YouSaid · the spoken record

PÉTER

lines on the record: 428
first: 1961-09-24
most recent: 1973-09-24
sittings or episodes: 11
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

“The arrangements envisaged for a peace, treaty with both German States would not harm the interested Powers, and they would safeguard the rights of the West Berlin inhabitants as well. This has been stated in most official form by competent representatives of the Governments of the German Democratic Republic and the Soviet Union. As the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Soviet Union said in this debate: "The Soviet Government and the Head of that Government, Nikita S. Khrushchev, have repeatedly declared the United Nations could also serve as a guarantor of the status of the free city. To that end the status of the free city could be officially registered with the United Nations, and other forms of United Nations participation in the guarantees of the freedom and independence of the free city could also be envisaged.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“In the heart of the German Democratic Republic, in one section of Berlin, under the cover of military occupation by Western armed forces, all sorts of hostile and demoralized elements are engaged in subversive activities against the German Democratic Republic and other countries of Eastern Europe. 191. The still glowing embers of the Second World War should be done away with in order to bring about peace in Central Europe at long last. The proposals for a peace treaty and for a settlement of the abnormal situation in West Berlin do not disturb any peaceful situation. On the contrary, the proposals have been made in order to bring peace to where there has been no peace so far. 192.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Since in the West, with the assistance of the Western Powers, the Federal Republic of Germany was created, opening far- reaching possibilities for old Hitlerite elements to recapture their former strong positions, in the East the 'German Democratic Republic has developed, faithfully abiding by the principles agreed upon by the Powers allied in the fight against Hitlerite Germany. Nations of the world owe much to the existence of the German Democratic Republic for securing peace against all dangers emanating from revanchist circles of the Federal Republic of Germany. Even Western Powers, especially those bordering upon West Germany, owe a great deal for their security to the existence of the German Democratic Republic. 190.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“At the end of the Second World War, theoretically speaking there were two possibilities for Germany. Either the agreement between the great Powers of the anti-Hitler coalition should stand to ensure the democratic development of a peaceful and demilitarized Germany, or the traditional military, political and economic forces of revanchist German quarters should regain power and create a revengeful State endangering the East and the West alike. What really happened is a third solution.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“It has been invented to convey to those who are not acquainted with the situation in Central Europe the impression that the new proposals are a threat to an existing peaceful situation there. On the contrary, in the true sense of the word, never since the Second World War has the peaceful situation been settled there. And we, the nations of Eastern Europe, have had to experience much trouble even in the post-war period, precisely because of the unsettled German situation. When we speak nowadays about the necessity of signing a peace treaty and doing away with the remnants of the Second World War, our concern is not simply to settle unsettled legal formalities but we wish to extinguish the live embers left from the Second World War in the interest of the German people itself and in the interest of the world's security at large. 189.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Berlin is no excuse for not signing such an agreement. Whoever would exploit the problems of Berlin and Germany to make excuses for not being ready to negotiate a non-aggression treaty would admit that he has the intention of searching for a solution to these issues by applying pressure of military strength. 188. The most critical point of the present world situation is indeed the German and Berlin question. There is no doubt about that. But it would be a mistake to think that the origin of the crisis lies in the proposal to sign a peace treaty with both German States and to settle the abnormal West Berlin situation. Such nonsense has been invented here to mislead delegations that are not closely linked with the recent history of Central Europe.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“The Governments of the States members of the Warsaw Treaty Organization are proposing a treaty of non-aggression to be concluded with the Governments of the NATO alliance. My Government is one of the sponsors of this proposal. Representatives of the NATO Powers would say that their organization is of a defensive character, and they usually qualify our intentions as aggressive. Well, the allegedly aggressive Warsaw organization now makes a proposal to the allegedly defensive NATO to sign a pact of non-aggression. Let the NATO Powers test our goodwill and start negotiations with the view of a treaty of non-aggression. The proposal is in the hands of the Governments of the NATO States. In case of a negative reply, people may well ask why such a proposal is not welcomed when the proclaimed intentions are so peaceful? 187.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“In the age of intercontinental missiles and of space exploration there is no invulnerable spot anywhere on the earth, not even in the United States. There is no possible new technical invention applied to military purposes that could alter that situation. So the utter hopelessness of any armaments race for certain military quarters in the West is a compelling force to renew negotiations on disarmament with the view of general and complete disarmament under real and effective control. 186. The test of such good will may be rather near. Yes, we have it near at hand. In a memorandum the Government of the Soviet Union has put forward proposals for interim agreements with a view to lessening tensions and creating a certain degree of mutual trust [A/4892]. I refer to only one of them.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Future negotiations may make it clear whether the name of the agency reflects its real intentions or not. 185. There is an unmistakably comforting sentence in the statement of the President of the United States, He pointed out: w... men may no longer pretend that the quest for disarmament is a sign of weariness— for in a spiralling arms race a nation's security may be shrinking even as its arms increase" [1013th meeting, para. 51]. In other words, even from the point of view of a policy of strength, the present arms race does not represent any real perspective for any United States Government which would like to continue the so-called policy of strength. There is a qualitative change in the world situation today.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“As long as the NATO Powers are intensifying their military preparations and staging manoeuvres on the borders of socialist States, we will be com" polled to strengthen our defensive forces not only for our security but also to safeguard peace at large in the interest of all nations. 184. We were told by the President of the United States that a new statutory agency fully endorsed by Congress would work to find an approach to disarmament. Since we heard this statement the establishment of this agency has been made public, as well as its name—Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. The very name of this agency calls our attention to the danger of the fact that the United States again speaks about control of armament and not about control of disarmament.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“People of good will recognize that in front of the thermo-nuclear preparations of the West we have had only one choice: either to look upon the growing dangers of a thermo-nuclear disaster without doing anything against it or to develop further the thermo-nuclear capabilities of the ^Soviet Union against all possible dangers. 183. On our part there is no inconsistency at all. We proclaim with the Soviet Union that it would be better to stop all tests as soon as possible, but the only way to do so is by concluding an agreement on general and complete disarmament under effective international control.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Records of the plenary meetings and the meetings of the First Committee show that efforts were expended here by the Western military allies just to ridicule those who spoke about the harmfulness of atomic radiation. Statements of United States authorities make it unforgettable how many scientists and public' figures of the United States had to undergo all sorts of vexation as allegedly being Communist agents because they spoke out against thermo-nuclear fallout. The present paradoxical situation has a happy by-product, which is that propaganda against thermonuclear tests has received laissez-passer even in the United States. It will also have good effects in the future. 182.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“When the item, was put on the agenda with a great majority of votes [1018th meeting], one could smell the feelings of victory in statements made by certain Western representatives. However, on second thought, the delegation of the United States could have realized that its proposal rested on the moral basis created in the Assembly by the Soviet Union and by all those who had for years worked here for the prohibition of thermo-nuclear weapons. However paradoxical it may seem, it is self-evident that the result of the vote reflected the deep-rooted effects created by those who have consistently fought in the Assembly against the thermo-nuclear policy of the United States.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Now, I think I have to do justice to Americans in. general. The editor, I quoted is certainly mistaken; it is not true that Americans as such are collectively disliked in every country. No, they are not. But it is certainly true that many aspects of the foreign policy of successive administrations are regarded with distrust, and it is especially the armament race introduced and dictated by the United States, first of all its thermo-nuclear policy, that is—to put it mildly- looked upon with suspicion. 181. For example, the insistence of the United States delegation on debating the problem of a thermo-nuclear test ban as a separate item and the two-Power draft resolution circulated on this item [A/C.l/L.280] will not add much to the prestige of the United States.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“I emphasize, the words are not mine. The New York World-Telegram formulated the other day, in its editorial, the following question: "Why are Americans, collectively, the most unpopular people in the world? It is no exaggeration to say that this is so: any traveller finds that America is disliked in every foreign land he visits. If, for example, the United States had resumed testing nuclear weapons first, there wouldn't be a whole pane of glass left in any American embassy from Addis Ababa to Zululand." The question is by no means a private concern of the editor. I could have quoted the Attorney-General of the United States as well, who happened to utter almost the same words in a recent radio interview, and it is. generally known that a special commission has been set up to study the problems related to this question. 180.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“So far it is the thermo-nuclear power of the Soviet' Union that has deadlocked the use of atomic weapons by the Western Powers. Consequently, against growing threats and military preparations of the West, it is the development of thermo-nuclear devices by the Soviet Union that provides the principal protection for the majority of States and for all mankind. After the tragedy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Western Powers have no moral basis for challenging the logic of the facts. The new declaration of the Soviet Union regarding the necessity of the resumption of thermo-nuclear tests assures the whole of mankind that the atom bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki may and will forever remain the only tragic experiences of the military use of atomic energy. 179. I apologize for quoting a rather delicate passage from a New York newspaper.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Arms shipments and troop movements are to be taken more seriously than mild words. 177. All that we see and hear now should be put in the context of recent history. No one knows exactly why atom bombs fell on Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the very end . of the Second World War; we may know, however, why atom bombs were not used in the Korean war. Having lost the monopoly of atomic weapons, the Western allies could not expect to use them without risking retaliation. From that time on, it was by the growing nuclear and thermo-nuclear power of the Soviet Union that, on several critical occasions and in different regions of the world, great masses of human beings were protected against nuclear and thermo-nuclear disaster. 178.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Now, after all these developments, we witness an official proclamation of the United States in favour of general and complete disarmament [A/4880]. 176. But here comes the turning point. Parallel to these favourable developments all sorts of threats were unleashed. At a time when the Head of the Soviet Government stated in his letter to Prime Minister Nehru of India and President Nkrumah of Ghana that he was ready for negotiations "at any time, any place and at any level" the most different official sources of the Western Powers went out of their way to show their readiness to launch even a thermo-nuclear war if their interests so demanded. They are even ready to use thermo-nuclear weapons first. Parallel to these declarations all sorts of military preparations took place all over Western Europe, on the territories of NATO countries.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“During the first part of the fifteenth session, when the United States delegation of the previous administration was reluctant to deal with the item, the Indian delegation, together with a number of other Asian, African and Latin American delegations, introduced a detailed draft resolution on general and complete disarmament. At a later stage at the second part of the fifteenth session, when the delegation of the new United States administration asked in the First Committee [1136th meeting] for the postponement of the debate on this issue, giving as a reason its not being prepared for the discussion, the Conference of the Prime Ministers of the British Commonwealth issued a comprehensive statement on the idea of general and complete disarmament.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Now the goal is no longer a dream—it is a practical matter of life or death." [Ibid., para. 52.] He added: "And it is in this spirit that we have presented, with the agreement of the Soviet Union—under the label which both nations now accept of 'general and complete disarmament'— a statement of newly agreed principles for negotiation." [Ibid., para. 58.] 175. Indeed the break-through, the march forward, of the idea of general and complete disarmament surpasses all imagination." It must be so because it is really the only realistic alternative against a thermonuclear catastrophe. The idea gained ground here before our eyes.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“We had to listen in those months to utterances stating that the whole idea was nothing but Utopia. We had to experience manoeuvres even to avoid using the expression "general and complete disarmament". Without the slightest feeling of reprehension, we have to recall those months for the sake of more comprehensive evaluation of the situation we are in today. The other day we heard the President of the United States say here: "The weapons of war must be abolished before they abolish us." [1013th meeting, para. 50.] Then he proceeded thus: "Men no longer maintain that disarmament must await the settlement of all disputes —for disarmament must be a part of any permanent settlement." [Ibid., para. 51.] Then, again, he said: "For fifteen years this Organization has sought the reduction and destruction of arms.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“It is clear that the idea of general and complete disarmament has gained ground all over the world beyond all expectations. When the Head of the Soviet Government, Mr. Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev, surprised—in the pleasantest sense of the word— the fourteenth session of the General Assembly, and world opinion in general, with the idea of general and complete disarmament as the only realistic alternative of mankind to an inevitable ride towards a thermonuclear holocaust, we should remember what the reactions of some quarters here were. In contrast to the general relief of many delegations having most different ideological and political backgrounds, the main Powers of the Western allies mobilized every imaginable argument against the very idea.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“The same factors that have given rise to favourable developments in recent years are active below a deteriorated surface, and if the forces of good will are able to do away with actual harmful measures a new era of hopeful co-operation may be inaugurated for the nations of the world. So, the burdens of concern are heavy and justified by stubborn facts, but the reasons for comfort regarding the fruitfulness of efforts at a radical solution of our crucial problems are much more vivid and decisive. 173. These general observations are but faithful reflections of recent developments on concrete sections of the international field. 174. Let me analyse some of these sections. What is the connexion between the unfortunate events of disarmament talks and previous favourable developments in this domain?”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“As for the aspects of concern: the deterioration has overshadowed all the results achieved in recent years through efforts at mutual understanding and has put at stake all that the will for peace and constructive co-operation among nations had firmly established. It has become obvious once again that exasperated forces of destruction may be regenerated against favourable developments, and what is still worse: even in the future one cannot be vigilant enough to prevent new improvements being reversed by powerful groups hostile to the peaceful settlement of controversial issues. But in the view of my delegation, the aspects of comfort are more decisive. Thanks to basic factors of the present-day international strife, the deterioration came about on a basis more favourable to the will for peace than to destructive intentions.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“In so far as the sixteenth session is able to translate the words of previous historic resolutions into proper deeds, the process of improvement will be restored. 172. The process of improvement must be restored. My delegation pays much attention to the fact that the present growing deterioration was engendered in a process of a series of favourable developments. I venture even to say that in some respects the whole trend of deterioration is a sort of reaction to general improvements. These facts contain much comfort and much concern; much consolation, but at the same time desolation as well.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“The questions which arise are, what can representatives to the General Assembly do to reverse the speedy trend towards a thermo-nuclear disaster; what can the Assembly at this session do to stop general deterioration and pave the way for constructive international co-operation. The fourteenth session will be remembered in the future history of the United Nations—provided there is to be such history— as a meeting that put on the agenda of this Organization, and on that of world history, the programme of general and complete disarmament. Also, the fifteenth session will go down in history as having proclaimed the declaration on the liquidation of the colonial system. The present growing deterioration set in after such hopeful resolutions. What is the best this session can do to turn the trends towards improvement?”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“What we hear in the course of the general debate about any corner of the world, or about central problems of current international affairs, presents a sorrowful picture of the deterioration of the world situation: deterioration under the shadow and in the direction of growing dangers of a thermo-nuclear holocaust. The choice is tremendous indeed. The words of the President of the United States were wholly justified when he said in this Assembly: "we ... shall be remembered either as part of the generation that turned this planet into a flaming pyre or as the generation that met its vow, 'to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war' " [1013th meeting, para. 94]. 171.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“The problems of present- day international life are so interwoven that, though they are discernible, they certainly are not separate. Consequently, however small and modest the section we intend to choose for consideration, we are inevitably confronted with all as a whole. In every detail the lesson of life and death is put before us. Such an inter-connexion will determine all the deliberations, not only in the plenary but in each of the Committees as well. 169. In such a situation, however modestly any delegate would like to act, he is compelled to deal with issues beyond his reach—one could as well say, beyond his competence. Even when any delegation speaks its mind regarding the local or regional problems of its country, it inevitably will face problems touching the interests of all. 170.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)