YouSaid · the spoken record

GURINOVICH

lines on the record: 943
first: 1966-09-24
most recent: 1989-09-24
sittings or episodes: 23
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

“Is it surprising, then, that the United States is opposing the preparation in the United Nations of a world treaty on the non-use of force in international relations and that it is unresponsive to the proposal for a treaty between the Warsaw Treaty and NATO countries on the mutual non-use of military force and the maintenance of relations of peace? 60. Let us now consider the question of preventing an arms race in outer space. The earlier Soviet proposals on this subject are well known.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“It is not concern for international peace and security that motivates the United States. This was acknowledged even by the United States Secretary of Defense, Mr. Weinberger, when he said that much of the energy resources that the United States needs and many strategically important minerals are thousands of miles away from United States shores and that in order to gain access to these resources—to be more exact, other peoples' resources—the United States must increase its military and naval might. Thus there is a direct link with the imperialist practice of proclaiming vast regions of the globe "spheres of United States vital interests". 59.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“According to his data, the United States has an advantage of 7,000 tactical nuclear weapons. It is also worth recalling that the United States has encircled the Soviet Union with a network of military bases and installations; that since the Second World War it has resorted to military force 260 times to further its foreign policy goals and threatened to use nuclear weapons on 19 occasions, including 4 times against the Soviet Union; and that since 1975 alone it has dispatched its forces abroad in about 50 cases. The United States is building new military bases on foreign soil, expanding existing ones, and sometimes even increasing its payments, as if a higher rent increases the security of the owner of a house who is forced to share it with a sick trespasser who is dangerous to the people around him. 58.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“It has always been the other way around, and we should like to point out that in the so-called passive years the United States increased its strategic nuclear potential by a factor of 2.5, developing new kinds of arms and weapons systems, increasing their range and accuracy and multiplying their destructive capabilities many times over. It is also common knowledge that, notwithstanding its mounting propaganda campaign about "lagging behind", the United States in effect enjoys an advantage over the Soviet Union in the number of nuclear warheads. As stated by Mr. Romulo, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Philippines, speaking in the general debate on 26 September , the United States strategic arsenal includes some 9,500 warheads, while the Soviet Union has 7,700.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“The United States is not only increasing its own military expenditures but is also asserting its right to dictate to its allies their levels of military spending. As a result, the aggregate military expenditures of capitalist countries increased seventeen-fold from 1950 to 1982. 57. The United States is attempting to justify its obstructionist stand on arms limitation and genuine disarmament by demagoguery about "Soviet military superiority", a supposed "passivity" on the part of the United States in the past and the resultant American "lagging behind". Even favorably disposed Western analysts have failed, however, to come up with a single instance in the entire post-war history of the Soviet Union's having taken the lead in developing any new kind of arms, thus forcing the United States to take counter- measures.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“It is sabotaging the implementation of the United Nations resolutions on the non-first-use of nuclear weapons, a freeze on nuclear capabilities, nuclear disarmament, a comprehensive nuclear-test-ban treaty, the renunciation of the production of neutron weapons and of new types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons and on the preparation of a convention on the elimination of chemical warfare capabilities. It should be noted in this regard that, according to reports in the United States press, the Pentagon already has in its possession enough chemical weapons to destroy the entire population of the Earth 50 times over. The United States is opposing a freeze on and a subsequent reduction of military budgets.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“The proposals put forward by the United States provide for selective reductions whereby the United States would end up with three times as many warheads as the USSR. Such proposals are designed to disrupt the existing structure of Soviet strategic forces. 56. The United States is pursuing the same self-seeking and negative course with regard to all other disarmament issues. It is blocking the Vienna talks on the reduction of armed forces and armaments in Central Europe.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“It should also be emphasized that the American Pershing II and cruise missiles to be deployed in Western Europe are capable of destroying targets throughout the Middle East and over half the African continent, that is to say, they are targeted at several regions of the world—Europe, the Middle East and Africa. 54. Let us now consider the question of the strategic arms of the United States and the Soviet Union, which are roughly equal although difficult in structure. The Soviet Union has proposed the reduction of such arms by one fourth and, concurrently, the reduction to equal, agreed levels of the aggregate number of nuclear warheads deployed on the remaining delivery vehicles. 55.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“With regard to missiles in Europe, the United States seems to harbour the illusory hope that somehow it might be possible to force the Soviet Union to end up with zero missiles in exchange for zero reductions on the part of NATO; or, according to the latest United States proposal, to force the Soviet Union to reduce its medium-range missiles and allow new American missiles to be deployed in Europe over and above the present NATO nuclear potential. Such an approach is totally contrary to the principle of undiminished security of other States, as recognized by the United Nations, and the principle of equality and equal security.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“At the same time—and this is another facet of the monstrous plan designed to hold the States of Western Europe hostage to the United States—the United States of America is forcing them to break off mutually beneficial economic and other ties with the Eastern European States, notwithstanding the fact that Soviet orders alone have been providing employment for no less than one million people in Western Europe. Moreover, the United States is strangling the economies of Western European countries with its high interest rates and an artificially inflated exchange rate for the United States dollar. 53.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“These proposals, if agreed to, would provide ample opportunities for mutually beneficial co-operation by the States and peoples of Europe in all areas and in a climate of lasting peace and reliable security. 52. What are those who oppose such initiatives seeking to attain? They want to divide Europe with a palisade of American missiles. They are preparing to deploy neutron weapons on the continent of Europe and demanding that their NATO allies further increase their military spending.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“In the area of conventional arms it is seeking a reduction in armed forces and conventional weapons in Central Europe and advocating that their numbers be frozen by the States permanent members of the Security Council and States having military agreements with them. 50. Finally, the States parties to the Warsaw Treaty have proposed to the NATO countries the conclusion of a treaty on the mutual non-use of force and the maintenance of relations of peace, which would have as its centerpiece an undertaking not to be the first to use either nuclear or conventional weapons against each other, that is, not to use any military force against each other. 51.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“Finally, the Soviet Union is prepared, if a mutually accepted agreement is reached that includes the non- deployment by the United States of new missiles in Europe, to reduce its medium-range missiles in the European part of the Soviet Union to a number equal to the number of British and French missiles and to eliminate all missiles subject to reduction, including SS-20s. Thus, the Soviet Union would be left in Europe with a smaller number of medium-range missiles than it had in 1976, that is to say, before the modernization of Soviet missiles began. 49. The Soviet Union supports the proposals for nuclear- free zones in northern Europe and in the Balkans and for a 500-600-kilometre-wide zone in Central Europe that would be free of battlefield nuclear weapons.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“Turning first to Europe, approximate parity exists between the military potentials of the two social and political systems, though the concentration of combat units and military hardware is 20 times higher than the world average. 48. The Soviet Union, constantly striving for an improvement in the situation on the European continent and for the elimination of the threat of war, is proposing that both medium-range and tactical nuclear-weapon systems in Europe be destroyed or that the deployment in Europe of any new medium-range missile systems be renounced while all existing systems are reduced, by both sides, by approximately two thirds. The Soviet Union is proposing that agreement be reached on parity in both delivery vehicles—missiles and aircraft—and their warheads.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“Are there real possibilities of a radical improvement in the current political situation, of solving the problems created by the imperialists, of a return to the path of detente and co-operation? 45. Yes, there are. Such opportunities are being offered by the Soviet Union and other States of the socialist community, by the members of the Movement of Non- Aligned Countries and by the overwhelming majority of the States Members of the United Nations. Such opportunities have also been adumbrated in earlier General Assembly resolutions. 46. Let us try to imagine the world as it would be had the constructive proposals of the forces of socialism and peace been implemented and made a reality. Let us try to analyse what is preventing the implementation of those peace initiatives. 47.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“They are engaged in gross interference in the internal affairs of other States, poisoning the political atmosphere by staging acts of provocation, and deliberately impairing the potential of the peoples for economic and social progress. Driven by their imperialist ambitions, they are trying to impose their imperialist will on the world through the use or threat of force, including the threat of nuclear force. 43. The time available for effectively solving the problems of preserving peace and achieving true disarmament is limited and growing ever shorter. In these conditions the United Nations and its Member States cannot simply register these alarming facts; they must act and act decisively and without delay. 44.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“Tensions in the world have reached a very dangerous level, a fact clearly indicated in the statement by the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, Mr. Yuri Andropov, on 28 September 1983 The aggravation of the world situation is the result of the policy being openly pursued primarily by the United States, and by its closest military and political allies as well, a policy that undermines peace and international security. In their attempts to achieve military superiority for the United States of America over the Soviet Union and, by the same token, for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization over the Warsaw Treaty Organization, they are constantly whipping up the arms race, particularly the nuclear arms race.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“40. Please accept, Sir, the congratulations of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic on your election to the presidency of the thirty-eighth session of the General Assembly, together with our best wishes for every success. We thank the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Hungarian People's Republic, Mr. Imre Hollai, for the dignified and responsible manner in which he discharged his functions as President of the previous session. 41. Our delegation welcomes the admission of Saint Christopher and Nevis as a Member of the United Nations. 42. As many preceding speakers have already pointed out, this session of the General Assembly is being held in the context of a difficult international situation.”
1983-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 38 (1983)
“If we do not, the wise sphinxes to which the United States Secretary of State recently alluded in justifying Washington's policies will no longer be there. The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR, guided by the testament of Lenin that the Soviet State wishes to live in peace with all peoples and directs its efforts to the building of its own State, will actively promote the preparation and adoption of measures designed to avert the threat of nuclear war, strengthen peace, bring about co operation among peoples and solve other problems on the agenda of this session of the General Assembly in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“In those circumstances United Nations efforts should be directed towards making the intercommunal talks a success, while fully respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Cypriot State and its policy of non alignment. Thus in the final analysis underlying all these deadlocks there are selfish imperialist interests and a reluctance to take account of the real situation in an evolving world and of the will of the peoples. Today political wisdom lies in concerted, persistent and patient efforts to solve the problems threatening universal peace. In that way, even if not all the problems are solved at once, many will be. It is particularly important, of course, to solve the most pressing problems of our time: that of averting a nuclearwar, curbing the arms race and achieving disarmament.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“This can be said about almost every situation of conflict and outstanding problem the continuing conflict between Iraq and the Islamic Republic of Iran, opposition to the peaceful reunification of Korea free from outside interference, and to the withdrawal of foreign troops from South Korea, the refusal to take part in, or the obstruction of, disarmament talks, the desire to put weapons into outer space and other pressing problems. Let us take as an example the problem of Cyprus. Here again we see who is doing what to impede United Nations efforts to defend the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Cyprus and to demilitarize the island by withdrawing all foreign troops and eliminating all foreign bases; how attempts are being made to impose on the Cypriots a solution alien to them.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“At present our industry produces 30 times more than in the pre war year, 1940, despite the fact that it was almost totally destroyed by the Hitler aggressors in the Second World War and that those aggressors murdered a quarter of its population. Education, science, health care and culture have made great strides in the Republic. We live and work in a socialist democracy which guarantees genuine rights and freedoms for every human being. In order to continue their successful and constructive work the Byelorussian people, like other peoples of the USSR and of the entire planet, need above all lasting peace. Deadlocks in the international arena do not occur of themselves. It is well known that they are created deliberately.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“The sixtieth anniversary of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is clear testimony to the triumph of the Leninist national policy and to the historic achievements of socialism. The workers of the Byelorussian SSR cherish the fact that they belong to the unified family of Soviet peoples. They realize that everything we have done and achieved has been brought about by the concerted efforts of all the peoples of our multinational homeland. We have every reason to be proud of our achievements in political, economic and social development. In this period Byelorussia has become a Republic with a highly developed industry and intensive agriculture.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“The creation and the successful development of the Soviet Union are of undying international significance and an important historic landmark in the age old struggle of progressive mankind for equality, the progress of nations and world renewal. Faithful to the principle of peace and friendship among peoples, to which it pledged itself at the hour of its birth, the Soviet State takes this as the basis of all its activities in the international arena. It underlies all its successes and achievements. Leninist ideals and principles embodied in the decisions of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the highest State bodies of the Land of the Soviets and in the Constitution of the USSR determine the approach of the Soviet State to all problems of relations between countries and peoples.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“The Soviet Union and other socialist States oppose that policy of diktat and blackmail by a clear and unequivocal policy of developing international economic co operation on a basis of equality and in the interest of all the participants and with due regard for the special interests of the developing countries, at the same time providing them with assistance on a scale greater than that recommended by the United Nations. Given the deterioration in the international situation caused by the policy of imperialism, of overriding importance for the destiny of mankind is the positive implementation of the Leninist strategy of peace, the Peace Programme for the 1980s worked out by the twenty sixth Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and promoted by the Soviet Union, which is celebrating its sixtieth anniversary.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“The weapon of coercion is being used also against the developed countries allies of the United States. One recent example of this in addition to the constant demands for an increase in their military budgets, is the unseemly efforts of the United States Administration directed against a mutually advantageous project for a gas pipeline between Siberia and Western Europe. We almost have the impression of hearing a cowboy's lasso whistle over some countries of Western Europe. AU this is a significant lesson for the young developing countries, which should indeed think twice before developing ties, especially economic ties, with the United States.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“It is precisely those in the ruling circles of that country that impede by every means available the implementation of United Nations decisions on the establishment of a new international economic order, obstruct the launching of global negotiations and defend in every possible way the activities of transnational corporations, which are detrimental to the sovereignty and the economies of the developing countries. The policy of blackmail and threats is being employed not only against socialist States but also against those developing countries that have chosen the road of independent development and social progress. Attempts are being made to split the non aligned movement, to play down its significance as a major factor in improving the international situation.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“A vivid example of the policy of force and blackmail as a means of carrying out imperialist plans on a global scale is provided by the actions of the United States aimed at undermining the regional organizations of the developing countries, nullifying the United Nations decision to convene the Conference on the Indian Ocean, opposing the drafting of a world treaty on the non use of force in international relations and refusing to sign the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The same strategy of force is being carried out by the United States in the realm of international economic relations.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“When the conflict between the United Kingdom and Argentina erupted as a result of the stubborn opposition of the United Kingdom to the decolonization of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), the United States ignored its obligations as far as Argentina was concerned, extended the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to Latin America and took advantage of the situation in order openly to assist in the colonialist plunder and to penetrate the South Atlantic region.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“As regards the Namibian problem, the so called new doctrine basically encourages the South African racists to retain Namibia as a colony of South Africa and to impose on the Namibian people conditions that are advantageous to Pretoria. The Apartheid regime is allowed to use force in pursuing its colonial policy, to employ the piratical methods of the Israeli militarists in Lebanon, and to attempt to destroy the South West Africa People's Organization and to exclude it from participating in decisions on the future of its homeland. The task of the United Nations is to prevent this and to work for the early attainment of independence by the people of Namibia. Washington is known never to have fulfilled its obligations as regards the developing countries.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“When in August 1981 the racists of Pretoria launched their large scale aggression, which is still going on now, against the People's Republic of Angola, the United States chose to act as a forthright advocate of that naked act of aggression. In the Security Council it vetoed the draft resolution strongly condemning the aggression and calling for its immediate cessation. The veto was in no way accidental; it constituted the implementationof what had earlier been proclaimed the new regional strategy of the United States regarding southern Africa. The basic tenets of this strategy, which in its very essence is a doctrine of recolonization, amount to nothing less than a naked threat to use South Africa to bring about the destabilization of independent African States.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“This is clearly demonstrated by the continuing hostile actions of the United States of America against Cuba, Afghanistan, the countries of Indo China; Nicaragua and other States of the world, and this should serve as a warning. It is also shown by its support for reactionary anti people regimes in Chile, South Korea, El Salvador and other countries. The long chain of irrefutable facts indicative of the dangerous course followed by the foreign policy of the United States, which is a threat to peace and social progress, includes the well known action of that country against the anti colonialist struggle of the peoples of the world.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“It also implies a constant desire to contribute by practical action to curbing the arms race in the world and strengthening security by gradually building up mutual confidence on a just and reciprocal basis. This is exactly what the States of the socialist community are doing. Unfortunately, this cannot be said for the United States and its partners in aggressive blocs. Yet another example of the fact that the Washington Administration adheres to diametrically opposite principles is its policy with respect to Afghanistan, South East Asia and the Caribbean. They are trying to achieve their aim of barring the way to social reforms by staging military adventures against peoples seeking freedom and progress.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“We take a positive view of the principles that were adopted at that Conference for the solution of the Palestinian question and the Middle East problem as a whole. Nowadays it is more necessary than ever before for political leaders to demonstrate common sense, clear sightedness, prudence and genuine realism in their approach to the problems that arise. We should also, of course, be guided always by the fact that international detente calls for peaceful co operation with other States, not military preparations or hostility toward other States. Detente is a conscientious observance in good faith of the norms of international law and the principle of non intervention in the internal affairs of others.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“This problem cannot be resolved without strict observance of the principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by forces; the recognition and exercise of the right of the Arab people of Palestine to self determination and to create their own independent State on Palestinian soil, which must be freed from Israeli occupation; and ensuring the right of all States of the region to a secure existence and development in conditions of mutual respect for sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity, with appropriate international guarantees. This is the only course that will lead to a settlement, as envisaged in the Soviet proposal on the convening of an international conference on the Middle East. The results of the Twelfth Arab Summit Conference at Fez constitute a constructive contribution to the settlement process.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“The new plan for a Middle East settlement which has been announced by the President of the United States and widely publicized does not contain anything new. The United States proposals are flawed in their very essence. They fail to provide for the liberation of all Arab territories seized in 1967, deny the right of the Palestinians to create their own State and disregard the PLO, This is nothing but a continuance of the treacherous Camp David policy of acquiescence, designed to enslave the peoples of that region. Our position on the Middle East problem has always been and continues to be crystal clear. The complex problem of the Middle East can be resolved only by the concerted efforts of all the parties concerned, which must certainly include the PLO, the sole legitimate representative of the Arab people of Palestine.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“In shamelessly arming the aggressor, which has repeatedly been condemned by the United Nations, and overtly and covertly acting as its accomplice, the United States contrary to its obligations as a permanent member of the Security Council is doing everything possible to establish in that area an order which would enable it and its henchmen to do as they please in other people's territories. However, they should know better than to labor under such a delusion. Attempts to rule the destinies of the peoples of the Middle East from Washington or Tel Aviv are inevitably doomed to failure. The selfless struggle of the Palestinian people under the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the courage and determination of the Syrians and the Lebanese, have clearly demonstrated this.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“A typical example of this reign of bloody terror a war of annihilation which is nothing short of genocide is the aggression launched by Israel against Lebanon and the Arab people of Palestine. The tragedy in Lebanon has shaken the entire world and provided yet further evidence that in this latest criminal adventure, in addition to all the others, the strategic allies, Israel and the United States, acted hand in hand. Scores of thousands of human beings and the destiny of hundreds of thousands more, have fallen victim to the most sophisticated American military technology, tried out with the help of Israel in Lebanon.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“That proposal develops further the work already begun on questions of preventing nuclear war and of nuclear disarmament ranging from a simultaneous freeze on the production and deployment of nuclear weapons and their delivery vehicles to the elimination of existing nuclear capabilities as well as of strengthening the security of non nuclear countries. It is designed to ensure the safe development of nuclear energy for constructive purposes in all countries. Any destruction of non military nuclear facilities should unquestionably be qualified as a nuclear attack, which, in the definition of the United Nations, is the gravest crime against humanity. The aggressive actions of the imperialists and their henchmen even today are leading to bloodshed in many flashpoints on our planet.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“Further evidence of the readiness of the USSR to reduce the nuclear threat, to curb the arms race and to make our planet safer for life and for constructive work is provided by the proposals aimed at the speedy cessation and total prohibition of nuclear weapon testing; these were formulated with due regard for the views and suggestions of many countries, including suggestions regarding verification and regarding an appeal to all the nuclear Powers to declare, within an agreed time frame, a moratorium on all nuclear explosions, pending the conclusion of a treaty banning them completely. The USSR initiative entitled Intensification of efforts to remove the threat of nuclear war and to ensure a safe development of nuclear energy is also of vast significance.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“A set of specific and constructive proposals set out in the memorandum of the USSR on Averting the growing nuclear threat and curbing the arms race, which was submitted to the Assembly at its second special session devoted to disarmament creates possibilities for making progress along all avenues leading to the limitation and radical reduction of armaments, whether nuclear weapons, other weapons of mass destruction, including chemical weapons, conventional weapons, or naval activities. There is no kind of weapon which the Soviet Union would not be prepared to limit or ban on a basis of reciprocity.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“The step taken by the USSR is a powerful stimulus for the drastic of the threat of nuclear war and for the strengthening of trust in relations between States. The exclusion from international relations of force in all its manifestations, both nuclear and conventional, would be fostered by early completion of the work on a world treaty on the non use of force in international relations, a draft of which was submitted by the Soviet Union in 1976 for consideration by the United Nations.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“Today's realities demand the adoption of urgent and effective measures for the prevention of nuclear war. Particular responsibility for that lies with the permanent members of the Security Council which are in addition nuclear weapon Powers. In present conditions. the commitment by each nuclear weapon Power not to be the first to use nuclear weapons would be of key significance for removing the threat of nuclear war. That is the express duty of the nuclear Powers; it is their primary responsibility towards mankind. As is known, the USSR, which takes a. very serious view of its status as a nuclear Power and as a permanent member of the Security Council, has already shouldered that responsibility.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“As to notions that one's own security can be strengthened by chasing the phantom of military supremacy, plans to achieve such supremacy simply cannot be carried out, and measures undertaken to that end can only aggravate military nations and lower the level of security for all. While, in this nuclear age, strategic stability based on an approximate balance of forces is an extremely important basis for universal security, it is no guarantee of that security. Mankind can free itself from the deadly threat only by gradually lowering the level of military confrontation, through the implementation of agreed measures on the limitation and reduction of armaments and on disarmament. There is no other way, for security and disarmament are inseparably linked.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“In his message at the twelfth special session the second special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament, the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, Mr. Leonid Brezhnev, described as indisputable and determinant the fact that nuclear war, should it break out, could, in the current international situation, mean the destruction of human civilization and perhaps en the end of life on Earth. Such is the harsh imperative of this nuclear age: there can be no security for anyone through nuclear adventurism. A nuclear Power can be secure only if its foreign and military policies pose no threat to any other country.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“There can be no doubt that any use of nuclear weapons will cause a chain reaction. That being so, strategic planning of this kind, in any of its versions, represents in actual fact planning for a nuclear catastrophe. But those so called planners ought to be reminded that planning and preparation for of aggression are qualified in international instruments specifically in the Charter of the United Nations, in the judgment of the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal, and in the Definition of Aggression and other United Nations documents as a crime against peace and against humanity. Military political stereotypes inherited from the time of the former monopoly on the atom bomb are now outmoded.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“The world has been subjected to cynical bombast about first, second and subsequent nuclear strikes, about nuclear escalation in doses, about demonstrative and selective use of nuclear weapons, and so forth. Over the past year and a half, the United States has put forward more different concepts of the use of force primarily in a nuclear context than in any preceding decade. They talk about a secured nuclear war, then they talk about limited war, about blitzkrieg, and about protracted war. All these statements and actions are permeated with the idea of the first use of nuclear weapons and an insane reliance on winning a nuclear victory. Such notions are the sheerest adventurism, fraught with enormous dangers for mankind. They constitute nothing but naked war propaganda.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“The United States is instigating an anti communist crusade and is spreading lies about an alleged Soviet threat and other fabrications in order to impose its latest missiles on the territories of others and to cause an impasse in disarmament talks. Those provocative actions are camouflaged by demagogic utterances about a commitment to peace through strength; to the prevention of wars in general. But the legitimate question arises of whether the authors of those pronouncements did not indeed have an opportunity, for example, to prevent or halt the Israeli aggression in Lebanon. Acting at variance with the commitment to prevent nuclear war they entered into in the 1970s, Washington's strategists are now proclaiming the admissibility and even the acceptability of a nuclear conflict.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“Is this not an express policy of military and political confrontation, a policy of seizing dominant positions on a global scale is it not making this all part of a fundamental principle It would be difficult to imagine a political credo in greater opposition to the requirements of the Charter. The policy of discarding in practice the principle of equality and equal security, which, in this nuclear age, is an absolutely vital principle, erodes the mainstays of the structure of relations between States and contributes to the threat of war. The United States is provoking tension and protracting conflicts; it acts on its own behalf and through proxies in order to justify the further buildup of arms and its growing demand that its allies toe the line.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)
“A close analysis of statements by leading United States officials on the substance of the military and political problems, in the world today and a careful analysis of the goals of the intensive rearmament programme that has been launched in the United States and of the strategic concepts being put forward cannot but show that Washington's present course is by no means peace oriented. We have all heard the frank statement at the 11th meeting by the United States Secretary of State, Mr. Shultz, that the United States is guided in its actions by the principle of the position of force and will be unswerving in its use of it.”
1982-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 37 (1982)