The Bondi Massacre and the Issue of anti-Semitism:

Was the anti-Semitic sentiment the primary catalyst for the massacre?

On 21 December, I posted a short Japanese article entitled ‘The term “anti-Semitism” is running rampant in Australia’ on my blog. To be honest, I don’t think I adequately explained why discussions about anti-Semitism in Australia had suddenly increased after the Bondi massacre. This is because anti-Semitism is a very complicated issue requiring a comprehensive analysis of various factors from many different angles. Furthermore, I am still unable to process my anger at the highly political exploitation of the Bondi tragedy by certain Israeli and Australian politicians. Due to my busy schedule, despite being on summer holiday, I have not yet had the opportunity to sit down calmly and write a rational and lucid analysis of this event in either Japanese or English.

On 27 December, I was interviewed on a podcast hosted by a friend of mine in Hiroshima regarding my article. Despite spending almost an hour on the program, unfortunately, I was unable to discuss my thoughts on the “sudden rise of anti-Semitism” in a clear, analytical manner. This is simply because I need more time to consider all the important factors in order to present a critical and persuasive argument on this issue. I would like to do so within the next few weeks.

For now, however, I would like to highlight some important considerations for discussing anti-Semitism using a few YouTube programs that I found very useful. 

As I mentioned briefly in my Japanese article, as far as I am aware, there is hardly any anti-Semitic sentiment among Australian civil activists campaigning against the Netanyahu regime’s genocidal attacks on Palestinians in Gaza. We condemn the Israeli government and the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) not because they are Jewish, but because of the genocidal atrocities they have committed against innocent civilians, including many children, in Gaza. In other words, we condemn the Netanyahu regime’s state terrorism. Therefore, it is anti-Zionism — opposition to Israeli nationalism, which seeks to maintain an exclusively Jewish state through the brutal colonization of Palestine — that motivates Australian civil peace movements, not anti-Semitism. I should also point out that many of the Australian activists campaigning against the Netanyahu regime are Jewish. By the way, needless to say, I do not support any form of violence committed by Hamas or any other organization or individual.

Consequently, I believe that the claim by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and Australian Zionist leaders that the Bondi massacre occurred because the Australian government failed to prevent the rise and spread of anti-Semitism serves to conceal the genocidal attacks perpetrated by the Netanyahu regime in Gaza over the past two years. Yet few Australian politicians, including Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, major newspapers or television outlets, have pointed this out. Why have they failed to do so? It seems that they are all afraid of being labelled “racist” or “anti-Semitic” by the so-called “Jewish community,” which appears to be Zionist-led.

‘Get her out!’ Protester removed from Bondi vigil

As far as I know, this TV report is exceptional. It’s about Michelle Berkon, a Jewish woman who tried to condemn the politicizing of the memorial service for the victims of the Bondi massacre by Zionists the day after the massacre, when they draped themselves in Israeli flags at the site. She claimed that the Israeli flag represents genocide. Shockingly, her freedom of expression was suppressed when she was taken to a nearby police station by a group of police officers. Who authorized the police to take this action?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZxb8328hZU

In stark contrast to Australia, a widely viewed video shows renowned American actor and singer Mandy Patinkin, his wife Kathryn Grody (a playwright and actor), and their son Gideon Grody-Patinkin passionately denouncing Netanyahu’s atrocities in Gaza during an interview with the New York Times. They argue that Jews worldwide should condemn Netanyahu’s actions, as these are the very cause of anti-Semitism and are placing Jews in perilous situations.

Mandy Patinkin on Gaza: A Plea to Jews

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFjOb9DGS1w

Kathryn Grody: ‘I am concerned, compassion for every person in Gaza, you know, is very Jewish. According to the policies of Netanyahu, I’m a self-hating Jew or I’m anti -Semitic. I feel this is the behavior the politics of what he’s doing is the worst thing for Jewish people.’

Mandy Patinkin: ‘And I ask Jews all over the world to consider what this man, Benjamin Netanyahu, and his right-wing government is doing to the Jewish people all over the world. They are endangering not only the state of Israel, which I care deeply about and want to exist, but they are endangering the Jewish population all over the world. He is the most dangerous thing, not just since October 7th. It is it has been a deeply troubled situation and endangering the Jews by endangering those in Gaza, and to watch what is happening for the Jewish people. To allow this to happen to children and civilians of all ages in Gaza for whatever reason is unconscionable and unthinkable. And I ask you Jews everywhere all over the world to spend some time alone and think, is this acceptable and sustainable? How could it be done to you and your ancestors? And you turn around and you do it to someone else.’

Incidentally, it is interesting how Mandy Patinkin found that his own relatives were among the victims of the Holocaust.

Mandy Patinkin Discovers His Ancestor's Hidden Holocaust Connection

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8_arGR3LEQ

Some Holocaust survivors also denounce the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza as genocide. This is a prime example of the idea that “sharing pain generates hope,” a belief that I hold dear.

Holocaust Survivor Absolutely DEMOLISHES Israel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxLtxX7kPcU

Holocaust Survivor: ‘The way that the Israeli government is using the memory of the Holocaust in order to justify what they’re doing to the Gazans is a complete insult to the memory of the Holocaust, it’s an outrage……. What distinguishes the Jewish Holocaust is its industrial scale and industrial methods being applied. And what has been happening to Gaza is similar in that the scale of the bombing and the indiscriminate nature of the bombing, the complete lack of care about children and women being the majority of the victims amounts to Industrial scale of genocide. The painting of the Palestinian people as worthless almost “animal like” by the description of some of the leaders that dehumanization enables the population of Israel to tolerate what’s going on.’

I know that many Jewish people in Australia and elsewhere still support the Israeli government’s military actions in Gaza. I just hope that they will use their moral imagination to picture what is happening to the many children in Gaza and ask themselves the question Mandy Patinkin asked: ‘Is this acceptable and sustainable?’

‘Children ask why they survived’: Doctor’s Gaza testimony shocks UN Security Council

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5B1MO1PW3M

Dr. Feroze: ‘Last year, I published in the New York Times a survey of 65 American healthcare workers who had served in Gaza. 83% of them reported seeing children shot in the head or the chest. I personally treated 13 such cases in my two weeks at European Hospital. According to the War-child Alliance, nearly half of Gaza’s children are suicidal. They ask, “Why didn’t I die with my sister, my mother, my father?” Not out of extremism, but out of unbearable grief. I wonder if any member of this council has ever met a 5-year-old child who no longer wants to live, let alone imagined a society in which so many young children feel this way. And what astonishes me is not that some children in Gaza have lost the will to live, but that any still cling to hope. My Palestinian friends, mostly healthcare workers, no longer speak of resilience or even survival. Parents memorize their children’s clothing in case they must identify their remains later. They pray for one piece of bread to give them before they sleep so that their children might die less hungry if they are killed at night.’

Dr. Feroze Sidhwa was born in the US in 1982 to the Pakistani parents migrated to the US. https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2024/10/18/hwiv-o18.html

Now, I would like to share with you an interview with Bob Carr, one of the few Australian politicians to strongly condemn the mass killings carried out by the Netanyahu government in Gaza. In this interview, Bob Carr details how Australian government foreign policy is consistently shaped to serve Israeli interests under the influence of the Jewish lobby.

Exposing the DISTURBING ISRAELI Lobby inside Australia | Ex-Foreign Minister Bob Carr

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4psBTp6CVk

Bob Carr: ‘The Israel Jewish lobby in Australia is a foreign influence operation. It’s designed to put the interests of Israel above the interests of Australia and its foreign policy. No one else has an operation as well funded. No other country has an operation with offices in every Australian capital city. No one else organizes donations to attempt to elevate its influence in the way the Jewish lobby does in Australia. This is how they operate. We’re not going to be intimidated by the pressure of the Jewish lobbying in Australia. If a country is knowingly implementing a genocide, uprooting civilians, sending them on death marches, reducing the population to one of walking corpses, and allowing the IDF to shoot at children. Do we deal with the perpetrators of this as a normal nation? I don’t think we can.’

Australian politics is not the only area to have faced political pressure from the so-called “Jewish community.” There have been numerous instances of Zionist groups exerting pressure on freedom of expression in the arts and culture. The most recent example is the cancellation of the annual Writers Week event as part of the highly regarded Adelaide Festival, due to pressure from Zionist groups. These groups were displeased that Randa Abdel-Fattah, an Australian of Palestinian and Egyptian descent who has strongly criticized the Israeli government, had been invited to the event next month. They pressured Peter Malinauskas, the Premier of South Australia, to withdraw the invitation. Malinauskas succumbed to this pressure and cancelled the invitation. In protest against this decision, the director of the Writers’ Week and three other Festival board members resigned. Furthermore, more than 180 writers announced that they would also refuse to participate. Ultimately, this made it impossible to hold this year’s event, leading Malinauskas to cancel it entirely. Thus, freedom of expression in Australia is now being blatantly violated in many places due to political intervention by the extreme right-wing Zionist lobby.

Incidentally, Randa Abdel-Fattah is an impressive writer, legal practitioner and academic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randa_Abdel-Fattah

Adelaide writers’ week 2026 cancelled as board apologises to Randa Abdel-Fattah for ‘how decision was represented’

https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2026/jan/13/adelaide-writers-week-cancelled-as-board-apologises-to-randa-abdel-fattah-for-how-decision-was-represented-ntwnfb

Louise Adler speaks out after Adelaide Writers’ Week cancelled

Louis Adler is also a remarkable Jewish person. She was CEO of Melbourne University Publishing from 2003 until 2019.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5T3Dxw9Cas

I cannot be party to silencing writers, which is why I am resigning as director of Adelaide writers’ week Louis Adler

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/jan/13/i-cannot-be-party-to-silencing-writers-which-is-why-i-am-resigning-as-director-of-adelaide-writers-week-ntwnfb

Adelaide Writers Week under attack from the Jewish Right

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekmPL7nkozA

 

Although there are many other useful sources of information, I hope you find the above helpful for understanding the current situation regarding anti-Semitism in Australia.  

Yuki Tanaka

 

 

Jeffrey Sachs Blasts US Power Grab Over Venezuela, Maduro Capture at Historic UN Meeting

 ジェフリー・サックス氏、ベネズエラをめぐる米国の権力掌握を非難、歴史に残るであろう国連会議でマドゥロ大統領の拉致を批判 （日本語版は英語版の後をご覧ください）

Though brief, the statement delivered by Professor Jeffrey Sachs to members of the United Nations Security Council on 5 January was an excellent declaration that explained the historical background to this issue and the United States’ blatant violation of the United Nations Charter with remarkable clarity and conciseness. I therefore present the full text in English and its Japanese translation below.

(Yuki Tanaka)

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTCnOD_szRw

Jeffrey Sachs, President of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, delivered a powerful warning at the UN Security Council following the U.S. capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. Sachs condemned unilateral U.S. intervention, stressing violations of the UN Charter and international law, and called for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces and end to economic coercion. 

Professor Jeffrey Sachs

 By Jeffrey D. Sachs
January 05, 2025

Mr. President,

Distinguished Members of the Security Council,

The issue before the Council today is not the character of the government of Venezuela.

The issue is whether any Member State — by force, coercion, or economic strangulation — has the right to determine Venezuela’s political future or to exercise control over its affairs.

This question goes directly to Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, which prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.

The Council must decide whether that prohibition is to be upheld or abandoned.

Abandoning it would carry consequences of the gravest kind.

Background & Context

Since 1947, United States foreign policy has repeatedly employed force, covert action and political manipulation to bring about regime change in other countries. This is a matter of carefully documented historical record. In her book Covert Regime Change (2018), political scientist Lindsey O’Rourke documents 70 attempted U.S. regime-change operations between 1947 and 1989 alone.

These practices did not end with the Cold War. Since 1989, major United States regime-change operations undertaken without authorization by the Security Council have included, among the most consequential: Iraq (2003), Libya (2011), Syria (from 2011), Honduras (2009), Ukraine (2014), and Venezuela (from 2002 onward).

The methods employed are well established and well documented. They include open warfare; covert intelligence operations; instigation of unrest; support for armed groups; manipulation of mass and social media; bribery of military and civilian officials; targeted assassinations; false-flag operations; and economic warfare aimed at collapsing civilian life.

These measures are illegal under the U.N. Charter, and they typically result is ongoing violence, lethal conflict, political instability and deep suffering of the civilian population.

The Case of Venezuela

The recent United States record with respect to Venezuela is clear.

In April 2002, the United States knew of and approved an attempted coup against the Venezuelan government.

In the 2010s, the United States funded civil society groups actively engaged in anti-government protests, notably in 2014. When the government cracked down on the protests, the U.S. followed with a series of sanctions. In 2015, President Barrack Obama declared Venezuela to be “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.”

In 2017, at a dinner with Latin American leaders on the margins of the U.N. General Assembly, President Trump openly discussed the option of the U.S. invading Venezuela to overthrow the government.

During 2017 to 2020, the U.S. imposed sweeping sanctions on the state oil company. Oil production fell by 75 percent from 2016 to 2020, and real GDP per capita (PPP) declined by 62 percent.

The U.N. General Assembly has repeatedly voted overwhelmingly against such unilateral coercive measures. Under international law, only the Security Council has the authority to impose such sanctions.

On 23 January 2019, the United States unilaterally recognized Juan Guaidó as “interim president” of Venezuela and on 28 January 2019 froze approximately $7 billion of Venezuelan sovereign assets held abroad and gave Guaidó authority over certain assets.

These actions form part of a continuous United States regime-change effort spanning more than two decades.

Recent US Global Escalation

In the past year, the United States has carried out bombing operations in seven countries, none of which were authorized by the Security Council and none of which were undertaken in lawful self-defense under the Charter. The targeted countries include Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Somalia, Syria, Yemen, and now Venezuela.

In the past month, President Trump has issued direct threats against at least six U.N. member states, including Colombia, Denmark, Iran, Mexico, Nigeria and of course Venezuela. These threats are summarized in Annex I to this statement.

What is at Stake Today

Members of the Council are not called upon to judge Nicolás Maduro.

They are not called upon to assess whether the recent United States attack and ongoing naval quarantine of Venezuela result in freedom or in subjugation.

Members of the Council are called upon to defend international law, and specifically the United Nations Charter.

The realist school of international relations, articulated most brilliantly by John Mearsheimer, accurately describes the condition of international anarchy as “the tragedy of great power politics.” Realism is therefore a description of geopolitics, not a solution for peace. Its own conclusion is that international anarchy leads to tragedy.

In the aftermath of World War I, the League of Nations was created to end the tragedy through the application of international law. Yet the world’s leading nations failed to defend international law in the 1930s, leading to renewed global war.

The United Nations emerged from that catastrophe as humanity’s second great effort to place international law above anarchy. In the words of the Charter, the UN was created　“to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind.”

Given that we are in the nuclear age, failure cannot be repeated. Humanity would perish. There would be no third chance.

Measures Required of the Security Council

To fulfill its responsibilities under the Charter, the Security Council should immediately affirm the following actions:

1) The United States shall immediately cease and desist from all explicit and implicit threats or use of force against Venezuela.
2) The United States shall terminate its naval quarantine and all related coercive military measures undertaken in the absence of authorization by the Security Council.
3) The United States shall immediately withdraw its military forces from within and along the perimeter of Venezuela, including intelligence, naval, air, and other forward-deployed assets positioned for coercive purposes.
4) Venezuela shall adhere to the U.N. Charter and to the human rights protected in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
5) The Secretary-General shall immediately appoint a Special Envoy, mandated to engage relevant Venezuelan and international stakeholders and to report back to the Security Council within 14 days with recommendations consistent with the Charter of the United Nations, and the Security Council shall remain urgently seized of this matter.
6) All Member States shall refrain from unilateral threats, coercive measures, or armed actions undertaken outside the authority of the Security Council, in strict conformity with the Charter.

In Closing

Mr. President, Distinguished Members,

Peace and the survival of humanity depend on whether the United Nations Charter remains a living instrument of international law or is allowed to wither into irrelevance.

That is the choice before this Council today.

Thank you very much.

Jeffrey D. Sachs is a university professor and director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, where he directed The Earth Institute from 2002 until 2016. He is also president of the U.N. Sustainable Development Solutions Network and a commissioner of the U.N. Broadband Commission for Development.

国連安全保障理事会におけるジェフリー・サックス氏による陳述

コロンビア大学教授、ジェフリー・サックス氏が1月5日に国連安全保障委員会メンバーに向けて行なった陳述は、短いながらも、この問題の歴史的背景と米国の露骨な国連憲章違反行為を、ひじょうに簡潔明瞭に解説した素晴らしい声明だと思います。よって、（拙訳ですが）日本語訳を紹介しておきます。

（田中利幸）

ニコラス・マドゥロ大統領

 国連の「持続可能な開発解決策ネットワーク」のジェフリー・サックス会長は、米国によるベネズエラのニコラス・マドゥロ大統領の拉致を受けて、国連安全保障理事会で強い警告を発した。サックス氏は米国の単独介入を非難し、国連憲章及び国際法違反であることを強調すると同時に、米軍の即時撤退と経済的強制の停止を求めた。

（なおジェフリー・サックスはコロンビア大学の教授（開発経済学、国際経済学）であり、同大学「持続可能な開発センター」の所長を務めている。2002年から2016年まで同大学「地球研究所」の所長を務め。また国連の「持続可能な開発解決策ネットワーク」の会長および国連ブロードバンド開発委員会の委員も務めている。）

ジェフリー・サックス

2026年1月5日

本日、理事会が審議すべき問題は、ベネズエラ政府の性質ではありません。

問題は、国連加盟国のいったいどんな国に —— 武力、威圧、あるいは経済的締め付けによって —— ベネズエラの政治的未来を決定する権利、あるいはその内政に干渉する権利があるのか否かということです。

この問題は、いかなる国家の領土保全及び政治的独立に対しても武力による威嚇又は武力の行使を禁止している国連憲章第2条4項に直接関わるものです。

理事会は、この禁止規定を維持するのか、それとも放棄するかの決定を迫られています。

これを放棄すれば、最も深刻な結果を招くであろうことは明らかです。

背景と文脈

1947年以来、米国の外交政策は他国における政権交代を実現するために、武力行使、秘密工作、政治的操作という手段を繰り返し用いてきました。これは明確に記録されている歴史的事実です。政治学者リンジー・オルークは自著『秘密の政権交代』（2018年）において、1947年から1989年までの間に米国が試みた70件にものぼる政権交代作戦を記録しています。

こうした手法は、冷戦終結後も継続されました。1989年以降、国連安全保障理事会の承認を得ずに実施された主な米国の政権転覆作戦には、最も重大な影響を及ぼした事例として以下のケースが含まれています。イラク（2003年）、リビア（2011年）、シリア（2011年以降）、ホンジュラス（2009年）、ウクライナ（2014年）、ベネズエラ（2002年以降）。

用いられた手法については、十分に立証され、記録されています。これらの手法には、公然の戦争、秘密諜報活動、騒乱の扇動、武装集団への支援、マスメディアとソーシャルメディアの操作、軍・文民当局者への賄賂、標的型暗殺、偽旗作戦、市民生活を混乱崩壊させることを目的とする経済戦争などが含まれています。

これらの措置は国連憲章に違反するものであり、通常、継続的な暴力、致命的な紛争、政治的不安定、そして民間人に深刻な苦痛をもたらす結果へとつながっています。

ベネズエラの場合

米国が最近ベネズエラにもたらした記録についても、明らかになっています。

2002年4月、米国はベネズエラ政府に対するクーデター未遂を認知し、これを承認しました。

2010年代には、米国は反政府抗議活動に積極的に関与する市民団体に資金を提供しました。この点では、特に2014年が顕著です。政府が抗議活動を取り締まると、米国は一連の制裁措置を講じました。2015年、バラク・オバマ大統領はベネズエラを「米国の国家安全保障及び外交政策に対する異常かつ特別の脅威」であると宣言しました。

2017年、国連総会開催中のラテン・アメリカ首脳との夕食会で、トランプ大統領はベネズエラ政府転覆のための米軍侵攻という可能性について公然と議論しました。

2017年から2020年にかけて、米国はベネズエラの国営石油会社に対し広範にわたる制裁措置を発動しました。その結果、石油生産量は2016年から2020年にかけて75％減少し、実質GDPは一人当たり（購買力平価ベース）は62％低下しました。

国連総会はこうした一方的な強制措置に対し、繰り返し圧倒的多数で反対決議を採択しています。国際法上、こうした制裁を発動できる権限を有しているのは安全保障理事会のみだからです。

2019年1月23日、米国は一方的にフアン・グアイドをベネズエラの「暫定大統領」と承認し、同年1月28日には国外に保有されているベネズエラ政府資産約70億ドルを凍結し、グアイドに特定資産の管理権限を与えました。

これらの行為は、20年以上にわたる米国の継続的な政権転覆工作の一環をなしています。

最近の米国の世界的な軍事行動の拡大

この1年間で、米国は7カ国で空爆作戦を実施しましたが、いずれも安全保障理事会の承認を得たものではなく、国連憲章に基づく合法的な自衛権の行使でもありませんでした。標的となった国は、イラン、イラク、ナイジェリア、ソマリア、シリア、イエメン、そして今回はベネズエラです。

過去1か月間、トランプ大統領は少なくとも6つの国連加盟国（コロンビア、デンマーク、イラン、メキシコ、ナイジェリア、そしてもちろんベネズエラ）に対して、直接的な脅威を突きつけました。これらの脅威については、私のこの陳述の付属書Iにまとめられています。

目下の危機の内容

当安保理事会のメンバーは、ニコラス・マドゥロを裁くことを求められてはいません。

求められているのは、最近の米国による攻撃と継続中のベネズエラに対する海上封鎖が、ベネズエラに自由をもたらすのか抑圧をもたらすのかを評価することでもありません。

理事会メンバーに求められているのは、国際法、特に国連憲章を擁護することなのです。

ジョン・ミアシャイマーがひじょうに鮮やかに論じているように、国際関係論の現実主義学派は、国際的な無政府状態は「大国政治の悲劇」がもたらしたものであると適確に描写しています。したがって、このような地政学の描写は現実主義的なものであって、平和への解決策を議論しているわけではありません。つまり、その結論は、国際的な無政府状態が悲劇を招いている事実そのものなのです。

第一次世界大戦後、国際法の適用を通じてこの悲劇を終わらせるため国際連盟が創設されました。しかし1930年代、世界の主要諸国は国際法の擁護に失敗し、再び世界大戦を招きました。

この惨禍から生まれた国際連合は、無政府状態の上に国際法を据える人類の第二の偉大な試みなのです。憲章の言葉によれば、国連は「我々の生涯において二度も人類にはかり知れない悲しみをもたらした戦争の惨禍から、後世の人々を救うために」創設されたのです。

現在、核時代に生きている私たちには、失敗を繰り返すことは許されません。なぜなら、失敗すれば人類は滅びるでしょうから。三度目のチャンスなどは、ありえないのです。

安全保障理事会が講ずべき措置

国連憲章に基づく責任を果たすため、安全保障理事会は直ちに以下の行動を表明すべきです。

1) 米国はベネズエラに対するあらゆる明示的・暗示的な武力行使の威嚇または武力行使を直ちに停止し、差し控えること。

2) 米国は、安全保障理事会の承認を得ずに実施している海上封鎖及び関連する全ての強制的な軍事措置を終了させること。

3) 米国は、強制を強いる目的で配置している情報機関、海軍、空軍、その他の前方展開戦力を含め、ベネズエラ国内及び周辺地域から直ちに軍隊を撤退させること。

4) ベネズエラは、国連憲章及び世界人権宣言で保護されている人権を遵守すること。

5) 国連事務総長は直ちに、関連するベネズエラ及び国際的な利害関係組織と協議し、国連憲章に合致する勧告を14日以内に安全保障理事会に報告する権限を有する特使を任命するものとすること。安全保障理事会は、本問題を緊急に審議し続けるものとすること。

6) 全加盟国は、国連憲章に厳格に従い、安全保障理事会の権限外で行われる一方的な脅威、強制措置、武力行使を控えるものとすること。

結びに

議長ならびにご列席の各位。

平和と人類の存続は、まさに、国連憲章が国際法の（実際に効力のある）生きた規範として存続するのか、それとも無用の長物へと衰退するのかにかかっています。

それが本日、この理事会が直面している選択なのです。

ご静聴ありがとうございました。

― 完 ―