YouSaid · the spoken record

Charles MALIK

lines on the record: 121
first: 1953-09-24
most recent: 1957-09-24
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

“When Secretary of State John Foster Dulles of the United States of America called Israel’s removal of its Foreign Ministry from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem an ‘inopportune act’ which embarrassed the United Nations, he could have been called the spokesman for those who wish to have the Jerusalem decision of the United Nations implemented, “On two prior occasions this Association has found it necessary to present to the United Nations protests against the over-extension of Israel. As the General Assembly opens its 1953, or eighth, session, we ask you, Honourable Sir, to present to it our condemnation of Israel actions against an international Jerusalem and our respectful request that the United Nations remember its plighted word and proceed to the implementation of its decisions.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“It has been in his hands for twelve days. This letter is from the Catholic Association in the United States which is exclusively interested in Near Eastern questions and which is headed by Cardinal Spellman, and it states, in part, the following: “It is sufficient to recall here the resolutions and votes of the General Assembly in 1947, in 1948 and in 1949, as regards the international zone of Jerusalem, and then to point out and to condemn the effrontery of a Member of the United Nations, the State of Israel, which has, without right and in defiance of these resolutions and votes, tried to make the New City of Jerusalem its capital. “It is true that many Members of the United Nations have openly opposed this utter disregard of the decisions of your august body.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“Second, the Christian and Moslem religious forces also insist on the internationalization of the Holy City. There is reason to believe that even the strictly religious Hebrew circles will insist on the same. The position of the Catholic Church was made abundantly clear by the two encyclicals of the Pope in 1949 and by many subsequent declarations and statements by Catholic authorities. About ten days ago a letter was sent to the Secretary-General of the United Nations by the Catholic Near East Welfare Association, whose President is none other than Francis Cardinal Spellman. The Secretary-General was requested to bring this letter to the attention of the General Assembly. As far as I know he has not done this as yet, and I therefore take this opportunity to request him to distribute this document among us.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“The present tactics seem to be to let matters ride quietly for a while until, whether at this session of the General Assembly or at next year’s session, the opportune moment arrives when it will be possible 'to have the United Nations take a fresh decision, rescinding the old one and making it possible for Israel, from the international juridical point of view, to establish its capital in Jerusalem. 47. Since this is my reading of the Jerusalem situation, it is appropriate, I believe, to make one or two fundamental observations. 48. First, I know there are attempts to persuade Jordan to establish its capital in the Old City, as a sort of compensation for accepting the Israel fait accompli in Jerusalem. It is right to declare that the Arabs will never accept the capital of Israel to be in Jerusalem. 49.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“The last step in this process took place a few months ago, when the Israel Foreign Ministry moved to Jerusalem and invited the foreign envoys to move there also. I do not know how many of them actually left Tel Aviv, but we have been told that the missions of the United States, the United Kingdom, France and several other Western European and Latin- American governments refused to move to Jerusalem. How long this anomalous situation will last, I do not know. It is perfectly obvious, however, that there are only two alternatives: either something decisive must be done soon by the great Powers, in whose hands alone the issue lies, to bring about an effective implementation of the internationalization scheme, or all missions must sooner or later transfer to Jerusalem. 46.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“I do not know whether Israel knew in advance that the great Powers would not utter a single word of protest, but the sequel proved them strangely unconcerned. Government departments began to be moved there; the Israel Parliament met regularly in the Holy City; and every attempt in the meantime by the Trusteeship Council to implement the design of the General Assembly was frustrated, largely because the United States and the United Kingdom, from considerations either of impracticability or of tenderness towards Israel, would not whole-heartedly co-operate in the matter. May I be permitted here to remark that “impracticability” often means only that you have decided in advance against seeing a thing through, or at least for doing nothing yourself to have it come through. 45.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“One would have supposed that after the decision had been taken and after they had really given, in perfect good faith, a most valiant account of themselves in opposing it, the United States and the United Kingdom would have excused themselves before Israel and turned round and supported the will of the world community. But matters never stop at that with Israel, even in respect to Jerusalem, a city which, whatever it means to Israel, certainly means, or should mean, even more to the Powers that support Israel. 44. Scarcely was the decision of 1949 taken, according to which Israel could not set up its capital in Jerusalem, when the Israel authorities, in blatant defiance of that decision, announced that Jerusalem was their capital from eternity to eternity.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“It will be recalled how, on 9 December 1949, the General Assembly, by more than a two-thirds majority, voted the internationalization of Jerusalem [resolution 303 (IV); how this vote was, in effect, only a reaffirmation of the decision of 1948 [resolution 194 (III)], which was in turn a reaffirmation of the decision of 1947 [resolution 181 (II)] ; and how subsequently to 1949 this decision was again reaffirmed and any attempt at altering it was decisively defeated. In all this, the United States and the United Kingdom, which, as everybody knows, could have been and still are most decisive in the matter, not only vigorously opposed the decision before it was taken, not only did nothing after it was taken to help in implementing it, but actually, either directly or indirectly, encouraged Israel to disregard it.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“In fact, with the passage of time and without any attempt by the United Nations or, more precisely, by those Members which are truly effective in the matter, to implement its own solemn decisions, there is a hardening of feeling and position on both sides and a dangerous growth in the cynical belief that, for the long as well as for the short run, only force avails. I am only being realistic and honest in affirming that, whether or not the United Nations wearies of this problem, Palestine will remain on its agenda for many a year to come. Some affect to see in this fact, namely, in the fact that the United Nations is there to remain seized of this explosive problem, a hopeful ground for peace. I would share this view, were I to see the United Nations pass from mere resolution to resolute action in connexion with Palestine. 43.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“The delegation of Lebanon, therefore, welcomes the new initiative taken by the Commission on Human Rights in exploring wider possibilities for the discharge of its mandates. 41. Thanks largely to the wisdom, firmness and high principles of the Egyptian revolutionary government under General Naguib, and thanks also to the increasing unity of the Egyptian people under his leadership, Anglo-Egyptian problems appear to be on the way to a final settlement. Egypt has the complete support of Lebanon, as indeed, of every other Arab State, in its demands for the fulfilment of its national aspirations. 42. The everlasting question of Palestine continues to be our greatest tribulation in the Near East. No light, or any promise of light, appears to be breaking into this situation.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“This tendency is reinforced by the moral certitude that their possible enemies will not sign the legally binding documents. Progress in human rights is thus directly dependent upon the growth of international trust and understanding. 40. This does not mean that, so long as tension persists, the believers in human rights should get discouraged. On the contrary, they should continue with their work no matter how arduous it proves to be. The documents should be finished and ready, in the certain belief that the hour of their usefulness will one day strike. At the same time, we should not limit the task of promoting human rights to the drafting of legal documents. There are other avenues of approach to the fulfilment of this obligation under the Charter, including the great process of education and the just mobilization of public opinion.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“But although most of the preparatory work for the Declaration was itself also preparatory for the covenants, not much progress has been made during the past five years; at least, one cannot say that such covenants, if finished today, would be more readily adhered to than five years ago. The chief reason is not so much the difficulty of juridical elaboration — difficult as that certainly is — as the paralysing effect of the international tension. For so long as the danger and fear of war exists, even the most liberal countries, the countries whose whole outlook and heritage are based upon the doctrine of freedom and of the infinite worth of the individual human person, cannot be too careful as regards the possibility that subversive elements within them might take advantage of their liberal laws.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“The point I am making is that there is a direct inverse correlation between international tension and the prospects of development. 38. This principle can be further illustrated by the fact that, for the first time in the history of the United Nations, the Soviet Union this year joined in pledging contributions to the United Nations programme for technical assistance. When there is thus a relaxation in the political field, or a will to relaxation, a corresponding liberality of spirit manifests itself in the economic field. 39. The fie d of human rights is also peculiarly responsive to international tension. Since the proclamation by the General Assembly of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 in Paris [resolution 217 (III)], the Commission on Human Rights has been elaborating legally binding conventions or covenants.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“According to the same report, the President of the Council considers that the outstanding resolution of the past year was that relating to the establishment, within the framework of the United Nations, of an international fund for the development of the underdeveloped countries [resolution 482 A (XVI) of the Economic and Social Council]. This ambitious idea aims at going far beyond anything hitherto attempted either by the United Nations or by any specialized agency. That such an idea was conceived at all was due to the relative relaxation of tension, but the actual bringing into existence of the fund would be conditional, as the Council itself has stated in the declaration it is asking governments to adhere to, upon the making of “sufficient progress... in internationally supervised world-wide disarmament”.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“In his introduction to the report of the Economic and Social Council to the General Assembly, the President of the Council writes: “The year’s work of the Economic and Social Council . . . has been conducted in an atmosphere of harmony and a growing spirit of co-operation... Not only was the Council able to celebrate in Geneva the armistice in Korea, but for the first time a large number of unanimous votes were recorded — a clear sign of a conciliatory attitude among the delegations, symbolic of the change in mood in the Council’s deliberations” [A/2430, p. xi]. This is great news about the Economic and Social Council. 37.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“When we seek the ultimate and the fundamental, when we take the standpoint of principle, when we venture to yield to our highest hopes and to be guided by our deepest and truest desires, we should then, obviously, be about every limitation, except, indeed, such as flows from the truth alone. The time of haggling and bargaining and horsetrading is not now; that time will come later. The challenge now is to see things steady and whole; for unless we do see them this way. who can guarantee that our footsteps later will not turn out to be only blind leaps in the dark? 36. There is a perceptible abatement in international tension. The effect of this abatement on the nonpolitical fields has been immediate and obvious.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“It is commonly argued that national sovereignty in our modern world must, in the interest of the common good, undergo some limitation, and that this is why there is international organization today — bilateral, multilateral, regional and, of course, under the aegis of the United Nations. But whatever limitations may have to be accepted willingly by us upon our respective sovereignties in practice, in this initial debate it is given to each one of us to exercise his sovereignty to the utmost. In thinking through the great problems of the hour, we are permitted to perform an act of unlimited sovereignty.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“This task is possible only if one takes a standpoint of principle, namely, if one examines the state of the world in the light of some ideal of truth, justice and peace. 34. I stress the word “truth” because there is such a thing as false justice, and certainly such a thing as false peace. Neither of these states can be tolerated in the long run, and if they persist for a while it can be only because they are on their way to a justice and a peace that are genuine and true. But the prospect of a permanently false justice and a permanently false peace can never be admitted by man. Truth, then, is a higher guide than either peace or justice and, in seeking to take a stand on the fundamental issues of the day, governments and their representatives must, first and foremost, be guided by it. 35.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“We congratulate you, therefore, on your attainment, both in itself and because of its larger significance. 32. I wish also to take this opportunity to congratulate our distinguished new Secretary-General on his election to his high office and to wish him well in the discharge of the important responsibilities that devolve upon him. He can count on the trust and co-operation of the Government and the delegation of Lebanon. 33. The idea of this opening general debate is that governments and their representatives pause for a moment in order to take stock, from as high a point of view as possible, of the most important issues that face them. Thus, one must make three choices: one must concentrate on the more important issues, one must give them a fundamental treatment and, even under this guise, one must be brief.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“And when you held your reception in the Room of the Dons at the Mark Hopkins Hotel, some of those who attended that event literally came through the back door lest they should be seen by their superiors, or — what was still more fearful — by the superiors of their superiors. You were at San Francisco, but you were outside; you were at the periphery of things. Today, however, you are at the centre. This passage from the periphery to the centre, which, in the short span of eight years, you have gone through in your remarkable career, only epitomizes for our epoch the phenomenal growth in moral and political stature of your great country, and therewith of the whole continent of Asia. I should suppose that not only all Asians from every corner of the continent would take pride in this arresting development, but all free men everywhere.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)
“31. It is an honour to be able to congratulate Mrs. Pandit on her election to the presidency of the eighth session of the General assembly. The rise of Asia during the past eight years in the determination of world events is best attested by the contrast between the state of affairs today and the state of affairs at San Francisco. You, Madam President, were at San Francisco. You tried to make, in the interest of the freedom of your country, your clear voice heard by the diplomats and statesmen gathered there; but you were not permitted to enter the conference, let alone to speak in it.”
1953-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 8 (1953)