The United Nations

[Shammu]

United Nations in Geneva Presents Miquel Barcelo's Dome at the Palace of Nations
By MICHAEL DAMIANO

GENEVA.- Tuesday morning (Nov. 18) the Spanish government officially presented to the UN the dome Miquel Barceló (Felanitx, Majorca, 1957) painted in the organization’s Palace of Nations. A multinational group of over 600 diplomats, politicians, members of the art world and journalists filled the Human Rights and Alliance of Civilizations Chamber for the event. Guests of honor included King Juan Carlos, Queen Sofía, President José Luís Rodriguez Zapatero, and Foreign Minister Miguel Ángel Moratinos, representing Spain; as well as Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon; President of the Swiss Confederation, Micheline Calmy-Rey; and Prime Minister of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

In the minutes leading up to the ceremony, the distinguished crowd milled about the circular conference room craning their necks toward the multi-colored stalactites perilously clinging to the dome overhead. Some—aware that the dome’s appearance changes depending on one’s perspective—walked around the hall observing this effect. Another group, in the central part of the chamber, inundated the amiable Barceló with handshakes and congratulations.

Once the crowd was seated, the guests of honor, accompanied by their entourage of bodyguards, filed through the chamber to take their places at a long table flanked by two huge monitors at the front of the room. President Calmy-Rey delivered the first and most eloquent of the six speeches, demonstrating his grasp of European history and a capacity for interpretation of art.

Barceló delivered his characteristically concise speech in French, Catalan and Castilian. More poetic than discursive, his address made reference to the two primary sources of inspiration for the appearance of the dome: a cave and the sea. Representing both at once, the monumental work is an “absolute union of opposites.”

None of the speakers made reference to the controversy that has erupted in Spain over the financing of the dome—a welcome respite. The publication of the nearly €20 million (US$25.4 million) price tag of the Human Rights Chamber renovation (which included the cost of Barceló’s dome) enraged the Spanish right. In the past weeks, Spain’s right-leaning newspapers, El Mundo and ABC, have been ablaze with accusations of extravagancy directed at the socialist PSOE government. Unfortunately, the ordeal dominated the press leading up to the inauguration of the Majorcan artist’s project.

Nevertheless, on Tuesday, all attention was focused on Barceló’s work. The 4,600 square-foot dome, too big to be grasped in its entirety by the human eye, serves as a metaphor for the world. The spectator can only appreciate the work as a whole by focusing on one section at a time and synthesizing the resulting impressions.

Furthermore, Barceló and his team applied gray paint from one side and multi-colored paints from the other to the three dimensional forms of the dome. This unique treatment—which Barceló has employed in paintings for nearly twenty years—causes the dome to change colors as one moves, reinforcing the metaphor of a complex world. The work cannot be properly understood from any one perspective.

However, as President Calmy-Rey fittingly pointed out in his speech: despite its diversity of appearances, the dome presents many pictorial similarities from any angle. Similarly, although the people of the world differ in color and perspective, we share some universal values.

The symbolism fits the function of the Chamber. The Alliance of Civilizations—the brainchild of President Zapatero and Prime Minister Erdogan—seeks to solve human rights issues, among others, with an open-minded, multilateral approach.

United Nations in Geneva Presents Miquel Barcelo's Dome at the Palace of Nations

[Shammu]

UN Bans "Defamation of Religion"
Tuesday, 25 November 2008, 11:03 am
Press Release: UN Watch

UN Bans "Defamation of Religion" in Islamic Bid to Curb Free Speech

But advocacy campaign reduces support from 108 to 85 votes

Geneva, November 24, 2008 - By a vote of 85 to 50, with 42 abstaining, the UN General Assembly today adopted a draft resolution calling on all countries to alter their legal and constitutional systems to prevent "defamation of religions," asserting that "Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism."

The decision, sponsored by Islamic states with the support of Venezuela and Belarus, drew immediate protests from human rights activists and legal experts.

"This is just the latest shot in an intensifying campaign of UN resolutions that dangerously seek to import Islamic anti-blasphemy prohibitions into the discourse of international human rights law," said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, an indpendent human rights monitoring group in Geneva.

"Human rights were designed to protect individuals -- to guarantee every person free speech and free exercise of religion -- but most certainly not to shield any set of beliefs, religion included."

"These resolutions legitimize the criminalization of free speech in countries like Sudan, Egypt, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia," said Neuer. "Muslim moderates, bloggers, women seeking basic freedoms -- all of these will be the first to suffer from the worsening climate of state repression in the name of state-supported Islamic orthodoxy."

"No less is today's enactment aimed at the Western world, to intimidate anyone from criticizing radical Islam and those who commit violence in its name," said Neuer.

Proponents of free speech celebrated one small victory, however.

Successful campaigning by an international human rights coalition, including the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and UN Watch, led to a decline in support for the resolution compared to last year's vote, which had garnered 108 in support, 51 against, and 25 abstentions.

The proposed draft declaration for the UN's April 2009 "Durban II" conference on racism includes numerous provisions on the "defamation" of Islam. Denmark has threatened to walk out if they are included.

UN Bans "Defamation of Religion"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On this page is also the GA draft resolution, link, which seems to be a dead link now.

[Shammu]

Rebuilding U.N.'s Palace? A Billion Dollars

Monday , November 24, 2008
By Joseph Abrams

The U.N.'s Palace of Nations is falling apart.

The Palais des Nations is the U.N.'s European headquarters, flanked by the Swiss Alps to the west and Lake Geneva to the east. Peacocks roam freely on the grounds of the pristine, 111-acre Ariana Park that surrounds it.

But on the inside, the onetime home to the League of Nations is plagued by 70-year-old wiring, fire hazards and miles of rusty pipes that have flooded the archives repeatedly. Asbestos lines some of the walls, and the roof is in danger of caving in. The palace is in need of a major facelift.

The tab: one billion dollars, says Director General Sergei Ordzhonikidze, who heads the U.N. Office at Geneva.

But critics say it's not worth a cool billion to preserve a diplomatic palace. They say new offices could be built for less, and the money could be spent to heal the sick and feed the hungry.

For $1 billion, a firm could build 407,244 square meters of office space in Geneva. That's one and a half times the size of the Empire State Building, and five times the size of the main building at the Palais des Nations.

Based on 3,000 Swiss francs per square meter, a figure provided by Mario Botta Architetto, an architecture firm based in Switzerland, 407,244 square meters is two-and-a-half times the size of the entire Palais complex, which includes new wings and an underground garage.

A comparable building in the U.S. would cost about $228 per square foot, according to Kermit Baker, chief economist for the American Institute of Architects. That translates into almost precisely the same amount of brand new office space — 407,469 square meters.

Baker said those costs would cover construction only, and wouldn't pay for any expenses for design, buying land, brokering the deal or any changes in plans along the way, which are significant.

But the difference is massive; keeping the Palais des Nations could cost more than double what it would take to build a new home from scratch.

"We are extremely conscious that our mandate is not to do renovations for the pleasure of renovations. This is not our purpose," said Marie Heuze, chief spokeswoman for the U.N. Office at Geneva.

Heuze said the buildings are a storehouse of history and stand as a symbol of international cooperation. Every year about 100,000 visitors come to the palace, where tours are led in 15 languages.

Heuze told FOXNews.com that the director general's figure isn't on the U.N. budget yet and is an estimate that would have to be evaluated by a team of architects. Any major work on the Palais would likely come after the $1.9 billion renovation of the U.N.'s New York headquarters is complete.

Yet relief groups expressed bewilderment at the scope of the suggested renovations. Non-governmental organizations said $1 billion represents more than twice the amount the U.S. government spends worldwide on child survival and maternal health aid.

That $1 billion, relief groups said, is also larger than the entire humanitarian action appeal for all countries served by UNICEF, the United Nations Children's Fund, which requested $850 million to address 39 humanitarian emergencies around the world in 2008.

$1 billion could also go a long way to feed the hungry. Oxfam America reports on its Web site that "$1,000 brings potable water to 22 families in the Rift Valley of Ethiopia," and that "$20 buys enough maize to feed a family of four" there for six months — enough food and water to feed millions and flood the valley.

Critics are up in arms about the U.N.'s possible billion-dollar plan.

"This is entirely consistent with their spending habits worldwide for years," said Claudia Rosett, a U.N. watcher at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. "For them to spend this kind of money, especially at a time when so many people are in economic distress, is outrageous."

The U.N. said its plans may slow as a result of the world's economic downturn. "With the financial crisis, of course, it seems very frivolous to talk about the renovation of a building which is old and dates from before the Second World War," said Heuze.

Renovations of massive scale may not be considered until 2009-2010, and they would have to be approved by a vote in the General Assembly — meaning all member nations would have a say in the expenditures.

But changes have already started in Geneva. A massive meeting hall was unveiled last week by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, adorned with a $23 million art ceiling by the Spanish artist Miquel Barcelo. A number of other meeting rooms have been redone in recent years at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars, generally donated by foreign governments.

"There is constantly some renovation work done in the Palais des Nations, but much more needs to be done," Heuze said.

Director General Ordzhonikidze renovated his office this year, though the U.N. would not say how much the changes cost and did not specify whether a member state paid for the work. A spokeswoman said that his office was often overheated by the sun, and he had an air conditioner installed to cool it.

Sitting behind his desk in the Palais in June, Ordzhonikidze addressed the level of decay at the palace in an interview with Reuters.

"This door leads to a balcony. If you go out on the balcony, you see that everything is rusted. It's not nice," he said.

Rebuilding U.N.'s Palace? A Billion Dollars
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I still think the Useless Nations would be better off building new in Babylon, or a deserted island.

[nChrist]

I still think the Useless Nations would be better off building new in Babylon, or a deserted island.

 

I vote for giving them a flotilla of rubber dinghies in the middle of an ocean of your choice. Ample fish parts should be tied to the bottom of each dinghy to stabilize them in the water. The U.N. could then hold all the private meetings they want to, BUT nobody would know what they talked about or how they voted. The taxpayers would be happy to pay for something like this.

[Shammu]

More concern about the choke-collar of anti-hate speech legislation
23 September, 2008

Australia (MNN) ―  The World Evangelical Alliance is concerned about growing evidence of a fundamentalist religious lobby in Australia supporting same-sex relationships, stem-cell research, and abortion. Anti-hate speech legislation in Australia would put a choke collar on anyone who spoke against these practices, including Christians. The Human Rights Commission is launching a national review of what Australians believe freedom of religion means.

Commissioner of race discrimination Tom Calama says that a balance needs to be struck between the freedom to practice a religion and not pushing those beliefs on the rest of society. He says that people in Australia need to understand what religious freedom means in the 21st century.

"Does religious belief influence policies being determined in any country, particularly in our country?" he said.

Law in Australia provides for freedom of religion, but in October 2003 hate speech legislation affected two pastors giving a seminar on Islam. A civil suit was filed with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, alleging defamation of Muslims during a seminar the pastors had given on Islam. The Islamic Council sought an apology, retraction of the comments in question, and compensation.

"These seminars largely consisted of opening the Koran and reading from [it]," said Jeff King, president of the International Christian Concern. "There was Saudi money that went into Australia; they hired the best lawyers in the country and sued these guys for defamation."

The pastors' lawyers argued that the complaint was outside the tribunal's jurisdiction and that it infringed on the Constitutional right of freedom of expression. Although the pastors were convicted, the case was appealed and later settled after mediation.

Calama says that in a secular, multi-faith society, people sometimes have different expectations of what freedom of religion means and how the law should reflect those beliefs. People are invited to make submissions concerning their views of freedom of religion until the end of January.

More concern about the choke-collar of anti-hate speech legislation
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The court should be fining these Muslims and any other groups, who seek to muzzle free speech. They are stupid judges who fall for this garbage!!

[nChrist]

Brothers and Sisters,

A country either has Freedom of Religion or NOT, and there really isn't any in between. Either all have it or none have it. Islam seeks Freedom of Religion for themselves and denial of that freedom for everyone else, AND THE ANSWER IS NO! The answer must be "NO!" here and in every country. I can BLUNTLY state that my FREEDOM OF RELIGION will NOT be removed. Those who practice Islam are welcome to do so as long as my FREEDOM is respected. In return, I will respect their FREEDOM. It is a two-way street, and that's the way that it will stay. We will both have FREEDOM, and that should be a common sense matter in any FREE country. It isn't a FREE country without FREEDOM OF RELIGION.

BLUNTLY, those who wish to DEMAND ISLAM ONLY need to stay in their own country THAT IS NOT FREE! If they leave their NON-FREE COUNTRY, they will discover other people with RIGHTS TO OTHER RELIGIONS THAT WILL NOT BE INFRINGED - PERIOD - END OF STORY! If they don't like FREE COUNTRIES with FREEDOM OF RELIGION for everyone, THEIR ONLY CHOICE IS TO GO HOME TO THEIR NON-FREE COUNTRY! It really is just this simple. Islam or any other religion IS NOT DEMANDED in a FREE COUNTRY! - and WILL NEVER BE DEMANDED IN A FREE COUNTRY! If an immigrant can't stand the thought of EVERYONE having FREEDOM OF RELIGION - they need to either stay home or go back home. Bluntly, they will not be allowed to remove or restrict the FREEDOM of others because that isn't done in a FREE COUNTRY! Maybe the first step would be to find out what a FREE COUNTRY is and what that means. If someone doesn't like it - stay away and don't go there.

This really isn't a difficult topic at all - just the opposite. It's the easiest topic in the world to understand. The same is TRUE for FREEDOM OF SPEECH, FREEDOM OF THE PRESS, and others FREEDOMS that people in FREE COUNTRIES enjoy. Those FREEDOMS either exist or they don't. They do exist in a FREE COUNTRY AND THEY WON'T BE TAKEN AWAY - PERIOD - END OF STORY! Those who wish to remove or restrict the FREEDOMS of others WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO DO SO! I would hope that the people of Australia are smart enough to JUST SAY NO! LIKE IT OR LEAVE IT - SIMPLE AS THAT! Those who are unable to adapt to the ways of a FREE COUNTRY need to be DEPORTED AND SENT HOME TO THEIR NON-FREE COUNTRY! The numbers make no difference at all - SEND THEM HOME!

[Shammu]

How can islam be respected when, islam refuses to respect any other religion, or person??

Islam only wants to rule the world, through domination, and making the world submit muslim. I will agree though, I will not submit, to anyone/religion, except to our Lord, Jesus Christ. Freedom of choice Jesus gives us. Islam demands obedience to satan. Even then, you don't have a choice with islam. In most arab countries if a family member is muslim, then you MUST become muslim.

[nChrist]

How can islam be respected when, islam refuses to respect any other religion, or person??

Islam only wants to rule the world, through domination, and making the world submit muslim. I will agree though, I will not submit, to anyone/religion, except to our Lord, Jesus Christ. Freedom of choice Jesus gives us. Islam demands obedience to satan. Even then, you don't have a choice with islam. In most arab countries if a family member is muslim, then you MUST become muslim. :'(

For me, all I can say is they need to learn how to whistle Dixie or spend their time in some other manner. My family and I will never be potential converts. I hope that my wording in the previous post didn't hint that I would consider anyone other than JESUS CHRIST AND THE CROSS! As far as I'm concerned, the rest are like politics. All REAL Christians know the UNQUESTIONED AND ONLY TRUTH about JESUS CHRIST, our LORD and SAVIOUR forever! I WILL NOT EVEN PAY LIP SERVICE TO ANY OTHER - PERIOD - END OF STORY! I would think, hope, and pray that ALL CHRISTIANS are in the same LIFEBOAT and refuse to get out!

Love In Christ,
Tom

1 Thessalonians 1:5  For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake.

[Shammu]

UN approves six resolutions against Israel
United Nations, Nov 27, IRNA

UN-Israel-Resolutions
The United Nations member states approved six resolutions against the Zionist regime for its crimes in Gaza Strip during a General Assembly session on Wednesday.

The resolutions were passed despite severe opposition made by the US, Britain, Canada, Australia and a number of tiny islands that receive financial aid from Israel.

The documents supported absolute rights of the palestinian nation and called for Israel's withdrawal from the Golan Heights.

The resolutions also urged the Zionist regime to stop occupation of Beit ul-Moqaddas, establishment of new Jewish settlements and construction of the Apartheid wall in the occupied lands.

At the end of voting, Palestine's representative appreciated all members that voted in favor of the Palestinian nation.

UN approves six resolutions against Israel

[Shammu]

World Jewish Congress Dismayed by One-Sided Statements of UN General Assembly President
Wed Nov 26, 11:36 am ET

NEW YORK and BRUSSELS, Belgium, Nov. 26 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The president of the World Jewish Congress (WJC), Ronald S. Lauder, has criticized recent anti-Israel statements by Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann of Nicaragua, the current president of the United Nations General Assembly (GA). D'Escoto had likened Israel's actions vis-a-vis the Palestinians to "the apartheid of an earlier era" and called on the international community to consider stricter measures against Israel including "boycott, divestment and sanctions" similar to those enacted against South Africa in the 1980s. The GA president had also added that the failure to establish a Palestinian state made "a mockery of the United Nations and greatly hurts its image and prestige." The Holocaust and other historical crimes against the Jews would not give Israel "the right to abuse others, especially those who historically have such deep and exemplary relations with the Jewish people," according to Miguel d'Escoto.

WJC President Ronald S. Lauder called the accusations against Israel "false and without basis." He added: "Israel has served as an ingathering of many people of all colors and races whose citizens are granted equal rights. Not for the first time, the United Nations is applying different standards for Israel and the Jewish people than it does for other countries. When will we hear the UN unequivocally condemn the rocket attacks against Israeli towns from Hamas terrorists in the Gaza Strip? When will the United Nations speak out against the mockery that the Iranian regime makes of the international community by threatening to wipe another UN member state off the map?" The creation of a Palestinian state, the WJC president pointed out, favored by a majority of Israeli citizens, could only become a reality once the threats to Israel's security cease.

Ronald S. Lauder emphasized that recent developments in the international organization, such as the one-sided obsession with Israel on the part of the UN Human Rights Council or the looming repeat of Israel bashing and anti-Semitism at the upcoming UN Durban Review Conference in Geneva next year continue to give rise to great concern. The WJC would continue to work towards equitable and fair treatment of Israel in all the UN venues, he said.

The World Jewish Congress is the international organization representing Jewish communities in over 80 countries around the world. The WJC serves as the diplomatic arm of the Jewish people to governments and international organizations.

World Jewish Congress Dismayed by One-Sided Statements of UN General Assembly President
~~~~~~~~~~~

Soon as I can find these six resolutions against Israel, I will post it. My opinion of the UN is going from Useless Nations to Anti-Semitism Nations

[Shammu]

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ADOPTS SIX RESOLUTIONS ON MIDDLE EAST, PALESTINIAN RIGHTS,

FOLLOWING TWO-DAY DEBATE ON ISSUES
Also Adopts Texts Addressing ‘Protection of Global Climate’;

Global Health; Cooperation with Caribbean, South-East Asian States

Following two days of sometimes contentious debate on the conflict in the Middle East and the plight of the Palestinian people, the General Assembly today adopted by recorded vote six resolutions meant to promote the Palestinian people’s rights and limit Israel’s actions in Jerusalem and the Syrian Golan.  The votes came on a day that saw action on a total of 10 texts, with the other consensus texts addressing climate change, global health, and global and regional cooperation.

The first three Assembly resolutions zeroed in directly on the Palestinian people’s needs, by backing the work of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, and supporting the Secretariat’s efforts to raise awareness of their difficulties through conferences, training programmes, links with civil society and other activities.  A fourth affirmed the illegality of Israeli actions to change the status of Jerusalem.

Two additional resolutions on the Middle East region expressed the Assembly’s unhappiness with Israeli moves to control Jerusalem, as well as Israel’s activities in the Syrian Golan, including what it views as Israel’s illegal occupation of the Syrian Golan since 1967.

Turning to other issues, the Assembly adopted resolutions that pushed for immediate action on climate change, and urged Member States to consider health issues when shaping foreign policy and stressed the importance of achieving the health-related Millennium Development Goals.  Two other texts aimed to reinforce cooperation between the United Nations and the Caribbean, and the United Nations and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).  A fifth resolution, meant to strengthen ties between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization, was introduced and postponed for consideration at a later date.

Regarding the question of Palestine, the Assembly adopted by a recorded vote of 107 in favour to 8 against (Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 57 in abstentions, its draft resolution on the “Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People” (for voting details see Annex I).  With that text, the Assembly requested the Committee to keep promoting the Palestinians’ realization of their inalienable rights, including their right to self-determination, as it mobilized assistance for them.

By a recorded vote of 106 in favour to 8 against ( Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 57 abstentions (Annex II), the Assembly adopted the resolution on the “Division for Palestinian Rights of the Secretariat”.  By this draft, the Assembly requested the Secretary-General to continue providing the Division with the resources needed to carry out its work, which included monitoring developments, organizing international meetings and working with civil society.

By a recorded vote of 162 in favour to 8 against (Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 4 abstentions (Cameroon, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Tonga) (Annex III), the Assembly next adopted the resolution on the “Special Information Programme on the Question of Palestine of the Department of Public Information of the Secretariat”, by which it requested the Department to continue its programme for the 2009-2010 biennium. 

This request included the dissemination of information on all United Nations activities relating to the question and the peace process; putting out publications on the various aspects of the question; and organizing fact-finding missions for journalists to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel.

The Assembly also adopted by a recorded vote of 164 in favour to 7 against ( Australia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 3 abstentions ( Cameroon, Canada, Tonga) (Annex IV), the resolution on the “Peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine”.

By that text, the Assembly reaffirmed the illegality of Israeli actions meant to change the status of Jerusalem, including the so-called E-1 plan, which aimed to connect Jerusalem to the West Bank settlement of Ma’ale Adumim.  It also reaffirmed the illegality of other unilateral measures that tried to alter the character, status and demographic composition of the city and the Territory as a whole.  This included Israel’s construction of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem.

Speaking before the votes, the representative of the United States said her country could not support the four resolutions since the texts, in combination with 15 other resolutions that came before the Assembly this year, created a clear pattern of institutional bias.  The United States had clearly stated its policy that there should be two States, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace, and backed that policy with support for both sides.

She was distressed that each year the Assembly devoted a disproportionate number of resolutions to the Middle East, with disproportionate criticism of Israel.  Those resolutions, along with others on the Middle East, were repetitive and unbalanced, and at odds with the Assembly’s action on any other State.  They placed demands on the Israeli side, while failing to see that both sides must take steps towards peace.

Turning next to the situation in the Middle East, the Assembly adopted two resolutions.

By a recorded vote of 163 in favour to 6 against ( Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 6 abstentions ( Australia, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Fiji, Haiti, Tonga) (Annex V), the Assembly adopted the draft resolution on Jerusalem.  In that text, it stressed that a comprehensive and just solution to the question of the city should incorporate Palestinian and Israeli concerns.

By a recorded vote of 116 in favour to 6 against ( Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Palau, United States), with 52 abstentions (Annex VI), the Assembly adopted the draft resolution on the Syrian Golan.  In this text, it expressed concern at the illegal occupation, settlement, construction, and other activities of Israel in the Syrian Golan since 1967.  It also requested that all parties concerned, the co-sponsors of the peace process and the entire international community work to resume the peace process by implementing Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973).

Speaking after the vote, the observer for Palestine said he looked forward to not having to bother with discussions or resolutions, on what was balanced or not balanced.  He wanted to relieve the United Nations of all those resolutions.  He hoped that next year, if all the parties moved towards peace, the Palestinian flag would join the other 192 flags at the United Nations.  The Palestinian people wanted to live with all their neighbours, including Israel, in peace and security.

In other action, the Assembly adopted by consensus a draft resolution entitled “Protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind”, contained in a report by the Second Committee (Economic and Financial).  With that text, the Assembly stressed the seriousness of climate change and called on States to implement the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.  It also strongly urged those States that had not yet done so to ratify the Kyoto Protocol to the Convention in a timely way.

As part of an agenda item that focused on integrated and coordinated implementation of and follow-up to the outcomes of major United Nations conferences and summits in the economic, social and related fields, the Assembly adopted by consensus a draft resolution on “Global health and foreign policy”.  This stressed the importance of achieving the health-related Millennium Development Goals.

In final action, the Assembly adopted by consensus two draft resolutions under its agenda item on cooperation between the United Nations and other organizations.

Introducing the draft resolution on “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Caribbean Community”, the representative of Guyana, speaking on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), said the most important elements of the text involved sensitive issues in which the need for cooperation was greatest.  This included illicit narcotic drugs and weapons and the region’s vulnerability to natural disasters.

With its resolution on “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations”, introduced by the representative of Thailand, the Assembly encouraged the United Nations and the Association to regularly convene summits and cooperate in the delivery of operational development activities.

Also speaking after the vote on the resolutions related to Palestine were the representatives of Iran, France (on behalf of the European Union), and Belize.

Speaking before adoption of the resolutions on the situation in the Middle East was the representative of Iran.

[Shammu]

Speaking after adoption of the resolution on the Middle East were the representatives of Brazil (also on behalf of Argentina), Iran and Syria.

Speaking before adoption of the resolution on “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Caribbean Community” was the representative of Venezuela.

The representative of Afghanistan introduced a resolution on “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization”.  The resolution will be considered at a later date.

Speaking after the adoption of the resolution on “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations” was the representative of the United States.

The General Assembly will reconvene at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 2 December, to take up the reports of the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security).

Background

The General Assembly met today to take action on draft resolutions relating to the question of Palestine and the situation in the Middle East (Please see Press Releases GA/10789 and GA/10790).  It is also expected to take action on several draft texts under agenda items 44 and 114.

Under its agenda item 44 on the “integrated and coordinated implementation of and follow-up to the outcomes of major United Nations conferences and summits in the economic, social and related fields”, the Assembly is to take action on a draft resolution entitled Global health and foreign policy (document A/63/L.28).  

By that text, the Assembly would urge Member States to consider health issues in the formulation of foreign policy and stress the importance of achieving the health-related Millennium Development Goals.  It would request the Secretary-General, in close collaboration with the Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO), to submit to the Assembly, at its sixty-fourth session, a report on the challenges and activities related to foreign policy and global health.  Further by the text, the Assembly would decide to include in its provisional agenda of that session an item entitled “Global health and foreign policy”.

For its consideration of “cooperation between the United Nations and regional and other organizations” (agenda item 114), the Assembly had before it a draft resolution on cooperation between the United Nations and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) (document A/63/L.40), by which it would continue to encourage the United Nations and the Association to convene summits regularly, and recognize the value of partnership in providing timely responses to global issues of mutual concern.

Further by the text, the Assembly would encourage cooperation between Association member countries and United Nations organizations in the delivery of operational development activities, and request the Secretary-General to submit to the Assembly, at its sixty-fifth session, a report on the implementation of the present resolution.  It would also decide to include, in the provisional agenda of that session, a sub-item on cooperation between the two entities.

A draft resolution on cooperation between the United Nations and the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) (document A/63/L.38) would note the Assembly’s grave concern at the current international environment, characterized, in part, by crises in food and energy security, and call on the Secretary-General, in association with the Secretary-General of CARICOM, to assist in furthering the maintenance of peace and security in the region.  The Assembly would call for vastly increased efforts by developed countries to strengthen the multilateral development framework to respond more effectively to programme country needs.

Also by the text, the Assembly would urge specialized agencies, among others, to step up cooperation with the Secretaries-General, invite United Nations organizations to increase financial assistance to Caribbean countries for implementing the Caribbean Regional Strategic Framework for HIV/AIDS, and stress the urgent need for reopening the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime in the region.

Further, the Assembly would reaffirm the goal of strengthening the implementation of the Mauritius Strategy for the Further Implementation of the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States, including through mobilizing financial and technological resources, and request the Secretary-General to submit a report, at the sixty-fifth session, on the implementation of the present resolution.

By a draft resolution on cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization (document A/63/L.39), the Assembly would call for increasing the technical assistance of the World Trade Organization, among others, to Economic Cooperation Organization States that are at various levels of development, with some pursuing accession to the world trade body.  Welcoming the trilateral agreement among the Economic Cooperation Organization, the Islamic Development Bank, and the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) for projects under the Asian Highway and Trans-Asian Railway network, the Assembly would also appreciate Economic Cooperation Organization efforts to develop energy trade in the region.

Further by the text, the Assembly would call for strengthening technical assistance provided by United Nations bodies, especially the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and call for increased cooperation between the Economic Cooperation Organization and United Nations bodies to combat the production and trafficking of narcotic drugs.  Finally, the Assembly would request the Secretary-General to submit a report on the implementation of the present resolution at the sixty-fifth session.

The Assembly also had before it the report of the Second Committee (Economic and Financial) on the protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind (document A/63/414/Add.4), which contained a draft resolution on that topic, by which the General Assembly would stress the seriousness of climate change and call on States to work towards achieving the ultimate goal of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.  It would also invite parties to the Kyoto Protocol to continue to make use of the information contained in the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Further by the text, the Assembly would recognize the need to provide financial, technical and capacity-building resources to developing countries adversely affected by climate change, and call on the international community to fulfil commitments made during the fourth replenishment of the Global Environment Facility Trust Fund.  Finally, it would invite the Secretariat of the Framework Convention to report, through the Secretary-General, at its sixty-fourth session on the work of the Conference of Parties, and include on the provisional agenda of that session a sub-item on the “protection of global climate change for present and future generations”.

Action on Draft Resolutions under Agenda Item 16 on Question of Palestine

Speaking before the vote, the representative of the United States said that the four resolutions, in combination with 15 other resolutions to come before the Assembly this year, form a clear pattern of institutional bias.  The United States had clearly stated its policy that there should be two States, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace.  The United States backed that policy with support for both sides, consistent with agreements made at the Annapolis, Maryland conference, and contributed financial support to both the Palestinian Authority and refugees.  There was no contradiction between support for Palestinians and that for Israel, as both sides needed support to achieve a just and lasting peace.

[Shammu]

She was distressed that, each year, the General Assembly devoted a disproportionate number of resolutions on the Middle East, with disproportionate criticism of Israel.  These resolutions, along with others on the Middle East, were repetitive and unbalanced, at odds with the General Assembly’s action regarding any other State, and placed demands on the Israeli side, failing to see that both sides must take steps towards peace.  The United States accepted that the General Assembly may look into practices of States but, last year, adopted 14 resolutions criticising Israel.  In that same year, it adopted only six critical of other States.  She supported some and opposed others.  The 21 resolutions on alleged Israeli violations stretched to 61 pages.  The Assembly was on course to repeat that pattern, which represented an unjustified focus on one Member State.  The situation in the Middle East did not merit three quarters of all the time the Assembly devoted to review of its 192 Member States.

Of notable concern were drafts on the Division for Palestinian Rights of the Secretariat and the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, as well as the work of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices.  They perpetuated the perception of an inherent United Nations bias and failed to properly demand action from both sides.  The millions of dollars spent could be better utilized towards direct aid, including that to needy Palestinians.

The international Quartet must be seen as an honest broker, she continued, and she expressed concern that those resolutions could not only have a corrosive effect on negotiations, but also added nothing to the Security Council’s monthly discussions.  They presupposed the outcome of permanent status issues that belonged to bilateral negotiations.  In the 9 November briefings to the Quartet, both sides attested that the negotiating structure was effective, and noted that third parties should not intervene in the joint negotiations [absent their request].

The United States would continue to be at the forefront of addressing the underlying causes of the conflict.  For such reasons, the United States could not support the resolutions.

The General Assembly then adopted by a recorded vote of 107 in favour to 8 against (Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 57 abstentions, its draft resolution on the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (document A/63/L.32).  (For details on voting, see Annex I.)

The Assembly then adopted by a recorded vote of 106 in favour to 8 against (Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 57 abstentions (Annex II), the resolution on the Division for Palestinian Rights of the Secretariat (document A/63/L.33).

The resolution on the Special Information Programme on the Question of Palestine of the Department of Public Information of the Secretariat (document A/63/L.34) was adopted by a recorded vote of 162 in favour to 8 against (Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 4 abstentions (Cameroon, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Tonga) (Annex III).

The Assembly then adopted by a vote of 164 in favour to 7 against ( Australia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 3 abstentions ( Cameroon, Canada, Tonga) (Annex IV), the resolution on the peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine (document A/63/L.35).

Speaking after the vote was the representative of Iran, who stated its votes in favour of the resolutions were in solidarity with the Palestinian people.

The representative of France, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said he had voted in favour of A/63/L.34.  The European Union welcomed the new elements introduced in the resolution, in the spirit of cooperation on the Palestinian mission.  These improvements would encourage the parties involved to improve the programme between the Palestinian Authority and Israel.  The European Union was prepared to work with the Department of Public Information and all parties involved to meet the objectives of the resolution.

The representative of Belize requested that their vote in favour of those resolutions be on record.

Action on Draft Resolutions under Agenda Item 15 on Situation in Middle East

Speaking before the vote, the representative of Iran referred to the unfounded allegations by Australia against Iran and rejected the distortions that were made under agenda item 15.   Iran had condemned terrorism in all its forms and manifestations.   Iran was a victim of terrorism.  With its history and unqualified support of Israel, Australia should be the last judge of others in that area.   Iran had fully cooperated with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and its nuclear programme was absolutely peaceful.  If Australia was concerned about the Middle East, it should cease its complicity with the Israeli regime in war crimes and join with the international community in stability on the question of Palestine.

The General Assembly then adopted by a recorded vote of 163 in favour to 6 against (Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 6 abstentions (Australia, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Fiji, Haiti, Tonga) (Annex V), the draft resolution on Jerusalem (document A/63/L.36).

The General Assembly then adopted by a recorded vote of 116 in favour to 6 against (Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Palau, United States), with 52 abstentions, the draft resolution on the Syrian Golan (document A/63/L.37).

Speaking after the vote, on behalf of Brazil and Argentina, the representative of Brazil said he had voted in favour of the draft resolution on Jerusalem, and the two countries had understood that the central aspect of the resolution was linked to the illegal acquisition of land by force.  That use of force violated international law.  He urged Israel and Syria to renew negotiations and find a definite solution under the principal of land for peace.

The representative of Iran said he voted in favour of all the resolutions just adopted in a spirit of solidarity with the Palestinian people and Arab people under occupation.

The representative of Syria thanked the Assembly for its adoption, once again, with no interruption since 1981, of the resolution contained in document A/63/L.37 and other resolutions related to Palestine and the Middle East.  He supported the international community’s continued positive response to upholding those objectives of the United Nations Charter and the backing of its right to restore its land, occupied by Israel and supported by a superpower for more than 40 years.  There was no doubt that voting for those resolutions sent an international message to Israel and those who supported it.  The policies of aggression and annexation of land were practices that were rejected and repudiated by the entire international community.

He thanked all States that sponsored and voted for the resolution, and urged those whom abstained to lend their ears to the voice of international law that should govern their actions.   Syria wanted to achieve comprehensive and durable peace, and to liberate the Syrian Golan from Israeli occupation.  He urged the international community to help prevent the eruption of war by pressuring the party that impeded peace, Israel, and those who protected it.

[Shammu]

The observer for Palestine expressed gratitude and appreciation to all the countries that played a very important role in introducing the draft resolutions and to all the countries who voted in favour.  He also thanked all the political blocs, specifically the Arab Group, the League of Arab States, the African Union, the Non-Aligned Movement and the European Union, that collaborated to ensure the resolutions were drafted in responsible and balanced language that reflected the sentiment of the international community.

Bringing Israel into compliance with international law, and to uphold international law so that peace and justice could be achieved was a challenge to the international community.  It was essential to end the occupation that started in 1967, and giving Israel preferential treatment was not in service of the United Nations or the international community, as it did not move the process forward to a peaceful solution.  Those resolutions were balanced, and the majority votes in favour reflected their just and balanced approach, he stated.

“It has been too long… and it’s been too long because Israel has not been compliant,” he said.  He recalled the 50 countries and organizations that convened in Annapolis to help the parties towards a solution.  He had hoped that there would be a peace treaty by now that would allow for the birth of the Palestinian State.  But, until that peace treaty was accomplished, it was “the duty of the international community to remain engaged in this issue until it was resolved in all its aspects,” and to that end, he pledged that he would continue to work until it was resolved.

He then offered hope that next year, if all parties involved moved towards peace, the Palestinian flag would join the other 192 flags at the United Nations, and he pledged that the Palestinian people would “reflect the essence of that peace treaty that will be the birth of our state.”  He concluded by saying that he looked forward to not having to bother in discussion or resolutions of what was balanced or not balanced.  He wanted to relieve the United Nations of all these resolutions.  What the Palestinian people wanted was to live with all their neighbours in peace and security, including Israel.

The Assembly then took up the report of the Second Committee on the protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind, issued as document A/63/414/Add.4.  There was no discussion of the report.

The Assembly adopted by consensus a draft resolution, entitled protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind, recommended by the Second Committee in paragraph 8 of the report.

Turning to agenda item 44, Integrated and coordinated implementation of and follow-up to the outcomes of the major United Nations conferences and summits in the economic, social and related fields, the Committee then adopted by consensus draft resolution Global health and foreign policy (document A/63/L.28).

In other business, the Assembly then resumed its consideration of sub-items (c), (e) and (i) of agenda item 114, Cooperation between the United Nations and other organizations.

Speaking on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), George Talbot (Guyana) introduced the draft resolution, entitled cooperation between the United Nations and the Caribbean Community, (document A/63/L.38).  He said the preambular section of the draft would have the Assembly recall previous United Nations commitments to cooperate with CARICOM.  After that, the draft would have the Assembly give due recognition to what the Community considered particular landmarks in the development of that cooperation.

The most important items related to very sensitive areas or issues in which the need for cooperation was greatest, he said.  That included illicit narcotic drugs and weapons; the challenges of sustainable development for small island developing States, as highlighted in the World Summit on Sustainable Development; the region’s vulnerability to natural disasters; and the ravaging effects of HIV/AIDS on their societies.

Threats to the region’s security led the group to stress the urgent need to reopen the office of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime in the region, in order to reinforce its efforts to combat drugs, violent crimes and the illicit trade in small arms and weapons.

Speaking before the vote, on the draft resolution on cooperation between the United Nations and the Caribbean Community, the representative of Venezuela said he supported CARICOM in its efforts to lift the region out of poverty and its social difficulties.  He reiterated its position for sustainable development and support for the small island developing States.

[Shammu]

MOHAMMAD ERFANI AYOOB ( Afghanistan), introducing the resolution on cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization (document A/63/L.39), pointed out that, despite its young age and the lack of appropriate infrastructure and institutions in its region, the Economic Cooperation Organization had developed into a successful regional organization.  Today, it sought to develop its infrastructure and institutions, on a prioritized basis, that made full use of the available resources in the region.

Specifically, the Economic Cooperation Organization had embarked on several projects in priority sectors, including energy, trade, transportation, agriculture and drug control, he said.  Additionally, the Economic Cooperation Organization had established relations, and signed a memoranda of understanding, with regional and international organizations, including the United Nations specialized agencies and international financial institutions.  Consequently, the Economic Cooperation Organization’s international stature had continued to grow.

He said the draft resolution he was introducing stressed the importance of continuation and the expansion of the areas of cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization; expressed appreciation for the technical and financial assistance the United Nations and its specialized agencies had extended; and called for a further increase of that assistance to the Member States of the Economic Cooperation Organization.

DON PRAMUDWINAI (Thailand), introducing the resolution on cooperation between the United Nations and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) (document A/63/L.40), said it was the aim of ASEAN leaders that the regional grouping’s Charter provided a legal and institutional framework to make it more rules-based, people-centred, effective and efficient.

He said all ASEAN members aspired to move ahead towards closer integration, with a goal of transforming South-East Asia into a single market and production base, with free movement of goods, services, skilled labour and freer movement of capital.  Through that process of community-building and integration, ASEAN would emerge as a stronger partner for the United Nations in the pursuit of the shared purposes and principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter.  At the same time, partnership between ASEAN and the United Nations had also been undergoing what he said was an exciting period during the past two years.  ASEAN had also worked closely with the Organization in responding to humanitarian needs in the wake of the devastating Cyclone Nargis in May this year.

Continuing, he noted that, next month, the third ASEAN-United Nations Summit is slated for Thailand.  That Summit was expected to provide ASEAN leaders and the United Nations Secretary-General an opportunity to exchange views about issues of common interest and to develop effective partnership in response to those critical issues.

The Assembly postponed a vote on its draft resolution on cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization (document A/63/L.39).

The Assembly then adopted by consensus its draft resolution on Cooperation between the United Nations and the Caribbean Community (document A/63/L.38).

The Assembly also adopted by consensus its draft resolution on Cooperation between the United Nations and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (document A/63/L.40).

Speaking in explanation after the vote, the representative of the United States said he was pleased to join in favour of the adoption, and welcomed cooperation between the United States and CARICOM.  The need of Member States in the region to fight illicit trafficking of drugs was very important, and to that end, he recognized the work of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.  He said, however, that, in light of budgetary concerns, any field office should be sustainable, and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime should consider those concerns in decisions to reopen any offices in the field.

ANNEX I

Vote on Palestinian Rights Committee

The draft resolution on the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (document A/63/L.32) was adopted by a recorded vote of 107 in favour to 8 against, with 57 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, China, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Ghana, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Paraguay, Philippines, Qatar, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Palau, United States.

Abstain:  Albania, Andorra, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Colombia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Tonga, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uruguay.

Absent:  Belize, Burundi, Chad, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Kiribati, Madagascar, Malawi, Mongolia, Niger, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu.