YouSaid · the spoken record

Pachachi

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS PACHACHI

lines on the record: 61
first: 1966-09-24
most recent: 1967-09-24
sittings or episodes: 2
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

“If the international community is unable to end that occupation, then there is no alternative left for our people but to fight — a desperate, unequal and hopeless fight perhaps, but a fight that will restore the honour and self-respect of a nation which has lost much, but not its faith.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Actions are finally catching up with all those empty and insincere declarations. To some it is perhaps an unpleasant revelation, especially to those who had convinced themselves that their deep sense of guilt would be expurgated if they permitted Israel to get what it wanted at the expense of the Arabs. 186. If the United Nations fails to act now, then a new outbreak of armed conflict will be inevitable. Let there be no mistake about it: failure to come to grips with the problem will lead to war, because there are limits beyond which no people can endure the humiliation of continued enemy occupation of its territory.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“I cannot believe that there is any fair-minded person in this Assembly who would in all honesty and sincerity expect the Arabs to negotiate while their territories are under military occupation. I do not think the Israelis seriously believe that the Arabs will ever engage in such negotiations of capitulation. Their real aim is to keep the situation fluid and unsettled until a new opportunity presents itself to occupy more Arab lands and to render a few more hundreds of thousands of Arabs homeless. That is Israel's programme of peace. 185. We have had no illusions about this, but there are some who are either unable or unwilling to face the facts. However, at long last Israel feels bold enough to reveal a good deal more than it usually does about its real intentions. The mask is off.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Dean Rusk, stated: "We could not accept the proclamation of peace as a prerequisite for the return of refugees, and hope the Assembly would not make this a condition ... they need not wait for a proclamation of peace ... these unhappy people should not be made a pawn in the negotiations for a final settlement." It would be interesting to know whether the United States delegation today shares the views of its Secretary of State. 184. What is the United Nations to do now? Israel tells us to do nothing, to leave it to Israel and the Arabs to settle their conflict by direct negotiation — in other words, to give Israel time to consolidate its occupation and proceed with its plans for annexation.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“The United Nations has a special responsibility towards the long-suffering people of Palestine because everything that has happened in the last twenty years has flowed directly from the United Nations decision to partition the country against the wishes of its people, and from the United Nations failure to put an end to Israel's continuous expansion. 183. This is especially pertinent in respect of the refugees, who have been and still are the principal victims of Israel's expansion. They were considered from the beginning to be the special responsibility of the United Nations. Their welfare and their right to return to their homes was guaranteed and accorded priority over and above all the other aspects of the problem — a matter of such importance that the representative of the United States at the time, Mr.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Jerusalem has been annexed despite two clear resolutions [2253 (ES-V) and 2254 (ES-V)] of the General Assembly, and new settlements are being established in occupied Syrian and Jordanian territories, while the ceasefire on the Suez Canal is repeatedly violated, with the wanton and indiscriminate slaughter of innocent civilians in the heavily populated cities in the area. 182. As can be seen, the story of Zionism in the Arab world is one of continuous advance, gradual but relentless and pursued with fanatical single-mindedness. In view of this record of uninterrupted expansion and violence, are we not entitled to ask: Whose security is really threatened, the Arab States’, or Israel’s?”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“During the Second World War the demand for a national home changed into a demand for a national State. Thus, partition was advocated so that a State could be established in part of Palestine, preferably with a minimum number of Arabs, whose mass exodus in 1948 — largely engineered by the Haganah — was described by the late Chaim Weizmann as a miraculous solution of the major problem facing the State. A further stage in the Zionist programme was reached with the occupation of the West Bank of the Jordan and Syrian and Egyptian territory. Already steps are being taken to go still further.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Limited demands which to an outsider seemed eminently reasonable were presented from time to time, and as soon as they were granted farther "limited and reasonable" objectives were proclaimed, until step by step the whole programme would be fully implemented. Thus, at the beginning the early Zionist immigrants came as religious people who wished to worship their God in the land which contains their holiest shrines. Then, when the time came for the establishment of agricultural settlements, the immigrants shed their religious robes and became pioneers. 181. The next stage was the Balfour Declaration and the Jewish National Home. Then, in the thirties, the banner of unlimited immigration was raised to provide a haven for the victims of Nazi persecution in Europe.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“As the Zionist programme could be implemented only at the expense of the Arabs, the interests of Zionism and those of the Arab people of Palestine soon became mutually exclusive, and the issue could be settled only by force. It could not be otherwise, since the Arabs of Palestine could not be expected to co-operate in their own destruction. The story of the implementation of the Zionist programme is well known, and it is this gradual and piecemeal implementation, frequently by force, that is at the heart of the problem and that is the basic cause of the conflict. 180. An important characteristic of Zionist strategy which perhaps more than any other has contributed to the success of the movement is that it never, at any time, has fully revealed its aims.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“The conflict arose because in the nineteenth century European Jews calling themselves Zionists planned to establish a State in a country which for centuries had been overwhelmingly Arab in population, land-ownership, language and culture. This was not a clash of nationalisms, nor was it the usual antagonism between settler communities and indigenous populations. The new society which Zionism wanted to establish in Palestine was to be completely and exclusively Jewish. Such an aim was bound to be opposed by the Arabs of Palestine for the very simple reason that no nation in the world gives up its homeland to accommodate another. 179.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Some well-meaning people who have been brainwashed by Zionist propaganda have attributed this to so-called religious antagonism or traditional Arab-Jewish hostility; others have attributed it to the clash of two nationalisms; still others have laid the blame on the unbridled ambitions of certain Arab leaders. But what are the facts? 178. The conflict arose not because of any historical or religious antagonism between Arabs and Jews. On the contrary, we Arabs can pride ourselves on the fact that throughout our long history and at the height of Arab power in the Middle Ages the Jews found a haven and refuge in Arab lands and their scholars and theologians were able to make their greatest contributions to Jewish philosophy and ethics under the benevolent and tolerant rule of the Arab caliphates of Cordoba and Baghdad.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“The fifth of June was not the first, and I fear will not be the last, time that the Arab countries will be forced to fight to defend themselves against Israeli aggression, unless the United Nations rises to the challenge facing it today. The true nature of the conflict between Israel and the Arabs bears no resemblance to the picture which Zionist mythology has presented to the world: a picture of the Arabs with their vast homelands and rich resources, maliciously and wantonly grudging a long-persecuted people their little corner of earth which their ancestors had once occupied thousands of years ago.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“If we add to that the assurances of the Arch States that they would not initiate offensive action, and consider the progress which had already been made at that time to find a generally acceptable formula for the solution of the problem of navigation, can there be any explanation of Israel's attack except in terms of its war aims, which we now know go much beyond asserting the right of innocent passage? If there were any doubts about that they were entirely removed by Israel's declared intention of annexing the newly-conquered territories — an intention proclaimed to the world a few days after the leaders of Israel had declared on the morning of 5 June that their country had no territorial ambitions. 177.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“As for the Straits of Tiran, neither the interests involved nor the legal controversy relating to the right of innocent passage could possibly justify the launching of an armed attack of such massive proportions. And, in any case, the concept of preventive war is not admissible under the Charter. The only permissible casus belli is self-defence against armed attack. And the closing of the Straits of Tiran was not such an act of armed attack.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Because of its scale and power, the Israeli attack could not possibly be considered as a spontaneous act of self-defence. The element of surprise necessary for military success could hardly have been achieved if the United Arab Republic was on the verge of attacking Israel. There can be no room for doubt, therefore, that that attack, far from being an act of self-defence, was the end-product of a carefully drawn up plan of aggression. 175. Israel justifies its attack mainly on two grounds: the statements emanating from certain Arab quarters, and the closing of the Straits of Tiran. Regarding those statements, no one can seriously suggest that war can be justified on such a flimsy basis. Bellicose statements came from both sides; and, in any event, it is acts and not words that count. 176.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Eban rightly said that the question of responsibility for the war was a crucial one — a question which has the closest relevance to our present discussion. Now, two questions must be answered before we can determine that responsibility. The first is who started the war, and the second is whether there was any justification for starting it. 174. Regarding the first question, there is hardly any need to state once again that it was Israel which started the war. General Dayan was kind enough to confirm to the world that the Arabs did not attack first, and had to pay for their mistake. Now we come to the second question — was Israel justified in attacking its Arab neighbours? The Charter fully recognizes the right of self-defence in case of armed attack. But no such attack was launched against Israel.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Eban read to us copious quotations of warlike statements from various Arab sources. I can assuredly quote a few choice phrases from some of his more talkative colleagues past and present. But the point is not who talked but who acted. 172. As the Foreign Minister of the United Arab Republic said in his statement: "War is not a state of mind; war is aggression ... Peace, like war, is made up of deeds, not words." [1573rd meeting, para. 102.] The facts, and only the facts, will reveal who is really the aggressor and who is the victim, who should be worried about security and territorial integrity and who is the one whose insatiable territorial ambitions are the principal threat to peace in the area. 173. But we do not have to go far back to get the answer. The recent war in the Middle East has provided us with all the evidence we need. Mr.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“We are all familiar with the picture that Israel propaganda has presented to the world — of a small country whose very existence is threatened by predatory neighbours — and with the endless repetition of stories about its vulnerability, the danger of its imminent destruction and strangulation, a word which Mr. Eban seems to be particularly fond of using. One who was unaware of the facts would think that Israel had always been in the region and that suddenly and out of sheer malice the Arabs plotted and prepared for its destruction. 171. I think the time has come to explode, once and for all, that myth, which gave Israel so much undeserved world-wide sympathy and made the Arabs, who have for years been the victims of aggression, appear as the aggressors. Mr.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“If this drift towards international anarchy is not halted, no State will be immune from attack or from mutilation of its national territory. 169. A good deal has been said about the necessity of linking the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Arab territory to an affirmation of the Charter principle that all Members are entitled to security and freedom from threat of attack — a principle, I might add, which was incorporated in all the General Armistice Agreements signed in 1949, agreements which have been repeatedly flouted, and now denounced, by Israel. 170. This question of security and national existence has proved to be the most potent weapon in Israel’s propaganda arsenal.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“49.] I know that many of my colleagues in this Hall have quoted those passages from the introduction to the annual report, but those words are of such primary importance for the future of the Organization that I considered it my duty to repeat them in this statement. 168. The same serious and urgent challenge which faced the emergency session of the General Assembly faces us today; and it is: will Israel be allowed to solidify its aggression, and will it be encouraged in its avowed aim to annex the Arab territories it has occupied? I do not think there is a single representative in this Hall who is not aware of the ominous implications in this situation for the United Nations and, indeed, for the civilized world order which the Charter seeks to establish.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“He said: "There is the immediate and urgently challenging issue of the withdrawal of the armed forces of Israel from the territory of neighbouring Arab States occupied during the recent war. There is near unanimity on this issue, in principle, because everyone agrees that there should be no territorial gains by military conquest. It would, in my view, lead to disastrous consequences if the United Nations were to abandon or compromise this fundamental principle." [A/ 6701/Add.1, para. 47.] Further on he said: "It is indispensable to an international community of States—if it is not to follow the law of the jungle— that the territorial integrity of every State be respected, and the occupation by military force of the territory of one State by another cannot be condoned." [Ibid., para.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Any other position would condone territorial expansion and make it the sole basis for a political settlement which, in such circumstances, would inevitably be in favour of the side which chose to use military force. 167. The central issue emerging from this debate, as indeed was the case in the emergency session, is the withdrawal of Israeli troops from occupied Arab territories. I can do no better than repeat what the Secretary-General said in the introduction to his annual report on this fundamental question of principle. His words express, better than I can ever hope to express, the concern that the military occupation of territories of Member States has evoked throughout the world.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Eban such statements as "the Middle East is not an international protectorate" and solutions "cannot be grafted onto it from outside" [1566th meeting, para. 145], I wonder, in passing, whether that was the view held by Mr. Eban in 1947 and 1948 when the partition plan was grafted from outside, although every State in the region had voted against it and the great majority of the people of the country whose fate was being decided strongly objected to it. Is this not a typical example of the opportunism which has become the most characteristic feature of Israel’s contribution to the work of this Organization? 166. While Israel virtually alone advocated a hands-off attitude, the overwhelming majority of Members felt that the United Nations should continue to play an active role in finding a solution to the crisis.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Israel must have known that the Assembly could not subscribe to such a course, but it presented its ideas none the less, not expecting them to be adopted by this Assembly but in the hope that its intransigence would in the end prevent the United Nations from taking any action, which is really Israel’s aim and purpose. The Israelis undoubtedly hope to achieve this negative purpose with the help and support they confidently expect to receive from some of their powerful friends. 165. This situation reflects the deep-seated hostility and mistrust with which the United Nations is now viewed by the ruling circles in Israel. The Israelis consider the United Nations as an interfering nuisance. That is why we hear from Mr.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Twenty years of United Nations work and involvement in the region would come to an end, the numerous resolutions adopted by the General Assembly upholding the rights of the refugees would be discarded, the elaborate machinery set up to keep the peace would be dismantled, and all past obligations assumed under the auspices of the United Nations would be nullified. And all this for what purpose? The answer, clearly and simply, is this: to put the stamp of international approval on Israel’s new gains at the expense of the Arabs. 164.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“There is on the agenda of the present session an item entitled "The situation in the Middle East" (item 94), which the Assembly decided to consider as a matter of high priority. Yet the other day we heard the Foreign Minister of Israel suggest [1566th meeting] that the United Nations should take no substantive action but merely content itself with a call for direct negotiations between the parties. This approach found no support in the Assembly, and with good reason. The implications of Israel’s proposal are clear.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Once it is conceded that a military solution is not the answer — to use the exact words of Ambassador Goldberg [1562nd meeting] — what justification is there for continuing the savage bombing of the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam? It is only in the immediate and unconditional cessation of the bombing that there can be any hope for rational and fruitful discussions of the underlying political issues. 162. Ultimately there must be a return to and scrupulous observance of the Geneva Agreements of 1954, which provide the soundest bases for ending this vicious conflict which has brought suffering to millions of people and imperilled international peace and security. 163.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Before I deal with this problem which, understandably, is of paramount importance for us, I should like to state that my country's position on the other important questions on the agenda of the present session, such as disarmament, peace-keeping, decolonization, development, human rights and China's representation in the United Nations, will be fully expounded by my delegation when they come before the appropriate bodies. I should, however, like to refer briefly to a question which is of world-wide concern. 161. A cruel war continues to be waged in Viet-Nam, inflicting unimaginable suffering on the people of that unhappy land. It cannot be repeated too often that a military solution imposed from the outside can never solve what is essentially a civil war, fought for political ends.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“These are words uttered by a man deeply devoted to the cause of human brotherhood and understanding, and I should like to add my voice to those which have preceded me in expressing our appreciation and admiration for U Thant's tireless efforts for peace in the world. The disillusionment and anguish clearly reflected in the Secretary-General's words were echoed by many representatives in this debate. But nowhere has this feeling of frustration and disappointment been more manifest and justified than in the handling by the United Nations of the issues arising out of the war unleashed by Israel against our people last June. 160.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“I should also like to pay a tribute to the outgoing President, Ambassador Abdul Rahman Pazhwak of Afghanistan, who presided over three strenuous sessions of the General Assembly with great ability and distinction. 158. The Assembly is meeting this year in sombre circumstances. As the Secretary-General stated in the opening sentence of the introduction to his annual report, "the international political situation has not only not improved; it has in fact deteriorated considerably" [A/6701/Add.1, para. 1]. He rightly attributed this deterioration to the recourse to violence and threat of violence throughout the world, and warned that "When unbridled use of force is accepted and intimidation and threats go unchallenged, the hopes of a world order such as the one outlined in the Charter become dim and hollow" [ibid., para. 151]. 159.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“156. Mr. President, it gives me great pleasure to extend to you my sincere congratulations on your election to the Presidency of the General Assembly at its twenty-second session. Your election is a tribute not only to your country and to the group of socialist States of which Romania is a member, but also to your own high qualities of statesmanship, qualities which I have known and appreciated from our frequent personal contacts, especially during my visit to your country last spring. 157. It is a happy coincidence that your election should take place in the jubilee year of the Great October Revolution. I take this opportunity to extend my warmest congratulations and best wishes to the Soviet people on the anniversary of this great historic event.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“I add my voice to the numerous distinguished representatives who preceded me in expressing the hope that he will find it possible to reconsider his decision, especially as there seems to be such a strong response to his appeal to us all to deal seriously with the problems and the difficulties which led t .,s decision. We ask him to stay on because he is needed at this critical juncture in the life of the Organization for the ideals of which he has dedicated himself with such single-minded devotion.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The developing countries, in their turn, must exert greater efforts and adopt sounder and more progressive economic and financial policies and planning to help them traverse the long and difficult road that lies ahead. 104. I have left to the end of my statement what I consider to be the most important question facing this session of the General Assembly, namely, the decision of I Thant not to offer himself for re-election as Secretary-General. He has rendered great services to this Organisation and he has earned universal confidence and esteem. No one can really disagree with the reasons which prompted him to take this decision, which we hope is not irrevocable.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“we feel that action is now overdue to divert a much greater proportion of financial assistance through multilateral channels. 103. The first six years of the tinted Nations Development Decade have been disappointing. The rate of growth still falls short of the 5 per cent envisaged in the resolution adopted by the Genera: Assembly m 1901. The General Assembly and, under its authority, the Economic and Social Council, are required to take vigorous action to reverse this trend during the remaining years of the Decade. This can be achieved only if there is a great* willingness on the part of the developed countries to bring their trade and economic policies into closer harmony with the objectives of the Decade.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The nature and dimension of this problem arc only now being understood and appreciated by the international community. 102. The problem of closing the gap between the developing and developed countries has not yet been seriously met. The United Nations Development Programme has made valuable contributions, but its resources are limited and woefully inadequate. Conscious of this, my country, as a token of its appreciation and confidence in the Programme, has raised its contribution by 33 per cent of the Special Fund and by 23 per cent to the Expanded Programme for Technical Assistance. The United Nations is still not permitted to deal effectively with the crucial question of financing development. While we fully agree that the key to the problem of financing is trade, rather than aid.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“We were most heartened by recent Indications of an impending understanding between the two major nuclear Powers on a treaty for nonproliferation and on the peaceful uses of outer space. 100. The General Assembly is called upon at this session to make a determined effort to find the widest measure of agreement on the principles which should guide the Eighteen-Nation Committee in its deliberations next year. It is also our hope that the efforts to hold a world disarmament conference will bear fruit and that such a conference, in which all the major military Powers — including the People's Republic of China — will participate will be held during the coming year. 101. The developing countries, including my own, are engaged in the gigantic task of rebuilding their societies on progressive and modern foundations.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“It is now the duty of the General Assembly to take effective measures to save the people of South West Africa from the rule of the South African racists. 98. This past year has been a disappointing one in respect of disarmament and economic development. The Eighteen-Nation Disarmament Committee has not been able to make any real progress towards the solution of some of the outstanding problems, which must be solved before there can be general and complete disarmament. 99. A particularly urgent question is the necessity of concluding an international treaty to control the proliferation of nuclear weapons. This is a problem that cannot be delayed much longer. If nothing is done within the coming months, hen it may be too late to control the spread of nuclear weapons, with all the fearful consequences that this entails for the human race.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“My Government will do everything in its power to alleviate the suffering of the victims of apartheid, and will support any action taken by the United Nations to ensure the compliance of the South African Government with the numerous resolutions adopted by the General Assembly in this regard. 97. The question of South West Africa is still being discussed here in the General Assembly. My delegation has already had an opportunity to express its views, and I shall therefore confine my comments to an expression of regret for the failure of the International Court of Justice to deal with the substance of this question. It shirked its duly and responsibility by invoking a legal technicality which should never have been allowed to influence its judgement on a case with such important political and legal implications.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“My delegation fully supports the African States in their demand that force be used to put an end to racist minority rule. 96. Portugal's desperate efforts to maintain a foothold in Africa will no doubt crumble before the mighty tide of African nationalism. All Members of the United Nations — particularly those with special relations with Portugal — must shoulder their responsibilities in helping to bring about the speedy liquidation of the Portuguese colonial empire in Africa. South Africa continues to defy the United Nations and world opinion by its illegal occupation of South West Africa, and by its apartheid policies.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“My Government expresses the hope that, at this present session of the General Assembly, action will be taken to put the problem in its proper perspective and set in motion the process of national liberation in Oman through collective international action, as has been the case with other former colonial Territories. 95. Turning to the continent of Africa, we have, in the past, deplored the unwillingness of the British Government to take resolute action to put an end to the rebellious and illegal regime of the racist minority in Rhodesia, It is quite clear that the half-hearted measures so far taken have not and are not likely to create any impression on that regime and afford no real hope for the oppressed African majority. It is far from certain whether selective mandatory sanctions are sufficient to deal with the problem.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“60.] There is no mention of any reservations, and it is our hope that this will be formally and clearly indicated to the Secretary-General before the mission starts out on its important and historic task. 94. The question of Oman continues to be a matter of grave concern and anxiety to my Government. The struggle of the people of Oman for freedom and independence has been going on for over ten years. The question was referred to the Committee of Twenty- four, as a colonial problem involving the use of force by the colonial Power to maintain its position of influence and privilege.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“It is our fervent hope that the British Government will reconsider their position, and indicate their willingness to co-operate with the United Nations in the implementation of these measures. 93. We were gratified, therefore, to hear the Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom state, from this rostrum, the other day. his Government's readiness to co-operate. He said: "More recently we have announced our acceptance of the 1992 and 1960 General Assembly resolutions on Aden [resolutions 1949 (XVIII) and 2023 (XX)] — which inter alia called for our withdrawal from the base — and we have told the Secretary-General that we shall be glad to co-operate with a special mission from the United Nations to recommend practical steps for the full implementation of those resolutions." [1436th meeting, para.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The impression given by this statement, which the British Government called a reservation, was that it would not be possible for the British Government unilaterally to put into effect the constitutional changes called tor in the General Assembly resolutions, prior to the holding of general elections under United Nations supervision and control. 92. It is the view of my delegation that, if this reservation were accepted, then the resolutions would lose meaning. For it is precisely these interim constitutional measures, which the resolutions called for, that make the United Nations presence in the Territory necessary, and without which no adequate preparation could be envisaged tor the attainment by the Territory of its freedom.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“It had been our hope that this mission would be dispatched immediately to the Territory. But this could not be done, mainly because the administering Power — which had been asked repeatedly to declare its acceptance of the resolutions of the General Assembly — had finally done so, subject to certain unacceptable reservations. The British Government stated last August [ibid., chap. VI, annex V, para. 6] that, while they accepted the resolutions in principle, they drew attention to their so-called commitments to the Federal Government of South Arabia and to the various rulers of the area, stating that such commitments could not be altered or modified without the agreement of those concerned. 91.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“A resolution adopted in 1963 [1949 (XVIII)] and reaffirmed in 1965 [2023 (XX)] by the General Assembly, has formulated a clear programme of action for the guidance of the administering Power, with a view to leading the Territory — in co-operation with the United Nations — towards independence, and laying down certain conditions and concrete steps that should be taken prior to the attainment of independence. 90. Last June, in Cairo, the Committee of Twenty-four adopted a resolution [A/6300/Rev.1, chap. VI, para. 382] by which the Secretary-General was requested to appoint a mission to go to the Territory and consult with the people concerned, and with the administering Power, on ways of implementing the resolution and extending United Nations involvement during the period immediately preceding independence.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“We did this because we feel that, as Members of the United Nations, we must bear our share of the responsibility of this Organization for the welfare of the refugees pending their return to their homeland. 89. On the question of Aden and the occupied South, the United Nations has played an active and useful role in finding the best ways and means whereby the people of the Territory would achieve their freedom and independence under the best conditions, by peaceful and orderly methods, in accordance with the Charter.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“As far as the Palestine Arab refugee problem is concerned, we shall not only insist on the full and unconditional implementation of paragraph 11 of resolution 191 (III), granting the right of the refugees to repatriation or compensation, but will urge the Assembly to take effective measures to guarantee the inviolable right of free choice that was given to the refugees and has been re-affirmed annually since 1948. 88. Regarding assistance to the refugees, we are happy to say that, although Iraq has taken full responsibility for the 10,000 Palestinian refugees in our country, my Government has this year decided, in addition to its direct assistance to the Palestine refugees in Iraq, to contribute $100,000 to UNRWA.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“They continue to demand to go back to their ancestral homeland. Their right to do so is not negotiable. It is an absolute and unconditional right that has been solemnly proclaimed and re-affirmed in every resolution adopted by the General Assembly on the refugee problem since 1948, but consistently flouted and violated by Israel. 87. There are those who say that all this is now water under the bridge, that what we should concern ourselves with is established facts. But how can the United Nations accept this theory without violating every principle in its charter? How can the United Nations survive if it surrenders to expediency and allows itself to become an instrument for the consolidation of aggression?”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Its aim was to destroy the Arab community of Palestine and permanently detach from the rest of the Arab world a country which had been an integral part of it for more than fourteen centuries. In no other occupied territory in the world has the physical removal of the inhabitants, through mass expulsion, been the avowed objective of the alien usurpers, not even in South Africa, not even in Rhodesia, For this reason, the problem of Palestine must be viewed as a conflict between the people of Palestine, who are determined to regain their homeland under the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization, and the Zionist invaders, who wish to legalize and consolidate their aggression. 86. The Arab refugees of Palestine are a living reminder of one of the gravest crimes committed against any people.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“But the fact is that the Arab people cannot accept such a dangerous concept, which implies that once an injustice has been done, once an illegal situation has been established and maintained by the use of force, the sufferers have to accept their fate, and the aggressors are sustained in their aggression. If we were to accept this theory, which gives sanctity and permanence to situations brought about by force and aggression, then we will be tearing to shreds our Charter and making a mockery of all the high principles and ideals enshrined in it. 85. The tragedy of the people of Palestine stands out, unique and unparallelled in the annals of this or any other century in modern times. The Zionist aggression in Palestine was not merely an armed invasion of a country and the imposition of alien rule on its inhabitants.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)