The Madrid Conference Closing Speeches
November 1, 1991
REMARKS BY MR. FAROUK AL-SHARA,
MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF THE SYRIAN ARAB REPUBLIC
November 1, 1991
I wanted to read a statement which I had prepared to reply to the speech
made by the head of the Israeli delegation which he made yesterday. But
the head of the Israeli delegation, who has just left, paying no heed to
this historic Conference and to the peace process, has taken a different
course from the chief subject on whose basis the Conference is held,
which is the achievement of just, comprehensive, and lasting peace in an
area which has not known security, stability, and well-balanced
development for long decades.
Yesterday some Western journalists said the Syrian speech was perhaps
tough, and I told them it was not tough. Rather it gave facts and
realities as they are, and I challenged some of them when I said I shall
find it strange if the Israeli delegation can find one single paragraph
to answer to. This challenge was not out of place, because I never
accused Israel of anything that is not in it, and thus the head of the
Israeli government could not reply to any word or expression by which I
described the Israeli policy in our region.
Today, I find it necessary to make clear some facts because those, for
us, for the co-sponsors of the Conference and for the international
community, are very important points closely connected with the future,
peace, security, and stability of the area and for the world security in
general. Therefore, I would briefly say that the head of the Israeli
government did not mention in his speech the United Nations Security
Council Resolutions 242 and 338, which in effect means that they are not
on the course for which the Conference is convened. This also means a
rejection of even the invitation issued by the co-sponsors, the United
States and the Soviet Union, who said in the invitation that the
Conference convenes on the basis of Resolutions 242 and 338. Naturally,
he did not talk about the principle of "land for peace" because he
openly said he does not want peace. He who analyzes his words will
immediately come to the conclusion that he says if the Arab side comes
to the Conference or to the talks to speak about land, we shall arrive
at a dead end.
Naturally, I would not talk about the history which the head of the
Israeli government yesterday used because it was a false and fabricated
history that is not based on realities, nor does it rely on neutral
world historians, particularly European and American historians who were
sympathetic to Israel, as is well-known. He writes a special history as
he sees it. For example, he says the Palestinian refugees left Palestine
because the Arab governments asked them to. This is not true, and the
Israeli delegation will not have one single document to confirm this.
Second, if we take it for granted that those Palestinians left by order
of governments at the time, why, then, doesn't the head of the Israeli
delegation who is talking about peace with empty words, ask them to go
back to their lands. Arab governments now agree to this. They demand
this.
The head of the Israeli delegation yesterday openly pointed out that
Palestine is the only home land for all world Jews. He considered a Jew
who lives in any other country in the world, however hospitable this
country is - the United States, for instance, which is really hospitable
to all Jews, and has treated them well, as the Arabs have treated them
throughout their history - as an exiled Jew; diaspora. This means that a
Jew in the United States is not an American citizen, having no
allegiance to the United States, as the head of Israeli government
claims. His allegiance would be to Israel, because there a Jew is only a
resident whose aim is to go to Israel, notwithstanding everything that
the States had offered him, support and backing inside the U.S. and on
the international arena.
They want a Soviet Jewish citizen not to stay in the Soviet Union. I am
confident that what he says does not express the truth. There are many
honor able Jews in the Soviet Union and the United States and in Europe
who declare allegiance to those homelands where they lived and grew up.
Hence, one would easily conclude that the concentration on this point in
itself is a real desire by the Israeli head of government to keep
tension high not only in our region but all over the world as well, to
keep the Jewish question alive in memory. He does not want the Jews to
be equally treated. He always wants to see the Jews persecuted, and
tortured, contrary to world facts now. When he talks, for instance,
about Syrian Jews. Jews in Syria are subject to the law like any other
Syrian citizen, be he Moslem or Christian. They know, the whole world
knows, everybody who visited Syria knows, historians know, that a Syrian
Jew lives in the same freedom and equality as any other Syrian citizen.
I shall briefly cite a paragraph of a report by a European parliamentary
delegation who visited Syria only two months ago: Syria has an amazing
religious freedom, for those who know little about Moslem Arab
countries. What we saw astonished us. Religious freedom is perfect in
Syria because the state considers itself secular, thus Judaism,
Catholicism, Orthodoxism and Islam with all its sects express them
selves in Syria and freely perform their religious duties. Of course,
they distribute pamphlets through Israeli embassies in Europe to talk
about persecution of Jews and drive people to demonstrate before Syrian
embassies. No more than 20 or 50 persons carry false banners that Jews
in Syria are persecuted, or they are hostages. Nonsense.
Mr. President,
I would like to get to an important point because the subject of the
Conference is peace.
The head of the Israeli delegation yesterday admitted that he would not
return any part of the land, as I have just pointed out. Especially when
he talked about the area for Palestinians, he indicated an area which is
more than the area of mandated Palestine. This means he reaffirms
occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, Jerusalem, Golan. Anybody who looks
carefully into this will find out the truth.
The Arabs are the only people who lived in Palestine over millennia of
years. Even when the Jews came from the South through Sinai, the
Palestinians were there in Palestine. I do not want to elaborate on this
period.
I wonder if the head of the Israeli government says it is the right of
every Jew to return to Pales tine after an absence of about two thousand
years. Then how is it that a Palestinian whose absence is only forty
years has no right to return? Which is more realistic? A Palestinian who
still remembers his house, who may even have the key to his house, or
talk about the return of Jews who were there two thousand years before.
This is a difference between forty and four thousand years, which was
discussed by the head of the Israeli government. He talked about freedom
of worship. We all know, through the media, and Arab media, that they
encourage Israeli extremists to destroy sacred places, the act of arson
against the holy al-Aqsa Mosque, their attempt to destroy the al-Aqsa
Mosque and they claim they try those people.
Israeli control over Jerusalem is not a guarantee for any of the three
religions, or for the city to remain holy with its spiritual places
eternal, to remain the city of peace, so long as it is under Israeli
control and under the feet of their soldiers.
Mr. President,
I had wanted to concentrate on peace for which we have come. But before
this let me show you an old picture of Shamir, when he was 32 years old.
The caption says - it is distributed in Europe. At the time he was 32
years old. Height 165 cm., then the other details which you all know.
This picture was distributed because he was wanted. He himself confessed
he was a terrorist. He confessed he practiced terrorism and participated
in murdering U.N. mediator Count Bernadotte in 1948, as far as I
remember. He kills peace mediators and talks about Syria, Lebanon,
terrorism. I cite another example: Israel in 1954 hijacked a Syrian
civilian aeroplane, and downed a Libyan civilian aeroplane.
The problem is that I don't have enough time to talk about Israel's
terrorist practices which needs volumes, not only a quarter of an hour.
But I would like to briefly say that Israel hijacked a Syrian civilian
aeroplane in 1954 with passengers on board between Cairo and Damascus.
Israel downed a Libyan plane in 1973, as I remember, and killed over one
hundred civilian passengers. Israel hijacked a Syrian plane six or seven
years ago which was carrying a Syrian political delegation. Had Syria
not hastened to file a complaint with the Security Council, the plane
would not have been released.
Yesterday I gave our perception of terrorism and we believe he could not
respond to any word in it. I don't want to disturb you with more
details. If anyone wants more, they can refer to it. He says the 1967
war was defensive. In their media they say the Arabs attacked Israel in
1967. They insult historians. I would like to say one final word.
Regardless of who occupied, or who started the war in 1967, the text of
the resolution is clear, Mr. President, that it prohibits the
acquisition of other people's land by war. This land must be returned.
Finally, and simply, Mr. President, we have come here for peace. We
shall continue to work for peace out of our faith in this peace. We
declare with confidence and resolution our determination to work for
just and comprehensive peace that liberates the land, and guarantees
rights and security for all parties. We would find it strange if the
Israeli side declined to continue the bilateral talks or created excuses
to prevent their continuation in Madrid.
I am sorry, Mr. President, I took a longer time but I have to clarify
those facts.
Thank you.