YouSaid · the spoken record

Bevin

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS BEVIN

lines on the record: 127
first: 1948-09-24
most recent: 1950-09-24
sittings or episodes: 3
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

“Yet months later, the Atomic Energy Commission itself had reported that it could no longer profitably continue its activities, and that its work in effect must now be adjourned. In fact, however, a resolution was later submitted (A/57 9) by the Security Council asking the Assembly to consider the question again. The reason was fundamentally simple. It was that although the minority often put forward a point of view which could not be disregarded and which should be intelligently discussed, in those matters it resolutely refused to accommodate itself, even in the slightest degree, to the wishes and desires of the majority. That was a circumstance which not only applied to the field of atomic energy, but was evident in practically all the political activities of the United Nations.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“In the first report of the Atomic Energy Commission, a committee of experts on which all the Governments on the Security Council, including the USSR, were represented had said: «With regard to the question posed by Committee 2, «whether effective control of atomic energy is possible», we do not find any basis in the available scientific facts for supposing the effective control is not technologically feasible.» In later discussions, that conclusion was developed into a detailed plan. The United Kingdom, with the majority, agreed that effective control over atomic energy could have been exercised if the international control agency to be set up were given powers including some form of international ownership, management and inspection.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“Attlee, had come to the United States of America to discuss the problem with Mr. Truman and Mr. Mackenzie King. The United States should hereafter have full credit for working out the resulting coherent plan for the control and use of atomic energy. It had known, as the United Kingdom had known, that it would be impossible to harness those immense and unparalleled forces for peaceful purposes unless steps were taken to control and prevent the clandestine use of those same forces for secret and disastrous purposes.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“view to the quick organization of collective security, so that all could settle down to the tasks of peace in the knowledge that political problems would be dealt with in a spirit of compromise, and that if aggression or disputes occurred, there would, in the last resort, be a collective force available to deal with them Coincidently, the United Kingdom Government, like many other Governments, had been studying what could be done, not only about the atomic bomb, but about atomic energy. It had realized that while there was such a tremendously important weapon, it must be controlled if mankind were to benefit from the equally important forces of atomic energy that might be available for peaceful purposes. Therefore, in 1945, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Mr.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“No right-thinking person could possibly want that to happen, and if such misunderstandings were allowed to persist, they would effectively prevent the United Nations from carrying out the great task entrusted to the Trusteeship Council of assisting the Administering Authorities in bringing the peoples in Trust Territories to a stage where they could govern themselves. Turning to the political side of the activities of the United Nations, Mr. Bevin found it a black and depressing picture. At San Francisco, the United Kingdom had agreed to the Charter, and had decided to base its policy on it. To that policy it had steadfastly adhered. It would be remembered that at the first session of the General Assembly in London, the United Kingdom had called for the immediate setting up of the Military Staff Committee, with r.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“Nevertheless, the United Kingdom intended to pursue its policy, in the interest of Africans and other dependent peoples, wherever it was responsible. There was a misguided idea that the possession of colonies was bad in itself and that colonial Powers could not be trusted to guide backward peoples. As a result, the Trusteeship Council was in danger of degenerating into a platform for political propaganda, which would not serve the interests of the inhabitants of Trust Territories, and could not do anything but undermine the trusteeship system itself.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“Moreover, it had been made abundantly clear that the intention was to make that land habitable and fertile, and in due course to hand it over to the indigenous peoples as fruitful, well-cultivated land which they would be taught to maintain by methods of large-scale agriculture and co-operative farming. A considerable portion of the large sums devoted to that scheme were being spent on establishing schools and training centres for African technicians and artisans; hospitals, and other social measures for the benefit of the local population. If what the United Kingdom was doing were being done by those who criticized here, they would be making great propaganda for their actions and their work in development and for their plans. But it happened to be Great Britain, so the efforts were singled out for condemnation.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“The second example was the ground-nuts scheme, which the USSR representative had criticized as leading to the disruption of the indigenous economy and the concentration of millions of acres of land in the hands of the non- indigenous population. The fact was that millions of acres of thorn scrub desert were being brought under cultivation; the tsetse fly was being destroyed and an attack was being made on the disease which had made the lives of many Africans «solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short ». The ground-nut scheme was no ruthless experiment. Africans were not being expropriated; the expropriation was of thorn bush and tsetse fly, the enemy of mankind and of the health of the people.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“The clan and tribe more than anything else taught and enforced the Social responsibilities and enriched and coloured the lives of individuals. To break that system up, as was suggested, in the name of progress, would be equivalent to destroying the family unit in a Western society. The Administering Authority had a much more constructive and realistic policy. Its aim was steadily to develop the existing traditional tribal organizations into more liberal forms in a way which would eventually result in a system of indirect electoral representation, linking representative local councils with the Central Legislative Council itself.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“There was no iron curtain around the United Kingdom Trust Territories, nor for that matter around any of the Non-Self-Governing Territories for which the United Kingdom was responsible. But in the administration of those Trust Territories, Great Britain would not be deflected from what it considered the right course by uninformed or prejudiced doctrinaire criticism or by propaganda from people who were not required to reveal the truth about conditions in their own territories. Two examples might be cited of the sort of criticism in question. The United Kingdom had been severely reproached for maintaining the tribal system in Tanganyika. The tact was that the clan and tribe alone bound the vast majority of rural areas together for community action of any sort.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“Those Trusteeship Agreements had been approved by the United Nations. But although their aim had been to associate the United Nations with the administration of the territories in a general supervisory capacity, it had always been intended — and that was made quite clear by the wording of the Agreements themselves — that the Administering Authority should have sole responsibility for their administration. There now seemed to be a tendency in the Trusteeship Council to go beyond its general powers of supervision, and beyond the terms of the Charter and of the Agreements, and to take upon itself the functions of the Administering Authorities. In its role of Administering Authority, the United Kingdom was anxious to co-operate, and welcomed constructive criticism.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“It would be remembered that it was the United Kingdom Government, together with the Australian Government, which had taken the initiative in preparing the draft of Chapter XII of the Charter. That draft had been based on the recognized and long-standing policy of successive British Governments in regard to all British dependent territories. Together with other Powers at San Francisco, which had had considerable experience with the same problems which faced the United Kingdom in its colonies, a draft had eventually been elaborated and accepted by the United Nations as a whole. In accordance with the provisions of that Chapter, the United Kingdom and other Powers which administered colonial territories under mandate had agreed to place the territories in question under the trusteeship of the United Nations — he repeated, the trusteeship.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“All, or almost all, European countries were anxious to come into the Programme, notwithstanding the allegations made in certain quarters about infringement of national sovereignty. It was known that the countries of Eastern Europe had been forbidden to come in, and that was the only reason why they were outside. It was noteworthy that every country really free to come in had come in. The European Recovery Programme was not charity; it was to assist Europe to get on its feet, to produce for itself, to rehabilitate its industry. It was not designed to take away independence, but to tide over and help in its re-establishment. Referring next to the Trusteeship Council, Mr. Bevin expressed the view that the Trusteeship Council was not fulfilling the duty laid down for it in the Charter of the United Nations.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“Later, Mr. Marshall’s speech had indicated that the United States would make a contribution to Europe, to be applied to the whole of Europe without discrimination, provided that Europe set about helping itself. Britain had welcomed that. It had striven to make it a workable scheme and did not apologize for having done so. Indeed, he was confident that many of the Governments which now pretended to rejoice that they were outside the European Recovery Programme did so with regret in their hearts. When Mr. Modzelewski, the leader of the Polish delegation, had stated that the very fact of Poland’s rejection of the Marshall Plan had made it possible for Poland to establish and carry out its own Polish plan of reconstruction, his words had not carried conviction.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“Thus, in order first to continue the war when it was alone and then to carry on to victory in conjunction with its allies, Britain had sold over 1,000 million pounds sterling of foreign investments, gold and dollars, and had incurred debts to an amount even greater than that. Therefore, instead of constantly attacking the United States of America, Great Britain welcomed its generosity. In the war itself the lend-lease system had been established; all the Allies had benefited. Then, at the end of the war UNRRA had been set up as a universal contribution without discrimination. The United Kingdom had also made a significant contribution to UNRRA in proportion to the national income, and many other countries in the Assembly had benefited from that effort. Britain did not expect gratitude, but decency should have made them remember that.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“He would therefore quote some striking figures: four million houses — one in every three in the country — had been destroyed or damaged. The destruction to factories and installations was valued at over 1,500 million pounds sterling. Nine million tons of shipping had been sunk, and there had been a tremendous loss of a great proportion of British overseas investments. Owing to the damage to Britain’s economy it was a formidable task to make those losses good, A further handicap was the grave impoverishment of the country caused by two world wars in which Britain had been engaged from the beginning to the end.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“The Charter contemplated a healthy world, economically speaking, and that was unfortunately not the case at present. Nevertheless, the possibility existed for progressively restoring economic health to the world. One of the contributions offered was the Marshall Plan. The United Kingdom was anxious to see the rehabilitation of Europe. While Great Britain was the centre of a great Commonwealth, it was also a European country, and the wellbeing of its citizens depended upon the security and the prosperity of Europe. Britain had always, since the close of the war, been anxious to make what contribution it could, notwithstanding its terrific losses in the war, to European rehabilitation. Those losses were sometimes forgotten; because Great Britain was an island, it had sometimes been assumed that it had not suffered as others did.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“That now seemed doubtful, but his Government would not slacken its efforts to secure such a covenant. It was hoped that the General Assembly would, without dissent, approve the draft declaration on human rights which was now submitted to it, and also that it would be possible to agree upon the covenants covering freedom of information and freedom of association. In themselves those were great instruments. If a definition could be agreed upon as to what human rights each should safeguard; if there were provision among the Members of the United Nations for the free movement of information as well as of individuals, the tension between the Members would be immediately relieved and misunderstanding would ultimately be removed. Those social activities of the United Nations could however thrive only on a healthy economic foundation.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“Another piece of work which merited attention was that undertaken by the ILO in developing its special trade committees, in which people engaged in different industries could collaborate internationally for their mutual benefit and advancement. Experience had shown that when people met and talked in terms of the occupation — miner to miner, textile worker to textile worker, transport worker to transport worker, and so on — rather than in terms of narrow national interests, a great comradeship developed and a great solidarity was evolved. He trusted that the United Nations would foster that development. As regards the question of human rights and freedom of information, it had at one time been hoped that at the present General Assembly the nations of the world would be able to pledge themselves to a covenant defining human rights.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“A really resolute effort by the General Assembly and every constituent Member of it during the coming year could solve that problem finally and clear up the situation left by the war. There must, however, be no excuses for inaction; the problem must be approached with a will to help in its final solution. Mr. Bevin had been associated with the International Labour Office since its foundation in 1919, and that organization, too, was pressing on with its social work. It had framed an important convention on freedom of association and trade union rights and he urged Governments to ratify it and apply it over the widest possible field.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“It was not so great as could have been wished. It had been hindered, like other work, by political differences, and it had been affected by great political problems which divided the world today and which had their repercussions on economic and social collaboration. Nevertheless, it did represent great progress. The scope of the work of all the specialized agencies was tremendous. Mr. Bevin welcomed the coming into existence of the International Refugee Organization. One of the terrible things in the aftermath of the war and the disturbances which had followed the war was the suffering of the refugees. The IRO had performed very useful work. Mr. Bevin made an earnest appeal for support and aid for that organization, now fully established, from all Members of the United Nations.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“His Majesty’s Government had always attached the greatest importance to the work of the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations, It believed that if the problems of the lack of proper food, of distribution, or social unhappiness and discontent, were found to be capable of settlement, and if a great stimulus were given to agricultural production and to means of meeting all the other essential needs of the ordinary people, together with agreed covenants on human rights, freedom of information and freedom of association, a great contribution would have been made to a sound structure of world peace. The representatives present at the Assembly, and the parliaments and other representatives of the world in all fields, should study the substantial measure of progress which had been made in that direction.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“The plan contained in part one of the Mediator’s report was one in which the two parties should be able to acquiesce without sacrificing any of their vital interests; it offered the best hope of healing the breach between those two Semitic peoples, and accordingly the United Kingdom Government had decided to support Count Bernadotte’s plan in its entirety and urged speed in dealing with it.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“The establishment of the truce had been due in large part to the devotion and courage of Count Bernadotte, whose tragic death would cast its shadow over the decision to be taken on Palestine at the present session of the General Assembly. No one had been in a better position than Count Bernadotte to estimate the kind of settlement which would give the best prospects of stable and peaceful conditions in Palestine. It was therefore fortunate that he had been able, before his death, to complete his report (A/648) to the Secretary-General and so to resent the conclusions to which his experience ad led him.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“Whatever might happen in the future, whatever the decisions the United Nations might make, the future rulers of Palestine would be building on foundations laid by British administrators. The problem of Palestine had been accentuated by the persecution of the Jews by Hitler. The resulting pressure of Jewish immigration had intensified the conflict between Arabs and Jews. In the end the problem came to be considered insoluble, and the Mandate was surrendered to the United Nations, which was asked for a decision. Considerable time had been spent in the previous year on the Palestine question. Nevertheless, the termination of the British Mandate had unfortunately been followed by an immediate outbreak of hostilities.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“In the view of the United Kingdom Government, a rapid solution was most desirable. Mr. Bevin reminded the General Assembly that his Government had held for twenty-five years a Mandate from the League of Nations, the terms of which presented a problem which had proved to be insoluble. The object of that Mandate had been to prepare for self-government in Palestine, where Arabs and Jews could live together in harmony, and the United Kingdom had made many efforts to settle the problem on that basis. All kinds of proposals had been advanced from time to time, none of which had proved acceptable. Nevertheless, His Majesty’s Government had reason to be proud of the contribution it had made during those years to the development of the country and the well-being of its people.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)
“Mr. BEVIN said he was glad to have the opportunity of addressing the General Assembly of the United Nations at its third session. It was a particular pleasure to him that it was taking place in Paris, where the Members of the Assembly were the guests of the French Government, of the City of Paris, and of the whole French people. The long history of France, its many struggles and crises and vicissitudes, and its triumphs, were in a way a symbol of the endeavours of the United Nations, in which the great problems of the day and of the future had to be discussed. Mr. Bevin proposed to refer to several phases of the work and labours of the United Nations. But there was one subject which he desired to mention at the outset - Palestine. It was a long discussed problem, and it was before the General Assembly now.”
1948-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 3 (1948)