YouSaid · the spoken record

FACIO

lines on the record: 237
first: 1970-09-24
most recent: 1977-09-24
sittings or episodes: 6
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

“My country has been able to allocate for the health, education, housing and nutrition of its people the inevitably scarce resources which others allocate for instruments of war. That is perhaps why our democracy is today sounder than it has ever been and why our citizens live with decorum, in freedom and dignity.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“We do not deny the right of every country to be vigilant with respect to its own security. The truth is that many countries have recourse to weapons because the international community regrettably has so far not been able to offer an international substitute for the duty of each State to see to its own security. 185. It might be said that as an exception Costa Rica wishes to offer the testimony of its confidence in the present agreements on collective, regional and world security to which it is a party. Therefore, inspired by its age-old civilian tradition, we decided in 1948 to dissolve our armed forces and refrain from investing funds in acquiring the instruments of war. That act of faith has yielded optimum dividends.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“The data of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute indicate that mankind has accumulated the equivalent of more than a million Hiroshima bombs. That represents a lethal potential capable of annihilating the total population of the world 12 times over. And yet the number of nuclear warheads for guided missiles continues to increase from year to year, and in the last eight years they have increased fivefold. At the same time, the lethal capacity of conventional weapons which, unlike clear weapons, are available even to the poorest countries of the world is being perfected. 183. These facts demonstrate that the human race is lagging behind in its race against weapons. Increasingly vigorous efforts are required to achieve disarmament, or at least a reduction in armaments. 184.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“My Government hopes that at this thirty-second session there will finally be a full and dispassionate consideration of the sincere desire of my delegation and many others that there be established the post of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. The support given to this idea by President Carter when he first appeared in this forum on 17 March 1977 and the voices of encouragement we have heard from other delegations have led us to request of the General Assembly that it at least earn out an exhaustive consideration of the matter. 181. The primary goal of the United Nations is to promote international peace and security. That goal logically becomes more distant in inverse ratio to the increase in the number and destructive capacity of nuclear and conventional weapons. 182. The statistics on weapons are truly terrifying.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“The need for such an agency, rejected by an impartial official having objective authority, has become more obvious because of the tendency to create ad hoc committees to investigate selectively certain cases of alleged violations of human rights with a predominantly political criterion, a criterion which casts doubt on the equity of the conclusions and recommendations that might be arrived at by such ad hoc committees. A High Commissioner would, on the contrary, have the prestige arising from his impartiality and broad knowledge of the subject and would be heeded because his good offices and recommendations would be objective and removed from the urge to provoke a political scandal in the country against which it is rightly or wrongly alleged that violations of human rights have occurred. 180.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“The coming into being of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination [resolution 2106 A (XX)], the two International Covenants on Human Rights and the Optional Protocol of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights have given legal content to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Those instruments have conferred new functions on the United Nations, functions which should, in the opinion of my delegation, be co-ordinated and promoted by an agency of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. 181.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“The delegation of Costa Rica attaches special importance to agenda item 76 of this session of the Assembly, entitle alternative approaches and ways and means within the United Nations system for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms. 179. Together with other delegations which share our interests, my delegation has participated in the drafting of an informal working paper which explains the approach given to the item and an initial draft which brings up to date and includes our old idea of establishing a post entitled United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. 180.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“Only when the rich States really comply with their obligation to co-operate with the poor in their efforts to overcome under-development can they rightfully call for full observance of human rights. 177. On the other hand, my delegation is convinced that repression set up as a rule of government is not only a violation of the United Nations Charter, which requires respect for human rights, but also creates major obstacles to the attainment of socio-economic progress by the subjugated peoples. Such repression prevents the full participation of the people without which no process of socio-economic development can be successful, whatever may be the prevailing system. That is why under-development and political repression are but aspects of one and the same problem. 178.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“It is a grave fact that in many cases, in order to overcome the obstacles presented by under-development, it is considered necessary to do without civil and political rights as well. Thus the peoples of many developing countries are not only cast into the abyss of economic wretchedness, ill health, servile labour, ignorance and under nourishment but must also bear arbitrariness and oppression from those who rule them. 175. The solution, therefore, is not to suppress some rights for the sake of others. The solution is progressively and simultaneously to move forward towards full effectiveness for all rights. That is why international co-operation for development, like respect for human rights, has ceased to be an internal obligation and has become a great international duty. 176.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“In reaction to the Jack of social solidarity which characterized he capitalist in the first half of our century, today there is greater insistence upon economic and social human rights than upon purely civil and political rights. 173. This emphasis can be explained and accepted as long as it is not used as an excuse to suppress civil and political rights for the sake of economic and social development, which in fact does not require the suppression of other rights. 174. Obviously, economic and social rights require that they be enjoyed by all, that the nation should have the financial and technical resources which only development can provide. That in why the under-developed countries have great difficulty in making human rights effective in the economic and social fields.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“If it is recognized that a man cannot be truly free under .mi arbitrary Government, it must also be recognized that neither can ho he free -even if freedom is proclaimed by the constitution and laws of his country he is subject to the oppression of poverty or the tyranny of ignorance. 171. For a human being to have dignity, e mast have at least a minimum number of rights, which must be simultaneously applicable: the right to life, to freedom of thought and opinion, to equality, to economic well-being, to education, to equitable remuneration when working and to fraternal treatment from the other members of society. 172.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“Those who are concerned with preserving and developing human rights in free societies must, then, also be concerned with promoting human rights in the rest of the world, and those who are concerned with promoting international peace and security cannot be satisfied with the attainment of those objectives in their own countries alone. As was eloquently asked by President Kennedy in 1963, is not peace ultimately and basically a question of human rights? 170. Just as the promotion of human rights has a universal character, as is recognized and emphasized by the United Nations Charter, it must also be approached universally and simultaneously and be applied to every sphere of human activity.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“The recent history of nazism in power should have taught us all that the suppression of internal freedoms is the instrument of external aggression, that a domestic lack of respect for human dignity can rapidly lead to the crushing of human dignity abroad. Dictators have always used international adventures as pretexts for consolidating the subjugation of their own peoples. And the danger of their external policies is made all the greater by the systematic suppression of domestic dissidence. 168. The other side of the coin is also less deplorable. The more a country is threatened by external aggression, the less opportunity exists for the observance of human rights within that country. 169.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“During the first 30 years of the United Nations there was a tendency to define the struggle for freedom as being similar to a struggle for national independence. But we well know that history is full of sad examples of tyrannies that have tried to justify themselves by their nationalism. Now that so many new nations have at last attained their national liberation, we must face the prior question of what happens to the individual freedom of men, women and children, the freedom of every human being whose value and dignity is affirmed on the first page of the United Nations Charter? Today, obviously, the world gives a very unsatisfactory reply to this question. 167. Experience has demonstrated the close interdependence existing between human rights, on the one hand, and international peace and security, on the other.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“The growing effectiveness of all these three institutions which constitute the Organization depends or. international co-operation. This co-operation does not come about spontaneously. It is not merely an ideal, a principle, a desire ; r a policy. It is represented by institutions, by treaties, by laws, by negotiations, by agreements and by actions. Finally, it is made up of concrete elements which are frequently difficult to bring into being. 165. Peace is not an abstraction. It requires an organized system for the peaceful settlement of disputes among nations and peaceful change in internal structures. The alternative to nuclear weapons is not their mere suppression. The alternative resides in the existence of efficient and trustworthy institutions that will guarantee the security of all nations. 166.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“This function is, by far, the largest in terms of money and staff, and it is far less controversial than the United Nations action in the political and military fields, although of course this action is not free from vehement controversy either. The other aspect of the United Nations as an instrument of action is the wide; range of activities undertaken to maintain peace throughout the world. Here we emphasize the diplomatic efforts of the Secretary-General's office in mediation, conciliation, observation and investigation before and during conflicts. Beyond the activities of the Secretariat there are the peace-keeping operations, which include the use of numerous troops, such as those which participated and sacrificed their lives in Korea, the Middle East, the Congo and Cyprus. 164.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“The United Nations provides a permanent place where the representatives of 149 sovereign States can meet informally, whether in the corridors and conference rooms, at banquets and receptions, or in friendly talks in the Delegates' Lounge. Furthermore, the United Nations provides a framework in which this quiet diplomacy among nations in conflict can be initiated and moderated by the presence of a third person, the Secretary-General of the United Nations or any one of his representatives. 163. Thirdly, but not finally, the United Nations is a centre for international action, an Instrument for making things happen instead of merely talking about them. One part of this action is connected with promoting the well-being of nations through the implementation of economic and social plans.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“This aspect of the United Nations has been used by its enemies to denigrate our Organization, when in a derogatory manner they call it a debating society or a cave of the winds . But those who make these criticisms only prove their lack of knowledge of the value of debate in an open society. My delegation maintains that, in the long run, free debate works against error and for truth and justice. Those who deplore broad debate in the forums of the United Nations seem to have little confidence in the capacity of their respective countries successfully to present their good causes. 162. Secondly, the United Nations is a place for negotiation, a kind of permanent diplomatic gathering where the peaceful solution of disputes can be sought behind the scenes.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“is the real position of the United Nations in the affairs of the world? Is it really a central element in the foreign policies of most Governments? 159. My delegation endorses the important considerations advanced by our Secretary-General in regard to those questions and, in a desire to assist his deliberation, I would venture to add the following comments. 160. The United Nations is in itself three different institutions which nevertheless form one whole, and each is of immense value to Member States. 161. First of all, the United Nations is a world forum for debate, a centre for publicity, education and persuasion, a place where weak nations can advocate their causes as freely as the- strong nations.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“The peoples of the American hemisphere demonstrated their solidarity with Panama when their highest dignitaries went to Washington on 7 September this year as very special witnesses to the historic act of the signing of the new treaties. 157. It is to be hoped that this Assembly, in the name of all the peoples represented here, will also make manifest its support for the agreements which the Administration of the United States reached with the Government of Panama. This would convince the Congress of the United States that these treaties were negotiated not with only a small and weak nation but with a people which, because of the justice of its cause, has the full support of the international community. 158. In his report this year the Secretary-General, Mr. Waldheim, puts these crucial questions: What...”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“To redress this historical political abuse represented by the imposition of the 1903 Treaty is an indispensable act of international justice which only a bold and brave Government, as that of President Carter, could dare to undertake in defiance of North American public opinion, which is indifferent or adverse because it is erroneously or maliciously informed. A calm and objective assessment by the international community would assist in illustrating for the North Americans how just is the Panamanian cause in comparison with what they thought was a legitimate enterprise and what, from the point of view of technical ingenuity, was in fact a magnificent piece of work. 156.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“They mark the beginning of the end of an era, offering tangible proof of a new political style in the United States. They are a gesture which proves the joint goodwill of two peoples prepared harmoniously to end a serious conflict. 154. What is still lacking is ratification by the Senate of the United States of America and approval by the citizens of Panama by means of a plebiscite. There cannot be much doubt about the favourable result of the Panamanian referendum but, on the other hand, some apprehension exists regarding the affirmative vote which has to be cast by at least 67 of the 100 United States Senators. 155.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“In every statement I expressed the support of Costa Rica for the Panamanian position on the need to replace the 1903 Treaty by other treaties which, while guaranteeing the neutrality of the Canal and its continued operation for the benefit of all nations, would grant Panama growing participation in the administration of the operating enterprise and in its benefits. Above all, I advocated that as soon as possible the last vestige of a colonialist enclave, which has kept the territory of the Republic of Panama divided, should disappear. 153. The treaties signed by the United States and Panama on 7 September 1977 fulfilled those major objectives. They are the result of 13 years of laborious negotiations which seemed as though they would never end.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“My delegation also affirms that the recognition and legalization of Israeli settlements in the occupied areas, whatever their legal status, leads to the interpretation of such actions as an attempt by Israel to consolidate the occupation of those territories for annexation purposes. That would imply open contradiction of paragraph 1 of Security Council resolution 242 (1967), which, I repeat, we consider to be the best instrument for arriving at a just peace in the Middle East. 152. In each of the seven statements which I have made since 1970 in the general debate which takes place annually in this Assembly I have spoken in favour of the legitimate claims of Panama to the Canal. In each of those statements I maintained the need to abrogate the obsolete and unjust Panama Canal Treaty of 1903.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“It is to be hoped that these obstacles will be overcome in a search for formulas which can bring agreement on and ensure Palestinian representation at the Geneva Conference, with recognition of the irreversible legal existence of Israel, and that in turn those formulas will, on the other hand, provide for the withdrawal of the Israeli forces from the occupied areas in such a way as to leave Israel with only the territory that is indispensable if its boundaries are to be defensible. 151. With the same frankness with which we have defended the legitimate rights of Israel to an independent and peaceful existence and condemned aberrations such as those equating Zionism with racism, today we state that my delegation does not support the annexation of territory for reasons of religious dogmatism or historical romanticism.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“Waldheim, and the Secretary of State of the United States, Mr. Vance, encouraged the hope that the Geneva Conference would meet again in the next few months, with a good opportunity to do positive work. Nevertheless, disagreement regarding Palestinian representation at the Conference and the manner of the Israeli withdrawal from the territories occupied during she six-day war has weakened the hopes for an early and fruitful Conference. 150.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“Regrettably, it has not been possible to implement those resolutions, because attempts have been made to destroy their harmonious balance by priority application of paragraphs which favour one or more of the parties and the indefinite postponement of paragraphs which favour the opposite party or parties. A formula must therefore be sought to ensure the simultaneous application of the resolutions in their entirety so as to do justice and instil confidence in all the parties involved in the conflict. 149. That is the task which, as provided for in resolution 338(1973), the Geneva Peace Conference which, unfortunately, has only held preliminary meetings in December 1973, must accomplish. The atmosphere of moderation that prevailed at the beginning of this year, together with the efforts of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“My delegation has invariably maintained that Security Council resolution 242 (1967), supplemented by resolution 338 (1973) of the same Council, contains all the principles necessary for a peaceful solution of the problem. Indeed, implicit in those resolutions we find three basic elements for peace in the Middle East: first, the existence of the State of Israel within secure and recognized boundaries; secondly, the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territories occupied during the 1967 war; and thirdly, recognition and practical application of the legitimate rights of the Palestinians, including the right to live in peace within a State of their own, independent or federated. 148.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“I also wish to reiterate most energetically the permanent condemnation by my country of the policy of apartheid practised by the Government of South Africa and all other forms of racial discrimination. This irrevocable position of Costa Rica against apartheid is one of longstanding and is fully in force because the ignominy of discrimination is totally alien to Costa Rican sense of freedom, democratic practices, equality and respect for human rights. 146. From the beginning of the United Nations the Middle East conflict has held a prominent place on the agenda of every session of the General Assembly, thus confirming the importance which the international community attaches to that matter, as well as its inability so far to find a lasting solution. 147.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“It is our hope that a negotiated solution cm by peaceful means break the stubborn obstinacy of the minority and in the nearest possible future establish a democratic regime based on the principle of majority rule, 144. As regards the situation in Namibia, I must state once again that my delegation considers that South Africa's permanent and flagrant mockery of the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council constitutes the most striking defiance of United Nations decisions ever witnessed. Costa Rica renews its support for every effort leading to the independence of Namibia and expresses its solidarity with the long-suffering people of that nation. 145.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“The reunification of Viet Nam and its admission as a new State Member of the United Nations leaves behind painful, but superseded, memories of a cruel war which, for more than two decades, afflicted that heroic nation. 142. My country has followed with interest and concern the development of events in southern Africa, where the gravest situations of colonialism and racial discrimination prevail. 143. The consultations held on Rhodesia by Mr. Owen, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom, and Mr. Young of the United States are a positive quest for a peaceful transition in that nation so as to arrive at the desired goal of a majority Government in an independent Zimbabwe. My delegation expresses its appreciation for those endeavours and supports the proposals for an agreement on Rhodesia.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“Amerasinghe, in addition to the many other congratulations he has received, for the brilliant manner in which he guided the debates of the thirty-first session of the General Assembly. 140. As in past years, the report submitted by the Secretary-General on the work of the Organization, Mr. Kurt Waldheim, is an invaluable document. The observations contained in it will enlighten us as to the proper course to take in guiding the work of this Assembly. 141. My delegation wishes most cordially to welcome the two new Members of our Organization: the Republic of Djibouti and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam. The entry of the former is yet another step in the advance of the policy of decolonization, to which the United Nations has contributed so much.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“137. May I congratulate you, Sir, on your election as President of the thirty-second session of the General Assembly. It is a just recognition of your great merits as a diplomat and a political leader of your country. It is also a well-deserved tribute to the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, whose enlightened foreign policy has contributed to world peace and better understanding among nations. 138. The Osimo agreements, which have just been ratified by the Parliaments of Yugoslavia and Italy, constitute genuine proof of that enlightened foreign policy of your country, Mr. President. A satisfactory solution has thus been found for the Trieste question which for so many years was a vexed question on the agenda of our sessions. 139. I also wish to congratulate Mr.”
1977-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 32 (1977)
“In order to express in a single sentence all the importance which we attach to this matter, I should like to end my statement by saying that for Costa Rica the disarmament question in itself justifies the very existence of this world Organization.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)
“If the great Powers were to channel 1 per cent of the resources they devote to military expenditure to international economic co-operation there would be more than $2,000 million more for assistance to peoples who are trying to find a way out of poverty. This would represent an increase of 20 per cent on what is now spent on that noble purpose. 241. For the reasons I have stated, my delegation has supported and will continue to support every measure proposed in this Assembly intended to reduce military expenditure and to promote disarmament. We take all proposals made at their face value. We refuse to attribute to those proposals propagandist intentions or attempts to gain a position of advantage in the arms race objections raised by other delegations which are more suspicious or less interested in the solution of the problem. 242.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)
“For Costa Rica the objectives of disarmament, or at least of arms limitation, are clear: first, to ensure peace by eliminating or limiting elements whose only purpose is war, secondly, to liberate resources so as to increase economic and social co-operation. 239. At present the amounts disbursed by developing countries for military purposes are 20 times higher than expenditure on development assistance. In 1973, for example, the developed countries allocated 6.6 per cent of their gross national product to military expenditure, while they contributed only 0.26 per cent to development assistance. 240.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)
“It is not only the great Powers which are involved in this arms race; small and medium-sized States waste resources which they should devote to solving their grave internal problems on acquiring weapons, which in most cases they use only to subject their own peoples. 236. The Secretary-General was quite right when, on the occasion of the thirtieth anniversary of the signature of the Charter, he appealed urgently to nations large and small to give proof individually of moderation in acquiring arms, while intensifying their efforts to negotiate agreements leading to disarmament. 237. It is a great satisfaction to state that Costa Rica welcomes and puts into practice the appeal made by the Secretary-General. Since 1948 my country has dissolved its armed forces and since then has spent not a penny on instruments of war. 238.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)
“Regrettably, so far nothing really effective has been done even to limit the arms race, much less to disarm Member States. 233. The Secretary-General, in the introduction to his report on the Work of the Organization, severely criticizes this situation. He points out the discouraging fact that in a world increasingly concerned with the problems of social justice and economic development total expenditure on arms exceeds $300,000 million per year. 234. The international traffic in arms has become a sadly profitable business, to the extent of more than $20,000 million per year. 235.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)
“As long as Panama does not recover the full exercise of its sovereignty over the entire territory of the Republic, as long as an unacceptable colonial enclave remains in the very heart of that sister nation, the Latin American countries will not be free of the apprehension caused by the presence of a world super-Power within the inter-American community. 231. The negotiation of a new canal treaty which recognizes the just aspirations of Panama has become a test case as regards the sincerity of the inter-American policy of the United States. The cause of Panama is not that of Panama alone; because of its very merits it has become the cause of all Latin America. 232. Peace and security through disarmament were the principal objectives of the founders of the United Nations.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)
“That is why Costa Rica was determined that the organ of consultation itself, which in 1964 decreed the prohibition of States members of OAS maintaining diplomatic, consular or trade relations with Cuba, should make that inoperative. 228. That purpose was finally achieved during the sixteenth consultative meeting of the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of States members of OAS held at San Jose on 29 July 1975. 229. The Government of Costa Rica hopes that, by eliminating that cause of friction in inter-American relations, a more propitious atmosphere will be created for dedicating the efforts of the inter-American system to improving the conditions of life of our peoples. 230. There still remains a vexatious item in inter-American relations, and that is that the Isthmian Canal Convention of 190310 is still in force.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)
“Therefore, in future, the consultative organ cannot interpret that a given ideological definition or a heterodox form of political organization adopted by a Government of the Americas can be considered tantamount to aggression which affects peace in America and which, consequently, justifies pacifying action or the imposition of sanctions. 226. The measures taken against Cuba in a very debatable implementation of the Treaty were the result of the cold war, which is now thawing out. Their application for more than 11 years had made them obsolete and turned them into a source of disagreement within the inter-American family. 227.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)
“We consider the Treaty to be our best instrument for national defense, and on this we based the decision we took in 1948 to do away with our armed forces. 223. This led us to co-operate enthusiastically in the reform of its text, not only to adjust it to the new conditions of inter-American policy, but also so as to avoid dangerous expansionist interpretations, as had occurred in the case of Cuba. 224. The new text which was approved in San Jose no longer gives such flexibility to the consultative organ which administers the Treaty, to impose sanctions on a State unless it is for very serious acts which constitute genuine aggression in accordance with the definition adopted by the United Nations. 225.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)
“Two important decisions, both taken at the meetings held in the month of July 1975 in the capital of my country, are proof of the intention to strengthen the inter-American system which, on a regional basis, helps to achieve the purposes of the United Nations. One relates to the reform of the inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance of 1947, and the other, the lifting of sanctions which have been imposed on the Republic of Cuba since 1964. 222. The inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance, as its name indicates, is not a military alliance, nor is the idea behind it to take advantage of States which are not parties. Basically, it is a covenant for the defense, in a spirit of solidarity, of a State party which is the victim of aggression from within or outside the continent.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)
“The difficulty resides in the fact that application is hampered by those who would try to destroy its harmonious balance by the immediate application of the paragraphs of those resolutions which are to their liking, and the indefinite postponement of the implementation of the paragraphs which are not. 220. I believe that this deadlock can only be overcome when all the parties involved in the conflict evince the same determination, perseverance and flexibility which Egypt and Israel demonstrated in the direct negotiation of the disengagement agreement for Sinai, which has deservedly been the subject of so much applause in this Assembly. 221.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)
“There remain extremely difficult questions to be solved such as: first, the security of the State of Israel within frontiers which can only be final when a peace treaty is reached that its neighbors recognize; secondly, the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the territories occupied during the 1967 war; and thirdly, the recognition and practical implementation of the legitimate rights of the people of Palestine, which includes living in peace within its own State. 219. My delegation considers that Security Council resolution 242 (1967), supplemented by its resolution 338 (1973), contains all the necessary elements for the solution of these problems.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)
“My delegation hopes that the example will have the effect of inducing the other belligerent parties to negotiate directly with their neighbor on agreements which will, in the near future, bring about a lasting peace. 217. I wish to express the admiration of Costa Ricafor the valor and statesmanlike vision evinced by the President of Egypt, Mr. Sadat, and by the Prime Minister of Israel, Mr. Rabin, incoming to this agreement, I also wish to congratulate the Secretary of State of the United States, Mr. Kissinger, whose perseverance and extraordinary diplomatic skill were so important a factor in negotiating that agreement. 218. It is true that the Sinai agreement is only a first step on the long road towards solution of the Middle East conflict.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)
“The agreement just initialed by Egypt and Israel for a further disengagement of troops in the Sinai is the result of a dialog which was started before, not after, military confrontation. 216. This agreement, therefore, has a far greater importance than its immediate effects might indicate. Israel and E-gypt have proved that it is possible to hold direct negotiations between the belligerent parties in the region. And this is a remarkable improvement in view of the repeated refusal of the Arab States to sit and discuss their problems with the representatives of the State of Israel whose existence they have unrealistically been determined to ignore. Now it can be seen that the result of direct negotiation has no substitute as a means of arriving at a peaceful solution of the conflict.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)
“if guarantees are given that force will not be used to unify Korea, and that the political structure and orientation of the unified Korean State is chosen exclusively and directly by the people of the peninsula through the machinery of a free referendum under international supervision. 215. The conflict in the Middle Hast has for decades cast a shadow on the panorama of the peace of the world. That is why it has been the subject of constant attention by the United Nations. The partial agreements achieved have the nature of emergency measures to halt hostilities. Now, for the first time, an agreement has been reached between Israel and a neighboring Arab country which docs not have armed conflict as an immediate antecedent.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)
“As a means of giving greater participation to the two Korean Governments in decisions on matters of direct concern to them, we believe it is desirable to dissolve the United Nations Command in Korea. But to that end we must first have the parties directly concerned adopt adequate measures so that, on the disappearance of the military Command of our Organization. there be no fundamental change in the operation of the armistice. 213. That is why we have sponsored draft resolution A/10142 and Add. 1-7 now before the Assembly. 214. My delegation would have no difficulty in supporting, in its essential premises, draft resolution A/10191 and Add. 1-3.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)
“Any other way of representing the popular will is based on an assumption which, for us who are democratic, is difficult to accept namely, that people are not wise enough to choose their own course and, therefore, the choice must be made only by a man or a group which is the self-designated interpreter of the popular will. 211. In order to achieve the ideal of the peaceful reunification of Korea on the basis of the complete exercise of the self-determination of the Korean people, the armistice must be kept in force since it prevents new military clashes, and we must, by every possible means, bring about a constructive dialog between the representative of the two States concerned. 212.”
1975-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 30 (1975)