YouSaid · the spoken record

AIKEN

lines on the record: 293
first: 1957-09-24
most recent: 1967-09-24
sittings or episodes: 10
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 present crisis and the future of the Organization are closely related to the governing currents of our times, of the mid-twentieth century — the cold war and the widening of freedom. By the widening of freedom I mean, of course, the emergence into independent national life of vast areas, mainly in Asia and Africa, formerly subject to foreign States. The interaction of these great currents, which we feel so directly here in the Assembly, will be decisive for the future of humanity. This is not to say that we are necessarily to be the sport of blind forces altogether beyond our control. On the contrary, man's mind and spirit have always sought to dominate and control the elemental forces both of nature itself and, what is much more difficult, of man's own nature.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“We should ask ourselves, I suggest, what would our situation be if the United Nations were to break down or to become paralyzed. What form would the cold war then take? Would it not be likely to develop into what are described sometimes too airily as "brush fire wars" — wars which, though confined in space, may none the less become appalling national tragedies, like the Spanish war of 1936-1939 in which domestic antagonisms drew in the far greater destructive forces of foreign intervention on both sides? The prelude to the Spanish tragedy had been a catastrophic decline in the prestige and influence of the League of Nations. The sequel was the Second World War. 65.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“The seventeen new Members which we are proud to welcome here at this Session have joined us at a moment of crisis in the Organization and, perhaps, at a turning-point in world history. The history of the United Nations is indeed not lacking in crises, but the present one, more than any of those which have preceded it, except possibly the Korean crisis, calls into question the very existence of the United Nations as a functioning international body. 64. That question — the possibility that, should we fail here to act in a sufficiently enlightened and responsible fashion, the United Nations may not survive — is one that should be constantly present in our minds as a chastening influence on our emotions, words and deeds.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“As Chairman of the delegation of Ireland, making my first statement in the Assembly under the Presidency of Mr. Boland, it gives me very particular pleasure, to express my delegation's deep satisfaction that the choice of the Assembly should have fallen on him. My delegation, with the long experience it has of his high abilities, is entirely confident that he will preside over our debates with impartiality, courtesy, and firmness and that the Assembly will have, as bur discussions continue, ever-growing confirmation of the wisdom of its choice. May I say to him, in the words of an Irish greeting to a man engaged on a particularly difficult task, "Bail o Dhia ar an obair" — God bless the work. 63.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“80. The wars and shadows of wars, the revolutions and civil strife, the fears and confusions which surround us are all signs of our need for positive and inspiring leadership. Sooner or later these tensions can only have one end if the nuclear Powers should fail to reach agreement On a positive and progressive programme for the implementation of the Charter. Now that these Powers are in contact, we appeal to them to give the United Nations that courageous and generous lead which will dispel our confusion, spur us to action and carry us to victory.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“The heavy responsibility of giving the generous and rigorous lead necessary to control it rests squarely on the leaders of the nuclear Powers. We appeal to them to act as wise and brave captains, whose call to action turns confusion into purposeful advance and threatening defeat into victory. 79. If this generation is defeated, if it fails to use its boundless power and wealth for the good of mankind, its defeat will be truly ignominious. Wars for conquest and for colonies made sense of a kind when there was less than enough for all, and the survivors enjoyed the fruits of victory. They make less than sense in the age of nuclear weapons, when the survivors would envy the dead and when all we need to provide abundance for mankind is the will to co-operate generously in the peaceful development and distribution of our fabulous resources.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“What we do suggest is that both power groups should take certain steps which, it seems to us, are clearly in the interest of both, where an earnest of good faith must be paid by each at each step, where the risks involved through a breach of faith are limited and where a breach of faith would be quickly discerned and where the risks are as nothing compared to the supreme risk we are now running: that is, the risk of drifting into a nuclear war which neither group, we believe, wants, and in which both groups and a large part of the world would be utterly destroyed. 78. The cosmic energy which man has released from the atom has its own cold and inescapable logic: either we evolve the machinery to control it or it will eventually overwhelm us; either we harness it for the common good or it will destroy us in the end.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“Is there not a danger that, within both great-Power systems, traditional military conservatism and professional infatuation with perfecting means of destruction may not be holding back changes which are overdue? Adaptation to change in environment is known to be the law of survival — and survival, after all, is basically what we are discussing here. 77. In suggesting the gradual application of the rule of law and the restriction of nuclear weapons, we are not proposing that either of the two power groups should trust the other blindly. The element of distrust is a grim reality which must be faced.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“But do not the changes that have taken place over the past ten years clearly indicate the ineluctable necessity for such a revision, in the interests of all Members of the United Nations? How long can human beings stand the tension and the burden of the ever-amounting accumulation of destructive power without somebody somewhere making a mistake? Can we safely assume that the leaders and governments who may come into power, both in the present nuclear States and in those which may become nuclear during the next ten or twenty years, will all be wiser and more forbearing than those leaders who precipitated their countries into war in recent times?”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“Indeed we believe that not only the national and personal rights and the lives and property of the peoples concerned, but also the security of the great Powers, the peace of Europe and the peace of the world, would all be better and more effectively served if these troops were drawn back until they were 1,000 miles or more apart, and if the area comprising all these countries became an area of law, without foreign troops, and with a restriction on armaments. Within such an area, Berlin would take its rightful place as the capital of an all-German federation. 76. These questions Imply a fundamental revision of the policies pursued by the major Powers in the last ten years.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“What were the military, political or economic reasons which each Power had for keeping and reinforcing these troops in their present positions since 1945? Granted that these reasons were valid in 1945-1949, are they valid in 1959, in view of the great political and economic changes that have occurred in Europe and in the Far East, and in view of the capacity of the forward ground troops of both sides, with 1959 equipment, to destroy everything in front of them within 1,500 miles? 75. As far as we can see, keeping these nuclear armed troops forward in dangerous proximity, and keeping Berlin and Germany divided, serves no basic interest of either group of Powers or of the Central European countries.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“That implies, we submit, that we may properly raise in this Assembly questions that trouble us about policies at present being pursued by the major Powers, and express our opinions as to the character of the settlement which we would hope to see emerging from agreement between the great Powers. Indeed, it has often been emphasized that one of the valuable functions of this Assembly, and in particular of this General Debate, is to afford a setting and an occasion for the discussion of such questions. 73. There is a series of questions regarding the present situation in Central Europe which, we submit, needs fresh consideration. These questions concern the relevance to modern conditions of the policy of maintaining troops in forward positions in the heart of Europe. 74.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“In these areas the nuclear Powers, in co-operation with the nations concerned, would make the principles of the Charter a reality on the Central European model suggested, as part of a combined effort to establish the rule of law progressively area by area throughout the world. 72. The present conjuncture in the relations between the great Powers is clearly one of reappraisal. How fundamental that reappraisal will be, and how far- reaching its effects, those of us here who represent smaller countries have no means of knowing. We do know, however, that our own destinies are likely to be affected by the decisions reached, when great Powers agree, as when they fail to agree, all our peoples will undoubtedly be touched by the consequences for good or ill.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“We wonder whether there can be any peaceful solution for the reunification of Germany unless its people can make of a reunited Germany a mainstay of peace and a barrier to war, under some system of international guarantee. Nor can we see, even in the distant future, any peaceful solution acceptable to both great power groups for the problem of European security, unless a reunited Germany together with Poland and other European countries agrees to become an area of law, free from foreign troops, free from weapons of blitzkrieg and mass destruction, and subject to United Nations inspection and guarantee. And if this heart-land of Europe were to become an area of law it would be a much needed prototype for similar areas elsewhere, particularly for areas of great tension.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“Each such area should be sufficiently large to afford room for give-and-take agreements and for positive and significant progress to be made in the. rule of law and the enforcement of law. 70. Perhaps we may take Berlin as an example of the approach we suggest. The problem of Berlin and the reunification of Germany is not only a heartbreak for the German people but a cause of great distress to their friends and to all who abhor the division of historic nations. If a just and lasting peace is to be made in Europe, the problem of German reunification must be settled in accordance with the will of the majority of the German people and with the right of nations to unity and independence. 71. There is, as far as we son see, no peaceful and permanent solution for Berlin except as the capital of a united Germany.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“If we succeed in this most difficult task, their ultimate dismantlement for peaceful uses, warhead by warhead, will become practical politics in a world that will have gradually become accustomed to abide by the rule of international law and learned to trust in the machinery for its determination and enforcement. 69. Therefore, we join with those who have appealed to the leaders of the great Powers to look not only at the Immediate problems which are causing great tension in many critical zones, but also at the major steps in the years and decades ahead which must be taken if our will to live in peace is to dominate our ever-growing power to destroy. We urge them not to be content with stop-gap solutions, but to seek broad comprehensive settlements in areas where their interests are dangerously interlocked.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“The risk of nuclear war will, of course, remain so long as nuclear weapons exist, but it seems to us that nothing we can do will eliminate it entirely, until we change the political conditions which caused the nuclear stockpiles to be built up. What we can do, however, if we concentrate upon it, is to reduce the risks which the spread of these weapons involves for this generation, and not to hand on to our children a problem even more difficult to solve than that with which we are now confronted. Our main effort, therefore, we suggest, should be to prevent the further spread of nuclear weapons and to interpose insulating areas of law between the existing stockpiles.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“As far as we know, no perfect system of detection covering this risk is yet available. We would point out, however, that there is a much greater risk of secret transfer in the present situation, in which there is no international control or inspection at all. The best guarantee against the risk of secret giving is the enlightened self-interest which the nuclear Powers would have in the maintenance of such an agreement. If no such agreement is made they may well be forced, by mutual fear and the pressure of their allies, to distribute these weapons, and so increase geometrically the danger of nuclear war. 68.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“It is for that reason, in order to substitute peaceful and orderly co-operation for ruinous nuclear competition, that my delegation suggests that, simultaneously with an undertaking by the nuclear Powers not to transfer these weapons, the non-nuclear Powers should agree not to manufacture or receive nuclear weapons. If they so agree, they should open their territories to detailed United Nations inspection to ensure that they are abiding by their pledges. In the case of those who also belonged to an area of law such as we have envisaged, they would also accept inspection in regard to other forbidden materials and equipment. 67. It may be argued that the proposed system of inspection and control is not sufficient to guard against the secret giving of nuclear weapons to the allies of nuclei Powers.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“But, in view of the history of disarmament negotiations since 1919, it is hardly realistic to expect an early agreement on the abolition of nuclear weapons. There is danger, therefore-very grave danger — that, while proposals for general disarmament are being discussed, the problem may become far more difficult as smaller States compete among themselves to acquire these weapons. The main danger is that, failing regulation by specific international agreement, a sort of atomic sauve-qui-peut may go up in which States, despairing of safety through collective action, will seek safety for themselves by getting their own nuclear weapons as quickly as they can. Among States as among individuals, panic has its own logic leading to the same terrible results. 66.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“Apart from the obvious threat that long before they became universal the world would have been destroyed, we believe that the wisdom of the nations represented here will induce them to agree to the non- dissemination of nuclear weapons upon the basis of a reasonably practicable system of inspection and control. 65. We hope that eventually the present nuclear Powers themselves will agree to abolish testing, to cut off production, to accept effective inspection of their reactors and territories, and to start using nuclear stockpiles for peaceful purposes. We do not intend these proposals as in any way a substitute for general disarmament subject to effective inspection and control. That remains our goal.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“The area-by-area approach takes account of the probability that nuclear weapons will be retained by the nuclear Powers until we perfect the art of living in peace, until in the ordering of our mutual relations we have effectively excluded all force, except force exercised in common by the United Nations in accordance with law. 63. The approach suggested is, we submit, in accordance with common sense. For common sense rejects the fatalistic argument that, because we cannot at once by force or persuasion secure total disarmament and the universal application of the rule of law, we should make no attempt to apply the law as and where we can, and no attempt to prevent nuclear weapons becoming the normal equipment of an ever-increasing number of armies and more easily obtainable by revolutionary groups. 64.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“Briefly what we would hope for is an agreement between the nuclear Powers not to give the weapons to non-nuclear Powers, and an agreement between the non-nuclear Powers not to make or accept nuclear weapons. 62. These suggestions fall far short of immediate and total nuclear disarmament, for our delegation regrets to say that it must accept as inherently probable that the nuclear Powers will continue to keep nuclear weapons until the United Nations has built up a system of international law and law enforcement which will guarantee these Powers to their satisfaction that such weapons are no longer necessary for their defence.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“If this is achieved, as it can be by wise and daring leadership and increasing enlightenment of public opinion, then territories which are at present scenes of tragic strife can become fields for development through common effort under a law whose strength is in its acceptance by free men. 60. As the Assembly is aware, agenda item 67 [Prevention of the wider dissemination of nuclear weapons] has been inscribed at the request of my delegation. I hope to have an opportunity of setting out our views in detail on this question when it comes before the First Committee, and at this stage 1 shall only touch on the aspects which have a specific bearing on the suggested areas of law. 61.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“A people which has been under colonial rule can co-operate with its former rulers and with other countries on a footing of equally. That has happily been demonstrated in many areas. If, however, the colonial Power attempts to prolong its rule without the consent of the governed, then the conditions for collective effort do not exist, and what ensues is a bitter and sterile struggle, wasting the human and material resources of ruler and ruled alike. There, as elsewhere, what is needed — and what we hope is coming — is a burst of imaginative energy to shatter this vicious circle, and release for creative purposes the powers which mankind is now abusing for purposes of self-destruction.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“Security, we submit, cannot be achieved separately in the nuclear age, even with unlimited diversion of national resources to military uses and even if all nations were grouped in two or more cohesive power blocs. It can only be achieved gradually through a common effort. Such an effort ought in our view, to begin in limited areas. A collective effort in such areas would be a far more effective safeguard for the security of individual members than military competition can be, and would involve far less consumption of national resources. 59. The principle of collective effort, rather than hostile competition, is one that could usefully be applied to all areas of tension, including areas which have recently been, or still are, under some form of colonial rule. But collective effort implies equality of status.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“A United Nations force guaranteeing the security of an area of law would greatly increase the moral authority of the United Nations. It would also free resources for other uses by reducing tension, fostering international esprit de corps, and reducing the necessity to maintain large national armies. The resources of men and material thus freed from military use would be available for domestic improvements and for the investments necessary to eliminate the appalling poverty in many countries. Even if there was no net saving, a common United Nations force in an area of law which had previously been an area of contention would, we submit, give the nations of the world more effective security against war than if all were to increase their expenditure on their individual defence forces, particularly if nuclear weapons continued to spread. 58.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“Nuclear war arising out of tensions and violence in vital areas can by no means be excluded until the rule of law is universally in effective operation; and even with the best of good will this may take many decades. The nuclear Powers should therefore, we suggest, begin to work towards that objective by encouraging, groups of nations to accept the rule of law, area by area, throughout the world. They should also be prepared to support a permanent United Nations force designed to protect one such area for a beginning. In this way they would give the world concrete evidence of their determination to uphold their Charter pledges, and of their determination to build a world order based on justice and law, co-operatively defended by a common force. 57.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“In view, however, of the unhappy history of deadlock in the Security Council, it would be necessary to provide an additional, firmer, guarantee for the nations in a defined area who would be invited to limit their own means of defence. There is little need to emphasize that such a beginning could not be hoped for without the clearest understanding between the nuclear Powers and without convincing proof of their determination to co-operate with the United Nations in enforcing the principles of the Charter in the area concerned. Such a guarantee might take the form of a resolution of the General Assembly providing for a standing United Nations force to. ensure the security of these countries, and providing for an advance payment of their quotas by all Members for the establishment and maintenance of the force. 56.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“The non-nuclear nations in such an area would undertake, firstly not to manufacture or acquire nuclear weapons or other weapons of blitzkrieg or mass destruction, and secondly to subject themselves to United Nations inspection to ensure that they are keeping to that agreement. In return the nuclear Powers, and all the other Members of the United Nations, would bind themselves in advance, by specific engagements, to defend the members of the area from attack, by means of a standing United Nations force. 55. The terms of the Charter, of course, provide in theory for action by the Security Council in all such cases in every part of the world.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“As a first step and as an earnest of our good faith, Member nations ought, we suggest, to be prepared to co-operate in securing the firm application of Charter principles in certain restricted areas, particularly in the areas where the interests of the two great-Power groups are entangled and where there is the greatest danger of stumbling into war. 53. What we have in mind is a system whereby a group of nations in a defined area would be invited to give guarantees of their intention to abide by their Charter obligations to uphold the rule of law in their international relations, in return for corresponding guarantees by the other Member nations in relation to the area in question. 54.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“We realize, much as we would wish it otherwise, that effectively controlled world disarmament and the universal rule of law cannot be attained in a single spectacular bound. But we can start moving towards these desirable ends with assurance of success-even if it takes many decades to attain them — if 11 Members of the United Nations sincerely recognize and agree upon them as our ultimate objectives, and if each is determined to work for them as if the fate of mankind depended upon its sole will.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“Now that they have been established, the chief danger is that, if these contacts should break down without agreement having been reached, the tension in the world might well be greater than if they had never begun. 50. On the leaders of the nuclear Powers lies the primary responsibility of reaching preliminary agreements on which the decisions of the United Nations may be based. But the ultimate responsibility must rest here with the United Nations. 51. In the search for solutions of immediate problems we must keep ever clearly before our minds that peace, if it is to be stable and lasting, cannot be secured unless it is based on justice to all nations great and small, and unless the application of the principles of the Charter can be secured by effective guarantees. 52.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“The Irish delegation heartily welcomes these meetings, and prays that God may guide all who take part in them and inspire them with wisdom, fortitude and perseverance. We believe that these leaders, so heavily burdened by the grave and intricate problems bequeathed to them, and by the tremendous responsibility which rests upon them to save the world from destruction, will have the understanding and support of all peoples for the success of their labours. 49. We trust that a continuation and expansion of discussions among these leaders will eventually result not only in a clear definition of what is required to keep the peace in the short run, but also of the major steps which must be taken on the road to stable peace.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“47. I should like at the outset to congratulate you, Mr. President, on behalf of my delegation on your unanimous election as President. We all feel that the fact that the General Assembly was able to agree on its choice of President is a happy augury for the success of our proceedings. We are conscious that the unanimity was made possible by the respect which your personality has inspired in the whole Assembly, and we trust that under your dignified and courteous presidency the fourteenth session will indeed make the necessary progress to deserve the title that you have indicated, that of the "Assembly of Peace". 48. Since our last session a number of conferences and contacts have taken place between the leaders of the two great-Power groups.”
1959-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 14 (1959)
“Pressing, however, as are the military, psychological and political difficulties confronting us, and great as is the temptation to despair of solving them, I have no doubt that, if only we can preserve, peace for another few years, this Organization will, with God's help, find ways of fostering our esprit de corps as a world community of neighbours on this satellite of the sun, helping each other in our difficulties, keeping our differences within bounds and taking a just pride in our common achievements.”
1958-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 13 (1958)
“President Eisenhower's suggestions [733rd meeting] for a United Nations development fund for the Middle East and for the expansion of the International Monetary Fund and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development also give promise of fruitful co-operation. 99. Recent developments in the Formosa Straits remind us that great difficulties still subsist and that the danger of war has not ceased to hang over the world. All of us earnestly hope that talks now proceeding in Warsaw may not only be successful in relation to the immediate crisis but also may soon open the way to a just and stable settlement in the Far East, averting the recurrence of threats to peace from that region of the world.”
1958-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 13 (1958)
“It should be noted too that, despite so much publicized contention on the highest levels, the many organs of these United Nations are working quietly on the acute problems that confront humanity in these days of revolutionary technological and political change. The great Powers are in closer diplomatic contact here in this building and elsewhere than they have been for years. The Geneva Conference for the cessation of atomic tests was successful beyond expectation. It was particularly heartening to note the success of the Second United Nations International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy. The United States proposals for the co-operative exploration of outer space and the internationalization of Antarctica have great possibilities for eliminating tension and for our common welfare.”
1958-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 13 (1958)
“Yet a number of such agreements have been achieved, and offer the best hope of future advance in international understanding, I need only mention among the more recent of such achievements the agreement which led to the evacuation and neutrality of Austria; those which made possible the United Nations Emergency Force and the United Nations Observation Group in Lebanon; the cultural and technical exchanges between the major Powers; and the scientific co-operation between different groups of Powers during the International Geophysical Year, 1957-1958. Each agreement, each act of international co-operation, does something to clear from the atmosphere the poisonous accumulations of earlier conflicts and thereby to render a new conflict less likely. 98.”
1958-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 13 (1958)
“These governments, particularly the Governments of the major Powers, were bequeathed grave difficulties, frightening responsibilities and dangerous antagonisms; the heritage of the chaos and terror of two world wars. It is not surprising that the aftermath of the Second World War has been a period marked by fear, resentment and suspicion. In such a climate it is not easy to bring about even limited agreements between contesting groups.”
1958-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 13 (1958)
“We feel sure that if a community is subject to a government with aggressive designs that government is more likely to be changed by a release of tension around its borders, and by offers of peaceful and friendly co-operation, than by outside pressure and threats. It was after all the sun and not the wind which persuaded the gentleman in Aesop's fable to shed his cloak. Avery strong element also in our approach is the belief that through the heavy clouds of threats and propaganda we can discern rays of hope for the organic growth of United Nations institutions in keeping with our scientific achievements and our economic resources, and in keeping with common, sense and common humanity. 97. It would be quite wrong to assign all the blame for the troubles of the world to governments of the present day.”
1958-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 13 (1958)
“Our approach to the problems we have dealt with is conditioned by our conviction that majorities in all States desire a stable peace in order to devote their energy and resources to economic and social development. We believe that when it is a permanent and cooperative peace we want its terms must hot offend the self-respect or the prestige of either opponent. We believe that an essential preliminary to peace is to reduce to a minimum recrimination, hate propaganda and threats; We believe that, while the nuclear stalemate may have saved us from a third world war, we should leave nothing undone to secure the eventual total abolition of nuclear weapons.”
1958-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 13 (1958)
“as I can see there would be no technical difficulty in providing that a United Nations institution, say the International Monetary Fund, should act as a world payments union or even a world central bank; and that this institution should increase or restrict as required the world’s supply of international money and provide for the balancing of international payments. Initial untied credits, issued to all countries at the rate of even a few dollars per head of population, would restore international liquidity and would give international trade the stimulus it needs so urgently. Such credits would enable under-developed countries to buy the equipment they so badly need to reduce poverty and hunger, without at the same time requiring developed countries to impose additional taxation or draw on their liquid reserves. 96.”
1958-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 13 (1958)
“Under the beneficial influence of the European Payments Union, inter-European trade increased within a few years by 75 per cent, with a consequent increase in capital resources and the standard of living. If, in the light of the European Payments Union experience, the Second Committee examined the problem of how to bring the world exchange of goods and services up to the level of our combined productive capacity it could, I feel sure, recommend an agreement, based on the balancing of payments at the highest potential level and on the extension of mutual credits, which would greatly increase world trade. 95. As far.”
1958-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 13 (1958)
“That poverty is one of the most fundamental and enduring causes of bitterness and unrest in the under-developed countries. It has in the past created openings-dangerous openings — for contention among the great Powers, It could in the future serve instead as a fruitful field for their co-operation. 93. May I suggest that in a campaign against poverty our greatest handicap is not lack of resources but the non-application of our financial knowledge. Indeed, of all the fields in which we fail to keep up with the spectacular achievements in science and technology, that of international finance is the outstanding example. Yet, as the European Payments Union proved, it. is the easiest field in which to achieve agreement and in which to practise international co-operation. 94.”
1958-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 13 (1958)
“If, as in the case of Austria, permanent neutrality were to be declared by the States evacuated, it should be welcomed and guaranteed by the great Powers and by the United Nations. 91. The various suggestions made by our delegation have but a single aim: to insulate atomic weapons, as bees cover with wax the ugly intruders they are unable to eject, while we set to work for peace and prosperity. 92. With the help of the agreements suggested, together with local political settlements, nuclear weapons can be restricted and the existing nuclear Powers gradually separated by States under bond not to fight unless attacked. Under these conditions it will become possible to launch a determined campaign against the dire poverty of most of the world's population.”
1958-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 13 (1958)
“Here are two areas in which the contest for the adherence of smaller Powers is much too dangerous to be continued, and where, as far as we can see, there is no net balance of advantage to either side in holding to their present positions. In the case of the Middle East considerable efforts have been made to reduce tension. Is it too much to hope that similar efforts will also be made in Middle Europe? 90. What is necessary in Middle Europe is not, of course, an abrupt withdrawal of forces for which people may not be mentally prepared and which might plunge the region into turmoil. It is rather a measured, and carefully prepared drawing back, East and West, supervised and controlled by the United Nations, and with United Nations Observers in the evacuated area, to serve as a guarantee against the return of foreign troops.”
1958-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 13 (1958)
“The hope for a just and stable peace lies, we believe, not in the perpetuation of "iron curtains", lines of containment, "cold war" propaganda and astronomically costly defence expenditure, but in the growing realization that these expedients are outmoded, and in a determination to replace them by a system of security and welfare corresponding to the necessities and possibilities of this nuclear age. Nuclear restriction could be one important element in such a system. In my remaining remarks, Mr. President, I hope to indicate other elements, of which some are political, some social and economic. 89. The Irish delegation has suggested that there should be a military and diplomatic drawing back in Middle Europe and in the Middle East.”
1958-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 13 (1958)
“The first part of the solution is a great Power agreement to create, as opportunity offers, ever widening areas in which the contest for the adherence of the smaller States will be brought to an end. The smaller States can play their part, if they desire to do so, by declaring neutrality which the great Powers and the United Nations should guarantee. The second part of the solution is to persuade, and to help as far as we can, the nuclear Powers to practise co-operation along political, economic and cultural lines, and especially for the economic improvement of under-developed States. 88. We would therefore urge the great Power groups to take up vigorously the good work they began in Austria, and to reduce competition wherever it is mutually safe and wherever the net balance of advantage to either is negligible.”
1958-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 13 (1958)
“It would be a positive one, interlocking closely with the most pressing political requirements of peace. 86. The gravest threat to stable peace, in the period of nuclear stalemate between the major Powers, is the contest between them for the adherence and control of the non-attached and the detachable States. How can we prevent this contest inadvertently bringing about the general war which no one wants? How can we also prevent another danger which flows from this contest: that the rivalry between the great Powers, held back from direct conflict by the nuclear balance, should spend Itself In creating strife and tension among and within the lesser States? 87. The solution to this problem is, we think, twofold.”
1958-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 13 (1958)