YouSaid · the spoken record

Van Zeeland

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS VAN ZEELAND

lines on the record: 147
first: 1949-09-24
most recent: 1953-09-24
sittings or episodes: 5
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

“For our part, we consider it right and necessary that, as soon as Korea has been liberated from aggression, the United Nations should help the Korean people in the task of reconstruction with which it will be faced. This must be a twofold effort; on the one hand, we must rebuild the ruins caused by the war and, on the other, we must take the opportunity to help Korea in rapidly reducing the gap which separates its economic and social circumstances from those of the more advanced countries. 154. We wish to associate ourselves straightaway with a great project whose conception, in present circumstances, Is at once an act of faith, of hope and of human solidarity.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“Lastly, we consider that it would be useful for the Assembly to give immediate consideration to practical methods of utilizing the forces which the United Nations would place at the service of the purposes and principles of the Charter. 152. But we should be so happy if we could go beyond the sphere of strictly defensive measures, of measures designed solely to remove a threat, to safeguard the peace. We should be so happy if we could devote all our attention and all our efforts to constructive measures. There is so much we could do to create wealth, to make that new wealth available to men, to raise the standard of living, to improve health, to prolong life and to open wider doors that lead to the highest realms of the spirit. 153. Nothing, however, prevents us from undertaking these multifarious tasks at one and the same time.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“We simply take the view that it would be wise and expedient to make use of all the opportunities afforded by the Charter for the more effective attainment of the purposes of the. Organization. 149. _ We therefore support the idea of simplifying the conditions under which a special session of the Assembly could be called in case of emergency. 150. We also favour the creation by the Assembly of something in the nature of a standing commission of inquiry which, with the consent of the country concerned, could immediately visit any area in which an international conflict appeared to be imminent; the idea is a sound one and reflects the experience gained by the Organization in a variety of circumstances and again, quite recently, in Korea. 151.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“In cases where the very purposes of the United Nations — promoting peace, fighting against aggression — are at stake, the Assembly is not relieved of its own responsibilities by the mere fact that some other organ of the United Nations falls short of its task; on the contrary, in such a contingency the Assembly has an added responsibility. 147. In adopting this attitude, my country remains faithful to a policy which it has followed ever since the establishment of the United Nations. At San Francisco our representatives on several occasions sponsored proposals or supported amendments all of which were designed to give the Assembly a more important and more decisive role. 148. We have no desire to recall past history, nor on this occasion do we advocate amendments to the Charter.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“The mere fact that one of the great Powers has seen fit to exercise its right of veto forty-four or forty-five times shows that there is a flaw in the mechanism of the Security Council. 145. But surely this is not a good enough reason for us to give up the whole business as a bad job, to forego recourse either to the Security Council or to the United Nations. It is our duty to take fullest advantage of everything the Charter offers. We have the right to make use of every single one of its Articles; they are all of equal value. 146. That is why we regard as timely and practical Mr. Acheson’s suggestions for expanding, in conformity with the letter and the spirit of the Charter, the function of the Assembly.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“I agree with him that it is extremely important “that five Powers — the United States, the United Kingdom, France, China and the Soviet Union — should unite their efforts towards peace”. 143. Nor do I fail to realize that the Charter itself has conferred upon the Security Council the principal responsibility for the maintenance of peace and security. But we should dwell on this point a little longer. Those who settled the terms of the Charter at San Francisco were inspired by the hope that the five great Powers would continue to act as they had done during the war, that is to say, in harmony, with a common outlook on the essential points. 144. Unfortunately, we cannot ignore the facts; this hope has been disappointed, this foundation has collapsed, the Security Council has not' functioned as it should have done.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“Hence we shall continue with all the energy at our command this policy of defence, of defence proper, of defence of the peace. Such a policy, however, does not at all release us from the obligation to carry on with the organization of international relations — political, economic and social — within the framework of the United Nations. On the contrary this policy makes it even more our bounden duty to carry on with this task. 141. I thus arrive quite naturally at the specific proposals [A/1377] made by the United States Secretary of State for strengthening international co-operation and fortifying the bulwarks against aggression. 142. Far be it from me to take Issue with Mr. Vyshinsky’s argument that the great Powers have a special function to perform in the maintenance of peace.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“If only the USSR representative, after mentioning the admirable principles which have never ceased to inspire us, had said, for example that the Soviet Union would scale down its military power to the level now prevailing in other countries, we should have had faith in the principles invoked and we should have been entirely willing, ourselves, to pursue once again, as zealously as in the past, the organization of the peace on the basis of disarmament. But the mere attempt to formulate such thoughts shows how vain — I was going to say naive — they are. Accordingly we are inevitably led back to the solution, which is admitted only with difficulty but is now quite settled, that at the present time the road to peace leads through the balance of armaments, 140.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“It is the Soviet Union which has brought about the armaments imbalance from which we are suffering. And such an imbalance invites war; it creates the danger of war more assuredly than anything else. 138. In the end, the free peoples, unable to achieve the general disarmament which they desired, have had to recognize that they had no choice but also to rearm. So far as they are concerned, this is not an armaments race; it is an attempt, undertaken reluctantly but resolutely, to redress the balance in armaments which has been disturbed by others, and so to restore the chances of peace. Such is the spirit in which we have allied ourselves under the Treaty of Brussels and the North Atlantic Treaty; such is the spirit in which we have decided now to regain the military strength of which we are capable. 139.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“Our countries believed in peace. They disarmed rapidly. They neglected to take the precautions which were perhaps indicated. In running this risk, some of us have tried to give an irrefutable token of the purity of our intentions. But we were grievously disappointed. For while we were following this line, the Soviet Union was expanding its military equipment to a point which, so far as we know, has never yet been attained by any people in time of peace, 137. We are, I think, entitled to say to the Russians that if they had followed our example, disarmed while we did, stopped arming instead of rearming more and more intensively and checked their policy of expansion, the problem now before us would not have arisen, the organization of peace would proceed in an entirely different atmosphere.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“There exists, however, a danger to peace even more serious than the armaments race. That is unilateral disarmament, an international situation in which one group of States foregoes the preparation of its defences, while another group devotes its best efforts to the development of its armaments. 136. On this point we, the representatives of the free nations, are able to state that our conscience is clear. After the last war, our countries acted with complete honesty; they did, of course, comply with the specific commitments they had entered into in respect of international co-operation, but they did even more — they retained, for as long as possible, the feelings of esteem and solidarity which they had for their war-time allies. If we must reproach ourselves for anything, it is for having pushed those feelings to the point of imprudence.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“Today, as in the past, we believe that the danger of war is inherent in a policy of competitive armament; such a policy imposes upon the peoples of the world burdens which involve a waste of strength and slow down the rate of social progress. 133. A disarmament policy, however, can be contemplated only if it is truly multilateral; it must be sincere, realistic, honest from the start and protected by concerted guarantees. It must be pursued by all the nations. It must develop in an atmosphere of trust; and this atmosphere can exist only if nothing is hidden from the nations voluntarily prepared to entrust themselves to one another’s good faith and good-will. 134. It is surely obvious that such an atmosphere is entirely incompatible with the policy of absolute secrecy maintained behind an iron curtain. 135.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“I should like, incidentally, to refer to two points in Mr, Vyshinsky’s speech, in order to define our own position: the condemnation of the armaments race and the renewed suggestion for a policy of disarmament. 132. The attitude adopted by Belgium from the outset, that is to say, from the time of the League of Nations, has never varied: we have always favoured, and continue to favour, a policy leading to a reduction of armaments, gradual, concerted, general, balanced, effectively supervised reduction; we have never missed an opportunity to support the efforts, made here and elsewhere, for international disarmament. We are not relinquishing this ideal.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
““At the present moment the problems with which the United Nations is faced — averting the menace of a new war, strengthening co-operation among nations and ensuring international peace and security — have become even more acute.” “[The United Nations is] based on the principles of the sovereign equality of all its Members, respect for the political independence and territorial integrity of every State ...” 130. I could go on with such quotations. If we could unreservedly believe in such declarations of principle, if they were not in conflict with a series of actions carried out so far under auspices of the Soviet Union, we should certainly have cause for rejoicing. 131.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“I then re-read it, word for word. I found in it many sentences to which I would subscribe without hesitation, for they express the ideal tor which, together with so many men of good-will, we have been fighting in the international scene since our youth. Here are some examples, and I quote: "[An answer must be given] to the question of what should be done… by the General Assembly… to respond clearly and firmly to the urgent appeal of the conscience of millions of human beings who hate war and long for peace.” That is correct.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“Those two last statements, given the circumstances in which we find ourselves and the power of the two nations on whose behalf they were made, are necessarily of very special significance and must not be left without reply. In the name of the Belgian delegation, I wish to comment on some of their aspects. 128. We listened with mixed feelings indeed to the speech of the representative of the Soviet Union. When, with befitting words, he spoke of exalted principles, we felt astonishment, some incredulity and yet some hope; but when, on the contrary, he made allegations which have been repeated often and almost as a matter of routine and which are contrary to facts reliably known to us, amazement, doubt and at times even indignation marked our reactions. 129. I had listened attentively to Mr. Vyshinsky’s speech [279th meeting].”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“The Brazilian representative spoke in distinguished terms of eternal principles and of experiences which, even when they were disappointing, were most instructive. Today the representatives of the Netherlands and Chile followed in the same strain to speak with frankness and clarity. On the very first day the United States representative, in a particularly constructive speech, made positive suggestions concerning ways of preventing possible aggression and of pursuing more effectively our struggle against all forms of human hardship, hunger, fear, disease. The USSR representative repeated the principles which he says his country proposes to observe in the pursuit of a policy of peace. 127.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“Finally, the United Nations has shown that in certain circumstances it can be, even as the Charter says, “a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of common ends”. 125. It may not be out of place to refer briefly to recent events. When right, after it has been flouted, is again supported by might, it ultimately triumphs. The Nazis learned this to their cost. And even as the United Nations is fighting in Korea to stop aggression, we are gathered here to seek, as is our duty, the means of strengthening the right, of preventing aggression, and of avoiding war. 126. From the first day, the general debate in the Assembly justified the high regard in which that forum of the United Nations is held everywhere. The representatives of several great countries at once began to deal with the most important problems.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“Lastly, it has shown that when preparations to repel aggression have not been made in time, there is no choice but to make the effort later under the pressure of events, though under much more difficult conditions. 121. These are not, of course, the only lessons of the Korean affair. It would be well if some of them were weighed on the other side of the fence as well, 122. Thus, it already seems clear that violence and surprise succeed for a relatively short period only. 123. Furthermore, it has been most comforting to see that moral force and the force of law still operate in our era. There is still such a thing as the conscience of mankind. It would be equally unrealistic to ignore the psychological reaction to the use of violence. 124.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“That is because these words express the ideal for which we fought and the great truth which we tried to incorporate in the Charter of the United Nations, and without which nothing would be left in the world but the law of the jungle. 117. Without, however, abandoning these high and necessary goals, we must face realities. The Korean adventure has helped us to do that. It has spelled out a triple lesson which our generation will never forget. 118. First, it has shown that aggression is still one of the means to which rulers dare to resort to further their plans. 119. Secondly, it has shown that military preparations carried on behind a curtain of mystery sometimes pay, in that they may give the aggressor a real though temporary advantage. 120.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“In spite of the disappointments of these last few years, this time everyone has come to New York with the stubborn hope that the Assembly will have something new to offer to the cause of peace, that it will help to enlighten men’s minds and to determine responsibilities, that it will once more appeal to forces whose names are familiar to us — justice, international-co-operation, law, security, the principles of the Charter. We have used these great, just and noble words so much that they have become worn; in the eyes of some they have lost part of their attraction and prestige. And we must admit that they have sometimes been abused in an attempt to conceal sordid interests or reprehensible actions. Yet we cannot do without them; they arise before us every time we undertake a great task.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“Never before have men throughout the world more fervently and unanimously wished for peace. Never have they seen more clearly than now the horror and the vanity of war. And yet, through an irony of fate, never has the whole earth resounded more loudly to the clash of arms. Never have the nations, in times of peace, made such an effort to rearm. 115. This cruel paradox is not of recent origin. The threat that weighs upon us has been increasing week by week for the past three or four years, Two and a half months ago, out of a sky already heavy with dark clouds, the aggression against South Korea came like a bolt of lightning. In this exceptionally serious situation, the United Nations lived up to the trust which the free peoples had placed in it. It reacted promptly and unequivocally. At the moment, all eyes are upon it. 116.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“To achieve such ends, no effort could be too great; though clouds might gather on the political horizon, Belgium remained convinced that no endeavour in the right direction was ever completely lost.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“van Zeeland expressed the hope, that the same spirit should prevail at each level of the international organization, the spirit of loyal and effective co-operation among all Members, the same respect for the fundamental rules of social life, and the same concern that the legitimate interests of each should be served while the interests of all were respected. 118. If that condition were met, then the Members of the United Nations would be enabled to draw gradually nearer to the ultimate aims which the Organization had set itself and short of which it could not rest without defeat. At that price the world might one day know peace with security, material prosperity, the raising of living standards for the masses and withal — social justice.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“He believed he was expressing the ideas which inspired all those who had worked unceasingly through long years for the establishment of a more secure and more just international order, when he said that such an order, could exist only if at the base there were the national State, at the apex, the United Nations and, between the two, the intermediary groups duly integrated for international action, each pursuing the same purposes, namely, to serve the individual and the collectivity. 116. Belgium had never ceased to work for and serve that ideal of international organization. In the past it had served it within the League of Nations; in the future it would serve it within Benelux, the West, Europe and, above all, the United Nations. 117. In conclusion, Mr.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“There could be no clearer evidence that any violation of those fundamental rights was of direct concern to the collective entity as a whole. Mr. van Zeeland regarded such a vote as an obvious step forward on the path of freedom and respect for the human person, the path which led to the achievement of One of the highest purposes of the United Nations itself, 115.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“In so doing, its object had been one which was shared by many of the representatives at the General Assembly of the United Nations, and which had been expressed in the far-reaching discussions concerning the means of ensuring the implementation of the international bill of human rights. The vote had shown that the members of the Strasbourg Assembly considered that any violation of the fundamental rights pertaining to a human person was a matter which, as such, was outside the purview of the powers and responsibilities of the national State; it should be possible, subject to the necessary precautions, to bring such a violation before a supreme court, an organ whose authority went beyond that of national States. 114.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“111. The earlier that co-ordination was achieved, the more valuable it would be. Nevertheless, it was better that two organizations should be doing the same work, even though they might, in their zeal, sometimes interfere with each other, than that nothing at all should be done. 112. He wished to draw a general conclusion from one of the resolutions adopted by the Assembly of the Council of Europe at Strasbourg, a conclusion which affected one of the items on the agenda of the current session. 113. After careful work in committee and a general discussion of a high standard, the Assembly had approved, by a majority of more than two-thirds, a resolution to the effect that a court of human rights should be established.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“throughout the world. 109. The setting up of such organizations unquestionably emphasized one aspect of a general problem which had already been mentioned during the current session by some Members of the United Nations, notably by Brazil (222nd meeting), namely, the multiplication of international bodies with overlapping functions. 110. The time had come for the United Nations to concern itself about that multiplicity, to take steps for the re-establishment of order and clarity, to co-ordinate and to simplify. Mr. de Freitas Valle had cited some impressive facts concerning the organs of the United Nations. The problem had already made itself acutely felt in Europe, and it was clear that the respective functions to be carried out by the Council of Europe, the OEEC and the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe must be reconsidered.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“The region was a necessary intermediary, but it fulfilled its role only if it acted as a link between the national State and the supreme Organization. 107. Europe would live and realize its political mission only if it were closely integrated in the universal Organization. Such was the spirit which had guided the founders of the new organization. It was for that reason that the authors of its Statute had inserted a clause stipulating that all precautions should be taken to ensure that the meetings of the European organs should in no way hamper those of the United Nations; though only a detail, the point was significant. 108. That being so, it was true to say that anything done to organize Europe directly served the same ends as were being pursued by the United Nations, namely, the improved organization of relations among men.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“In such circumstances, a question immediately sprang to mind, namely, whether there was no juridical conflict between such regional organizations as the Council of Europe or OEEC and the United Nations, whether there was not in fact a danger that their activities would clash. 104. Anyone who had attended the meetings in Strasbourg or Paris, or had taken part in them in any capacity whatsoever, could easily reply to that question. 105. The most, convinced champions of European organization were aware both of the needs and of the limitations of such an organization. 106. Again and again, it had been stressed that the errors made and repeated by nations should not be carried over to the regional organization. No region of the world could isolate itself, nor could any State.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“It had been necessary to start from scratch; no one could have foreseen what personal reactions, what clashes of ideas and national sentiments, what difficulties of language there might be. Yet there was not a single experienced parliamentarian who had not left Strasbourg with the impression that the Assembly of the Council of Europe had deliberated in an atmosphere of high dignity and genuine efficiency. 102. Mr. van Zeeland did not wish, in any way, to express an opinion on the resolutions of the Strasbourg Assembly. They would be submitted to the Committee of Ministers according to the Statute of the Council. But it seemed obvious to him that the European spirit had been expressed at the Strasbourg Assembly with such lofty power and dignity as to ensure that the resolutions would not remain a dead letter. 103.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“But the pact had been signed by the Governments because congresses organized by private initiative had succeeded in making clear to Governments, and at the same time to the general public, the determined, spontaneous and active will of a large section of opinion in each of the countries of Europe. It could be said of the Council of Europe, with even more truth than of most of the bodies established in democratic nations, that it was the expression of the free will of the peoples. 101. That, in Mr. van Zeeland’s opinion, was the explanation of the surprising success of the first Assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg. About one hundred men had met there, from thirteen different countries, representing very divergent political tendencies, and with no other point of contact than the desire to create a new Europe.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“The direct and courageous solutions so long awaited must be put into effect at once, as part of a long-term policy. 99. But the will to restore to Europe, through true, solid and lasting organization, the place it had enjoyed before the previous wars, had led the European nations to take a step of probably decisive, and in any case, historic significance, namely, the establishment of the Council of Europe. 100. The events preceding the birth of the Council were worthy of emphasis. It was obvious that in that matter European public opinion had preceded the desires and actions of the Governments themselves. It was true that the new organization was based on a decision whereby the Governments concerned had expressed their common will.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“He did not wish to minimize the difficulties of the task; but in his opinion the time for half measures was past. If Europe wished to regain its former status, it must restore its economy on new foundations. It was essential, by whatever method and whether in one or two stages, but without delay, to recreate a vast, territory where goods would be exchanged and where capital would circulate free from the obstacles that had hampered or immobilized it so far. 98. The removal of quantitative trade restrictions, the freeing of payments, the distribution of investments, were all problems capable of technical solutions eminently favourable to the production of goods, in other words, solutions that would meet the interests of all, both inside and outside Europe.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“He would refrain from giving his opinion, but many believed that the OEEC had so far merely touched upon the fundamental problems facing Europe. 96. To be sure, by technical methods and by the most efficient use of the possibilities of immediate action placed at its disposal by the enlightened generosity of the United States, OEEC had made possible a stabilization of the material situation which struck any impartial observer visiting the old countries of Europe. But obviously that did not suffice. The OEEC was faced with a magnificent but formidable task. It had to prepare and to foster the economic integration of Europe by organic and, hence, lasting methods. That was the task to which he hoped it would devote itself thenceforth, without neglecting others. 97.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“Thirdly, the word “European” emphasized the necessity for Europe to organize itself at a level above that of national States but below that of the world Organization. That was the idea of regionalism, the region, in the case in point, being Europe. 94. Finally, that complex title evoked the idea of the need for a special effort in the economic field. It was hoped that through such an effort nations would be assured of the material conditions which strengthened their freedom of action, while the peoples of Europe would be assured of the standard of living to which they were entitled at the current stage of scientific and technical knowledge. 95. Mr. van Zeeland would not go so far as to say that the OEEC had so far been more successful than the United Nations.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“In the first place, it evoked the concept of co-operation between peoples. There was no need to stress the cardinal importance of that idea. Everyone, was convinced that there was not a single State, however powerful, in the modem world which could isolate itself in its own power and aim at achieving its own happiness without concerning itself with others. Mankind had reached complete unanimity on that point, but divergences arose in respect of the methods of achieving such co-operation or the goals to which it must be directed. 92. Next, it expressed the idea that such co-operation among States at that time must be carried out in accordance with a specific, organic method. Hence the term “organization". 93.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“He recalled that because of his functions he had been called upon to preside over some of the councils of the new Europe, but explained that he would deal with those problems only from a personal point of view. 90. Thanks to the Marshall Plan, nineteen countries had benefited by the efforts of the United States to restore normal conditions of life, production and exchange throughout the world. They had grouped themselves in an organization of limited aims but very great significance, the Organization for European Economic Co-operation. That title stated precisely what it was intended to state. It comprised, in fact, the four essential words corresponding to the basic ideas of the whole undertaking and, in Mr. van Zeeland’s opinion, it met the needs of modem times. 91.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“van Zeeland referred briefly to two groups of very different character and with widely differing objectives, which nevertheless served to illustrate his argument: on the one hand, the organic association of peoples’ republics under the aegis of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and, at the other end of the world, the strengthening of the bonds constituting the Pan American Union. 89. He then pointed out two other signs of the need to organize nations at a level between that of the national State and that of the United Nations, and in that connexion referred to Europe and to the forms which the expression of the people’s will had taken in order to regain for the old Continent, decimated by the war, its role, its prestige, and its former prosperity.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“Even had it been otherwise, even had the United Nations from the beginning, and with universal consent, acquitted itself satisfactorily of all its tasks without exception, the need for intermediate organizations would still have made itself felt. For that method was imposed by concrete realities from the demands from which there was no escape. 87. It had been one of the weaknesses of the late League of Nations that it had failed to make use of such forces and had in fact by-passed problems by making a direct transition from the national State to the world organization. But, as always happened when an idea was right and mature, the desire for regional association had nevertheless found expression in many parts of the world. 88. Mr.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“But between the two categories of problems there was a third category which could be solved neither by the national State acting in isolation nor by the collective intervention of the United Nations. The proper solution of such problems required the intervention of intermediate organizations, and particularly of regional arrangements, for the existence of which provision had been made in the United Nations Charter. 85. The failure of the United Nations in certain spheres — whether temporary or otherwise was unimportant — had made it particularly clear that the establishment of such intermediate organizations was both mandatory and of immediate urgency. 86.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“Furthermore, some of those problems arose at a level at which they could not be dealt with effectively by an international organization conceived and established at the universal level. After the war, national. States were confronted with numerous problems which were of equal gravity and urgency but which required vastly differing solutions. 83. Some of the problems were related to activities which only a national State could exercise within its own frontiers. Other problems at the opposite end of the political scale were beyond the capacity and competence of any national State. Their solution was inevitably and solely dependent upon agreement among all the peoples of the world, sought at the level of the United Nations. 84.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“No one would deny that responsibility for such shortcomings and deficiencies lay with the nations which constituted the United Nations, particularly with those Powers which, either de jure or de facto, had assumed its direction, and especially with those Powers which had used their rights and powers for ends other than those of the community as a whole. 81. It must nevertheless be recognized that, however great, the goodwill inspiring the vast majority of the Members of the United Nations, whatever support they had received from the departments working under their orders, the problems confronting the peoples after the recent world war had been beyond the scope of any organization in their magnitude, complexity and diversity. 82.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“The role played by the United Nations since its inception in the relations both between States and between individuals had disappointed large sections of the population. The severest critics of the Organization included those who, despite everything, were the most convinced of the need to organize international relations at the world level. 80. Was it the time to inquire into the causes of the relative failure of the United Nations? Mr. van Zeeland thought that it was not. He wished to emphasize, how far the United Nations had fallen short of the magnificent objectives it had set before mankind at the close of the war — lasting and universal peace, economic prosperity, better material and spiritual standards of life for all men throughout the world.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“The advantage of free general discussion was that it enabled Members of the Organization to make their points, to bring up questions of a magnitude beyond the scope of any commission and far transcending their solution in importance. 78. The speeches hitherto made had focused attention on many aspects of the life of the Organization, on its needs and potentialities. Mr. van Zeeland would in his turn submit to the Assembly a few reflections, which were admittedly of a general nature, but which had nevertheless a close bearing on the concrete realities of the time. Those realities were of direct concern to the United Nations by virtue both of the limits they imposed and of the opportunities they afforded for action on the level appropriate to the Organization, namely the world level. 79. It would be vain to harbour illusions.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)
“Mr. van ZEELAND said that, in commenting on the opening meetings of the General Assembly, an American newspaper had recently expressed the belief that the United Nations had already come of age. That was perhaps an over-optimistic view. So vast an Organization, the objectives of which were rightly and necessarily ambitious, could not be expected to mature early. Many of the difficulties encountered by the late League of Nations had been due to the excessive hopes and over-impatience which had presided at its birth. The United Nations was still taking its first steps. It would not do, however, to take refuge behind an easy scepticism and ignore mistakes, forget shortcomings, let opportunities slip and thus run the risk of once more arriving too late.”
1949-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 4 (1949)