YouSaid · the spoken record

KISELEV

lines on the record: 504
first: 1946-09-24
most recent: 1965-09-24
sittings or episodes: 13
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

“The common people and the ex-servicemen of the allied armies who sincerely believed that victory over fascist Germany would also mean the speedy emancipation of the Spanish people from the yoke of their fascist oppressors, may well ask: how can continuance of the fascist regime in Spain be explained? Why has the war criminal Franco not been punished for the crimes he has committed? Why is he still in power? The same indignant question is put by the Byelorussian people, whose territory was despoiled by Franco’s troops. We must answer these questions and settle this problem more rapidly.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Two years after the military defeat of fascism by democratic forces we have still to cope with the unsolved problem of liquidating the fascist regime and setting up a democratic order in Spain. The victory of democratic forces over fascism is not yet a victory for the Spanish people. The freedom-loving Spanish people bore the first blow of the nazi war machine. Hitler’s army and Mussolini’s troops, taking advantage of the policy of “non-intervention”, forcibly set up a fascist regime under Franco. For eleven years now Spain has been under fascist occupation and the Spanish people have been heroically struggling against the Franco regime. The existence of Franco Spain is a serious threat to international peace and security and a factor which strengthens and encourages reactionary forces in other countries.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“For a just and prompt solution of this most important problem we must show our eagerness to co-operate with one another in the interest of international peace; we must unite our efforts; we cannot do this by pitting one country against the other, by creating blocs directed against peace-loving States and by pursuing a policy designed to place some countries under the domination of a stronger Power. The Byelorussian delegation is convinced that, if the Members of the United Nations sincerely wish it, these difficulties can be overcome and international peace and security attained. The United Nations is once again faced with the Spanish problem. This question has been frequently discussed in international organizations.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“At the present time the sources of our difficulties, alarm and anxiety are the results of the machinations of warmongers, their friends and abettors. The peoples who have endured the indescribable horrors of war long, as never before, for peace. Only a durable and stable democratic peace will afford mankind an opportunity of healing the wounds of war speedily, and raising the material and cultural level of the common people. A general reduction of armaments will serve the cause of peace and international security and, by strengthening confidence between great and small nations, will reduce military budgets and thus relieve the tax burdens of the population.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Whatever difficulties may arise in finding a favourable solution for these problems, there is not one of them which could not be satisfactorily solved if the great and small Powers followed a joint and agreed policy. Conversely, not a single important international problem of our time can be solved with any measure of success by pursuing a policy of unilateral action, faits accomplis or other methods of an aggressive diplomacy which takes no account of the lawful interest of other countries. Only by the friendly co-operation of nations, based on their equality, on full respect for their freedom and independence, on consideration for their legitimate and vital interest, can a stable peace be ensured.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“These are the questions which are bring asked by the common people. The Security Council must answer them not only in words but in deeds. History tells us that the former League of Nations smothered the problem of disarmament in futile and endless negotiations. We must bear these lessons of history in mind. No one denies that the solution of the problem of a general reduction of armaments will require much time and that we shall have to overcome great difficulties. The Second World War is becoming more and more a memory, but the lessons of that war should convince us that effective steps must be taken now to prevent a new war. The last war has left many problems unsolved, among them problems of basic significance for the further development of Europe and the whole world.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The common people of all countries are concerned because, under the screen of resolutions for peace and hypocritical pledges of peace, secret preparations are being made for a new war and armaments am bring increased in certain countries. We still remember the examples of Hitlerite Germany, fascist Italy and militarist Japan. We may well ask why the Anglo-American Joint Staffs are bring maintained now that the war is over and yesterday’s pretenders to world hegemony have been defeated, and now that the Allies have every possibility of keeping these countries disarmed for a sufficiently long period. What is the necessity for the standardization of armaments as is now bring practised? Who needs a treaty for the defence of the Latin-American countries? Who intends to attack them?”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Nor is the resolution of 14 December 1946 on the “Principles governing the general regulation and reduction of armaments” being implemented satisfactorily. The resolution says that the General Assembly recognizes the necessity of a rapid general regulation and reduction of armaments and armed forces, and recommends that the Security Council give prompt consideration to formulating the practical measures, according to their priority, which are essential to achieve this end. unfortunately, the Security Council has not obtained substantial results on this question either. The peoples of the world have just endured the most bloody and destructive war in history, a war that was begun by Hitler and Mussolini. Mankind is tired of war and wants a durable and stable peace.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Molotov, at the last session of the General Assembly, said: “Science and scientists cannot be shut up in a box and kept under lock and key,” and he added: “It should not be forgotten that atomic bombs used by one side may be opposed by atomic bombs and something else from the other side, and then the final collapse of all the present-day calculations of certain conceited but short-sighted people will become only too obvious”. We should give serious thought to this highly authoritative statement. The solution of this supremely important problem would undoubtedly facilitate agreement on other questions connected with the use of atomic energy. Consequently, the Byelorussian delegation hopes that a positive solution of this problem will be found by the Security Council at a very early date.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“There must be strict international control over atomic energy. This plan fully accords with the principles of the United Nations and the fundamental interests of the peoples of all countries, who demand an immediate solution of so vitally important a problem as the organization of control over atomic energy. There is no doubt that the atomic bomb now plays a great part in the political calculations of the individual leaders responsible for the policies of certain Powers. I must say quite frankly that those who reckon that any one country can long retain a monopoly of the atomic bomb are badly mistaken. Mr.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Certain circles are attempting to present the matter in such alight as to blame the delay in implementing the General Assembly resolution on the Soviet Union, which is opposed to die adoption of the United States proposal The Soviet Union’s plan has been repeatedly explained very fully and clearly. I shall only point out that the Soviet proposals call for outlawing the atomic bomb. According to these proposals, the production and utilization of atomic energy for military purposes should be prohibited, and the atomic weapon and all other types of weapons of mass destruction should be barred from national armaments. The discovery of atomic energy should be used to improve the standards of living of the peoples of the whole world, to raise their level of prosperity and to further the progress of human culture.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“An attentive study of the United States plan clearly shows that its authors made considerable efforts to ensure that, if the plan were adopted, the United States would be guaranteed the decisive role in producing and exploiting atomic energy. The failure to achieve any perceptible progress was due to the attitude taken by the United States representative in the Security Council. The United States proposals did not provide for the signing of an international convention prohibiting the atomic weapon. Moreover, the United States representative on the Security Council categorically declared that he could not agree to the conclusion of such a convention until the United States proposal was adopted in full. We know, however, that tins proposal entirely satisfies the interests of the United States as regains the manufacture of atomic armaments.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“That fact undoubtedly merits the attention of the representatives in the General Assembly. The peoples of the whole world patiently wait for us to solve this problem. The Heads of the corporations, trusts and syndicates of certain Powers are doing all they can to wreck the work of the Atomic Energy Commission. Certain prominent figures in the United States are openly opposing any kind of control over atomic energy. For instance, Mr. Martin, Governor of the State of Pennsylvania, declared that, “We must go ahead with the atomic bomb in one hand and the Cross in the other”. Such statements are not calculated to facilitate a speedy solution of so difficult a problem.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“At the first session of the General Assembly the following highly important resolutions were carried: the resolution of 24 January 1946 on the “establishment of a Commission to deal with the problems raised by the discovery of atomic energy”; and the resolution of 14 December 1946 on the “principles governing the general regulation and reduction of armaments”. Naturally the question arises: what has been done during the intervening period to carry out these resolutions? We know that the Atomic Energy Commission and the Security Council have discussed at great length the plans put forward by the United States and the Soviet Union, but have unfortunately failed to reach a satisfactory decision. The solution of this very important problem has again been postponed.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The opponents of friendly co-operation between states and nations evidently want to set over the Security Council — where the principle of great Power unanimity in settling important peace problems operates — some other kind of body to deal with questions of peace and security; a body in which the principle of adopting common decisions would not apply; which could be converted into a body with contending blocs of States, in which the will of some States would be imposed on others. It is not difficult to realize that such action would be gravely detrimental to our Organization and would jeopardize international peace and security.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The proposal to set up an interim committee on questions of peace and security in reality an expression of the aims of certain circles which are anxious to limit the powers of the Security Council and nulify the part it plays; when according to Article 24 of the United Nations Charter the Security Council betas “primary responsibility for the maintenance of International peace and security”.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Paragraph 1 of Article 7 of the United Nations Charter provides that: "There are established 23 the principal organs of the United Nations: a General Assembly, a Security Council, an Economic and Social Council, a Trusteeship Council, an International Court of Justice, and a Secretariat." There is not even a hint there of the possibility of setting up an interim committee or any other similar kind of committee with such wide powers as Mr. Marshall proposes. Accordingly, Mr. Marshall's proposal really amounts to a demand for revision of the United Nations Charter; but we cannot embark on a course which would be so extremely dangerous to the existence of our Organization.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The Byelorussian delegation will resolutely oppose any revision of the principle of the unanimity of the five great Powers. The Byelorussian delegation will oppose no less resolutely Mr. Marshall’s proposal to establish an interim standing committee of the General Assembly on questions of peace and security. According to Mr. Marshall’s proposal such a committee should be one of the principal organs of the United Nations. The establishment of a committee such as that proposed by the United States Secretary of State would be unconstitutional.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
““If the great Powers which led the struggle again the fascist aggressors keep together and, if, with the support of the other nations, they refuse to allow any rift in their ranks, they will be able to do much to counteract the whetting of insatiable appetites. Otherwise the new claimants to world domination will be given a free hand for all sorts of adventures until they break their necks.” These deeply significant words of Mr. Molotov still hold good today. Our task is to strengthen, not to weaken, the United Nations, which has all the resources necessary to consolidate peace and prevent fresh aggression. The United Nations should not be a repetition of the late-lamented League of Nations; it should be sufficiently strong and authoritative.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The other, on the contrary, is intended to shake the foundations on which the United Nations rests and to pave the way for the proponents of a different course.... The success of this campaign would mean victory for a policy which would enable one group of States, led by the strongest of the Powers, to dominate the other Powers, which would then find themselves in the minority. Instead of a policy of international cooperation in the spirit of the democratic principles of the United Nations, the triumphant policy would be that of the new claimants to world domination as represented by a corresponding bloc or, if you wish, by a group of Powers to which the Retention of the principle of unanimity of the great Powers already seems to be inconvenient.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“As we have heard here, the Argentine delegation has again moved to discuss the question of abolishing the principle of unanimity applied by the permanent members of the Security Council, although this question has already been discussed at the last session of the General Assembly. What do the Argentine delegation and other delegations hope to gain by pressing for a revision of the principle of the unanimity of the five great Powers? Mr. Molotov, the head of the Soviet delegation, made an exhaustive statement on this question at the last session of the General Assembly. He said: “Two principal trends are struggling within the United Nations to gain influence over the main course of its work. One of those trends bases itself on the main fundamentals of the United Nations Organization and on respect for the principles underlying it.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“By its just policy and its progressive ideology in favour of equality and friendship among peoples, the Soviet Union is steadily helping to unmade the intrigues of all aggressors and to rally the forces fighting for peace and security. Obviously, such overt advocacy of racial discrimination is bound to react unfavourably on the establishment of co-operation and mutual confidence between the great Powers and the small nations, without which no stable and lasting peace can be achieved. The campaign to disrupt international co-operation, waged by the overt and covert enemies of lasting peace, is accompanied by unbridled anti-Soviet propaganda, blackmail and the threat of new war. In this connexion the principle of great Power unanimity, the so-called veto, is now bring most energetically attacked by the forces of reaction.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Field Marshal Smuts in his book, Toward a Better World, states that in Africa there must be created a country for the white man, and no mixture of blood allowed between the two rates. Naturally, these statements of Smuts are in complete conformity with the policy of repression which he has followed in South Africa against all unsubmissive Indians and other non-whites. The Government of the Union of South Africa has not discharged the obligation laid upon it by a resolution of the. General Assembly, and has openly defied this resolution. While this is going on, torrents of calumny are being levelled against the Soviet Union, which stands in the forefront of the progressive forces fighting for peace.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“In their efforts to maintain and inflate their excessive profits, they are attempting to capture still greater foreign markets, and to enslave on any pretext economically weak countries. These same forces are inspiring the so-called “atomic diplomacy” and “dollar diplomacy”; they are fighting for the disruption of international co-operation, and they are urging die United States to follow an official policy of expansion. They have taken up Hitler’s slogan of world hegemony and have dragged out the racial theory to justify it. Some have proclaimed in the Press the idea that the future belongs to the all-absorbing “American spirit”, that the “American type” of man is the prototype of the “superior being”, and that there exist “peoples who have no clearly marked path in life”.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The establishment of naval and air bases in regions thousands of kilometres distant from the frontiers of certain States, the maintenance of industry in a state of mobilized preparedness, the expansion of military budgets, the expenditure of enormous sums on scientific research for the discovery of new types of armaments — all these are directed towards implementing the imperialistic plans of these sinister reactionary forces. War is threatening to intrude upon the peaceful life of the peoples. The heads of American business firms, corporations, trusts and syndicates, who earned enormous profits out of the last world war, are quite openly preaching world hegemony.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“One need only mention such facts as the armed struggle of the Netherlands Government against the Indonesian people, the unrestrained savagery of the fascist terror against the people of Greece; the civil war in China; the maintenance of the Franco regime in Spain; the race in atomic armaments; the maintenance in power of Japanese militarists; the maintenance in Germany of certain fascist and pro-fascist elements, who fought against the freedom-loving peoples; the armaments race in certain countries — all these facts show that the forces of international reaction, on which Hitler and Mussolini formerly thrived, do not even now intend to abandon their fight against the forces of democracy and progress.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The most important resolutions of the General Assembly have not been carried out. I refer to the principles governing the general regulation and reduction of armaments; the control of atomic energy; the relations between Members of the United Nations and Spain; the treatment of Indians in the Union of South Africa, and the surrender and punishment of war criminals.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The last world war from which we have recently emerged was begun by Hitler and Mussolini and cost millions of human lives and created devastation unprecedented in history. From hundreds of thousands of graves scattered over the fields of Europe, the flower of our youth who fell in the fight against fascism for the happiness and freedom of their peoples, summon us to combat these who are now talking loudly of a new war, sowing fear and mistrust among nations, carrying on the ideological preparation of public opinion for a future war in the pages of many reactionary newspapers published in the United States, Turkey, Greece, Spain and other countries. The question naturally arises: what has been by the United Nations during this period? I regret to have to say that it has done very little.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“It is now two years since the Second World War ended. During that interval the United Nations has been founded and its Charter states that it is necessary “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small...” The idea of a struggle for the peace and security of all peoples embodies the expectations and hopes of millions of simple people who are sincerely striving for a peaceful and a better life, and for the attainment of peace and security throughout the world.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The Byelorussian delegation expresses the hope that the representatives to the present session of the General Assembly will show a spirit of cooperation and mutual trust in the solution of the highly important problems on our agenda. The peoples of the world are watching our progress with attention, and expect from us just and effective decisions. Our task is to justify these expectations.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The entire democratic world knows that the Spanish people are impatiently awaiting their liberation from the fascist dictatorship of Franco. History has placed the problem of the liquidation of fascism in Spain on the agenda. The sooner and more completely this problem is solved, the sooner and the more completely will Spain join the family of democratic States, united in their desire to ensure world peace. Peace is the most ardent wish of the vast majority of mankind. The peoples of the whole world are certain that we can all be loyal friends in the establishment of peace, even as we were loyal allies in the grim days of the war.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The Franco regime, which has been imposed by force upon the Spanish people, must receive no support whatsoever from the Governments of the States, Members of the United Nations. The Byelorussian delegation therefore insists that the Security Council should again consider the question of Franco Spain, and hopes that it will be examined in accordance with the principles of collective security. It is essential that the States members of the Security Council should, in examining important matters affecting peace and security, forget the economic and political interests of their own countries and should, in accordance with Article 24 of the Charter, take prompt and effect action in respect of countries which, under the provisions of Article 39 are violating peace and security.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The Council, instead of taking effective measures in relation to Franco Spain, passed a resolution rejecting the use of all positive coercive measures by the Members of the United Nations against the Franco fascist regime. By this resolution, the Security Council resigned itself to accepting the situation created by the Franco Government, which may lead to the violation of peace and security throughout the world. The Byelorussian delegation takes note of the fact that the solution of the problem of Franco Spain by the Security Council is completely unsatisfactory. The nations of the whole world demand, in the name of international security and justice, joint action on the part of the democratic nations with regard to the Franco Government. It is our sacred duty to-do everything possible to destroy the hotbed of fascism in Spain.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“Moreover, on the basis of the documents which it examined, the Sub-Committee came to the conclusion that in fact the Franco regime was by its nature, structure and general line of conduct, a fascist regime, brought into being largely with the help and based on the model of hitlerite nazi Germany and the fascist Italy of Mussolini. The Sub-Committee decided that the existing situation in Spain was such that its continuance might actually endanger the maintenance of international peace and security. Yet, in spite of this, and after a further lengthy examination, the Spanish problem found no positive solution in the Security Council.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“This would have been an effective means of influencing Franco Spain, and would have led to a definite change of situation in that country. It would have weakened the international position of the Franco regime, and would have confronted it with a political crisis. But the Security Council rejected the resolution submitted by the Polish representative. Instead of taking effective steps, the Security Council chose the method of formal procrastination. We do not know the reasons which motivated the establishment of a sub-committee to investigate the Spanish situation, as this situation was extremely well known to the members of the Council.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The Franco regime continues to exist as a centre for the fascist plot against freedom-loving peoples, and as a springboard for a future war which may once again spread throughout the whole world. Under Franco’s domination Spain continues to be an armed camp. These are the facts: they are convincing and obvious, and it was natural to expect the Security Council to take all the measures in its power, since the activities of the Franco regime in Spain are of the nature described in Article 34 of the Charter. That is why peace-loving nations welcomed the Polish Government’s proposal in the Security Council, that the Council should ask all those Members of the United Nations which maintain diplomatic relations with the Franco Government to break off those relations immediately.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The fact that the Spanish “Blue Division” took part in battles against Soviet troops, side by side with the German fascist armies, is known to the whole world, and this can only be described as military action on the side of the Axis against the nations of the democratic coalition. Even after the war, the Franco regime continues to serve as a centre for propaganda and the dissemination of dangerous fascist activity. Spain has become a refuge for German scientists engaged in research which endangers peace and humanity. The Franco Government has given shelter and assistance to a large number of war criminals, Nazi leaders and agents, who are using Spain as an operational base for their activities and for their plans to organize a military revenge.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The Security Council has dealt for a long time with this question, the urgency and significance of which are fully apparent. Everyone knows that the Franco regime was imposed on the Spanish people as a result of military interference on the part of the principal Axis Powers — hitlerite Germany and fascist Italy. During the second world war Franco Spain was a loyal ally of Germany and Italy, supplying those countries with strategic raw materials and military information, and placing its ports and air bases at the disposal of these countries. Assertions that Spain took no part whatever in the second world war and remained a “nonbelligerent country” are quite untrue. If Spain did not formally enter the war, this was due to circumstances entirely outside her own control.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“Lastly, the activities of British and Dutch troops in Indonesia cannot be reconciled with Article 2, paragraph 4, of the Charter, which demands that Members of the United Nations “shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.” Humanity is tired of war, and genuinely desires that friendly co-operative relations, based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, should exist between nations and States; whereas, the maintenance by some Powers of their troops on the territories of other non-enemy States creates an atmosphere of anxiety and insecurity amongst the nations, The next question with which I wish to deal is that of the situation prevailing in Franco Spain.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“Article 2, Paragraph 1, of the Charter, for instance, states that “the Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.” Nevertheless, the Anglo-American armed forces exercise, on the territory of some Members of the United Nations, such wide powers and such privileges as can only be assumed by a conqueror over a defeated country. It is also impossible to reconcile the policy of the United States of America in China with the obligation placed on Members of the Organization by Article 1, paragraph 2, of the Charter, “to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples”.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The increasing military aid given by the United States to certain elements in China against Chinese democratic forces is fostering civil war' in that country, and arousing the anxiety not only of the Chinese, but of democratic public opinion throughout the world. This policy of the United States in China is in no way conducive to the maintenance of peace in the Far East. Regardless of the attitude which the States directly interested in this question may assume, the Byelorussian delegation feels obliged to draw attention to the fact that the pursuit of such a policy by the Governments of the United Kingdom and the United States of America towards non-enemy States cannot promote a spirit of sincere co-operation between the allied States, and is a direct contravention of the Charter.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The United Kingdom is maintaining air units on the territory of Iraq, and is controlling the armed forces of that country. British troops are concentrated on the frontier of Iran and on the frontier between Turkey and Iraq. Large numbers of British troops are concentrated in Palestine and in Transjordan, where British bases and a network of aerodromes have been equipped, and strategic roads have been built. In Indonesia, the United Kingdom has concentrated an enormous army. This army, which entered the country with the praiseworthy aim of disarming the troops of militaristic Japan, has embarked on one-sided military action against the Indonesian people who wish to secure their national independence. The presence of the forces of the United States of America in China is causing alarm amongst democratic public opinion throughout the world.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The presence of foreign troops on the territory of non-enemy States was necessary in order to crush the fascist aggressors. This necessity, however, no longer exists since the war is over. Nevertheless, some States have not withdrawn their troops from the territories in question. For nearly two years, British troops have remained in Greece, where they interfere in the internal affairs of that country. A number of measures taken by the Government of the United Kingdom indicate that Great Britain is doing all she can to keep her troops in the countries of the Near East also. According to available information, the number of British troops at present in Egypt is several times greater than the number which the United Kingdom has the right to maintain there in accordance with the Anglo-Egyptian Treaty of 1936.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“I wish to draw your attention particularly to the proposal made to the Security Council that it should ask all the Members of the United Nations to supply information regarding the numbers and disposition of their troops stationed in foreign countries other than ex-enemy territories. It is well known that during the war against hitlerite Germany and its satellites, and also against imperialistic Japan, the armed forces of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United States of America and the United Kingdom were compelled, by military necessity, to enter the territories of a number of countries. Thus, for instance, the Soviet army was active in Poland, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia, while British and American troops operated on French territory. There was nothing surprising or strange in this.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“Those who criticize the principle of unanimity of the permanent members of the Security Council forget the fact that the responsibility for the maintenance of peace and security falls primarily on the great Powers. They forget also that peace can only be established when the great Powers settle unanimously all the fundamental problems of peace and security. The effort to achieve unanimity in deciding fundamental questions of principle must be the main task of the Members of the United Nations. That is the purpose of Article 27 of the Charter of the United Nations. That is why the Byelorussian delegation strongly objects to any revision of the Charter, and of Article 27 in particular. Furthermore, the Byelorussian delegation considers it necessary to examine certain aspects of the work of the Security Council.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The sole aim of the attacks against Article 27 of the Charter, which are based on the alleged wish to make the United Nations Organization more democratic, is to shatter the unity of the United Nations, for it is on the principle of unanimity of the great Powers that the very existence of the Organization is based. Any other method of taking decisions in the Security Council on vital matters relating to the organization of international peace involves the risk of changing this body into an instrument of one State or a bloc of States, whereby some nations may impose their will on others. This would bring the United Nations Organization to an inglorious end, for the essence of its existence is to enable the great Powers to take decisions in common.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The representatives of several States have spoken openly against Article 27 of the Charter, which provides for the unanimity of the great Powers on decisions reached by the Security Council in matters affecting peace. The voices of the representatives of Peru, Venezuela, Argentina, Turkey and others have been raised from this very platform against the unanimity of the great Powers. The Belgian delegation took credit for the fact that already at the San Francisco Conference it had declared itself against the principle that the permanent members of the Security Council must take their decisions in common. Its arguments at San Francisco, the falsity of which was exposed at the time by the supporters of peace and security, have just been reiterated by the Belgian representative before this high Assembly.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“It is necessary, in my view, to bring to the attention of the General Assembly yet another circumstance which cannot fail to react on the work of the Organization. I mean the efforts of certain States (Cuba, Australia) towards the amendment of the Charter which we signed and adopted, and particularly to revise that part of it which concerns the unanimity of the five Great Powers. The fact that an attempt is being made to amend the Charter at the very beginning of the existence of the United Nations, implies the existence of a threat that this Organization may become an instrument for the pursuance of a policy by certain nations or groups of nations instead of an instrument for the establishment of a durable universal peace. No other construction can be given to these intentions, whatever guise they may assume.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
““It is necessary to distinguish clearly between the hue and cry about a ‘new war’ which is taking place now and the real danger of a ‘new war,’ which does not exist at present.” Such is the realistic estimation of the existing situation given by Generalissimo Stalin. From this, of course, it does not follow that all is well in the international political field. On the contrary, this appraisal points to the existence of organizations and parties which wish to ensure the success of their own policy by speculating on the danger of “a new war.” All this cannot but react unfavourably on the establishment of co-operation and mutual confidence between nations, especially between the Great Powers, without which it is impossible to build a durable peace.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“In his answer to a question asked him by Alexander Werth, correspondent of the Sunday Times, Generalissimo Stalin gave a clear appraisal of these rumours. Generalissimo Stalin said: “I do not believe in a real danger of a ‘new war.’ Those who are clamouring about a ‘new war’ are chiefly military-political intelligence agents and their few supporters among civilian officials. They need this clamour if only: (a) to frighten with the spectre of war certain naive politicians from among the opponents and thereby help their Governments to wrest more concessions from these opponents; (b) to make it difficult for some time to reduce the military budgets of their countries; (c) to check demobilization of troops, and thereby prevent a rapid increase of unemployment in their countries.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)