Mu’ammar-al Qadhafi’s Address to the General Assembly

This speech has been edited for grammar and spelling. Its messages and implications have not been distorted in any way.

In the name of God. Ladies and gentlemen, members of the General Assembly of the United Nations:

I greet you on behalf of the African Union, and I pray that this will be a historic convene in the life of the world.

On behalf of the General Assembly of the United Nations, chaired by Libya, on behalf of the African Union, on behalf of the traditional African Kingdom, and for you all. I congratulate our son the president, “Obama,” who for the first time attended our General Meeting as President of the United States, and I commend him because he is the host country.

1. This convention comes at the climax of several challenges that face us all; the world should unite and make serious efforts to overcome these challenges that constitute the common enemy. Climate change, the financial crisis, the collapse of the capitalist economy, food and water crisis, desertification, terrorism, immigration, the spread of diseases created by man and others; some of these viruses are manufactured as weapons and are beyond our control. Perhaps swine flu is one of these viruses that was not controlled and is produced in laboratories as a war weapon. The horrible nuclear spread, in addition to other form of terrorism, the spread of hypocrisy, fear and atheism leads to moral deterioration and material dominance. All this constitutes a common enemy to all of us.

2. Gentlemen: You know that the United Nations started first with three or four nations united against Germany. This is the United Nations and not the UN Organization.

The UN Organization of today is something else. But the ‘United Nations’ is [made up of] the countries that united against Germany in the Second World War and these countries formed a Council – [and] called it [the] Security Council – and they gave themselves permanent seats and the veto.

We were not present; it was tailored by the United Nations and we were asked to wear this dress, which was tailored by these three or four nations which united against Germany.

This is the truth and this is the base of this international organization.

The happened in the absence of 165 [nations] present today. That means the ratio is 1:8 – 1 nation present and 8 absent. They are the ones who made the UN Charter, which is here with me. Its preamble is one thing and its articles are another.

How did that happen?

Those who were present in San Francisco in 1945 participated in making the preamble and they left other articles, including rules of the so-called Security Council to experts, technicians and politicians of the countries interested in this subject.

The preamble is very tempting and there is no objection [to] it, but everything that came afterward contradicts it. And this what we are facing now, we protest against it and reject it. It is outdated and belongs to the period of World War II.

3. The preamble says that nations big and small are equal.

Are we equal regarding the permanent seats? Not at all. The preamble says that [countries in the] United Nations big and small are equal in [the] rights [given to them]. Are we equal regarding the veto right?

According to the preamble, all nations, big and small are equal in rights. This is what we approved. Therefore, the veto is against the Charter and so are the permanent seats. This we cannot recognize or accept.

The Charter states in its preamble “We are committed not to use armed force in other than the common interest.” This we rejoiced and signed and joined the United Nations in accordance with that.

But, 65 wars took place after the establishment of the United Nations and the Security Council in its current form and after this commitment millions were victims more than the World War.

Are all these aggressions and wars for [the] common interest? Not at all. That was in the interest of one particular nation or maybe two or three.

This is in clear and open contradiction with the Charter’s preamble that we accepted and the joined the organization accordingly.

If the matter does not comply with the preamble that we approved, then even our presence in this organization is no longer valid as of now.

4. We do not flatter nor make diplomatic statements. We are not scared nor can we compromise when it comes to the destiny of the world.

We now talk about the destiny of the world. The destiny of the planet and the human race. When it comes to these crucial issues there can be no flattering, procrastination or hypocrisy because that led to 65 wars after establishment of the United Nations.

The preamble says if force is used there should be a United Nations force – a common force – a UN war staff not [of] just one country or two or three. The United Nations together should decide whether to use force to keep world peace.

If aggression occurred against one country after 1945 when the organisation was set up, the UN will come to its defence and repel the aggression. If Libya aggressed on France for example, the UN will repel the aggression because France is a sovereign country.

We are committed to defending the sovereignty of nations in a collective fashion, but that did not prevent the outbreak of 65 wars of aggression with the UN doing nothing to curb them; including eight major wars that claimed the lives of millions of people, perpetrated by a veto-holding member of the Security Council.

The states that we thought would rebel against aggression [and] protect [our] peoples, turned out to [be] the ones that used aggressive force, while enjoying the veto.

5. There is nothing in this Charter that allows the United Nations to interfere in [the] internal sovereignty of another country.

In other words, [a] ruling system is [an] internal affair; no one else has the right to interfere in it and it is the responsibility of the concerned society to have dictatorial, democratic, socialist, capitalist, reactionary or progressive system. It is an internal affair.

Once Rome voted for Julius Caesar to be a dictator and the Senate gave him the authority to be [a] dictator because they thought that dictatorship was useful to Rome then. This is an internal affair. Who can say to Rome, why did you do that? Why did you make Caesar a dictator[ial] ruler?

6. The preamble is what we have agreed upon, but the veto that came afterwards is not mentioned in the Charter.

If they told us there is a veto right, we would not have joined the UN. We joined the UN because we are equal in rights.

But when one country has the veto over all our resolutions and enjoys a permanent seat – Who gave it that permanent seat? – These four nations gave themselves the permanent seat.

The only nation that we voted for in this assembly to have a permanent seat is China. We gave our votes to China to become a permanent member of the Security Council. It is the only country with democratic presence, but the presence of the other four seats is undemocratic; rather it is dictatorial and imposed on us, so we do not recognize that and it does not apply to us.

7. Reforming the United Nations is not [done] by increasing the number of seats at the Security Council, because that would just add insult to injury since there will be countries who would be joined to the others and would further tip the balance.

Therefore we object to increasing the number of seats. The solution is not increasing the seats – this will run against the interests of the Third World countries the “Forum of Small States” or “G 100″.

These will be trampled on by fresh major powers joining the old list. This is unacceptable.

8. Moreover, opening the door to increase seats in the Security Council will create more injustice and high tension worldwide.

It will intensify competition for seats in the SC and we are going to enter in a competition with very important group of nations.

There is going to be a contest between Italy, Germany, Indonesia, India, Pakistan, the Philippines, Japan, Brazil, Argentina, Nigeria, Algeria, Libya, Egypt, Congo, South Africa, Tanzania, Turkey, Iran, Greece and the Ukraine.

All these countries will demand to have seat in the Security Council. In this case competition is to continue till members of the Security Council will be equal to those in this Assembly, which is impractical.

So, what is the solution? Now, the solution put forth before the GA presided over by “Ali Treki” and where a decision is to be taken by voting, and the abiding resolution is that of the majority of the GA without regard to any other side. The solution is to close the door for membership and for increasing the number of seats in the Security Council.

This is to be introduced to the General Assembly, the Secretary General. And that will be replaced by membership to achieve democracy through equality between member states and to transfer the powers of the Security Council to the General Assembly.

9. Membership is for unions not countries because if it was made available for all countries, every country would have wished to get a seat in the council and this is its right according to the preamble, so who would claim the right to deny these countries their rights?

Who can deny Italy the right to claim this right? It would say, “I pulled from the Axis and joined the allies unlike Germany which was the aggressor.” Not today’s Germany, the Nazi Germany.

If we give India a seat, which we say it deserves, Pakistan will protest. It is a country with nuclear weapons and they are in a state of war. This is serious.

If Japan was offered a seat why not Indonesia, the largest Muslim state?

What about Turkey, Iran, Ukraine, Brazil, Argentina, and Libya which renounced its WMD programs, it too deserves a seat at the Security Council.

Then comes Egypt, Nigeria, Algeria, Congo, South Africa, and Tanzania, all these are important countries.

This door should be shut – extension of the Security Council is a hoax. How can we reform the United Nations and then bring in other major countries to join the other major powers from which we suffer?

10. The solution is to achieve democracy on the level of the Congress of the World – the General Assembly. Whereby the Security Council becomes the instrument of execution of the General Assembly’s resolutions.

The General Assembly is the Parliament of the World; the Congress of the World; the legislative body; the democracy and the Security Council should be from now on subjected to it.

This is the legislative authority – and these are the lawmakers of the General Assembly. They wrote that the General Assembly do so and so on the basis of the General Assembly. But the proper thing is to the contrary. The Security Council do so, and so in accordance with the recommendations of the General Assembly.

There are 190 nations that the United Nations is made of, versus 10 persons in the adjacent hall. What kind of democracy is this? How can we be sure of the world peace if our destiny lies in the hands of ten members who are under the control of four or one country?

We are here like Hyde Park – you [are] made to act like a decor. You have no value; it is like talking in the Hyde Park you talk and go.

11. The Security Council should merely be an executive body to carry out the resolutions of the UN General Assembly, and when the Security Council becomes a mere executive body, there will be no competition for the Council seats.

The Security Council should be represented by all nations, and not by a few nations. What is presented now to the General Assembly is a permanent seat for every space, every union:

  • A permanent seat in the Security Council for the 27 EU countries.
  • A permanent seat for the 53 AU countries.
  • A permanent seat for [a] Latin America Union.
  • A permanent seat for ASEAN (10+2+3+4).
  • The Russian federation already has a seat in the Security Council.
    The American Union, [whose] 50 states – United States of America – already has a permanent seat.
  • A permanent seat for SARC, if established.
  • We have the G100, we’re thinking about it, perhaps the small nations – [a] ‘Forum for Small States’. ‘FSS’ could also have a permanent seat.

And there are other nations out of the unions I have mentioned, a permanent seat could be given alternatively every six months or every year.

Perhaps Japan, Australia or New Zealand are not in a union; none of these countries has joined ASEAN. They are not in the Russian Federation, nor the African Union, not the European Union, nor the Latin American, nor the United States; a seat should be allocated.

12. This is what’s presented to you – to the General Assembly for voting. This is the decisive essential issue, presented to the General Assembly, the master of the world. The world’s Parliament – it is the world’s Congress, no one opposes it and we will not recognize anyone outside the hall. We’re the United Nations.

Ali Treki and Ban Ki-moon will make the administrative and legal drafts, form committees that will vote on this issue. The Security Council, from now on, will be formed by unions.

This is justice and democracy and we’re finished with the Security Council, which is occupied by certain nation. One possesses [the] atomic bomb, another possesses economic power, another possesses technology, and another possesses technique. This is terrorism.

We cannot live in a Security Council dominated by those with overwhelming powers. This is terrorism. This [depends on whether] you want a world that lives united and secure and peaceful; [or] if you want to us to live in terrorism, live in conflict. Let us continue [without] conflict until judgment day.

All of these seats should have veto, or there should be no veto.

The Security Council in form should either all the union seats have a veto or annul veto from the Security Council with its new form.

This is the genuine Security Council.

In any case, the Security Council with its new form is presented for vote; it is an executive instrument for the General Assembly.

13. Sovereignty is for nations, for [the] 190 [plus] nations that are represented. This is how all nations should be equal in the Security Council, just as in the General Assembly.
We in the General Assembly have equal votes; we should also be equal in the adjacent room, the Security Council.

But for a nation to have veto power, and another does not; a nation to have a permanent seat and another that does not; this is annulled as of now, we absolutely do not recognize this and we will not be subject to any resolution passed by the Security Council with its current form.

Now, we’ve come. We’re colonized, we’re under trusteeship, now we have gained independence and united, we want to determine the world’s destiny in a democratic way that preserves peace and security for all peoples equally, small and powerful.

Terrorism is not only the terrorism of Al-Qaeda, the status quo is terrorism.

Recourse is only to the majority of votes in the General Assembly and not to any other side; and if the General Assembly votes this, it [will come] into force. No one can oppose this or say he is above the General Assembly, and any who says he is above it can leave the United Nations.

Democracy is neither for the powerful, nor the rich nor those who terrorize us.

The last word is for all nations equally.

As for now, the Security Council is a feudal security, a feudal policy for permanent members. It protects them and they use it against us; hence, it should not be called the Security Council rather the Terror Council.

14. Brothers, you can in [see what] our political life [is]. When they want to use the Security Council against us they resort to it; and if they do not need to use it against us, they ignore it.

And if they have [an] interest [to use the Charter against us], they respect and sanctify it. They search for the 7th Chapter to apply it against these nations.

And if they want to carry out an act in violation of the Charter they would ignore it as if it did not exist.

It is unjust and terrorism that veto and permanent seat are for the powerful, we can neither take this nor can we live under it.

Powerful nations have saturated interests in the world, and they use veto, they use the force of the UN to protect their interests. This is terrorizing the Third World, the Third World is now terrorized; they are living under terrorism.

The Security Council was established in 1945 and until now it didn’t provide security for us, rather [it] provided punishments and terror. It is only used against us, therefore, we are not obliged to obey Security Council resolutions as from the fortieth speech.

65 wars were waged since the establishment of the Security Council, against small nations; or fighting against each other; or an aggression by [a] superpower against a small nation.

15. The General Assembly will vote on these historic solutions and afterwards we could either continue together or be divided in two: equal nations that have their own assembly and Security Council, and veto-wielding powers remain in their council of four, five or three, as they want.

We’re not with them, they should apply [the] veto against each other. This does not concern us, and remain permanently in these seats, this does not concern us, God is permanent.

As of now, we cannot remain under the dominance of the veto-wielding powers, which they gave themselves.

We did not give them this, we would be fools to give veto and permanent seats to a group of nations, and discredit other nations and consider them inferior and despicable, and say they do neither deserve permanent seats nor veto power.

Why do we degrade nations? We did not decide this, certain nations are sanctified and respected. These are the nations of the world.

You realize that now there is a disregard of Security Council resolutions after we were assured that it is only used against us and never used against superpowers.

The Security Council could never be use against veto-wielding powers. There could never be a resolution against the superpowers.

Hence, it’s created against us, and consequently, [the] resolutions it passes are being laughed at and ignored.

This has become a farce for the United Nations, now actions are being taken outside the UN: aggression; wars; invasion of sovereign nations; destroying their sovereignty and independence; committing war crimes; collective extermination and violation of the Charter; and the Security Council.

16. The important thing is that every international group started to form a Security Council of its own to tackle its problems and issues. Henceforth, the Security Council in its present form, attending this session gradually becomes isolated.

  • African Union formed ” MAS ” which is African Peace and Security Council.
  • European Union will form a Security Council.
  • ASEAN will do so to and so is Latin America. Non-Alignment Movement’s 120 countries are considering this option.

This indicates that we have lost confidence in the current Security Council since it did not provide us with security and, in turn, we resorted to regional councils. There is no obligation on our part to obey the SC in its current form in which we are not partners. It is [an] undemocratic construction, and oppressive dictatorship and no one can force us to stay in this Council or obey its orders.

17. The United Nations has no standing or any value, nor any affect in the life and the peace of the world.

The International Court of Justice has its decisions implemented on small countries and on Third World countries but not on the powerful. In front of me are the decisions of the court that other countries refused to implement.

The International Atomic Energy Agency is an important UN body but the major powers are not answerable to it. It is merely made for us. If it is international as you say it should inspect the atomic stock of the nuclear countries.

Ali al Treki in the General Assembly will question the Director of the agency and question al Braedei to see if they looking into the stockpiles of these countries.

If they say yes, these countries are subject to inspection. So we will be subject to inspection. But if not, we will slam the door shut in its face.

18. For your information, gentlemen, I called al-Baradie during the Libyan nuclear bomb crisis and I asked him, “Are the agreements on reducing weapons of mass destruction agreed upon by the nuclear powers, under your supervision? And did they really abide by the reduction and are you aware of any violations regarding this matter?” His answer was “Not at all.” He told me that he cannot ask the big powers on this subject.

Therefore, you only came to us, get out.

This is not an international agency. It is imposed only on us. The Security Council is imposed on us, so is the international Court of Justice. This is not United Nations. This is not fair. This is not a security. This is unacceptable.

19. Regarding Africa – as of now [it] needs a permanent seat in the SC with full authorities as a compensation for the past, even if UN reform is not under consideration. Africa [was] colonised and [is] isolated and wronged; they regard it as animals. [It was] used for [the] slavery trade, [and then colonised.]

The African Union deserves a permanent seat, as compensation for the past (exactly like China) and this right is not related to UN reform.

This is on the table and has the priority, it is immediately referred to the GA and no one can sway that Africa. The African Union deserves a permanent seat.

[If] anyone has an argument let him give me an answer and discuss that with me. Who has evidence to prove that the African continent does not deserve a permanent seat?
No one can give an answer.

20. It is proposed to the General Assembly to vote for the compensation of the countries that were colonised, in order that colonisation is not repeated; and in order not to repeat the robbery of the wealth of nations and not to repeat the immigration of these countries to the nations that robbed their wealth.

Why do Africans go to Europe and why do Asians and Latin Americans go to Europe? It is because Europe colonised Africa, Asia and Latin America. It took the gold, silver, copper, diamonds, iron, uranium and all other valuable minerals as well as oil, vegetables, foods, livestock and human beings.

We have a new African generation and a new Asian and Latin American generation. They are after this stolen wealth and they have the right and we are incapable of stopping them.
When I stop a thousand Africans going to Europe on the Libyan borders they say, “I am going after the stolen wealth. If you return it I will remain.”

Who will return it to them? There has to be a resolution to return this wealth to stop immigration. You have to return the stolen wealth.

21. Africa deserves compensation to the tune of $777 trillion from the colonisers and Africa will demand that. And if these trillions are not returned, the Africans will keep going to where you have invested these trillions and they have the right to go after it. You return it to them and they will stop.

There is no Libyan immigration to Italy, which is the closest country to Libya. That is because Italy decided to compensate the Libyan people for colonisation and apologised and signed a treaty with Libya, ratified by the Libyan and Italian people to turn the page of the past. Italy acknowledged that colonisation is wrong, a failed programme and it will not return. Italy will not allow any aggression against Libya by sea, air or land from Italy or from any other place. Italy is compensating Libya for twenty years of colonisation.

It is paying a quarter of a billion annually. It is building hospitals for those children whose limbs were dismembered through the mines planted by the Italians during the two World Wars. Italy apologised and expressed regret for the colonisation. Italy has done the glorious thing. This is a historic action. It is a civilised action by Berlusconi and has to be an example.

The Third World is claiming its right in compensation in order that colonisation is never repeated. In order that colonisation is not repeated it has to be held accountable, penalised and compensation must be paid.

22. The second point, which I hope to face patiently, is rather sensitive. Undoubtedly, we the real Africans are happy and proud that one of Africa’s sons has become president of the USA. This is an historic event at a time when blacks were not admitted to the same cafes, restaurants or buses as whites. Now the American people have voted enthusiastically for Obama, the African-Kenyan black youth. This is something great which we are proud of. We consider it the beginning of the change.

I consider Obama as a beacon in the darkness for about four or eight years but I am afraid things will come to the old habit because nobody guarantees anything after Obama. Nobody guarantees it, not the chairman, nor Ban ki-Moon. We are satisfied at present and wish Obama to be [the] President permanently.

23. He is totally different from any American president. Americans in the past used to say, “We will send you cast bullets and the mother of all bombs.” This seems to be the grandmother of all bombs. “We will send you clusters of grapes, our summer rainfall, the desert storm, rolling thunder and we will send you the poisonous rose for Libya’s children in 1986.”

That was the logic when an American president spoke from this forum. That was the way they spoke and terrorised the world. They said, “We will send you all these things as was sent to Vietnam, and as was sent to Iraq, and as was sent to Egypt in 1956, and we will send you the poisonous rose ‘El Dorado’ which was sent by Reagan to the children of Libya in 1986.”
Imagine the president of the largest country has a permanent seat in the Security Council. We expect it to protect our independence, and defend us from aggression [instead of] saying, “I decided to send the poisonous rose to the Libyan children and anyone who smells it dies.”

What is the poisonous rose? It is the laser bomb, airborne by F111. That was the logic at the time. They used to say we will lead the world and we will take on anyone who differs with us, whether you like it or not.

24. Our son Obama is totally different from the past. He calls for abandoning nuclear weapons and this is something we applaud. He says America could not solve the problems of the world unilaterally and the world has to solve its problems.

He said the present situation should not go on. We should not come to meet, speak and then go away and we agreed to that. He said that the United Nations was always a forum for disputes. We used to meet to attack each other. This is right and it has to end. We have to unite and agree on international institutions where we are all equal and happy.

He says democracy could not be imposed from abroad, whereas the former American President used to say we have to impose democracy on Iraq and on others.

This is an internal affair. It is for the state to be democratic or not. Each state has its own culture and heritage. This is correct but this language was not there. Accordingly we have to be quite alert to this sensitive point. The world has to consider phrase ‘multi polar world’.

There shouldn’t be a multi polar world. There should be equal nations. No one agrees to a world of multiple poles. Why shouldn’t we become equal nations without any poles? Are we required to have a patriarch? Do we need idols? We don’t need a multi-polar world. This means the poles will clash and we reject it. We want a world where all nations, large and small are equal without any pole.

25. The sensitive point is the seat of the UN. This headquarters. You have all come from overseas and beyond the oceans and from beyond the continents in order to get to this place. Why? Is this Al Quds? Is it the Vatican? Is it Mecca? You are all tired and sleepy and your timing has changed and you are physically exhausted. Some of you travelled for 20 hours.

How can you deliver speeches and tackle the future of the world? You are all sleepy and it is clear you are all tired. Your countries are now asleep because it is midnight but you awake and you should have been in bed because this is your [body clock].

Today I woke up at 4am New York time because in Libya this is 11am. And this very late in Libya. But I am awake from 4am. Why should we have such trouble? If this is the situation in 1945 then it shouldn’t go on at present. You have to think in a middle place that is more comfortable. This is the first point.

26. The other good point is that the host country shoulders the cost of securing the United Nations headquarters and securing the permanent missions, and securing scores of presidents who come to this place every year. This requires strict security and high costs; New York and America live in tension.

I want to alleviate this burden. You have to alleviate the burden from America;…we want New York to be quiet and America to be quiet, and not to shoulder any more responsibility for scores of presidents coming to this place.

Suppose a presidential plane is bombed or a presidential car is bombed. Terrorists could do it.

For your information Al Qaeda targets this headquarters. Yes, this headquarters is targeted and we wonder why it was not struck in 9/11. It could be involuntary. We have scores of Al Qaeda members detained in our prisons and their confessions are highly worrying.

This makes America live nervously because this building may be attacked one day by a hijacked plane or a rocket and scores of presidents may die. We want to rid America of this worry. We should thank America, and say, “we want to help you and confer the headquarters to another place that is not targeted.”

27. This headquarters is supposed to be transferred after 50 years to the other part of the globe. Fifty years in the western hemisphere is enough. The next 50 years should be in the other hemisphere and this could rotate every 50 years to the east, to the west and to the centre.

The headquarters has been here for 64 years. That is 14 years more than the presumed term for the transfer of the seat.

Of course this [does] not undermine America. In fact this is a service to America. It is help for America and we thank America, but the situation of 1945 should not be maintained. We do not accept that.

This is proposed for a vote in the General Assembly. Only in the General Assembly because Article 23 of the agreement of 1947 says, “The UN seat is to be transferred only by a resolution from the General Assembly by a simple majority. This means if 51 percent agree then the seat is to be transferred.”

We are not obliged to tolerate all this trouble, to come from India, the Philippines or Australia to [be] here.

I am surprised that my brother President Ahmed took 14 hours to come by air from the Comoros. They told him, “You come and deliver a speech.” How can he deliver a speech with such trouble?

28. There are some restrictions, which annoy some people arriving from abroad. America has the right to impose tough restrictions because it is targeted by Al Qaeda and the terrorists. It has the right and we do not dispute that. But we are not to shoulder these unnecessary formalities. It is not necessary to come to New York and these formalities are not necessary.

One president has complained to me. They told him that the co-pilot of [his] plane could not come to America because there [were] some restrictions on him. He said, “How can we cross the ocean without an co-pilot?” The reply was, “You can cross the ocean without an co-pilot.” In the end he is not obliged to come.

Another president complained to me, as he was told his military bodyguard is not allowed in America, because his name is confused.

Another president also complained that his special doctor was not given a visa because there was some problem and he is banned.

29. You see there are very tough measures here. And if there is a state with a problem with America then they will restrict its delegate and its delegation. Those delegates are told to limit their movements 50 steps in that direction or 500 meters in this direction. It is as if we are in Guantanamo. Is this a United Nations delegate or is he a prisoner in Guantanamo?

All this is proposed for voting in the General Assembly. Mr. Al Treki, the chairman, you have to conduct a vote on the transfer of the seat. If 51 percent say ‘yes’ then we will come the next day to vote on where to transfer the seat. This could be somewhere in the middle.

We nominate Sirt or Vienna and the ballot will be held if the seat is to be in Sirt or Vienna. If you go to Sirt you can go 1,000kms in any direction and nobody stops you. You come with a plane full of passengers and you may even come without a visa as long as you are with the president you are allowed.

The country is safe and you can go in every direction. Libya has no animosity with anyone and it is not targeted. It is the same in Vienna. I don’t think there are restrictions like this.

30. If voting results in transferring the seat to the Eastern Hemisphere the next vote [should] be on whether it goes to New Delhi or to Beijing.

This is the logical thing and no one can object to it. Then we say, “God bless him, he who brought this proposal and God bless those who voted for it.”

Why do we think badly of America. We shouldn’t. America is committed to its obligations towards this international organisation. It will not be cross and it will not be angry. On the contrary it will thank you for alleviating the burden.

This is fine because it will find someone to reduce the burden. It will be happy and will get rid of the restrictions on delegations, and the restrictions on the headquarters.

31. Then we will come to the issues to be investigated by the General Assembly under the chairmanship of Ali Al Treki. We hold ourselves accountable. We will hold the United Nations accountable. Either it is over and we begin a new United Nations from the Security Council to the General Assembly. This meeting is extraordinary.

Even ‘my son’ Obama said this before me. He said this meeting is extraordinary. It is historic.
Firstly, the wars that occurred after the establishment of the United Nations. Why was that? Where was the Security Council? Where was the General Assembly? Where was the Charter and why did it take place? These should be investigated and rulings have to be issued with all the cleansing that took place.

We will begin with the Korean War. Why did it happen? It claimed millions of victims. The Korean War is still there. It is like a time bomb and a new Korean war could take place and nuclear weapons could be used. This is a serious issue. We have to try those who caused the war with all its losses and who is to pay the cost? Who is to be prosecuted?

Then we come to the Suez canal war in 1956. It has to be investigated. The file has to opened and shut. Why do we have states with a permanent seat in the Security Council with a veto and these states attack other states that are member states in the United Nations?

Egypt is a sovereign country – its city, its army and its canal were destroyed. Thousands of Egyptians were killed just because it exercised its right to nationalise the Egyptian-Suez canal.

Why did this take place when the United Nations was there and the Charter was there? How can we be sure this will not be repeated again? The only way is to hold accountable those who caused these past wars.

This is a serious issue. We have to re-open the files of the Korean War and the Suez War in order to close these files.

32. We then come to the Vietnam War. It claimed three million victims. The bombs dropped in 12 days in the Vietnam War were more than those used in four years during WW2. How can we keep silent about this?

This was a lot more catastrophic than WW2 and why did it take place even after we established the United Nations and said, “no more wars”?

The wars took place but we can’t keep silent. We are worried about the future of humanity. We want to end this worry. We have our sons and grandsons. We are discussing here in this World Parliament. This is the destiny of the world.

33. Then we come to the issue of Panama which his an independent state and a member in the United Nations. This country has been invaded and 4,000 people from Panama were killed. Its president was arrested and transported as a prisoner of war. He was prosecuted as a criminal and placed in prison in another country.

This case has to be submitted to the General Assembly. Noriega has to be released. This file has to be opened. How could a senior member in the United Nations attack another smaller country in the United Nations?

How could it arrest its president, kill 4,000 citizens and take the president as a criminal and jail him? No one accepts this. This might happen again.

We should not keep silent. We have to investigate it as this could happen to anyone. Anyone might be liable to his. Any country could be liable to this, particularly when the aggression is made by a state that has a permanent seat in the Security Council and is supposed to guarantee security.

34. Then we come to the war of Grenada. This island, which is a member state of the United Nations, was invaded with 7,000 soldiers and by 5,000 war ships and scores of fighter planes even though it is one of the smaller countries.

And this took place also after the establishment of the United Nations and the establishment of the Security Council. This state called Grenada was invaded and its president Morris Bishop was killed. How can we keep silent about this? Why do we ignore this tragedy?

To issue a verdict on the United Nations whether it exists or not and whether the Security Council is useful or not and whether we are going the right way or the wrong way. Are we assured or not about our future? There have to be investigations.

Then we will have investigations about the bombing of Somalia. Somalia is a member state of this assembly and of the United Nations and it was independent but it was bombed at the time of Farah Idid. Finally we have to investigate the results of the bombing. Why did it take place and why was it allowed?

35. The Yugoslavia War is known. A peaceful country like Yugoslavia, which built itself brick by brick after Hitler had destroyed it, has been destroyed once again by the second Hitler. This is illegal.

Federal Yugoslavia was a peaceful country. It was built by Tito the champion of peace, brick after brick; and then after the death of Tito it was fragmented into pieces for personal, imperialist interests. We others how we feel if the peaceful country of Yugoslavia, which did not pose any threat to anyone, was invaded. The General Assembly has to investigate this. It has to see whom to prosecute in the ICJ.

36. Then the Iraqi War, the mother of all evils. This has to be investigated by the United Nations. The General Assembly chaired by Ali Al Treki has to investigate the Iraq war.

The Iraq war has four highly serious issues. Firstly the invasion of Iraq itself is a violation of the Charter. It is unjustified. Iraq is an independent state and member of the General Assembly.

Why should it be invaded? Where was the Charter? From the beginning I told you the United Nations has to deter any aggression. When Iraq invaded Kuwait they immediately came to the Charter and said the United Nations has to deter aggression and we all agreed. Arab sisterly states took part in the war beside foreign countries to deter Iraq’s aggression on Kuwait.

We were all against this invasion. But the Arab countries fought Iraq with foreign countries under the Charter. But when aggression took place against Iraq where was the Charter? Why didn’t we use it? In the beginning the Charter was sacred but then the Charter was put into the dustbin and was ignored, because they wanted to attack Iraq. Why didn’t the United Nations deter the aggression against Iraq?

Ali Al Treki has to launch the investigations by the General Assembly. You have to reveal to the world why Iraq was invaded. Everything is obscure and we might face such a fate. We have to investigate why Iraq was invaded.

37. Secondly after the invasion of Iraq there is mass cleansing. We have to investigate mass cleansing in Iraq. More than a million and a half Iraqis were killed. You have to show us the International Criminal Court where we are to prosecute those who committed mass cleansing against the Iraqi people.

It is easy to say Omar Al Bashir has to go to the court. It was easy for Slobodan to go to the court. It was easy for Charles Taylor to go to the court and it was easy for Hussein Habri and Noreiga. But [what about] those who committed mass cleansing in Iraq? Shouldn’t they go to the International Court of Justice?

If this court was only to target us then we reject it and we don’t acknowledge it. Either it treats everybody equally or otherwise we don’t acknowledge it. Everyone large or small has to be prosecuted in the International Court of Justice if he committed a crime.

We are not animals in a farm or on a ranch to be slaughtered when they like. We are nations that have the right to live in dignity to live freely and we are ready to fight and face death but we could not accept this situation and you may try us.

38. The third issue is the death sentence. How prisoners of war are being executed.

The states occupying Iraq [declared that the Iraqi president and his government were prisoners of war] and [that] they would be prosecuted on such a basis. Then who executed the president? We know those who tried him, the judge in known, but who executed him? He was put to death on the day of Eid Al Adha by masked men.

Is this right? If this world is civilised and if they are prisoners of war in a civilised state and under international law why were they executed by a gang with masks. Who are those who carried out the death sentence? Do they have a legal authority? Do they have a legal mandate to execute a prisoner of war?

39. Do you know what the people say? Some people say it is the American president and the British president who were the masked gang that carried out the death sentence on the Iraqi president and his government. This accusation will stay until it is rebuffed. Why did they mask their faces? Why didn’t they show their ranks? Why did they conceal their identity? Were they ranking officers, soldiers, a judge or doctor?

How can we execute a head of state that is a member state of the United Nations in this ambiguous manner? So far we don’t know who carried out the death sentence on the day of Eid. Those countries that occupied Iraq and arrested the Iraqi president and his government, and tried them and executed them are those responsible. However the execution remains ambiguous and the United Nations has to answer for it.

Whenever there is a death sentence those who carry out the death sentence have to have a legal entity, legal powers and responsibility. Their ranks must be known and a doctor has to be present. There are a number of conditions just to execute one ordinary person, let alone the president of a country that is a member state. This is the Iraq war.

40. The fourth issue in Iraq’s war is the prison of Abu Ghraib, which is quite shameful. I know that America could investigate this scandal. However the United Nations should not abandon this case.

The General Assembly of the United Nations has to investigate the case of Abu Ghraib prison where the prisoners of war were very badly treated, and they were ripped by dogs and men were raped. This is unprecedented. No one ever did that before – even the devil would not behave like that.

Prisoners of war were raped in the prison of Abu Ghraib in a country that is a member state of the United Nations. And the instigator is a country with a permanent seat in the Security Council.

What is this Security Council? This is a humanitarian issue and no one can keep silent about it. It has to be investigated. There has to be solution and the world has to know.
Up to now my brothers, there are a quarter of a million Iraqi prisoners of war in the prison of Abu Ghraib and you have seen how they were treated. We will not forget this and we will not abandon this issue. It has to be investigated.

41. Then the war in Afghanistan. It has to be investigated. Why are we antagonising the Taliban? Why are we antagonising Afghanistan? Who are the Taliban? If the Taliban want to establish a religious state in Afghanistan let them do so. We have nothing to do with it.

It is like the Vatican. Does the Vatican pose any threat to us? No it is a very peaceful, religious state. If the Afghans want to establish an Islamic emirate let it be like the Vatican. Who said the Taliban are the enemy and has to be struck by the armies?

Is bin Laden an Afghan? Is he a Taliban? Bin Laden is not from the Taliban and is not from Afghanistan. The terrorists who struck New York? Are they Afghans? Are they from the Taliban? No, they are not Afghani and they are not from the Taliban. So why were Iraq and Afghanistan targeted?

42. If I want to deceive my American and English friends I would not tell them this. But I would encourage them and tell them [to] go on, send more troops to Afghanistan and send further troops until they drown in a blood bath because they will achieve no result in Afghanistan or in Iraq.

You have seen what happened in Iraq. That took place even though Iraq is an open desert. Then what do you think of Afghanistan with these mighty mountains?

No one could defeat it – they are just hitting the rock. They will scratch it but they will not demolish it. Continue the war in Afghanistan in Iraq. But I want to save them. I want to save these hapless nations [from] America and the other countries that fight [them].

We are saying you have to leave Afghanistan for the Afghanis. You have leave Iraq for the Iraqis. Leave them even if they fight each other. They are free to do so. The civil war took place even in the USA. Nobody interfered. The civil war also took place in Spain and in China and in many parts of the world and nobody interfered. If it is a civil war let it go on. Leave it for the Iraqis and for the Afghans to fight each other – they are free.

43. Who says that if the Taliban rule Afghanistan they will become a threat? Do the Taliban have any intercontinental missiles? The airliner that hit New York – did it come from Afghanistan or Iraq? These airliners took off from Kennedy airport in New York. So why do we go and strike Afghanistan? They are not Afghans, not Taliban, nor Iraqis. Why should we keep silent about these things? Those who keep silent regarding what is right is like a silent devil. We won’t be silent devils. It is our right because we are keen on world peace. We are keen on the destiny of the world. We do not want to undermine humanity in this manner.

44. Then after that Mr Ali Treki, the General Assembly has to launch investigations of the assassinations. You have to launch an investigation once again on the assassination of Patrice Lumumba. We want this recorded in our African history. How an African leader, an African liberator was assassinated. We want to establish who killed him and to record that for history so that our sons will learn history and they will know why Patrice Lumumba, the hero of African-Congolese liberation was killed. Even after 50 years, that act has to be denounced and those responsible have to be held accountable. This file has to be opened and we have to go back to the old documents.

45. Then we would like to know who killed the UN Secretary General Dag Hammarskjöld. Who bombed his aircraft in 1961, the same year in which Lumumba was killed? We want to know who bombed the plane of the UN Secretary General. We want to know who bombed it and who had an interest in that.

46. Then we come to Kennedy’s assassination in 1963. The UN General Assembly has to open the file of Kennedy’s assassination. We want to know why he was killed. He was killed by someone called Lee Harvey; and someone called Jack Rubbi killed Lee Harvey.

We want to know why this Jack Rubbi, the Israeli, killed Kennedy. And Jack Rubbi himself, the killer of Kennedy’s killer, also died in vague circumstances before his trial. We have to return to these files and we have to know.

What I know and what the world knows and what we studied in history is that Kennedy decided to inspect the Israeli Dimona reactor to see whether it has nuclear bombs. That is the reason he was got rid of. As long as the case is international in this manner and it concerns world peace and weapons of mass destruction we have to open investigations into the reason why Kennedy was killed.

47. You should also open the file of Martin Luther King. This vicar was a black activist and human rights campaigner, and his assassination was a conspiracy. This file has to [be] opened to establish who killed him and prosecute him.

And, who killed Khalil Al Wazir the Palestinian Abu Jihad? He was attacked in a sovereign country, a member of this assembly. [He stayed in Tunisia’s capital.] But there was an attack by four warships, two submarines and two helicopters. The independence of that state was not respected as is clear from the assassination of Khalil Al Wazir.

How could we keep silent about such matters? If we keep silent there could be submarines coming to our countries and we could see warships coming to our coasts and pick up anyone they like without being held accountable.

Then we have the death of Abu Ayad. He was killed in very ambiguous circumstances. Then we have operations such as Al Fardan Operation and the Youth Spring Operation where Kamal Nasser was killed and where Kamal Udwan and Abu Yousif Al Najar were killed. These three Palestinians were killed in Lebanon, which is a sovereign state and member of the UN General Assembly. We have to establish who killed them. We have to prosecute them so that such havoc is not repeated.

48. We would like to know as well why Maurice Bishop the head of Grenada was killed. We have tackled how Grenada was attacked, with how many war ships and troops. We said they launched an attack on Grenada with 7,000 soldiers, 15 war ships and scores of fighter planes. The president of this member state of the General Assembly Maurice Bishop was killed.

We can’t keep silent about these crimes. Otherwise we will all become victims and sacrifices and every year it would be the turn of someone. We are not animals and we are not sacrifices. We are defending our existence, we are defending ourselves our sons and our grandsons. We are not afraid. We have the right to live. This globe is not only for the super powers. God created it for all of us. We should never live in humiliation.

49. Then we have to open investigations into the evil massacres in Sabra and Shhatila, which claimed 3,000 human victims. This village was under the protection of the occupying Israeli army. Then a massacre was carried out of Palestinian men, women and children. Most of them were Palestinians. How could we keep silent?

Lebanon is an independent state and a member of this assembly. The area of Sabra and Shatila was occupied and 3,000 were slaughtered. Then there is the massacre of Gaza in 2008. And for your information, there were a thousand women killed and injured. And 2,200 children. It means that there were 3,200 women and children only. Fifty educational centres belonging to the UN were demolished. Thirty non-governmental organisations were demolished including international relief organisations. Sixty clinics were demolished. Forty doctors and nurses were killed while they were doing their humanitarian work. That was the outcome the Gaza massacre in December 2008.

The culprits are still living. They have to be prosecuted in the International Criminal Court. But if the International Criminal Court is only targeting the smaller states and Third World countries, this is not right. Those culprits have to be tried in the court unless it was not international. Then we would not recognise it.

If it is international everybody is subjected to it. As long as the International Court of Justice is not respected and its rulings not implemented; and as long as the International Atomic Energy Agency does not include all countries; and the General Assembly is doing nothing; the Security Council is monopolised then the United Nations is nothing. There is no United Nations.

50. Then we come to piracy. This phenomenon may spread to all the seas. It could become a threat like terrorism. Let us tackle Somali piracy. I am telling you the Somalis are not pirates.

The pirates are ourselves because we exploited all the fishing grounds. We undermined their livelihood. We undermined their economies and their regional waters. All the ships of the world, whether from Libya, India, Japan or America exploited Somali waters and we are the aggressors.

After the Somali state collapsed we came to pick up the remnants. The Somalis had to defend their marine wealth – their food and the food of their children. Then they transformed themselves into pirates to defend themselves. They are not pirates. They only defend their livelihood. And now you are handling it in the wrong way. You are saying let us send warships to strike the Somalis. No. Warships should go to strike the pirates who undermined the Somali wealth and resources. You have to strike the foreign fishing boats.

51. Anyhow I held a meeting with the pirates. I told them I would make an agreement between them and the world. The world has to respect the Somali economy area up to 200 nautical miles according to the law of the seas. All the marine wealth in that area belongs to the Somalis. The world has to respect this economic area. This is [the] first [issue].

Then second, all countries should abstain from dumping hazardous waste in the Somali economic area off the coast, and in return the Somalis will abstain from attacking ships. We will draft this agreement and we will present it to the UN General Assembly. That is the solution. The solution is not more strikes against the Somalis.

What is worse is that their warships are preventing the Somalis from going into the sea for fishing. This is the wrong, the wrong approach. Our way of tackling terrorism is wrong.

52. Our handling of matters is wrong. If the vaccination for swine flu is produced and there could be more flues, the factories that belong to the intelligence operate; and they sell at a high price. This is trade. They produce a virus and they spread it across the world so that capitalist companies gain money from selling vaccines.

This is shameful. The vaccines are not to be sold. Medicines are not to be sold. You have to read the Green Book. It does not allow the selling of medicines.

The medicines are free and the vaccines are free; no viruses are spread because it is they [pharmaceutical companies] who produce these viruses in order to produce vaccines. That is how capitalist companies work. This is the wrong approach. You have to declare that medicines are free and not for sale. Even if the viruses are real, we should not sell the vaccines. They have to be offered for free.

53. All these matters are submitted in files to be discussed by the UN General Assembly. It has nothing to do but this work. Then we have the Ottawa Agreement, which bans the production, shipment, or sale of mines. This is wrong.

Mines are not offensive weapons. They are defensive. The mines do not move. They do not attack. It remains wherever it is planted. That means you went to it. Why did you go to it?

[For example,] I would like to plant mines on the borders of my country because [there are aggressors on the borders of] my country. Let your hand or leg be amputated. I urge you to review this Ottawa Agreement. This appeal can be seen in the Internet, in the website ‘Al Qadhafi talks’. This agreement has to be revoked or amended.

They want to deprive us [of] even the mines – if I want to plant a mine in front of my home or farm then this is my way of defence. It is not offensive. You must [then] cancel the atomic weapons, the missiles, and inter-continental missiles.

54. As for the Palestinian cause, the ‘Two-State Solution’ is impossible. I urge you not to speak about it. The only solution is one democratic state for Jews, and for Muslims and Christians and all others – like Lebanon. The ‘Two State-Solution’ is not practical [or possible]. There can be no two neighbouring states, which [overlap like this]. Any division will inevitably fail.

Firstly, the two states are not neighbours, but overlap from all aspects – population, geography and so forth. There are no states. You can’t establish a dividing no man’s land between them because it doesn’t exist.

The West Bank has half a million Israeli settlers. The so-called Israel has a million Palestinian settlers. How can we establish two states? [We have] got to impose one democratic state without any religious, nationalist or linguistic bigotry. Bigotry is reactionary and it is time is well over.

These are thoughts of the guard. The ideas of the Third World War. The ideas of men like Yasser Arafat and Sharon. All these are over. The new generation wants one democratic state. We have to exert every effort to give them one state where all people co-exist.

Look at the Palestinian youth. Look at Israeli youth. They want peace. They want to live in one state. This is the way to end this headache that undermines and poisons the whole world. The White Book has the solution for Israel. You have to consider it, Ali Al Treki.

55. The Arabs have no animosity with the Israelis. They are cousins and they live with them in peace. The Palestinian refugees must return and they have to live peacefully in one state. It is you who make the holocaust for them. You burned them down in the chambers of gas in Europe. It is you who hate the Jews but we don’t.

We have accommodated them, we protected them since Roman days and since they were expelled from Andalusia. We also protected them in the days of Hitler and from the gas chambers of Hitler. It is ourselves who protected them and it is you who expelled them. You expelled them and told them go and fight the Arabs.

Let us expose this reality. We are not enemies of the Jews. They are our cousins. The Jews will need the Arabs one day, but the Arabs will not protect them as they did in the past. Let us have a look at what Tito did. What Hadrian did. What Edward I did and what Hitler did to the Jews. You hate them, and you are anti-Semitic.

56. As for the issue of Kashmir – in short in has no solution, unless it becomes one independent state to buffer between India and Pakistan. It will become neither Indian nor Pakistani and the conflict will be over.

As for Darfur, I hope that the aid you sent to international aid organisations is transferred to other projects – developmental, industrial and agricultural. Darfur now lives in peace and there is no war. It is you who blew it up so as to interfere, and establish a foothold for the sake of oil – and you sacrificed the people of Darfur.

57. Why do I tackle all these issues? It is because we have to investigate these issues. Previously the case of Al Hariri, God have mercy on him, was submitted to the United Nations. Why did you do so? Is it because you wanted to sacrifice the blood of Al Hariri, and you sold his body in order to settle scores with Syria? If not, why did Lebanon, an independent state with a judiciary, law and order and police, not determine who the culprits are?

But in this matter it is not the culprits who are wanted. What is wanted is the settlement of scores with Syria and if we sacrifice this issue we will get nowhere.

Therefore all the cases of Abu, Khalil Al Wazir, Kennedy, Lumumba, Hammarskjöld etc should be transferred to the United Nations as the others were.

58. At any rate the UN General Assembly is chaired by Libya and this is its right.

Libya could help the world in moving from one phase to another – from this world that is lost, bitter, shameful, terrorised and threatened, to a more human world where there is peace and tolerance.

I will follow up this work with the General Assembly, Ali Al Treki and the UN Secretary General because we will not be complacent and we will not be submissive regarding the fate of humanity.

Humanity has to struggle in order to live in peace. The struggle by the Third World and the smaller states – over 100 of them – in order to live in dignity and in freedom is a continued struggle and it must continue till the end. Peace and blessings.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s