YouSaid · the spoken record

Urdaneta-Arbelaez

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS URDANETA-ARBELAEZ

lines on the record: 32
first: 1948-09-24
most recent: 1950-09-24
sittings or episodes: 2
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

“I should like to conclude my remarks by expressing my delegation's heartfelt hope that this session will be a successful one, and that the great Powers will reach an understanding despite the differing principles which govern the lives of their peoples. They all, surely, seek the happiness of their peoples, but it is inconceivable that they should contemplate the destruction of man in order to attain that goal.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“My country feels that this is a wholesome tendency. It coincides with the views we have held since the San Francisco Conference; and we have often expressed the opinion that under its rules the Security Council would frequently be found lacking in effectiveness. Events have confirmed our prognostications, but we cannot agree that this deficiency will lead to the complete collapse of our Organization. We feel that the Charter should not be looked upon as a dead or Static instrument, but as one imbued with life and capable of development to enable the organs of the United Nations to carry out their functions and meet the exigencies which may arise. 168.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“My Government is resolved to collaborate to the limit of its resources in carrying out this important plan, in which the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and a group of experts, headed by the distinguished economist Lauchlin Currie, have participated and taken an interest. 166. The representative of Chile [281st meeting] has already spoken at length on the development of Point Four of President Truman’s programme, a statement with which my delegation heartily concurs, 167. Finally, I should like to comment briefly on the trend of opinion which exists here to give greater flexibility to the action of the General Assembly in the solution of international disputes, particularly in cases where the Security Council is paralysed owing to the rigidity of its rules of procedure.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“Colombia is particularly interested in the success of the programme of technical assistance to economically under-developed countries which was initiated, with wisdom and foresight, by President Truman in Point Four of his inaugural address. The struggle against poverty and the determination to raise the standard of living of those who have been less favoured by fortune are, in our opinion, essential prerequisites to the establishment of peace with justice, In my country, at the present time, a long-term programme is being initiated under the auspices of the United Nations and its technical organs, an undertaking which may be called the first experimental step in the comprehensive humanitarian programme of assistance to under-developed countries; if it is successfully completed, it will reflect immeasurable credit upon our Organization.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“On the other hand, in view of the special characteristics of the territory and the division of opinion which has been reported by the United Nations Commission for Eritrea, it would be premature to consider the establishment of an independent state and dangerous to postpone a decision on the fate of so important a territory, 164. Perhaps a solution might be found in the proposal for federation which is supported in some quarters, but only provided that the statute of such a federation respect the sovereignty to which each member State of a federation is equally entitled. There can be no federation if the essential attributes of domestic sovereignty are vested in only one of the member States. 165.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“It now appears that despite the numerous problems which will have to be faced, it will be possible to convene in the coming year a constituent assembly, and that before 1 January 1952 Libya will enter the family of nations as a sovereign, free and independent state. 162. The report of the Advisory Council on Somaliland shows the wisdom of the General Assembly in making Italy responsible for that territory’s administration during the three years which were considered necessary for its preparation as an independent state. 163. It remains for the Assembly to solve the problem of Eritrea. Annexation to Ethiopia, carried out against the wishes of large sections of the population, would be a violation of principles on which we can brook no compromise.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“160, When the government of Mussolini invaded Ethiopia, Colombia was one of the first countries to vote in favour of the sanctions ordered by the League of Nations, and although the great Powers later accepted the fait accompli of annexation, Colombia always refused to recognize it. The countries of America regard as unacceptable any annexation carried out without consultation of the people and against their will. 161, One year ago there was some doubt concerning the possibility of setting up an independent state in Libya within the brief period stipulated in General Assembly resolution 289 (IV).”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“As the representatives of an overwhelmingly Catholic people, we desire a regime which will offer complete safeguards for the Holy Places and ensure free access for the faithful of all religions. The General Assembly resolution providing for the internationalization of the Holy City is still in force and Colombia respects it. We hope that in its application an attempt will be made to find a solution which can be supported by the inhabitants of both nationalities. We are prepared to exert our efforts to that end. 159. Colombia has no links and no direct interest in the territories of the former Italian colonies. This fact has enabled my country to take an impartial attitude during the discussions of their future status and our sole preoccupation has been to ensure respect for the general principles for which my country has always striven.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“But the internal peace of states is an integral part of international peace and it does not seem to be conducive to the strengthening of internal peace to promote from within or outside this Organization revolutionary movements designed to overthrow legally constituted governments. To expel from the United Nations, without careful consideration, the delegation representing the government which heretofore was unanimously recognized as the legitimate government of China, and which is still struggling to maintain its authority, and to invite the representatives of the subversive movement would, in my opinion, be tantamount to inciting people to sedition everywhere in the world and thereby weakening the foundations of international peace. 158. In the case of Jerusalem, the position of the Colombian delegation is well known.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“Yet, that was the Government which was recognized as legitimate and which later imposed its authority by force of arms. Nor is it idle to recall that in the case of Spain there is a government which for many years has completely and peacefully ruled the entire territory of Spain and is obeyed by all of its inhabitants. Nevertheless the legitimacy of this Government is not recognized by the very people who here advocate the immediate recognition and admission of the People’s Republic of China. 157. We must not forget in this instance that the maintenance of peace is the primary objective of the United Nations and that the first duty of the Organization is to strive for peace.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“I have heard it said here that the fact that the Government of the People’s Republic is now in control of most of Chinese territory and imposes its decisions on the majority of the Chinese people, provides it with sufficient credentials as a legitimate government which should be recognized and respected by the international community, and that the Government of Nationalist China, which was legitimate until quite recently, ceased to be legitimate because today it is confined by force of arms to the territory of Formosa. 156. Nevertheless, I find that those who maintain this thesis have on many occasions applied different principles. To mention only a single case, I give the example of the present Government of Poland whose members; for a long time resided outside their country without even setting foot on Polish territory.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“Then there occurred a subversive movement which, with arms supplied by foreign countries, fought to overthrow that legitimate government and which, after a long and varied series of events, succeeded in winning the upper hand, although it cannot be said that the battle is finally over. What I should like to know is at what precise moment the legitimate government ceased to be the legitimate government and at what point the one which sought to overthrow it by force acquired a legal and moral right. 155.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“It is with a heavy heart that Colombia sees her sons departing; but at the same time it is with a feeling of satisfaction because they are going to discharge their duty. 154. Already in the opening meeting of this session of the Assembly, the question of the delegation of China was brought up and it was debated which of the two Governments, the People’s Republic or Nationalist China, should occupy a seat in our Organization. My delegation’s attitude to this important question is as follows: the Nationalist Government had been unanimously recognized, even by those who today oppose it, as the legitimate government of the Chinese people and no one ever questioned the legitimacy of the credentials of its delegation.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“Colombia, accepting, therefore, the Security Council’s decision to come to the aid of Korea, even by recourse to arms as well as the recommendation that all Member States of the Organization should co-operate in this effort, replied to the Secretary-General’s telegram of 14 July by stating that it was prepared faithfully to fulfil its international commitments, whatever sacrifices might be involved. Consequently, Colombia has recently placed at the disposal of the Unified Command of the United Nations a frigate, the officers, noncommissioned officers and men of which are ready to proceed to the theatre of war and are prepared to give up their lives at the side of their comrades from other countries in the cause of the United Nations.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“We believe that it is by the vote of the majority that the democracies can express their will and that, whatever may be the disadvantages which this principle may offer, there is no other way for peoples to attain self-government in accordance with their own freely- expressed will. I cannot but differ on this point with the views expressed here a few days ago by the head of the USSR delegation when he repudiated the moral weight of the majority vote of the Assembly. If the decision of the majority does not determine the course to be followed by states and peoples, then there remains but one alternative: to impose the will of the armed minority upon the unarmed majority. This course, far from leading to peace, leads to slavery. 153.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“At the first part of the third session, our delegation stated that it would support the conclusions reached by the United Nations Commission on Korea that had gone to study on the spot the situation that had arisen there. We defined our position on the question then, even though we were not unaware of the proportions to which any conflict brought about by disregard of the Commission’s conclusions might grow. 152. The Government of Colombia has followed the invariable practice of respecting the decisions of organs of the United Nations and of obeying its decisions as expressed by the majority vote of the Member States.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“There can be no doubt that the bloody drama being enacted in Korea takes first place amidst the problems which face the world and on that account must take priority over all other matters before the General Assembly. This is not only because, in that distant land, the blood of heroic servants of the United Nations is being shed, but also because, there, the prestige of our Organization is at stake and the effectiveness of aggression against law and the predominance of right over force are being weighed in the balance, 150. The position of Colombia in relation to such an important problem cannot be a matter for vacillation. 151.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“The practice of beginning sessions of the Assembly with a general debate should be recognized as affording the Governments represented here an opportunity to state early in the session their attitude on the most important items on the agenda; thus an idea may be obtained of the general outline of the proceedings of the most important organ of the United Nations, and the world, anxious to learn the views of the Assembly, can without delay, form an opinion concerning the objectives of the Member States of the Organization and the responsibilities each one of them is prepared to assume. Accordingly, and taking into account the pressure of time, I propose to outline briefly the Colombian delegation’s attitude to the main problems on the agenda. 149.”
1950-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 5 (1950)
“Every individual, as well as every State, must be able to profess and to practice those principles which he considered right, so long as he did not try to impose them upon others by force or guile. By their very nature, man and all the institutions he had created tended towards freedom. Lack of freedom brought anxiety, quarrels, and breaches of the peace. Peace could only exist in the pure light of freedom and justice. Through its support of those ideals the United Nations would truly become «the conscience of the world», as a French writer had so aptly said. The fact that the Assembly was meeting among the French people allowed the world to glimpse a ray of hope. The land of France had been the cradle of liberty; the United Nations must not dig its grave there.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“Where freedom of information was concerned, Colombia adhered to the terms of its Constitution: freedom of information was ensured, but with due regard for the responsibility required by law in every country. Such was the position of Colombia on certain items of the agenda. Its views on the other items would be made known at the appropriate time in the course of the discussions. Finally, Colombia, faithful to its unshakable democratic tradition, was convinced that it was only under a system of freedom based on moral law that the world could regain balance and stability. Freedom must be ensured for the human person and for States, freedom of conscience, of speech and of association, freedom of work, freedom of movement and of trade.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“If that were not done, it was difficult to see who should decide which weapons were to be prohibited, which were to be destroyed, and where they were to be found. With regard to the question of Spain, which the Assembly had referred to the Security Council in accordance with resolution 114 (II) of 17 November 1947, and which the Council had decided not to include in its agenda on 25 June 1948, the Colombian delegation concluded that the Council had implicitly recognized that the question did not represent a threat to peace, and that, in those circumstances, any recourse to Article 41 of the Charter would be based solely upon the character of the political regime in Spain, and would therefore be an interference in the domestic affairs of a State and hence a violation of the Charter itself.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“Where such a serious matter was concerned, the world could not be left in a state of uncertainty and anxiety. The Assembly should take steps to settle the disagreement. The Colombian representative feared, however, that it would be impossible for the General Assembly to take any effective measures, since it was only the great Powers who could settle the problems separating them. From the very beginning Colombia had stated in the Commission and would reiterate again that it was not possible to begin by taking steps to prohibit atomic weapons and destroy those already in existence and after that to establish an organ of control. The reverse procedure would appear to be the logical one to follow.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“Then again, when the differences were as to whether the question under consideration was procedural or not, it might be well to ask the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion, not in order that the views of that body might be enforced, which might have serious consequences, but in order to oblige the refractory State to declare itself against the opinion of the highest authority on the legal interpretation of the Charter. Such a method might perhaps lessen the drawbacks of the excessive use of the veto, while in no way detracting from its effectiveness. Colombia would ask for the adoption of some such formula. As a member of the Security Council, Colombia had taken part in the discussions of the Atomic Energy Commission, and had been deeply disappointed to have to admit that its deliberations had ended in complete failure.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“On the other hand, it was easy to understand the arguments in favour of the veto, and to realize that the great Powers could not accept a situation in which they might be obliged against their will, at any moment, to take measures to their prejudice. The two aspects of the question could, however, be reconciled without necessarily amending the Charter, and for the moment it would be sufficient to try to find a correct interpretation of the text in accordance with the true spirit of the Charter. Perhaps, when the case of the veto seemed imminent, it might be possible to make compromise between the permanent members of the Council easier, by avoiding its use at that meeting and deferring the final decision, in order to give the States parties to the dispute time to come to an agreement.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“If then, under such circumstances, the General Assembly did not give its unqualified approval to the work of the Commission, it would in fact be renouncing its own authority and admitting the existence within the Assembly itself of the privilege of the veto, which existed only in the Security Council. As for the voting procedure in the Security Council, it was quite evident that the manner in which that procedure had been followed, and the excessive use of the veto, had often rendered that body powerless, even on purely procedural questions. It was obvious that, if such a practice were to continue, the most important organ of the United Nations would lose prestige in world opinion and States would no longer have any faith in its action.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“The United Nations should have a universal character and, consequently, should be composed of the greatest possible number of States, so that all might co-operate in the task of safeguarding peace. With regard to the question of the independence of Korea, the position of Colombia was clearly defined. At its 112th plenary meeting on 14 November 1947, by a vote of forty-three nations, the Assembly had established a Temporary Commission on Korea. The functions of the latter had been clearly defined. Despite the obstruction of the USSR, the Commission had faithfully carried out the task allotted to it.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“As regards the admission of new Members, the Colombian Government considered that the only principle which, under the terms of the Charter, applied to that question was the following: all peace-loving States which accepted the obligations imposed by the Charter, and which were ready and willing to carry out those obligations were eligible for membership in the United Nations. No other considerations should apply and it would be a violation of the principles of the Charter to refuse admission to a State on account of its social order or the political ideology in which such order was inspired. It would be even more serious if membership were refused a peace-loving State because it was on good or bad terms with one or other of the great Powers.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“If peace did not exist in fact, the task of the United Nations would seem to be an almost impossible one. There was no way in which a thing which had not yet come into being could be preserved. The problem of Berlin was to be submitted to the Security Council, and probably to the General Assembly at a later stage. That meant that the United Nations was going to find itself confronted with reality. Its ability to acquit itself of its task would be put to the test and the world would thus learn just how sincere certain States had been when they had signed the Charter at San Francisco. It was going to discover whether they had signed it with a sincere desire to live up to its provisions or whether they had done so solely for the purpose of paralysing the work of the Organization or utilizing it for their own ends.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“Still others had to do with the improvement of the health and well-being of mankind, but the most urgent problem, the one of greatest concern to the world, was not to be found on the agenda of the General Assembly, The speaker wondered whether it were necessary for that very important question to be submitted to the consideration of the United Nations or not, for, so long as it remained unsolved, all the efforts that body might deploy to ensure the peace of the world would be made in vain, and that fact confirmed what the Secretary-General had so convincingly said in his annual report; namely, that the existence of the United Nations presupposed agreement among the great Powers. That Organization had not been formed to establish peace but to maintain it once it had been established.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“The circumstances of the moment recalled in many respects those which had led up to the last world tragedy and, rightly or wrongly, the whole of humanity was hopeful that the United Nations would be able to find a solution which would mean peace for all men of good will. Mr. Urdaneta-Arbelaez wondered whether that hope was really well founded, as some of the problems which had been submitted to the General Assembly had been turned over to it because the institutions most competent to deal with them had proved to be powerless to do so. Other questions on the agenda were in reality praiseworthy and interesting efforts to improve the structure and working of the United Nations if possible.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“For example, all Colombia could do was to express its desire to play its part in international co-operation and to assume its responsibilities by making its voice heard in defence of justice, by warning the world of dangers wherever it saw them and by calling attention to any defects it might notice in the working of the institutions intended to safeguard the peace. Two thirds of the inhabitants of the world possessed no armaments. They, however, formed the majority of public opinion, that opinion with which it was dangerous to clash, because, sooner or later, truth would out and selfishness and despotism, despite their power, in the end would yield to the weight of public opinion. The present Assembly was meeting in an atmosphere of expectation and anxiety.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“Mr. URDANETA-ARBELAEZ declared that when the spokesmen of the smaller nations appeared on the rostrum before the Assembly, from where their voices could be heard throughout the world, they were imbued only with an ardent desire to tell the truth as they saw it, and fully determined to speak the truth with courage and frankness. Nations which did not have great wealth at their command and which could not back their opinions with material force did not constitute a threat to world peace. At the same time they did not have the means of saving humanity from the scourge of war.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)