Castigated by every one of the eleven members of the United Nations Security Council for the use of force against Syrian troops in the Lake Tiberias region last December 11, Israel replied today with a challenge to the world body to abandon its practice of “accepting Arab belligerency with indulgence and of insisting that Israel should never hit back.”
Israel’s plea to the Council for understanding and sympathy instead of condemnation followed British submission of an amendment to the tripartite draft resolution condemning Israel, the effect of which was to remove all onus from Syria for provoking the incident. The amendment, as submitted by Sir Pierson Dixon, softened the draft resolution’s reference to Syrian interference with Israel’s rights on Lake Tiberias by holding that “this interference in no way justifies the Israeli action.”
Abba S. Eban, head of the Israel delegation, presented the Israel viewpoint after Ahmed Shukairy of Syria renewed his demand for expulsion of Israel from the United Nations and the imposition of sections. Shukairy, who paid glowing tribute to the Soviet Union, called on all members of the United Nations to withhold economic aid from Israel and proposed that the Security Council appoint a special committee to study the problem of compensation. The Council adjourned until tomorrow afternoon and it was understood that efforts would be made in the interim to secure agreement of the Soviet Union and Syria to the tripartite draft resolution as amended today.
Mr. Eban, making no denials with regard to the Lake Tiberias incident, told the Council that his government had the choice of resisting the aggressive threat openly maintained by Syria or abandoning its sovereignty and rights. He reminded the Council that “the United Nations has not been able to offer Israel the minimal daily security enjoyed by everyone of its other 75 members in nearly every sector of their national lives.”
“We know,” he added, “that Israel is most popular when she does not hit back, and world opinion is profoundly important to us. A practice has grown up of accepting Arab belligerency with indulgence and of insisting only that Israel should never hit back. It is our apprehension that more influence is used to prevent Israel’s reactions than is exercised to prevent the provocations that give rise to them.” He added that Israel felt entitled to receive from the Council “a greater volume of understanding than we have received.”
Mr. Eban rejected proposals that Israel offer compensation, pointing out that in the absence of compensation to Israel victims of Arab attacks, such reparations would be an “affront.” The tripartite resolution, he declared, contained expressions of condemnation and warnings “wholly disproportionate to the actions to which they refer.” The Soviet resolution, he noted, did not even “make any claim to objectivity.”
JTA has documented Jewish history in real-time for over a century. Keep our journalism strong by joining us in supporting independent, award-winning reporting.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
