YouSaid · the spoken record

Corner

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS CORNER

lines on the record: 74
first: 1966-09-24
most recent: 1979-09-24
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

“As our multiracial society develops, new perceptions gleaned in part from the international oversight which we have accepted as a party to the Covenants, impel us to further efforts to improve our performance. 281. New Zealand wishes this Assembly well in its indispensable endeavours.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“In the International Covenants we have a mechanism for the genuine advancement of human rights. Last year in the general debate the Prime Minister of New Zealand expressed our intention to ratify both Covenants. We have done this, and the New Zealand Human Rights Commission has among its tasks that of overseeing their implementation. As a consequence, there have been distinct advances in positive action programmes to enhance the position of minorities, where this is necessary and to introduce new procedures and practices that will help women take their place in the full range of national life. The International Year of the Child has been the occasion of spontaneous action throughout the community to take heed of the needs of children. 280. We have taken pride in our domestic record in the field of human rights, but we are not complacent.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“We look forward, also, to further rounds of negotiations that will lead not only to reductions in nuclear armament but to corresponding limitations in the conventional field. It is on the success of these efforts, and on the growing confidence that should come from such successes, that progress in other areas will rest. It would be a tragic irony if the acceptance of restrictions in one area led to pressures for enhanced capacity in others. Peoples everywhere legitimately expect that the process of reducing armaments will be made irreversible and that resources currently spent on defence will be redirected to reduce suffering and to advance human welfare. 279. Finally, my Government wishes to pay a tribute to this Organization for its leadership in the field of human rights.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“The nuclear-weapons States have been prepared to make unilateral declarations undertaking not to use or to threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapons States. Each has, however, qualified the statement in a different way. Without minimizing the difficulties in the way of reconciling these statements, New Zealand would support further exploration of the ground for bringing these assurances together so as to give them a collective and ultimately binding force. 278. New Zealand has welcomed, as a major step in the limitation of nuclear arsenals, the signature of the second SALT Treaty by the United States and the USSR. Like others, we hope it will soon be ratified.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“They believe also that the nuclear-weapons States have not honoured the obligation they incurred under the Treaty to advance the control and limitation of their nuclear arsenals, and to facilitate the transfer of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. Be that as it may, the pursuit of a nuclear option by any State not currently possessed of nuclear weapons must inevitably have the gravest implications for regional stability and global security. No nation will enhance its security by these means. 277. How can the international community allay the fears that may lead a country to keep this nuclear option open? It can encourage and support efforts to accommodate differences within regions. At the global level more can be done.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“The problems that still stand in the way of a treaty are described as technical. But as a contributor to the work of the ad hoc seismic group, formed to study some of the requirements of a system to monitor compliance with the treaty, we must frankly say that the problems in this area do not seem to us to justify further delay. The conclusion of a treaty is widely recognized as a key to preventing horizontal as well as vertical proliferation. 276. We shall also support endeavours to strengthen the non-proliferation regime. We continue to attach primacy to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and to universal adherence to it. Some States continue to stand aside. The balance of advantage under the Treaty appears to them to favour the nuclear-weapons States.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“There are some areas in the vast network of negotiations currently in progress where there is a clear and urgent need to bring the negotiations to a head and to reach new agreement. 275. Foremost among these is the need to conclude a comprehensive nuclear test-ban treaty. The Pacific was for many years an arena for the atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons. Underground tests are still being conducted in the South Pacific, and elsewhere, despite repeated calls for a halt by the overwhelming majority or the United Nations membership. Last year the General Assembly set a time-table for the conclusion of a treaty. To the regret of us all, that time-table has not been met. It was a reasonable time-table, given the very substantial agreement already apparent on the main provisions of such a treaty.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“We are ready to look with an open mind at proposals that may come forward for new mechanisms, or new methods of working, to help us find a way around the obstacles which at present inhibit our efforts to achieve a new order in international co-operation. The recent meeting of the Committee of the Whole Established under General Assembly Resolution 32/174 took an important initiative to this end. Such a proposal is an expression of faith in our collective capacity to control our economic destiny. We may from time to time lose faith in the machinery. We cannot afford to lose faith in the goals. 274. Another major topic on the agenda of this Assembly is the problem of disarmament.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“New Zealand sees this as an evolutionary process. Not all countries share this view. Yet, regardless of our individual prescriptions for the world's economic ills, I am sure we can all agree that this is the place, and now is the time, to give force to the concept of global economic interdependence which we have talked about for so long. What is needed now in the North-South dialogue is not resolutions, but resolution. 273. We in New Zealand are conscious of the sense of disenchantment in the United Nations and in other international economic bodies with the use to which these existing mechanisms are put.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“Therefore, there can be no argument: we must move to new energy systems. The challenge lies in how we manage the transitional period. The General Assembly has already risen to this challenge by deciding to convene in 1981 a United Nations Conference on New and Renewable Sources of Energy. New Zealand attaches the highest importance to this Conference. It intends to play its full part to ensure its success. While many important energy questions lie outside its purview, the Conference has the potential to make a significant contribution to identifying new energy systems that will benefit us all. 272. In its short history this Organization has often taken the lead in promoting new goals for social justice, international peace and racial equality. Now it must define new standards for global economic co-operation.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“Agricultural protectionism is practised by almost all industrialized countries—to the disadvantage of their consumers and to the frustration of internationally efficient producers, such as New Zealand. That, we believe, is a denial of the responsibility of this generation to establish an efficient production base for feeding the next. This responsibility demands new approaches and positive adjustment policies based on the principles of free multilateral trade. 271. We also have to learn to see energy issues in a new perspective. Experts predict that within the next 10 years the production capacity for our present oil- based energy system will have reached a ceiling. There will be further rises in the real price of oil and an absolute and increasing shortage in relation to total global import requirements.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“We believe that the effectiveness of these strategies and the future well-being of the interdependent global economy will rest, to a very considerable degree, on the success of renewed efforts to find constructive solutions in two critical sectors—trade and energy. 270. The explosion in world trade in the last quarter of a century has brought greater prosperity to many countries. We must ensure that this growth is maintained, based upon acknowledgement of the doctrine of comparative efficiency and a positive assault on the forces of protectionism. New Zealand cannot accept that there should be two sets of rules, one for the old industrial producers and another for the rest, that is, for the new industrial producers and for the agricultural producers.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“In the face of these probabilities we can no longer afford the luxury of debating the possibility of new forms of global economic co-operation, structural adjustment and institutional reform. The time has come to put an end to the polemics and arid definitional disputes which have so far characterized the dialogue between North and South. Let us do so in the sure knowledge that if we do not master the forces of economic and social change, they will surely master us. 269. New Zealand looks to this session of the General Assembly, and to the special session to be held in 1980, to bring a new sense of purpose to the unfinished task of formulating strategies for global economic management.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“Sluggish rates of economic growth will inhibit the continued development of enlarged "northern" markets for "southern" goods—and vice versa. Heavier foreign debt burdens for many countries seem inevitable. Inflation, unemployment, balance of payments disequilibrium and protectionism will feed upon global economic uncertainty. The pressing need to develop new energy sources will be set back financially—and therefore technically. 267. No Government need imagine that it will be able to insulate its economy entirely from the effects of a spreading economic malaise. Developing countries— and all small economies, that rely on trade, including my own—will be especially vulnerable. 268.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“The year 1979 could have been a watershed year for the international community in its continuing debate on global economic reform. The fifth session of UNC- TAD and the Tokyo round of the multilateral trade negotiations were major events which held great promise for a new break-through in North-South relations, but then ended inconclusively. The urgent task of this session of the Assembly will be to find a way of restoring momentum to the debate on the establishment of a New International Economic Order, for the international community faces pressing and dangerous economic problems. The economic "ripple-effects" of this year's sharp price rises in oil have become painfully obvious—to developed and developing countries alike. The outlook is for severe disruption to the process of global economic growth.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“The rights of the Palestinians, including their right to self-determination and to establish an independent Palestinian State if they so desire, can no longer be ignored. 265. The road to a negotiated, just and lasting solution in the Middle East will not be easy. It is critical therefore, that everyone concerned should eschew insensitive or provocative acts. We believe that the continued establishment of Israeli settlements in land occupied during the 1967 war is one such act. The recent outbreak of hostilities in southern Lebanon is another. My Government rejects the policy of pre-emptive strikes by Israel as strongly as it rejects any act which violates the territorial integrity of Israel. The road to peace is fragile. It should not be put at risk. 266.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“My Government sees as a significant advance the dramatic events of the past two years, which culminated in the Camp David agreements and the subsequent negotiations between Egypt and Israel. The current efforts of the leaders of these States must be given a chance to succeed. A critical dialogue has begun. The objective of the world community now should be to broaden that dialogue. 264. My Government continues to believe that Security Council resolution 242 (1967) contains the essential element for a negotiated settlement. That resolution remains a central foundation, and it can be built on. It is now widely recognized that the search for a political solution in the Middle East must involve the participation of the Palestinian people.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“New Zealand joins with the rest of mankind in urging the Government of that unhappy country to move now to break down the barriers of apartheid— those barricades that deny the very essence of human rights and human dignity to the vast majority of its people. Apartheid nurtures the seeds of bitter and vicious conflict. If only for that reason— though it is only one of many—the Members of the United Nations cannot rest until the risk of this conflict has been eliminated. 263. In his inaugural remarks the President called on this Assembly to pursue practical means, rather than to promote ever-increasing resolutions, in the search for solutions to the many problems which afflict the world today. Nowhere could his advice be better heeded than with respect to the situation in the Middle East.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“But I hope that you will keep in mind at all times that the fate of millions of your men, women and children, now and in the future, lies in your hands—and in your hands alone." 260. New Zealand hopes that, through this Lusaka initiative, which underlines once more the value of the Commonwealth association, one area of southern Africa will at last reach peaceful and legal independence. 261. My Government is also encouraged that the consultations which five Western Powers initiated, over two years ago, on Namibia have been resumed. A possibility now exists for the final, legal independence of the Namibian people. 262. But if there are prospects for a peaceful solution to two of the problems of southern Africa, the third the intolerable system of apartheid, still exists unchecked in the Republic of South Africa.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“Here, too, the search for negotiated solutions to the conflicts that have caused this human suffering must be a prime concern of this Assembly. 259. In southern Africa there have been some promising developments. The most significant was the agreement reached by the Commonwealth Heads of Government at Lusaka last month. From this came the Rhodesia Constitutional Conference on Zimbabwe Rhodesia. My Prime Minister, to underline his support for the agreement reached at Lusaka, sent a message to all 24 delegates assembled in London for the conference. He said: "The road to a peaceful settlement is now open to you. It is for you—each and all—to make your contribution to the final stage and to lead your country into independence, peace and stability. I do not minimise the difficulties that lie ahead of you.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“We can hope, therefore, that there will be no resurgence of the tragedies we saw earlier this year. 257. The most desperate human problem at this moment is in Kampuchea. Continual fighting, following the internal troubles of recent years, has uprooted a large part of the population. Food supplies have been severely disrupted. Before long, 10 per cent of the country's population may be starving. Famine would bring a new wave of desperate refugees who would flee to Thailand. The world must stop this disaster happening. Another great effort by the international community is essential. Food and medical supplies must be provided—and right away. New Zealand is ready to join in this new effort. 258. We do not forget that in other regions there are also massive displacements of people. Some of these situations are of tragically long standing.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“They must be able to decide their own future until those conditions exist my Government sees no justification for expelling the present representatives of Kampuchea or for accepting another delegation. 256. Meanwhile, we face the practical problem of dealing with the human consequences of the continuing conflict. On one aspect of it the United Nations has already taken some effective action. The Meeting convened by the Secretary-General in Geneva in July succeeded in mobilizing greatly increased resources for the relief of refugees from Indo-China. My Government welcomed the Secretary-General's initiative. We are playing our part in the programme he has launched. We have also noted with satisfaction the decline in the flow of refugees since the Meeting. That showed that the Government of Viet Nam was accepting its responsibilities.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“My Government accepts as logical the decision taken by the General Assembly on the question of Kampuchean credentials. That does not mean that we condone in any way the policies of the Pol Pot Government. That regime was tyrannical in the extreme. It was notorious for its cruelty and its utter disregard for the most basic human rights of its people. Nevertheless, it was the established Government of Kampuchea, and it was recognized by the international community. The same cannot be said of the regime headed by Heng Samrin. That regime was installed by foreign forces. It has failed to demonstrate its independence. The main aim of any political settlement must be to let the people of Kampuchea express themselves freely without the dominating presence of foreign troops.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“If, however, it ends once and for all, the process of political negotiation can begin. If the withdrawal of forces can be brought about, the normalization of relations can be contemplated. The massive task of relief and rehabilitation for the suffering people of Indo-China can proceed without hindrance. 254. New Zealand has always said that the most pressing need was to begin working towards a political settlement. That need is even more urgent today. Any settlement must be based on the fact that there are three separate countries in Indo-China, each with its own national tradition. These three countries must live closely together. In practice this means that there can be no peace until the independence of Kampuchea is assured and Kampuchea is prepared to co-operate with its neighbours. 255.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“Nationalism runs too high for any one party to impose its will on another by force. Peace will be restored only when the countries of the area—those in Indo-China and their neighbours, too—learn to respect one another's independence and territorial integrity, as they pledged to do when they joined the United Nations. 253. There can be no justification for any government to send armed forces into another country against the will of its people. There is no justification for a government to drive out vast numbers of its own people to hazard their lives on the high seas. It has been abundantly demonstrated that government policies can stimulate, and can retard, the flow of refugees. If that desperate flow of people begins again, the world will know where the responsibility lies.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“It has been able to make a major contribution towards the stability of the But the longer the conflict continues, the greater the danger that the great Powers will once more involved and establish themselves in the area, the longer the fighting goes on in Kampuchea the more risk there is that it will spill over into Thailand. The conflict in Indo-China threatens to jeopardize not only the prosperity of the ASEAN countries but also their effectiveness as an influence for peace and stability in Southeast Asia. 252. Two attempts have been made this year to resolve the conflict by force. Neither has succeeded, the conflict arises from deep-seated issues—ancient animosities, revived and stimulated by recent actions that have been aided and inflamed from outside IndoChina.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“Vast numbers of people have been forced to move. Starvation and suffering are daily facts of life. Fighting goes on and may well spread. The already desperate food shortage threatens to get worse. The situation is little short of disastrous. 250. My Government is deeply concerned by these developments. The conflict in Indo-China has polarized South-East Asia: a gulf of mistrust now divides the States of Indo-China and the members of ASEAN. 251. New Zealand has close and friendly ties with the five countries that belong to ASEAN. We have welcomed the rapid progress they have made in developing their economies and improving the living standards of their peoples. It has been a remarkable achievement. ASEAN has emerged as a significant force in international affairs.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“This year we have followed with attention, and with concern, events in three areas of instability: the Middle East, southern Africa and South-East Asia. We have welcomed the political progress made in the Middle East, limited though that may have been. On the other hand, we have deplored the continued escalation of oil prices, for this has jeopardized efforts to establish a stable world economic order and damaged the economies of many countries. We have taken part, through the Meeting of Heads of Government of Commonwealth Countries in Lusaka, in the efforts of the Commonwealth to break the impasse on Rhodesia. But our most direct concern, naturally enough, has been with the conflict that has taken place nearest to us. The calamitous events in Indo-China have caused us the gravest concern. There we have seen continued armed conflict.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“We admire the leadership Tanzania has given to the movement for self-determination not only in Africa but for all people. We New Zealanders value, in particular, the help Ambassador Salim, as Chairman of the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, has given us as we have worked, loyally and consistently, to promote the principle of self-determination in the small island Territories of the South Pacific which have been associated with us. 249. Ambassador Salim has had the opportunity of seeing how remote and isolated are the islands of the Pacific. New Zealand, too, is remote from the trouble- centres of the world. This geographical isolation, how-ever, has never cut us off from the impact of world events.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“As a member of the Commonwealth, New Zealand is pleased to welcome Saint Lucia to the United Nations and to offer its warmest congratulations to the representatives of Saint Lucia at this session of the General Assembly. We look forward to working with the delegation of Saint Lucia in furthering the purposes of this Organization. 248. It is a pleasure to congratulate you, Sir, and other officers of the Assembly on your election. I should be grateful if you would convey my special greetings to Ambassador Salim, the President of this session. New Zealand values its special link with the United Republic of Tanzania. We work together in partnership, within the Commonwealth. We admire Tanzania's example of self-reliance in the struggle for social and economic progress.”
1979-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 34 (1979)
“It is our hope that U Thant will agree to continue to serve the United Nations and the world community as Secretary-General of this Organization.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“At a time when the United Nations is in faltering health, we believe that this is a good augury for the Organization. For this reason and because, too, of our own friendly ties with Indonesia, a great nation straddling the regions of Asia and the Pacific, New Zealand received news of Indonesia’s decision with much pleasure. 120. In conclusion, I wish to express our deep appreciation for the devoted work of the Secretary-General, Throughout his term of appointment he has worthily maintained the high standards of impartiality and integrity which the Charter demands of his office. He has never spared himself in his search for means to promote and to maintain peace. In this aim, he has had the warm support of the Government and people of New Zealand.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“At this point, I should like to express our pleasure at the recent admission to membership of that international community and this Organization of three new Commonwealth States: first Guyana, and now Botswana and Lesotho, admissions which my delegation has had the privilege of co-sponsoring. I should like also to welcome the return of Indonesia to active membership. It may perhaps be questioned in some quarters whether the entire episode constitutes a good precedent for the Organization. Whatever we may think of the principle, we can at least draw the lesson that even a nation as large and as richly endowed as Indonesia saw greater advantage in full' participation in the work of the United Nations than in being outside it.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“We have heard readiness expressed to consider other proposals also. What is now needed is a constructive response from the other side, a response which Members of the Assembly have a right to expect. 118. It is too much to hope that an additional benefit of a successful negotiation bringing peace to Viet-Nam might be an easing of tension in the whole of Asia — a process which might, in turn, open up possibilities for gradual accommodations between Communist China and the non-communist States of Asia and the West? Such a trend, a softening of hostile attitudes, might then aid the important task of bringing the Government of Peking into a wider and more constructive relationship with the international community at large and with this Organization. 119.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Self-determination for the people of Viet-Nam as a whole can hardly be advanced by allowing South Viet-Nam to have imposed upon it the same lack of choice that marks elections in North Viet-Nam and other communist States. If the people of South Viet-Nam were to choose communism, we should be surprised, even concerned, for nowhere, not even in North Viet-Nam, has a people freely shown by an election or referendum offering a genuine choice, that it wants communism. But if the people of Viet- Nam, North or South, were freely to choose communism, this is their right. If they freely choose to reject communism, this is equally their right. 117. The question now is how to bring the war to an end in a manner which will safeguard this right. We have heard constructive proposals made from this forum.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“But wars of this kind will not be stopped by making them profitable. The world community must make known its desire for a settlement; it cannot ask for a unilateral capitulation. 116. What can such a settlement be? It is not perhaps here t..at its terms can be formulated. This can be done by negotiation among those most directly concerned, as soon as the will to seek a solution is evident on both sides. But such a settlement will surely be one that seeks its modalities and its justification in the wishes of the people most directly concerned. The people of South Viet-Nam should be able to choose their own government and their own political and social system, including the question of relations with the North, free of pressure from any quarter, free from the threat of terror and reprisals.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Those who urge this "cause" as a necessity of some supposed "objective laws" know too what it involves: "The sacrifice of a small number of people in revolutionary wars", says Lin Piao reassuringly, "is repaid by security for whole nations, whole countries and even the whole of mankind; temporary suffering is repaid by lasting or even perpetual peace and happiness". 115. Do any of us here, we who accept the Charter, support this doctrine? New Zealand opposes it, not simply because we reject the ideology that has given birth to it, but because it is a menace to the security of us all. We are not committed to an ideological war. But we are committed to defence against aggression. Certainly, it would be quite wrong for us to let any ideological concern excuse anyone from seeking to bring the war to an end.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Viet-Nam, we are clearly and expressly told, is the example before the world of what will occur — of what will be promoted — elsewhere. 113. The countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America already know from experience what this means. Guerrilla wars were seen in several countries of Asia in the forties and fifties. In South-East Asia the people of the Philippines, Malaysia, Laos, Indonesia and Burma do not need to look at Viet-Nam today to see what such a war would mean, as the Prime Minister of Laos pointed out from this rostrum a few minutes ago. The newly independent States of Africa have been told that they are ripe for revolution. The nations of Latin America have been similarly advised by a recent conference held in their region. 114.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Mao Tse-tung says that: "The seizure of power by armed force, the settlement of the issue by war, is the central task and the highest form of revolution. This Marxist-Leninist principle of revolution holds good universally, for China and for all other countries." Mao Tse-tung lays down: "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun". Lin Piao, his prophet, proclaims that "fighting is the pivot of all our strategy and tactics" and that "war of annihilation is the fundamental guiding principle of our military operations". This, we are told, is the inevitable future course of events for Asia, Africa and Latin America. "Protracted war" in these areas will come, must come, and must be promoted and supported.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“But when an attempt is made to impose a National Liberation Front government by force, and our assistance has been asked, the principles that have long governed our policy demand that we give it. 111. None of us can fail to be moved by the material and human tragedy of this war. It is a war not fought upon a narrow and defined front, but in the midst of the people themselves, day by day, month by month, year by year. The grenade thrown into the restaurant, the airstrike from the sky, the mortar attack upon a village, the operation to clear a road, the assassination of local officials and their families: all take their toll, and the toll, we know, is heavy. It is horrifying. It must be stopped. The only question that can divide us can be: how to stop it. 112. Unfortunately not everyone regards such a war with horror.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Through all the difficulties and vicissitudes of recent years we have seen no major group or political figure rally to the National Front; but we have seen many struggle against it at great cost and risk. We do not believe that victory for a so-called National Liberation Front would be a victory for national liberation or for the future of the nation. We have seen, in the north of Viet-Nam and elsewhere, by what means and at what price such a regime would impose its will and deal with those who oppose it. If the people of South Viet-Nam were to choose a National Liberation Front government, we would accept that decision, however great our regret and our concern for them and for ourselves.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“That is why the Charter is founded on the notion that a threat to the peace anywhere is a matter of general concern. That is why this Organization exists. That is why none of us here in this Assembly can stand aloof from what is happening in Viet-Nam today, whether or not the matter appears formally on our agenda. That is why New Zealand has responded to the request for military assistance from the Republic of Viet-Nam. 110. The effort in which New Zealand has joined is not designed to impose a government or a regime upon the people of Viet-Nam, whether North or South. We do not believe that the people of South Viet-Nam want a communist government or a communist front government.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“In the 1930's we were farther still from Manchuria; from Ethiopia; and from Czechoslovakia and Poland. Yet we found then that developments in those places carried implications for our own safety and for the world's safety. We were further still from Korea in 1950 than from Viet-Nam today; but we recognized then that armed attack, even though it might be across the demarcation line of a politically divided country, was nonetheless aggression, and a threat to us along with others. Whether the seeds of conflict appear in Europe, as in Berlin in 1948, or in Africa, as in the Congo in 1960, or in Latin America, as in Cuba in 1962, we have seen that our fate can be involved in the outcome of events in many places, places more distant from us than Viet-Nam.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Others have said that this war is, in essence, or was, in origin, a civil war within South Viet-Nam. There is no doubt that political and social weaknesses in the Republic of Viet-Nam have contributed to the success of communist military tactics. But we believe the evidence of the direction and support of the Viet-Cong forces from North Viet-Nam to be undeniable. We believe further that the extent of this direction and support is such that the war cannot be regarded simply as a civil war within the South: there is also clear aggression from the North. Countries such as New Zealand do not seek to become involved in a civil war, but we cannot disregard an act of aggression, 109. My country lies remote from Viet-Nam, more than five thousand miles distant from that unhappy country.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“There are those who deny that an attempt by North Viet-Nam to impose a government and political system on South Viet-Nam by force can be an act of aggression. To their eyes it can be only a civil war. One must ask whether this Organization should have stood aside when North Korea attacked South Korea in 1950; on the grounds that to assist would have been to interfere in the domestic affairs of the Korean people. One must ask whether some of those who put forward this notion would have stood aside had the Federal Republic of Germany attacked East Germany. Would they then have argued that an attempt to achieve the unity and independence of the German people by force could not be regarded as aggression because the Germany people could not possibly commit aggression against themselves? 108.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Some features of the situation are particular to Viet-Nam; others are shared with other countries which, in the post-war years, became divided into communist and noncommunist zones. The fact of such division is regrettable. But it exists: in Germany, in Korea, in Viet-Nam. The people of all these divided States will, we hope, be able to achieve reunification, if they so wish, by their own decision, through a democratic process, through self-determination. But, pending these decisions, an attempt by one part of such a State to impose reunification under its own political system by force — whether by direct invasion, as in Korea in 1950, or by a war of terror and subversion, a so-called war of national liberation, as in Viet- Nam today — is not an act of self-determination: it is an act of aggression.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Need I mention, for example, the losing battle between population growth and the expansion of food production. 106. These reflections bring me directly to the question of the conflict in Viet-Nam. Great as may be the other issues that confront the world, and this Assembly, the situation in Viet-Nam carries the most immediate threat to peace and the gravest implications for us all. This Organization — and more especially this body — may not be the forum in which the problem can be resolved. But this Organization and this Assembly are certainly a fitting place, indeed the only place, for all of us to voice our concern at the situation and our common desire to see negotiations begin for a just settlement. 107. The situation in Viet-Nam is not simple, though some of the issues it raises are.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Let us not disguise it: it would be too great an irony if the United Nations itself were to be used to pioneer a return to the anarchy of what we believed was a by-gone age. 105. The lesson is clear: either we are going to develop our procedures and practices to apply the principles of the Charter to new forms of aggression which have been proclaimed and practised in recent years; or this Organization, and international law, will become less and less relevant to the realities of international life. Those realities, unless we are more successful, may well see a world with many more nuclear States adding to regional insecurity in many areas, in circumstances in which political stability may continue to be undermined — shaken by the stresses of inadequate responses to real needs.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“It must be said frankly, too, that this tendency favours the clandestine, the attack launched but publicly denied; and those nations whose systems of government do not easily lend themselves to such surreptitious implementation of policy may find themselves condemned if they frankly acknowledge their own inevitable response. This sort of dual standard, of which there are signs already, is scarcely a prescription for international peace; it is, rather, a prescription for the comity of nations to become, in practice, the comity of hard knocks, a comity of reprisals. 104. The authority of international law is being steadily eroded as national policies are pressed in defiance of its slowly developed rules. We have gone several steps back to the jungle, despite the existence of the United Nations.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“This whole question of the preservation of peace and security, of interposition by international peacekeeping missions, and of the development of peaceful settlement procedures is vital to this Organization and to the world community. Let us not delude ourselves. In this respect the Organization is not working as it should. We shall all have to live, or try to live, with the consequences. 103. Increasingly, it must be noted, a practice of injury by stealth is being followed. This tendency is not confined either to one continent or region or to one kind of power struggle or ideological conflict. Those so injured, if they cannot get redress here, will tend to reply as best they can.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)