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

“In fact, the question of the peaceful settlement of disputes is, in New Zealand's view, an essential part of the whole structure for international cooperation built at San Francisco. No one, so it seems to us, who genuinely subscribes to the ideals of the Charter could object to it. Yet there is objection, on the one hand from those who claim that for us to get to grips with procedures for the peaceful settlement of disputes would circumvent the Charter; and on the other hand from those who conceive it to be a manoeuvre to divert attention from one specific need for a non-peaceful settlement of a dispute. We cannot but be concerned at the implications of both objections. 102.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“There is a need for some alternative to the all too common contemporary sequence: ceasefire, then political stalemate. Should we not at least be seeking to give greater practical reality to the principles which are contained in the Charter? Would it, as one great Power so speciously maintains, be superfluous or involve a violation of the Charter to fill out in more detail the means of peaceful settlement which are sketched in summary form in the Charter? Surely not. Even the conduct of this Assembly, an organ established by the Charter with prescribed powers, needs rules of procedure to permit it to function effectively. Why then should we not at least consider what scope there is for providing agreed procedures to carry out in practice the principles of political behaviour to which our signature of the Charter committed us? 101.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“In the meantime we, for our part, shall preserve the hope that continuing differences on issues of principle and continuing uncertainty as to financial backing will be overcome should a specific situation arise. 99. A related question, that of peaceful settlement of disputes, also deserves exploration but, again, has been set back, this time with aid from an unexpected quarter. In many ways it is a more important question than the mechanics of peace-keeping, for here we come to the core of peaceful change. 100. A domestic political and legal system, by analogy, preserves and enforces law and order the more effectively because it is buttressed by provision for redress of grievances through either the courts or the legislature.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The Organization can still undertake peace-keeping functions in an emergency by the ad hoc methods to which it is obliged to resort. There has been proof of that, most recently in the case of the fighting between India and Pakistan last year. 98. We are only too well aware, from practical experience, of the difficulties inherent in the present situation which make the financing of peace-keeping operations uncertain and unfair, and which prevent or inhibit the proper planning of their logistics and common services. We deplore this unsatisfactory situation. Nevertheless, it is a situation we may have to live with, the facts of international life being what they are.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“We are also attracted by the Secretary-General’s suggestion [A/6301/Add.1, p. 4] that an authoritative study might be undertaken of all that is involved, in effort and cost, in a decision to make nuclear weapons; it seems reasonable to assume that the publication of such an analysis would be a salutary discouragement to potential proliferators. 97. If the United Nations has so often been handicapped in the major issues affecting peace and security and in the negotiations on disarmament, it has, as we all know, had some success in the secondary role of interposition: that is, of peace-keeping. Yet even here we face serious difficulties. It would, however, be well not to exaggerate the difficulties or to press prematurely for abstract remedies; failure to achieve theoretical agreement may do concrete damage.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“At this point it is sufficient to say that New Zealand fully shares the widely endorsed view that a nonproliferation treaty and a comprehensive test ban are the urgent problems in this field — the first, and perhaps the easiest, hurdles which we should seek to clear. 95. Some maintain that progress is impossible unless and until every militarily significant State is both a participant and a party. We do not share this view. Such universality is a desirable goal — one for which we were prepared to support the proposal to convene a world disarmament conference — but it cannot be conceded to be an absolute prerequisite. Otherwise, in all realism, defeat must be conceded. At least, therefore, we must search for agreements of limited scope and possibly even of defined duration. 96.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“New Zealand has repeatedly made clear its opposition to continued nuclear testing in the atmosphere. We have objected to the tests conducted ty Communist China; and we have protested, so far unavailingly, against the series of tests in the South Pacific which France has now began to conduct, albeit with as much care for the interests of those situated in the area as the present state of this terrible art permits. We object to continued atmospheric testing, both because of the potential hazards, however slight, to the natural environment and because of the graver dangers to the political environment. 94. I do not intend to dwell on these issues, since there are appropriate items on our agenda under which they should be discussed.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Admittedly, it is a two-way process — armaments in turn feed the fires in which they are forged. But until political relationships ease, major steps of real disarmament are not likely to be taken. What we must try to do, therefore, is to prevent the situation from becoming more dangerous and more complicated, perhaps beyond remedy, and to take the limited measures of progress that are possible, in the hope that by so doing we enlarge the realm of what is possible. 92. Already, there has been some success in this limited field in the shape of the partial test-ban Treaty of 1963. My Government welcomed that Treaty. We believe that it has been vindicated, despite the difficulties which have attended all efforts to extend its scope; and despite the fact that two Powers which possess some nuclear weapons have chosen to ignore it. 93.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Early this year there was resistance even to the proposal to place the question of Viet-Nam on the Council's agenda for discussion; and in recent days we have been treated to the spectacle of an obstructive filibuster to delay consideration of an urgent complaint. Moreover, the expanded Council this year, widely accepted as being in its structure more truly representative of the United Nations membership than its recent predecessors, has not been able to do better than they: and it has, indeed, on occasion done worse and often been unable to reach even simple practical decisions in circumstances in which they were plainly warranted. That is not a reassuring phenomenon in the world of today. 91. The armaments of the contemporary world are, in fact, a measure of the extent of present international distrust.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Largely, it must be said, because of the restraint of the great Powers, in sober awareness of the nature of the weapons available in their own and in each other's nuclear armouries. The role which the United Nations has been able or has been permitted to play in their conflicts of interest, although on occasion useful, has necessarily been limited. In one recent and major instance, that of the fighting last year between India and Pakistan, the Security Council was able to act as its founders intended, because the great Powers discovered a common interest in peace higher than any of their otherwise divergent national interests. In many other circumstances, however, even relatively minor ones, the powers of the Council have been frustrated and its standing diminished.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“We have indeed come some distance in the twenty-one years since San Francisco in developing genuinely international attitudes and in devising international responses to the challenges which face all peoples. It would, I know, be unjust to underestimate the extent of that achievement. We have taken many strides forward; but the substance and even the shape of some of the most crucial problems of our time, it must be admitted, still elude us and in fact dance on even faster ahead of us. Nowhere is that sense of frustration, of grappling with phantoms, greater than in the principal questions of peace and security and of disarmament. 90. True, the fabric of world peace, while torn, has so far held together. Why?”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“At this point I should like to dwell for a moment on a general trend which is, I believe, causing concern in many quarters: that is, the increasing tendency of Assembly resolutions to be declamatory rather than considered statements, crammed with sweeping and often unsubstantiated assertions, loaded with emotion-charged and often questionable judgements — and sometimes obscure or even meaningless language — and containing virtually no serious regard for the means, the cost or the consequences of their implementation. Already the significance of General Assembly pronouncements has been eroded. This process of devaluation diminishes the standing of the Assembly and diminishes us, its Members, too. 89.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Even apart from that consideration, the practical consequences of the courses of action sometimes proposed must always be thought through and their potential cost — not only in terms of money but also in terms of lives — reflected upon. We can understand the pressure some Members feel to designate situations that are repugnant to them as threats to the peace. We can understand, but we cannot necessarily accept; for to enlarge the scope of the Charter provisions designed to meet a threat to the peace may also be to dilute them. We should all then be the poorer and the less secure. 88.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Confronted with objectionable behaviour or seemingly intransigent situations, it may be tempting to enlarge the scope of the definition of a threat to peace and thus to commit the international community to the use of force in a widening circle of international problems. It may be tempting; but it would represent a distortion of the Charter and a transformation of the United Nations, not only far beyond what we believe was ever intended or even conceived by the countries which drafted and signed the Charter at San Francisco, but far beyond what we believe would be acceptable if a new Charter were being negotiated at some fresh conference at this time.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Protection from aggression was provided for; standards for political evolution were set. There was no provision for punitive crusades. The range of activities of this Organization and of the specialized agencies can, and should, be expanded by broad agreement and within the terms of the Charter to meet new needs or old needs as they come to be more keenly felt. They have in fact been so expanded. The Charter has been constantly interpreted and developed. But, in respect of the ultimate weapon in our armoury, mandatory enforcement measures and especially the mandatory use of force, we should be well advised to think very carefully before we distort or relax the limitations imposed in the Charter; for these represent today, as heretofore, the maximum that Governments are prepared to accept.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“That the aid of the international community should be sought as a means of expressing disapproval of this colonial condition and of bringing weight to bear to help to change it is also entirely understandable. We may soon face another and fateful question: whether this weight ought to be fully mobilized immediately at undefined, but virtually limitless, cost. The Charter has provisions which make it possible to bring to bear, if ultimately necessary, an unlimited degree of force to defeat a major breach of peace. The question now looming is whether these provisions are to be interpreted as authority for the institution to make similar sacrifices for the righting of wrongs. 87. There is a protective as well as a positive element in the original doctrines of this Organization.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“I shall not speak at this stage in specific terms, since on one such issue — that of South West Africa — New Zealand's position has already been made clear and, on others, more appropriate opportunities will soon be furnished. Rather, I wish to make some general observations on the nature of these issues as they affect this Organization. I make them because, as a small country, New Zealand has valued the United Nations: support of the United Nations has been one of the main pillars of our foreign policy. 86. That the persistence of colonialism and of racial discrimination in Africa is felt as an affront to all independent African States of the continent we fully appreciate.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The adoption at the twentieth session of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination [resolution 2106A (XX)] was, we believe, an achievement of very considerable significance. This Convention can be expected to do much to help combat the denial of human dignity which, in various shapes and forms, is both widespread and peculiarly persistent. I am glad to be able to announce that my Government has now authorized its signature. 85. The international community, however, is now faced with certain intractable colonial problems, intertwined with dangerous divisions based on race, which exist especially in southern Africa.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“In fact, it may be held that in some ways the most effective aspect of the work of this Organization has been in the field of colonial and Trust Territories, generally in co-operation with the metropolitan Powers concerned. New Zealand has played a part in that process, in both its colonial and its trusteeship aspects, and as an administering Power we welcomed the contribution of the United Nations to our task of bringing to self- determination the dependent peoples for whose progress we had assumed, responsibility. 84. Another and related aspect of the work of the United Nations which has recently been given a new impetus is that of promoting and protecting fundamental human rights and freedoms.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Today, for example, no one would question that problems of development are international in scale and must find their place on the agenda of the world community and its various institutions. What an advance this is. Only a generation ago it was not even generally accepted that Governments should actively concern themselves with the state of their own nation’s economy, let alone with the economic health of their neighbours or of the whole family of man. Similarly, as the concurrent debate on South West Africa has reminded us, it is less than fifty years ago that the concept of the "sacred trust" was laid down in the Mandates System of the League of Nations. But that decision contributed to the process of decolonization which the United Nations has assisted so vigorously and to which its membership today bears witness.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“In its other aspects, notably in its intensified concern with matters of economic and social development and with the right of dependent peoples to self-determination, the Charter went considerably further than the Covenant of the League had done. These were two fields in which New Zealand was able to make some positive contribution at San Francisco, a fact in which we take pride. The Charter, therefore, set the Organization on a course designed to preserve peace and to facilitate peaceful change. Peace and peaceful change — these were the twin roads by which world security was to be approached. 83. The objectives of the international community which are contained in the Charter are now taken for granted. It is, therefore, salutary to look back to the time, not too distant, when assumptions were different.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The result was not quite what all of them had hoped for; as the then Prime Minister of New Zealand, leader of our delegation observed to the New Zealand Parliament on his return: "Not security itself but the way to security lies in the Charter ... it will by no means resolve in advance all the problems that lie in the way of the nations of the world. It can do no more than set up the rules and procedures by which those problems may be approached." 82. The rules and procedures, the principles, the purposes and the machinery were established. But clearly the real test of their effectiveness would be the way the machinery was used and developed.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“We meet at a time when even the most optimistic among us must confess to a deep and growing sense of concern at the tide of events on almost every international front. The Secretary-General himself has in a number of recent statements given voice to his mounting anxiety; it is not, I believe, an exaggeration to describe his statements as expressing foreboding and despondency. I propose to describe first some aspects of the world scene and of the work of the United Nations as they seem to us; and then to look especially at the most immediately dangerous situation which confronts the international community: the war in Viet-Nam. 81. The United Nations, like its predecessor, the League of Nations, was created in order to preserve international peace. That was the prime intention of the representatives who met at San Francisco in 1945.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“78. The task of ensuring full expression of the diverse views of 121 Member States, while still bringing our deliberations to a constructive outcome, is no sinecure. Our gratitude and appreciation are due to the retiring President, Mr. Fanfani, for his notable contribution to the work of the preceding session. 79. In congratulating you, Sir, on your elevation to the Presidency of this Assembly, the New Zealand delegation pledges its co-operation with you in your demanding duty of attempting to channel in a positive direction the authority which the Assembly possesses. At a time when the problems of Asia are of such primary concern, it is altogether appropriate, as many have remarked before me, that it should be a distinguished son of Asia who presides over our deliberations. 80.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)