U.N. Vote Calls for International Mideast Talks : General Assembly Also Proposes Israeli Withdrawal From Occupied Lands

The U.N. General Assembly voted overwhelmingly here Thursday to call for an international conference on the Middle East, for an Israeli withdrawal from occupied Arab territories and for those territories to be placed under U.N. supervision.

The latter two proposals are unlikely to be implemented, but U.N. Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar said the call for a peace conference created “much more favorable” conditions for an international gathering to deal with the decades-old problems of the Middle East.

All three proposals were embodied in a resolution that came at the end of a three-day General Assembly session moved here from New York when the U.S. government refused to grant an entry visa to Yasser Arafat, chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization.

Arafat addressed the full General Assembly on Tuesday, and Wednesday he read a statement at a press conference that prompted Secretary of State George P. Shultz to lift the longstanding U.S. boycott and establish diplomatic contacts with the PLO.

A second U.N. resolution was also passed here Thursday evening by a huge majority, acknowledging, although not necessarily accepting, the proclamation of a “state of Palestine” made in Algiers last month by the Palestine National Council, the PLO’s lawmaking body.

The second resolution stated that Palestinians should “exercise their sovereignty” over the territory occupied by Israel during the 1967 Middle East War.

That resolution was also opposed only by the United States and Israel on a 104-2 vote. Thirty-six countries abstained, most of them European.

The reason for the abstentions, diplomats here said, was that some delegates considered the resolution flawed because it took note of the existence of a Palestinian state even before its borders have been set.

Calls for U.N. Supervision

The resolution calling for an international conference on the Middle East also proposed that the Israeli-occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip be placed under temporary U.N. supervision. That measure could be enforced only by a unanimous vote of the U.N. Security Council, and the United States would be sure to cast a veto if it came to a vote there.

The peace conference resolution focused attention on a statement made earlier here by a senior Soviet official, who called for immediate preparations for a Middle East peace conference and said his government would start normalizing relations with Israel as soon as conference preparations begin.

“There is a unique chance today to start a political settlement in the Middle East, and this chance should not be lost,” Deputy Foreign Minister Vladimir F. Petrovsky said in a statement.

The Soviet Union broke off diplomatic relations with Israel during the 1967 Middle East War, but consular contacts have recently resumed.

If the Soviets should restore full ties with Israel after Washington’s decision to talk to the PLO, both superpowers would be in contact with all parties to the Mideast conflict for the first time.

The Soviet proposal, which was viewed by most delegates here as moderate and positive, said an international gathering “represents the only realistic and reliable way to a comprehensive and just settlement which will enable the Palestinian people to regain its homeland, and the people of Israel together with Arab peoples will have durable peace and security at last.”

The Soviet plan, endorsed by Arafat, praised the “growing international authority” of the United Nations and said a U.N.-supervised conference would be the “most effective and reliable mechanism for resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict.”

The United States, along with Israel, has in general not been in favor of an international conference, partly because such talks could provide a way for the Soviet Union to play a stronger role in the Middle East. In explaining America’s objections to the two key Middle East resolutions passed here Thursday, Joseph C. Petrone, the U.S. ambassador to the Geneva talks, said they were “unhelpful and inconsistent with the search for peace.”

Explains U.S. Stand

Petrone said the United States would support a “properly structured international conference.” But he said it must be one “designed to facilitate negotiations between the parties concerned, not a conference with the authority to impose a prescribed solution.”

The U.S. delegation in Geneva has been sensitive about criticism from friends, as well as ideological foes, for consistently supporting the Israeli position on resolutionsdealing with the Palestinians.

And the Americans did vote against another resolution Thursday, one to change the title of the Palestinian observer delegation at the United Nations from “PLO” to simply “Palestine.” The resolution was passed, again with only Israel siding with the United States, and will not require Security Council approval to go into effect.

Washington’s reason for opposing the measure, Ambassador Petrone said, was that the new formulation is “vague.”

“We cannot support attempts to lend even a degree of purported legitimacy to the self-proclaimed Palestinian state,” he said.

“The United States, like the large majority of members of the General Assembly, does not recognize this state.

“As Secretary Shultz reaffirmed yesterday, our decision to engage in a substantive dialogue with the PLO should not be taken to imply acceptance or recognition by the United States of an independent Palestinian state,” he said.