Israelis Say Afro-asian Resolution Could Wreck Peace Initiative, Peace Talks

A spokesman for the Israeli delegation to the United Nations reacted sternly today to the Afro-Asian-Yugoslavian draft resolution submitted to the General Assembly today. The spokesman termed the draft “the kind of thing that could wreck the United States’ peace initiative and the United Nations’ peacemaking efforts.” The draft resolution condemns as “inadmissible” the occupation of territories by force and calls for “full respect for the inalienable rights” of the Palestinians. It also urges the “speedy implementation” of Security Council Resolution 242 and expresses “full support” for the Gunnar V. Jarring peace mission. The draft also calls on the Israelis and Arabs to resume their negotiations with Dr. Jarring “at the earliest possible date” in order to enable the Mideast peace envoy “to carry out at the earliest possible date his mandate for the implementation of the Security Council resolution in all its parts.” Finally, the draft requests Secretary General U Thant to report within two months on peace progress and recommends that the Security Council take any “necessary” steps to implement its resolution. The Israeli delegation spokesman stated that the objection to the draft was two-fold: there is excessive emphasis on occupied territories and Dr. Jarring’s mandate is limited to mediating peace between the parties and has no authority to implement the Council resolution in all its parts.

The spokesman also noted that, “The character of the resolution is clearly demonstrated by such of its sponsors as Afghanistan, Somalia and Pakistan, which openly denied Israel’s right for independence.” The resolution, which was prepared at Egypt’s instigation, is backed by most Arab nations. Algeria and a few others want stronger language. Meanwhile, Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban’s speech to the Assembly yesterday. In which he declared that illegally placed Egyptian missiles were “the sole obstacle” to resumption of the peace talks, was condemned by the Arab-Soviet bloc. The Saudi Arabian ambassador, Jamil M. Baroody, charged that Israel’s admission to the UN resulted from pressure beyond the bounds of the Charter. Israel, he said, was thus a colonial intruder. He castigated Zionism and what he called its grip on such American politicians as Gov. Nelson A. Rockefeller, Mayor John V. Lindsay, and Arthur J. Goldberg. The Arabs’ experience with Zionism, he averred, has been too painful for them to believe any of Mr. Eban’s talks about friendship. Dr. Gunnar V, Jarring, the UN peace negotiator, should talks with the Palestinians, not with the Israeli aggressors.” Mr. Baroody declared.

Abdullah el Erian of Egypt called Israel’s violation allegations the “height of duplicity” since Israel has condemned the Security Council. Ambassador Hamilton Shirley Amerasinghe of Ceylon, which recently severed diplomatic relations with Israel, charged that the Jewish State had been created “in expiation of the crimes of a monster, but at the expense of the guiltless Palestinians.” In not acting promptly on Israel’s “three-year record of effrontery towards the United Nations and the rule of law,” he continued, the Assembly was standing, “somewhat nonchalantly, it would seem, on the brink of a crisis.” G.G. Shevel, Foreign Minister of the Ukraine, endorsed the thrust of the Afro-Asian resolution and condemned American aid to Israel. He said Israel has evinced a “chauvinist madness.” Mohan Dharid of India said there was insufficient cause for any party’s withdrawal from the Jarring talks. Ambassador Augusto Legnani of Uruguay took a middle-of-the-road position, reaffirming support for Security Council Resolution 242 of Nov. 22, 1967.