YouSaid · the spoken record

Arenales Catalan

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS ARENALES CATALAN

lines on the record: 150
first: 1956-09-24
most recent: 1967-09-24
sittings or episodes: 4
sources: un-general-debate

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“In this context, Guatemala categorically condemns the policy of racial discrimination, and it will fully support any measures that will enable the United Nations to achieve its goals and apply its principles in this area. 38. I must now refer to the economic aspect of the work of the United Nations, and I take this opportunity to pledge Guatemala to doing its utmost in the Economic and Social Council If, as we hope, the General Assembly confirms our election at the present session. 39. My Government's interest in the problems of international trade in primary commodities, promoting industrialization and supporting economic development is not unique but is, rather, in keeping with the universal desire to increase productivity in order to bring about social reform and economic justice for the poorest classes of the population.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“This brings me to the social aspect of the United Nations programme, to which the Government of Guatemala attaches so much importance. Whatever the prevailing systems of government or philosophies of economic development, respect for human rights is a touchstone for judging the moral value of men's acts, of their institutions and of their way of thinking. Guatemala can understand that there maybe violations of human rights anywhere in the world at any given moment; but what is reprehensible — more, abominable — is complicity in such violations on the part of a Government—through its actions or its failure to act, through its indifference or negligence, or even through hidden motives. But such monstrous behaviour goes beyond all bounds when it is openly exalted into a policy of defiance, a legal system or a philosophy for action.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“I am referring to the tragic situation of the people of "unredeemed" South West Africa and their fellow Africans. We must also deplore the inexplicable attitude of the Government of Portugal which, divorcing itself from the present trends towards the liberation of dependent peoples, still refuses to transmit information on the Territories for which it is responsible, Territories whose development should already have been speeded up so as to place them on an equal legal and political footing within the international community. But what is really beyond all comprehension is the callousness shown by the Government of South Africa in maintaining its policy of apartheid in flagrant violation of the principles underlying the United Nations, the resolutions of the General Assembly and the most fundamental human rights. 37.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Fortunately, I do not think that any of the administering Powers would entertain such ideas; but the watchfulness of the Trusteeship Council and the Special Committee on the Situation with Regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples can help to avoid illusory independence or the upheavals which occur in nations that are not properly prepared for independence. We must also reaffirm our position that if Chapter XI of the Charter is properly interpreted, the programmes for and the advances in the economic, social and educational development of the Territories must be measured against their political goal, which is self-government. 36. Unfortunately, I must close this portion of my address on a note of discouragement.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The million and a half inhabitants in the Trust Territories and the twenty-six and a half million in forty Non-Self-Governing Territories must, through accelerated political, economic, social and educational development, attain their independence, which will enable them to find a way of controlling their own destinies. However, I should recall a warning which I gave in the last statement I made in this hall several years ago, on leaving the Presidency of the Trusteeship Council: it can be an easy solution to push a Territory into independence before it is ready and, while terminating the obligations of the Administering Authority to the United Nations, still keep the inhabitants in subjection through economic bonds and the handicaps of immaturity and underdevelopment.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“I must also at least mention our concern with colonial problems, with the economic and social functions of the Organization, and with some administrative and budgetary matters. 35. Colonial questions, with which we were so closely concerned a few years ago in the United Nations, have always occupied an important place in the foreign policy of Guatemala. After an eight-year absence, it gives me great pleasure to sit in this forum of international co-operation with nations for whose independence Guatemala struggled so resolutely for more than a decade, always inflexibly anticolonial, a position which we most vigorously reaffirm today.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Such a study on the manufacture, acquisition, development, demonstration, stockpiling and possible use of these weapons could be a valuable contribution to our understanding of these complex problems and to our search for a suitable solution. We hope that at this session the General Assembly will feel able to authorize this study. 33. I shall not tire my listeners by detailing our position on other question of peace and war, such as the financing of certain United Nations operations, the United Nations Emergency Force and the Special Committee on Peace-Keeping Operations. Statements on these points will be made by our representatives in the First Committee and the Special Political Committee. 34. I therefore turn to the last part of my statement. Thus far I have dealt with the political function of the United Nations.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“For these reasons, Guatemala has viewed with sympathy and admiration the efforts made by the Government of Mexico in favour of a denuclearization treaty for Latin America. We are sure that the differences of opinion over details that have temporarily held up this commendable project will soon be smoothed away. 32. We have also noted with considerable interest the suggestion made by the Secretary-General in the introduction to his annual report [A/6301/Add.1] that an appropriate body of the United Nations should undertake a thorough study of the impact and implications of all aspects relating to the manufacture and development of atomic weapons.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The 1963 Treaty must be extended to cover underground tests. We are also prepared to support resolutions calling upon those Powers which are not signatories of the Treaty banning nuclear weapon tests to sign and ratify it. We are certain that once a Power is assured that tests and production have been suspended, that stockpiles are being reduced and that adequate surveillance or guarantees have been instituted over the remaining supply, it will abandon its plans to procure atomic weapons and will devote those enormous funds and efforts to more constructive ends. Otherwise, whatever United Nations declarations may be made, the only limit to the proliferation of atomic weapons will be financial capacity, for even technology can be bought. 31.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Such acceptance does not imply a renunciation of our rights, and the primary concern of both Guatemala and the United Kingdom is to further the highest interests and the development of the people of Belize. The equally long-standing reservation of its rights in this matter which Guatemala has always made in the general debate — a reservation which it makes again at this session of the Assembly — does not diminish the profound interest and concern held by the Government of Guatemala for the well-being and the progress of the people of Belize. 30. But, to return to the political items on our agenda, Guatemala will support in principle resolutions designed to prevent the proliferation of atomic weapons and to extend the ban on nuclear tests not only to all countries, but also to underground tests.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The logical structure of his thinking on the items of disarmament, peace-keeping, the peaceful settlement of disputes, and United Nations efforts in the economic and social sphere, was directly related to the sub-items or projects for immediate execution to which he referred. Guatemala is in general agreement with the substance of his thinking and will support any decisions or steps which seem likely to deal with these perennial agenda items. 29. An admirable example of this civilized philosophy and the procedures through which it is applied is the mediation which the Governments of Guatemala and of the United Kingdom have both accepted with regard to their long-standing dispute over the territory of Belize.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The role of small nations, therefore — apart from the fact that thinking is not the privilege of the big Powers — will be to urge discussion of the problem, to demand more information from the great Powers and to make use of it, to promote whatever course of thought and action they believe most likely to lead to the slow but sure realization of those goals which help to break the vicious circle of insecurity and the arms race. 28. In this context, my delegation is pleased to express its interest in the masterly address made by the Foreign Minister of the United Kingdom at the twentieth session of the General Assembly.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The vicious circle of mistrust must be broken little by little, through toilsome discussions at the conference table, with their myriad technical details and through the slow but determined action —or rather, actions — which the great Powers are taking, slowly but surely, in the right direction. 27. At first glance it would seem that in matters of such significance the ability of small States to participate is limited. But the danger of extermination and contamination knows no boundaries, and the waste of enormous financial and technological resources is a source of bitterness to peoples which are still struggling against poverty, disease and ignorance.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Although I have defined the principles of legality and universality on which the general position of my delegation is based, I still feel that I must mention certain basic political issues which, although not of the same order as the Viet-Namese crisis, nevertheless exert international pressure fraught with immediate and potential dangers. These are also issues of peace and war, such as disarmament and the related matters of atomic energy and atomic tests. The progress made by the United Nations in these areas does not encourage undue optimism; but we must not give up.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“This question of new Members carries with it a note of sadness and a note of hope: Rhodesia's absence, the refusal of its present government to respect the most elementary principles of racial democracy, its determination not to comply with United Nations decisions — these are distressing matters for the democratic peoples and Governments of the world, We hope that the United Kingdom will be able to solve this problem under the authority of the United Nations, for otherwise we shall have to consider more decisive action by our Organization. 25. The note of hope is contributed by the imminent independence of Botswana, Lesotho and Barbados. Guatemala will be most happy to welcome them to the United Nations. 26.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“First, Guatemala maintains relations with all the States Members within the United Nations and its organs and committees. Secondly, we feel that all countries should be represented in the Organization, and that there can be no exclusions based on injustice and discrimination contrary to the principles of the Charter, 23. This last point immediately brings to mind the case of the People's Republic of China, a subject on which we shall express our opinion in due course; but it also leads us to rejoice at the admission of Guyana, which we had the occasion to welcome two days ago, and at the return of Indonesia, that great Asian nation with which we once fought side by side as struggling and oppressed peoples and whose prompt return to the Organization Guatemala greets with since rest good wishes. 24.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“All are witnesses to the courageous and unrelenting efforts of eminent jurists who, with imagination and patience — although overshadowed at times by the political concerns of Member States — are gradually building the edifice of international law. This structure is already helping to guide our relations — and it will do so even more in the future — to the point when the political settlement of conflicts will be abandoned in favour of a just and correct legal settlement, in keeping with the loftiest values of a humanistic philosophy. 22. The principle of universality casts light particularly on the political issues facing the United Nations. Guatemala supports this principle, which has at least two immediate consequences that should be noted.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“In this area, the new Government of Guatemala bases its policy towards the United Nations on the principles of legality and universality: on legality, because that promotes the ideal operation of the Organization and defines the authority and sphere of action of its organs; and on universality, because it is the loftiest humanistic principle inspiring the Charter and underlying its aims, and one which must, therefore, serve as an additional criterion in the examination of our problems. 21. The principle of legality, which is the greatest protection for small States, also finds positive, ambitious and very noble expression in the work of the Sixth Committee, the International Law Commission, and other bodies and committees.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“It is unnecessary and, perhaps, inappropriate during the general debate to attempt to define the position of one's Government on each and every item on the Assembly's agenda. This must wait until the debates in the Committees. But it is important, and at times necessary, to explain the general policy of one's Government towards the United Nations and towards certain general matters for which the Organization and the General Assembly are responsible under the Charter or through the decisions of the principal organs. 20.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“This session of the General Assembly will not have risen to the needs imposed by the conflict, or the principles of the Charter, the hopes of the peoples that founded the United Nations, or the searching demands of Member States, unless it makes an appeal or formulates a declaration which, in no uncertain terms, will convey to the participants in the conflict what the nations of the world require of them and provide the Secretary-General with the political support which will help him carry out his diplomatic task. 19. I am devoting the greater part of my address to what I feel it should be devoted to an examination of the two most important issues facing the United Nations.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“We hope that the other parties involved in the conflict, particularly the Government of North Viet-Nam and the Viet-CongNational Liberation Front, and the parties to the Geneva Agreements of 1954 and 1962 will be able to accept those three points, along with a time-table for a reduction of the fighting, which might be proposed by the Secretary- General in consultation with the parties directly involved. 18.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“These efforts of the Secretary-General, which have upheld the moral responsibility of the United Nations while its principal organs remained silent, today give us cause for a cautious optimism, which my Government is happy to point out. I am referring to the welcome — as I hope it is — given in the United States to the three points proposed by the Secretary-General as conditions for initiating peace negotiations, even though this meant modifying entrenched positions.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Let us not intervene to widen the gap between the parties involved, nor between these and third Powers; let us avoid at all costs a debate on the substance of the problem; but let us not remain indifferent in the face of a holocaust, when we set up this Organization specifically to eliminate such threats. 17. In this connexion, I should like to repeat that my delegation has unbounded admiration for the tireless efforts of the Secretary-General, the wisdom and devotion he has placed at the service of peace, and the moral stamina which has enabled him to overcome his deep disappointment each time his efforts met not only with no support or understanding, but with actual hostility.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Secondly, as a consequence of this, it can, of course, be asserted that the United Nations cannot effectively contribute to the solution where there is a particular threat or breach of the peace, but it can never be said that this Organization must not intervene in the face of a breach of the peace, and even in doubtful cases liable to create friction or threaten international peace. The most that can be said is that United Nations intervention must be cautious, well informed, tactful and prudent. 16. It is no longer merely a matter of safeguarding the prestige of the Organization, or even its existence. The aim is to bring peace to an extensive region of the world and, even more important, perhaps to avoid a war of immeasurable proportions. No statutory limitation can justifiably stand in the way of an act of goodwill.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“I wish to refer to the Secretary-General while just briefly mentioning the fourth argument outlined earlier, namely that his personal intervention in the Viet-Namese crisis is limited by the expressed will of the Member States-especially of the great Powers — and that as a result the United Nations cannot and must not intervene in this issue. Such views seem to be reflected in repeated public statements by the Secretary-General. 15. I do not wish to enter into a discussion of this issue; I merely wish to express some reflections. First, in addition to the expressed will of the Member States we have this same will codified in the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, which include a mandate for the Secretary-General.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“But this argument can also be set aside if United Nations intervention is planned in such a way as precisely to avoid the negative reaction which such intervention might create. I am referring particularly to a bitter debate on the substance, or the alleged substance, of the question, full of accusations and counter-accusations. While I do not wish to suggest specific solutions, I wonder whether the United Nations could not present a vigorous appeal or judgement in a resolution without debate —deliberately without debate. This, plus a mandate given to the chief official of the Organization, could combine the vehement expression of will, inexorable universal will, with the diplomatic tact of the Secretary-General, to the extent that his personal interventions were considered desirable. 14.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“On the other hand, when the great Powers are involved in international conflicts, if we wait for them to reach an agreement, the task of the United Nations will in due course become superfluous. But should there be no agreement among the great Powers, then the United Nations always has the obligation, under the Charter, to intervene in the manner most effective for the pursuit of its objectives, always of course endeavouring to avoid any approach which might complicate the problem rather than help to solve it. 13. This brings me to the third argument, which we grant has a certain measure of validity, namely that a debate on Viet-Nam might drive some of the great Powers further apart, whereas a progressive rapprochement is essential to the cause of peace.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Does this mean that the United Nations was established only to ensure peace among small or medium-sized nations? Does it mean that the great Powers will act and rejoice only when peace has been made, for example, between India and Pakistan? Does it mean that, like the League of Nations, our Organization must be concerned only with regional conflicts, such as the Chaco War? If such is the case, then the United Nations is doomed to suffer the same sad fate as the League of Nations. No, the United Nations must be able to meet the challenge of the great issues confronting it, and it is the duty of the small- and medium-sized nations to take the initiative when the great Powers are encumbered by their very immensity.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Of course, the possibility of sanctions, particularly those of a moral nature, becomes less effective with non-member nations. But the United Nations does not have to resort to coercive action; in this situation it should act rather as negotiator, initiator and mediator. Furthermore, United Nations sponsorship is not an essential prerequisite to peace initiatives. The United Nations can at least lend its full moral, political and diplomatic support to peace negotiations, or to efforts to get them under way. Peace talks — and I wish to emphasize this point — might even be held in accordance with the Geneva Agreements, should this be desirable in settling the issue. 12. Now let us turn to the second argument — that the action of the United Nations would be ineffective as long as disagreement persists among the great Powers.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“There is only one valid argument among these, and even this is not an insurmountable obstacle to some sort of action by the United Nations. 11. The fact that there are nations directly or indirectly involved in the conflict which do not belong to the Organization does not and should not prevent the United Nations from sponsoring or encouraging measures with regard to Viet-Nam. Guatemala firmly supports the principle of universality of the United Nations, including its application to the admission of Members. But Guatemala realizes, as we all must, that, just as an individual may discuss the solution of his problems with people of another nationality or circle, so this Organization may negotiate a settlement of its problems with non-member States.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“There are perhaps three main reasons: first, not all the nations involved in the Viet-Namese conflict are Members of the Organization; secondly, as long as there is no agreement among the great Powers, action by the United Nations would be ineffective; and thirdly, a debate on this issue within the United Nations would widen the gap between some of the great Powers, whereas the vital concern of maintaining peace requires a rapprochement between them. 9. There is a fourth argument, which at once supports and weakens the tireless and disinterested efforts of the Secretary-General in this matter, namely, that the Secretary-General is only the spokesman of the Member States, which are organized and express themselves, naturally, through their statutory organs. 10.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Whether we call it prudence or indolence, powerlessness or indifference, fear, realism or precaution, the fact still remains that the United Nations is increasingly in danger of becoming a static structure rather than a living organ pulsing with energy, translating the feelings, thoughts, concerns and aspirations of all the peoples of the world. 8. Several reasons have already been suggested to justify or explain this attitude on the part of the United Nations.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“There is still another grave factor implicit in the situation, namely, the stand taken thus far by the United Nations in favour of non-intervention in the conflict, of non-confrontation, of refusal even to study, analyse, discuss or pass judgement. We know the opinion of the United States on this issue, as well as that of troth South Viet-Nam and North Viet-Nam; we know the position of the People's Republic of China, the attitude of the Soviet Union and the statements by General de Gaulle; and we have heard the world-wide debate held by the most outstanding and varied personalities of our time at the national or international level. But we do not know the opinion of the United Nations.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“We may speak of Hungary or Korea, we may remember Suez or the Congo, we may mention financial difficulties such as those encountered two years ago; but in none of those crises did the United Nations remain inactive. The gravity of the Viet-Namese war does not lie merely in the fact that human beings are killed every day, or merely in an internal situation producing more than international friction. Nor is it sufficient to point to the conflict between two great world Powers, to rival or aggressive ideologies, or to geopolitical theories. The full scope of this crisis cannot be comprehended even when we rightly point out that it continuously threatens to become a world holocaust. No.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The consensus of the great and small nations of this Organization imposes upon the Secretary-General the clear moral obligation to reconsider his position; but it also imposes upon the Member States, particularly the great Powers, the binding obligation not to oppose, impede or inhibit the political and diplomatic efforts that so wise and impartial a mediator can contribute to the cause of peace. And finally, it imposes upon the United Nations, as an institution, the obligation not to remain indifferent in the face of the very grave crisis now afflicting mankind and facing the United Nations. 7. This crisis in Viet-Nam is perhaps the most serious ever to darken the horizon of the United Nations.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“We well understand the intolerable situation in which political and legal circumstances, by setting limits on his sphere of action, have placed U Thant, in the face of grave world events calling for intervention by an Organization Which neither acts nor permits him to act. Personal bitterness, intellectual rebellion and moral anguish must weigh heavily upon a man of such intellectual honesty, who so scrupulously upholds his ethical beliefs. 6. But though we understand his distressing personal dilemma, we have to recognize that while his attitude has aroused the attention and conscience of the Member States, adherence to his decision can only make it more difficult to solve those very problems to which he has devoted his whole-hearted efforts.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“This necessity takes on giant proportions in view of the responsibility placed on each and every Member of the United Nations by the two crises facing us as this session begins: the Secretary-General's decision not to continue at the head of the Organization, and the threatening clouds of war in Viet-Nam. 4. Guatemala has clearly defined its position with regard to the Secretary-General's decision. Our Permanent Representative to this Organization supported, within the Latin-American group, the joint appeal of our region asking U Thant to reconsider his decision. I am pleased to say that all the Latin American delegations, sharing the same concern, joined together in this unanimous request on behalf of Latin America, that the Secretary-General agree to remain in his high post. 5.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“We are meeting in circumstances which are ominously grave, not only for the existence and fate of the United Nations, but also for life itself in a large part of the world, for they point to the danger of a world-wide holocaust. 3. If participation in the general debate of the United Nations is ever imperative — a debate unjustly criticized as yielding scant results in comparison with the amount of time involved — if, I repeat, participation at this stage of our discussions is ever called for, it is precisely at a time when a new Government must restate or modify its political stand as a Member of the United Nations.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“1. Guatemala comes before this august world parliament to explain the position of its new Government, revolutionary in its desire to bring about immediate and radical economic and social reforms for the underprivileged classes, but democratic in the legal basis of its actions and the fact that it was elevated to power, from the opposition benches, through free and direct elections which gave voice to the unlimited support of those same people. 2. As representative of this Government, Mr. President, I wish to repeat the tribute which I had the honour to pay you from this same rostrum three days ago on your election to the Presidency of the General Assembly. Today I should like to add our most sincere wishes and to offer our loyal cooperation in bringing the work of the twenty-first session to a successful conclusion.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“It is not idle, however, to recall that, apart from such ethical or philosophical considerations as may have contributed to the birth of the United Nations, those same political motives which made the association of nations large and small imperative after the Second World War still persist, and have perhaps become more urgent, amid the increasing awakening of the world’s peoples and the crises and tensions which face us half-way through this century. 94. Guatemala reaffirms its faith in the United Nations Charter, but also reaffirms and claims on its people’s behalf, as a basic condition of its participation, recognition and respect of the legal equality of States.”
1957-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 12 (1957)
“There is no further need to add Guatemala's voice to those of such delegations as the Salvadorian, the Costa Rican and the Mexican, which have spoken of the proud dignity with which we small and medium-sized nations participate in the United Nations, and of the conditions for our participation. Suffice it to record our support of and agreement with those delegations and the views set forth in the introduction to the Secretary-General's report to this Assembly. 93.”
1957-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 12 (1957)
“We proposed to recall that, whatever the motives of the great Powers might have been in establishing the United Nations, Guatemala's co-operation in that act, its signature and ratification of the Charter, and its continued presence here have been guided solely by the purposes, principles and conditions set forth in that very Charter. But there is no further need to raise our voice to defend the United Nations from attacks the reason for which may have been that the majority of the people in the countries which compose the United Nations held an unfavourable opinion of the actions of some of its Members.”
1957-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 12 (1957)
“With these ideas in mind Guatemala cannot but view with sympathy the suggestion that the General Assembly might adopt a declaration of economic principles, even as the American nations at Chapultepec and Buenos Aires defined the rules which should govern their economic relations. Again consistently with this line of policy, we continue to be in favour of the Special United Nations Fund for Economic Development, which we hope will at last become a reality. 92. Our delegation originally planned to include in its contribution to the general debate some reflections on the principles which govern Guatemala’s participation in the United Nations.”
1957-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 12 (1957)
“Nevertheless, the ethical and profoundly humane character of the argument cannot fail to appeal to the good will of Member States and impel them to give the proposal their most serious and attentive study. 91. In the economic field I wish to restate Guatemala's policy of giving firm support to every action or step intended to promote the economic development and raise the level of living of the under-development, peoples in accordance with policy of genuine social justice and without prejudice to the sovereignty and the political and economic independence of nations.”
1957-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 12 (1957)
“The first question, while of a social nature, has both legal and political aspects and is rooted in philosophical and humane considerations. I refer to the international jurisdiction over human rights, a thesis which, the delegations of Uruguay and Costa Rica have propounded, here. 90. We expressed last year, and have reiterated at this session, the deep sympathy with which the people and Government of Guatemala view this initiative. We have not yet reached any conclusion on the legal basis of the argument, which appears to be that compulsory international jurisdiction is implicit in the United Nations Charter. Moreover, we have pointed out that before some States could accept such an interpretation their national parliaments might have to take action.”
1957-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 12 (1957)
“We venture to restate these ideas with all due respect, and with the conviction that this reiteration of what we consider fair and right can do no harm, and that our reflections will always be received broadmindedly both by Israel, with whose birth my country's name is associated, and by the Arab nations with which we have always maintained the most cordial ties. It was not an accident that, a few days ago, Mr. Lequerica of Spain referred from this rostrum, in colourful and elegant language, to Spain's unshakable historical ties in the Mediterranean basin and North Africa. Spanish America has not been left out of this proud heritage. 89. I should now like to refer briefly to two questions relating to the economic and social activities of the United Nations.”
1957-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 12 (1957)
“Possibly this is not the time to touch on this problem; but, equally possibly, it is for us small countries to tell the Arab nations, our dear friends, that we still consider that they must recognize Israel's existence as an irrevocable historical fact and as an essential step towards the well-being and prosperity of the area, and to ask Israel, another friend of ours, to understand the feelings of the Arab nations and to realize that the interest of the Semitic peoples of the area override any outside interests. 88.”
1957-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 12 (1957)
“Hence it will not be out of order to address on this occasion a new appeal to all the parties concerned to refrain from any step which might help to set off or to prepare for an active conflict in the Middle East. 86. Apart from these aspects of the question, which relate to the most immediate and pressing problem in the Middle East, the region also presents a second basic problem; not only is it an area of friction between two or more major international political or economic forces, but there is also friction within the region, in the relations between Israel and the Arab countries. 87.”
1957-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 12 (1957)
“We went on to remind friendly nations in the area that, in international situations of the kind which obtained then and which are still recurring today in a less serious degree, any step taken in the Middle East might produce actions and reactions which might endanger world peace, and thus also the peace of the area concerned, or, failing that, seriously endanger the freedom and independence of the very peoples that were trying to preserve peace, as well as the very interests which other nations were trying to protect. That, I said at the time, was the inevitable fate of those regions which found themselves at the crossroads of world politics.”
1957-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 12 (1957)
“Last year, when the more acute symptoms and unhappy facts of the Egyptian situation were slowly beginning to abate, we pointed out that any disturbance in the equilibrium of that part of the world produced an even greater disturbance, and warned that the price of independence or survival flight be to compromise the very independence and freedom of nations. We were referring to the preparations which had already been started a year previously in a country in that area with the assistance of countries outside the area which were directly or indirectly concerned.”
1957-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 12 (1957)