YouSaid · the spoken record

MENON

lines on the record: 397
first: 1953-09-24
most recent: 1955-09-24
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

“I suppose that destruction can be brought about by what are called the “conventional weapons” of war, but in this stricken world any remedy, any step that we can take towards reducing arms and, what is more, any step which we can take to deal with a situation which the representative of Australia and Mr. Dulles have described as tending towards the elimination of humanity from the face of this earth, would be a step in the right direction. 107.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“Here, again, we are not without precedents in this matter. There are, for example, the conventions relating to gas or bacterial warfare. The prohibition of, or rather the agreement not to use, chemical warfare goes back towards the time of the First World War, when an amount of gas was used. The convention which came after the war proved a deterrent to the use of gas. 105. It may be that the appeal made by the General Assembly, this proclamation of its will, of the conscience of humanity, may lead to the formulation of a convention for the abandonment of these weapons as instruments of war. 106. I do not for a moment say that an agreement, even if it be an effective agreement, for the non-use of atomic weapons or other weapons would by itself be disarmament.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“What is more, it would make people begin to realize that with the use of such weapons it would be not only the enemy that would be destroyed, but that the whole of humanity would stand in the face of destruction, and that coupled with these beautiful bombs are other weapons which have introduced in modern warfare the medieval methods of torture by burning people slowly in order to annihilate the enemy. There are such things as the napalm bomb and various other weapons and inventions, by means of which human beings are gradually tortured and burned to death. These instruments could be banned or, at any rate, a declaration could be made to this end. Some people might call it a pious declaration, but even that would be the beginning of an approach of a different and wholesome character. 104.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“Therefore, in the course of the proceedings of this General Assembly, and without any prejudice to the work of the Disarmament Commission, without any claim that we would thereby be solving the problem, we should make and appeal to the great Powers to subscribe to a declaration on the non-use of these weapons for destructive purposes, which they should immediately follow up by the work of the Disarmament Commission in that direction. 103. I want to make it quite clear that we are not in any way simplifying the issue or taking a very elementary view of it in thinking that a mere form of words would solve anything, but it would certainly bring an attitude of the non-use of these weapons.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“It is on the basis of this last statement which I have just read that I want to suggest to the General Assembly that the time has come when we must think in the terms of “if, by any manner of means, it could be laid down that the atomic and hydrogen bombs are not going to be used anyhow” and “that itself would bring tremendous relief to the world.” The time has come for the General Assembly to declare itself in favour of the non-use of these weapons of mass destruction, that this release of material energy discovered by the genius of man shall be used only for industrial and constructive purposes.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“My own Prime Minister, in his speech of 18 September, said: “In fact, if, by any manner of means, it could be laid down that the atomic and hydrogen bombs are not going to be used anyhow, that itself would bring tremendous relief to the world.” 102.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“Referring to the armament race, the President of the United States said on 16 April 1953: “The best would be this: a life of perpetual fear and tension; a burden of arms draining the wealth and the labour of all peoples; a wasting of strength that defies the American system or the Soviet system or any system to achieve true abundance and happiness for the peoples of this earth. Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies — in the final sense — a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its labourers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.” 101.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“It is, indeed, a destructive power inherent in matter which must be controlled by the idealism of man’s spirit and the wisdom of his mind. They alone stand between us and a lifeless planet. There are plenty of problems in the world, many of them interconnected. But there is no problem which compares with this central, universal problem of saving the human race from extinction.” 99. Therefore, I think it is useful for us to remember that what we are faced with today is not merely the adjustment of some minor difficulty, of saving the face of one nation or another, but really of saving humanity from total destruction. 100.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“And what will happen if armaments production should reach which the distinguished Foreign Minister of Australia called the saturation point?” And then comes the ominous thought: “When the toys pile up, does not the child want to play with them?” 97. These are statements, not by what are called the great Powers, but of people from far away in the Pacific and from Iceland, a country which is not identified with any of the great Power blocs, and genuinely seeking the reconciliation 'of all points of view. 98. We have also another statement, which comes from Mr. Dulles himself. Mr. Dulles stated [434th meeting]: “Physical scientists have now found means which, if they are developed, can wipe life off the surface of this planet. Those words that I speak are words that can be taken literally.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“All kinds and all sizes of ammunition are available, to suit any place and any congregation of human beings. “And who wants this? The United Nations was founded ‘to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war’.” 95. If I may interpolate here, I think we should always say to ourselves: “The United Nations was founded ‘to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war’.” Unless we are prepared to subscribe to the doctrine that the more arms, the more peace, we should seek to reduce and scrap arms and take such other steps as must be taken. 96. The representative of -Iceland went on to ask: “What has it done to slow or call off the armaments race? Nothing. It has proved to be entirely unable and impotent to do anything in this vital matter. No wonder some people talk about the United Nations as merely a debating club . . .”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“Or, rather, no treatment has been found possible since 1946, when the ice-cold winds of the cold war began blowing. No result has been reached. Resolutions have, however, been passed — a whole bunch of often high-sounding resolutions. Some of them — those which were naive enough — have even gained unanimity: 60 votes in favour, none against. And speeches and words have flowed year after year. All kinds of words — friendly words, warning words, angry words — have flowed. To no avail. The production of armaments has flowed, too — incessantly and ever increasingly; all kinds of armaments, from small ammunition to the most destructive weapons — those intended for individual killing, for mass murder, for wholesale slaughter, to the point of the complete destruction and extinction of huge areas of land and human life.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“It might well be that all the population of very large areas of the world would be killed by atmospheric, poisoning, by the explosion of any considerable number of these dreadful weapons.” 93. That is the unhappy prospect which our great technical skill has produced before us, but the statement of Mr. Casey arouses new thoughts in us that a further attempt, which is complementary and will perhaps assist in the deliberations of the Disarmament Commission, must now be made. 94. The representative of Iceland, speaking on disarmament, said [444th meeting]: “One of the most important items before us, or, more correctly, the most important question, is disarmament. Again, we must admit this has been treated in all previous sessions.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“The approach to this saturation point makes international agreements for control, through an effective system of inspection of manufacture of atomic weapons, not only urgent but imperative. It is something to which the great Powers which possess these weapons must set their minds if the world is not to be destroyed by itself. They must realize the deep anxiety of all the peoples of the world that the ever-present fear of complete destruction should be removed. “Apart from the direct destructive effect of atomic bombs — and more so of hydrogen bombs — the poisoning effect on the world’s atmosphere of the explosion of these weapons must be taken into account.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“The General Assembly is familiar with these problems, but we have this year, in the autumn of 1953, reached a position in which, from either side, we hear expressions which must create not only awe in our minds, but the realization that a newer phase of the already ominous situation has developed. 92. Listen, for example, to the words of Mr. Casey, the distinguished representative of Australia, who said [436th meeting]: “We must face, before very long, a situation in which both sides will have reached saturation point in the possession of atomic weapons, saturation point being the point at which both sides possess a sufficient quantity of bombs to destroy all the major defences of the other side.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“Speaking on behalf of my delegation last autumn, in the First Committee, on the resolution on disarmament, I pointed out that advances had been made and that it would be a mistake to be cynical about those advances; the Soviet Union, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Canada and others had come together on such issues as simultaneity and the continuation of the Disarmament Commission itself. Nevertheless, technical problems still remain and we are still faced with this question of what takes place first: whether you count the arms and then disarm, or disarm first, and so on. 91.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“While tension is the all-pervading factor that rules us, its “dread arm” is rearmament. As the representative of Iceland pointed out [444th meeting], arms are piled upon arms — for what purpose? The energy of the world is, to a great extent, concentrated in the building up of defences. Most certainly a situation exists in which the world is divided into two armed camps. We recognize that the Disarmament Commission has been sitting for a long time; we recognize the progress that has been made in regard to its work.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“So far as we are concerned, when we speak of this high-level conference we mean a meeting of those who are most likely to bring about or help a solution; a meeting which will not exclude those who differ, but will attempt to bring together those who now differ, where both sides would make up their minds beforehand not to adopt a priori attitudes which would bar the way to peace. We regard this as the most immediate step. We recognize its limitations; we recognize that it arouses hopes. But without hope there can be no action, especially in times like these. Therefore this is the first proposal to which we seek to draw attention, and which we hope we shall, in due course, bring before the Assembly. Side by side with this other steps will become necessary. 90.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“I will restate, however, the view of the Government of India as expressed by the Prime Minister: it is that this should not only be a conference where there is no inhibition because of detail, but that it should also be a conference not of sections, not of a group of like-minded Powers making up their minds beforehand in order to bargain with Powers of unlike minds but — to use a word which I am afraid will create another contest — a round-table meeting, that is to say, a palaver, a discussion, a conference in the real sense of the term.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“This proposal does not supersede anything, but is one of those things that will perhaps restore confidence to stricken humanity. Its main consequences will be that world public opinion will begin to join more effectively in support of the idea of concrete attempts towards peace, that peoples will gain greater confidence in the United Nations itself, and that they will work more ardently, and a greater sense of the responsibility of and faith in their leaders will be created. 89.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“We subscribe to that but we say that the situation we face is such that no way should be left unexplored. It is necessary for us to approach the problem of tension from the point of view of detail, from the point of view of particular issues, such as Korea, Germany, Austria, or disarmament, or anything else; equally is it necessary for us to attain some release and relaxation in regard to the supervening pervading factor which stifles our thinking and the adoption of any measures. While one cannot talk in terms of priority of time, this matter must certainly engage the priority of attention. It does not mean that any other schematic devices we may have, any other technical solution which we may be attempting, have to be put on one side.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“We put this forward as an idea so that, at the appropriate time in committee, it may be possible for us to consider collectively whether it may not be the wisest thing to do in present conditions. For the Assembly, with all the weight of public opinion, representing sixty nations of the world — a great many of them without the power to make these decisions, but to make only their own contributions — may make an appeal in that direction if only so that the heads of these great States concerned may have the feeling that they have behind them the voice of humanity as articulated in the General Assembly. 88. There may be those who. will argue that these problems before us are so complex that a meeting of the kind proposed is no remedy alone and that there are no magical remedies.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“My delegation, if it finds that the renewal of this idea — at this time and here — receives sufficient response from the General Assembly, will propose that the Assembly make a request of this kind to those Powers concerned, so that there can be no feeling whether it is that one or the other who is initiating it. As I have pointed out in these extracts, each one concerned has not only not opposed the idea, but endorsed it. 87. There are precedents, and remarkable precedents, to show that meetings of this kind are the way to resolve the difficulties that we face at present. It is not the intention of my delegation to propose before this plenary meeting of the Assembly any resolution of this character.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“Naturally, for this, suitable prerequisites must be created.” So that this idea, which did not come out of one brain but is what humanity cries for, is a thing which the great leaders of the world, the heads of nations with power in their hands, could, without being overburdened by detail, bring to the discussion of peace and, by means of it, reach a solution of our present difficulties. And, as it has been rightly pointed out, even if any important result does not emerge in the way of a formula, still, not only can there be no harm, but it would perhaps help to clear the air to a considerable extent even in the immediate context of the situation in regard to Germany and Korea. 86. Nothing could be more desirable than that the heads of the four great Powers should meet and hammer out some sort of approach to the problem.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“I would earnestly commend this suggestion. The stakes are the highest that the world offers, and a war-weary and fear-laden humanity will bless those who will rid it of these terrible burdens and lead it to peace and happiness.” 85. This was followed, even more recently, by the Premier of the USSR, who said: “In our days, the government of any country, if it seriously cares for the fate of its people, is obliged to take measures to promote in actual fact the settlement of controversial international questions. No small part, of course, can be played by talks among the great Powers.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“If there is not at the summit of the nations the will to win the greatest prize and the greatest honour ever offered to mankind, doom-laden responsibility will fall upon those who now possess the power to decide. At the worst the participants in the meeting would have established more intimate contacts. At the best we might have a generation of peace.” 84. This proposal by the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom was applauded and supported by the Prime Minister of India, who said, three days after it was made: “I am very glad that the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom has recently suggested a conference on the highest level between the leading Powers of the world, to meet informally, in privacy and without a rigid agenda, to tackle the problems. that afflict mankind and to make every effort to rid humanity of the fear of war.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“It might well be that no hard-and-fast agreements would be reached, but there might be a general feeling among those gathered together that they might do something better than tear the human race, including themselves, into bits. “For instance, they might be attracted, as President Eisenhower has shown himself to be, and as Pravda does not challenge, by the idea of letting the weary toiling masses of mankind enter upon the best spell of good fortune, fair play, well-being, leisure and harmless happiness that has ever been within their reach or even within their dreams. “I only say that this might happen, and I do not see why anyone should be frightened at having a try for it.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
““I must make it plain that, in spite of all the uncertainties and confusion in which world affairs are plunged, I believe that a conference on the highest level should take place between the leading Powers without long delay. This conference should not be overhung by a ponderous or rigid agenda, or led into mazes and jungles of technical details, zealously contested by hordes of experts and officials drawn up in vast cumbrous array. The conference should be confined to the smallest number of Powers and persons possible. It should meet with a measure of informality and a still greater measure of privacy and seclusion.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“It is that spirit which we must try to recapture. If we cannot recapture it, we must at least learn through that experience that, despite the difficulties which we face, we must make the effort. There must be a meeting of the people who have the responsibility, of the people who have the effective power in their hands, of the people who, in the words of Sir Winston Churchill, would stand “shamed before history” if they did not render by performance what was expected of them. 83. I would therefore once again quote the words of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. On 11 May this year, speaking before the House of Commons, he said: “I feel exactly the same about it today.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“Even embarking on a long period of suspicions, of abuse and counter-abuse, and of opposing policies would be a disaster hampering the great developments of world prosperity for the masses which are attainable only by our trinity. I hope there is no word or phrase in this outpouring of my heart to you which unwittingly gives offence. If so, let me know. But do not, I beg you, my friend Stalin, underrate the divergencies which are opening about matters which you may think are small to us but which are symbolic of the way the English-speaking democracies look at life.” 82. The substance of that telegram is this: some of our difficulties were foreseen at the end of the war. At the same time, the statesmen who helped to found the United Nations at a time when war was still raging envisaged the joining in it of people who were then enemies.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“In this connexion I should also like to quote from a telegram which the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom sent to Stalin in 1945, and which he read to the House of Commons on 11 May, 1953: “There is not much comfort in looking into a future where you and the countries you dominate, plus the Communist Parties in many other States, are all drawn up on one side, and those who rally to the English-speaking nations and their associates or Dominions are on the other. It is quite obvious that their quarrel would tear the world to pieces, and that all of us leading men on either side who had anything to do with that would be shamed before history.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“But there is no one today who will deny that, vague — perhaps eclectic — as those words were, they formed the basis of this great Organization, and that the formulation of those thoughts and ideas and the fact that they became the basis of a world charter were possible only because there was a meeting of minds outside the context of procedure, outside the context of technicalities, outside, the context of preparatory material which can always cause one to become bogged down in details. In this Organization we are in serious danger of not seeing the wood for the trees. 81.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“Hence, we should like to submit to the Assembly, at F the appropriate moment, that it is necessary for the heads of these States — or whoever speaks for them at the highest level — to meet together in the context of an informal gathering, the kind of gathering that made possible the emergence of this very body. There were no rules of procedure when the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and the President of the United States met somewhere in mid-Atlantic and drafted the Atlantic Charter, which became the basis of the United Nations. There were many of us who thought at the time that the Atlantic Charter was very largely verbiage; it was and is possible to construe it in that way, because almost everything that humanity wants can be found within the pages of the Atlantic Charter.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“What I have quoted, however, are the statements of heads of powerful States, and there is no need for them to make use of words unless those words have a social purpose. It is our business in this stricken world — and this applies particularly to those of us who are not riveted to great Power blocs — to see in such words the hopes of a future settlement. In so saying I come to the main purpose of these observations. 80. The time has come when it is necessary for us to move away, perhaps, from the lines of action that have been followed by the great Powers. Of course, the responsibility really lies upon the shoulders of the great Powers. There can be no real settlement of world problems except by agreement between the great Powers which alone have the material strength and in whose hands largely lies the power of decision.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“That statement was followed, chronologically speaking, by the declaration made on 16 April by the President of the United States: “None of these issues, great or small, is insoluble given only the will to respect the rights of all nations.” 78. Then, on 8 August, Mr. Malenkov said: “We firmly maintain that at the present moment there is no disputable or outstanding issue that cannot be settled in a peaceful way on the basis of mutual agreement between the countries concerned. This refers also to those issues under dispute that exist between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. We stood and stand for a peaceful co-existence of the two systems.” 79. It is easy enough to argue that these are mere words, without content.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“All of these things still dominate us and stand in the way of the reconciliation of nations. Our task, however, remains unchanged. That task is to resolve tensions in order that the United Nations may become what it was intended to be, in 0rder that it should not take the path of its predecessors of the nineteenth century. Breaking with the past is part of the task now before us. 75. Some contributions to this effort have already been made by the leaders of the great nations of the world. 76. On 15 March, the Chief of State of the Soviet Union, Mr. George Malenkov, stated: “In the present and in the future, there do not and will not exist troublesome and unsolved questions that cannot be resolved by peaceful means. Any country, including the United States, can be assured of the firm policy of peace of the Soviet Union.” 77.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“It is therefore quite apparent — from these statements and from the situation with which we are faced today — that the remedies which have been sought, the institutions which have been created, the approaches which have been made, whether or not they were intended to lead in the direction I have referred to and described, have certainly not had that desired effect. What conclusion must we draw from this fact? Making use of our experience, drawing inspiration from wherever we may find it, we must make further and other efforts. 74. It is true that, in implementing any attitude of that kind, the past very largely dominates us. There are fears and suspicions, the thought that proclamations may prove to be deficient in content while full enough in words, the idea that willingness to negotiate might be construed as fear or weakness.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“At the same time it is apparent to us that the methods that have been followed by the nations of the world, and particularly by the great Powers, have, it must be said inferentially, failed to overcome this tension. In other words, we have been told in this Assembly time after time that they must negotiate from strength — that every combination, every grouping, every step and, indeed, every further conflict and every further difficulty in resolving deadlocks that have arisen in consequence of such conflict, are part of the remedy to overcome tension. 73.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“I quote here the statement that was made in the first speech to the Assembly by the Secretary of State of the United States [434th meeting]. I quote it first because the Assembly began in this context. Mr. Foster Dulles said: “Never was the need for such harmony more urgent. Never were the consequences of disharmony so menacing. Yet the fact of tension cannot be ignored. That would be dangerously unrealistic. Also, the causes of that tension will have to be explored. Otherwise there can be no cure. But, in whatever it does here, the United States will seek to avoid any word or deed which might needlessly aggravate the present state of dangerous tension.” That was a good background indeed from which to have started. My main point in making this quotation is to allude to this feeling of compulsion to overcome tension in the world.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“There have been during the last few months, and particularly since the sittings of the Assembly last autumn, many events in the world which have proclaimed that there is a tendency, not necessarily for some of the conflicts to become resolved, but at least for some of the deadlocks to be eased, and the awareness of this tendency towards relaxation, and the hopes aroused by it, have also marked every observation in every speech that has been made here. 72. Side by side with these two factors we also sense a feeling of compulsion in the speech of every representative however much he may be in disharmony with the speakers who precede and follow him. In each of these speeches we felt that there was the indication of a compelling idea that the conflicts and the deadlock which had supervened must be overcome.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“The first point is that — whatever may be the reasons and whatever the backgrounds — from each representative who has spoken we have heard words that reminded us of the awareness of this tension, an awareness that seems to pervade every problem surveyed, an awareness which is put forward before us both as a challenge and as a warning, an awareness which calls us to action. While there is this awareness there is also, at the same time, the awareness of relaxation.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“Listening to these debates, however, while one has been somewhat oppressed by the irreconcilability of points of view — perhaps by hearing the repetition of these irreconcilabilities — one has also been impressed by the extent of the common factors that have pervaded them; I should like to refer briefly to those common factors, because it is always necessary, even more so in the context of conflict, to be aware of and to utilize what little common ground there is, in order that from there we may march towards reconciliation. 71.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“We have the inestimable advantage of coming in at the end of this debate, when we can utilize the experience and the counsel and the ability of a great many representatives who have spoken before me, and of having listened to the diversity of opinions — a diversity that is characteristic of this Assembly and of the world, a diversity which must be recognized, because without such recognition it would be impossible for us to address ourselves to the problems before us with any common sense or understanding. 70. The tension which we face is further sharpened by the quickness of the pace of mechanical development and by the inability of man to catch up in spiritual values and to make the consequent evaluations that are necessary.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“The great hopes that were cherished at that time and the purpose for the implementation of which this Organization was founded are far from the realm of achievement. That is not to say that we have not made great progress, not only in the political field but in the economic and social fields and also in bringing to the notice of mankind and of world public opinion the necessity for a higher standard of conduct in regard to human relations. 69.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“After these few observations I shall now address myself to the thought that is uppermost in the minds of all in this Assembly — the problem which overshadows every discussion — on which all our other problems centre, and the solution of which — that is to say, the beginning of the solution of which — is essential if we are to see daylight at all in the affairs of mankind. I refer to what is popularly called “the tension that prevails”. One need make no apologies for prefacing these observations with a reference to world tension. We are today in the eighth year of this Assembly, very nearly ten years after the conclusion of the Second World War and very nearly twelve years after 1 January 1942 when the United Nations was first planned and born soon after the Atlantic Charter.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“He has already brought into the precincts of this building and into the context of our work the impact of his personality, and we owe him a great deal in respect of the re-creation and recovery of confidence in and within the Secretariat, and of a new atmosphere wherein the Secretary-General is making contributions to implementations of the Charter in the realm of administrative politics. We shall greatly look forward to his taking his place as the first public servant in the world. 68.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“I should also like to take this opportunity of expressing our appreciation of her immediate predecessor, a world statesman of quality whose friendliness, objectivity of judgment and genial capacity to reconcile points of view in private conversation have contributed greatly to the progress of international affairs during his tenure of office. 67. I would not want to conclude these introductory observations without making a similar brief reference to our new Secretary-General — not really so new, but still new.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“65. It is my happy privilege to offer Mrs. Pandit the felicitations of our delegation and our country on this happy occasion when she is presiding over the deliberations of this Assembly during this year. While we are sad that we should be deprived of her wise guidance and counsel from within the ranks of our delegation, we are happy that she has been offered this greater opportunity of service to the world community. It is a tribute that this Assembly has paid to her person, to our country and to the womanhood of India and of the world in general. The Assembly stands to profit by her wise guidance and by her genial personality. 66.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)