YouSaid · the spoken record

Lyng

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS LYNG

lines on the record: 52
first: 1966-09-24
most recent: 1968-09-24
sittings or episodes: 3
sources: un-general-debate

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“I should like to express the hope that a great majority of the States Members of the United Nations will ratify the treaty at the earliest possible date. This would undoubtedly be greatly facilitated if the atomic Powers took steps to initiate negotiations on nuclear disarmament as envisaged in article VI of the non-proliferation Treaty.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“The United Nations has also an important task regarding the problems connected with the physical and social environment. We therefore fully support the Swedish proposal, which led to resolution 1346(XLV) of the Economic and Social Council, for an international conference to study these questions on a global basis. 143. If the United Nations is to be able to accomplish the tasks just mentioned it must fulfil a basic requirement, that of establishing the basis for a durable peace. It is indispensable to halt the nuclear arms race and prevent the further proliferation of nuclear weapons. In spite of the feeling of insecurity created by recent international events, particularly in Europe, the Norwegian Government will this autumn seek parliamentary approval for the ratification of the non-proliferation Treaty.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“We feel also that the strengthening of the authority of the world Organization in the humanitarian field would be a worthy contribution to the celebration of this event. 141. The International Covenants on Human Rights constitute a step in the right direction. It may be necessary, however, to go beyond this and to work out an international agreement which would provide the legal basis for the United Nations and its agencies to take action in emergencies involving great human suffering. 142. In line with this and in order to emphasize the wish of my delegation further to strengthen the United Nations, I should like to confirm the Norwegian Government’s strong support of the proposal for the peaceful use of the sea-bed under the auspices of the United Nations.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“It is up to the Member States to develop those powers which, though not expressly provided in the Charter, are conferred upon the United Nations by necessary implication as being essential to the performance of its duties, but which have not yet been formulated in international agreements. 139. This year we celebrate the twentieth anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The General Assembly has unanimously proclaimed 1968 as the International Year for Human Rights. 140. May I take this opportunity to congratulate Mr. René Cassin, to whom the Nobel Peace Prize Committee of the Norwegian Parliament has just awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, for his untiring work for human rights. This may be considered a symbolic salute to the International Year for Human Rights.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“Could we not consider the possibility of giving the United Nations and its agencies, the Secretary-General, UNICEF, the World Food Programme, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, a stronger mandate and increased authority — for instance, by means of a special treaty — a mandate to carry out the purely humanitarian task of organizing and providing relief to a civilian population which has endured great sacrifices brought upon them by wars, conflicts or other calamities? 138. The tragedies which we have recently witnessed, for instance in Nigeria, demonstrate the need for such an extended authority for the United Nations. The United Nations Charter is a flexible instrument.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“The Norwegian Government has consistently advocated a gradual expansion of the authority of the United Nations. This is, however, a difficult and time-consuming task, and we have no guarantee that it will ever succeed. At the same time, however, it appears likely that in the years to come international developments will confront us and future generations with problems of such magnitude that they will not be able to be solved without an organization of a truly global character having sufficient powers. 137. Should it not be a task for all of us to consider what concrete steps could be taken in order to strengthen the authority as well as the means of operation of the United Nations administrative organs? I would suggest that a measure or a relatively limited character be considered.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“134. In my opinion, there is no basis at all for criticizing the Secretary-General or his staff or the United Nations relief agencies, such as UNICEF, the World Food Programme and others. I do not believe that these organizations have shown any lack of devotion or will to help. These events, however, have again focused attention on the insufficient mandate and authority given to them and have demonstrated the insufficiency of the means and facilities at their disposal. 135. The conflicts to which I have referred — Viet-Nam and the Middle East are other examples — have again brought to the foreground a question so often discussed in the United Nations: How can we strengthen and develop the Organization and enable it to play a more active role in settling conflicts and alleviating human suffering? 136.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“Several Governments and organizations have tried again and again to improve the possibilities for the transportation of really effective help. The Governments of the five Nordic countries have jointly taken a very active part in those efforts. 133. I shall not pass any judgement between the conflicting parties on the responsibility for these difficulties. However, One must be permitted to express profound disappointment that those efforts have not yielded better results. The tragedy has thereby reached dimensions which not only are frightening but seem quite unnecessary. This disappointment is widespread in many countries and it has also been directed at the United Nations. Many have asked why it has been impossible for the United Nations to act even in respect of a task of such a limited nature and of a purely humanitarian character.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“Many Governments and humanitarian organizations have contributed to large-scale operations to bring relief to the civilian population. These efforts have a purely humanitarian objective, with no political aims. Substantial quantities of food and other provisions have for a long time been available close to the distressed areas and further supplies can easily be obtained. 132. However, it has proved extremely difficult to reach the starving population with the supplies which have been collected. Nevertheless, substantial quantities have been airlifted through the battle lines and these supplies have saved many lives. But this relief has not been sufficient to prevent the tragedy from reaching frightening dimensions.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“As mentioned by several other speakers, only the occupying Powers can answer these questions and only they can undo some of the harm which has been caused. Until this happens the relations between these Powers and the outside world, and particularly their neighbours, will be marked by doubt and insecurity. 130. Let me now say a few words about the crisis in Nigeria, a crisis which, of course, is of an entirely different character. World opinion has, above all, been concerned with the human tragedies inflicted upon the civilian population. Armed conflicts or civil wars will always bring hardships to the civilian population. In this conflict, however, unfortunate circumstances seem to have made the fate of the population very, very tragic. 131.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“But the events which have taken place have forced individual States, as well as military alliances, to consider new steps in order to safeguard their own interests. It is particularly regrettable that the entry into force of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons has been endangered. 128. What, then, are the prospects now facing us? How and when will it be possible to resume the work of creating better conditions for peaceful coexistence in Europe? 129. Much will depend on how the occupying Powers use or abuse their military superiority, how soon and to what extent the demand for withdrawal of the occupation forces is implemented, and to what extent the country’s own authorities and political leaders are allowed to carry out their functions.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“The invasion is an obvious and unwarranted interference in the internal affairs of another country. It is contrary to all the principles on which relations between nations must be based. It is of particular concern to this Assembly that this occupation of one of the Member States is a violation of the fundamental principles of the world Organization. 127. The occupation has accordingly resulted in a strong and spontaneous reaction all over the world. It has created new apprehension, new insecurity and new tensions. The efforts to create conditions for a lasting détente in Europe have suffered a severe setback. Nobody wants a return to the cold war or to provoke a new sterile arms race.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“Its freedom of action is obviously seriously curtailed. We are of the opinion, however, that the present Government in Czechoslovakia is the one which in this situation best represents the will of the people to handle its own affairs. And it is quite clear that, on the part of the West, there will in no way be any interference with the dispositions of that Government. 125. That being said, however, I wish to add the following. One cannot accept the argument that it is the sole concern of a group of neighbouring States or allies when a big Power through military force subjects a small nation to its own control. On the contrary, such an event is a matter which concerns the whole world. 126. The events in Czechoslovakia represent a clear violation of international law.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“Like the other members of the NATO defence alliance, my country has been of the opinion that it would be useful to strengthen relations between countries in Eastern and in Western Europe and to work for increased co-operation between them regardless of the differences in their political and social systems. This has of course been our policy also towards Czechoslovakia. 123. But these efforts were never aimed at interfering in the internal affairs of other countries or their alliances. This principle of non-intervention has been observed by all the Western nations. The allegation that attempts have been made by these nations to carry out infiltration in Czechoslovakia is not borne out by facts. 124. A government whose territory is occupied by foreign troops is, of course, not a free Government.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“On the contrary, he gives a rather gloomy review of tensions and crises and serious conflicts in all corners of the world. I am afraid that we all have to concur with the Secretary-General that a steady deterioration has taken place in the international situation during the last year. 120. I do not intend to follow. the Secretary-General on his tour around the horizon in discussing the many tragic conflicts facing us. I should like, however, to deal briefly with a few conflicts and events which have given cause for much apprehension and insecurity. These conflicts are very different in nature, but they do at the same time highlight certain shortcomings of the powers and procedures of the United Nations. 121. Let me begin with some words concerning the invasion of Czechoslovakia. 122.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“The smaller nations, if left to themselves, have only limited possibilities to assert themselves in international politics. Their possibility of influencing international developments and protecting their own way of life and their own interests lies in close co-operation with others. The activities of the United Nations and the effectiveness of the Organization will therefore be of special importance to the smaller nations. 118. This leads me to what is a basic theme in my statement, namely, the possibilities of the United Nations for settling or mitigating conflicts — particularly conflicts which threaten the freedom or the existence of the smaller nations. 119. In his very interesting introduction to his annual report [A/7201/Add.1] the Secretary-General does not present a very encouraging picture of the international situation.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“116. First of all, 1 should like to join many other speakers in congratulating the General Assembly on the election of its new President. I should also like to wish the President success in carrying out the important task entrusted to him—a task for which we all feel he is eminently suited. 117. I think that it is worth noting how often the highest officials of the United Nations — the President and the Secretary-General — are elected from among the representatives of the smaller Member States. Those who hold these important offices symbolize the very concept of world-wide co-operation which is the fundamental idea of the United Nations. The smaller nations have the greatest stake in organized international co-operation, and perhaps also the greatest appreciation of the necessity of such co-operation.”
1968-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 23 (1968)
“President, throughout all I have said I have wanted to stress the Norwegian view that the United Nations and co-operation within it are of vital importance for the future development of the world. It is with that in mind that I should like to associate myself wholeheartedly with the many speakers who have congratulated you upon your election as President of the General Assembly. Or, to put it in a slightly different manner, it is with this in mind that I wish to congratulate the United Nations on having you as the President of the Assembly during this important and difficult session.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“And the decisions must, as far as possible, take into consideration the different interests which exist among the parties concerned. 116. The Norwegian Government has supported every initiative previously taken in order to expand the authority of the United Nations to act on behalf of the Member nations, and to strengthen the means which are at the disposal of the Organization. With the conflict in the Middle East in mind, I would especially underline the position we have taken with regard to the question of organizing and developing the capacity of the United Nations to carry out peace-keeping operations. Norway will also in the future take a positive attitude on every initiative which aims at strengthening our Organization. 117. Mr.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“To blame the administrative leadership of the United Nations for lack of results is to direct criticism to a completely wrong quarter, What has been missing is, to put it bluntly, the political will on the part of the Member nations to give the Organization the necessary means to carry out its functions in accordance with the United Nations Charter. 115. How can we correct this situation and develop the United Nations as an instrument for the promotion of peace? It is of vital importance that Member nations respect the United Nations Charter and that decisions be based on its principles. The political and economic organs of the Organization must arrive at decisions which can he generally accepted and implemented.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Admittedly, we all can feel disappointed that achievements have not always corresponded to expectations. But we must not forget that the Middle East conflict, which could easily have got completely out of control was after all confined and temporarily stopped. 114. On the other hand, even if the feelings of resignation concerning the capacity of the United Nations are unjustifiable, it is equally clear that we must learn from experience. We have learnt that the Organization must be strengthened, above all by giving it more effective instruments to maintain peace and security.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“The concept of its universality invests the very existence bf the Organization with a value in itself. To keep the Organization in being, irrespective of its greater or lesser efficacy in any given phase of its development is therefore an important task in itself. 112. But the realization of this does not suffice, of course. During recent years the United Nations has been subjected to new trials and ordeals. Among many Member nations there is considerable disappointment that the United Nations has not been able to achieve more, particularly in connexion with some aspects of the crisis in the Middle East. We can also sense a somewhat resigned and negative attitude concerning the capacity of the United Nations to influence the course of international events. 113.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“The Organization should be universal in its membership too, so that it comprises the vast majority of the peoples in the world. This is the basis for Norway's consistent support of the seating of the People's Republic of China in the United Nations. Perhaps it is not realistic to think that this question will be solved in the present somewhat confused situation. We do, however, consider that as a matter of principle the present Members of the United Nations should make it clear that the United Nations is open also to the most populous nation in the world. 111. It may be said about most organizations and associations, also in international life, that they are not an aim in themselves but only instruments for the furtherance of certain purposes and interests. This is not the case with the United Nations.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Norwegian foreign policy has in many important fields been influenced by our participation in organizations such as the Nordic Council, the Council of Europe, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the European Free Trade Association group, and so forth. Several other Member countries have similarly found their place within the pattern of the co-operation in other regional organizations. 110. But regional co-operation only becomes really meaningful when it takes place within the context of comprehensive international co-operation on a global basis. In Norway we therefore regard our membership in the United Nations as a cornerstone in our foreign policy. It is one of the fundamental principles of the United Nations that its functions and tasks are of a universal character.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“I shall now make some more general observations on the United Nations and its ability to perform its functions. 109. It is often the smaller nations which are most concerned with the promotion of international cooperation. Individually they have only limited capacity to influence the geopolitical power constellations and the international conflicts of interests. Their contribution to the creation and maintenance of international law and the way to influence the course of international events lies in co-operation with other States. It is for this reason that so many smaller nations have found it useful to engage in different patterns of regional co-operation.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“It would be particularly helpful if the understanding reached between the United States and the Soviet Union during the emergency special session could serve as a basis for progress. 107. In addition to the two fundamental principles to which I have already referred, there is a third aspect on which there is common agreement: a solution must not be found to the refugee problem in the Middle East. This can, of course, not be achieved without the full co-operation of all the parties concerned in the area. But it is equally certain that this is a humanitarian task which, in terms of finances, technical problems and administration, far exceeds what these countries can be expected to do alone. This is a responsibility for all of us. We are faced with a task which demands a joint effort on a broad international scale. 108.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Furthermore, the continuation of the conflict is not acceptable to the international community. It is also of paramount importance that neither side carries out any measures which in turn may present new obstacles to a final and lasting solution. 106. My Government is of the opinion that it must be an important undertaking for the United Nations to bring this conflict out of the present deadlock. I shall not in this context elaborate on the various formal and procedural questions involved, I shall confine myself to saying that my Government fully supports the idea of designating a special United Nations representative who could assist in the return of peaceful conditions. We also welcome the efforts of third parties to aid in bringing about conditions for a settlement.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Israel has adopted the position that the withdrawal from occupied territories can only be considered as part of a complete and comprehensive settlement. Thus the parties concerned have been frozen into positions which have hitherto hindered any progress. 105. Sometimes it may happen that the lapse of time in itself makes it easier to solve a conflict. It seems quite clear that just the opposite is the case in the Middle East. As has already been said by my colleague, Mr. Brown, the United Kingdom Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs [1567th meeting] in this conflict time is not the great healer. As time goes by, it becomes obviously ever more difficult to implement the two fundamental principles on which a solution will have to be based. For the parties concerned there is no time to lose.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“First, territorial gains obtained through the use of force cannot be recognized — any more in this conflict than in any other conflict. Secondly, all the States in the area have a right to independent national existence and territorial integrity. They must, on a mutual basis, recognize the rights of each other in conformity with international law. These two principles have, as far as I know, not been challenged by anyone. 104. At the same time the present situation seems deadlocked in a way which has frustrated the prospects of a step-by-step implementation of these principles. The Arab States have adopted the position that the Israeli troops must be unconditionally withdrawn from the occupied territories; only then are they willing to negotiate.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“As already mentioned by my Danish colleague [1562nd meeting], we had at a later stage engaged in discussions with our Nordic neighbours to find out whether it would be useful to organize our contributions to such a reconstruction as a joint Nordic endeavour. 101. The Norwegian Government has also found it natural to support the initiative taken by a group of former Peace Prize winners who, through contact with the parties to the conflict, will try to ascertain the possibilities for negotiations. 102. Now, I should like to give a brief summary of how my Government views the situation in the Middle East. 103. During the different phases of the consideration of this question in the United Nations, two very clear and simple principles have emerged.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Consequently, there does not seem to be any other alternative than to take the chance and to use this possibility to initiate negotiations. 99. A small nation like Norway can, of course, do very little in a direct way to contribute to a solution of a conflict of the kind we have in Viet-Nam. I should like, however, to refer to two modest initiatives which have been taken in my country. 100. In February 1966 the Norwegian Parliament declared Its willingness to participate in the reconstruction of Viet-Nam which we assume will take place on a broad international basis when hostilities have finally been terminated.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“I agree with those who have pointed out that the situation would be clearer if North Viet-Nam could give some indication of willingness to negotiate if the United States should cease the bombing. In this connexion I refer to the speech by the President of the United States last Friday at San Antonio, Texas, But even without such an indication, it is the view of the Norwegian Government that it would greatly improve the possibilities for development towards a negotiated settlement if the bombing of North Viet-Nam were stopped. Of course, nobody can say or predict exactly what would be the response to such an initiative. Nevertheless, we feel that this should be tried as a first step to get negotiations started. There seems to be general agreement that no lasting and just solutions can be achieved by military means.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“We have learnt from our close and long-standing relations with the United States that there is no reason to doubt commitments made by that country. However, the distrust between the parties to this tragic conflict is so strong that it has not been possible to get talks or negotiations in any form started. The question now seems to be how to create an atmosphere in which negotiations might be initiated. I repeat: to create an atmosphere in which negotiations might be initiated. Mr. Goldberg, in his statement in the general debate [1562nd meeting], invited an open and frank exchange of views on just that question. There is every reason to take advantage of this invitation. 98.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“As to the long-term objective stated by the spokesmen of the United States I believe it can be summed up as follows: the United States does not aim at establishing permanent bases or any other form of permanent military presence on Viet-Nam territory. The United States does not aim at creating any long-term or permanent influence on the right to self- determination of the people in South Viet-Nam or in North Viet-Nam or in a united Viet-Nam. The United States has declared that it will withdraw from the area as soon as a stable situation has been created through negotiations. 97. I have the impression that some of the speakers have tended to regard the United States presentation of its position as a sort of verbal camouflage of its real intentions. We do not share that view.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“Following this, I will make some remarks about this Organization, its structure, it working methods and its ability to act. 95. Even if the question of the conflict in Viet-Nam is not formally on the agenda of the United Nations, the member nations of a world organization obviously cannot stand aloof from a crisis which affects world peace. The conflict has in years past been in the centre of the general debate, and the debate this year has in many ways become a continuation of the debate which took place at the last session. Attention was then sharply focused on two questions. First, what long-term aims have the parties to the conflict, and particularly the United States of America, defined as their final objectives? Second, what are the conditions of the parties for entering into negotiations? 96.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“93. This session of the General Assembly has opened at a time when the international situation is characterized by serious conflicts and difficult problems: the war in Viet-Nam, the grave and acute conflict in the Middle East, and the tensions which prevent the harmonious liberation of peoples, particularly in the southern part of Africa. And, overshadowing all this, there is the threat of an accelerated development of nuclear weapons, which might obliterate most of mankind. 94. Quite naturally, during this debate, several of these conflicts and problems have been amply discussed and analysed from different viewpoints and positions. For my part, I shall not engage in any detailed examination. I should like, however, to state the position of the Norwegian Government on some of the most pressing problems and conflicts.”
1967-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 22 (1967)
“It is up to each and every one of us to give the Secretary-General the necessary tools to enable him to fulfil the mandate conferred upon him. It is up to us, through our policies, to assist him in reaching the high objectives which he has set forth for our Organization, The Norwegian Government and the Norwegian people will do their utmost to this end. We are fully aware that our effort can only be a very modest one. But there are other Members here in a position to play a more important role in this respect.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“In conclusion, I should like to say a few words about the Norwegian Government's attitude towards the United Nations and how we view the future of the Organization. Ever since the Organization was founded, the United Nations has been one of the cornerstones in our foreign policy. We feel convinced that the United Nations, in spite of its weaknesses, has a great potential for influencing future international developments and promoting world peace. 83. Our serious concern about the future of the United Nations has motivated the Norwegian Government's urgent requests to the Secretary-General to continue in his office, I repeat this appeal, combining it, however, with another appeal addressed to the members of this Assembly.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“With due respect to this view, we nevertheless have some difficulty in understanding these apprehensions. There is every reason to believe that we shall also in the future have to rely on the peacekeeping capacity of the United Nations. We should not continue to rely on improvisations in this field. We can only regret that the efforts to improve the peacekeeping machinery of the United Nations have, for political reasons, come to a standstill. We do hope, however, that it will be possible to overcome the obstacles and reach a satisfactory solution, I associate myself in this respect with the points of view expressed so clearly and comprehensively by the Canadian Foreign Minister [1413th meeting]. 82.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Parallel with, and as a supplement to, its efforts towards disarmament, the United Nations should utilize all adequate means under the Charter to prevent international friction and to settle disputes which might otherwise lead to a breach of the peace. In this field of peace-keeping operations the United Nations has proved itself useful and viable. 81. In our view, the peace-keeping functions of the Organization should be further improved in accordance with the proposal advanced by the Secretary-General in 1964. This proposal aims at a study of the various preparatory measures of national and international character that are desirable if the United Nations is to act swiftly and effectively to preserve peace. We are aware that serious misgivings have been voiced with regard to this aspect of the Organization's activity.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“This would obviously be a very limited measure which should in no way be seen as competing with more comprehensive solutions. Such a step might, however, lead to more comprehensive arrangements. We are considering ways of following up the idea presented at Vienna. The Norwegian Government would be ready to place its own nuclear activities under the safeguards system of the International Atomic Energy Agency. 79. In concluding this part of my statement, I would like to emphasize my Government's warm support for the idea presented by the Secretary-General in the introduction to his annual report on the work of the Organization [A/630l/Add.1] that the time has come for an appropriate body of the United Nations to explore and weigh the impact and implications of all aspects of nuclear weapons. 80.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“This would satisfy the nuclear Powers as well as States which are at the threshold of mastering the technology for producing nuclear weapons, and those States which are far from that stage. I fear, however, that it will not now be possible to combine these two basic elements of arms control in one single stage, and that the most realistic procedure is to accept partial solutions. 78. During the tenth session of the General Conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency, held at Vienna from 21 to 28 September 1966, the Norwegian Government raised a question of a more limited character. The idea was that States which do not possess atomic weapons might voluntarily place all their peaceful nuclear activities under the safeguards system of the Agency.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“In accordance with the basic views I have outlined above, the Norwegian delegation has co-sponsored the draft resolution presented by the Soviet Union, requesting States to refrain from actions which might hamper the conclusion of an agreement on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, and asking them to take all necessary steps for the earliest possible conclusion of a treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons [see A/6398], This draft resolution has also been sponsored by the United States of America. 77. I will not attempt a detailed analysis of the various efforts to arrive at effective methods of preventing further proliferation of nuclear weapons. To reach concurrent agreements on non-proliferation and a comprehensive test ban would, of course, be the ideal solution.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Members of a defence alliance must, of course, consult each other regarding basic principles, including strategic questions. However, such consultations can take place without any transfer of the control of nuclear weapons within the alliance. I agree with the Foreign Minister of Canada when he states [1413th meeting] that on the central issue of the definition of proliferation, the formula must prevent nuclear weapons from passing into the control of additional States or groups of countries, and that this should be combined with legitimate measures of collective defense. 76.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Secondly, we should furnish the United Nations with adequate means under the Charter to play an active role in alleviating friction between States and thereby neutralizing latent conflicts. 75. As regards arms control, it is the conviction of my Government that the question of the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons must be given top priority. In their statements the Foreign Ministers of the Soviet Union [1413th meeting] and of Czechoslovakia [1416th meeting] touched upon the particular problems which arise within alliances when some of the members possess nuclear weapons while others do not. They addressed themselves particularly to one of the defence alliances. In the opinion of the Norwegian Government, the principle of the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons should also apply to existing and future alliances.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“There are, however, in this Assembly many Members who are in a position to assist in the communication of viewpoints between the parties. These Members have, I think, the particularly important task now of assisting in seeking further clarification of the position of North Viet-Nam and the National Liberation Front. 73. Leaving the subject of this tragic conflict, I shall now turn to some of the long-term tasks of the United Nations, the tasks aiming at the creation of a lasting basis for peaceful co-existence. These objectives can be reached only by seeking patiently to remove potential controversies which might provoke future crises. 74. First and foremost, we should try to obtain an increasing control over, and a reduction of, armaments.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Without going into detail, there is reason to emphasize the declaration by the United States that it seeks no permanent military bases, no permanent establishment of troops, no permanent alliances and no permanent United States presence of any kind in South Viet-Nam. This formulation of the main objectives is by necessity of a rather general character. This should not, however, discourage anyone, I think, from entering into negotiations. 72. I now turn to the position of North Viet-Nam and the National Liberation Front on the same two questions, and particularly the question of their conditions for opening negotiations. We fully understand the difficulties inherent in obtaining precise clarifications from Hanoi and the National Liberation Front.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Goldberg, indicate a certain flexibility in the United States position. Mr. Goldberg's statement left me with the impression that a cessation of the bombing might be effected if and when there are any indications of a possible approach from the other side. If this impression is correct, we might be right in assuming that the United States position is now approaching the opinion expressed on various occasions by our respected Secretary-General in the form of a three-point programme. This raises the important question of whether these two positions are still so far apart that they cannot be bridged. 71. The clarification given by Mr, Goldberg of the long-term United States objectives in Viet-Nam also deserves careful study, and I think a searching analysis.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“With respect to the conditions for initiating negotiations, it seems to me that the position of the United States is the following. 68. The United States has declared its readiness to come to the conference table without stipulating any preconditions as to the course of the negotiations and their final outcome. As to the status of the National Liberation Front in these negotiations, Mr. Goldberg used expressions which seem to imply a readiness to accept the participation of its representatives and their right to express their points of view. 69. Mr. Goldberg also dealt with the key question of the bombing of North Viet-Nam. He stated that an end to the bombing would be tied to an assurance of a corresponding de-escalation by the other side. 70. But statements by official United States representatives, including Mr.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“It seems to me that, Mr, Goldberg, in his statement [1412th meeting], contributed to a certain clarification of the United States position with regard to these two questions. I have the impression that some of the subsequent speakers have tended to regard his presentation as a sort of verbal camouflage for the real intentions of the United States. I do not find it justified to reject in this way a further discussion of the basis for a solution which has been presented by the United States. The United States representative has actually invited the Members of this Assembly to comment upon his statement, to express criticism, and in general to present their own points of view. Why should we not accept that invitation? Why not subject the United States conditions and objectives to a careful analysis and to searching criticism? 67.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)