitment of the United Nations to peace based on our common multilateral framework developed by United Nations resolutions and international law, he concluded. The release and election of Nelson Mandela as president of a united and democratic South Africa has shown that what may seem "insoluble and unrealistic" is in fact "soluble and realistic". Let this serve as a lesson in the search for peace between Israelis and Palestinians, 

THE SITUATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST, INCLUDING THE PALESTINIAN QUESTION

declarations

ANTÓNIO GUTERRES, Secretary-General of the United Nations , said that he was speaking today with very deep concern as "we are witnessing growing tensions and instability in the world, especially in the Middle East ". He mentioned the worrying level of tensions and risks in the Gulf and the new escalations in the conflicts in Libya, Yemen and Syria, after certain positive developments. This volatile context underlines the need for a political solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which has lasted far too long, he insisted, adding that this solution remains crucial for a lasting peace in the Middle East. 

"I reiterate my full personal commitment, as well as the commitment of the United Nations, to support the parties in their efforts to reach a two-state solution," said the Secretary-General. He recalled that the position of the United Nations has been defined over the years by resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly, which bind the Secretariat. The United Nations remains committed to helping the Israelis and the Palestinians resolve the conflict on the basis of relevant United Nations resolutions, international law and bilateral agreements, and to contribute to the realization of the two-state vision - Israel and the Palestine - living side by side in peace and security, within internationally recognized borders, based on pre-1967 borders. 

Guterres said the time for dialogue, reconciliation and reason must come. He urged the Israeli and Palestinian leaders to show the political will necessary to promote the cause of a just and lasting peace, with the support of the international community. Rest assured of the full commitment of the United Nations to a just and comprehensive peace between Israelis and Palestinians on the basis of our common multilateral framework developed by United Nations resolutions and international law, concluded the Secretary-General. 

Mr. NICKOLAY MLADENOV, Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process , recalled that on January 28, the United States presented its vision of peace between Israelis and Palestinians, as the basis for negotiations between the two parties. The Palestinian Government rejected the proposal, while the League of Arab Countries and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation did the same in statements, stating that the proposal does not meet the minimum rights and aspirations of the Palestinian people. The High Representative of the European Union, in turn, said that the proposal deviates from "internationally agreed parameters" and a number of African States also rejected the proposal at their last Summit. 

Senior Israeli government officials, on the other hand, welcomed the proposal, indicating their readiness to make it the basis of direct negotiations. Some Member States expressed the hope that the presentation of the vision would be an opportunity to bring the parties back to the negotiating table, in the interest of a two-State solution. However, just days after the presentation of the vision, we unfortunately experienced violent incidents in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem and in and around Gaza, said the Special Coordinator. Another escalation and other provocations would constitute a worrying development, he warned. After the presentation of the American proposal, senior Israeli officials have, in fact,

The United States has announced the creation of a joint committee with Israel to develop a more detailed version of the concept maps included in the proposal, which would thus recognize the Israeli decision to apply its laws in specified areas of the West Bank. The Secretary-General, recalled the Special Coordinator, has continued to speak out against unilateral annexation measures and plans. Such measures, including the possible annexation of territories in the West Bank, would have a devastating impact on the prospect of a two-state solution. They would close the door to negotiations, would have negative repercussions on the whole region and would seriously jeopardize the chances of regional normalization and peace.

On the other hand, those who reject the proposal should in no case engage in violence, which would be the worst possible answer at this delicate moment. What is needed, said the Special Coordinator, is political leadership and serious reflection on the measures to be taken to bring the parties back to the negotiating table. The United Nations, he said, has long supported the solution of States on the basis of relevant resolutions, international law and previous agreements. But it is not enough to reaffirm its positions. The time has come, the Special Coordinator urged, to hear proposals on how to move the process forward and to return to an agreed mediation framework to initiate substantive negotiations. 

Avoid the status quo, he urged, speaking of a status quo that would only further drive the Israelis and Palestinians away, consolidate the occupation and jeopardize the viability of the two-state solution. The goal can only be the realization of the vision of the two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security on the basis of the 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as the capital of the two states. To get there, there is no other way than negotiations. There is no other way than the one where Israelis and Palestinians agree on a framework based on relevant United Nations resolutions, international law and bilateral agreements. Without a credible path to the resumption of negotiations, we would face an increased risk of violence, 

I have come here to advocate for a just peace on behalf of the 13 million Palestinians, said Mr. MAHMOUD ABBAS, President of the Observer State of Palestine, at the outset. He rejected the "Israeli-American result of unilateral measures" proposal. He listed those who support his position: the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the European Union, the League of Arab States, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who reaffirmed his commitment to the solution of the two States and the relevant United Nations resolutions. The "Israeli-American" proposal, explained the President, calls into question the legitimate rights of the Palestinians, in particular the right to "our independence in our own territory". The proposal, he further accused, legitimizes illegal measures contrary to international law. Nothing in this proposal can be considered as a basis for negotiations, he said. It is a prescriptive plan drawn up by Israel and the United States, a plan which bars access to peace and which withdraws East Jerusalem from Palestinian sovereignty. This is enough to reject the proposal because it would "kill in the bud" any possibility of peace, said the President.

We are offered "a Swiss cheese", he indignantly, brandishing a map which shows the evolution of Palestine which in 2010 had only 9% of the territory approved in the 1947 Sharing Plan. The proposal "Israeli-American" goes even further. This proposal, he commented, is the consecration of the occupation, it is the annexation of territories, it is the hardening of an apartheid regime. It is also, he said, impunity for all crimes perpetrated against our people and their territories. 

The President thanked all the members of the international community and the international and regional organizations which took a stand against this proposal, in the name of international legality. He also did not forget to thank the Israelis who demonstrated against the proposal in Tel Aviv and the 107 members of the House of Representatives and the 12 American senators who rejected it. He also saluted the Palestinians and other Arab peoples who have taken hundreds of thousands around the world to denounce the proposal. “Yet some insist on the fairness of this plan! He wondered. He said, however, convinced that peace is always at hand. I came here to establish an international partnership for a just and lasting peace, he promised, adding "I don't understand why we insisted on writing this Israeli-American project". In 2017, he said, we are entering into a constructive dialogue with the United States government. With President Donald Trump, we discussed all the issues raised in Oslo. But what was my surprise, said Abbas, to see the United States subsequently proclaim Jerusalem, the capital of Israel, close the Palestinian Authority office in Washington and end aid to the Palestinians. I don't know who influenced Trump, but I know the President is not like that, he said. we had addressed all the issues raised in Oslo. But what was my surprise, said Abbas, to see the United States subsequently proclaim Jerusalem, the capital of Israel, close the Palestinian Authority office in Washington and end aid to the Palestinians. I don't know who influenced Trump, but I know the President is not like that, he said. we had addressed all the issues raised in Oslo. But what was my surprise, said Abbas, to see the United States subsequently proclaim Jerusalem, the capital of Israel, close the Palestinian Authority office in Washington and end aid to the Palestinians. I don't know who influenced Trump, but I know the President is not like that, he said.

Jerusalem, he insisted, is occupied territory. Who has the right to give it to either State? To date, he also recalled, 140 countries have recognized the State of Palestine, which has become an actor in the international community and an observer state at the United Nations. Palestine, he said, is part of 120 international and regional organizations and has even chaired the Group of 77 and China here at the United Nations. Who can, under these conditions, deny its existence? President Abbas instead urged the Security Council to send a mission to Palestine to observe progress in governance, including the fight against corruption. The culture of peace is promoted among young Palestinians as is the rejection of terrorism and violence. “We are not terrorists. " 

Some say, he said, that "we never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity" and that we have missed our chance to achieve peace. Nothing could be further from the truth, the President defended himself. He recalled the multiple agreements signed by the Palestinian Authority which strictly respected its commitments while the "Occupation Government" was undermining international efforts. We tried to take advantage of all the opportunities available to us, insisted the President. Several countries, he said, invited us to a meeting with Mr. Benjamin Netanyahu. I have been to Moscow three times and the Prime Minister of Israel refused to come. Who, under these conditions, refuses to resume talks? 

Abbas rejected the link that the United States is trying to establish between a political solution and an economic solution. First, a political solution is needed. I would like to tell Mr. Trump that the American project will not allow us to achieve peace and security because it rejects international legality, he warned. Trump, he said, ignored this legality and the rights of the Palestinian people. He even considers that East Jerusalem is no longer part of the Palestinian territory. An imposed peace is an unsustainable peace, he stressed, adding "let's build peace between our two peoples, as we started to do in Oslo". 

The Palestinian Authority, he confirmed, remains committed to the Oslo Accord and calls on the Quartet and members of the Security Council to organize an international peace conference to facilitate the implementation of the relevant resolutions in the field. Whom to turn to when none of the Security Council resolutions are respected? Any country can join the Quartet, but to be frank, the President admitted, the United States can no longer be the only mediator.

Abbas reached out to Israel to build a real peace that works for both Palestinians and Israelis. Our peoples can no longer tolerate this occupation because it is a situation that can implode at any time. We need hope, that of justice, peace and independence. Do not deprive us of this hope, pleaded the President. But looking at the map of the evolution of the occupation, my hope disappears, he said. How did we get there, these little islets of land separated from each other? 

To the Israelis, the President replied that the continuation of the occupation and the yoke imposed on the Palestinians will not improve their security. Let us reengage ourselves to make the choice of peace. We are not fighting, assured the President, against the Jewish people. For a Muslim, to oppose a Jew is blasphemy. Palestinians fight against those who attack them regardless of their faith. We are ready, concluded the President, to start negotiations with Israel provided that they are supervised by the Quartet. I am ready to stay here at the United Nations to start these negotiations immediately. "Take care not to deprive the Palestinian people of hope," he warned, in conclusion.

If President Abbas truly wanted peace, he would not be here today, he would be in Jerusalem and not in New York, commented Mr. DANNY BEN YOSEF DANON ( Israel). The late President Anouar al-Sadat, he said, had come to Jerusalem and reached out to the Israeli people. It was an incredible moment. All of Israel was glued to its television set. If President Abbas really wanted to negotiate, he would not be in New York, but in Washington, as King Hussein of Jordan did before him, in a gesture that resulted in the Peace Treaty between Israel and Jordan, a continued Mr. Danon. He maintained the position of his country: President Abbas does not want to negotiate and refuses to meet Prime Minister Netanyahu. In 10 years, he has only met him once. Why, the representative insisted, President Abbas is not coming to Jerusalem because Mr. Netanyahu could go to Ramallah. 

Today, the representative was surprised, President Abbas wants to blame the Israelis for the failures. His words are just empty promises and his calls to sovereignty, cries of war. The representative regretted that certain countries had conformed President Abbas in his position, by voting for unilateral resolutions. Can we still speak of negotiations when we respect the 1967 borders as a precondition? No, Mr. Abbas, you have come to New York to criticize Israel and the United States and further distance the prospect of negotiations. The representative asked the international community to press for the return of Palestine to the negotiating table. Accusing President Abbas of lying openly, he praised President Trump's "healthy approach" whose plan ends obsolete measures and a formula that hasn't worked for 70 years. President Trump's plan is driven by a "pragmatic" desire to remove all difficulties. It is only a tool to move on to negotiations. However, resigned the representative, we will never progress as long as President Abbas is in power, "it is reality". We have always been ready to negotiate and have given President Abbas this opportunity on several occasions. But each time, he opposed our dismissal, said the representative. Danon urged Council members to choose peace, unlike President Abbas. President Trump's plan is driven by a "pragmatic" desire to remove all difficulties. It is only a tool to move on to negotiations. However, resigned the representative, we will never progress as long as President Abbas is in power, "it is reality". We have always been ready to negotiate and have given President Abbas this opportunity on several occasions. But each time, he opposed our dismissal, said the representative. Danon urged Council members to choose peace, unlike President Abbas. President Trump's plan is driven by a "pragmatic" desire to remove all difficulties. It is only a tool to move on to negotiations. However, resigned the representative, we will never progress as long as President Abbas is in power, "it is reality". We have always been ready to negotiate and have given President Abbas this opportunity on several occasions. But each time, he opposed our dismissal, said the representative. Danon urged Council members to choose peace, unlike President Abbas. " it is reality ". We have always been ready to negotiate and have given President Abbas this opportunity on several occasions. But each time, he opposed our dismissal, said the representative. Danon urged Council members to choose peace, unlike President Abbas. " it is reality ". We have always been ready to negotiate and have given President Abbas this opportunity on several occasions. But each time, he opposed us, said the representative. Danon urged Council members to choose peace, unlike President Abbas. 

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is at a turning point, with the questioning of the agreed parameters, commented Mr. TAREK LADEB ( Tunisia). He recalled that with Indonesia, he had launched negotiations on a draft resolution which would have reaffirmed the need for a just and lasting solution, on the basis of UN resolutions, including resolution 2334 (2016 ), and reportedly called for an end to the Israeli occupation of the occupied territories, including East Jerusalem. The representative stressed his country's commitment to the Charter and to international law. He urged the international community to remain united and reject any violation of international law and any policy of the fait accompli. Palestinian rights are inalienable, he said, before again supporting the Madrid principles and the Arab Peace Initiative. 

Mr. DIAN TRIANSYAH DANI ( Indonesia ) paid tribute to the dedication and skills of his "brother", the Ambassador of Tunisia, Mr. Moncef Baati. We have called for the meeting in response to recent developments in the region, including the announcement on January 28 of a plan for the Middle East, which could affect the stability of the region, he said. . He recalled that African and Asian countries, at the Bandoeng Conference in 1955, supported the independence of Palestine. This Council owes a debt to the Palestinian people and must respond to their critical humanitarian needs. "How much longer will we wait before we see a sovereign and independent Palestinian state? "

The delegate pleaded for the two-state solution, with Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace and security, and within recognized borders on the basis of the June 4, 1967 borders. He insisted on the need to " credible multilateral negotiations ”. Any agreement will have to be found by associating the two sides closely, if we want lasting peace and stability in the Middle East, he warned. The need for a practical solution should not be met at the expense of international law, including the various UN resolutions. The Security Council cannot be seen as a mere spectator of the maintenance of international peace and security, particularly with regard to the independence of Palestine, concluded the representative.

Since their creation, commented, in turn, Mrs. KELLY CRAFT ( United States), the United Nations has devoted countless hours to debates on Israeli-Palestinian peace, adopting more than 800 resolutions. But neither these debates nor these resolutions led to a real and lasting peace. With a failure "as spectacular", it would be folly to suggest that what is needed today is other debates and other resolutions. This is why, said the representative, that President Trump has proposed a "new Vision for Peace" that is truly shaking up the status quo. President Abbas, said the representative, I heard you, I heard you speak of hope and I heard your words on the importance of hope. But to keep hope alive, she warned, it takes the will to compromise, to get involved in good faith. It is time, encouraged the representative, to set the table for a conversation of a new kind, a conversation where one does not speak to others but where one speaks with others. A conversation, she added, which is only the starting point and not the finishing line. We are here, she said, to offer a partnership based on common interests and values. But we must first understand that peace is not in the papers but in a concrete experience of security, economic opportunities and freedom. We are here, she said, to offer a partnership based on common interests and values. But we must first understand that peace is not in the papers but in a concrete experience of security, economic opportunities and freedom. We are here, she said, to offer a partnership based on common interests and values. But we must first understand that peace is not in the papers but in a concrete experience of security, economic opportunities and freedom.

This kind of peace, said the representative, is anchored in President Trump's plan of January 28. The fact that Israel accepted the concept map is a "historic" step in the creation of a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital. The new Vision respects the special role of the Kingdom of Jordan and guarantees Muslims around the world access to the Al-Aqsa Mosque. The plan, the representative continued, offers the Palestinian people the "realistic" prospect of seeing an autonomous and fully recognized state in their lifetime. The plan also recognizes that political settlement is not enough. It therefore offers "historic" levels of economic investment in the future State of Palestine, 

This is not a proposal for peace in theory, it is a proposal for dignity in practice, said the representative. It's an opening offer and it's the start of the conversation, not the end, she said. She hoped that Israelis and Palestinians will have the "courage" to talk to each other and that the Council will avoid going back to its old ways which can in no way lead to peace. The people of Israel have no better friend than the United States, which will always stand by their side. But the United States is also on the side of the Palestinian people, said the representative. We hope, she said, that the Palestinian leaders will view the plan as lucky as it is, that they will roll up their sleeves and take this opportunity to sit down with the Israeli leaders and start the conversation . "If you choose peace, America and many other countries will be there for you!" ", She concluded.

M. NICOLAS DE RIVIÈRE ( France) stressed that lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians requires respect for international law and Security Council resolutions and the establishment, alongside Israel, of a viable and sovereign Palestinian state in internationally approved executives. He recalled that the parameters for the settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are known and have been endorsed several times by the Security Council, most recently with resolution 2334 (2016). France, he assured, will continue to defend a negotiated solution in accordance with international law and enshrined in the resolutions of this Council. The representative stressed that respect for international legality is the only realistic solution to end the occupation and bring about a just and therefore lasting peace. 

France, he insisted, will never compromise with the security of Israel and strongly condemns those who threaten it. In this context, the representative considered it urgent to relaunch the negotiations on the basis of the agreed parameters with a view to recreating a political horizon. An active involvement of the main countries of the region, as well as Europeans, is necessary to contribute to the resumption of the political process, added the representative before recalling that the Arab Peace Initiative remains current. He asked the two parties to return to the negotiating table "in good faith" and urged them to create an environment conducive to the resumption of discussions. This requires everyone to refrain from violence or the threat of it, 

Mr. JUN ZHANG ( China) denounced the Israeli settlements which continue to expand in the Palestinian territory. He noted the American plan and the reactions of the representatives of Palestine and the Arab League. He pleaded for a political solution, respecting the point of view of all parties, in particular that of the Palestinians. He noted the intense consultations underway in this Council and supported the efforts of Indonesia and Tunisia. The representative reiterated his country's support for the two-State solution and respect for international law. He encouraged the parties to continue consultations in order to create conditions conducive to a settlement of the situation. He urged Israel to lift the blockade on Gaza and improve the situation in the Palestinian territories, before calling for a remedy to the plight of UNRWA. The Council must play a constructive role for a just and lasting solution, he said, adding that China has always championed the just cause and the legitimate rights of the Palestinians.

Mr. SVEN JÜRGENSON ( Estonia ) welcomed all efforts to achieve a peaceful settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and praised the United States for its initiative to revive the peace process. It is essential, he said, that the European Union and the United States work as closely as possible on this complex global issue. He called on Israel and Palestine to take steps to resume direct and meaningful negotiations, to resolve all standing status issues, including those relating to borders, the status of Jerusalem, security and the issue refugees, with the aim of achieving a just and lasting peace.

Estonia's position on the Middle East peace process, he said, remains unchanged: direct negotiations between Israel and Palestine are needed, taking into account the legitimate aspirations of both parties. He also reiterated his commitment to a negotiated two-state solution that meets the security needs of the Israelis and the Palestinians and the Palestinians' aspirations for one state. This must be based on the 1967 lines, with an exchange of equivalent land, as it will be approved by the parties, and respecting internationally agreed parameters and UN resolutions.

Recognizing that there are still several sensitive issues to be resolved, Jürgenson urged all parties to exercise restraint and to refrain from taking unilateral steps that could further aggravate tensions and undermine the viability of the two state solution. He expressed concern about Israeli settlement activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, in violation of international law, and warned that the annexation of one part or another of the West Bank would infringe that same right as well as Security Council resolutions. Finally, he called on the parties to refrain from acts of violence, terror and incitement, before concluding by reiterating his commitment to the security of Israel.

Ms. INGA RHONDA KING ( Saint Vincent and the Grenadines) stressed that the "moral" objective of the United Nations is to ensure freedom for all peoples and all nations, large and small. The “fundamental” promise to respect the political independence and territorial integrity of all States is one that cannot be taken lightly, at the risk of causing anarchy and immense human suffering. For a small state like mine, whose peaceful existence depends so heavily on a robust body of international law, it is particularly troubling to see the decline of these internationally agreed standards, said the representative. She said she was deeply disturbed by the attempts to deviate from the agreed parameters of the search for peace between Israel and Palestine. 

We remain committed to the international position and support for the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, including their right to self-determination, and the two-state solution based on pre-1967 borders, said the representative. She insisted on the first resolution adopted in eight years, namely resolution 2336 (2016) in which the Council ensures "that it will not recognize any modification of the borders of 4 June 1967, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations ”. The representative warned that there could be no dialogue and therefore no solution without involving both parties. 

M. DINH QUY DANG ( Vietnam) noted that any equitable and lasting solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains a major concern for the countries of the region and the international community. He supported the two-state solution, within the boundaries defined by the relevant United Nations resolutions. Seeing that “peace continues to elude us”, the representative called on the parties concerned to resume dialogue with a view to finding a solution in accordance with the resolutions of the Security Council. Such a peace agreement can only be reached if the parties refrain from any action that could undermine it. The representative therefore welcomed any effort to relaunch the Israeli-Palestinian peace process on the basis of international law and relevant Security Council resolutions.

Mr. JUERGEN SCHULZ ( Germany) declared that lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians requires respect for international law and Security Council resolutions and the establishment, alongside Israel, of a viable and sovereign Palestinian state in internationally approved executives. He called unilateral measures to impose a solution "useless" and warned against calling into question internationally agreed parameters. He believed that the American plan deviates precisely from these parameters, particularly with regard to Jerusalem and the settlements. The alienation from a perspective of peace, he warned, feeds the "frustrations". Seeing all the same in the American plan of the proposals which deserve to be examined, the representative suggested the creation of a multilateral format to do this. He took note of President Abbas' ideas and stressed the importance for both parties to make proposals. 

One of the main obstacles to peace is the pursuit of settlements, which are illegal under international law, the representative warned, concerned by the statements of Israeli leaders on a possible annexation of the Jordan Valley and other parts of the occupied West Bank. Any annexation would be illegal, undermine the prospect of lasting peace and have serious consequences, he insisted. He therefore urged Israel not to take this route and warned that "we will not recognize any modification of the borders of June 4, 1967, except exchanges of territories agreed by the parties". The representative concluded by calling for elections to legitimize the Palestinian Authority and redress the political divisions between Gaza and the West Bank. 

M. BELIEVE THE TEACHING LIES ( Afrique du Sud) said he was pleased that this meeting provided an opportunity to hear the voice of President Mahmoud Abbas and therefore that of the Palestinian people. The Security Council, he recalled, held its first meeting on Palestine on December 9, 1947. In more than 72 years, he said, we have not progressed since the vision and the Palestinian aspirations continue to be ignored, including by the latest initiative. Only initiatives developed with the full participation of all parties, in particular the Palestinians themselves, will bring lasting peace and stability, the representative warned. A real, inclusive and open dialogue, where both parties are at the table, is the only way to overcome the current impasse. 

The Security Council, the representative continued, must therefore support the environment necessary for the equal involvement of the Israelis and the Palestinians to relaunch the peace process. Any peace initiative must comply with internationally agreed terms of reference and parameters, including the Madrid Principles, the Arab Peace Initiative, the Quartet Peace Plan and General Assembly and Security Council resolutions, including resolutions 242, 338 and 2334. Flagrant violations of international law in the name of what is presented as "political reality" or "opportunity" only jeopardize the rule of law and the multilateral system developed during for the past 75 years. 

The position of South Africa is clear, insisted the representative. It is in line with that of the African Union Summit which just ended in Addis Ababa: we want a viable Palestinian state, living side by side and in peace with Israel within internationally recognized borders, based on those which existed on June 4, 1967, with East Jerusalem as its capital, in accordance with all relevant United Nations resolutions, international law and internationally agreed parameters. No peace plan can lead to a Palestinian state without sovereignty or territorial continuity and even less economic viability, the representative warned. Any solution must be based on a just settlement with just laws that facilitate equality and equity for all who have the right to live in the territories of Israel and Palestine. This is called sovereign equality between states, insisted the representative. The release and election of Nelson Mandela to the Presidency of a united and democratic South Africa, he concluded, has shown that what may seem "insoluble and unrealistic" is in fact "soluble and realistic". Let this serve as a lesson in the search for peace between Israelis and Palestinians. has shown that what may seem "insoluble and unrealistic" is in fact "soluble and realistic". Let this serve as a lesson in the search for peace between Israelis and Palestinians. has shown that what may seem "insoluble and unrealistic" is in fact "soluble and realistic". Let this serve as a lesson in the search for peace between Israelis and Palestinians. 

Ms KAREN PIERCE ( United Kingdom) recalled that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has brought an entire region into chaos and that it has been going on for too long. Our position remains unchanged: we want a negotiated settlement, based on the two-state solution, which is realistic and acceptable, including with regard to the refugee issue. We must recognize that we are not moving forward, impatiently Mrs. Pierce. The Israelis and the Palestinians deserve better. A Palestinian state and the security of Israel will only be possible if the parties resume direct negotiations. The last negotiations dating from almost 10 years ago, the representative saw in the American plan, an attempt to break the deadlock. The plan is not ideal, she conceded, but it is a first step towards negotiations. It is very different from what has been discussed so far and we all know, she added, that it will take time. She noted the deep concerns of President Abbas, "it is perfectly his right." But, she said, we encourage you to examine the American plan and negotiate. In the meantime, concluded the representative, we immediately oppose any unilateral measure by any party, including the possible annexation of part of the West Bank by Israel. The time has come to take the first steps to relaunch the negotiations. we encourage you to review the US plan and negotiate. In the meantime, concluded the representative, we immediately oppose any unilateral measure by any party, including the possible annexation of part of the West Bank by Israel. The time has come to take the first steps to relaunch the negotiations. we encourage you to review the US plan and negotiate. In the meantime, concluded the representative, we immediately oppose any unilateral measure by any party, including the possible annexation of part of the West Bank by Israel. The time has come to take the first steps to relaunch the negotiations.

Mr. JOSÉ SINGER WEISINGER ( Dominican Republic ) explained that his country, which respects human rights and international law, which recognizes the international legal order guaranteeing respect for the fundamental rights to peace, justice and development political, social, economic and cultural of nations, which is also committed to peaceful and united coexistence between nations, calls for seeking a just, lasting and integral solution that meets the legitimate needs of the parties to the conflict. The Dominican Republic remains committed to respecting the sovereignty and self-determination of the peoples, he said, reaffirming his support for a two-state solution, as provided for in the various resolutions. 

In order to reach an agreement between the parties, the representative recommended that increased efforts be made to conciliate, with the support of the international community, in order to guarantee the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and the right of Israel to live in peace, within secure and recognized borders. “We are convinced that it is useless to formulate new resolutions or to go back on already taken paths. The Dominican Republic remains committed to the frame of reference based on existing resolutions and bilateral agreements between the Israelis and the Palestinians, insisted the representative, encouraging the parties to promote a real dialogue and to restart negotiations in order to reach a plan of peace, based on internationally agreed agreements.

Mr. VASSILY A. NEBENZIA ( Russian Federation) defended a just solution on the basis of the relevant United Nations resolutions, the Madrid Principles and the Arab Peace Initiative. The goal is to lead to a Palestinian State, living in peace and security alongside Israel. The American solution does not take into account the fundamental principles. We will only accept an agreement deemed acceptable by both parties, warned the representative. What will you do if the Palestinian side refuses this plan? How do you intend to achieve peace with unilateral measures? The representative nevertheless saw an advantage in the current situation: the Palestinian question was once again at the heart of concerns and the so-called "agreement of the century" highlighted the need for a solution. He called for intensified Quartet efforts and the restoration of Palestinian unity. Noting that despite their differences, the Palestinian and Israeli representatives spoke today of the importance of negotiating, he called on them to exploit the platform offered by Moscow. 

Mr. PHILIPPE GOFFIN ( Belgium ) underlined that his country had always defended a process of credible negotiations registered in the respect of international law, including the resolutions of the Security Council. He also stressed the need for an agreement on the borders of the two States, on the basis of the borders of June 4, 1967, with exchanges of territories defined by mutual agreement between the parties. He considered it essential to find a just, equitable and realistic solution to the refugee question by commending the essential work of UNRWA in the field. In addition, the representative considered it important to find a way to settle, through negotiation, the status of Jerusalem as the future capital of the two states, meeting the aspirations of all its inhabitants. 

Finally, Mr. Goffin called for security arrangements which, for the Palestinians, respect their sovereignty and show that the occupation is over, and which, for the Israelis, ensure their security. A lasting solution implies a State of Israel with legitimacy recognized by all and an independent, democratic, unified, sovereign and viable Palestinian State, so that the two States can live side by side in peace, security, and mutual recognition, said the representative. Believing that the American vision has put the issue of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at the top of the political and diplomatic agenda, he stressed the urgency for the international community to re-mobilize and create an environment conducive to the resumption of negotiations of good faith between the parties. 

The Secretary General of the League of Arab States, Mr. AHMED ABOUL GHEIT, announced the decision taken on February 1 by the Council of Ministers of the Arab States to refuse the peace plan proposed by the United States. International law is on the side of the Palestinians, he said. They must "stand firm" and the international community must act. If the negotiations of the past have come to nothing, the fact remains, he commented, that the proactive measures proposed by the United States are simply aimed at removing certain issues from the agenda to satisfy the Israeli side. The Palestinians were not even informed of this plan and even less consulted and today, they are asked to submit to it. It is as if we were looking for a way to impose in violation of the very principles of a neutral negotiation, he indignant.

The League of Arab States, he added, finds that the provisions of the American plan contain new parameters which can be summed up as follows: grant the territories and the settlements and Jerusalem to Israel and get the Palestinians to be satisfied with a "Bantustan without real autonomy". The plan does nothing for the two-state solution, he said. He proposed creating a single state with two categories of citizens. It is an "apartheid in the Holy Land" plan, he insisted. Can the international community accept such a solution? The League, he said, calls for a return to the Arab Peace Initiative which aspires to help the two parties reach a solution through negotiations while the American plan undermines the very principle of these negotiations. . There can be no peace between two parties if this peace is not based on justice, he added. Peace cannot be born if a party must recognize its defeat and submit. This is what we do when trying to force the Palestinians to submit to an unjust settlement. What the League is asking for, he insisted, is that the international community preserve its credibility, by returning to internationally recognized parameters for the settlement of the conflict, "parameters in which the Palestinians have believed for 30 years".

Gheit said he was "stunned" to hear a "very clear" appeal to the exclusion of "Abu Mazen" on the grounds that he would not be a true partner in peace. This way of doing things clearly shows a personalization problem. What the Palestinian President does not accept, said the Secretary-General, is what is "unacceptable" to all Palestinians. Having witnessed a similar speech on another Palestinian president 15 years ago, the League calls for vigilance, concluded Gheit.




https://www.un.org/press/fr/2020/cs14103.doc.htm
claud39
claud39
VIP Member
VIP Member

Posts : 12469
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum