12 Nations Condemn Israel’s Occupied Territory Policy; Wj Congress Stopped from Talking

The United Nations Commission on Human Rights adopted a resolution today condemning Israel for alleged human rights violations in the occupied territories, although less than 40 percent of the 32-nation membership voted for it. The resolution was backed by 12 nations, including the Arab and Communist countries, India, Iran, Turkey and Mauritania. Israel and two African members–Tanzania and Senegal–refused to vote. The members representing Western (including the United States), Latin American and African countries-abstained. Before the vote by the Commission was taken the representative of the World Jewish Congress, which has consultative status with the UN’s Economic and Social Council, was stopped by the UAR delegate when he tried to present to the Commission evidence relating to the character of Israel’s administration of the territories occupied after the Six-Day War. Max Melamet said his organization had not hesitated to be critical of certain actions of the Israel Government but unlike some of the critics on the Commission had not focused exclusively on possible crimes or isolated excesses but had endeavored to see the picture in its entirety.

Mr. Melamet said the Israeli occupation had to be judged by comparison with other occupations and not by the criteria of peace time. He referred to the fact that in spite of the sense of outrage caused by the nature of some of the terrorist bombings, the death sentence had not been imposed in a single case. He said that not only had material benefits been brought to the Arabs in the occupied territories, but they also enjoyed freedom of expression. He cited the example of Al Kuds, an Arabic paper published in Jerusalem which had a wide circulation and which was very critical of the Israeli Government. It was at this point that the UAR delegate said that a non-governmental organization had no right to speak on the nature of Israel’s occupation but should confine itself to the subject of violation of human rights in the occupied territories. Morocco supported the UAR and said that the World Jewish Congress was defending Israel which was represented by its own delegation.

Mr. Melamet replied that if he were not to be permitted to present evidence he had collected which he though was relevant and of interest to the Commission to show that all wrong was not on one side and all right on the other, he would abide by the opinion of the Commission. He concluded by saying that his organization was “convinced that sooner or later, and we earnestly hope it will be sooner rather than later, Jews and Arabs in the Middle East will have to accept that the history that joined their destinies demands that reciprocal destruction must yield to reciprocal recognition and peaceful cooperation…we do not believe that the cause of peace is advanced by addressing oneself to the vexed problem of the Middle East as if the Arab states were completely without responsibility for the strife in that area and it were only from Israel that conciliation and accommodation must come.”