48. As to violations of human rights, the Soviet delegation was ready to consider the matter in the appropriate General Assembly Committee, particularly from the point of view of Israeli infringements, which had already been examined by the General Assembly and a number of united Nations bodies. The soviet delegation possessed a very detailed file on the subject and was ready to bring its contents to the attention of the members of the Fifth Committee if they so wished. 49. Mr. ELIASHIV (Israel), speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that the slanders of the representatives of the Soviet Union were nothing new. Everyone knew who wanted peace in the Middle East and who was encouraging and assisting the subversive forces there. How dare the representative of the Soviet Union speak of "concentration campsn when he knew what horrors and suffering that term, which now belonged to history, evoked for the Jewish people? The Israeli delegation rejected that tendentious comparison, which was a grave offence to the memory of the 6 million Jews who had been victims of the Nazi tyranny. The concept of concentration camp, furthermore, seemed to have been succeeded by that of Gulag. 50. Mr. KUDRYAVTSEV (Union Soviet SOCialist Republics), speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said there was no point in engaging in polemics with the previous speaker' in any event, the peoples of the Middle East were well aware of the identity of the aggressor in that region. The meeting rose at 12.55 p.m. 
**Analysis**
The text appears to be a transcript of a discussion in the United Nations General Assembly, specifically regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and human rights violations. The language used is polemic, with both sides accusing each other of aggression and human rights abuses. This suggests that the category should be related to international relations, diplomacy, and human rights.

**Category**
Humanitarian aid and relief, International relations