{"id":199255,"date":"1987-06-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2019-03-12T17:45:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/?p=199255"},"modified":"2019-03-12T17:45:10","modified_gmt":"2019-03-12T17:45:10","slug":"auto-insert-199255","status":"publish","type":"document","link":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/document\/auto-insert-199255\/","title":{"rendered":"Sixteenth United Nations Seminar on the Question of Palestine (New Delhi, 8-12 June 1987) – Report – DPR publication"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

\n

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

<\/p>\n

\n

SIXTEENTH UNITED NATIONS SEMINAR ON THE QUESTION OF PALESTINE<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Theme:  "The inalienable rights of the Palestinian people"<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Vigyan Bhawan Conference Centre<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

New Delhi, India<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

8-12 June 1987<\/strong><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

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

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
<\/td>\n<\/td>\n\n

Paragraphs<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Page<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

INTRODUCTION<\/p>\n

<\/td>\n

\n

1 – 2<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

I.<\/p>\n

II.<\/p>\n

III.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

OPENING STATEMENTS<\/p>\n

PANEL DISCUSSION<\/p>\n

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

3 – 34<\/p>\n

35 – 93<\/p>\n

94 – 108<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2<\/p>\n

7<\/p>\n

19<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Annexes<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

I.<\/p>\n

<\/td>\n

\n

Message from the participants in the Seminar to the Chairman of the Executive Committee of the  Palestine Liberation Organization<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

23<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

II.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Message from the participants in the Seminar to Mr. Javier Pérez de Cuéllar, Secretary-General of the United Nations<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

24<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

III.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Message from the participants in the Seminar to the Chairman of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, H. E. Mr. Robert Mugabe <\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

25<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

IV.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Motion of thanks<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

26<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

V.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

List of participants and observers<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

27<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\n

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

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

.\t<\/span>  <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

1.\t<\/span>The Sixteenth United Nations Seminar on the Question of Palestine entitled "The inalienable rights of the Palestinian People" was held at the Vigyan Bhawan Conference Centre, New Delhi, India, from 8 to 12 June 1987 in accordance with General Assembly resolution 40\/96 B. The Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People had decided, on an experimental basis and in the interest of economy, to integrate the Seminar with the Asian Regional NGO Symposium on the Question of Palestine which was held from Monday, 8 June to Wednesday, 10 June 1987. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

2.\t<\/span> <\/span> <\/span>The Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People was represented by a delegation consisting of Mr. Oscar Oramas-Oliva (Cuba), Vice-Chairman of the Committee, head of the delegation; Mr. Guennadi I. Oudovenko (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic); Mr. David D. Karran (Guyana); Mr. Saviour F. Borg (Malta); Mr. Pramathesh Rath (India); and Mr. Zehdi L. Terzi (Palestine Liberation Organization). Mr. Oramas-Oliva was Chairman and Mr. Rath Rapporteur of the Seminar.<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

3.\t<\/span>  Seven meetings were held and 14 panelists presented papers on selected aspects of the question of Palestine. In addition, representatives of 40 Governments, the PLO, three United Nations organs, two United Nations programmes and specialized agencies, one intergovernmental organization and observers of 30 non-governmental organizations attended the Seminar. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

I. OPENING STATEMENTS<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

4.\t<\/span> <\/span> <\/span>The opening session of the Seminar was addressed by Mr. K. Natwar Singh, Minister of State for External Affairs of India. In his statement he emphasized that, at <\/span>a <\/strong><\/span>time when all but a few nations had broken the shackles of colonialism and had become free, the Palestinian people continued to suffer. Yet they continued to make sacrifices and to fight for the most fundamental of human rights – the right to self-determination and the right to <\/span>live in <\/span>freedom and with dignity.<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

5.\t<\/span> <\/span> <\/span>The Israeli Government had sought, through various means, to consolidate its position in the occupied territories and had attempted to make the annexation' of territory irreversible. Israel had also tried completely to destroy and decimate the movement for national liberation of the Palestinian people and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). That policy was, however, self-defeating. There could be no security for the States of the region unless a comprehensive settlement of the Palestinian problem was secured. <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

6.\t<\/span> <\/span> <\/span>India had, even during the days before independence, recognized the historical, cultural and national identity of the Palestinian people and had supported the aspirations of the Palestinian people for freedom and for their own national homeland. That support had continued after India's independence. In 1980, India had accorded full diplomatic recognition to the PLO as the sole and authentic representative of the Palestinian people. <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

7.\t<\/span> <\/span> <\/span>India did not believe that partial or piecemeal solutions would bring about lasting peace. The settlement had to be premised upon certain fundamental principles – the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and the right to return to their homeland. It was in that context that the call by the United Nations to convene an International Peace Conference on the Middle East assumed paramount importance. The efforts of the international community in recent months had focused on ways and means to convene such a Conference. Those who had been disinclined to accept the Conference now recognized that it was the only way left for achieving peace. The recently released report of the Secretary-General (A\/42\/277-S\/18849 of 7 May 1987) gave ground for cautious optimism.<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

8.\t<\/span>Through all its years of travail Palestinian nationalism had emerged stronger and deeper. The last session of the Palestine National Council in Algiers had shown that the Palestinians were even more united and determined to continue that struggle. It was India's duty to provide all assistance to them.<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

9.\t<\/span>Mr. N. G. Rathore, representative of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, stressed that the fate of Palestine had engaged the attention of the United Nations almost since its inception. While a solution to the question had eluded the organization for 40 years, the continuing intensification of tension and violence in the area made it imperative that collective efforts be resumed to achieve a just comprehensive and lasting settlement. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

10.\t<\/span>The United Nations had a crucial role to play in that endeavour. Its machinery, suitably adapted, could provide a useful framework for that  purpose. The idea of an International Peace Conference appeared to be gaining wider support and a number of procedural proposals had been made in that respect. It was encouraging that those proposals envisaged a central role for the Security Council, especially since the Council had a universally recognized responsibility for that important problem. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

11.\t<\/span>The report submitted on 7 May 1987 by the Secretary-General reviewed his efforts towards the convening of an International Peace Conference on the Middle East. Those efforts included consultations with members of the Security Council, the representatives of the parties directly concerned and the PLO. The Secretary-General had stated that, in contrast with the experience of recent years, none of the members of the Security Council opposed in principle the idea of an International Peace Conference under the auspices of the United Nations, but there were still wide differences on the form it should take. The position of the parties directly concerned had remained far apart on a number of issues of procedure and substance, but in recent months there had been indications of greater flexibility in attitudes towards the negotiating process, and that had to be encouraged. The Secretary-General intended to intensify his contacts with the parties in the months to come, in order to try to find ways of bridging the gaps between them. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

12.\t<\/span>The repeated requests for continued efforts for the convening of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East could not but be viewed as recognition of the fact that a comprehensive settlement had to be reached through a process of negotiations with the participation of all parties concerned under the auspices of the United Nations. Any solution had to take into consideration the interests and concerns of all States and peoples in the region, including those of the Palestinian people. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

13.\t<\/span>The programme of the Committee On the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People on seminars and NGO symposia had effectively helped to focus international attention on the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and had contributed to a greater understanding of the issue, as well as to mobilizing international public opinion in support of a just and peaceful solution. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

14.\t<\/span>Mr. Oscar Oramas-Oliva, Chairman of the Seminar, gave a brief account of the work of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. He stressed the particular importance that the Committee attached to the organization of seminars and symposia and meetings for non-governmental organizations in various regions. He emphasized the Committee's conviction that objective information on the question of Palestine would help to ensure more comprehensive coverage of developments in the region and promote public support in favour of an equitable and peaceful solution. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

15.\t<\/span>The General Assembly had, since its thirty-eighth session, endorsed the holding of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East as called for by the International Conference on the Question of Palestine held at Geneva in 1983. It had gone further and invited the Security Council and the Secretary-General to undertake all preparatory measures to convene the Conference. In its resolution 41\/43 D adopted at the forty-first session the Assembly had also endorsed the call for setting up a preparatory committee within the framework of the Security Council, with the participation of its permanent members, to take the necessary action to convene the Conference. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

16.\t<\/span>In accordance with the request contained in resolution 41\/43 D, the Secretary-General had presented his report on the question of convening an International Peace Conference on the Middle East on 7 May 1987. In that regard, the Committee was determined to pursue its efforts to ensure that the Conference was convened, for it was convinced that the holding of the Conference would be an important step towards the settlement of the question of Palestine. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

17.\t<\/span>Accordingly, the Committee, as a matter of priority continued to exert all efforts to promote the early convening of the Conference and welcomed the recent momentum in favour of its convening. That momentum had been reflected in the Declaration adopted by the Eighth Summit Conference of the Non-Aligned Countries, the Declaration adopted by the Foreign Ministers of the Twelve States Members of the European Community on the Middle East and the Harare Declaration of the Committee of Nine Non-Aligned Countries on Palestine. The Palestine National Council at its eighteenth session had also supported the convening of the Conference. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

18.\t<\/span>The 1983 International Conference on the Question of Palestine had demonstrated the importance of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the search for a solution to the question of Palestine. Their active participation in the Conference led the Committee to make every effort to get NGOs interested in the question of Palestine from every region of the world to work together and to harness their potential in influencing public opinion and, consequently, government positions. With that in mind the Committee had, over the past few years, adopted a programme of work in which NGOs had a significant role to play. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

19.\t<\/span>Mr. N. G. G. Makura, High Commissioner of Zimbabwe to India conveyed a message from Mr. Robert Mugabe, Chairman of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries. The message stressed that all the problems of violence, insecurity and instability in the Middle East emanated from Israel's occupation of Palestinian and other Arab territories, including the Holy City of Jerusalem. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

20.\t<\/span>Peace and stability which had eluded the Middle East for almost four decades could be achieved only by putting an end to those injustices through the attainment and exercise of the legitimate and inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, particularly the right to self-determination and to the establishment of their own State, and by Israel's total, immediate and unconditional withdrawal from all the Palestinian and other Arab territories which it had occupied since 1976, including Jerusalem. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

21.\t<\/span>The Middle East was but one region which had remained a zone of tension for such a long time. As in the case of Israel in the Middle East, the apartheid<\/u> régime in South Africa had contemptuously continued to defy all efforts by the international community to bring about a peaceful end to apartheid<\/u> in South Africa itself and to end its illegal occupation of Namibia. The very same Western countries that had been supporting Israel in its repression of the Palestinian people also tacitly propped up the racist régime in Pretoria. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

22.\t<\/span>The Movement of Non-Aligned Countries at its Eighth Summit at Harare had expressed its support for the call by the United Nations to intensify its efforts in the search for a negotiated settlement to the question of Palestine. It strongly supported the United Nations resolution calling for an International Peace Conference on the Middle East. The Foreign Ministers of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries' Committee on Palestine had called on all States, international organizations and the international community at large to do all in their power to promote and support efforts for the convening of such a Conference. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

23.\t<\/span>For that Conference to succeed, it was imperative that the Palestinian people, as represented by the PLO, was included as a fully recognized and equal party in the deliberations. The Conference had also to find a comprehensive solution which could take into account all aspects of the problem. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

24.\t<\/span>The Movement of Non-Aligned Countries appealed to the international community, particularly to those Powers that had it within their means, to exercise their influence on Israel and to persuade it to accept the holding of an International Peace Conference on the Middle East. In that regard, the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries fully supported the United Nations efforts to find means of initiating the process that could lead to a peaceful settlement of the Middle East problem. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

25.\t<\/span>Mr. Khalid El-Sheikh, Ambassador of the PLO to India, read out a message from Mr. Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the Executive Committee of the PLO. In the message it was noted that the Palestinian people – both those living in the occupied territories and those in exile – were facing greater hardships owing to the concerted plan of the United States of America and Israel to bring the Palestinian people to its knees, to undermine the PLO and to deprive it of its inalienable national rights. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

26.\t<\/span>The people living today in occupied Palestine were facing the Israeli Government's iron-fist policy, which was reflected in the escalation of the campaigns of repression, persecution and State terrorism. It had been met by the Palestinian people firmly and resolutely with a series of courageous popular uprisings, despite the fact that the Israeli Government itself sponsored those acts by financing, arming and protecting the gangs of terrorist settlers in the pursuit of its avowed policy of annexing the Palestinian territories which it had occupied since 1967. Thus the Israeli Government was seeking to impose its plans for administrative and functional reorganization and its development schemes with the aim of improving its image and perpetuating its occupation. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

27.\t<\/span>Outside the occupied territories, Israel was waging an equally dangerous battle against the Palestinian people in pursuance of the policy of arrogance and might which Israel was seeking to impose on the region with the unlimited support of the United States Administration. Israeli air, naval and land forces, using the most up-to-date weapons supplied by the United States, were carrying out repeated raids on Palestinian camps in Lebanon. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

28.\t<\/span>Furthermore, Israel, in collusion with certain forces hostile to the Arab nations, was imposing a naval and land blockade on the Palestinian camps and attacking children, women and freedom fighters in order to eliminate the Palestinian people and its authentic representative, the PLO, and by balkanizing the region into insignificant communal groups, to subject it to the domination and will of the United States and Israel. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

29.\t<\/span>The Palestinian people was determined to continue its struggle to bring about a just peace. This demand had been reiterated by its representatives at the eighteenth session of the Palestine National Council held from 20 to 25 April 1987 at Algiers, which unanimously endorsed the convening of an International Peace Conference in accordance with General Assembly resolutions 38\/58 C and 41\/43 D, which provided for the holding of such a Conference under the auspices of the United Nations and with the participation of the permanent members of the Security Council as well as the parties concerned, including the PLO, on an equal footing. The conditions might be favourable for the holding of such a conference if there was a willingness to reach a just settlement to the conflict in the region. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

30.\t<\/span>Mr. Guennadi I. Oudovenko (Ukrainian SSR), speaking as representative of the Special Committee against Apartheid<\/u>, noted that the seminar was a reflection of the deep concern of the United Nations over the problem of Palestine and part of the continuous support lent to the Palestinian people in their just struggle. The overwhelming majority of the States Members of the United Nations were convinced that the non-settlement of the issue constituted the underlying cause of tensions in the region and the core of the Middle East conflict. The dangerous situation in the region was, above all, the result of the ongoing illegal occupation by Israel of Palestinian and other Arab territories and its refusal to recognize the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. The current exceedingly complicated and dangerous setting in the Middle East required immediate and decisive actions on the part of the international community which supported the legitimate and inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. A peaceful solution aimed at solving the Middle East dispute could not be attained without the participation of the PLO, the authentic representative of the Palestinian people, on equal footing with all parties concerned. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

31.\t<\/span>For a decade the Special Committee against Apartheid<\/u> had been submitting a special annual report to the General Assembly and the Security Council on recent developments concerning relations between Israel and South Africa. The reports pointed very clearly to the seriousness of the alliance between the two States. Israeli assistance to the minority régime in South Africa in the military and nuclear fields had become a serious obstacle to the efforts of the United Nations to eradicate apartheid<\/u>. The concern at the collaboration between those two countries stemmed from the fact that it constituted an alliance detrimental to the interests of the African and Arab people. The General Assembly had repeatedly called for the cessation of that alliance. In its resolution 41\/35 C on the relations between Israel and South Africa, the General Assembly demanded that Israel desist from and terminate forthwith all forms of collaboration with South Africa, particularly in the economic, military and nuclear fields, and abide scrupulously by the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

32.\t<\/span>Mr. Ammar Amari (Tunisia), representing the Special Committee on the Situation with Regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, emphasized that the Middle East conflict continued to be one of the most intractable issues facing the international community. Concerted action was overdue to persuade the supporters of Israel to compel it to respond to relevant United Nations resolutions and to the will of the international community. The Special Committee had always recognized the importance of the role played by NGOs in informing the public regarding the issues of decolonization, and particularly their ability to enlist pubic support and assistance for the cause of those who had long been denied their most basic human rights. By making known the plight of the Palestinians by publicizing their struggle and their sacrifices, the action of NGOs over the years had tremendously enhanced public conscience in support of the Palestinian cause. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

33.\t<\/span>On Monday, 8 June 1987, the delegation of the Committee was officially received by Mr. K. Natwar Singh, Minister of State for External Affairs of India. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

34.\t<\/span>The Seminar decided to send messages to Mr. Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the Executive Committee of the PLO (see annex I), to Mr. Javier Pérez de Cuéllar, Secretary-General of the United Nations (see annex II) and to Mr. Robert Mugabe, Chairman of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries (see annex III). The Seminar also adopted a motion of thanks to the people and Government of India (see annex IV). <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

II. PANEL DISCUSSION<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

35.\t<\/span>Four panels were established to consider different aspects of the question of Palestine.  These panels and their panelists were as follows:<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t\t(a)\t<\/span>Panel I:  "The Role of the Palestine Liberation Organization"\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t\tMr. Jawad Naji Al-Awad (Palestinian)\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n
\n\t\t\t\t(b)\t<\/span>Panel II: "The International Peace Conference on the Middle East, in accordance with United Nations General Assembly resolution 38\/58 C, the need for such a Conference, efforts and prospects to promote a successful outcome and benefits thereof”\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t\tMr. P. N. Haksar (India), Mr. Igor M. Khvorostiany (Ukrainian SSR), Mr. Jorge Manfugas (Cuba), Mr. Abdullah Salah (Jordan), Mr. Mohammad Aziz Shukri (Syrian Arab Republic), Mr. V. P. Vorobyov (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics), and Mr. Wan Guang (China);\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n
\n\t\t\t\t(c)\t<\/span>Panel III:  "The question of Palestine and Asian Public Opinion:\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t\tMr. Mansoor Alam (Pakistan), Mr. Rahmat Ali (India), Mr. Yilmaz Altug (Turkey), Mr. Hardi (Indonesia), Mr. Tran Hoan (Viet Nam), M. K. R. Misra (India);\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n
\n\t\t\t\t(d)\t<\/span>Panel IV:  "The United Nations and the question of Palestine"\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t\tMr. Guennadi I. Oudovenko (Ukrainian SSR)\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

36.\t<\/span>The expert members of the various panels agreed on summaries of the presentations and discussions on each of the topics. The Seminar decided to include those summaries in the report. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Panel I:<\/u> "The role of the Palestine Liberation <\/u>Organization"<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

37.\t<\/span>The Palestinians constituted a people fully entitled to self-determination. The Palestinians also had the right to strive for the restoration of their rights by all means, particularly since many peoples had exercised that inalienable right and had been able to attain their independence during the time in which the Palestinian people had been exiled from its homeland and robbed of its resources, wealth and the various constituent factors of its economic and social life. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

38.\t<\/span>In May 1964, the establishment of the PLO had been proclaimed. It was to mobilize the potentials of the Palestinian people for the liberation of its land. The merging of all the Palestinian national forces within the framework of the PLO and the stepping up of the political and armed struggle against the occupation had led to the emergence of new dynamics for national liberation in the form of mass organizations and federations comprising all sectors of the Palestinian people. Institutions had been also established for social and productive services, and the PLO had begun to be transformed from an organization merely expressing the aspirations of the Palestinian people into an organization striving for the liberation of the land and energetically incorporating the hopes and aspirations of that people. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

39.\t<\/span>The PLO had received Arab recognition as the sole, legitimate representative of the Palestinian people at the 1974 Arab Summit. It had received legal recognition successively from 117 States of the world by 1983 and from many international and regional organizations. Its international legal status had received the ultimate ratification by virtue of United Nations General Assembly resolutions 3210 (XXIX) and 3237 (XXIX), which conferred on it the status of observer at sessions of the General Assembly. It was also accorded the right to attend meetings of the Security Council when questions relating to the situation in the Middle East were discussed. It had achieved full membership in the League of Arab States, the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

40.\t<\/span>The foundation of the PLO had represented the first step towards the Palestinian people's restoration of its national identity and its unity through the joint resolve to protect its rights. Although the Palestinian people had lost its societal unity, its struggle, under the leadership of the PLO, had been a<\/span> <\/span>practical demonstration of the truth that that people had an affiliation with a specific homeland and a specific culture and that its struggle on the various levels would continue until that feeling of belonging acquired through the resistance was transformed into an actual fully fledged social and national affiliation with the land of Palestine, where Palestinian national sovereignty would be exercised. In addition to the burdens borne by the PLO against zionism and United States schemes in the region, it had also fallen to it to bear the economic and social problems faced by the Palestinian people, whether living in exile or under occupation. <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

41.\t<\/span>The state of the economy of the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967 was distinguished by the fact that the circumstances of the areas under settler-colonialist military occupation were characterized by features not found in other occupation experiences in the twentieth century. The authorities had proceeded to follow a multifaceted policy, including terrorization, humiliation and oppression of the population by all available means, forced emigration of Palestinians and fragmentation of their social, cultural, economic and political structure. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

42.\t<\/span>Israel's occupation of the Palestinian and Arab territories had taken the form not merely of expansion for security reasons but expansion and settler-colonialist occupation aimed at enslaving another people, exploiting its wealth and turning it into a consumer market for the Israeli economy. As a result of Israeli economic policies, the occupied Palestinian territories had become an extensive and convenient market for Israeli industrial and agricultural products. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

43.\t<\/span>The very existence of the economy in the occupied Palestinian territories was under threat from the occupation authorities. All forms of discrimination were employed with a view to strangling the Palestinian economy and reducing it to a subordinate status so that it might later be made completely dependent on the Israeli economy and the way thus be paved for the process of final annexation of those territories. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

44.\t<\/span>The retention of territory and preservation of the Palestinian population were among the most important objectives on which the Palestinian revolution, represented by the PLO, had based its action. The PLO was aware that that had been possible only through support for the steadfastness of the Palestinian population in the occupied territories. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

45.\t<\/span>The PLO had adopted a number of principal guidelines for its economic and social development efforts on behalf of the occupied Palestinian territories. Those guidelines were: <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t\t<\/span>(a)\t<\/span>To curtail migration out of the occupied territories, whether such migration was permanent or temporary for the purposes of study or employment; <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t\t<\/span>(b)\t<\/span>To reduce pressure and incentives tending to impel Palestinian workers to work in Israeli businesses; <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\t\t<\/span>(c)\t<\/span>To improve the qualifications of citizens and equip them with patriotic consciousness, as well as to provide them with the most comprehensive skills at all levels, in order that the Palestinian human barrier might be qualitatively superior rather than simply superior in numerical terms. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

46.\t<\/span>The efforts of the PLO to support national steadfastness had encountered a number of obstacles, particularly with respect to the occupation authorities, which had deliberately taken various measures to prevent the delivery of support funds from whatever source on the pretext that such funds were provided by the PLO. However, the real reasons for such measures had to be seen in the attempts of the authorities to thwart any endeavour towards development in the occupied territories and to crush any attempt designed to enable the Palestinian people to maintain its steadfastness. The occupation authorities thus hoped to deprive the people of the material resources required for such steadfastness and thereby to induce them to emigrate. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

47.\t<\/span>The PLO's efforts in the field of economic and social development for the Palestinian people had not been confined to the service sectors but had also extended to production sectors. Outside the occupied homeland, the PLO had carried out an experiment which was unique for national liberation movements. The experiment related to the Society of the Sons of the Palestinian Martyrs (SAMED), which had been founded in 1970. It served as a public sector and a nucleus for a national economy which endeavoured to attain various noble and ambitious objectives. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

48.\t<\/span>The organization had satisfactorily withstood the complicated challenges arising from its commitments to its people, since it had been able to incorporate economic and social development into the totality of its activities in the struggle for restoration of the Palestinian people's national rights. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Panel II:<\/u> <\/u>"The<\/u> <\/u>International<\/u> <\/u>Peace Conference on the Middle East,<\/u> <\/u>in<\/u> <\/u>accordance<\/u> <\/u>with<\/u> <\/u>United<\/u> <\/u>Nations General Assembly resolution 38\/58 C, the need<\/u> <\/u>for such<\/u> <\/u>a Conference<\/u> <\/u>and efforts and prospects to promote<\/u> <\/u>a<\/u> <\/u>successful<\/u> outcome and benefits thereof"<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

49.\t<\/span>Participants stressed that the world community's concern had continued to grow over the current situation in the Middle East which was dangerously threatening international security. Military force, put at stake to solve the conflict, had fully discredited itself. A time when an aggressor, relying on its temporal military advantage and supported by a powerful ally, could terrorize neighbouring countries, seize their territories, deprive a whole nation of its legitimate right to live in a politically independent State – inevitably had passed. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

50.\t<\/span>The very nature of the Middle East conflict, the close relationship between different aspects of the Middle East problem and intertwining interests of many parties and States made a settlement through collective efforts imperative. Mutually acceptable solutions to outstanding issues that took into account the rights and interests of all the parties could be found only at the conference table. Peace in the Middle East could best be achieved through a comprehensive settlement that would cover all aspects of the conflict, including the question of Palestine. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

51.\t<\/span>Considering and solving major fundamental problems, including regional conflicts, on the basis of a new political way of thinking was a characteristic feature and an imperative need of the present time. A new way of thinking and a suitable foreign policy had to be based on a realistic analysis of the situation and on taking into account the diverse nature of the forces and contradictions which shaped international politics and considerably influenced the emergence of conflict situations. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

52.\t<\/span>Despite persistent efforts of the world community to achieve a just, lasting and peaceful solution to the conflict, that objective continued to be elusive and the plight of the Palestinian people remained a matter of acute international concern. The recurrence of violent incidents had continued to exacerbate tension and put further obstacles in the search for peace. As a result of that and the lack of a political solution, most Palestinian lived under occupation or in exile. Many of them existed under conditions of extreme tension, hardship and insecurity. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

53.\t<\/span>In 1947, the United Nations General Assembly had adopted resolution 181 (II), which recommended the creation of two States, an Arab State and a Jewish State, which had been implemented so far only to the extent of the creation of the State of Israel. One of the foremost commitments of the international community was to ensure the rights of the Palestinian people, including its right of return, to self-determination and to the creation of its own State in Palestine. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

54.\t<\/span>In that connection it was strongly reaffirmed that the question of Palestine was at the core of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Over the years, an international consensus had emerged on the necessity for a comprehensive, just and lasting settlement of the problem. That consensus had been defined in the Geneva Declaration on Palestine adopted by the International Conference on the Question of Palestine in 1983, and affirmed in General Assembly resolution 38\/58 C of 13 December 1983 and subsequent resolutions calling for the convening of an International Peace Conference on the Middle East. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

55.\t<\/span>Recent times had seen an intensification of the international campaign for the convening of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East as a peaceful alternative for arriving at an acceptable solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict. That conflict had reached alarming proportions with Israel's occupation of all the territories of Palestine and other Arab territories, following the aggression of June 1967, its invasion of Lebanon in June 1982 and its refusal 51ÁÔÆæ the international will by full and complete withdrawal. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

56.\t<\/span>There was no doubt that multilateralism – not bilateralism – would ensure fair representation at the proposed Conference and provide the necessary balance, impartiality and even-handedness. Direct bilateral negotiations, as learned from past experience, could not secure the lasting comprehensive peace needed. They would only legitimize Israel's military superiority in the Middle East and, in fact, cripple peace talks even before they had begun. Only multilateralism could guarantee an open dialogue on all the issues relating to the Middle East problem, without prejudice to any one of the concerned parties to the conflict. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

57.\t<\/span>The view was expressed that from the normative\/legal approach, two basic notions could be available. First, there could only be two alternatives in a situation, a state of war or a state of peace, and in no real way could these two incompatible states coexist, either spatially or temporally. In spatial terms, that meant that the United Nations had to mobilize all resources to achieve world peace and security or else mankind would face inevitable chaos. In temporal terms, it meant that peace and war could alternate, but there could be no middle ground between them. Thus, trust could not be put in the no-war\/no-peace situations prevailing in many parts of the globe and they could not be regarded as a satisfactory or acceptable condition of life. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

58.\t<\/span>It was evident that the approach to achieve peace based on Israel's conditions had failed. There were signs that a deep concern has grown over that fact in Israel itself where public support for the convening of an international conference was increasing. The very fact that the question of the possibility of holding an international conference on the Middle East had been discussed in the Knesset, witnessed the process of demarcation in that country. It seemed that Israel could no longer afford to ignore the mounting international consensus in support of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

59.\t<\/span>The Seminar noted that there was a difference between the concept of an International Peace Conference aimed at the attainment of a comprehensive, peaceful settlement including participation by the PLO, and the concept of an international conference as a mere vehicle to initiate separate direct negotiations, which excluded the PLO, a principal party to the conflict, and therefore was completely unacceptable. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

60.\t<\/span>The Conference now enjoyed almost universal support, dominated the contemporary political scene and had become an unavoidable point of reference in any plan that touched the Palestinian question. Irrespective of that privileged international status, however, as long as the present circumstances persisted, the initiative would not attain the phase where it would become a workable project, unless Israel and the United States were induced to participate positively in carrying it out. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

61.\t<\/span>The ongoing imbalance in the correlation of forces in the Middle East had hardened. The Conference, in serving as a neutral moderator, could provide balance and soften the inflexible stance of the parties involved in the conflict. It was clear that the aggrieved party, the Palestinians and the Arabs, could not be expected to submit to peace on Israeli terms, while the Israelis might not accept certain proposals made by the Arab side either. But both sides could conceivably yield to the United Nations for moral and political considerations. That alone made an international forum a necessary imperative for substantive negotiations and the subsequent implementation of a just and equitable peace. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

62.\t<\/span>It was stressed that the PLO should be an equal participant in the Conference as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. The Palestinian problem could not be solved without the participation of the PLO. The permanent members of the Security Council and other countries that had participated actively in the efforts aimed at finding a peaceful solution to the conflict might also be considered for participation. The Conference should be convened without any pre-conditions. It was agreed that only the United Nations, in particular the Security Council, which had been asked to facilitate the organization of the Conference, could provide a legal and political framework acceptable to the international community that would make it possible for negotiations to proceed with full respect for internationally recognized principles. Only an International Peace Conference organized under the aegis of the United Nations could make it possible to go beyond the narrow strategic interests and the national concern of various States. Agreements concluded at such a Conference could thus enjoy universal legitimacy and be implemented and applied in a manner acceptable to all the parties. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

63.\t<\/span>The holding of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East reflected the political will of the international community. It had been supported from the very beginning by the PLO, the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, the Organization of Islamic Conference, the Socialist countries and other important forces in international life. More recently, the States Members of the European Economic Community as well as the Nordic countries had declared their support for the convening of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East. At its recent session the Political Consultative Committee of the States Members to the Warsaw Treaty had voiced its support for the convening of the Conference. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

64.\t<\/span>Participants emphasized the urgent need for additional concrete and constructive efforts by all Governments in order to convene the Conference without further delay and supported the call for setting up a preparatory committee, within the framework of the Security Council, with the participation of the permanent members of the Council, to take the necessary action to convene the Conference. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

65.\t<\/span>In that regard the Seminar took note of the report of the United Nations Secretary-General (A\/42\/277-S\/18849) on his consultations with the members of the Security Council and representatives of the parties directly concerned on the convening of an International Peace Conference on the Middle East as called for by the General Assembly. The participants in the Seminar endorsed the Secretary-General's observation and, in particular, fully supported his determination to continue his efforts to establish a process that would lead to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

66.\t<\/span>The possibility of convening the Conference and its successful work depended to a great extent upon the unity and co-ordination of the Arab States – the parties to the conflict. It was stressed that the PLO had proven to be a real force which had to be taken into consideration. It had managed to find solutions to numerous organizational problems and worked out its political platform as witnessed by the results of the eighteenth session of the Palestine National Council. The documents adopted at Algiers stressed the importance of unity in the ranks of the Palestinians on a national basis and expressed support for holding an International Peace Conference on the Middle East. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

67.\t<\/span>The participants in the Seminar appreciated the increasingly active participation of NGOs in furthering the objectives of the United Nations on the question of Palestine. NGOs had, at the annual United Nations International NGO Meeting on the Question of Palestine since 1984, repeatedly expressed their support for the convening of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East under the auspices of the United Nations as specified in General Assembly resolution 38\/58 C and had declared their readiness to work towards that objective. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

68.\t<\/span>The proposal was made that with the institutional support of NGOs and other similar entities, pro-Peace Conference committees, at local and national levels could be set up, particularly where the idea had encountered rejection or hostility. Those committees could strive to mobilize public opinion in favour of the Conference. The goal of such campaigns would be to influence Governments by pertinent ways and means and to persuade them into adopting a favourable attitude toward the Conference as well as to the solution of the Palestinian question. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Panel III: "The question of Palestine and Asian public opinion"<\/u><\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

69.\t<\/span>The Palestinian question and the Arab-Israeli conflict had remained in the forefront of the public opinion as one of the major issues faced by the world. The reason for the intense preoccupation of the international community with that question were the moral and ethical issues it raised in regard to the use of force and military power to deprive a whole people of its land and the wars that it had caused in the region, the threat it posed to world peace and the instability which it sustained in an extremely sensitive region of the world. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

70.\t<\/span>It was agreed that, generally, public opinion was becoming an increasingly important factor in influencing the formation of national policies on international and regional issues and, in particular, on issues of international peace and security. Public opinion, therefore, had to be mobilized to strengthen the voice of reason, justice and objectivity in world affairs with a view to making the world safer to the benefit of mankind. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

71.\t<\/span>Regarding the question of Palestine, it was shown that public opinion was an important and fundamental element with a potential to contribute to, and to be utilized in, bringing peace to the Middle East based on a just, comprehensive, and lasting settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict and its core, the question of Palestine. It was necessary to promote a deeper understanding for and awareness of the question of Palestine in all its complexity. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

72.\t<\/span>It was agreed that the formation of informed public opinion on any issue or set of issues was not an easy or automatic process. Public opinion formation was an area of prime concern for those groups and individuals who were deeply involved in matters relating to the Middle East and who were, in particular, deeply concerned for the future of the Palestinian people and who were involved in the struggle to see that the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and statehood in its own land should come about in the near future. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

73.\t<\/span>The international system of information, generally dominated by the Western media, played an important role in the formation of public opinion. It emphasized division among the Palestinians, internal conflict and "Arab terrorism" and reported less frequently what was happening within the occupied Arab territories, the daily oppression and life under occupation and the consequences of the implementation of the policy of settlements. Public opinion in Asia, as elsewhere, needed a clearer depiction of the Palestine question in order to encourage positive attitudes and to strengthen the support of the legitimate struggle of the Palestinian people. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

74.\t<\/span>It was particularly emphasized that more objective information was needed on the activities to convene the International Peace Conference on the Middle East in conformity with United Nations resolutions, so that Asian public opinion could play a forceful role in contributing to the initiation of a process leading to a solution to the conflict. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

75.\t<\/span>The Seminar heard accounts of the supportive role of public opinion in India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey and Viet Nam. Although it was difficult to discuss Asian public opinion in general because of the region's cultural, socio-economic and political diversities, it was recalled that the plight of the Palestinian people was one that was viewed with profound sympathy by the Asian peoples and Governments, especially among members of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries. There had been support for the struggle of the Palestinian people from the earlier stages of independence of the Asian countries themselves which had experienced colonial domination, oppression and exploitation. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

76.\t<\/span>It was emphasized that the support and sympathy of the Asian and African nations towards the struggle of the Palestinians had been engraved in the Final Communiqué of the Asian and African Conference in Bandung in 1955, which included the following: <\/p><\/div>\n

\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>"In view of the existing tension in the Middle East, caused by the question of Palestine and danger of that tension to world peace, the Asian African Conference declared its support for the rights of the Arab people of Palestine and called for the implementation of the United Nations resolution on Palestine and achievement of the peaceful settlement of the Palestinian question".\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n
\n

That support had been based on the fundamental and universal principles of peace, freedom, independence, justice and human rights upheld by the Bandung Conference. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

77.\t<\/span>It was recalled that Asian countries were favourably disposed towards the International Peace Conference on the Middle East and that their support should be used by Asian public opinion to assist in removing the remaining obstacles in the path of convening the Conference and to contribute to a deeper understanding of the urgent need to promote the beginning of a negotiating process that would lead to peace in the Middle East. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

78.\t<\/span>The point was also made that particular attention should henceforth be directed towards those forces that were still not sufficiently supportive of the just cause of the Palestinian people so as to correct the misperception and distortion on the question of Palestine and its root causes. In the contemporary world it was highly anomalous that the Palestinian people should be denied the exercise of its inalienable national right to self-determination, enjoyed by other peoples. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

79.\t<\/span>The Seminar recalled that the year 1987 marked several anniversaries: the seventieth anniversary of the adoption of the Balfour Declaration, the fortieth anniversary of the adoption of General Assembly resolution 181 (II), the twentieth anniversary of the 1967 war and the resulting occupation of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem and the fifth anniversary of the massacre at Sabra and Shatila, which could be utilized by the media, NGOs and the public at large to promote the necessary political will by the Governments concerned to achieve peace. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

80.\t<\/span>It was important that the media should play a more responsive role in providing a more balanced reporting on the Middle East and, in particular, on the plight of the Palestinians. Institutions such as United Nations Associations, universities, colleges, research institutes, churches and other religious establishments as well as national and international NGOs had a crucial role to play in the formation of public opinion. Those institutions and organizations had to be urged to give wider coverage and more balanced treatment to the question of Palestine.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

81.\t<\/span>Seminars and symposia organized by the United Nations were a pressing necessity for the Asian region. Through those means NGOs could be sensitized. Special consideration had also to be given to wider observance of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, which had been established by United Nations General Assembly resolution 34\/65 D to be 29 November each year, and the occasion had to be taken to give maximum coverage to the question of Palestine. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

82.\t<\/span>Every effort had to be made to step up the widespread dissemination of information, as one of the major contributions to the achievement of a just solution of the problem of Palestine on the basis of the attainment of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine. The Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People and the United Nations Division for Palestinian Rights had an important role in such dissemination of information. Furthermore, the United Nations Department of Public Information was requested to make every effort to ensure that accurate information on the question of Palestine received the widest possible dissemination. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Panel IV: "The United Nations and the question of Palestine"<\/u><\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

83.\t<\/span>The evolution of the question of Palestine was intertwined with the evolution of the United Nations. It was a reflection of the reality that the issues which lay beneath the tragedy of the Palestinian people went to the very heart of the principles upon which the United Nations was founded: respect for the dignity of peoples and the sovereignty of States and the pursuit of peaceful relations and co-operation among nations and peoples. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

84.\t<\/span>On 29 November 1947, resolution 181 (II) had been adopted by the General Assembly. The resolution provided for the establishment of two States, one Arab and one Jewish. Jerusalem was to be a corpus separatum<\/u> under a special international régime, economic unity and safeguard of the fundamental rights were to be ensured. Following the establishment of Israel and during the events that had taken place in the years to follow, the United Nations had been increasingly preoccupied with and involved in the problem. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

85.\t<\/span>The Arab-Israeli war of 1967 had been a turning point in the struggle of the Palestinian people for its rights. Israel had occupied the Gaza Strip, the West Bank including East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights and the Sinai. The second great Arab exodus had taken place, and thousands of Palestinians were now uprooted from their homes, some of them for the second time. The United Nations Security Council had secured a cease-fire and adopted resolution 242 (1967) which emphasized the inadmissibility of acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

86.\t<\/span>Beginning in 1969 and in the years to come, the General Assembly had recognized <\/span>"<\/sup><\/span> that the problem of the Palestinian Arab refugees has arisen from the denial of their inalienable rights" and that "full respect for the inalienable rights of the people of Palestine was an indispensable element in the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East". In 1974, those rights had been defined by the Assembly as the right to self-determination without external interference; the right to national independence and sovereignty and to return to their homes. <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

87.\t<\/span>On 10 November 1975, the General Assembly had established the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. The Committee's recommendations had been repeatedly approved by the General Assembly since 1976. In its recommendations, the Committee had laid down a programme which would give effect to the inalienable rights of the Palestinian peoples. As was known, the United States as one of the permanent members of the Security Council had prevented the Council from following up those recommendations. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

88.\t<\/span>The International Conference on the Question of Palestine, held at Geneva from 19 August to 7 September 1983, had adopted the Geneva Declaration on Palestine and also approved the Programme of Action for the Achievement of Palestinian Rights. The Declaration had called for the convening of an International Peace Conference on the Middle East, under the auspices of the United Nations, with the participation on an equal footing of all parties to the Arab-Israeli conflict, including the PLO as a well as the United States and the USSR and other concerned States. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

89.\t<\/span>The General Assembly, at its thirty-eighth session in resolution 38\/58 C, had endorsed the Declaration on Palestine as well as the call for the convening of an International Peace Conference on the Middle East in accordance with realistic and acceptable guidelines. At its thirty-ninth, fortieth and forty-first sessions, the General Assembly had reaffirmed its endorsement of the call for the convening of the Conference and reiterated its conviction that such a step would constitute a major contribution by the United Nations towards the achievement of a just, comprehensive and lasting solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict through the collective efforts of all parties concerned. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

90.\t<\/span>Another major contribution towards the convening of the Conference had been the adoption by the United Nations General Assembly of resolution 41\/43 D. The resolution endorsed the call for setting up a preparatory committee within the framework of the Security Council with the participation of the permanent members of the Council to take the necessary action to convene the Conference. That proposal had gained strong support from the international community as a practical step to facilitate the preparation of the Conference. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

91.\t<\/span>The United Nations carried out various activities related to the question of Palestine. They included the continued maintaining of the United Nations peace-keeping operations in the Middle East and activities of and initiatives taken by the Secretary-General, as well as the work of such bodies as the Economic and Social Council, the Commission on Human Rights, the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). The right of the Palestinian people over Palestine had been repeatedly and unequivocally recognized in resolutions adopted by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights and the Sub-Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities. It had also been a major concern of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

92.\t<\/span>Economic and social assistance to the Palestinian people was also one of the activities of the United Nations. United Nations resolutions on that matter emphasized the necessity for the different United Nations organs to intensify their efforts to promote the economic and social development of the occupied territories and to identify the areas where that development was most needed. The Economic and Social Council at its sessions regularly considered the living conditions of the Palestinian people, the subject of permanent sovereignty over national resources in the occupied territories and assistance to the Palestinian people. Under the latter one it had requested the development of a co-ordinated programme of assistance. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

93.\t<\/span>The Seminar welcomed and expressed its appreciation for the activities of the Committee, which had in the decade of its existence carried out a valuable task in order to reach greater and more positive international awareness of the facts relating to the question of Palestine. Moreover, the efforts of the Committee in support of the convening of the International Peace Conference which it had made one of its main objectives, deserved unqualified support. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

III. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

94.\t<\/span>The Seminar expressed deep concern over the dangerous situation in the Middle East as it presented a threat to the stability of the region and to international peace and security as a whole. In the nuclear age it was necessary for international relations to be restructured so that confrontation was replaced by co-operation, and conflict situations resolved through peaceful political means, not through military means. The Seminar affirmed the need for a comprehensive, just and lasting settlement of the Middle East conflict, the core of which was the question of Palestine. The full exercise by the Palestinian people of its inalienable rights, including the right of return, the right to self-determination without external interference and the right to create its own independent State in Palestine, as well as the complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from all the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, remained the basis for solving the Palestinian problem. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

95.\t<\/span>The situation relating to the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people continued to deteriorate. Whilst strenuous attempts had been made to find a solution to that problem, the situation in the region continued to be further complicated by Israel's actions in the occupied territories. Israel continued with its policies of illegally maintaining and expanding Jewish settlements as well as the confiscation of Arab owned lands in the occupied Palestinian territories. The "iron-fist policies" were accentuated by measures designed to stifle all forms of political, cultural, social and economic expression of the Palestinian people. Furthermore, Israel continued to strengthen its control over most aspects of life, with the objective of obstructing the self-generating development of the occupied territories by turning them into a dependent entity with the aim of final absorption and annexation. Those policies were in violation of United Nations resolutions and international law and led only to the exacerbation of tension in the area thus hindering attempts to find a peaceful solution to the Palestine question. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

96.\t<\/span>The Seminar was aware of the factors that encouraged Israel in pursuing its policies. It noted with serious concern the relations between Israel and the racist régime in South Africa, in particular, in the economic, military and nuclear fields. The Seminar called upon the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People and the United Nations Division for Palestinian Rights to keep under review the development of such relations and report thereon. The Seminar also demanded that Israel desist from and terminate such collaboration and abide scrupulously by the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

97.\t<\/span>The Seminar expressed grave concern about the economic and social policies of the occupying Power, Israel, against the Palestinian people in the occupied Palestinian territories. It noted that Israel pursued a policy which deprived the Palestinians of their main source of livelihood and survival, in particular agriculture, land confiscation and takeover of water resources. The Seminar further noted the increasing utilization of cheap Arab labour by Israeli employers which constituted exploitation and discrimination. In that context, the Seminar expressed appreciation for the endeavour and efforts of the PLO in the fields of social and economic development of the Palestinian people. The Seminar called upon the United Nations and its organs and agencies to render and co-ordinate all forms of economic and social assistance to the Palestinian people, in consultation and co-operation with the PLO. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

98.\t<\/span>The Seminar also recalled that the year 1987 marked a number of anniversaries of significant events in the history of the Palestinian people in its struggle to attain its legitimate and inalienable rights including the seventieth anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, the fortieth anniversary of the adoption of General Assembly resolution 181 (II), the twentieth anniversary of the 1967 war and the fifth anniversary of the Israeli invasion and occupation of Lebanese territory and the massacre of Sabra and Shatila. The Seminar stressed the urgency of solving the Middle East conflict and its core issue, the question of Palestine. Those States that did not support the attainment of and the exercise by the Palestinian people of its inalienable rights, in particular the right to self-determination as well as the establishment of a State of its own in Palestine, were urged to reconsider their position towards a solution to the problem. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

99.\t<\/span>The Seminar unanimously concluded that the best way to establish a just and lasting peace in the Middle East was by convening the International Peace Conference on the Middle East under the auspices of the United Nations and with the participation of all parties to the conflict including the PLO, as well as the United States and the USSR and other concerned States, in accordance with the guidelines laid down in General Assembly resolution 38\/58 C. The Seminar supported the establishment of a preparatory committee within the framework of the Security Council, with the participation of its permanent members as called for by General Assembly resolution 41\/43 D, as a means to undertake practical steps towards the convening of the Conference. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

100.\t<\/span>It further recalled the unyielding and firm support by the PLO, Arab States, the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, the European Community and other groups of countries for the proposed International Peace Conference on the Middle East. The Seminar was convinced that partial and piecemeal agreements would ignore the core of the Arab-Israeli problem and were not conducive to a comprehensive peaceful solution. The Seminar was of the view that the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People had a major role to play in promoting the convening of such a Conference and encouraged its efforts in that regard. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

101.\t<\/span>The Seminar greatly appreciated the efforts undertaken by the Secretary-General of the United Nations with a view to convening the International Peace Conference on the Middle East. In that regard the Seminar took note of the Secretary-General's report (A\/42\/277-5\/18849) of 7 May 1987 and expressed support for the continuation of his efforts to intensify his contacts with the parties concerned and to continue his consultations with the members of the Security Council. In that context the Seminar urged the Governments of Israel and the United States to reconsider their negative attitude towards the convening of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

102.\t<\/span>The Seminar appealed to the members of the Security Council, and in particular to its permanent members, in exercising their responsibilities for the maintenance of international peace and security, to make every effort to achieve the convening of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East without further delay. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

103.\t<\/span>The Seminar viewed the results of the eighteenth session of the Palestine National Council held in April 1987 at Algiers as a significant contribution in achieving a just solution to the question of Palestine and resolving the plight of the Palestinian people. The Seminar welcomed in particular the unequivocal support of the PLO for the convening of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East and the establishment of a preparatory committee within the framework of the Security Council, with the participation of its permanent members. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

104.\t<\/span>The Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People had an important role to play in promoting the convening of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East. In that context, the Seminar recommended the intensification of the political and diplomatic efforts by all concerned for reaching a comprehensive, just and durable settlement of the conflict in the Middle East. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

105.\t<\/span>The Seminar agreed that vigorous efforts should be made to mobilize public opinion in Asia as well as in other regions of the world, in particular, through the use of the media and activities by NGOs. The Seminar suggested that the United Nations information centres in various cities in Asia should establish closer liaison with universities, educational institutions and NGOs. The Seminar appealed to the leaders of major Powers and the parties of the conflict to demonstrate political will and to play an active and constructive role in the efforts to create lasting peace in the Middle East, in particular, in the resolution of the Palestine problem. <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

106.\t<\/span>In that regard, the United Nations should make additional efforts to disseminate factual and up-to-date information on the question of Palestine not <\/span>only <\/span>in its official languages but also in other languages and, in particular, on the United Nations resolutions relevant to the convening of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East and the establishment of the aforementioned preparatory committee. <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

107.\t<\/span>It was important that the media should play a more responsive role in providing balanced reporting on the Middle East and, in particular, on the plight of the Palestinians in and outside the occupied territories as a dispossessed and harassed people. The Seminar emphasized that intergovernmental organizations, institutions such as universities, colleges, research institutes, churches and other religious establishments as well as national and international NGOs, had a crucial role to play in the formation of public opinion, especially in the United States and Israel. Those institutions should be urged to give wider coverage and balanced treatment to the question of Palestine. It was the view of the Seminar that national committees be set up to promote the convening of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

108.\t<\/span>Every effort should be made to step up the widespread dissemination of information, as one of the major contributions to the achievement of a just solution to the problem on the basis of the attainment by the Palestinian people in Palestine of their inalienable rights. The Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People and the Division for Palestinian Rights of the Secretariat had an important role in such dissemination of information. Furthermore, the Department of Public Information in co-operation with the Division for Palestinian Rights should make every effort to ensure that accurate information on the question of Palestine received the widest possible dissemination. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n
\n

Annex <\/u>I<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

MESSAGE FROM THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE SEMINAR<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

OF THE PALESTINE LIBERATION ORGANIZATION<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

The Sixteenth United Nations Seminar on the Question of Palestine, meeting in New Delhi, India from 8 to 12 June 1987, wishes to express its sincere appreciation for your kind message conveyed to the Seminar at its opening session. We are gathered here, in the capital of India, whose people and Government have consistently supported the Palestinian cause, to consider ways and means to promote the convening of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East in accordance with United Nations General Assembly resolution 38\/58 C to achieve a just comprehensive and lasting solution to the Middle East conflict and its core, the question of Palestine. The Seminar also considered how best to mobilize Asian public opinion in support of the exercise of the inalienable national rights of the Palestinian people, including its right to return, to self-determination and to establish a State of its own in Palestine. The participants viewed the results of the eighteenth session of the Palestine National Council as a significant contribution in achieving a just solution to the question of Palestine and welcomed the unequivocal support of the PLO for the convening of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East and the establishment of a preparatory committee within the framework of the Security Council, with the participation of its permanent members. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

We convey to you and to the Palestinian people under the leadership of the PLO, its legitimate representative, our greetings of support and solidarity. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n

\n

Annex II<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

MESSAGE FROM THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE SEMINAR<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

TO MR. JAVIER PEREZ DE CUELLAR,<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

The Sixteenth United Nation Seminar on the Question of Palestine, being held from 8 to 12 June 1987 in New Delhi, India, wishes to express its profound appreciation for your kind message conveyed to the Seminar by your representative, Mr. N. G. Rathore, Chief, Division for Palestinian Rights. Recognizing that the United Nations has a crucial role to play in initiating a negotiating process to achieve a just comprehensive and lasting settlement of the Middle East conflict and its core, the question of Palestine, the Seminar unanimously supports your intention to intensify your contacts with the parties of the conflict and your consultations with the members of the Security Council in order to try to find ways of bridging the gaps between them in order to convene the International Peace Conference on the Middle East and to establish a preparatory committee as called for in General Assembly resolutions. The Seminar suggests that the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People and the Division for Palestinian Rights intensify their efforts to promote the convening of the Conference. It was also agreed that the Committee and the Division – through the organization of seminars as well as symposia and meetings for NGOs and other means – should continue and expand their activities to mobilize international support for the just cause of the Palestinian people and a solution to the question based on peace and justice. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n
\n

Annex III<\/u><\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

MESSAGE FROM THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE SEMINAR<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE MOVEMENT OF NON-ALIGNED COUNTRIES,<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

H.E. MR. ROBERT MUGABE <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

The Sixteenth United Nations Seminar on the Question of Palestine, meeting in New Delhi, India, from 8 to 12 June 1987, wishes to express its profound appreciation for your kind message conveyed to the Seminar at its opening session. We are gathered here in the capital of India, one of the founding fathers of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries to consider how best to contribute to the attainment and the exercise by the Palestinian peoples of its inalienable rights. The Seminar recognized the valuable contributions by the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries to the establishment of peace in the Middle East and a solution to the question of Palestine, as manifested in the documents of its eighth Summit at Harare and in the work of its Committee of Nine on Palestine. The Seminar agreed that vigorous efforts are necessary to convene the International Peace Conference on the Middle East and to establish a preparatory committee as called for in United Nations General Assembly resolutions that were supported by the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries. The Seminar wishes to convey to you its appreciation for the unswerving support of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries for the just struggle of the Palestinian people under the leadership of the PLO, the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n
\n

Annex IV<\/u><\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

MOTION OF THANKS <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

The participants in the Sixteenth United Nations Seminar on the Question of Palestine being held from 8 to 12 June 1987 at New Delhi, India wish to convey their profound thanks to the people and Government of India for providing a venue for this Seminar and the excellent arrangements made, which greatly contributed to the Seminar's success. They also express their sincere thanks for the generous hospitality extended to them. The participants in the Seminar wish to express their particular appreciation to H.E. Mr. K. Natwar Singh, Minister of State for External Affairs of India, for his personal concern and guidance. It also thanks H.E. Mr. A. S. Gonsalves, Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs of India for his contribution to the Seminar. The participants in the Seminar express their appreciation to the people and Government of India, the great country of Mahatma Gandhi and one of the founding fathers of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, for their consistent support of the just cause of the Palestinian people, under the leadership of the PLO, its legitimate representative, for the exercise of its inalienable national rights in Palestine. <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n
\n

Annex V<\/u><\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS AND OBSERVERS<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Delegation of the Committee on the Exercise of<\/u> the<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

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

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Oscar ORAMAS-OLIVA<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Permanent Representative of Cuba to the United Nations, Vice-Chairman of the Committee <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Guennadi I. OUDOVENKO<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Permanent Representative of the Ukrainian SSR to the United Nations<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. David D. KARRAN<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Deputy Permanent Representative of Guyana to the United Nations<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Saviour F. BORG<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Acting Permanent Representative of Malta to the United Nations<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Pramathesh RATH<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Counsellor, Permanent Mission of India to the United Nations<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Zehdi L. TERZI<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Permanent Observer of the Palestine Liberation Organization to the United Nations <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 Seminar <\/u>panellists<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mansoor ALAM (Pakistan)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Yilmaz ALTUG (Turkey)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

P. N. HAKSAR (India)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

HARDI (Indonesia)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Tran ROAN (Viet Nam)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Igor M. KHVOROSTIANY (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Jorge MANFUGAS (Cuba) <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

K. P. MISRA (India)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Guennadi I. OUDOVENKO (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mohammad RAHMET-ALI (India) <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Abdullah SALAH (Jordan)<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mohammad Aziz SHUKRI (Syrian Arab Republic)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

V. P. VOROBYOV (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

WAN Guang (China)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Symposium panellists<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Roman T. AKHRAMOVICH (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Donald BETZ (United States) <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

David D. KARRAN (Guyana)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ergun OZBUDUN (Turkey)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Amnon ZICHRONI (Israel)<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Representative of the Secretary-General of the United Nations<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. N. G. RATHORE<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Chief, Division for Palestinian Rights<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Member States<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

Mr. Zianddin Nazzery<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

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

\n

Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

Mr. Ahmed Bouchentouf<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

First Secretary<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

H.E. Mr. Erich M. Schmid<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ambassador to India <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

Mr. Narayan Katel<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Third Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

Mr. Joao Navajas Zicardi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

First Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

Mr. Doko Dokov<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

First Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

Mr. Ui Douyping Lei<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Second Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Chagchuan Bian<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Press Officer, Embassy in New Delhi<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

Mr. Juma Aldama<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Chargé d’affaires, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Democratic Yemen<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

H.E. Mr. Mohamed M. Al-Hubeishi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ambassador to India<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Kadle Ahmed Kassem<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Minister, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

H.E. Mr. Mohamed El Zoaiby<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ambassador to India<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Mohamed Ismail<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Counsellor, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Ahmed Fathalla<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

First Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

German Democratic Republic<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

H.E. Mr. Bernd Biederman<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ambassador to India<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Peter Werchan<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Third Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

H.E. Mr. Shiv Naraine<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

High Commissioner to India<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

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

\n

Mr. Gyorgy Ujlaki<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Counsellor, Chargé d’affaires a. i.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

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

\n

Mr. A. S. Gonsalves  <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Prakash Shah<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Joint Secretary<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ministry of External Affairs<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mrs. Kamlesh Kumar<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Joint Secretary<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ministry of External Affairs<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Saurabh Kumar<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Director, Ministry of External Affairs <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Ranjit Rai<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Under Secretary<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ministry of External Affairs<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

H.E. Mr. Tamtomo<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ambassador to India<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. S. W. Artanto<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Attaché, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. R. L. Nagi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Press Section, Embassy in New Delhi<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Fanis Ismail<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Press Section, Embassy in New Delhi<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Kunal Itfsar<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Press Section, Embassy in New Delhi<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Iran (Islamic Republic of)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Sadegh Touri<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Third Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

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

\n

Mr. Asaad al-Ghouthand<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Adviser for Palestinian Affairs to the Deputy Prime Minister<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

and Foreign Minister of Iraq <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

H.E. Mr. Abdul Wadood Shekhly<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ambassador to India<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Mohammed Jassim<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Counsellor, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Al-Hamdan<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

H. E. <\/strong>Mr. Jamal Khutat<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ambassador to India<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Kamal Momani<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Second Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

Mr. Miteb Al-Rumaih<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

First Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Libyan Arab Jamahiriya<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Mohamed Ali Erfeda<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. G. Lhagvadorj<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Attaché, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

Mr. Henry Jose Lopez Mendoza<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Chargé d’affaires<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

  <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

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

\n

H. E. Mr. Fernando Guillen<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ambassador to India<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Saudi Arabia<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Abdul Munen Abdul Hadi Moh'd Al-Magrabi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

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

\n

Mr. Abdr Ali<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Chargé d’affaires <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Syrian Arab Republic<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

H.E. Mr. Mohammad Khodor <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ambassador to India<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Ahmad Samir Dabbas<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

First Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. M. Said Bounni<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Second Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Haitham Saad<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Press Attaché, Embassy in New Delhi<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

ThailandMr. Nobphorn Janekarnkit <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Counsellor, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Vladimir Ogryzko<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Second Secretary<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Kiev<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

H.E. Mr. Michael Isinaliev<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Minister of Foreign Affairs <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Kasakh Soviet Socialist Republic<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Yuri V. Fedotov<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Counsellor, Embassy in New Delhi<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Nikolai Diakonov<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Moscow<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Andrey Zykov<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Attaché, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Alexei N. Pozin<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Information Department<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Rahul Kumar Sharma<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Information Department<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

United Arab Emirates<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Khamis Mohamed Al-Akla<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

First Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Mohammad Sheba<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

United States of America<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ms. Angela Henrikson<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Second Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Thaddeus W. Troy<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Second Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Viet Nam<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Nguyen Dac Mho<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

Mr. All Ali-Soso<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Second Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mrs. Ramzia Abbas Al-Hibrany <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Second Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Ibrahim Aladoufi <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

H.E. Mr. Zivojin Jazic<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ambassador to India<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Danko P. Danko<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Press Attaché, Embassy in New Delhi<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

Mr. Chikuru Bagula<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Counsellor, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Amir Tchoupani Rosa<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

\n

Mr. Redson Lusale<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

First Secretary<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

High Commission in New Delhi<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

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

\n

H.E. Mr. Nick G. G. Makura <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

High Commissioner to India<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Felix Nyamuringa<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

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

\n

High Commission in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Elijah Chitsike<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

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

\n

High Commission in New Delhi <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Nebiot Mukono<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

First Secretary<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

High Commission in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Non-member States represented by observers<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Democratic People's Republic of Korea   <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Lyo Jang Song<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Counsellor, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Song Mok Li<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Third Secretary, Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Republic of Korea<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

H.E. Mr. Dong Won Shin, Ambassador to India<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Jong Hoon Kim<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Deputy Director,<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

United Nations Division Ministry of Foreign Affairs<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Sung Joo Lee<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

First Secretary, Embassy in India<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

United Nations organs<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

United Nations organs Special Committee against Apartheid<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Guennadi I. Oudovenko (Ukrainian SSR) <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Ammar Amari (Tunisia) <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

United Nations Council for Namibia<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Ramul Damodaran (India)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

United Nations bodies and specialized agencies<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

High Commissioner for Refugees<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Intergovernmental organization<\/u><\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

League of Arab States<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mrs. Haga Kashif Badri<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Chief Representative, New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Badran Ramzi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Alternate Representative, New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Qamar Agha<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Press Officer, New Delhi <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

National liberation movement<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Palestine Liberation Organization<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

H.E. Mr. Khaled El-Sheikh<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ambassador to India<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Abdullah Samaadana<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

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

\n

Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Jaser Mohid<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

First Secretary<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Mohad Turuk<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Third Secretary<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Immad Najar<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Attaché<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Khaled M. Al-Haidar<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Attaché<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Mr. Mohamed Elturk<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Embassy in New Delhi <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Non-governmental organizations<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

All India Indo-Arab Friendship Association<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Saifuddin Choudhury, M.P.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mrs. Indira Mayaram<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. S. K. Banerjee<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. A. K. Aggarwal<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Krishnapal Singh <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Seshaiyengar Sundaram<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

All India Indo-African Friendship Association<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Maya Ram<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. S. K. Banerjee<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Azad Singh<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Writuraj Chaturvedi<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

All India Muslim Majlis-E-Mushawarat<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Ebrahim Sulaiman Sait, M.P<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Syed Shahabuddin, M.P.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Maulana Ahmed Al Qasmi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Writuraj Chaturvedi <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Afzal Husain<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Basir Ahmed Khan<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Syed Pervez Qaiser<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

All India Peace and Solidarity Organization <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Rais Ahmed<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Kaleem Bahadur<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Subrata Banerjee <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mrs. Perin Romesh Chandra<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Shekhar Ganguly<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Dinesh Goswami, M.P.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Sadhan Mukherjee<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. C. Sadasiva <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Sitaram Yechuri<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

All India Women's Conference <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mrs. Ashok Gupta<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mrs. Padma Seth<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mrs. Sham Mohini Pathak<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Centre for Research in Rural and Industrial Development<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Rashpal Malhotra<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Chinese People's Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Dai Guanghe, Deputy Director<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Committee for Palestinian and Jewish Studies, Japan<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ms. Yoshiko Tanaka<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Mikiro Yamaoka<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Indian Federation of United Nations Associations  <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mrs. Usha Malhotra<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

S. S. Bhakri<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

S. R. Chanana<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

R. L. Dhamija<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. B. D. Luthra<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mrs. K. Ratan<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Rekha Sethi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

R. P. Sinha <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Indian Society for International Law<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. R. P. Dhokalia<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. M. K. Rao <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Indo-Arab Society<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Ms. Usha Raj Chopra<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Naresh Kumar<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. P. Raj<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. N.N. Raja<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Shanker Rajee<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Kameshwar Singh<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

International Confederation of Arab Trade Unions, Syrian Arab Republic<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mohammed Abdel Karim Halab<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Israeli Council for Israeli-Palestinian Peace<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Amnon Zichroni<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

National Federation of Indian Women<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mrs. Maya Lahiri<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mrs. Rita Seth<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Palestine Committee for NGOs<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Marai Abdelrahman<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Adnan Al-Sherouf<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Soviet Committee for Solidarity with Countries of Asia and Africa<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Dr. Roman T. Akhramovich<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

World Association of World Federalists<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. S. Kumar<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. K.K. Khullar<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. R. Nayyar<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. P.L. Sarin<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Rajinder Singh<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Teja Singh<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Mohummed Younus Saleem<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

World Muslim Congress<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Mohammed Younus Saleem<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Non-governmental organizations attending as observers<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

All India Bharat Yuvak Samaj<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Harsh A. Chaturvedi<\/span> <\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Ajay Parmar<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Mohan Lal Singhal<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Asian Student Information Centre<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Ahmad Agel<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Bahrat Nirmal<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. S. Kumar Jain<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Haryana United Nations Association<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Gurbachan Singh<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Uttam Singh<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Indo-Arab Fraternity<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mrs. Usha Malhotra, President<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. K. L. Malhotra<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Om Prakash<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Devendra Narain Sinha<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Indo-Arab League<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Syed Vicaruddin, Chairman<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Moin Farooqui, Secretary<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Indo-Arab Society (Bombay)<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Najma Heptulla, M.P.<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Akber Heptulla<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Zaiuddin Bandukwala<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Charanoal Singh <\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Indian Committee of NGOs for the United Nations<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Marijari Saksena<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Islamic Cultural Centre<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Mohammad Azizullah<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Jawahar Lal Nehru National Youth Centre <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Krishana Kumar<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Alaka Madhok<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

Poirz Bhavam Society of India <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Mr. Sharma<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Press<\/u><\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

All India Radio – Mr. R. N. Sethi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

APN – Mrs. Krishana Gopal Sharma<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Doordashan<\/u> – Mrs. Devendra Sharma; Mr. N Sukumar<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Hindustan Times<\/u> – Mr. Zinat Imam <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

India Abroad West<\/u> –  Mr. Madala Madala<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

India Press Agency – Mr. O. P. Sabherwal<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Inter Press Service – Mr. Rajiv Tiwari<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

MEA – Mr. Radhay Agarwi<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Press Trust of India – Mr. Nandan Unnikrishnan<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

Punjab Photo Service – Mr. Vimod Sharma <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

United News of India – Mr. John Chacko; Mr. Joseph Bosco Celestine; Mr. T.V. Lakshminarayan<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

TASS – Mr. Vladimir Baidashin<\/p><\/div>\n

\n

The Hindu<\/u> – Mr. Appan Menon <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

SIXTEENTH UNITED NATIONS SEMINAR ON THE QUESTION OF PALESTINE Theme:  "The inalienable rights of the Palestinian people" Vigyan Bhawan Conference Centre New Delhi, India 8-12 June 1987 CONTENTS Paragraphs Page INTRODUCTION 1 – 2 2 I. II. III. OPENING STATEMENTS PANEL DISCUSSION CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3 – 34 35 – 93 94 – 108 2 7 […]<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"country":[882],"document-category":[2433,4602,2589,1323],"document-source":[1753,2173],"committee-meeting":[],"document-subject":[1801,1749,2577,5405,2145],"entity":[1985,1729],"document-language":[6542,6541],"class_list":["post-199255","document","type-document","status-publish","hentry","country-india","document-category-french-text","document-category-meeting-report","document-category-publication","document-category-report","document-source-ceirpp","document-source-division-for-palestinian-rights-dpr","document-subject-inalienable-rights-of-the-palestinian-people","document-subject-palestine-question","document-subject-peace-conference","document-subject-plo-palestine","document-subject-public-information","entity-state","entity-united-nations-system","document-language-english","document-language-french"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document\/199255","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\/199255\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=199255"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/country?post=199255"},{"taxonomy":"document-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-category?post=199255"},{"taxonomy":"document-source","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-source?post=199255"},{"taxonomy":"committee-meeting","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/committee-meeting?post=199255"},{"taxonomy":"document-subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-subject?post=199255"},{"taxonomy":"entity","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/entity?post=199255"},{"taxonomy":"document-language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.un.org\/unispal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/document-language?post=199255"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}