United States vetoes Security Council proposal concerning Israeli measures in Lebanon.

• Position: Includes summaries of delegates' speeches

Under the draft resolution, submitted by Lebanon, the Council would have affirmed that the occupying Power in the territories designated was duty-bound to respect and uphold the provisions of the 1949 Geneva Convention and of other norms of international law.

The United States, in opposing adoption of the draft resolution, said it made no specific mention of all foreign forces or of the discord in Lebanon other than that in southern Lebanon.

The vote on the text (S/16732) was 14 in favour (Burkina Faso, China, Egypt, France, India, Malta, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Peru, Ukrainian SSR, USSR, United Kingdom, Zimbabwe) to 1 against (United States), with no abstentions. The draft resolution was not adopted due to the negative vote of a permanent member, the United States.

Under the Lebanese draft, the Council would have called upon Israel, the occupying Power, "to respect strictly the rights of the civilian population in the areas under its occupation in southern Lebanon, the western Bekaa and the Rashaya district, and to comply strictly with the provisions" of the 1949 Geneva Convention.

The Council would have demanded that Israel immediately lift all restrictions and obstacles to the restoration of normal conditions in the areas under its occupation in violation of the 1949 Geneva Convention, "particularly concerning the closing roads and crossings, the limitation of freedom of movement of individuals and the normal flow of persons and goods between those areas and the rest of Lebanon, and the obstruction to the normal conduct of Lebanese Government institutions and personnel".

The Council would have reiterated its call for strict respect for the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries, and would have urged all States parties to the 1949 Geneva Convention to make every effort to ensure respect for the compliance with the Convention's provisions in southern Lebanon, the western Bekaa and the Rashaya district.

The Council held five meetings, beginning on 29 August, in response to a request for an urgent meeting "to consider all practices and measures taken by the Israeli occupying authorities in southern Lebanon, the western Beqaa and the Rashaya region" continued in a letter of 24 August from Lebanon to the Council President (S/16713).

Views of Lebanon and Israel

Rachild Fakhoury (Lebanon) said Lebanon had come before the Council on behalf of the more than 800,000 "tortured souls" in southern Lebanon, the western Bekaa and the Rashaya region, who suffered from Israel's occupation and injust arbitrary practices.

The population of southern Lebanon lived in a constant state of terror. Israeli tanks, weapons and guns were always pointed at them. Normal life in their region, which had become a paralysed part of Lebanon, had been interrupted. Towns and villages were stormed daily. Siege was laid to homes and private and official institutions. Children and the elderly were detained and arrested. Some of them were taken hostage. Roads between peaceful villages were closed. Shops were closed down. Curfews were imposed. Then, there was the destruction of crops and orchards and forced early harvesting.

All those acts were prohibited by customary law and by international instruments, particularly the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, the 1907 and 1899 Hague Conventions, the United Nations Charter and the Declaration on Human Rights. The occupying authorities had resorted to separating the south, the western Bekaa and the Rashaya region, completely isolating them from "the motherland".

He said those regions were being materially and militarily subjected to Israeli rule, despite the provisions of the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention--to which both Lebanon and Israel had acceded unconditionally. Lebanon considered the Israeli presence on its territory as outright occupation to which the provisions of international conventions were applicable, in particular, the Fourth Geneva Convention. The Israeli occupation forces had resorted to detaining and imprisoning countless thousands of people.

Special forces of the occupying authorities often resorted to the assassination of party officials and emient religious figures. The occupying forces often clashed with employees of the Lebanese State and army personnel. They often resorted to inhuman reprisals against the detainees. They also defiled places of worship. Israel disrupted the activities of the international forces and refused to provide the names of prisoners. The terrorist actions of the occupation authorities included firing above the heads of the village inhabitants.

Israeli barriers on the Awali River disrupted the transport of citrus fruits to Beirut, he stated. The occupation forces had destroyed an ancient Greco-Roman temple in the city of Sour, and their patrols continually plundered historical ruins. In Sidon, they had occupied the Government palace.

Israel had strengthened its stranglehold on movement between the occupied regions and Beirut. It now seemed that the occupying authorities had decided to prevent public transport vehicles from crossing from the south to the north, and vice-versa. The Israeli authorities had cut all telecommunications and postal communication. The movement of individuals from and to the south was subject to prior permission from the occupation forces...