YouSaid · the spoken record

Gibson Barboza

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS GIBSON BARBOZA

lines on the record: 139
first: 1970-09-24
most recent: 1973-09-24
sittings or episodes: 4
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

“Despite the persistence of serious situations of conflict I recognize that, in many aspects, the evolution of international relations appears to be following a more constructive course. But the conspicuous absence of the United Nations from the whole process of the easing of tensions, as though the flow of the major currents of negotiation had been diverted in order to bypass our Organization, has engendered a crisis of confidence and a feeling of frustration which limit the normative capacity of the United Nations. We are obliged to acknowledge that we have not as yet been able to assert the juridical and ethical preeminence of our constitutional document, nor have we been able in the political and security field to render the Organization fully operative. 25.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“The unwavering defense that Brazil has undertaken, and will continue to maintain, of the sovereign right of each State to make full economic use of the resources of its territory for the benefit of its own people does not preclude recognition of its responsibility to carry out its development plans without risk of significant damage to the environment of bordering areas. Our attitude in this regard can be illustrated by the positions we have been taking, in all good faith and in the best spirit of good neighborliness, at the regional forum which specifically deals with this subject and where, we believe, practical solutions that meet all the interests at stake can always be found. 24.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“The Brazilian Government considers that the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment attained its stated objectives, namely, to arrive at a common "to inspire and guide the peoples of the world in the preservation and enhancement of the human environment". The normative and operational framework adopted in Stockholm provides the bases for broad international co-operation in the preservation of the environment and indicates rational criteria to serve as guidelines for the sovereign action of States in the exploitation of their natural resources, in accordance with their national plans and priorities and without undue interference. 23.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“Let us give a voice and role in building true peace and lasting security to all of us gathered here, persuaded as we are that the destiny of each of us is closely intertwined with that of all the others, that the development of the poor segment of mankind is a condition for the stability of the wealthy segment of humanity, and that peace and security both political and economic-are inseparable. 21. These same purposes of reconciling points of view and of accommodating legitimate sovereign interests enabled us at Santiago to further negotiations on so many important matters falling within the competence of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development [UNCTAD]; and in Stockholm to achieve fairly appreciable results towards the solution of the major problem of safeguarding the human environment. 22.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“We are asked to be realistic. Well, then, let us be truly realistic and take advantage of the atmosphere of detente, the momentum provided by the initiatives that in Europe have resulted in the accommodation of interests through the German-Soviet and German-Polish treaties and the Berlin agreements, which have opened favorable prospects for a future conference on European security. And let us apply this momentum to the international scene as a whole by making full use of the diplomatic mechanisms available in our Organization.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“The considerations of Realpolitik, which at San Francisco influenced the composition and functioning of the Security Council, are not enough to justify bypassing the mechanisms for action envisaged in the Charter, as is increasingly occurring, through negotiations in lateral forums of restricted membership, without the active presence of the medium-sized and small Powers. It is beyond question, in our view, that the participation of the medium-sized and small Powers would be highly constructive and creative; it would be tantamount to an infusion of new blood, which might serve to heal the sclerosis of structures that have aged apparently without being aware of it. How can one deny the validity of the claim to a broader role for the international community in the solution of problems that, after all, are of collective' world interest? 20.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“Recent and explicit references to an alleged primacy of the security interests of the great Powers to which lesser interests and, viewed from that perspective, supposedly parochial interests should be subordinated betray the original assumption that some countries can act in consonance with special responsibilities which would politically validate their conduct. The logical consequence of such a doctrine and its ensuing application relegate to a category of secondary objectives the implementation of an effective system of international security in conformity with the conceptual terms of the purposes and principles of the Charter. 19.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“A few months ago, after a long period of waiting that became more and more anxious in view of the unbridled increase in the means of mass destruction at the disposal of the super-Powers, the international community was informed of the first and meager results of the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks results which in the final analysis reflect the interests of the microcosm of strategical parity. 17. It is worth-while asking whether the subsystem of lateral pacts is to supersede the United Nations and even override it, or whether our Organization prevails over these pacts and retains its right to appraise and sanction them. So long as strategic parity per se remains the goal, or so long as this parity is construed as the only possible condition and guarantee for peace, this peace will, by definition, be unstable and fleeting. 18.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“Our sense of reality obliges us to recognize the pragmatic merit of the various initiatives which have enabled us to leap over the walls of dissension and irreducible ideological conflict and pass from the sterile and sombre cold-war years to this period of dialog. But it is indispensable and urgent that the spreading awareness of the impossibility and irrationality of a final nuclear confrontation should result in the institutionalization of an equitable system of international peace and security. I submit that this system, to be enduring and universally accepted, has to be built within the framework of the United Nations and legitimized by it; for this is the true, the genuine, normative forum of inter-State relations. 16.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“./] determines the outstanding bilateral diplomatic activity in which the great Powers are currently engaged and reflects the complex problems of today's international reality. 14. But it so happens that the easing of tensions and coexistence are not synonymous with the peace and security we pursued when founding the United Nations. Rather they are palliatives, perhaps opportune in the circumstances, but inadequate and insufficient, serving only to render the political atmosphere less oppressive, yet still not succeeding in brightening it. In fact, to be lasting and fruitful, the easing of tensions should be more than a mere expedient resorted to by the predominant Powers as a function of their national interests. 15.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“But I cannot fail to deplore the fact that this slow progress towards the realization of our ideals of peace and security is being attained amidst contradictions and paradoxes, for there continue to weigh on the horizons of the world, albeit apparently less heavily, the dense clouds of nuclear confrontation; a kind of suspended sentence of doom hovers over mankind as a whole. Neither the doctrine nor the practice of strategic balance, nor arbitrary compositions among the poles of international power, have succeeded in extinguishing the fires of regional conflicts. The attempt to coexist within a strategic arrangement or, in other words, the contemporary "balance of prudence" referred to by the Secretary-General [A/8701lAdd.l, p.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“No less characteristic of the times in which we live is the unrelenting persistence of situations and ways of action which Brazil considers ethically unjust, politically anachronistic and juridically condemnable. The conflicting interaction between a new concept of peace and security-new because it is as young as the aspirations we inscribed in our Charter-and the old patterns of international behavior, which we have not yet succeeded in superseding, is basically responsible for the crises and tensions which still exist on the large stage of inter-State relations. 13. It is not that I am unaware of, or appreciate any the less, the encouraging progress that we are achieving, little by little, along the intricate path of reconciling differences and in the search for the easing of tensions.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“For the past 26 years Brazil has been given the privilege and responsibility of opening our general debate, a custom which brings me to this rostrum as the first speaker for the third consecutive session of the Assembly. This tradition also presents the challenge of initiating a critical analysis of the international political scene in the light of the diplomatic events of the past 12 months and from the angle of the repercussions that same activity will have on this broad and irreplaceable forum for the harmonization of the external behavior of States which is the United Nations. 12. Contemporary international political relationships are characterized by the complexity, extensiveness and swiftness of their evolution.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“The civic enthusiasm with which we commemorate our entry, a century and a half ago, into the community of sovereign States strengthens our determination to build our national destiny in the certainty that, to progress, Brazil must rely on itself and on the work of its people, and to build it in the conviction that this development can be accelerated by the establishment and maintenance of that peace and security which will ensure to each and every one of the members of the international community the right to progress and to stability as well as a sovereign voice and an active presence in the formulation of the world political order. Brazil's diplomacy, which it is today incumbent upon me to conduct, abides fully by the traditions of understanding and negotiation bestowed upon us by our elders. 11.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“We continue to maintain that this indiscriminate violence gives the outright lie to the thesis that terrorist subversion is the fruit of social injustice or of the poverty of a given society. 9. At this juncture let us be truly the "United Nations", regardless of our respective and different ideological convictions or patterns of political organization, and let us heed this clamor and be firm and united in the struggle for the final extirpation of violence in any of its forms. 10. The Brazilian nation celebrates this year the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of its independence.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“Nor is it my purpose to recall here recent history which must certainly still be in the minds of all. What I wish is to launch now, in this world forum, a vehement appeal for us to hanker to the outcry which requires our statesmen and government leaders to take practical and immediate measures to defend the most elementary principles which should preside over social relationships. 8. We are not prompted by any political preference or any ideological bias when we declare that it is urgent, that it is indispensable, for us to unite and organize ourselves with firmness and determination against the hideous and indiscriminate violence of terrorism to which each and every country has become exposed; indeed, this brooks no delay.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“It is not only in recent days that we have been concerned with the problem of terrorism which has affected so many countries, including my own, as is generally known. In January and February 1971 the General Assembly of the Organization of American States met at Washington in extraordinary session to attempt to establish on the regional level a juridical order capable of facing up to and overcoming this intolerable threat to the peace and well-being of our peoples. However, the limited results then obtained did not constitute, in our opinion, an adequate instrument with which to meet this pressing need, as subsequent tragic events have unfortunately proved. I do not feel it necessary to recall the clear and forceful position that Brazil has always adopted with regard to this grave problem.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“It is, in my view, most deplorable that the Assembly has failed to endorse the wording of item 92 as recommended by the General Committee [see A/8800/Rev.l, para. 18]. After the voting on the amendments presented at the plenary meeting last Saturday night [2037th meeting], the Brazilian delegation stressed two points that we deemed essential to clarify our position: first, we cannot accept terrorism, or any form of violence, as a legitimate political instrument; secondly, the wording of the item as finally adopted contains expressions which have been frequently used in attempts to justify or even tolerate terrorism. We are seriously concerned lest this wording encourage attempts at undue interference in matters falling within the exclusive domestic jurisdiction of States and consequently lead to acrimonious and sterile debates. 7.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“Waldheim will detect not only the affectionate message of a colleague and friend of many years standing but also and chiefly the conviction held by the Foreign Minister of a country whose international involvement keeps up with its growth that our Secretary-General possesses the indispensable qualities of moderation and dynamism required by the office he occupies. Proof of his capacity for taking the initiative to bring to the attention of the United Nations major problems we are now facing was the solemn appeal he addressed to the General Assembly to find the most appropriate means to combat terrorism and other forms of violence which endanger and take innocent human lives [A/8791 and Add.lJ. 6.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“Waldheim, whom I have so often met in other diplomatic forums, the satisfaction that my Government and I myself experienced upon his assumption of the responsibilities of Secretary- General of the United Nations. His sense of mission, already evidenced during the brief period in which he has been exercising the functions so worthily discharged by his predecessors, and his diplomatic experience which we all acknowledge and which contributed so decisively to his unanimous election to a post so exacting, yet so full of possibilities-all these qualifications are the best assurance of a reactivation of the role that the United Nations, through its Secretary-General, should play in the international political field. I am certain that in my words of greeting Mr.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“President, to congratulate you on your unanimous election and to express my gratification at seeing you preside over our work; for I also bear in mind that you represent a country whose sons migrated to Brazil in substantial numbers and, by their productive efforts and perfect integration into the open and multiracial Brazilian society, contributed in large measure to the progress of their adopted homeland. 4. In addition, I would avail myself of this opportunity to convey to Mr. Adam Malik my appreciation for the serene and correct manner in which he presided over the twenty- sixth session of the General Assembly. 5. It is also my wish to reiterate to Mr.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“Brazil is attending the twenty-seventh session of the General Assembly in the conviction that the intense diplomatic activity which has in recent months attracted the attention of our foreign ministries should be the subject of thorough study, not only because this diplomatic activity will have an impact on the general interests of the international community, but also because we shall thus be able to gage its compatibility with our Organization's specific competence and objectives. 3. Before I undertake such an analysis, allow me, Mr.”
1972-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 27 (1972)
“Nothing shall weaken our efforts to improve the United Nations by expanding its responsibilities and increasing its effectiveness in disciplining international relations among States for the benefit of world peace and security,”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“That is the understanding of the contemporary reality that Brazil wishes to share with other Member States at the opening of this general debate. Nothing can undermine our determination to go on working toward our common ideals and aspirations, which will draw us ever closer in progress and in peace. Nothing shall alter our certainty that, despite so many set-backs, we still retain in our hands, in the hands of the peoples of the United Nations, the power to repudiate, once and for all, the tragic legacy of violence and folly which drenched in Mood and tears the road we had to travel in order finally to create this Organization.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Since historical events are rendering obsolete the bi-polarization which dominated international relations, its alternative cannot be a new power system also to be based on a small number of nations claiming a de facto hegemony over the rest of the world; rather it must be an international community organized in conformity with the broader and more equitable provisions of the purposes and principles of the Charter. 36. The consistent tenor of our foreign policy is summed up in. the following words of President Emilio Garrastazii Mddici “Brazil is opposed to the division of the world into spheres of influence; it believes that peace is essential to the achievement of progress, and it adheres faithfully to the principle of the peaceful settlement of international disputes as its guide-line in the conduct of its diplomacy. 37.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“We firmly trust that the United States of America, as well as the developed countries currently engaged in mutual consultations for the purpose of maintaining their stability, will not abandon their prior commitments towards the developing world. 34. Brazil, with an already accelerated rate of economic growth and social progress which heralds the breaking of the barriers of under-development; will continue to the best of its ability to strive for the strengthening of an international order based on the concepts I have just outlined. 35.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Therefore, it is imperative that their interests be duly safeguarded in the search for corrective solutions in order to avoid any further set-backs to their economic and social development process, However, I very much fear that if Governments and specialized organs adopt measures to reshape the international monetary system without previously consulting the developing countries in the appropriate international organs-I very much fear, I repeat-that the action program for development embodied in the International Development Strategy adopted last year by this Assembly [resolution 2626 (XXV)] will be gravely impaired in the very first year of its existence. 33. The Latin American countries have already taken a common political stand on those problems.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“But I cannot refrain from pointing out that Brazil is following with deep concern the new trends and developments that now characterize the international monetary and trade scene as a consequence of the decisions taken by the Government of the United States of America to offset the deficit in its balance of payments. It is undeniable that the fundamental interests of developing countries have in this case once again been neglected. It should be stressed that developing countries have in no way contributed to bringing about this abnormal situation on the international financial and trade scene.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“To this effect we maintain that such States are entitled to exercise the right to determine the extent of their sovereignty or jurisdiction over those areas, in accordance with their geographical, geological and biological peculiarities, and their requirements in the fields of security, scientific investigation and with respect to the preservation of the marine environment. The Brazilian Government wishes to express its gratification at the wide-spread understanding and support these principles are increasingly receiving from States of all continents and levels of economic development in the context of the preparatory work on a comprehensive conference on the law of the sea. 32. I have no intention of bringing into this debate matters that are already being discussed in other international forums in a more adequate technical manner.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Collective economic security further presupposes the protection of all Member States against economic aggression, threats or pressures, especially in relation to international trade and financing; it also presupposes respect for the sovereignty of all States over their natural resources and the political and economic consequences thereof, namely, the right freely to protect those resources and exploit them for the benefit of their own peoples and in accordance with their own priorities. 31. Brazil reiterates the right and duty of riparian States to avail themselves of the resources of tire seas, the sea-bed and the subsoil thereof adjacent to their coastlines in order to ensure the economic and social well-being of their peoples.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“We want to see this issue frontally tackled in Lima, at the Ministerial Meeting of the Group of 77, so that the third session of UNCTAD may bring about concrete and global solutions to this problem. We are convinced that other countries in stages of development similar to Brazil's will join us in seeking such solutions; concurrently, it is essential, in accordance with the International Development Strategy for the Second United Nations Development Decade, that developed countries be prepared to contribute additional resources to eliminate more rapidly the disparities in growth among those in process of development. In the Latin American context, we are already acting increasingly in accordance with this political decision. 30.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“It also postulates the ditty of the more developed countries to contribute to the elimination of the external barriers which they have created and which hinder the acceleration of the growth of developing countries. This should be achieved in accordance with the negotiated time-tables and, in any event, before the end of the Second United Nations Development Decade. 29. To the extent of its capabilities, Brazil is prepared to take up its responsibilities towards the least developed among developing countries, bilaterally as well as multilaterally. And we are naturally moved to do so by reason of the solidarity that links us to these countries, and also because we consider it to be an ethical imperative.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Disappointed at the poor results of the first and second sessions of UNCTAD, and aware of the reluctance of developed countries, of the intransigence of some and the even less excusable indifference of others, Brazil believes that the fate of the third session of UNCTAD will depend on the growing acceptance by the international community of the concept of collective economic security through the adoption of decisions of broad range and significance at the institutional level, and through the creation of new and more ambitious mechanisms. 28. The concept of collective economic security will complement the system of collective political security. In practice, this concept, which Brazil has consistently defended since 1953, upholds in the first place the right of all nations to economic and social development.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“In a few months the third session of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development [UNCTAD] will be convened, the third opportunity afforded the developed world in less than 10 years to co-operate concretely with the developing countries to improve their living standards, and to close within the shortest possible time the economic, scientific and technological gap separating the nations of the world. 27.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Yet this solution stubbornly eludes us, prodded beyond our grasp by a diabolical illusion that power, which only apparently renders a few immune, will through its own dynamics guarantee the survival of all. 25. Hence our eyes and ears are fixed on the doors behind which, in Helsinki and in Vienna, the secret talks on the limitation of strategic arms are proceeding with the slowness to which we have, unhappily, become accustomed. Around those tables, where we have no seats, the negotiators of the super-Powers play with the destiny of us all. 26.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Although necessary and praiseworthy, these measures have not gone beyond the maintenance of the present distribution of nuclear power under the deceptive cloak of the co- chairmanship. The existence of nuclear arsenals and the sums expended annually to strengthen them quantitatively and improve them qualitatively are the result of antagonisms which the practice of the balance of power does not allow to be resolved. No one disputes any longer the irrationality of "over-kill", or that unrestrained spending on nuclear arms constitutes the greatest impediment to any integrated plan for global economic development. 24. We meet here once again entrusted with the responsibility of seeking a solution which, viewed rationally, seems about to materialize.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“On the contrary it should be a peace resting on the stable structure of collective security and providing conditions for progress, a peace which is identified with the eradication of under-development and which guarantees to all Member States territorial integrity, national identity, the right to develop their human potentialities, their political and social capabilities and the unimpeded possession and disposition of their factors of progress. 23. The basic requirement for the permanent establishment of peace and political and economic security lies essentially in general and complete disarmament, which cannot be reduced to the inadequate dimension of partial measures of arms control or non-armament.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“The establishment of peace is the fundamental task of the United Nations: a peace which is not to be confused with the balance of power or its nuclear counterpart, the balance of terror; a peace which should not be the mere perpetuation of an unjust international situation, or the mere absence of conflict with a whole range of sinister nuclear overtones; a peace, in short, which should not be reduced to sheer hope for the survival of mankind on the morrow and a hope, consistently renewed on a short-term basis, that the nuclear arsenals will not be used.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Its effects cannot be extended to any other forum or activity of the Organization, thus endowing the permanent members of the Security Council with special prerogatives. Nor should this privilege, which is restricted to the forum of that same Council, serve to assure its permanent members any advantage or priority of membership in the subsidiary organs of the Assembly, to the detriment of the principle of equitable geographic representation. 22. It seems necessary here to stress the obvious since the obvious frequently becomes distorted under the impact of powerful conflicting interests.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“As an illustration of the need for revision, I could point to the limited representativeness of such organs as the Economic and Social Council, the current membership of which renders it incapable of reflecting and interpreting the whole and complex gamut of the economic and social interests of Member States of the United Nations. 21. Along this line of thought I wish to reiterate that the Brazilian Government cannot agree that the principle of sovereign equality of Member States should be questioned in any way or restricted in its consequences. This principle is not subject to any qualification other than those prerogatives explicitly set forth in Article 27 of the Charter. An exceptional rule is involved here.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“The scenarios that have evolved and disappeared in the changeable international reality, the experiences we have accumulated during our 25 years of work to put a stop to or contain crises and causes of conflict, and, even more basically, the entrance into these scenarios of so many new, sovereign States, have rendered many of the mechanisms created a quarter of a century ago archaic, inadequate and insufficient. Revision is a prerequisite for making available to the United Nations instruments which will make them more active, more normative and more agile. 20.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“The most evident, and in the long run most dangerous, attempt to sanction immobility is the systematic refusal even to entertain the possibility of reviewing the Charter. The Brazilian Government does not think the political philosophy of the United Nations, as expressed in its purposes and principles, is in need of revision. That was the sense of the appeal I made during the twenty-fifth anniversary session: "let us use our Organization and let us apply the Chatter" [1841st meeting, para. 35]. 19. But since times change, the machinery established for the implementation of these purposes and principles must now be submitted to review and revision.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“On the contrary, the political philosophy of our Organization rests on quite a different basis: the equality of rights, duties and opportunities of all Member States, respect for the sovereignty and independence of States, the non-use of force in the settlement of international disputes, and the fulfillment in good faith of the obligations contracted under the Charter, It therefore becomes obvious that the doctrines of power threaten the existence of the United Nations as the normative organ of international society, downgrading it politically as the international forum competent to impose discipline on the fact of power itself--discipline that should benefit the international community as a whole rather than the oligopoly of force that acts to the community's detriment. 18.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Certainly, while I am attempting to picture the freezing of power as a trend that has become a major obstacle to the achievement of the objectives of peace, security and development, I do not postulate, either directly or indirectly, a symmetrical evaluation of the super-Powers, their world interests or political behavior. 16. Even if, hypothetically, the international community were willing to accept a "nuclear peace" and therefore the resulting principle that absolute power engenders absolute rights, historical experience disavows any permanent differentiation of States into a small, group endowed with, on the one hand, unparalleled power and, on the other, a second category of countries condemned to the role of spectators or protégés of power. 17.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Consequently the candidate for membership comes into existence from the moment the directorate of the club of power so decides. 14. The participation of this new partner is taken for granted, whether it be today or tomorrow. Timing appears to be irrelevant. The important point, the relevant innovation, would be for this display of Realpolitik to result in the United Nations henceforth discussing and deciding upon major issues of international peace and security which, strangely enough, have not been discussed in the General Assembly. 15.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“In relation to this issue, which is being given top- priority attention in all the chancelleries of the world, I should also like to remark that the new fact before us is not the discovery of a new star in the constellation of the great Powers. This star has long been shining. It has been there ever since it mastered the technology and means to jeopardize the survival of mankind -- in other words, ever since it proved it possessed atomic weapons. The very novelty of the situation now in the offing that fundamentally changes the prospects of the membership of the United Nations is that a super-Power has decided the time has come to acknowledge the existence of another great Power. This fact seems to be irrefutable.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“Now, unfortunately this is not Realpolitik we are dealing with-not the Realpolitik that would lead us to lasting and fruitful peace. Quite the contrary, the Realpolitik we are invited to apply on this occasion is the admission of the fact that a nation counting its population in the hundreds of millions and possessing its own nuclear weapons-even though, incidentally, the proliferation of these weapons is supposed to be proscribed-could not fail to be given a position among us compatible with its strength. What we are facing here is another instance of power politics, which can hardly set proper criteria for organizing an international society based on peace, justice and the equality of States. 13.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“As a matter of fact, I would prefer to have that so-called realistic spirit applied to the recognition by the United Nations of a process that can no longer be delayed: the translation into concrete deeds of the moral duty and political obligation of wealthy nations to make an effective contribution to the progress of the less-developed countries, or, at the very least, not to raise obstacles to their development. There is no lack of studies on the subject. Quite reasonable proposals have been put forth and even adopted. Yet when we take stock of the outcome of their implementation we are made aware that all we have succeeded in achieving is the splitting up of our deliberations into comfortable time-packages. That is how we came to the Second Development Decade. 12.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“That reiteration doubtless implies a rebuttal of the so-called political realism used as a means of imposing and justifying new modes of the freezing of power, as well as the implicit or explicit establishment of spheres of influence. 11. At the present session of the General Assembly we are invited to consider, in the light of this pseudo-realism, the accession of another great Power to our Organization. This realistic spirit seems to be a modem version of Realpolitik, a term which brings to mind less than happy memories.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)
“The Brazilian Government thus maintains, and will continue to stress, that peace and collective security, as well as the social and economic progress of developing countries, are the crucial problems of our time and that on their solution depend harmonious relationships among States. 9. For the same reasons, during the General Assembly's twenty-fifth anniversary session Brazil strove for the adoption of the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security [resolution 2734 (XXV)], through which we reiterated the purposes and principles of our Organization and its competence to examine, debate and settle major world issues. 10.”
1971-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 26 (1971)