Israeli officials cautioned today that this morning’s Security Council resolution deploring Israel’s retaliatory raids into Lebanon last week was only an “interim resolution” and that further Council meetings will be held on the matter.
The Israeli officials stressed, however, that the resolution–also calling for Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon “forthwith”–applied only to this weekend’s incidents, not to any future occasions when Israel might decide to retaliate in “self-defense” against terrorist attacks. The Council resolution was milder than one pressed by the Soviet Union, China and others, to “condemn” Israel for its action, and others urging sanctions against Israel.
The Israelis do not criticize the United States for voting for the measure that passed by 15-0, noting that the US had tried to put through a preamble deploring “all actions which have resulted in the loss of innocent lives”; it won eight votes, one short of the requirement for adoption. (In Washington, State Department spokesman Charles Bray called the resolution “a proper one.”)
LEBANON TRANSGRESSED CEASE-FIRE
The Council resolution demanded, in full, that Israel “immediately desist and refrain from any ground and air military action against Lebanon and forthwith withdraw all its military forces from Lebanese territory.” US Ambassador George Bush expressed “distress” at the actions of both the Lebanese “guerrilla infiltrators” and the Israeli soldiers, and called on Lebanon to take more effective measures to end terrorist attacks on Israel so that the recurring cycle of attack and retaliation can be ended.
Bush urged both parties to rely on the UN in future such incidents and not on armed force. He then introduced his middle-road preamble, gaining the support of Argentina, Belgium, Britain, France, Italy, Japan, and Panama, one short of the minimum. China, Guinea, the Sudan and Yugoslavia voted against, and India, Somalia and the Soviet Union abstained. Soviet Ambassador Yakob A. Malik added, however, that Israeli Ambassador Jacob Doron’s reference to Lebanese “bandits” was an example of “Himmler’s terminology.”
In the debate preceding the votes, Doron charged that the Lebanese government was transgressing the cease-fire by permitting “terror organizations” to commit “murder and sabotage” against Israel from Lebanese soil. Malik defended the Palestinians’ incursions as necessary in the battle against Israeli “aggression.” Jamil M. Baroody of Saudi Arabia called on the US to stop sending “diabolical weapons” to Israel, asserting: “Somebody must stop Israel or it will push the world into a holocaust.”
France’s Ambassador Jacques Kosciusko-Morizet said Lebanon has been trying to control the terrorists and was in this case the victim of Israeli military action. Britain’s envoy, Kenneth D. Jamieson, criticized both the fedayeen’s “murder or terrorism” and the Israeli reprisals. China’s Huang Hua said he was “deeply indignant” at Israel’s action.
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.
