Today's Date:

THE MINISTER – (…) Our objective (…), as President Chirac indicated, is to move forward on the basis of the work comprised by our first draft resolution, integrating the concerns of the various parties. If that effort can be achieved in agreement with our American partners, we can hope to arrive at a text backed by our two countries and possibly others. If we see that there are differences that can't be overcome, then France, as the President said yesterday, is not ruling out the possibility of submitting a text on her own behalf.

Discussions are currently under way among the five permanent members of the Security Council. We hope they will be productive. But we do not intend to renounce the core positions we have put forward since the beginning of these negotiations.

For France, which remains attached to a long-term solution whose outlines must be committed to by Lebanon and Israel, the main thing at this stage remains a halt to the violence in order to immediately set in motion a dual process: the progressive withdrawal of the Israeli army south of the Blue Line, and a gradual deployment of the Lebanese army backed by a reinforced UNIFIL.

With respect to this objective, our negotiating priorities are as follows:

- to obtain the establishment of this process, the withdrawal of Israeli soldiers and the deployment of the Lebanese army with the backing of a reinforced UNIFIL.

- to precisely define the modalities for reinforcing UNIFIL, beyond determining whether or not UNIFIL will be placed under Chapter VII. For us, the most important element is the definition of the missions of that force, which must be limited to the monitoring and oversight of the situation on the ground, as well as assisting the Lebanese army in its efforts to secure southern Lebanon.

- to determine a specific response to the question of Shebaa farms. We want to clearly define the modalities that would enable this problem to finally be resolved. Why not ask the UN secretary-general, in a letter attached to the resolution, to say that he could envisage all solutions, including placing the Shebaa Farms under the jurisdiction, the trusteeship, of the UN.

- to ratify the principles and elements of a long-term solution that would make it possible to consolidate the cease-fire and make it lasting. That implies in particular the implementation of all commitments flowing from UNSCR 1559 and 1680 and relating, for example, to the disarmament of all militias, the respect of borders and the monitoring of weapons to Lebanon with a view to restoring the full sovereignty of that country's government to all of Lebanon.

This is the spirit in which we have mobilized to seek an agreement in New York. I remain confident in the Council members' ability to end their differences. At a time when it is crucial for Lebanon to regain peace and stability, the international community must be equal to its responsibilities. We must succeed in putting an end to the suffering of the Lebanese people and giving back that country – so sorely afflicted by history – real hope in its future.

Concomitantly, I would like to speak about the humanitarian aspect. As you know, tomorrow a boat is setting sail for Lebanon carrying more than 35 tonnes of relief supplies, in cooperation with UNICEF, the WFP, the ICRC and the HCR, as well as NGOs. It will bring a significant amount of aid to Lebanon in the coming days; that is essential as there are now a million displaced people in Lebanon, half of them are children, and we are beginning to see a shortage of food and medicines, particularly paediatric medications.

I'd also like to add that we are studying the modalities for providing humanitarian support for the people of northern Israel, 500,000 of whom have already been displaced.

(…)

THE MINISTER – We are all hoping for an agreement, but as you know, the most important thing, the most urgent thing for us is the immediate cessation of hostilities. In our view, too, it is important to consider the Lebanese and Israeli governments' demands vis-ΰ-vis their right to security. The Lebanese government, for example, is asking – and it's quite normal – for the Israeli army to withdraw when its own army deploys. We hope that will be included in the resolution.

Just because we want to reach an agreement as swiftly as possible with our partners doesn't mean that we'll give way on elements that we consider essential.

(…)

THE MINISTER – For example, with respect to the UNIFIL missions. As you know, France has always advocated a three-stage diplomatic timetable: first an immediate cessation of hostilities, then a political agreement and finally an international force to provide support.

Since the Lebanese government proposed deploying 15,000 troops in southern Lebanon, it is obvious that this should be done under the supervision and with the support of the UN, and consequently UNIFIL, whose mandate would be reinforced. What is that mandate? That's the question we have raised. True, at first there were differences among the various partners, in particularly the United States and France, and others. In the course of our discussions, I see that we've moved forward, including with the Americans. I told you that for us, what's important is for UNIFIL's missions to be limited to monitoring and overseeing the situation on the ground as well as assisting the Lebanese army in its efforts to secure southern Lebanon. For us, those missions are important.

THE MINISTER – As we've always said, a multinational force to verify respect for the cease-fire can be deployed only if there is a political agreement. That's why the resolution we are presenting contains both the essential aspects of what had been proposed in terms of a cessation of hostilities as well as the elements for a political agreement, such as the questions of Shebaa farms, displaced persons, the Israeli withdrawal and deployment of the Lebanese army. In other words, the conditions for a political agreement combined with a UNIFIL whose mission would be solely monitoring, oversight and training the Lebanese army. (…)./.