The convening of the thirty-fourth session of the United Nations General Assembly this autumn provides an appropriate occasion for an assessment of the present status of the Palestinian question in the United Nations. A systematic analysis and evaluation of recent UN efforts to deal with the question is particularly opportune in view of the increasing international consensus that the Camp David agreement provides an inadequate frame- work for a just and durable peace in the Middle East. [1] In the absence of any other comprehensive peace proposal, the UN approach is still supported by the overwhelming majority of countries in the world as the basis for a peaceful settlement in the Middle East conflict. [2] UN Secretary-General Kurt Waldheim, speaking in Monrovia, Liberia at the last summit session of the Organization of African Unity, again reasserted that all parties concerned must ultimately be involved and that the UN offers the unique opportunity to achieve this. In his speech he restated the UN proposal for a preparatory meeting on the Middle East under UN auspices leading to an international conference and an eventual comprehensive settlement of the conflict which would cover all aspects of the problem, including the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. [3]
Although the UN has increasingly involved itself in the search for a solution to the Palestine problem in recent years, there is still no single comprehensive study outlining and analysing the international organization’s approach to the problem in its entirety. [4] In the English language, there does exist a proliferation of more or less polemical essays belittling UN efforts and labelling the organization as "a sounding board for an aggressive Third World majority of Afro-Asian-Communist members." [5] This campaign has been led principally by the Israeli government reacting to the increasingly strident challenges and opposition to Israeli policies within the United Nations General Assembly. During the Kissinger era, the United States ambassador at the UN, Daniel Moynihan, struck the same chord attacking the organization and the behaviour of its majority as a place dominated by implacable foes of American interests. [6] In the case of the US, however, such accusations do not merely arise from the UN's position vis-a-vis Israel or the Arab-Israeli conflict, although Moynihan himself has made no effort to hide his own personal pro-Zionist position. Rather there exists in the US a tradition which is overtly hostile to the UN and US membership therein. This tradition was encouraged by the Nixon administration placing the UN far down on the list of American priorities and by Kissinger's dislike for multilateral diplomacy which he could not dominate. [7]
The purpose of this essay is to contribute to the evaluation of the UN's ability to identify sound directives on the settlement of the Middle East conflict of which the Palestine question is not merely a ramification but its very core. The intention is systematically to examine and analyse decisions and actions taken by UN organs (Security Council, General Assembly, Economic and Social Council), including their subsidiary commission and committees (Commission on Human Rights, Economic Commission for Western Asia, United Nations Development Programme) and specialized agencies (International Labour Organization, World Health Organization and UNESCO) as they relate to the Palestine question between 1974 and 1979. [8] The data is based mainly on information available in UN documents.
The year 1974 marked the beginning of a new phase in the UN's approach to the Palestine problem, since the organization reassumed responsibility for the present realities prevailing in the Middle East by virtue of its own 1947 decision to partition Palestine and to create a Jewish state therein. [9] During the twenty-ninth session of the General Assembly the Palestine question reemerged as an independent agenda item in its own right. The Arab people of Palestine became involved in the decision-making process at the UN for the first time when General Assembly resolution 3237 granted observer status to the Palestine Liberation Organization and invited it, as the representative of the Palestinian people, to participate in the sessions, conferences and work of all organs of the UN.
The Palestine issue has now come to permeate all major UN General Assembly Committees (with the exception of the legal committee), subsidiary committees and commissions as well as agencies (see Tables II and III). Even the Security Council itself has increasingly met to deal with issues relative to the Palestine question (see Table IV). As late as 1979, it was finally able to overcome the traditional US veto by adopting two resolutions regarding the Palestinian situation in the occupied territories. [10]
PALESTINIAN RIGHTS AND THE UN
The concept of Palestinian rights in the UN is comprehensive, and implies political and socio-economic as well as cultural rights.
A. Political Rights
The political rights of the Palestinian people were for the first time clearly spelled out in General Assembly resolution 3236 (XXIX) of November 22, 1974 which is still the major reassertion of the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people. The operative phrase of this resolution defines these inalienable rights as follows: right to self-determination without external interference, [11] right to national independence, right to sovereignty, right of return, right to regain these rights by all means and the right to be represented as a principal party in the establishment of a just and durable peace in the Middle East. Subsequent General Assembly resolutions consistently and repeatedly reaffirm these rights in resolutions adopted under the agenda item, the Palestine Question. [12]
During its thirtieth session (1975-76), the General Assembly took action to have these resolutions implemented. First, it turned to the Security Council and requested it to take action to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their rights (resolution 3375 (XXX)). Second, in resolution 3376 (XXX) it established the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People with the specific task of formulating a programme of implementation, designed to enable the Palestinian people to exercise its rights as recognized by General Assembly resolution 3236 (XXIX) in paragraphs 1 and 2. [13] The mandate of the Committee included the specific responsibility to maintain international concern for progress toward a just solution of the Palestine question.
In its first report of July 21, 1976 the Committee submitted its recommendations on the modalities for the implementation of the exercise of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. [14] It proposed a two-stage plan for the return of all Palestinian refugees, stage one applicable to those Palestinians displaced as a result of the 1967 war and stage two dealing with the return of those displaced between 1948 and 1967. The Committee suggested that stage one should be carried out with the assistance of the International Committee of the Red Cross and/or UNRWA as the immediate implementation of Security Council resolution 237 (1967). Stage two, the implementation of General Assembly resolution 194 (III) relating to the rights of the earlier refugees, was to be carried out by the UN in cooperation with the PLO as the interim representative of the new Palestinian entity and all states directly involved. With regard to the establishment of an independent Palestinian entity, the Committee set up the following guidelines:
1. The Security Council should establish a timetable for the complete withdrawal of Israel from the areas occupied in 1967;
2. The Security Council should provide temporary peace-keeping forces in order to facilitate the process of Israeli withdrawal;
3. The UN should take over all evacuated territories and hand them over to the PLO as the interim representative of the Palestinian people;
4. Upon the establishment of an independent Palestinian entity, the UN, in cooperation with the states involved and the Palestinian people, should make necessary arrangements for the full implementation of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, the resolution of outstanding problems and the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the region.
The Security Council first discussed the issue of political rights for the Palestinian people in January 1976, as called for in Security Council resolution 381 (1975), which bound the renewal of UNDOF on the Golan Heights to the reconvening of the Security Council on January 12, 1976 in order to continue debate on the Middle East situation and the Palestine question, taking into account all relevant UN resolutions. [15] Although no resolution was adopted, the Security Council debate broke new grounds in its handling of the Middle East conflict, indicating a change in its attitude to the question of the rights of the Palestinian people. The draft resolution introduced by six non-aligned members (Benin, Guyana, Panama, Pakistan, Rumania and Tanzania) clearly affirmed the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people as established by the General Assembly. It also stated the basic elements for the establishment of a just and lasting peace to include: Israeli withdrawal "from all the Arab territories occupied since June 1967, and appropriate arrangements to guarantee the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of all states in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries." [16] In spite of the US obstruction by way of its veto, this draft still remains the most widely supported basis for a peaceful and just settlement in the Middle East. [17]
The Security Council was again confronted by the issue of Palestinian rights between June 18-29, 1976 when it considered the agenda item, "The question of the exercise by the Palestinian people of its inalienable rights," in accordance with the request by the General Assembly in paragraph 8 of its resolution 3376 (XXX). During this session it considered the report of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. A draft resolution again affirmed "the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including the right to return and the right to national independence and sovereignty in Palestine, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations." [18] During subsequent meetings of the Security Council on the question of Palestinian rights in October 1977, no resolution was adopted. [19] In his last report, the Chairman of the Committee on Palestinian Rights charged the Security Council with obstruction and creating a dangerous situation threatening world peace and security. [20] Suggested ways out of the present deadlock have included: a proposal by the Foreign Ministers of non-aligned countries to convene a special session of the General Assembly on the question of Palestine [21] and a renewed appeal by the General Assembly to the Security Council to approve without delay the recommendations transmitted to it by the Committee on Palestinian Rights and to consider them as a basis for the settlement of the question of Palestine. But the question of Palestinian rights has once again been left to the General Assembly.
Increased efforts are underway in the Assembly to find an outlet from the impasse created by the American attitude in the Security Council. One possible means that has been considered is the greater dissemination of information on the underlying issues. For this purpose General Assembly resolution 32/40 B requested the Secretary-General to establish within the Secretariat of the United Nations a Special Unit on Palestinian Rights whose tasks would concentrate on the dissemination of public information on the rights of the Palestinian people and efforts on behalf of the UN to promote the attainment of those rights, as well as a just and durable peace, and to promote maximum publicity. [22]
Although the Security Council has so far not taken action to facilitate the attainment by the Palestinian people of their rights, the issue has spilled over into organs and agencies of the UN system (see Table l). Today, all agencies and committees recognize the PLO as the sole representative of the Palestinian people, and as such have granted it observer status in their sessions. [23] The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), in its resolution 2089 (LXIII) of July 22, 1977, even accepted the PLO as a full member of its regional Economic Commission for Western Asia (ECWA). [24]
Almost all resolutions on the subject passed by UN commissions as well as the specialized agencies refer in one way or another to the legitimate and inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination and independence. The Commission on Human Rights, in particular, has recognized the importance of self-determination as a basic human right and as the prerequisite for the exercise of all other human rights. In two 1978 resolutions entitled "The Right of Peoples to Self-Determination and Its Application to Peoples under Colonial or Alien Domination or Foreign Occupation," the Commission affirmed the "inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-determination without external interference and the establishment of a fully independent and sovereign state in Palestine"; furthermore, it reaffirmed their right to return to their homes from which they have been displaced and uprooted, called for the return of all Palestinian refugees as a component of their right to self-determination and recognized their right to fight for their rights by all means. [25] In a similar resolution under the same title, the Commission reaffirmed the inalienable rights of the Palestinians, together with all other peoples under colonial or alien domination or foreign occupation, "to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national unity and sovereignty without external interference." [26] Both resolutions were adopted under new agenda items.
A general review of most resolutions passed during the last three years by specialized agencies such as ECOSOC, UNESCO, or WHO shows that although they address themselves to more or less non-political issues, the political rights of the Palestinian people have increasingly become incorporated in the phraseology for their preambles and operative phrases. [27]
B. Socio-Economic Rights of the Palestinian People The socio-economic rights of the Palestinian people generally fall within the scope of work and area of competence of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and its various commissions. The General Assembly itself and such specialized agencies as WHO, FAO and ILO have in recent years increasingly concerned themselves with the socio-economic conditions of Palestinians both inside and outside the occupied territories. [28] It is precisely in this field that the UN has broken new ground by preparing detailed studies on their conditions, particularly under occupation; by commissioning fact-finding missions; and by outlining and financing specific projects in order to enable the Palestinian people to maintain an independent identity.
Since 1973 the General Assembly has been concerned with the item, "Permanent sovereignty over natural resources in the occupied Arab territories," and has considered several reports on the adverse economic effects on the Palestinian people "resulting from repeated Israeli aggression and continued occupation of their territories." The last report prepared by the Secretary-General and submitted to the General Assembly in October 1977 [29] resulted in the adoption of resolution 32/161 of December 19, 1977, specifying the following economic rights of the Palestinian people: [30]
1. The right of the Arab states and peoples whose territories are under Israeli occupation to full and effective permanent sovereignty and control over their natural and all other resources, wealth and economic activities;
2. The right of the Arab states and peoples to the restitution and full compensation for the exploitation, depletion, loss and damages to their natural, human and all other resources.
The aforementioned report submitted by the Secretary-General is particularly critical of Israel's economic policy in the occupied West Bank and Gaza, which is said to be transforming the territories into an economic unit depending on Israel. He rejects Israel's claim that its occupation has only had beneficial effects on the indigenous Arab population's economic situation.
On the contrary, a review of the developments which have underlain the West Bank's growth would justify the conclusion that little real development has taken place in the West Bank since 1967. An economy has grown up whose growth is extremely vulnerable to changes in the activity of the Israeli economy - as was seen in 1975; and whose relative prosperity would be particularly vulnerable, in the short run, to a changed political relationship with that economy. This arises chiefly because of the dependence of income levels and recent rates of growth in employment on the economy of Israel.... It seems improbable that the necessary conditions to ensure self-sustained growth have been created in the area. [31]
The same basic theme is reflected in the latest ILO Report of the Mission by the Director General to Examine the Situation of Workers of the Occupied Arab Territories,[32] one of the few UN fact-finding missions allowed by Israel into the occupied territories and afforded the necessary facilities by the civil and military authorities of Israel to carry out its task. The ILO report is based on the most recent data and on-the-spot investigation and it is thus more comprehensive and detailed than the Secretary-General's report. It, too, clearly illustrates the close dependence of the labour force in the occupied territories on the Israeli economic system which employs over one-third of the total active Palestinian labour force. The insecurity of Palestinian labour is thus linked to the cyclical fluctuations in economic activity in Israel. [33]
The report further expresses concern over the exploitation of Palestinian labour in Israel, where "a clandestine market is growing up in which labour is traded as if it were a commodity." [34] With regard to the economic viability of the occupied Arab territories, the missions's report is particularly alarming. It, too, rejects the Israeli assertion that the GNP growth rate in the occupied territories has reached an annual rate of about 11 percent:
Most important, an analysis of the factors of overall growth in the occupied territories reveals a fundamental characteristic, namely that the decisive factor is the income earned in Israel by workers from the occupied territories. More than a third of the increase in the gross national product during the period 1970-1977 is directly attributable to this component, and in 1977 the total income of Palestinian workers in Israel accounted for a quarter of the gross national product of the occupied territories. If one considers its multiplier effect, certain commentators estimate that half of the overall growth is attributable to this income. The result, therefore, is a form of unbalanced growth that is largely dependent on external factors. [35]
The following problems faced by the indigenous Palestinian economic structure are directly attributed to Israel's policy of occupation and annexation:
1. The domination of the Israeli economy over the economic institutions of the occupied territories, crippling any kind of independent Palestinian industry that still exists;
2. The acute shortage of manpower in the agricultural sector, which is unable to compete with the wages paid in Israeli industry;
3. Lack of a proper capital market and banking system for loans and investment in order to stimulate industry;
4. Increasing emigration toward Arab countries because the local economy does not create jobs, and thus cannot absorb the increase in the active working population and those workers who lose their jobs in Israel due to recessions in the Israeli economy. (It is estimated by the ILO that during 1976-1979 there occurred an average outflow of 20,000 young, skilled, mostly professional workers.)
5. The Israeli settlement policy conflicts with the objective of development by and for the local population, jeopardizing their economic future and clearly violating the Palestinian right to natural resources.
Israel's settlement policy in the occupied Arab territories, apart from being inconsistent with international law, represents a clear and direct infringement upon the economic rights of the Palestinian people, in particular the above-mentioned right to full and effective permanent sovereignty and control over economic resources. First, it involves the confiscation and expropriation of Arab lands and properties. According to the report prepared by a Security Council commission, between 25 and 35 percent of West Bank land has so far been brought under direct Israeli control. [36] Second, it severely disrupts existing economic life in the occupied territories by exploiting much of the region's limited and scarce underground water resources for the exclusive use of the Israeli settlements. According to the Security Council commission's report: "The Israeli occupation forces are not only using water resources that do not belong to them, but they are also preventing the indigenous Palestinian population from developing their own." [37]
This is done in the following ways:
1. The Israeli authorities tightly control the drilling of artesian wells and forbid wells to be drilled close to the 1967 borders;
2. The Israeli authorities impose an upper limit of water pumped out of the existing wells by installing metres on each well, and penalties are imposed for overpumping;
3. Israeli settlements depend completely on West Bank water resources, either by wells or by pumping water out of the Jordan River. The Israeli National Water Authority has drilled 24 new artesian wells in the West Bank for the exclusive use of the Israeli settlements, enhancing Israel's ability to strengthen its existing settlements;
4. The Israeli drilling of deeper wells (300 to 600 metres deep) and the installation of powerful pumps have visible effects on existing Arab wells, some of which have completely run dry, depriving the Palestinian farmers of their own natural water resources.
Consequently, agricultural production in the West Bank has been increasingly diminishing, forcing the Palestinian farmer to leave his land and depriving him of his natural resources. [38] The same findings are again recorded by the ILO mission. Evaluating the direct and indirect effect of Israeli settlements on labour and employment the report concludes that:
...The settlement policy of the Israeli authorities, whose objectives are not solely of a military nature, has serious negative repercussions on the employment situation and income of the local population, owing to the extensive natural resources (cultivable land and water resources) which the authorities now control; as a result, problems of unemployment and shifting of small owner-farmers and countless other difficulties have appeared, while a climate of growing insecurity is kept alive by the announcement of projects of an ever increasing scale. [39]
The United Nations organization also has a positive record of long standing in defending the Palestinian people's social rights, in particular those that are commonly referred to as human rights. Immediately following the Israeli occupation of Arab lands in 1967, the General Assembly voted to set up its own subsidiary body, the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories. [40] In 1978, this special committee presented its tenth report (UN doc. A/33/356). In spite of Israel's consistent refusal to allow it access to the occupied territories to carry out on-the-spot investigations, the Committee's yearly reports contain a wealth of detailed primary source information regarding the violation of human rights in the occupied territories. The evidence presented in the lengthy and detailed reports clearly exposes Israel's breaches of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of August 12, 1949. Violations of the social rights of the Palestinian people occur in the following ways: [41]
1. Evacuation, deportation, expulsion, displacement and transfer of Arab inhabitants of the occupied territories, and the denial of their right to return, instead allowing an alien population to settle on Arab land;
2. Confiscation and expropriation of Arab property for military and non-military reasons, thereby drastically affecting the quality of social and economic life;
3. Destruction and demolition of Arab houses, turning Arab people into refugees;
4. Mass arrests, administrative detention and ill-treatment and torture of detainees;
5. Interference into family rights and customs;
6. Interference into existing legal structures and institutions;
7. Illegal exploitation of the natural wealth, resources and population, adversely affecting the economic and social welfare of the people.
All the above listed charges are now also continually voiced by other UN bodies dealing with the social rights and social conditions of the Palestinian people, namely the Commission on Human Rights (a functional commission under ECOSOC), [42] the World Health Organization, the Food and Agricultural Organization and the International Labour Organization. The last organization even determined that "any military occupation of territory constitutes in itself a permanent violation of basic human rights and fundamental freedoms." [43] The WHO in its concern for the health conditions of the Arab population in the occupied Arab territories moreover expressed the conviction "that the occupation of territories by force gravely affects the health, social, psychological, mental and physical conditions of the population under occupation, and that this can be only rectified by the complete and immediate termination of the occupation." [44] It attributed the poor health and psychological conditions prevailing in the occupied territories to Israel's arbitrary practices and policies. Its findings are based on its own data collected in cooperation with the Health Director of UNRWA and, since 1975, with the PLO. Additionally, during 1978 its own "Special Committee of Experts to Study the Health Conditions of the Inhabitants of the Occupied Territories in the Middle East" [45] was finally allowed by Israel to visit the occupied territories after years of continuous refusal. According to its mandate, the WHO mission concentrated upon: [46]
1. Investigation into the physical, mental and social conditions of the Arab people in all the occupied territories;
2. Investigation into the physical, mental and social conditions of prisoners and administrative detainees;
3. Contacting the indigenous Arab population in order to collect first- hand information on the existing health conditions.
As a result of the mission's findings, the WHO issued its strongest rebuke of Israel yet during its last session by adopting a resolution containing a triple condemnation of Israel and its practices. [47]
C. Cultural Rights of the Palestinian People
The cultural rights of the Palestinian people are defined as "their inalienable rights to education and cultural life in accordance with their natural aspirations and their national identity." [48] It is within the field of competence of UNESCO to assure the Palestinian people their rights to education and culture in order to enable them to preserve their national identity, especially under foreign occupation.
Although UNESCO has concerned itself with the educational process of Palestinian refugees in conjunction with UNRWA since 1950, and with the status of Jerusalem since 1968, only since 1974 did it specifically address itself to the issue of Palestinian cultural rights in the face of the Israeli occupation policy. [49] UNESCO General Conference resolution 18C/13.1 of November 23, 1974, apart from recognizing Palestinian cultural rights, invited the Director-General of the organization:
...To exercise full supervision of the operation of educational and cultural institutions in the occupied Arab territories, and to cooperate with the Arab States concerned and with the PLO with a view to providing the populations in the occupied Arab territories with every means of enjoying their rights to education and culture so as to preserve their national identity. [50]
UNESCO's criticisms and recent condemnations of Israel's violation of Palestinian cultural rights are based on the report of a fact-finding mission commissioned by the Director-General in 1976 to collect on-the-spot information in order to assess the extent to which the people of the occupied territories are able to enjoy their rights to an education and culture in accordance with their national identity. [51] The report is particularly critical of Israeli censorship measures by which the Israeli military authorities have banned Arab poets of the early twentieth century, such as Ahmad Shawki, and many other publications on grounds that they incite to violence.
In its most recent resolutions adopted during the 1978 Executive Board and General Conference meetings, UNESCO has increasingly followed the trend established in the General Assembly by associating Israeli occupation with colonialism, racism and oppression in southern Africa. In order to help alleviate the sad cultural condition of the Palestinian people it initiated a policy by which UNESCO funds are to be allocated to national liberation movements, including the PLO, to aid them in maintaining their own and unique cultural identity. [52]
UN ASSISTANCE TO THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE
The socio-economic and cultural conditions of the Palestinian people, both inside and outside Palestine, at present command great attention within the UN organization.[53] This is precisely because, in the absence of a political settlement, it is the non-political aspects of the Palestinian condition that can most practically be dealt with through relevant actions. ECOSOC thus initiated in 1976 an all-comprehensive programme of assistance to the Palestinian people. In its resolution No. 2026 (LXI) of August 4, 1976, ECOSOC envisaged and proposed an inter-agency programme, involving all specialized agencies as well as other organizations of the UN system, which was to identify the specific social, economic and cultural needs of the Palestinian people and then to propose "concrete projects to ensure the improvement of the social and economic conditions of the Palestinian people." This proposal was endorsed by the General Assembly in its resolution 33/147 of December 20, 1978, granting its organ for development projects and assistance, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), a clear mandate to assist the Palestinian people through identifying their social and economic needs and through establishing concrete projects to meet these needs.
The UNDP in turn convened two inter-agency meetings in Geneva during February, April and May 1979, providing a unique and first-time opportunity for all specialized agencies and other relevant UN organizations to meet, pull together and coordinate their individual programmes and experiences with regard to the Palestinian question. An inter-agency task force set up during the first meeting and composed of UNDP, ECWA, FAO, ILO, UNESCO, UNIDO and WHO was commissioned to prepare an initial study ''of the social and economic needs of the Palestinian people and to work out a list of national projects for meeting their needs." [54] The report compiled by the task force classified all the economic and social needs under the following twelve generalized categories. [55]
1. Research and Planning: The need for the development of research and planning capacity, and for statistical facilities;
2. Labour: The need for increased participation in the labour force, particularly among females; for new job opportunities; for vocational training facilities; and for the improvement of management and administrative skills;
3.Education: The need for pre-school and school facilities at all levels; for qualified teachers; for educational materials for laboratories, libraries, etc; and for expanded curricula at the university level;
4. Cultural heritage: The need to preserve cultural and religious sites; to advance traditional arts and crafts; and to have a free flow of information; .
5. Health: The need for additional health institutions such as hospitals, for health centres, clinics and laboratories; for additional doctors, nurses, health and paramedical personnel; for adequate training facilities; for the integration of preventive and curative health activities; and for the improvement of health insurance schemes;
6. Agriculture: The need to increase the role of agriculture in the economy; to expand the agricultural labour force, to enlarge areas of land available to agriculture; to improve water resources and irrigation systems; to expand investment and credit; to strengthen land marketing facilities; and promote livestock and forestry production;
7. Industry: The need to increase the role of industry and industrial production; to train manpower and personnel; and to develop better financing facilities;
8. Trade: The need to develop trade and to develop marketing channels and facilities to absorb products, particularly in the agricultural sector;
9. Tourism: The need to expand and improve tourism facilities;
10. Transport and communications: The need to improve transport and communications systems; to improve the maintenance of existing roads, especially village roads; to improve telephone connections between villages; and to train qualified personnel to plan, administer, maintain and operate telecommunications services;
11. Housing: The need for new housing schemes which would absorb part of the labour force; for the improvement of sanitation facilities and infrastructure; for improved and expanded electricity and water supplies; and for the strengthening of housing cooperatives and financial institutions such as housing banks to provide credit for housing construction; and
12. Public and social institutions: The need for additional financing of basic social and cultural services; for improved youth and cultural activities; for better coordination and improvement of planning for social institutions; for training of personnel in management and special skills required by these institutions; and for specialized training workshops to satisfy the job market needs.
In order to help in alleviating some of these needs, the inter-agency task force specified concrete projects, and UNDP allocated $3.5 million to finance 18 such projects agreed upon. [56] It was further stated that the major concern should be oriented toward Palestinians living inside the West Bank and Gaza, an area which so far had never benefited from a comprehensive development plan.
Yet, as in the case of many other project activities of individual agencies such as UNESCO or WHO, the major obstacle to the actual implementation of the projects will be the Israeli authorities. Ultimately it will be for them to decide which UN-sponsored projects are to be allowed and how they are to be carried out in the territories under Israel's occupation. Be that as it may, these recent UN efforts are not merely of immediate value, but are apt to have a far-reaching impact on the process of Palestinian nation-building. It is here that the UN organization, with all its experience and expertise in such specialized fields as demography, manpower, agriculture, education, health, or economic planning, most certainly will leave a positive and most valuable effect upon the Palestinian people and nation. This institutionalized contact between a UN development agency and the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza also implicitly signifies recognition of Palestinian statehood, since the UNDP Charter expressly states that assistance be only granted to member states.
So far, the United Nations represents the only international forum to have extensively tackled the issue of Palestinian rights, defined them and placed them in their proper perspective. It has done so with the express support of the international community which overwhelmingly voted for General Assembly resolutions affecting Palestinian rights. [57] The demand for specific action regarding the issue of Palestinian rights has received consistent recognition and strong assertion by a preponderant majority of member states. The relatively high voting support on UN General Assembly resolutions regarding Palestinian rights indicates that the majority of nations prefer that all the feasible initiatives in the direction of peace in the Middle East be undertaken within the UN framework. [58]
The UN, in defining the concept of Palestinian rights and in implementing practical steps toward their attainment, has also evolved its own unique approach toward a settlement of the Middle East conflict. The resolutions adopted under the agenda item, "The Situation in the Middle East," lay out the necessary conditions required for such a solution and the modalities to be applied to achieve that goal. In conclusion it is interesting to show here how the organization has fitted the issue of Palestinian rights within the general context of an overall settlement as based on the following established components: [59]
1. A comprehensive settlement must take into account all aspects of the conflict, namely the attainment by the Palestinian people of its inalienable rights, Israeli withdrawal from all the occupied Arab territories, and the establishment of secure and recognized boundaries for all countries and peoples in the area.
2. A comprehensive settlement must be achieved under the auspices of the UN in accordance with relevant resolutions of the General Assembly.
3. A comprehensive settlement should be achieved through the early convening of a peace conference on the Middle East, under the auspices of the UN and the co-chairmanship of the USSR and USA, with the participation on an equal footing of all parties concerned, including the PLO.
Research and scholarship requires investment. Generous contributions from people like you allow us to provide invaluable resources as a public good. Make a tax-deductible donation today!
Regina Sharif is the editor of the Institute for Palestine Studies' annual publication, International Documents on Palestine
I For a detailed and critical evaluation of the Camp David agreement and its selective reliance on UN proposals for peace in the Middle East, see Fayez A. Sayegh, "The Camp David Agreement and the Palestine Problem," Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. VIII, No. 2 (Winter 1979), pp. 3-40.
2 General Assembly resolutions outlining a general Middle East settlement based on the attainment by the Palestinian people of all their rights are generally adopted with over 100 votes in favour.
3 New York Times, July 18, 1979.
4 Surendra Bhutani in his book The UN and the Arab-Israeli Conflict (New Delhi: Academic Press, 1977) provides a descriptive study of the General Assembly's approach to the conflict mainly between 1947 and 1970. The period between 1970 and 1976, however, is only sparsely covered.
5 See Howard H. Sachar's foreword to Eliahu Elath, Zionism at the UN (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1976). See also Chaim Herzog, Ambassador of Israel to the UN, speaking before the General Assembly in UN doc. A/PV. 2423, pp. 46-47, and describing the General Assembly as a "world centre of anti-Semitic prejudice."
6 See, for example, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, "The United States in Opposition," Commentary, Vol. 59, No. 3 (March 1975), pp. 31-44.
7 See David A. Kay, "The United Nations and United States Foreign Policy," in David A. Kay, ed., The Changing United Nations: Options for the United States (New York: Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, 1977), pp. 11-16. It is interesting to note the findings of Alfred 0. Hero in his study on the American reactions to the United Nations system as expressed in public opinion polls. With regard to the UN's Middle East policy, a 1974 Harris poll revealed that 64 percent of the American public believed that the UN takes positive steps to keep peace in the Middle East and only 18 percent accepted the Moynihan charge that the UN is pro-Arab and anti-Israel. See ibid., p. 22.
8 For a precise and detailed chart of all organs, committees, commissions and agencies that directly or indirectly relate presently to the Palestine question and the Middle East conflict, see Table I.
9 With regard to the early stage of the UN Palestine policy, especially with regard to the 1947-48 period, a vast amount of literature is to be found. Suffice it here to mention the study prepared recently by the UN itself: UN Special Unit on Palestinian Rights, The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem, Vols. I and II (New York, 1979), ST/SG/SER. F/i. For an analysis of the UN's approach to the problem between 1947 and 197 3, see George J. Tomeh, "When the UN Dropped the Palestinian Question," Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. IV,. No. 1 (Autumn 1974), pp. 15-30, describing the process by which the Palestine question was removed from its political context and how by 195 3 it had effectively been reduced to a routine refugee problem.
10 Resolution 446 (1979) of March 22, 1979 established a three-member commission to examine the situation relating to settlements in the Arab occupied territories, and a recent resolution (1979) of July 20 called upon the government and people of Israel to cease the establishment, construction and planning of settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem.
11 The specific right to self-determination for the people of Palestine has also been consistently reaffirmed in a series of General Assembly resolutions passed since- 1970 under the agenda item, "Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples for the effective guarantee and observance of human rights." These resolutions identify the Palestinian people with the oppressed and colonized people of Africa and condemn Israeli occupation as a form of colonialism and foreign domination. These resolutions also affirm that armed struggle is a legitimate means for a liberation movement to gain its rights.
12 See resolution 3376 (XXX) of November 10, 1975; resolution 31/20 of November 24, 1976; resolution 32/40 AB of December 2, 1977: and resolution 33/28 ABC of December 7, 1978, all adopted by the General Assembly under the item, the Question of Palestine.
13 The following countries are members of the Committee: Afghanistan, Cuba, Cyprus, German Democratic Republic, Guinea, Guyana, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Laos, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Nigeria, Palistan, Rumania, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukrainian USSR, Yugoslavia.
14 UN doc. A/31/35.
15 UN doc. S/RES/381 (1975), adopted at the Council's 1856th meeting on November 30, 1975. Israel rejected the resolution on December 1, 1975 (see Jerusalem Post, December 2, 1975, p. 5). Following the adoption of the resolution the President of the Security Council announced that the PLO would be invited to participate in the January 1976 debate.
16 For the complete text of the draft resolution see UN doc. S/11940.
17 The draft was voted upoIl as follows: In favour: 9 (Benin, France, Guyana, Japan, Panama, Pakistan, Rumania, Tanzania, USSR) Against: 1 (USA) Abstentions: 3 (Italy, Sweden, UK)
18 See UN doc. S/12119 of June 29. 1979).
19 UN doc. S/PV. 2041 of October 27, 1977.
20 For his statement before the General Assembly see UN doc. A/33/PV. 59, pp. 2-17.
21 See the Political Declaration of the Conference of Ministers for lorcign Affairs of Non-Aligncc Countries, UN doc. A/33/206, p. 32.
22 In accordance with resolution 32/40 B of December 2, 1977, the Secretary-General established the Special Unit on Palestinian Rights within the Secretariat in January 1978.
23 UNESCO resolution 18C/18.2 and 18C/17.3 of October 25, 1974; Commission on Human Rights decision No. 2 (XXXI) of February 3, 1975; WHO resolution WIIA 28.35 C of May 28, 1975.
24 See also ECWA resolution 36 (IV) of April 1977.
25 Resolution 2 (XXXIV) of February 14, 1978. See Commission on Human Rights, Report on the 34th Session, February 6-March 10, 1978, pp. 104-5.
26 Resolution 3 (XXXIV) of February 14, 1978, in ibid., p. 106.
27 UNESCO resolution 18C/11.1 expressed "the firm hope that Palestine will join the community of nations within the international organizations, including UNESCO."
28 ECOSOC's mandate is specified in Chapter X, Article 62 of the Charter, namely to initiate studies and reports with respect to economic and social, cultural, educational and health-related matters and make recommendations to the General Assembly and specialized agencies. Under Article 13 of the UN Charter, one of the functions of the General Assembly is also to initiate studies and make recommendations for the purpose of "promoting international cooperation in the economic, social, cultural, educational and health fields, and assisting in the realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion." [or the most part, however, socio-economic rights items on the General Assembly agenda originate either in ECOSOC or in decisions taken by the General Assembly during earlier sessions to consider particular matters, such as the Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories.
29 Sec UN doc. A/32/204 of October 11, 1977.
30 See General Assembly resolution No. 32/161 of December 19, 1977. Previous General Assembly resolutions regarding the same rights are: No. 31/196 of December 21, 1976; No. 3516 (XXX) of December 15, 1975; and No. 3336 (XXIX) of December 17, 1974. ECOSOC resolution No. 2120 (LXIII) of August 4, 1977 asks the Committee on Natural Resources to intensify its work "in the field of the exercise of the inalienable rights of peoples and [in the field of] permanent sovereignty over natural resources in the territories subjected to foreign domination, colonial administration, alien occupation, apartheid or racial discrimination."
31 Report of the Secretary-General on Permanent Sovereignty over National Resources in the Occupied Arab Territories, UN doc. A/32/207, pp. 57, 60.
32 See Actioni Taken on the Resolutions Adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 59th to 64th SesNsion, Supplement to the Report of the Director-General, Geneva, 1979, pp. 22-53. The mission appointed by the Director-General of ILO visited Israel and the occupied Arab territories in April 1978 and in February/March 1979. The report was compiled in April 1979.
33 Ibid.
34 Ibid., p. 29.
35 Ibid., p. 40.
36 The commission was set up by Security Council resolution No. 446 (1978) and visited the Middle East, except Israel and the occupied territories, during March 1979. Its report was presented to the Security Council in July 1979. See Jordan Times (Amman), Vol. 4, No. 1062, May 23,1979, p. 4. According to a recent Jordanian government report based primarily on Israeli and Western sources, precisely 27.3 percent of West Bank land has been confiscated and expropriated by the Israeli authorities (1.5 million of the West Bank's 5.5 million dunums).
37 Ibid., May 24, 1979, p. 4.
38 Paul Quiring, ''Israeli Settlements and Palestinian Rights," Middle East International (London), October 1978, pp. 12-15.
39 ILO Report, op.cit. (see note 32), p. 42.
40 General Assembly resolution 2443 (XXIII) of December 19, 1968. The Committee is presently composed of three members (Senegal, Sri Lanka and Yugoslavia). It has established its own procedures for investigation, including field missions, accepting written and oral testimony, monitoring of information media and collection of public statements by public officials on Israeli occupation practices. Its yearly reports are submitted to the Secretary-General, who transmits them to the General Assembly, the Commission on Human Rights and other competent organs and agencies. From its very inception the Committee has been thwarted in the discharge of its mandate bv the obstructionist attitude of the government of Israel, which consistently refuses to cooperate.
41 UN doc. A/33/113, and A/RES/33/113 ABC.
42 The Commission on Human Rights in 1978 placed the item, "Question of the Violation of Human Rights in the occupied Arab territories, including Palestine," on its agenda as a matter of high priority. Since 1976 its resolutions have been phased in very strong language, openly condemning specific Israeli policies and practices in the occupied Arab territories. See ECOSOC, Official Records, 1978, Commission on Human Rights, Report on the Thirty-Fourth Session, pp. 100-4, 8-11.
43 ILO resolution No. IX, June 20, 1974.
44 See WHO resolution 33 of May 23, 1978.
45 The Committee of Experts was established in 1973 by the World Health Assembly (WHIA) resolution 26.56 of May 23, 1973. Prior to 1978 it was unable to fulfill its mission, owing to the refusal of the occupying authorities to grant it permission to visit the territories. Even in 1978, the mission was unable to carry out its full mandate because of Israel's uncooperative attitude.
46 UN doc. A/31/37.
47 WHA resolution of May 23, 1978.
48 For the latest reaffirmation of this definition, see UNESCO General Conference resolution 20C/14.1 .
49 UNESCO finances education programmes for Palestinian refugees in the Near East jointly operated by it and UNRWA. Other UNESCO activities have most often dealt with the status of Jerusalem and Israel's policy of Judaization. SO See UNESCO General Conference resolution 18C/1 3.1 of November 23, 1974.
51 See report in doc. 104 EX/52 Add. of May 31, 1978.
52 Executive Board decision No. 104 EX/7.1.2 of May 1978 and General Conference resolution No. 2() C/1.4 of November- 24, 1978.
53 The serious socio-economic condition in the occupied Arab territories is still on the agenda of the Security Council. Although no resolution was adopted in November 1976 a consensus statement made on behalf of the Council by its President considered the prevailing situation as "an obstacle to peace." See UN Chronicle, Vol. XII, No. 11 (December 1976), p. 5.
54 See UN doc. DP/410, June 20, 1979, p. 2.
55 Ibid., pp. 3-4.
56 For a detailed list and description of these projects see ibid., Annex 111, pp. 1-8.
57 Palestinian political rights were last enumerated and reaffirmed in General Assembly resolution 33/28A, which was adopted with 97 votes in favour, 19 against and 25 abstentions (see UN doc. A/33/PV.73). Palestinian economic rights as last reaffirmed by General Assembly resolution 32/161 were voted upon with 109 in favour, 3 against and 26 abstentions (see UN doc. A/32/PV.107). Palestinian social rights were upheld by General Assembly resolution 33/113C with 97 in favour, 3 against and 38 abstentions (see UN doc. A/33/PV.87).
58 The last General Assembly resolution, No. 33/29, calling for an early convening of a Middle East peace conference and listing the UN's general prerequisites for a political solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict, was passed with 100 votes in favour, 4 against and 33 abstentions (see UN doc. A/33/PV.7 3).
59 General Assembly resolution 33/29 of December 7, 1'978 (sce UN doc. A/33/RES/29)
