YouSaid · the spoken record

Araujo Castro

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS ARAUJO CASTRO

lines on the record: 72
first: 1963-09-24
most recent: 1963-09-24
sittings or episodes: 1
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

“Disarmament, development, decolonization, these are the only alternatives to death, starvation and slavery. Because, in everything and above everything, the essential goal is to secure human freedom. In the final analysis man will have gained nothing if he loses his freedom— freedom to live, to think and to act. For progress and economic development my country will make every sacrifice, yet it will not sacrifice freedom. No idea will be acceptable to us if it brings with it the suppression of human freedom. But as security is today linked to peace, so is the concept of freedom linked to those of social progress and economic development. And we must advance rapidly for time is running short, both for the United Nations and for mankind.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The concept of the need of revision as well as of its process are provided for in the Charter itself. 51. My delegation, in conformity with the ideas just expressed in respect of the various questions pertaining to our organizational collective life, shall maintain, in the course of the period of work we are about to initiate, the closest liaison with all the other delegations, On the basis of such consultations and conversations, the Brazilian delegation reserves its right to submit, either individually or in association with other Member States, certain draft resolutions incorporating these ideas and geared to a new concept of the United Nations —the United Nations of today. I repeat, it is not in vain that eighteen years of history have been lived through a nuclear era.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“In that sense, the Brazilian delegation submitted an amendment under which the General Assembly was to proceed to a mandatory examination of the basic statute of the Organization every five years, in order to embody all the modifications suggested by experience. After citing an opinion according to which the revision of constitutional provisions is a question of experience rather than of logic, my delegation proceeded to say: "Once a legal institution is created, it acquires a life of its own. Given sufficient time, the Organization will reveal the virtues and the defects of its structure, and indicate what adjustments are necessary to make survival possible and to bring about peace and justice." As may be seen there is nothing new or revolutionary in the idea of revising the United Nations Charter.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“It is not possible to delay any longer the right of sixty States admitted since 1945 to express themselves on the nature and the objectives of an Organization of which they are a part and to which they bring a great creative force. This consideration makes it imperative to revise the Charter, in order to adjust it to the reality of the nuclear era. 50. At the San Francisco Conference, where the structure of the Organization was first built, Brazil was one of the first and most persistent defenders of the principle of the flexibility of the Charter, maintaining the thesis that its provisions had to be continuously subject to an organic process of revision.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The efforts made in recent years to establish such international responsibility must be materialized within this Organization, which demands a Charter forcefully expressing the requirements of a world which must become dynamic in order to survive. Thirdly, the concept of colonial emancipation and the self-determination of peoples enshrined in the Charter is today a reality so firmly imbedded that it is necessary to speed up its ultimate practical effectiveness. The process of its application had indeed created the Organization we behold today, and its Charter, approved by fifty-one original signatory Member States, imposes itself upon the sixty new Members, who never had the opportunity to state their views on the new features required by the realities of the present-day world.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Secondly, the economic concepts —which were practically absent from the Covenant of the League of Nations, where there was but one single paragraph Article 23, paragraph e which referred to the "freedom of communications and of transit and equitable treatment for the commerce of all Members of the League"— appear in the Charter also at a level of extreme generalization, even though this represents a stride forward in the recognition of an international responsibility for the promotion of economic development. Today's world with its urgent needs certainly requires much more than these very broad generalizations.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The fundamental co-ordinates of the important task of revitalizing the Charter can, in our opinion, be outlined as follows: first, today the concept of security is inseparably linked to the concept of peace: without peace there will be no security for any nation, no matter how great the number of nuclear weapons it has in stock and the number of tests it has conducted. Therefore, the concept of security is truly collective and conditioned by collectively disarmed peace. The Charter, which was based on the concept of an absolute and individual security for each country, must reflect the new thermo-nuclear reality.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Indeed, is it not true that the nuclear test ban agreement was recently concluded in Moscow outside the framework of the United Nations? 48. There is no doubt that if this vicious circle is not broken and the invisible veto is not overcome with the co-operation and goodwill of all nations, including the great Powers of necessity, the Charter, though dynamic in character, will tend to come to a standstill. It is necessary that all Powers, all Member States, all States not yet Members but aspiring to membership in the United Nations, that all, in short, be imbued with what they claim to possess: the desire for peace. It is necessary for us to be able to overcome all the obstacles opposing human progress and freedom. For on our march towards progress, we are not prepared to forsake freedom. 49.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Nonetheless, certain perfectly justified claims, such as the immediate increase in the membership of the Security Council and of the Economic and Social Council, the possible creation of new councils, the setting up of an effective machinery for the maintenance of peace —objectives supported by an overwhelming majority of the Member States— suffer defeat at the hands of the directorate of the great Powers, which insists upon conditioning the action of the United Nations to the unyielding play of power politics or of specific political solutions to a given question. 47. It was in this manner that the vicious circle was created in which the revision of the Charter was frustrated, as was the possibility for asserting the presence of the United Nations in the most significant acts of contemporary diplomacy.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Their action nonetheless could be deemed positive if it were kept within the real and literal limits of the Charter itself. Today, we all feel the urgency of a modernization and an adjustment of the Charter to the conditions of the present-day world, in the very form outlined in Articles 108 and 109.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The Charter —apart from the enormous merits which accord to it the character of the most lofty diplomatic instrument so far devised by mankind— carries the marks of the historical conditions which gave it life, namely the heritage of the Second World War. It reflects those conditions as an instrument of big-Power policy, a residue of the struggles terminated in 1945, so that its true objective, the establishment in a disarmed world of peace based on universal justice, was jeopardized by certain inherent imperfections in its origin, inevitable at the time but which today should be corrected and overcome. What can be said, for example, about Article 107 of the Charter today? 46. The effective application of the Charter is obstructed by the effective directorate exercised by the great Powers.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Why was no action taken as outlined in Articles 57 and 63 and why was it not recognized that, despite the expenses involved, it would have had considerable advantages in respect of the organic structure of the existing specialized agencies as well as of those which it would be appropriate to set up by reason of superior collective interests? Why, on the other hand, are we not endeavouring to supersede completely Chapters XI, XII and XIII of the Charter by the fulfilment in toto of its explicit objectives? 45. There is no reason to keep silent on the causes which produced these impediments.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“However, the mere acknowledgement of these achievements does not suffice in itself, because the process and the pace of history are being accelerated and along with that the urgency of the collective needs. The Organization reflecting the pressures of these collective needs, and as a tool devised to deal with them, cannot allow them to reach the critical explosive point. It is therefore necessary continuously to infuse vitality into the Organization, first by considering what should have been done, and then considering what should be done. 44. Here it is appropriate to formulate certain questions in the light of the text of the Charter itself. Why were so many Articles of the Charter never applied? Why, for example, was Article 26 not applied? Why was Article 43 never institutionalized in connexion with Articles 45, 46 and 47?”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“However, as we are advancing towards the attainment of those objectives, we recognize the inescapable need of strengthening this Organization so as to allow it to adapt itself to the tasks resulting from its own duties and commitments. This task of regeneration has been dynamically stimulated by the insight and wisdom of our Secretary-General, U Thant, whose qualities of thought and action are complemented by an exact comprehension of what the United Nations ought to be in this world of nuclear dangers and underdevelopment, of great challenges and yet of great prospects. 43. The positive achievements of the Organization cannot be challenged, no matter how sceptical its critics.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“It would thus be desirable that the organs that are now entrusted with the problems of decolonization within the framework of the United Nations turn their attention to this new phenomenon of the modern world, the dangerous implications of which I have no need to emphasize. 41. The United Nations would be one more failure and the most bitter one in the long history of the hopes of the human race, and would betray its purpose and destiny if it does not face, with all the urgency and determination required by our times, these three sources of vital international problems: disarmament, development and decolonization. 42.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“As long as there remains a dependent territory, there will be a source of international misunderstanding inherent in this type of international relations which is both obsolete and anachronistic. Such is the lesson of our times. 40. Brazil views the struggle for decolonization as comprehending all the aspects of the secular fight for freedom and human rights, Brazil stands against every form of colonialism, be it political or economic. For the same reason, Brazil regards with extreme caution the emergence of alternative forms of political colonialism already defined as neo-colonialism.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The Special Committee of Twenty-Four on the implementation of the Declaration deserves the support of all the Members of the United Nations. The Powers which in the past had possessed a colonial empire have all heeded, almost without any exception, the voice of the new times. The remaining points of resistance to this process require increased efforts on the part of the United Nations in order to achieve its rational and harmonious solution. This is, therefore, an appropriate moment for the Special Committee, at the resumption of its work, to pass in systematic review each one of the continents, without omitting the American continent and its territories dependent on extra-continental powers.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Within the Organization of the United Nations, after resolution 1514 (XV) containing the Declaration for the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples had been approved in 1960, the Organization began to fail in its determination to implement the principles embodied in the Declaration for the liquidation of colonialism, which, though verbally required as immediate, met with difficulties previously foreseen by some observers, if not yet officially mentioned in the debates. 39. Brazil recognizes that the residual elements of colonialism are still offering resistance and still require, for a certain time, concentrated efforts and great wisdom. Nevertheless, the decolonizing movement can be peacefully completed within the framework of the United Nations Charter and General Assembly resolutions.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“And if nothing was done, this was due to the willingness to do nothing intrinsically related to the colonial problem. 38. As early as the eighth and until the fifteenth session of the General Assembly in 1960 —the African Year of the United Nations— decolonization was making enormous strides ahead, year after year, in a growing and cumulative movement, the theoretical preparation of which was due, to a large extent, to the action of Latin-American delegations. This movement received an extraordinary impetus as a consequence of the Second World War, when the peoples of the dependent territories in Africa and in Asia played a very important role, not sufficiently emphasized to this day. The Second World War generated conditions for national independence which, if impeded, would have jeopardized the precarious peace of the world.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“This objective, within the context of the United Nations, does not stem only from a quantitative element, namely, the voting predominance of the new Member States, but also from a qualitative factor: the fact that the anti-colonial thesis has in its favour all the ethical, economic, demographic, social and political motivations. Only reasons of power and state relations can explain postponements, since the so-called technical motivations, such as cultural development, capacity for self-government, national viability, lack of preparation of leaders and other related arguments, militate in fact against the colonial thesis, because whatever was left undone during the past decades can hardly be expected to be accomplished in the few remaining years.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“With very few exceptions these sovereign States have been encountering enormous obstacles in their development as a result of a trade pattern which has vitiated the economic means available to the former colonies; their semi-colonial economic status has perpetuated itself. 36. The liquidation and eradication of the historical and sociological anachronism of colonialism is, accordingly, a process of the highest interest for the defence of the economies of all former colonies, irrespective of the various phases of their political emancipation and of the continents where they may be located. 37. It is generally accepted today that total decolonization is the essential objective pursued throughout the world, wherever territories or peoples are involved which are dependent to any degree.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“It may be stated without exaggeration that mankind has reached the final stage of the colonial process with the same features which have characterized it during the last five centuries. And, consequently, it may be acknowledged that the colonial process is a historical and sociological archaism the remnants of which are sources of tensions and political friction in the contemporary world, which can and must be finally eradicated and liquidated. 35. What is most striking, however, in this comprehensive process is the fact that, until completely liquidated, the remnants of colonialism constitute the main obstacle of the economic development of the former colonies which have now become sovereign States.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“It is obvious, on the contrary, that the economic and social security achieved by some is in danger if all do not attain this economic and social security. We are on the verge of the reconstruction of a new international community, where the continued existence of economic and social under-development will be a risk for all. We live within a system made up of reciprocal causes and effects. Just as peace is indivisible —because peace involves an element of interdependence and its consolidation requires the cooperation of sovereign unities— so the economic and •social development of mankind, which is the condition and expression of peace, should be indivisible. We are not dealing with abstractions. We are confronted with hard realities that require prompt and decisive action. 34.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“This complex system must now be codified in a declaration that would represent a collective expression of faith in a comprehensive ordination of the international economic process which would provide guide-lines for international action against under-development. The Brazilian delegation wishes to express Its sincerest hope that we may, when we celebrate the jubilee year of the United Nations in 1965, have already proclaimed the declaration on the establishment and preservation of collective economic security. 33. After this survey of the tasks facing the United Nations in the promotion of economic development, one point should be stressed. This high degree of development achieved by a small number of countries does not necessarily imply the perpetuation of under-development elsewhere.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“General agreement around vague propositions is no substitute for a sincere willingness to co-operate in the promotion of the social and economic advancement of developing countries. A grandiloquent text unrelated to the practice of international economic relations would serve no useful purpose and indeed might have detrimental effects. For the preparation of this document the Conference should draw upon the valuable legacy of ideas that the United Nations family has been building up over the years, including the draft declaration on international economic co-operation, now under study by an ad hoc Working Group of the Economic and Social Council. The very concept of collective economic security was born out of this network of studies, explorations and cogitations.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The analogy which lends itself best to the definition of these objectives is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In a synthetic body of basic precepts related to the most complex theme of all —the human being— we find a concentration of a whole programme for the future aimed at shaping the human being of tomorrow out of the human being of today. Would it, then, not be possible to add to this Declaration yet another one which would deal with the second most controversial topic in the social world of our day: economic relations among nations? 32. In proposing this declaration, the Brazilian delegation does not overlook the difficulties to be overcome. Our task is all the more difficult as we do not have in mind a mere rhetorical document.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The declaration would no doubt find its place beside the two other documents of which we are so justifiably proud: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples. This declaration would not propose ideal solutions for establishing collective economic security. On the contrary, it would involve proposing, on the basis of clear-cut and objective premises, a set of principles which would serve as long-range goals to be reached by the United Nations in this sphere. Consequently, it would involve defining a common ground for certain economic notions about international economic life, from which easier chances of agreement maybe derived when discussing practical problems or objectives related to the economic organization of the international community.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The Conference must justify the legitimate hopes of all under-developed countries which are counting on the understanding of the advanced countries that have by far the heaviest responsibilities for bringing order and purpose into the inchoate universe of international economic life. 31. At the close of the Conference, and as a crystallization of a long process of political decision and extensive interaction of ideas, the Brazilian Government believes that a declaration on the achievement and preservation of collective economic security should be proclaimed. The declaration, which has already been foreshadowed by the joint statement of developing countries in Geneva, would be a political act of great significance, perhaps one of the most important events ever to take place under the aegis of the United Nations.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“This Conference means the living presence of the United Nations, with the universality of its outlook and its concern with the problems of development in the field of international trade that so far have been outside the scope of the world Organization. It means the political will to revise what must be revised, to reformulate obsolete principles, to set up new rules of international behaviour , to create conditions for a new international division of labour based on the correlation of trade and development, and finally to bring into existence the institutional framework required to implement the decisions of the Conference. The disappointment of those expectations would represent one of the most painful failures in the history of the United Nations.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“It is an unfortunate fact of life that international trade has contributed so far only marginally to the economic development of low-income countries, especially in recent years. In some cases, it has actually worsened the relative position of developing countries and, through the mechanism of the deterioration of the terms of trade, widened the gap of income levels between developed and developing countries. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development has been called precisely because the present structure of international trade is adverse to developing countries and is based on a set of principles and operational rules that in most cases are geared principally to the interests and peculiarities of industrialized countries.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Why, then, would it be too bold to request the sacrifice, or the saving, of 1 per cent of human folly for the social redemption and development of all mankind? 29. Furthermore, in order to mark the presence of the United Nations in the field of capital development and in order to permit the Governments of Member States to keep under continuous and systematic review the total flow of capital to developing countries, the General Assembly might envisage the establishment of a standing committee of the Economic and Social Council similar to the Committee for Industrial Development and other subsidiary bodies. 30. The third priority area —which, at the present stage, is also the most important one— must receive special attention in the context of the economic and social activities of the United Nations.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“A substantial portion of the resources released by general and complete disarmament could be diverted to the capital development fund. So long as comprehensive disarmament, so anxiously desired by mankind, is not forthcoming, a small percentage of current military outlays should be placed at the disposal of the fund. The diversion of only 1 per cent of the resources at present devoured by the armaments race would represent not less than $1,200 million annually, a sum that would enable the fund to start operations on a scale surpassing current expectations. We fervently hope that the $120,000 million spent on armaments every year will never be actually utilized in war. We fervently hope that future generations may be in a position to say that those were wasteful expenditures for senseless purposes.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“As a decisive step in this trend towards multilateralization, and while giving due importance to all existing sources of assistance, it is essential that the United Nations be endowed with its own financing body, thus enabling the Organization to enter the field of capital assistance to developing countries. 28. It has been with this in mind that the Brazilian delegation has advocated in the past and continues to advocate the establishment of a United Nations capital development fund, open to all Members of the United Nations and the specialized agencies. The new organ, already established in principle, would be capable of extending loans and grants and would be administered in such a way as to give each Member country equal voting power irrespective of the size of its contribution.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Assistance granted in this manner has the advantage of clearing the political atmosphere, both nationally and internationally, of a needless ingredient of controversy. Furthermore, it is entirely in harmony with the long-term interests of all sovereign countries, both capital-exporting and capital-importing, and should be encouraged in every possible way by the increasing utilization of multilateral channels. In this connexion, regional programmes of assistance play a prominent role, and all efforts should be made to intensify and enlarge the scope of these programmes.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The significance of soft loans has been convincingly emphasized by the former President of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Mr. Eugene Black, who stated that unless the aid mixture had a larger component of funds on concessionary terms, "the machinery of economic development would be loaded with foreign debts until it sputtered to a halt amid half-built projects and mountains of discarded plans". The inadequacy of international finance in terms consistent with the economic peculiarities of developing countries may compel these countries to adopt emergency solutions of an unorthodox nature if economic stagnation or retrogression and wide-spread social unrest are to be avoided. 27. It is now universally acknowledged that economic assistance should not involve any non-economic element.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The second priority area is the transfer of capital to the developing countries from the developed countries, where such capital is abundant. The mobilization of international financial resources is one of the essential prerequisites for the gradual attainment, by developing countries, of levels of welfare comparable to those of developed nations. Nevertheless, the flow of financial assistance should be genuinely geared to the needs of developing countries both from the quantitative point of view, in the sense that the total volume available be proportional to their capital requirements, and from the qualitative point of view, in that the condition of loans must take into consideration the structural difficulties in the balance of payments of these countries.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The rate of growth of these resources is nevertheless minimal when compared with the needs of developing countries and the financial capabilities of advanced nations, as was clearly indicated by the Advisory Committee of Experts that has recently examined the United Nations activities in the field of industrial development. According to the report of the experts, the current institutional framework is inadequate and must be urgently replaced by a new framework more in harmony with the general aspirations of developing countries for accelerated industrialization. The Brazilian Government considers that the establishment of a specialized agency for industrial development would contribute decisively to the fulfilment of that aspiration. 26.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The classical doctrine of international specialization of labour, that condemned the countries in the periphery to the immutable position of suppliers of primary products, is already obsolete and has been replaced by a theory that is more compatible with the realities of the present-day world. Conceived, however, in an epoch in which tins doctrinal evolution was not yet fully crystallized, the United Nations family has for a long time occupied itself marginally with the problems of industrialization and given almost exclusive emphasis to other sectors such as agriculture and public health. It is true that resources devoted to industrialization have shown some increase in recent years.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“In the view of my Government, the activities of the United Nations in the field of economic development must concentrate on three main priority areas: industrialization, mobilization of capital for development, and international trade. 25. Without wishing to minimize the importance of integrated economic development, there is today a unanimous conviction that industry represents the most dynamic sector of the economy of the developing countries and that most capable of ensuring, in a brief historical period, both the diversification and economic emancipation of these countries.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“It is within this context of gloomy facts and prospects that we must endeavour to understand the efforts of the developing countries to meet the requirements of social progress and economic justice. These requirements, that correspond to the most legitimate human aspirations, cannot be repressed indefinitely, and it is with a view to fulfilling them that the domestic efforts of each developing country must be supplemented by those of the international community. 24. While the struggle for economic development has to be conducted on several fronts, the United Nations, by the universality of its scope and in conformity with the letter and spirit of its Charter, has a vital role to play in redeeming the great majority of the world population from the sub-human conditions in which they are submerged.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Under present conditions, two-thirds of mankind are living at a subsistence level and suffer all the social and economic hardships inherent in underdevelopment. Alongside those two-thirds of mankind, the minority of the world population, beneficiary of the increased productivity resulting from industrialization, has attained high levels of economic prosperity and social well-being. 23. The key to the understanding of the problem that confronts us —the international community— is not, however, merely the existence of the income gap between developed and developing countries. The crucial factor is the widening of this gap, which will be increasingly more difficult to bridge if present trends are not reversed.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The problem of economic development —in the present demographic and economic condition of .the world— tends to become, in our opinion, of an urgency equal to that of disarmament, with a fundamental difference: that while disarmament will become a process prolonged in time, its inherent dangers diminishing with the gradual conquest of each step towards peace, economic development will generate pressures more and more unbearable to the structure of human societies unless urgent measures are taken to intensify and to speed it up. Just as we are bound to link collective security to general and complete disarmament under international control, by the same token we are compelled to join together, as twin concepts, the ideas of collective political security and collective economic security. 22.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The idea of a pact limited to a certain category of States is founded on the old East-West patterns, the predominance of which, as I have said, appears to be on the wane. 20. Brazil continues to favour the idea that a technical committee be established within the framework of the Eighteen-Nation Committee on Disarmament to study solutions for the problems of control, without which it will not be possible to advance decisively towards general and complete disarmament. We continue to believe that political discussions cannot permanently move within a technical void. We do not conceive of disarmament without control. 21. The second series of considerations which the Brazilian delegation deems necessary to submit is related to economic and social development.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“In the same spirit, the Brazilian delegation to the Disarmament Committee recently aired in Geneva the idea of a multilateral non-aggression pact which would establish a reciprocal machinery linking the greatest possible number of States parties to that pact, under which they would pledge not to commit aggression against any other State, regardless of its geographical location. This idea seems to us much more reasonable and dynamic than the previous idea of a non-aggression pact between the members of NATO and the Warsaw Pact. The Charter is universal in spirit. Peace should prevail among all members of the international community and not only among those States that are committed to specific military alliances.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Brazil proposes that Latin American nations, as sovereign nations, should consider the possibility, by the most appropriate ways and means, of concluding a treaty under which they would commit themselves not to manufacture, store, receive or test nuclear weapons. This is the sense which we attach to the proposal of the five Latin American countries, recently reaffirmed by a joint declaration of 29 April 1963, signed by the Presidents of Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador and Mexico. In this matter, my delegation will maintain the closest contact with all Latin American delegations. 19.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Brazil, jointly with Bolivia, Chile, Ecuador and Mexico, will continue its efforts aimed at the conclusion of a unanimous agreement bringing into effect the "denuclearization" of Latin America, while we formulate the hope that similar agreements may be concluded elsewhere to cover as great an area of the world as possible. With regard to the "de-nuclearization" of Latin America, my delegation, which has submitted this question as a specific item on the agenda, would like to indicate that we are not proposing that Latin America be declared a de-nuclearized zone by the General Assembly.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“This scheme, of course, involves technical and scientific aspects that can be revised and modified during the discussions to be held by the nuclear Powers, which certainly are technically better qualified through their well-known familiarity with explosions. 17. It is evident that in all these cases a meeting of minds is indispensable on the part of the nuclear Powers which, on the other hand, cannot continue to ignore the reiterated manifestations of the General Assembly. In advancing these suggestions, l am aware that we may face again some instances of the lack of understanding encountered in the past. 18.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The Sub-Committee on a Treaty for the Discontinuance of Nuclear Weapon Tests of the Eighteen- Nation Committee on Disarmament, when it meets again, could perhaps explore immediately the possibilities of a gradual and successive treatment of the question of placing nuclear testing under a ban. It is possible to envisage, for example, in a first stage, the immediate prohibition of underground tests to a limit currently detectable by the monitoring systems of the parties concerned and, in a second stage, to commence, within a maximum period of one year, to suspend those tests above a certain limit of, say, 4.75 kilotons, or the most technically feasible limit on that occasion.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“And it is this responsibility that the non-nuclear Powers wish to assume. 15. Just as we formulated our question on 25 July 1962, Brazil is formulating today, from this rostrum, the following questions addressed to the three nuclear Powers; What are the real difficulties which keep us from a final solution on underground tests? Why not recognize that, with reference to this question, the opposing viewpoints have been narrowed down to a point where any one of the parties could accept the opposing point of view without making, in fact, great concessions? Why not explore, by common agreement, the possibility of broadening immediately the area of agreement reached at Moscow by the additional banning of underground tests above an established range of detectability? 16.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Inasmuch as there existed in Geneva a Sub-Committee on Nuclear Tests made up solely of the three nuclear Powers, that Sub-Committee, under the rules of the Conference, could have met in any place and at any level of representation; why, then, did the three nuclear Powers not wish to give the Moscow Conference the character of a meeting of that Sub-Committee? This would have had the great merit of placing the subject matter within the context of general and complete disarmament and of serving as a starting point for the future work of the Committee. World peace and security cannot be the object of exclusive negotiations of a directorate of great Powers, no matter how great and powerful they may be. To a common danger of death and destruction, common responsibility must be the counterpart.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)