I can only reiterate what I said on Friday: let us stop being selective. If terror is bad, it is bad everywhere, for everybody and on every occasion. It is bad whatever the colour, race, creed or nationality of the terrorist. It is bad whatever the colour, race, creed or nationality of the victim.
That is the issue before us. That is the issue with which the United Nations has failed to deal. That is the issue which will plague the whole world until we deal with it.
I listened to the remarks of the representative of Pakistan. Frankly, I would have accorded them more respect if they had not come from the representative of a regime which has locked up its entire political opposition in gaol. Here was the miserable apparition of the representative of a State whose own people were brutally driven out of Uganda by the racist regime of Idi Amin falling over himself to ingratiate himself with the oppressors of his own kith and kin. How despicable can one be?
The representative of the Soviet Union asked me why we did not quote the documents of the United Nations banning aggression in international relations. The representative of the Soviet Union must be aware that the definition of aggression adopted by the General Assembly on 15 December 1974 has been widely criticized in all legal circles. It is not a binding statement of international law and does not, incidentally, rule out an act like that carried out by Israel.
When the representative of the Soviet Union asked why Israel did not file a complaint to the Security Council, I did not know whether he was naive or he assumed that I was naive. Let me assure him that at least in this respect I cannot be characterized as such, and I have no doubt that he is anything but naive.
I ask the representative of the Soviet Union: Had we submitted a complaint, would the Soviet Union have supported us? Why was there no Soviet statement when the plane was hijacked? Why have they not condemned the terrorist acts of the PLO on many occasions in the past? Why did they not issue a statement or an appeal when the innocent hostages were being held in Entebbe? Why did not the representative of the Soviet Union have even one word to say about the fate of Mrs. Dora Bloch? Or one word of appeal directly to the representative of Uganda in this respect? After all, you have influence in Uganda.
Is the representative of the Soviet Union not aware that since 1954 the Soviet Union has blocked every attempt on the part of Israel to bring its case to the Security Council? For 22 years we have had no remedy in this Council because of the Soviet veto. We are used to cynicism in this body but the cynical question of the representative of the Soviet Union—“Why did we not complain to this Council”—when he knows in advance that, without regard to the substance of the claim, he would have vetoed it, is, I submit, the height of cynicism.
I note the Soviet representative’s concern for the inviolability of African territory, and I sincerely trust that his touching concern will be reflected in Soviet Union policies and actions.
The representative of the Soviet Union talked about aggression and the inviolability of territorial integrity and national sovereignty. On these subjects I defer to him, having regard to the Soviet Union’s very considerable record in these respects in Hungary, in Czechoslovakia and in other countries in Eastern Europe. My colleague from China could doubtless elaborate on this subject.
Let me assure the representative of the Soviet Union that the people of Hungary in 1956 and of Czechoslovakia in 1968 would have been only too delighted if the Soviet intervention had been to save 100 hostages and had been of a duration not exceeding 53 minutes, as was the case at Entebbe. At that time the Soviet Union went to great pains to explain its position. Sergei Kovalev, in Sovereignity and the International Duties of Socialist Countries, published in Pravda on 26 September 1968, explained the Soviet Union’s justifications of such actions as follows:
‘‘Those who talk about the ‘illegal’ actions of the allied socialist countries in Czechoslovakia forget that in a class society there is not and there cannot be law that is independent of class.”
In a civilized society there is not and cannot be law that is independent of the loftiest principles of man, namely, freedom and dignity of man. That, my colleague from the Soviet Union, was the principle that Israel was defending at Entebbe.
Perhaps the more indicative of all in attitudes of Governments was the document from Algeria circulated to this Council, which was welcomed yesterday by the representative of the Soviet Union.
It is indeed appropriate that Algeria should speak out for the terrorists and hijackers, having regard to the fact that it was Algeria to which the first hijacked plane in operations against Israel in 1968 was directed. Algeria was directly involved in that operation and blazed the way for future terrorist exploits. One could hardly expect Algeria, which has played such a prominent part in the history of air hijacking, international kidnapping and the use of diplomatic immunity for terrorist purposes, to forfeit its place in the “hall of fame” of international terrorism. They had to get into the act. After all, what Amin did two weeks ago, they did in 1968.
In the course of all these discussions some delegations have tended to ignore the group which organized this hijacking, namely, the PLO. The PLO has issued a statement disassociating itself from this operation. This is a lie. The PFLP, to which the hijackers belonged, is a constituent member of the PLO. Members will recall that in the past the PLO denied any knowledge of the Black September organization, although Yassir Arafat’s second-in-command actually commanded it. They were the group which, according to the President of the Sudan, Yassir Arafat personally instructed to execute the American and Belgian diplomats in the Saudi Arabian Embassy in Khartoum in 1973.
The PLO’s policy is a matter of record. It is one based on the most brutal terrorism, in the course of which attacks have been made upon innocent people, including unsuspecting women and children. These gangs have cut down pregnant women in cold blood in Kiryat Shmona, have shot Olympic athletes bound hand and foot, have hijacked planes, have engaged in open assassination, have held small school children hostage in Ma’alot causing the death of over 20 children and over 60 wounded. These are the same individuals who tried to impose a reign of terror on the Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza, killing cold-bloodedly those suspected of not agreeing with them. These are the same individuals who planned the assassination of the Heads of five Arab States at Rabat in 1974. Fourteen members of the PLO were then arrested by Morocco. These are members of the same organization which executed in the most cowardly manner Wasfi Tal, the Prime Minister of Jordan, during a visit to Cairo. One of the assassins, not content with shooting the Prime Minister in the back, felt obliged to drink his blood publicly on the steps of the Sheraton Hotel in Cairo.
These are the same people who on 31 January 1974 sabotaged the oil installations in Singapore.
These are the same people who gained control of the Egyptian Embassy in Madrid and held three members of the staff, including the ambassador, as hostages.
These are the same people who murdered American and Belgian diplomats in Khartoum in 1973. These are the people who have been instrumental in destroying the Lebanese State, tearing it apart while this Council remains silent, killing tens of thousands and wounding thousands of others. These are the terrorists who kidnapped and held as hostages the ministers attending the OPEC Conference in Vienna and were then released by the Government of Algeria in an act which constituted a blatant condoning of the criminal terror acts of that group. From there they proceeded to Libya, where they were greeted and embraced by Prime Minister Jalloud of Libya, the same terrorists who had shot one of Libya’s citizens a day before in Vienna.
These are the people who have brought misery, murder and assassination to the area of the Middle East and who have introduced terrorism as a form of international idiom—terrorism which affects innocent people wherever they may be.
I note too, as I am already discussing Arab compliance in terrorism, that the Government of Egypt has co-sponsored the decision of the Organization of African Unity to bring thi
s matter before the Council. Let me remind the Council that the Government of Egypt released the cowardly assassins who shot Prime Minister Wasfi Tal of Jordan on the steps of the Sheraton Hotel in Cairo and then drank his blood. In 1970 the Government of Egypt released the terrorists from the Black September organization who had landed the hijacked Pan-American jumbo plane at Cairo airport and had blown it up at that airport.
I listened carefully to the long-drawn-out point of order made yesterday by the representative of Libya, and I must admit that I quite appreciate his concern—which he expressed again today. Who but the representative of Libya, a country which has been the paymaster and haven of international terrorism, would want to avoid a discussion in this Council on the evil: international terrorism? Libya’s role in supporting international terrorism financially, militarily and politically and its involvement in attempts at the assassination of foreign leaders, including Arab Heads of State, is known to all of us, and I need not repeat it here.
However, the motivation behind the timing of the point of order is quite clear in view of information revealed over the weekend by the President of Egypt. In an interview with the Egyptian newspaper Akhbar El Yom, as reported by the Middle East News Agency on 10 July, President Sadat, who only last week expelled the Libyan Ambassador for complicity in acts of terror, discussed publicly and on the record Libya’s criminal involvement in international terror.
It is apparent that Libya is the haven and refuge for the most wanted international terrorists, whose colleagues were among those who carried out the hijacking of an Air France plane to Uganda.
Indeed, while the deliberations in this Council were proceeding, forces financed and backed by Libya were actively continuing subversive operations in the Sudan against the Government of Sudan.
What further evidence is necessary to prove that Libya has forfeited its right to vote on this question and indeed is disqualified to be a member of the Security Council, a body charged with the duty to promote international peace and security?
In conclusion, may I express my appreciation to those representatives who have had the courage to take a stand clearly and unequivocally on the side of human decency and human freedom and against the scourge of international terror and those countries that support it, whether by commission or by omission.
The eloquent and moving statement by the representative of the United States of America, Mr. Scranton, and the call of all the other delegations that urged this body to take action, must evoke an echo throughout the world, regardless of political differences. I urge those countries that have already expressed their views on this issue at this table to join together to take action against hijackers and international terrorism.
I am sure that many will follow their lead. This series of meetings will decide in more ways than one whether the United Nations will continue its downward path in the grip of despots or will reassume its rightful role on behalf of humanity and international peace.
UGANDA. Mr. Abdalla: The allegations made by the Israeli delegation are not true. In the first place, on the question of complicity, the Israeli representative has referred to Mr. Cojot’s words, but Cojot is just one of the people who have said something on the Entebbe incident. On the other hand, some accounts have been given by other members of the crew which are favourable to my President. For example, the plane’s mechanical engineer and captain gave accounts that may be found in Le Monde.
As regards Mrs. Bloch, I have nothing to add to what I told the Council on Friday. As I said then, the Israeli invading forces took away with them all the hostages remaining at Entebbe, including Mrs. Bloch.
Let us not digress. We have come here to condemn the Israeli aggression and nothing else. On behalf of the Ugandan delegation I therefore totally rejecting all the allegations levelled against my country by the representative of Zionist Israel. Most of what he has said is nothing but a pack of lies.
This debate is dragging us nowhere but to a pack of lies and confusion, and, Mr. President, it is your responsibility to guide this Council so that we can arrive at a concrete condemnation of Israel.
Israel, of course, has the right to boast here of the killing of Ugandan officers and men and the destruction of property, and those so-called super-Powers try to cover up for Israel.
Perhaps it will not take a long time; it will, perhaps, be by the will of God. But those who say they are superpowers today will be buried.
We are not children, although we are small countries. We are not to be toyed with.
The representative of Israel condemns Uganda, all the African States and the third world for what they have done. Because we are small, we cannot fight the United States, the United Kingdom and Israel. We have no arms. We have nothing to bring them to their knees. But I am telling you that one day history will tell us.
TRANSCRIPT OF THREE TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN COLONEL BARUCH BAR-LEV AND PRESIDENT IDI AMIN
Wednesday, June 30, 2:00 p.m.
Bar-Lev: The president?
Amin: Who’s speaking?
Bar-Lev: Colonel Bar-Lev.
Amin: How are you, my friend?
Bar-Lev: How are you feeling, sir?
Amin: I’m very pleased to hear your voice today.
Bar-Lev: I’m speaking from my home. I heard what has happened. May I ask something of you?
Amin: I agree, because you are my good friend.
Bar-Lev: I know, sir . . . My friend, you have a great opportunity to go down in history as a great peacemaker. Many people abroad, in England, in America, in Europe, are writing bad things about you, and now you have an opportunity to show them that you are a great peacemaker, if you free those people, you’ll go down in history as a very great man and that will be against those who speak against you. I have been thinking about it all morning, since I heard about those things on the radio.
Amin: I have spoken satisfactorily with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. They have freed 47 of the hostages. Now they have 145 Israelis and Jews together, and other hostages, 250 altogether . . . I’ve just released 47 hostages and passed them to the French ambassador. It is important that you listen to Radio Uganda at 5:00 p.m.
Bar-Lev: What about the Israeli hostages?
Amin: The PFLP have now completely surrounded the remaining hostages . . . They say that if the government of Israel doesn’t give in to their demands, they’ll blow up the French plane and all the hostages, tomorrow at 12:00 noon Greenwich Mean Time. So I advise you, my friend, report to Rabin, General Rabin, the prime minister, I know him, he’s my friend, and to General Dayan, I know that he’s my friend even though he’s not in the government, that your government must do everything possible to free the hostages immediately, that’s the Palestinian demand.
I’m doing the best I can, I’m giving them mattresses, blankets, medical attention. There’s someone receiving medical care in hospital and on doctor’s advice will be flown to Paris, when the doctor approves. I want you to do everything possible. I’ve just spoken to the Israelis, and they’re very happy. What they said has been recorded on television. They asked me to pass this message to your government, immediately.
Bar-Lev: Mr. President, you are the ruler in your country. I think that you have the power to free these people. You will go down in history as a great man.
Amin: I want you to know that you’re my friend for all time . . . I told the American journalists that Colonel Bar-Lev is my friend. I shall be pleased to see you, because I know you well. I’m prepared to make peace between the Israelis and the Arabs. I want you to tell this to your government. Anything you want from me, tell me. Report to your government that they convey this declaration through the French, that I want to accept the Palestinians’ demands to save the lives of the Israelis.
Bar-Lev: Can you do something to stop them from killing?
Amin: I can do something if your government accepts their demands immediately . . . They’re calling me now. At 5:00 they’ll publish their final decision
, and so things must be settled quickly, before tomorrow at noon. If not, they’ll blow up the plane and kill all the hostages. Your government must do everything possible.
Bar-Lev: Mr. President. . . do you remember your mother, who said to you before she died that you should help the Israelis in the Holy Land? If you want to be a great and holy man, and to go down in history, and perhaps even receive the Nobel prize, you must free these people . . . It’s a great opportunity. It’s been given to you by God, to show everyone that you are great and good.
Amin: How are you, my friend, and your wife?
Bar-Lev: They are all fine. Do you want me to come to you?
Amin: I’ll be pleased to see you.
Bar-Lev: Can you stop them killing until I arrive?
Amin: Can you appeal to your government quickly, so that I can get an answer?
Bar-Lev: Very well, sir. I’ll call you back later.
Amin: You can call me whenever you like. I’m waiting . . . I’m speaking from the airport. I haven’t slept for three days. I want to save these people.
Wednesday, June 30, 11:05 p.m.
Bar-Lev: I’ve passed on your advice to the government through a friend. They said they accept your advice and will act on it, through the French government, as you proposed. Now I’m trying to find a way to visit you . . .
Amin: If you come, you’ll be at home . . . because you’re my good friend. No one will harm you.
Bar-Lev: I can trust in you and in God. No one else.
Amin: My daughter [son?] Sharon sends her [his?] regards.
Bar-Lev: Thank you, Your Excellency. Until I find a way of coming to visit you, can you take every possible step to make sure that nothing happens to the hostages?
Amin: . . . Now I’m with the leader of the PFLP. He’s only just arrived. The man I negotiated with previously was their number two. Now the right man has arrived. Forty minutes ago he told me that he won’t change his decision, if he doesn’t receive a reply by tomorrow at 10:00 a.m., Uganda time . . .
90 Minutes at Entebbe Page 23