Statement by Syria to Security Council
UNITED NATIONS, Feb. 14--Following is a transcript of the remarks of Farouk al-Shara, deputy prime minister of Syria, before the United Nations Security Council today, as recorded by the Federal News Service.
MIN. AL-SHARA: (Through interpreter.) Mr. President, Mr. Secretary-General, ladies and gentlemen. Three months ago, our council unanimously adopted Resolution 1441. Syria joined the unanimity after receiving assurances and clarifications that voting in favor of the resolution meant proceeding seriously towards a peaceful resolution to the issue of disarming Iraq of weapons of mass destruction and that the resolution would not be used as a pretext for waging war against Iraq.
Just a little while ago, Mr. Blix and Mr. ElBaradei submitted their reports and noted the progress made in the period that had elapsed since they last submitted their reports to the council. What this means is that in no more than two weeks, substantial progress has been made in the work of the inspectors. The progress reached its peak today when Iraq issued a decree prohibiting weapons of mass destruction there. The progress is a proof that the inspections are bringing about important results, given the dialogue, cooperation and mutual confidence between the inspectors and Iraq. The council must, therefore, continue to support the inspectors and allow them sufficient time to undertake their task as prescribed in Resolution 1441.
Mr. President, our region stands at a grave crossroads, teetering between war and peace. Our region has tremendously suffered the scourge of many wars, and continues to this very day to bear the brunt of a racist policy against the defenseless Palestinian people, a policy based on occupation and settlement, and bent on destroying man and nature.
We have been advised since 1973 to seek, through our policies, a peaceful settlement for the Arab-Israeli conflict, to normalize relations with Israel and to cooperate with it in different fields, despite the fact that Israel, first, continues to occupy Syrian, Palestinian and Lebanese territories, to build settlements thereon and to threaten its neighbors; second, Israel continues to possess all kinds of weapons of mass destruction, to be exclusively in possession of nuclear weapons, and to reject any international oversight or inspection, unlike the states of the Middle East that accepted such international oversight and inspection; and third, Israel continues to defy all the United Nations resolutions, over 500 of them, 31 of which were adopted by the Security Council, and refuses to recognize an independent Palestinian state endorsed by the international community, including the United States of America. And even when the United States of America voted on the resolutions, these resolutions remain "dead letter"; as we say in Arabic, "ink on paper."
The ink has faded lately, the paper yellowed, and miraculously Sharon became a man of peace.
Against this backdrop, allow me to ask: Where does today's Iraq stand? Hadn't Iraq recognized the state of Kuwait and its international borders that were demarcated by the Security Council? Weren't no-fly zones imposed on Iraq in the northern and southern parts of the country, without legal terms of reference to justify such a ban? Hasn't Iraq opened all its doors, without conditions or reservations, to the inspectors, and hasn't it cooperated with them positively at a time when Israel rejected any form of inspection over its nuclear facilities?
Against this paradoxical background, aren't many justified to wonder also whether such policies are indicative of double standards? Or perhaps we are to construe that the real danger lies in the fact that these policies are deliberately designed to put Iraq and Palestine, in particular, and the Arabs and Muslims, in general, in a bind and jeopardize their present and their future. Wouldn't these policies also impact the vital interests of the world at large?
We are in favor of a peaceful solution to the question of Iraq. Common sense also dictates that there be no alternative to this solution. We, as neighbors of Iraq, with considerable experience in what is going on around us, understand more than anyone else that this is the first war in the Middle East region unanimously rejected by the Arabs. The majority, the great majority, of the people of the world are saying no to this war.
This war will result in grave consequences for the unity and integrity of Iraq and its people. It will spill over to the entire region.
The war will lead to total anarchy, benefiting solely those who take it upon themselves to spread fear and destruction everywhere.
Those who are beating the drums for war make no secret of their objective, which is not disarming Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction; rather, they have a hidden agenda that they are seeking to implement through the entire region, the prelude to which is their war against Iraq. Had they really been seeking the elimination of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, they would have done so by supporting the work of the inspectors and granting them enough time to accomplish what they were set out to do.
Mr. President, we support the peaceful solution to the question of Iraq because we also believe that the war option will erode the international coalition to combat terrorism. The first signs of this erosion have already surfaced on the Afghan theater. We will spare you any details with which we assume you are all too familiar.
The simple thought that war would be one of the options before the Security Council is by itself a proof not only of the failure of the Security Council to discharge of its task, but also that of the entire international order. Under these circumstances, we believe that there is no alternative to respecting the Charter of the United Nations and using its institutions to safeguard world peace, security and prosperity, instead of putting the world for months on the edge of a volcano.
The efforts made by prominent members of the Security Council to stress the need to pursue a peaceful solution in order to implement Security Council Resolution 1441 gives us hope that the world order is still in good shape.
In this context, we recognize the French, German, Russian and Chinese efforts, as well as those of the majority of the Security Council members devoted entirely to the promotion of the United Nations, its charter and the central role it should play. Such efforts should be appreciated by us all.
We have considered the French proposals to strengthen the work of the inspectors. Inspections have brought about considerable achievements that could not be otherwise realized by military force. Therefore, we support the French ideas because they are an alternative to war. They constitute the basis for strengthening the inspections regime so as to allow it to fulfill the task entrusted to it as soon as possible.
The fulfillment of this task will immediately lead to the lifting through appropriate measures of the sanctions imposed on Iraq under Security Council Resolution 687.
It would also lead to the activation of paragraph 14 of that resolution, which calls for the declaration of the Middle East as a zone free from all weapons of mass destruction--nuclear, bacteriological and chemical--without accepting any state, including Israel, which alone has acquired all of those lethal weapons.
Mr. President, in conclusion, I say it is truly a historic moment. War in the 21st century is not a game. It has become a tragedy condemnable by history. Let us work for peace because we can achieve peace if we pursue it in good faith with strong determination and armed with the political will.
These requirements are readily available among those who are faithful to the charter of the United Nations, a charter, when all is said and done, remains the sole authority capable of maintaining world peace and security.
Thank you, sir.
nytimes.com |
