YouSaid · the spoken record

Sekaninova-Cakrtova

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS SEKANINOVA-CAKRTOVA

lines on the record

128

first

1951-09-24

most recent

1952-09-24

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

1. “It will lead to immediate international tension and to the danger of conflicts for which France is in no position to take the risk or the responsibility.” The French government later took this dangerous risk, and the same minister has recommended to the same National Assembly that France should renounce its national army, “which in the past has so often been the pride and the salvation of France and formed a part of its most precious traditions”. 20, The peoples of the world have by no means forgotten the consequences of the past war agreements. The war agreements which the representatives of the United Kingdom and France concluded once before, with the agreement of the United States and with the representatives of German militarism and imperialism, led to the unleashing of the Second World War.”

   1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

2. “After their economic and political subjection to a foreign Power, formerly great, independent, countries are being — simultaneously with the revival of the nazi army — bereft of their national armies, which are to disappear in an artificial, non-national, amorphous formation under the command of United States imperialists. They are also to give up their inalienable right as sovereign States, the right to the defence of their countries. 19. It is remarkable, I think, that these humiliating war agreements bear the signature of the French Foreign Minister, Mr. Schuman, who Still in 1949 declared in the French National Assembly: “I demand that those who are thinking of an active military participation of Germany in the system of European defence, consider the consequences of such a policy.”

   1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

3. “The agreement on the so-called European Defence Community threw off this mask also, and the Western European countries were obliged, on worthless guarantees, to take note of the full revival and privileged position of the nazi army. Thus, on the frontiers of France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg, and on their territories, will be stationed fully armed units of the revived German fascist army which, according to the plans of United Staley imperialism, would not only serve for aggression against peace-loving countries, but would also be commandeered in order to suppress the democratic rights and constitutional freedoms of the peoples of Western Europe.”

   1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

4. “Through the promise to annul the Allied proclamations on the dissolution of the Nazi Party and the disbandment of the units of the SS, the SA and the Gestapo, the so-called General Agreement is the final step in the process of rehabilitating the nazi formations, the principal agents of hitlerite aggression. The revival of the nazi army, which had already for a long time been prepared by the United States, aroused the protests and anger of the nations of Europe. That is why it was to be re-established in accordance with the so-called Pleven plan — another United States plan named after a French minister— under the cloak of the so-called European Army, in which there were to be no independent German units.”

   1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

5. “Both of these plans are based on the concept of United States imperialism, whose war plans rest upon the utilization of foreign territories and foreign troops. The so-called “General Agreement” — but which is in fact a separatist and war agreement — is an attempt to legalize the constant violation of the obligations arising out of the Potsdam Agreement and other agreements among the great Powers, an attempt to divide Germany permanently and to proclaim the military occupation and colonial rule in Western Germany a permanent institution. 18. The so-called General Agreement, which revives German militarism and vengeance, is a direct threat to peace in Europe.”

   1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

6. “The United States solution of the German question is the rebirth of German militarism and nazism and the utilization of a rearmed Western Germany as the principal basis of imperialist aggression in Europe. The United States has ruthlessly suppressed the objections and reservations of its Western European partners, justly fearing the anger of a people who fully realize the danger of a renewed aggression of German militarism, whose victim they have themselves been in the recent past. 17. The United States imposed the conclusion of the so-called general agreement and the setting up of the so-called European Defence Community. The principal aim of these war treaties is the integration of a remilitarized Western Germany into the system of the aggressive Atlantic bloc.”

   1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

7. “The United States, at that meeting, dictated to its partners an increase of military appropriations and of the number of their armed forces, the extension of war bases, and intensified political, economic and military control. It imposed a decision on the creation of the so-called European Army, of which the renewed nazi Wehrmacht, led by Hitlerite generals, was to form the aggressive kernel. The Lisbon meeting showed clearly, even then, how, United States imperialism intends to solve the question of Germany, a question whose just settlement has a fundamental significance for the maintenance of a lasting peace in Europe and in the entire world.”

   1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

8. “The substance of the entire activity of the representatives of the United States and their supporters may, however, be characterized very briefly: general non-committal declarations lacking in concreteness, proposals carrying no commitment, suggestions, initiatives, working documents, and so on, which all carefully avoid any consideration of the peace proposals of the Soviet Union and, the solution of principal and fundamental questions such as the prohibition of atomic weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, the prohibition of bacterial warfare and the reduction of armaments and armed forces. 16. Hardly had the sixth session of the General Assembly concluded, than the participants of the aggressive North Atlantic Treaty met in Lisbon.”

   1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

9. “The past period has fully proved the hypocrisy and the duplicity of the so-called disarmament proposals of the United States, the United Kingdom and France. It became apparent that the proposals had one aim — to legalize and intensify armaments and to increase war preparations. The Disarmament Commission and its committees held many meetings, and the records and other documents of the Commission make up quite a respectable volume.”

   1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

10. “At the sixth session of the General Assembly, the United States, together with the United Kingdom and France, were putting through proposals under false peace slogans, which were to serve, their war aims and hamper the effective measures proposed by the Soviet Union for the elimination of the danger of a new war. The delegations of the Soviet Union and the peoples’ democracies established quite clearly that those proposals had no relation to the maintenance of peace and that, on the contrary, they were only one of the planned steps in the preparation? for a new war. The few months which separate us from the closing of the sixth session of the General Assembly have amply proved this fact. 15.”

    1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

11. “The people of Czechoslovakia, like honest people all over the world, are with all their heart on the side of the oppressed and exploited peoples of the colonial countries and wish them every success in their great fight for national liberation and for a happy future. The fomenters of a new war are competing in desperate digressions and futile plans to contain and roll back history. In this they are doomed to failure. There is no force which can stop development, which, in accordance with an immutable law, goes forward from imperialist enslavement to national independence and freedom. The attempts of the imperialists to disguise their aggressive policy are futile. Facts convict them. 14.”

    1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

12. “The entire world knows the so-called generosity of the colonial Powers which, on the one hand, means economic and political discrimination, pauperization, murder of peaceful populations and famine for millions and millions of people of these countries and, on the other hand, shameless exploitation for profits for the colonial Powers. 13. The representative of Australia is right in that the peoples of the colonial countries have the shining example of the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China and the happy experiences of Czechoslovakia and the other people’s democracies before them. These shining examples encourage and strengthen the nations under colonial oppression in their struggle for independence and in their fight against the colonial exploiters.”

    1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

13. “In his opinion, a number of former colonial countries acquired their freedom thanks to the goodwill of the colonial Powers, without consideration as to whether this was appropriate or not, the representative did not fail to launch an attack, in this connexion, against Czechoslovakia and the other people’s democracies. The opinions of the representative of Australia, defender of colonial policies which are today condemned by the entire world, are an insult to the nations of colonial peoples and, at the same time, an instance of underestimation of the discernment of the members of the General Assembly.”

    1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

14. “In the footsteps of the Hitlerite aggressors and their sadly renowned propaganda, they also speak about the danger of communism. The peoples, however, are ever more conscious that their independence, security and peace are being threatened exclusively by the ruthless expansionism of American imperialism and its endeavour for world domination. They do not believe in any menace from the Soviet Union. They know full well that the policy of the USSR Government is, and has been, from the very beginning of the Soviet State, a policy of peace and peaceful co-operation among peoples. They know that this policy fully corresponds to their aspiration for peace and freedom. 12. The representative of Australia, in his address this morning [384th meeting], spoke as an enthusiastic defender of the old and new colonial policy.”

    1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

15. “In the New York Journal American, Bruce Barton expressed this when he said: “One of the finest words in the English language is being so twisted that good people are becoming almost afraid to speak it. The word is 'peace’. Officially, of course, everybody is for peace. The President is for peace. The Secretary of State is for peace. The Pentagon is for peace. From time to time they go through the motions of saying so. But what really monopolizes all their thinking and planning and spending is war. Instead of figuring out how we can live successfully with Russia, our officials do nothing but bluster and threaten.” 11. The war-mongers are attempting to divert the attention of the peoples from the true cause of the threat to peace, That is why they are using the “big lie" about the so-called menace on the part of the Soviet Union.”

    1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

16. “The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States, General Bradley, made the following complaint in April of this year in Macon, Georgia: “Many of our people muse about the good old days, days of peace, prosperity and personal indulgence. They speak longingly of the days of low taxes and complain bitterly about today's tax load. This reactionary attitude is no progress. It is retrograde. We live in a world of tension, tension of the present, tension in the forecast." 10. Hundreds of millions of simple people all over the world are fighting for peace ever more actively. The fomenters of a new war are well aware of this and that is why they attempt to cloak their war plans and aggressive actions with phrases about defence and peace.”

    1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

17. “The first and second world wars arose out of the conflicts between coalitions of the capitalist countries. Twice, in the recent past, the imperialist monopolies have attempted to seek a way out of their crises and their decadence in the adventure of war. Today, the danger of a new world, conflict has its roots in the same causes. 9. The ruling circles of the United States are not interested in the relaxation and elimination of international tension. By their aggressive acts they are, on the contrary, constantly aggravating the international situation. The internal and foreign policy of the United States stands for war preparations and threatens the world with a new world war. The people of the world, however, desire peace. But even this mere wish arouses the displeasure and the anger of the war-mongers.”

    1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

18. “The United States war economy, of course, not only prevents the realization of plans and programmes for the development of the economically under-developed countries, but the war economy dictated by the United States also brings to the so-called economically advanced countries a disruption of their economies, inflation, unemployment, the increasing of the fiscal burden and the pauperization of the broadest masses of the population. American imperialism, which exploits and enslaves the peoples of the under-developed territories and in the same way the peoples of the so-called allies of the United States, disorganizes the economies of the other capitalist countries. It disrupts normal economic contacts and traditional economic relations among nations.”

    1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

19. “These programmes and plans cannot bring any solution to the problems of economic development and, in particular, to those involved in the industrialization of the under-developed territories, because they are not prompted by a real desire to assist these countries. They are dictated by strategic considerations and the profit-seeking interests of the American and other monopolies. The programmes, and plans of so-called assistance of the capitalist countries to the economically under-developed countries are nothing but a means to increase the profits of the capitalist monopolies and to help the extension of their influence. 8.”

    1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

20. “The militarization of the economies of the capitalist countries, and in particular of the United States, has a pernicious influence on one of the most important problems of the present international situation — the economic development of the under-developed countries. The overwhelming majority of the economically under-developed territories are countries with great riches in material resources. Yet hundreds of millions of their population lack the most elementary needs and live on the verge of starvation. The ruling circles of the United States, in the guise of the most varied plans and programmes, pretend to be giving assistance to the under-developed territories.”

    1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

21. “The report also notes that armaments expenses, together with the expenditures arising of past wars, come to 85 per Cent of all budget appropriations for the current budget year. An additional $6,700 million is allocated to so-called foreign assistance; that is, to the armaments expenditures of the participants in the aggressive North Atlantic bloc. 6, The Government of the United States is utilizing all possible means of pressure on its allies so that they continually intensify their armaments programme without regard for any economic and social consequences that this may cause. On 13 February 1952, in Congress, President Truman declared that the “total value of Western European production of military hard-goods during 1952 will be approximately four times the 1949 value. 7.”

    1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

22. “It is, however, in vain that American imperialism is trying to hamper and obstruct the great peaceful economic construction which is being effected in the interests and for the benefit of their peoples in the countries of the camp of peace. 5, The militarization of the economies of the United States and the other capitalist countries today determines their entire economic, social and cultural life,. There has been a further tremendous intensification of the armaments of the United States. The economic, report of President Truman to Congress for the first half of 1952 states that the deliveries of military objects and military constructions in the first half of 1952 have reached a value of $15 thousand million — that is, $9 thousand million more than in the same period of 1951 and $12 thousand million more than m the second half of 1950.”

    1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

23. “It is the ruling circles of the United States which, for capitalist profits and to the detriment of the living standards of the working people, are feverishly arming, and which, through their war preparations against the countries of the camp of peace, constitute a threat to world security. 4, The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the People’s Republic of China and the other countries which have a people’s democracy, through their peaceful economic development and their consistently peaceful policy, are strengthening world peace and reinforcing international security. The ruling circles of the United States of America and also, under their dictate, the ruling circles bf other capitalist countries, are threatening world peace by their preparations for a war of aggression and are undermining international security.”

    1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

24. “3. The aggressive policy of the United States has its roots and fundamental causes, in an endeavour to forestall a general crisis and the general degeneration Of world capitalism, of which the ruling circles of the United States are today the foremost representatives, It is the American monopolies which dominate and direct the policy of the United States and also, through ruthless pressure, the policy of other capitalist countries, in particular those countries which have been driven into the aggressive North Atlantic Treaty, In the endeavour to save and increase the profits of the capitalist monopolies, the ruling circles of the United States are waging war against the people of Korea and preparing another world war.”

    1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

25. “The seventh session of the General Assembly is meeting in an international situation which confronts the United Nations with particularly important and responsible tasks. These are questions which touch upon the vital interests of nations, the vital interests of people all over the world. The Czechoslovak delegation is fully conscious of the significance of these problems and of its responsibility and, in the spirit of the peaceful principles of its Government’s policy will ever keep it in mind in the course of its work here. 2. The General Assembly .is meeting at a time of international tension. This tension is a result of the policy of the ruling circles of me United States of America, Which, after the end of the Second World War, have chosen, instead of peaceful co-operation among nations, the path of preparations for a new world war.”

    1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)

26. “If you charge the Soviet proposals with being propaganda it means you do not like the fact that they have been understood by hundreds of millions of people all over the world who grasp their whole meaning and actively support them. Thus you only underline their strength. Your proposals lack it. The Soviet proposals express the desires of the common man no matter where in the world he lives and works. We are convinced they are welcomed by all peace-loving people in the world as sincerely as they are welcomed by the people of Czechoslovakia. 195. The Czechoslovak delegation appeals to all delegations who cherish world peace and the security of nations to support the peace proposals of the Soviet Union.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

27. “How many billions of dollars have been expended for various broadcasting stations, for a flood of publications, for the purchase of souls, for the corruption of leaders of various groups, parties and midget parties, and how many attempts to create international organizations have collapsed with empty, miserable and sorrowful results. 194. To speak face to face to an elemental movement of its artificial character is an old worn-out argument which has been used against progress from time immemorial. We know, after all, that the great revolutions also, of which precisely this city has given many times an example to Europe and the whole world, have always been described by reactionaries as a war of a few agitators.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

28. “Their basis is a deep conviction of the possibility and necessity of peaceful coexistence of nations regardless of their different economic and social systems; the constructive desire to create at any time real conditions for a lasting peace; respect for the sovereignty of all nations, both large and small; respect for international obligations. 193. Behind the Soviet proposals there is the desire, the strong will and the active support of the great majority of mankind. Vain are the attempts of certain representatives in this Assembly to cover up these facts. Their efforts are only a proof of how great an obstacle to their plans they see in the great peace movement. This is why they speak of an “artificially created mass movement”, although they know from experience that a world mass movement cannot be artificially created.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

29. “They answer all the burning problems of the international situation. They find response in the hearts of millions of common people. The proposals of the Soviet Union are dictated primarily against the policy of blocs, which is so dangerous to world peace. Their objective is a just and immediate end of the war in Korea. The Soviet proposals further point out the effective way to an early reduction of armed forces and armaments, and to the prohibition of atomic weapons and their international control. The proposal for the conclusion of a peace pact amongst the five Great Powers is aimed at eliminating the present international tension and the strengthening of world peace. 192. The proposals of the Soviet delegation speak for themselves. Their strength is their own inner logic.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

30. “And right now, in recent days, we have been witnessing how in this criminal effort they resort even to the basest slanders of the heroic people whom they, after the example of the fabricated Goebbels propaganda, falsely charge with murdering prisoners of war. To such repulsive means they must resort to keep up the sinking spirits of their soldiers and their fighting morale, which has been shaken by the realization of the injustice of the aggressive war, as well as by its unsuccessful duration and who want to go home. 191. The proposals presented to the General Assembly in the name of the Soviet delegation by its head, the Soviet Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Vyshinsky, express the consistent peace policy of the Soviet Union. They aim as always at the very core of the fears and worries of the present-day world.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

31. “On the contrary, it subjects all its proposals to its aggression and postpones them till the time when, as it vainly hopes, it will have accomplished its aggressive aims. We know very well that those who were entrusted with the conduct of aggression in Korea do today everything to delay even the so-called programme of Mr. Acheson as much as possible. Already more than four months have passed since the peace appeal of the Soviet representative, Mr. Malik, and for all this time the commanders of the United States interventionists and their aides have been inventing the most varied pretexts to obstruct the armistice negotiations to which they had been forced by public opinion and the desire for peace of the people of their own country.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

32. “As regards the most important, the most dangerous and the most dreaded weapons — the atomic ones — they present us again with the old Baruch-Lilienthal-Acheson plan, a plan which tries desperately to keep the supposed monopoly in atomic weapons in the hands of the United States; a plan which, even from the viewpoint of these criminal purposes, is today worn out and absurd, since the recent clear words of Generalissimo Stalin crushed the last remnants of the fictitious illusion of United States atomic monopoly. 190. The American-British bloc, however, does not intend to liquidate the war where it rages today, and where the danger of the extension of aggression is greatest — Korea.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

33. “When we heard those proposals it was clear that we had here only a worse edition of previous proposals, which had been already many times unmasked before the world, as a means for achieving the aggressive imperialistic objectives of the United States Government. They are in no way aimed at the preservation and maintenance of peace. On the contrary, they wish us to take the illegal existence of the Atlantic Treaty and the armaments race as a basis for our work. 189. We are only expected to take a note of these illegal acts, file them and register them. On that basis we should then begin to reduce armaments, starting with the least important types.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

34. “Vyshinsky, submitted to this General Assembly the proposal [A/1944] that the General Assembly declare the membership in the aggressive Atlantic Pact, and the construction of military, naval and air bases on foreign territory, incompatible with membership of the United Nations Organization. The declaration of the incompatibility of Atlantic Treaty membership with United Nations membership is an essential prerequisite for the United Nations Organization to return to its mission as expressed in the Charter. The American-British bloc already, before having submitted its proposals [A/1943] to this General Assembly, announced them as a planned big “peace offensive”. 188.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

35. “The Atlantic Treaty — that is the American conception of uniting nations. 186. How sincere the politicians of the Atlantic bloc are in their assurances of peace we can find out now in this place. As a mockery of the General Assembly, as a mockery of their own proposal for limitation of armaments, they call to Paris conferences of generals and economic experts who prepare further increases in armaments, they plan the calling of a special conference of the Atlantic bloc, they invite to Paris the Chancellor of the puppet Bonn Government. 187. The Czechoslovak delegation warmly welcomed the fact that the Soviet Government, through its Minister of Foreign Affairs Mr.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

36. “In this Command are represented the governments of countries from all parts of the world except from the area which this supposedly “regional organ” tries to rule, and which, as the representatives of Syria and Egypt pointed out, do not intend to accept it. 185. The North Atlantic Pact was expanded to an all-inclusive international organization with its own economy, powerlessly subjected to Wall Street, with its own army commanded by an American general, with its own navy commanded by an American admiral. The United States thus aims at supplanting as soon as possible the United Nations Organization for all practical purposes by another organization under tile leadership of the United States with completely concrete war objectives similar to the objectives of defeated Hitler, that is, world domination.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

37. “It is an aggressive war pact which is contrary not only to the provisions of Article 51 of the Charter, but also to the basic principles and objectives to maintain international peace and security and to the principle of sovereign equality of all the Members of the Organization. 184. If there were further need of evidence it was given to us by Senator Taft himself who, according to a Reuters report published in the Paris Press yesterday, declared that the Atlantic Treaty was a denial of all principles included in the Charter of the United Nations. Similarly this was indirectly confirmed here on Wednesday last by the representative from the Union of South Africa when he declared the so-called Middle East Command to be a logical extension of the Atlantic Pact.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

38. “When the reluctance of the Western European States had especially clearly appeared at the Ottawa Conference, as, for instance, reported by Anne O’Hare McCormick in the New York Times of 19 September 1951, the newly created North Atlantic Treaty Organization Committee was formally extended to twelve members, but only to have its activities immediately concentrated as usual in the hands of the three great Powers and more specifically in the hands of its American Chairman. 183. The North Atlantic Treaty is, therefore, neither regional nor defensive and is moreover the prototype of an unequal treaty.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

39. “What the picture of the sovereignty of the Member States of the Atlantic Pact actually is was shown clearly in the American Harper's Magazine of last May in an article by James Reston. It is there stated: “Before the public we maintain that the North Atlantic Pact Organization is based on equality of the bond of twelve countries. Secretly, however, we have created an organization of such a kind as to have all the power concentrated in the hands of a narrow military committee. In this committee not all the twelve members are represented, but only the representatives of the United States, the United Kingdom and France. However, even the decisions of the three usually take place outside the framework of the organization between us and the British. This the French do not like.” 182.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

40. “By artificially whipped up war hysteria the “security” lines of the United States are to be projected to places thousands of miles distant where military bases could be built against the Soviet Union, the People’s Republic of China and the people’s democracies. 180. The Atlantic bloc, however, threatens not only the security and independence of nations against which it is aimed, but also the freedom and sovereignty of the nations which are being forced into it. For instance, The Times well expressed the meaning of the term “mutual cooperation” in the American concept when it said in August last that the United States “taking Western Europe by the scruff of the neck and shaking her from time to time... is now pressing a rifle into her hands”. 181.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

41. “It sees to it that everywhere the administrative and police machinery properly work for the interests of Wall Street and suppress all progressive, democratic and peace movements. 179. This is the real meaning of the Atlantic Treaty, the aggressive aim of which during the past year has become even more apparent. After the inclusion of Italy, the admission of Greece and Turkey and the extension of the Pact thousands of miles from Atlantic shores completely unmask the falsity of all argumentation about the regional character of the pact. Such argument is as false as the long ago unmasked arguments about its defensive character, and thus the word “Atlantic” ceases to be a geographical term and becomes a synonym for aggressiveness.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

42. “In the interests of this aggressive plan which the United States, in contradiction to Article 51 of the Charter, cynically pretends to be a regional defence plan, all Western European countries have been forced to let America order them to adopt a tremendous armaments programme. 178. Simultaneously, the United States exerts a merciless political, economic and propaganda pressure on Western European governments, and even on such a great Power as the United Kingdom; it threatens them with stopping economic or military aid each time the European countries do not show sufficient disposition to increase military expenditures or to lower the living standard of their people. At the same time the United States tries to spread the methods of the Committee on Un-American Activities all over its sphere of influence.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

43. “They were disclosed by the leader of the Tito delegation himself yesterday in this Assembly hall when he spoke of the necessity of foreign aid to his Government. This aid is a wage for the treason the Tito clique has committed on its people, when it placed its independence and sovereignty under the dollar protectorate. 176. Mr. Acheson, Mr. Eden, and certain other delegates in the general debate lauded the organization of the aggressive Atlantic bloc and its methods as a solid bulwark of peace built in harmony with the Charter. 177. In reality, it is an organization which is to mass the armed forces of all the Western European countries in one European army under United States command.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

44. “After the Washington and Ottawa decisions, the United States Government has already begun openly to incorporate Western Germany into its Atlantic aggressive system. 175. This aggressive system has today been fully joined by the Tito clique. This act was demonstrated to us also at the General Assembly, right at the beginning when it came with the provocative so-called complaint slandering the Soviet Union and the people’s democracies. It is not necessary to deal with the substance of these invented and completely absurd lies and slanderous statements; their real meaning was unmasked by yesterday’s Press reports announcing the signing of a special pact concerning American deliveries of arms and inspection of the Yugoslav army by United States army officers.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

45. “The illegal three-Power proposal [A/1938] for the establishment of a so-called impartial international commission for Germany, which so grossly violates the Potsdam Agreement as well as the Charter, is also a part of this policy. If the western occupation Powers and their German helpers would really want the unification of Germany on a democratic and peaceful basis, for which the policy of the Soviet Union ceaselessly strives, they would not prevent the German people from holding free elections, as proposed by the People’s Assembly and by the Government of the German Democratic Republic, which truly fulfils its obligations and effectively contributes to the maintenance of world peace. 174.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

46. “The American imperialists refuse to extradite these War criminals for punishment to the countries where they committed their bestial crimes condemned by all civilized mankind. 171. For American pay Nazi generals, officers and strategists of Hitler’s marauding war, such as Haider, Guderian, von Manteuffel, and others, now work. 172. The worst representatives of Prussian militarism which for several generations had been terrorizing Europe have been chosen by American imperialism as an ally. To the mercy of these people it would like to deliver Germany and, with the aid of the so-called Schuman and Pleven Plans, also the countries of Western Europe and their peoples. 173.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

47. “These criminals committed their crimes not only on citizens of the Soviet Union, which made the greatest sacrifices and which crushed the hitlerite fascism, not only on my countrymen and the citizens of other occupied European countries, but also on members of other nations, Among the criminals who had been sentenced to death and now freed is Joachim Peiper, the commander of a military unit which bestially murdered 142 unarmed American soldiers who had been captured by the Germans at the battle of Malmedy in Belgium. How will the United States Government justify to the American people and to the relatives of these murdered men the pardoning of their murderer? 169. The British High Commissioner for Germany, Kirkpatrick, already today speaks of amnesty for Hess, Raeder, and Donitz. 170.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

48. “Released are not only generals and officers but also criminals who carried out Hitler’s foreign policy of conquest, his war propaganda, who condemned people to death and served as hangmen, who were in charge of concentration and extermination camps, who enslaved occupied countries and who committed their hideous crimes in all sectors of the Nazi system.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

49. “Against the will of the peoples of all countries which had suffered immeasurably under the hitlerite occupation, whose best men died on Nazi scaffolds, in prisons and concentration camps, the United States Government did not hesitate at least to pardon the already-condemned hitlerite war criminals. The sentence of the armaments king and the main support of the hitlerite regime, Alfred Krupp, was annulled and all his property was returned to him. According to his own statement Mr. Krupp now works “in the old traditions of his family” and with him also the other hitlerite gun-makers. 168.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)

50. “The development of the United States policy in Germany will stand out best and more clearly when we read what he said in the first issue of the Neue Zeitung, the newspaper of the American armed forces published in Munich on 18 October, 1945. He wrote: “The denazification will be carried out by us by all available means. It will not affect only party members, but everyone who in any way enjoyed privileges from the Nazi regime. There will not be any indispensable national socialists. In addition to national socialism also German militarism must be destroyed.” 166. Today, however, not only General Eisenhower and the United States Government, but also the British and French Governments find the former Nazi criminals “indispensable” — indispensable for the preparation of war against the Soviet Union and the people’s democracies. 167.”

    1951-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 6 (1951)