The draft resolution on the Division for Palestinian Rights of the Secretariat, “L.13”, was then adopted, as orally revised, by a recorded vote of 108 in favour to 7 against (Australia, Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau, United States) with 59 abstentions.<\/p><\/div>\n
\n
Next, the Assembly adopted, as orally revised, the draft text on the Special Information Programme on the Question of Palestine of the Department of Public Information of the Secretariat, “L.14”, by a recorded vote with 163 in favour to 7 against (Australia, Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Palau, United States), with 7 abstentions (Cameroon, Honduras, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, South Sudan, Togo, Tonga).<\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
By a recorded vote of 165 in favour to 6 against (Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau, United States) with 6 abstentions (Australia, Cameroon, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, South Sudan, Tonga), the Assembly adopted “L.15”, as orally revised, on the peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine.<\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
Speaking after the votes, the representative of United States<\/u> said that his country remained deeply troubled by the repetitive and disproportionate number of one-sided Assembly resolutions condemning Israel. Only four other resolutions had been critical of other Member States. All parties to the tragic conflict had a responsibility for ending it, and the United States was disappointed that the Assembly continued to single out Israel. The United States urged a halt to one-sided actions that would disrupt or distract from the process. Continued support for biased resolutions complicated efforts to reach a just and lasting peace. Furthermore, the systematic bias and distortion of the conflict conveyed by the resolutions damaged United Nations’ credibility. <\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
Of particular concern, he said, were United Nations resolutions on the Division for Palestinian Rights, the Committee on Palestinian Rights and the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices, as those renewed mandates for ineffective United Nations bodies and wasted valuable resources. All Member States should evaluate the effectiveness of supporting and funding them. There was no contradiction between support for Israel and support for the Palestinian people, and efforts must be redoubled to build the trust and confidence necessary for a lasting agreement, he added.<\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
The representative of Singapore<\/u> said that his country had voted in favour of “L.12” on the understanding that the reference in operative paragraph 2 to the achievement of the two-State solution on the basis of the pre-1967 borders should be interpreted in the same manner as set out in operative paragraph 1 of “L.15”, namely, within recognised pre-1967 borders.<\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
The representative of Lithuania ,<\/u> speaking on behalf of the European Union, congratulated the Palestinian delegation for successful outcomes on several resolutions. The Union consolidated its votes on those resolutions, but it wished to put on record that it considered any reference to the words “Palestinian Government” in any resolutions of the sixty-eighth session referred to the Palestinian Authority. The Union’s further point involved the lack of an agreed definition on issues of displacement.<\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
The representative of Cyprus<\/u>, in explanation of “L.12”, reaffirmed support for the efforts of both Israelis and Palestinians to reach a comprehensive settlement. Peace talks were the only way to reach a viable solution. In that regard, he was concerned at unilateral initiatives that could affect the negotiations and the prospects for an agreement. <\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
Next, the draft text on Jerusalem, “L.16”, was adopted, as orally revised, by recorded vote of 162 in favour to 6 against (Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau, United States), with 8 abstentions (Australia, Cameroon, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, South Sudan, Togo, Tonga). <\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
The Assembly then adopted draft resolution “L.17”, as orally revised, on the Syrian Golan, by a recorded vote of 112 in favour to 6 against (Canada, Israel, Marshall Island, Palau, United States) with 58 abstentions.<\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
Explaining their votes, the representative of Argentina<\/u>, speaking also on behalf of Brazil<\/u>, said he and his colleague had voted in favour of “L.17” as they supported the position of the United Nations Charter on the use of force. The two delegations also highlighted the importance of finding a solution to the Syrian Golan in line with relevant Security Council resolutions.<\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
Right of Reply<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
Exercising the right of reply, the representative of Israel<\/u> noted that many countries had abstained from voting on issues including the violence and the use of chemical weapons in Syria. The Syrian delegate was trying to rewrite history. Iran’s representative had noted that the greatest obstacle to safety was the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, but the biggest obstacle to world security was really Iran, which was the architect of terrorism and provided weapons to Hamas and other groups. The way to peace in the Middle East was not possible by supporting baseless resolutions such as those before the Assembly.<\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
Also exercising the right to reply, Syria<\/u>’s delegate said the statements made by Israel’s representative needed to be addressed, especially the suggestions that what was happening in the General Assembly was not a part of history. Israel’s almost 70-year-long history was fraught with aggression. Peacekeepers in the Golan Heights were exposed to extreme danger posed by extremist groups in the area. Israel had strong support from a powerful State, which had led to the expansion of settlements and violent flare-ups. In short, Israel lived in a fictional world, he said.<\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
The representative of Iran<\/u>, also exercising the right of reply, said that Israel had committed heinous crimes against Palestinians, including construction of illegal settlements and an apartheid wall, and the Gaza blockade. Those were the tip of an iceberg, demonstrating the regime’s persistent defiance of human rights principles and the basic norm of decency. The Israeli regime, as a source of terrorism, continued to perpetrate its crimes with a sense of impunity. <\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
He called on the international community, including the United Nations, to take measures to prevent further heinous acts. The proposed nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East was challenged by Israel’s nuclear weapon programme. Peace and stability could not be achieved when Israel failed 51ÁÔÆæ international norms and principles. To establish such a zone in the Middle East, the international community must insist that Israel accede to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and place all its weapons under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards.<\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
The representative of Israel<\/u> said that the words of the Syrian and Iranian delegates were “upside down”. The Syrian delegate was revising history. As for the lecture on human rights by Iran’s delegate, he said Iran could instead lecture on the “abcs of terrorism”. In Iran, women lacked rights and elections were a sham, whereas Israel was a thriving democracy. “We’re not perfect,” he said, but it would not be lectured by Iran. Returning to Syria’s allegations of meddling in the areas of operation of the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF), he said the situation in Syria should be discussed at length.<\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
Next, Syria<\/u>’s delegate said that what was stated in the Assembly was not a lecture. When discussing the Israeli violation of human rights, speakers based information on facts documented in United Nations reports. Noting the levity with which Israel’s delegate addressed the voting results on the six newly adopted draft resolutions in the United Nations, he said that delegate must remember that the United Nations was involved in Israel’s establishment.<\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
In a further right of reply, Iran<\/u>’s representative said the bloody hands of the Israeli regime had brought violence to the region and was a sponsor of terrorism. Raising baseless allegations against Iran would not detract from its long list of crimes, including the assassination of an Iranian scientist. Democracy was not possible in an occupied land, he said.<\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
Additional Statements<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
RIYAD MANSOUR, Permanent Observer of the State of Palestine<\/u>, said he appreciated the handling of the deliberations and thanked all the countries that had sponsored and co-sponsored the draft resolutions and all others that had supported them. The number of overall votes had increased from past years, he said. “We trust the wisdom of the international community in voting in a positive way on these resolutions,” he said, adding, “We will continue this march to put an end to the occupation that started in 1967 so we can create the reality of a two-State solution”.<\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
He disagreed with delegates suggesting that the resolutions did not serve a purpose. The international community must do its job to uphold international law. It was arrogant and insulting to be told that members of the Assembly were voting as sheep would. That was the position of a sore loser. One delegate indicated that those resolutions were one-sided and had singled out Israel. Israel should honour and respect the implementation of the resolutions, he said. The texts were not eroding the credibility of the United Nations; what was eroding that credibility was the lack of their implementation. “In Palestine, we will never lose hope for what the United Nations is and what it stands for,” he said.<\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
Syria<\/u>’s delegate said he deeply appreciated the General Assembly’s adoption of a resolution on the Syrian Golan. He thanked the sponsors of the text and those who had voted in its favour. <\/p><\/div>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
* *** *<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n\n
<\/p><\/div>\n
\n
For information media • not an official record<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"General Assembly GA\/11460 Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York Sixty-eighth General Assembly Plenary 58th Meeting (AM) GENERAL ASSEMBLY, WRAPPING UP ANNUAL CONSIDERATION OF QUESTION OF PALESTINE, SITUATION IN MIDDLE EAST, ADOPTS SIX RESOLUTIONS BY RECORDED VOTE Sending a strong message of support for the Middle East peace process, albeit with […]<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"country":[],"document-category":[2433,1329,1338,3745],"document-source":[1753,2173,1365,1897],"committee-meeting":[],"document-subject":[2237,1741,1801,1813,1805,1749,1797,2145,2385,2137,2741],"entity":[1729],"document-language":[6542,6541],"class_list":["post-197729","document","type-document","status-publish","hentry","document-category-french-text","document-category-press-release","document-category-statement","document-category-voting-record","document-source-ceirpp","document-source-division-for-palestinian-rights-dpr","document-source-general-assembly","document-source-united-nations-department-of-public-information-dpi","document-subject-golan-heights","document-subject-human-rights-and-international-humanitarian-law","document-subject-inalienable-rights-of-the-palestinian-people","document-subject-middle-east-situation","document-subject-occupation","document-subject-palestine-question","document-subject-peace-process","document-subject-public-information","document-subject-security-issues","document-subject-settlements","document-subject-statehood-related","entity-united-nations-system","document-language-english","document-language-french"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document\/197729","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/document"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document\/197729\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=197729"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/country?post=197729"},{"taxonomy":"document-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-category?post=197729"},{"taxonomy":"document-source","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-source?post=197729"},{"taxonomy":"committee-meeting","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/committee-meeting?post=197729"},{"taxonomy":"document-subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-subject?post=197729"},{"taxonomy":"entity","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/entity?post=197729"},{"taxonomy":"document-language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-language?post=197729"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}