YouSaid · the spoken record

HARMEL

lines on the record: 238
first: 1966-09-24
most recent: 1972-09-24
sittings or episodes: 7
sources: un-general-debate

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“Belgium is asking that those two questions be examined by an ad hoc United Nations body set up for that purpose. That body should be guided in its conclusions by the opinion of all the parties concerned, who must therefore be consulted. 44. Allow me to conclude with some brief remarks concerning the continent of which my country is a part, Europe. Indeed, and this is perhaps paradoxical, the United Nations is the only place where for the present all European nations can speak amongst themselves, whether they be committed or neutral, aligned or non-aligned. It is here that we, for example, have forged bonds with men from European States whose opinions we do not share; they have always listened to us attentively, and we have also tried clearly to understand them. 45.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“Mainland China’s participation in the work of the international agencies poses a serious problem, which must be seriously studied without delay. For its part, Belgium is raising that problem in the interests of peace and of our Organization, with the political determination that a positive response shall be given to two connected preliminary questions that everyone is asking and to which no one yet knows the answer. 43. You all know what those questions are: Does mainland China desire to participate in the work of our Organization and observe its rules and principles? Further, how can we make sure that the Republic of China, which has been seated in the United Nations since its inception, can remain a full Member with all the rights of Membership?”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“In a word, I wish that a current of mutual exchange could be established between those theoretical research centres and our Organization for the greater good of all; and I know that in saying this I am once again repeating proposals that were submitted here by the Secretary-General two years ago. 41. We also feel a duty towards the universality of the United Nations. Several States are still absent from our international community, and a few moments ago I stated how much we regret the absence of Germany. From this very rostrum two years ago [1432nd meeting] I shared with you our hope that the voluntary or imposed isolation of mainland China would cease; it does net seem right to us that a nation which is the most populous on earth and possesses one of the world’s oldest civilizations should remain apart. 42.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“For that reason we believe that our Organization can and must co-ordinate those studies and provide an exchange of information among their makers, who have up to now often worked in isolation from one another. Our Organization can and must see to it that those studies turn from the abstract to the concrete in order that the science of survival may become a technology of peace that we may all employ. 40. I should like to propose that we ask our Secretary-General to make an annual summary report on the studies of the eighty-odd centres scattered throughout the world. We should hope that the United Nations might request those institutions to study matters of special benefit to us.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“So now a new science is attempting to provide objective and valid answers to those questions; its goals are these of the Charter; in fact, its very object is a search for ways to achieve United Nations goals. 38. How, then, is our Organization going to demonstrate its interest in those studies? There we see scientists from all countries attempting to establish, without prejudice or passion, how and why conflicts arise and end. Here politicians and diplomats from all countries meet throughout the year to study how to resolve some conflicts and avoid others. Would it not be ridiculous — and, given the importance of what is at stake, unforgivable — to pretend that the studies of the former have no bearing on the efforts of the latter? 39.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“However, that does not mean that other States — and my own country certainly — are prepared to abandon initiative within the United Nations. In that connexion I shall restrict my remarks to the efforts that we consider basic and positive, and by means of which we, for our part, wish to bind ourselves to the community of nations. 37. At the present time — and this is my first comment — eighty specialized scientific agencies all over the world are devoting themselves to studies on peace; UNESCO is assisting them. All of us, in thoughtful moments, have of course wondered how and why in one case peace has led to war, and how and why, in some other case conflict has been resolved or avoided.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“That is what seems to me natural and normal to ask of the great States: strict respect for what Mr. Debré called the prime safeguard of human rights [1683rd meeting], namely the principle of non-intervention; and positive contributions to the strengthening of our institutions, to economic development and to disarmament. If the great States could commit themselves jointly to the goals I have just mentioned, we believe that not only would they erase the lamentable picture of spheres of influence, but also that this would be of great consequence for the cause of peace. 36. I have until now spoken of the role of the great States because we are prepared to grant them a special authority and responsibility.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“Here I want to repeat the proposal of my eminent compatriot the President of the Belgian Senate, Mr. Paul Straye, who rightly recommended to the Assembly of the Council of Europe a type of Marshall Plan that would assist the millions of Middle East refugees through a programme of land irrigation and fertilization. If the great States jointly made a similar proposal, they know that they would meet with eager co-operation throughout the world - in other words, within our Assembly. 34. The third idea has to do with the same areas: that, in the areas of recent conflict the great States should themselves propose, and call forth from the other States, acceptance of a limitation of the supply of conventional weapons and their means of delivery. Belgium has already modified its national legislation in anticipation of that move. 35.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“Would it not be logical for the possessors of the right of veto to refrain from employing it when, owing to their acts, the sovereignty and independence of a State are in issue before the Security Council? I recall that we have seen the Government of the United States abstain from exercising the veto in the matter of the Dominican Republic — a good example. We trust that the question we are thus putting to the permanent members of the Security Council will not be left unexamined or, we hope, unanswered. 33. Our second suggestion is that the great States shall make a joint examination and submit to us as soon as possible immediate plans for reconstruction and economic development in the troubled areas of South East Asia, the Middle East and Nigeria.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“Secretary-General, echoes wholeheartedly a recommendation you formulated in the introduction to your annual report. For our part we would state that if the great Powers, whether rightly or wrongly, feel obliged to follow the policy of the balance of power in order to protect world peace, they must at least refrain from acting in place of United Nations bodies; they must not present those bodies with faits accomplis, and they must, in certain cases at least, agree to the rule of supranationality that other States accepted in 1945. We believe that the increased trust for which the great States have just asked other States by opening to signature the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons constrains them to make a comparable act of increased trust in the Security Council. 32.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“However, if the Assembly will allow me, I should like to go further and to say this: the great States are well aware that non-interference is not enough; the world expects from them, and welcomes when they offer, positive contributions to the cause of peace, which are necessary if they want to increase — or, if need be, restore — the serene authority that is expected from those to whom an exclusive power has been granted. 30. In submitting the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons the great Powers there and then accepted a solemn primary obligation: to take resolutely and without delay the road to nuclear disarmament. However, we should like to express three further ideas. 31. The first involves the right to veto and, Mr.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“28. What conclusions are we to draw from this survey? It is that the path of peace, in other words our own path, lies through scrupulous respect for the principle of non-intervention as set forth by our Assembly. That principle cannot be applied to operations like the one we have witnessed around Czechoslovakia; along with very many of our colleagues, Belgium is asking that it be terminated in the interest of everyone. Security will be continuously endangered if the Powers persist in creating exceptions to the most widely accepted and most solemnly enshrined principles of the law of nations. 29.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“Lastly, in another context, it has been maintained that Articles 53 and 107 of the Charter, together or separately, would allow a unilateral intervention in the domestic affairs of the Federal Republic of Germany. In our opinion those articles, which we have re-examined, have no relevance to present world conditions. No one can ignore that their unforeseen and unilateral invocation is in itself a source of tension. I should like to state very clearly that the German people has as much right as other peoples to protection from foreign pressures and threats. Having regretted on several occasions the absence of the largest Asiatic Power from this Assembly, I feel no awkwardness at saying that we deeply regret the absence of one of the great European countries, the world’s fourth largest economic power, namely the Federal Republic of Germany.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“They make no mention of a special law existing among socialist countries. 26. Belgium is of the opinion that the only interpretation compatible with the decision taken at the twentieth session is that those principles thenceforward have a universal meaning. They must be acknowledged to apply among States with different political, economic and social systems as well as among States adhering to the same system. Any other interpretation must inevitably mean that within a given system there are no legal relationships but only relationships based on submission, dependency and inequality and typical of a colonial system that the Organization is doing its utmost to eliminate. 27.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“I would further recall that the initial draft submitted by the USSR to the first Committee contained an article inviting “all States to be guided in their international relations by the principles of mutual respect and of non-intervention in domestic affairs for any reason” — and the proposal was very clear: “whether economic, political or ideological". 24. I should like to recall that at the twenty-first session, returning to this question of non-intervention, the USSR representative, Mr. Kuznetzov, stated: "We should recognize that every State has the inalienable right to settle for itself without any foreign intervention, questions concerning its future". He added that that was “a fundamental principle of the United Nations Charter”. 25. Those statements are categorical.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“On the other side it has been contended — and I am thinking in particular of an article that appeared in Pravda on 26 September 1968 and whose philosophy seems to be echoed in the recent statement made by my colleague from the Soviet Union [1679th meeting] — that all the classical concepts of non-aggression, non-intervention, sovereignty and independence are valueless in relations among socialist countries because they are abstract and devoid of class content. In that connexion I should like to say two things. 23. First: this is, so far as we know, the first time the Soviet Union has made such a clear statement of that thesis. I would recall that the statement on non-intervention which I mentioned earlier was adopted by our Assembly at the suggestion of the Soviet Union.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“It is also true that our efforts in Europe in recent years have been devoted to replacing relations based on the mere balance of power by a system based on stability that can bring peace. The Atlantic Alliance has clearly indicated that, along with legitimate security considerations, its member States were guided by a desire for relaxation of tension. In other words, in Europe we want a system of relations founded not on fear but on regional security agreements and reciprocal commitments that will include disarmament. That also means that in those relations there is no room for policies based on spheres of influence. 22.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“I think we have to say that many myths have grown up around the Yalta Conference. Must we prove that to ourselves by re-reading here the joint statement made by the three Governments on the results of the Crimean Conference, expressly mentioning the right of all European peoples “to choose the form of government under which they will live” and “the restoration of sovereign rights and self-government to those peoples who have been forcibly deprived of them by the aggressor nations”? Yalta thus grants no State a privileged right over another State. 21. It is true that since Yalta the principles I have just mentioned have often been ignored and that spheres of influence have been created by acts of power and force, while our nations, which had disarmed, were forced to form an alliance in order to build a protective wall against them.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“It is said that the Yalta agreements of 1945 authorize and legitimize intervention by the great Powers within their spheres of influence. We read that the principles of international law are not applicable among socialist countries, or that they are not applicable to States that were defeated in 1945. We must declare that those are alarming and dangerous theories, which I should like to examine with you. 20. First, the Yalta agreements. Is it true that they sanctioned the system of spheres of influence and that by tacit agreement the great Powers left each other a free hand with the States in their respective spheres? For our part we must very loudly declare that this interpretation of the Yalta agreements is historically false, as the United States Government has not failed to point out.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“That unanimous resolution clearly stated: "...all peoples have an inalienable right to complete freedom, the exercise of their sovereignty ...” It added: "...armed intervention is synonymous with aggression...” In it our Assembly declared: “No State has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the internal or external affairs of any other State.” And the Assembly further declared: "The strict observance of these obligations is an essential condition to ensure that nations live together in peace with one another ...”. In short, we considered that that resolution as a whole adequately defined what was, in the unanimous opinion of the community of nations, the duty of non-intervention. 19. Yet some other theories are appearing.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“That is why the principle of non-intervention in the domestic affairs of other States, of non-interference, of unwarranted intervention, must in face of the facts be respected with special strictness by those who have asked the rest of the world to sanction their power and to repose special confidence in them. History teaches that strength which is not tempered by moderation and respect for law can easily turn into tyranny. 18. We considered that the principle of non-interference had been defined and agreed to once and for all in December 1965, when our General Assembly resolution [2131(XX)] on the inadmissibility of interference in the domestic affairs of States was adopted by 109 votes to none.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“It was principally those two States that proposed for our signature the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and promised us to come to the assistance of whomever might be attacked or even merely threatened by atomic weapons if we renounced their manufacture and possession. 17. Thus in twenty-four years we shall have twice recognized, in law, the special status of the very great Powers by endowing them with an extraordinary authority and power and thereby with an extraordinary responsibility. In return, we feel we have the right to obtain an unequivocal commitment that there shall be no abuse of power.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“Consequently we wondered what we were supposed to accomplish here in such deplorable circumstances. Having taken thought we decided to say as clearly as possible what we believe we can expect from the great States. I shall now describe what in our view we must urgently accomplish together, all our nations jointly, in order if possible to advance along the road to peace. 16. Everyone well knows why the States that signed the United Nations Charter twenty-three years ago invested the victors in the Second World War with a permanent primary responsibility within the Security Council. Since that time two of those States have acquired an intercontinental nuclear destructive power whose use would be devastating.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“We took a resolute part in all those events, even when they were only a timid promise of progress; and we can even say that Belgium put forth its best efforts on the international level. 14. And now it is Europe’s turn to throw away its chances. We deplore and condemn in equal measure all that has recently occurred on our continent to frustrate that progress. The military occupation of Czechoslovakia, the pressures brought to bear on other States, the presence of Soviet divisions on the borders of the Federal Republic of Germany, the threat to invoke against it texts that are no longer applicable, the unrest concerning Berlin: those are never-admissible acts of force that, in the present context of our work, appear to us irreconcilable with the role the USSR has chosen for itself in the world. 15.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“Lastly, a further step seemed to have been taken on the road to disarmament: the Treaty on the NonProliferation of Nuclear Weapons [see resolution 2373 (XXII)], drawn up at the special instance of the two intercontinental nuclear Powers, has already been signed by more than eighty States. At the same time Europe seemed prepared to take a step towards acting in such a way that each State, whatever its régime, would respect the others. The path to peaceful coexistence and détente was being seriously and effectively marked out, to such an extent that at the Reykjavik Conference in June 1968 fifteen Western States concluded that mutual and balanced reductions of forces could lead to the creation of new confidence in Europe. They asked the Soviet Union and the Eastern European countries to join in that project. 13.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“Since no favourable event that has occurred during this year must be overlooked, let us then recall the celebration of the twentieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the international Conference held at Teheran which solemnly reminded us that, as members of the human family, every nation and every one of its citizens has equal, inalienable and inviolable rights. And on that occasion everyone — and who could be more pleased than my own country? — could note that an increasing number of States were acceding to our Organization’s international agreements concerning civil, political, economic and social rights. 12.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“I want to say how disappointed would be our expectation if our colleagues from the countries concerned were to fail to arrive at some preliminary understanding during the current session. 10. Lastly, with regard to the third subject, hope was aroused for the pacification of South-East Asia. President Johnson stopped the bombing of the greater part of North Viet-Nam and intended to devote his last months in office to the search for peace. The Paris talks opened and gave us reason to hope that, by further generous acts inspired by political insight, that distressing conflict might soon be ended for good. I cannot refrain from recalling that three years have already gone by since the world’s conscience spoke here [1347th meeting] with the illustrious voice of Pope Paul VI and we heard his appeal to desist and negotiate. 11.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“Last year we were concerned with three international conflicts: Cyprus, the Middle East, and South East Asia. During the past year discussions have at least been started with regard to each of them. Over the delicate problem of Cyprus the Turkish and Greek leaders have wisely begun a reconciliation; their accomplishment is all the greater considering the heat of the passions that were aroused. Similarly, with regard to the Middle East we are still grateful to the authors of the Security Council resolution of 22 November last [242(1967)] for the course of international justice they marked out, although they have unfortunately not yet evoked any suitable response.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“Consequently, I wanted to mention that fundamental question of development co-operation at the beginning of my statement in order to stress the importance our country attaches to it — for it is vital — and our determination to make a firm contribution within the Second Committee to the planning of the Second United Nations Development Decade. 8. The Ministers for Foreign Affairs who have spoken one after the other from this rostrum have stressed, following your example, Mr. Secretary-General, the negative and disappointing aspects of the developments that have occurred in international life over the past twelve months. How cam we deny the facts? The Belgian delegation’s disappointment is all the greater since in several important areas it had seen evidence that its hopes might be fulfilled. 9.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“Suffice it therefore for me to state solemnly that the Belgian people intends to devote an ever-increasing part of its national effort to solving the human, commercial and financial problems created by the inequality of opportunities among countries. 6. This year my Government has once again increased — for 1969 — its contribution to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). That is an increase of 25 per cent over two fiscal periods; but it is only a token. If further proof were needed of the determination I have just mentioned, I would recall that the Belgian Government has just made provision for one of its most qualified members to devote his entire time to those problems. I am referring to Mr. Scheyven, former President of our Economic and Social Council. 7.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“If, following the example set by the Secretary-General in the introduction to his annual report [A/7201/Add.1], we were to evaluate which of the items in our work is of the greatest importance in establishing a new order of justice and thus for world peace, I should have to mention here the contributions that each of our States must make towards co-operation between countries at different levels of development; and I should be obliged to devote my whole statement to that subject. 5. This year, however, Belgium has already twice expressed its views in detail, first at the Conference at New Delhi and then during the Economic and Social Council’s session at Geneva.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“At the same time I want to pay a sincere tribute to the President of the twenty-second session of the General Assembly, my colleague and friend Mr. Manescu. In a stormy international climate he presided with firm and calm authority over our discussions; the unanimous respect he inspired redounded to the benefit of the United Nations; the esteem and gratitude that we had already felt for him have grown even greater. 4.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“1. We all take pleasure in paying tribute to the new President of the Assembly and to the outgoing President. My country is privileged to know well and to think very high!y of both these statesmen, one of whom today succeeds the other in one of the highest posts attainable for the successful guidance of world affairs. 2. Consequently, Mr. President, the good wishes that we address to you are accompanied by a fervent belief. You represent a nation like our own, destined by its size, history and geography to moderate its ambitions so as to devote its best efforts to its progress, to support of the principles of the Charter, and to the rule of justice in international life. We know that those ideals guide you in carrying out the all-important office you have assumed. 3.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“This is no doubt what one of my compatriots meant to suggest in a message of encouragement which he sent me yesterday and which I want to share with you. He quoted a line of Paul Claudel’s which, I believe, applies to the situation in which we all find ourselves and to the work we have begun. It goes: "Belief in light is finest in the dark." Like many of us, and together with them, Belgium will persevere in its search for the lights of peace.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Belgium, for its part, announces that it is prepared to do so henceforward, being desirous of following the Secretary-General's suggestions and taking one of the steps that have to be taken towards the establishment of a world authority for co-operation and development. Belgium will persevere in its endeavour until this objective has been decided upon, accepted and attained within the United Nations. 39. What have we tried to do today, following the example of others? Not to conceal certain obstacles which lie in the way of the United Nations and hamper its action for peace. Not to conceal them; but also not to accept political crises and the distress of the many as inevitable; on the contrary, always to seek, together with others, rationally, energetically and stubbornly, to overcome them.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“We hope and believe that the relaxation of tensions between the East and the West will enable the International organizations, which have for so long been semi-paralyzed by these tensions, vigorously to discharge their mission of practical co-operation, using in particular some of the resources liberated by parallel reductions in armaments. 38. Lastly, I want to say that while waiting for these goals to he progressively reached, the more fortunate countries, when undertaking bilateral or regional cooperation programmes, should he prepared to regard the United Nations regional or local representatives as the natural coordinators of any multiple development action in their area. It is to be hoped that such countries will consult them before delineating an aid programme.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“First, the Assembly should solemnly proclaim that it recognizes it to be a duty of the United Nations to put forward a global development programme and to co-ordinate all development efforts throughout the world. 37. Next, we believe that it should also note, emphasize and endorse the trend in the Northern Hemisphere towards a rapprochement between the economic and social structures of the market-economy and planned-economy countries. That trend, too, will reduce world tensions as it will reduce the drain on all national incomes caused by the steady rise in armaments.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Lastly — and I list them last, for they fit in with the rest — there are the world-wide programmes conceived and executed by the specialized agencies and organizations associated with or dependent on the United Nations. 34. All these things, which are being done in the name of a more just order, are juxtaposed, added and sometimes tangled together. But who is better qualified than the United Nations to determine how much and what kind of aid is required and distribute wisely the various efforts made throughout the world, so that the second development decade may succeed in altering the as yet tentative but so far disappointing rate of economic and social growth of many countries? 35. Here again, we would not merely criticize; we have three suggestions to make. 36.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“These efforts include the development programmes carried out by the Governments and peoples of the poor countries themselves in a courageous endeavour to further those countries' growth; the timely action of the regional economic organizations which they set up and which broaden the usually narrow markets in developing zones; the many kinds of assistance furnished by private initiative and marked by a high degree of generosity, for it comes from all countries, whether rich or merely less poor than the others; and also bilateral aid accorded by many States which enjoy a high level of living and multilateral aid given by groups of privileged States, of which the European Economic Community is an example, to certain African countries.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“At the same time, of course, the total number of mouths to feed in those same developing countries rose by about 3.5 per cent annually, so that the combined effect of these two factors is that there is less food available per person from year to year. 32. These are brutal and to us cruel facts which show that, in the painful process of mankind's joint development, something is very wrong and growing worse. 33. We know that many efforts are being made to remedy the situation, and that they should be added up; yet their total falls far short of the needs.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“The fact is that peace is not merely the absence of war. There are other situations which endanger peace, because of the injustice and misrule they reveal. If we wish to know what these situations are, we have but to open the Annual Report of the Secretary-General on the Work of the Organization [A/6701, p. 95]. There, following an analysis of world economic trends in 1966 and the first months of 1967, we read that the over-all economic growth rate in the developing countries had already weakened slightly from 1964 to 1965; it dropped again from 1965 to 1966. For these countries as a whole — and that may be one of the most discouraging facts cited — total agricultural production, according to the report, diminished by more than 1 per cent in 1966.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“We must emphasize once again the obligations of the Security Council, its permanent members' responsibilities towards the rest of us, and also the heavy if temporary responsibilities assumed by States which ask for our votes for election to the Council. Surely it is for the General Assembly to support the Security Council's efforts and, if need be, remind the States which sit in it of what we expect and hope from them. 30. For it is only through such fresh awareness of our responsibilities, a spirit of detente and an unremitting effort at mutual tolerance that our Organization — which everyone recognizes to be indispensable - can accomplish what our peoples expect of it. 31. I should now like to deal briefly with the second subject, which we have called "the second pillar of peace": co-operation.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“We think it would be a mistake to go ahead and set up a committee which would not know its exact terms of reference and scope of activity. 29. These considerations, which relate to highly important subjects, bring us to the following conclusion: we firmly believe that the pessimistic views we have formed in examining certain specific threats to world security should prompt us to revise the methods of action used by the United Nations. It would not be a drastic revision. There is no question of amending the rules and principles inscribed in the Charter, but simply of returning to a painstaking and scrupulous discharge of the obligations contained in it.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Truly, it is by performing such an analysis that the General Assembly can make suggestions which would be of help to the Security Council, the organ responsible for the prevention and settlement of crises. 28. I also wish to support the Secretary-General's efforts to bring about the conditions and general operational framework for the maintenance of peace. Here again, what we must have is political agreement on the need for specific action. Once such agreement has been demonstrated, the constitutional and financial problems will be readily solved, as they are within our countries when a political will is manifest. If such an affirmation of principle can be had, then, and only then, we should like a special committee to be set up to settle the practical details.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“In that connexion, I cannot but regret the particularly unsatisfactory and cursory manner in which the Special Political Committee considered the problem of the peaceful settlement of disputes. It is also most deplorable that the Netherlands representative's suggestion was not taken up. How can it be claimed — as it was claimed — that there is no need to formulate conclusions on the best ways of preventing armed conflicts from arising? Would it not be useful to define the best procedures for obtaining and ensuring a truce, when we see that it is in this very area that the assistance of the United Nations has been the most often sought in the past twenty-three years?”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“None of our Governments would be able to bring off this tour de force in their domestic decision-making. How, then, can we ask a number of States to work together under such conditions? 26. Thirdly, we should like the meetings of the Security Council to be held, as provided for in Article 28 of the Charter, at the Government member level. The proposal made yesterday by the Secretary-General that a meeting of this kind should be held with the Ministers of the principal countries members of the Security Council has, I must say, aroused great hopes on our part. 27. Lastly, I should like to recommend once again a serious study of what last year [1432nd meeting] I called the strategy of peace.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“To begin with, we should like the General Assembly to appeal to the Security Council and, more particularly, to the Council's permanent members, to use their powers of conciliation and the broad range of measures set forth mainly in Chapter VI of the Charter. 25. Secondly, we support the Secretary-General's suggestion in the Introduction to his Annual Report [A/6701/Add.1, para. 159] that the Security Council should hold closed meetings. This suggestion is far more than a mere matter of procedure. How can one possibly endow an organ with executive responsibilities on the one hand and, on the other, expect it to find, in public, under the eye of the cameras, solutions to the extremely difficult problems which are referred to it and which concern the prestige of some countries and the interests of others?”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“It is inconceivable that the dialogue now in progress between these two great States should not be reflected in their interchanges in the Security Council. It is there that the spirit of detente and tolerance should find its most fertile soil and its best testing ground. For, as Mr. Brown said here yesterday [1567th meeting], no group in our Assembly can impose its will upon others if positive results are to be expected. In consequence, we can at last ask that the Security Council should stop confining itself to separating the combatants without trying to eliminate the causes of the combat. 23. We are well aware that it is far easier to bring out the errors and criticize the action of the United Nations than to make positive suggestions. I shall nevertheless advance a few. 24.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“To see how true that is, we need merely to read the report prepared by the Security Council for the General Assembly, Hence the frustration felt in some of our countries with regard to the action of the United Nations and the crisis of confidence mentioned by the Secretary-General; both result from that inability to take decisions, that reluctance to take action, because of which the countries sitting in the Security Council and therefore bearing a special responsibility under the Charter cannot achieve what public opinion, what world opinion, expects of them. 22. We nevertheless believe that the antagonism between the USSR and the United States, which has lasted throughout the existence of the United Nations, most fortunately is on the wane.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“We have the means at hand. If we reread the Chapters of the Charter which confer pacifying functions on the Security Council, we shall see that they give it the right and the necessary authority to initiate action. They give it the means for continuing action. They authorize it to investigate, recommend negotiation, propose mediation and arbitration, have recourse to judicial settlement and, lastly, if these methods of conciliation fail, consider enforcement measures. 21. In fact, no use is made of these possibilities.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)