YouSaid · the spoken record

Pirzada

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS PIRZADA

lines on the record: 94
first: 1966-09-24
most recent: 1967-09-24
sittings or episodes: 2
sources: un-general-debate

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

“Serious thought needs to be given to issues like the softening of the terms of foreign assistance so that the debt-servicing burden, which is becoming heavier and heavier, can be reduced. Equally urgent are the questions of preferences and the liberalization of trade. We need to explore urgently the possibility of granting a larger share to the developing countries in earnings from invisibles, particularly shipping. The conclusion of commodity agreements which would emancipate the developing countries from the constant uncertainty resulting from the fluctuation of prices is imperative. 82.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“In the field of trade, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development was a milestone in making clear the impediments which stood in the way of stabilizing the prices of primary commodities and expanding exports from the developing countries. It is regrettable that the recommendations of the Conference, even those adopted unanimously, have not yet been concretely implemented. As an example, let me mention the position with regard to commodities. An agreement on sugar was finalized, but unfortunately its implementation has left much to be desired. Furthermore, an attempt was again made earlier this year to conclude an international cocoa agreement, but it was not successful because some countries failed positively to respond to the exporting countries' just aspirations. 81.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“They can acquire foreign exchange, first, by inflows of capital through assistance provided by the richer nations either bilaterally or multilaterally, and secondly, by increasing their exports. 79. It is indeed depressing to see that the annual transfer of development capital from the developed to the developing countries still remains far short of the target of 1 per cent of the gross national product of the developed countries, which was reaffirmed when the General Assembly designated the 1960s as the United Nations Development Decade [see resolutions 1710 and 1711 (XVI)]. In fact, the ratio between resource transfers to the developing countries and the gross output of the capital-exporting countries has actually declined from 0.84 per cent in 1961 to 0.65 per cent in 1964. 80.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The Committee for Development Planning and the various committees of the Trade and Development Board have met and helped to identify the problems facing the developing countries in accelerating their economic growth. 78. The mere establishment or strengthening of institutions cannot, however, provide solutions. The grim reality is that even after we have passed the mid-point of the United Nations Development Decade, the goals set for the Decade are far from being achieved. The reason is obvious. The developing countries need capital, particularly foreign exchange, to implement their economic development plans. They have only very slight possibilities of increasing domestic capital formation because consumption levels continue to be extremely low and there is no further room for squeezing them.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“In consonance with this stand, we lend our full support to the people of that country in their struggle for the same cause. 76. I am happy to state that, as a result of the mediatory efforts of His Majesty the Shah of Iran, the relations between Pakistan and Malaysia have been restored. We are grateful to the Shah for the interest and pains he took in cementing ties between Malaysia and Pakistan and it is our hope that a new chapter in those relations has opened. 77. Let me now turn to the world economic situation. Since last year we have seen the establishment of new, and the strengthening of some existing, institutional machinery. The creation of the Asian Development Bank and the working-out of procedures which would lead to the effective functioning of the United Nations Organization for Industrial Development are notable examples.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The United Kingdom has declared its intention to withdraw its military base from Aden and to grant independence to this Territory not later than 1968. These are steps in the right direction, Pakistan is, however, of the view that the independence date need not be delayed, and that South Arabia should assume its rightful place in the comity of free nations earlier than 1968. 75. The question of Oman is also essentially a colonial problem involving the right of self-determination of the people of the territory. In the past the United Kingdom and the authorities in the territory have prevented the United Nations Ad Hoc Committee on Oman from visiting the Territory. This is rather unfortunate. Pakistan has strongly supported all struggles for independence based on the right of self-determination.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“We believe that the question of Cyprus could be resolved only in the context of the long historical, traditional and cultural backgrounds of the two communities inhabiting the island State. Real and lasting peace can be achieved and sustained only on the basis of the preservation of the legitimate rights and interests of the two communities and the observance of international obligations and treaties. It is, therefore, of paramount importance that the parties that are directly involved honour their obligations and do not attempt to repudiate their international commitments. 74. In conformity with its policy of opposition to colonialism in all its forms and manifestations, Pakistan supports the right of the people of South Arabia to freedom and independence.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“In Pakistan's view, the United Nations cannot absolve itself of its responsibility in the matter, and we hope that this body will consider suitable steps to ensure the restoration to the peoples of Palestine of their legitimate rights. 73. We are very much concerned over the fact that the Greek and the Turkish communities in Cyprus have not yet been able to resolve their differences, and, consequently, the situation in Cyprus continues to present a serious threat to peace and stability in the Eastern Mediterranean region. It is, however, gratifying to see that the United Nations presence in the island State has served to restore and maintain peace and has averted a reversion to violence and conflict.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The Palestine question continues to fester, with no end in sight to the heart-rending misery of a million human beings who have been deprived of their rights in their homeland, despite the existing resolutions of the United Nations, which Israel continues to flout with impunity. The truce over Palestine remains precarious, as was proved once again last July when the Israeli air force committed a violation by launching an aggressive attack against Syrian territory. While the Security Council was virtually unanimous in criticizing Israel for this culpable attack, it is to be regretted that it failed to adopt a resolution condemning Israel for its aggression.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“It now remains for the Security Council to take further consequential and effective action in accordance with the wishes of the African and Asian nations. 71. The Government and the people of Pakistan are equally concerned over the struggle of the peoples of Angola and Mozambique, which are at present under Portuguese domination. My country will continue to offer its whole-hearted support to the United Nations in any action that it may decide to take to enable the peoples of Angola and Mozambique to exercise their right of self-determination. It cannot accept the plea of the colonial Power that these areas constitute an integral part of its territory and that, as such, their peoples are not entitled to determine their own future. 72.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“On the question of Southern Rhodesia, my delegation has already made it abundantly clear, both in the Security Council and the General Assembly last year, as well as at the Commonwealth Prime Minister s' Conference, held in September 1966, that Pakistan regards the unilateral declaration of independence by the usurpers of Salisbury as illegal. This cancer must be removed, and removed surgically, from the body politic of Africa. My Government has imposed the complete and effective boycott of the Smith regime, as indeed most other Members of our Organization have done, in accordance with the Security Council resolutions. Unfortunately, because of the support the Salisbury regime has continued to receive from the Governments of some of the neighbouring States, the illegal authorities in Southern Rhodesia remain in power.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“We have welcomed the adoption by the General Assembly of the Declaration and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination [resolutions 1904 (XVIII) and 2106 (XX)]. In the opinion of my Government, it is the duty of the world community to eradicate the evils of racial inequality. In pursuance of its well-known attitude and policies, my Government has signed and recently ratified the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. 70.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Is it too late to hope that those who wield power in that benighted land, will realize the tragedy which stalks their people and will turn away from the disaster to which they are leading their own country and the continent where they have made their home? The rulers of South Africa appear to have set their foot firmly on the path of unreason and self-isolation. The United Nations has failed in its persuasions with the rulers of South Africa, but cannot fail in its obligation towards mankind. It is our clear duty to take such steps as will make the South African Government see the folly of its ways and will make it cease to be a danger to the peace of Africa and the tranquillity of the world, 69.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Animated by desire for the survival of a gifted people, rich in history, Pakistan has consistently advocated a peaceful solution of the Viet-Nam conflict. We maintain that peace will not come by ever-increasing military measures. In our view there can be no military solution. It is our firm conviction that a peaceful settlement of the Viet-Nam conflict can only be brought about if the people of Viet-Nam themselves work out their destiny in peace and freedom. 68. The recent happenings in South Africa are a grim sign and omen of the subterranean forces of hate and bitterness unleashed by the inhuman policies of the Government of South Africa.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“For over twenty years the people of Viet-Nam have been struggling to achieve their freedom and national unity. A whole generation has grown up in the midst of war. The dangers inherent in the continuation of this conflict are apparent to all. None are more aware of these dangers than the countries of the region, for whom this escalating conflict carries the most fearful implications. Unless the world community and in particular the Power whose interests are most directly involved, take positive measures urgently to stem the tide of war, a much wider conflagration may overtake us. 67. The people of Pakistan, like the people all over the world, are deeply concerned with the ever-increasing fury of the war in Viet-Nam. It has caused and continues to cause untold sorrow, suffering and misery to the Vietnamese people.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“In fact, we can appreciate more fully, for example, the spirit and determination which animate the people of Rhodesia in their struggle against the rule of a racist minority; the defiance of the people of Angola and Mozambique against the fiction that they form integral parts of a self-appointed mother country; the fight which the people of South West Africa and South Africa wage in the face of the South African Government's persistent disregard of the principles of the United Nations and its contempt for the resolutions of this world Organization, as well as its brazen violation of the international agreements by which the Mandate of South West Africa was placed in its charge. 66. The attention of the whole world is focussed on the conflict in Viet-Nam.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“A people's passion for freedom is unconquerable. Force and oppression can succeed no more in Jammu and Kashmir than in other parts of the world where people struggle for freedom from alien domination. Mr. President, the other day you referred to the promissory note given to Africa which must now be honoured. The United Nations gave a promissory note also to the people of Kashmir that they would be allowed to choose their destiny themselves. That promissory note also must now be honoured. 65. If my country is concerned with the problems it has to face in its relations with its immediate neighbour, we are not for that reason less aware of the tensions and problems which prevail in other parts of the world.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“In what way are the Indian professions of friendship to Pakistan compatible with the actions it is taking in occupied Jammu and Kashmir? The recent exchange of correspondence between the two countries concerning the settlement of their disputes and differences under the procedure agreed upon at Tashkent shows that the unconditional talks proposed by India will mean, in fact, a shelving of purposeful negotiations on Kashmir. The discussions India contemplates would at best provide the occasion for a fruitless and acrimonious debate on India's claim to sovereignty over Jammu and Kashmir. 64. We do not wish India to entertain the delusion that, with the passage of time, Pakistan's resolution will waver and that, by force of arms and weight of oppression, the spirit of the people of Kashmir can be crushed.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The very issue between the two countries is that India is not sovereign over Jammu and Kashmir, that its presence there has no sanction other than the sanction of force and that there can be no settlement of the dispute which does not reflect the wishes of the people of the State. India asserts that a solution can be found only through bilateral negotiations. It claims that it is ready for discussions without preconditions on all outstanding disputes and differences between the two countries. How should one reconcile these assertions with moves being made for the integration of Jammu and Kashmir with India? How should one reconcile these assertions with the continuous affirmation of the claim that the disputed State of Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India?”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The question which must be answered is, will the disputes between Pakistan and India be settled through peaceful means or will the path of force and oppression, chosen by India in Jammu and Kashmir, lead to the repetition of past history? Pakistan has shown its willingness, throughout the years, to let reason be the guide of its actions and goodwill the anchor of its policies. We are prepared today, as we have always been, to sit across the table and seek ways of settling the Jammu and Kashmir dispute on the basis of justice and honour. 63. Negotiations cannot, however, be held if the Government of India continues to maintain that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India and Indian sovereignty over the State is not negotiable.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Once again, as in the past, a farce will be played out in which a hand-picked electorate will elect puppet candidates, while the real spokesman of the people remain behind bars, while the parties which reflect the sentiments of the people are forced to boycott the election, and when the very use of the word "self-determination" has become an offence punishable by ten years' imprisonment under a so-called law enacted by the Government of India in June of this year. 62. These are the realities of the situation which confront the oppressed people of Jammu and Kashmir and cast their shadow upon relations between Pakistan and India and their 600 million inhabitants.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“It is not possible, however, to turn one's back on realities without having to face the consequences of doing so. The reality in Jammu and Kashmir today is that the equivalent of six divisions of Indian soldiery are stationed there to suppress the people. Sheikh Abdullah, to whom the late Prime Minister Nehru offered his pledge and his hand fifteen years ago, has spent thirteen of those years in Indian prisons. He has been joined there by all the accredited leaders of the people of Jammu and Kashmir, by all those who fight for freedom at the cost of personal liberty and at the risk of life. Kashmir, which was guaranteed the right to decide its future affiliation, is not today free to prescribe the text books which its children may read. Preparations are now afoot for holding another so-called election in the occupied territory.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“I have no doubt that, after I finish, the representative of India will, in the style of the representative of South Africa, mount this rostrum and seek to justify his country's defiance of the United Nations and dishonouring of its pledged word on Kashmir. The Assembly will hear again, as it has in the past, about Pakistan's alleged aggression, about the sanctity of the instrument of accession — signed by a feudal autocrat — about elections and secularism, about Indian democracy, the Chinese threat and so forth. All these matters have been debated before and we shall debate them again if need be. 61. But we have not come here to bandy words. It is easy to confuse issues in a case which has remained unresolved for nineteen years.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“With the passage of every year, with the failure of every mission, with the rejection of every proposal, suggestion and recommendation, it has become clear that the only obstacle — the only one — which stands in the way of settling the Jammu and Kashmir dispute and of putting an end to conflict between Pakistan and India, is India's obstinacy in hanging on to Jammu and Kashmir at all costs — at the cost of peace in the region, the value of its pledged word, the prestige and effectiveness of the United Nations and the welfare of its own vast populations. 60. The Kashmir dispute has a long history written in blood.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“To appreciate the seriousness of this situation, it is not necessary to rehearse the merits of the dispute concerning Jammu and Kashmir. The records of the Security Council and of this Assembly contain abundant material on the basis of which impartial Governments can make their own judgement.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“How should one evaluate the present policy of a Government which, in solemn language, has given its word, made its pledge, affirmed its duty, freely to permit the people of Jammu and Kashmir to exercise their right of self-determination — a right enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and guaranteed by the agreement between the two countries which is embodied in the General Assembly resolutions relating to the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan; a right which is inalienable to, and inherent in, all peoples, and upon the basis of which the countries of Africa and Asia and India and Pakistan themselves regained their independence and in vindication of which the people of Angola and Mozambique, Rhodesia and South Africa pursue their valiant struggle. 59.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“This is the position now taken by a country which has given solemn pledges to the people of Jammu and Kashmir and to this world Organization that the future status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will be determined by the wishes of the people of that State ascertained through a fair and impartial plebiscite. 58. Against this background, how should one describe the statements made by the Indian leaders that the fate of Kashmir is sealed forever?”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“To illustrate India's attitude, one needs only to read a number of statements made by Indian leaders on the question of settling the Jammu and Kashmir dispute since the Tashkent Declaration was signed. In these statements it is being asserted that Kashmir is not negotiable and that the accession of the State to India is final and irrevocable. These affirmations are made on behalf of a Government which undertook at Tashkent to eschew the use of force and to seek a peaceful settlement of all its disputes with Pakistan. This defiance is flung in the face of an Organization under whose auspices the two countries reached a solemn agreement to withdraw their forces from the disputed territory and to allow its people to decide the question of accession in a free and impartial plebiscite.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Developments in the relations between India and Pakistan in the last six months have done nothing to encourage the expectation that the lessons of past experience are being imbibed and a fresh beginning might be attempted. This is not the occasion to give an account of what has gone wrong in these months, of the stirring-up of emotions where the need is for calm reasoning, of the fanning of tensions where there is a need for tranquillity. The central tendency remains what it was in the past — the repudiation of every means of settlement, the refusal to engage in a purposeful dialogue, the deliberate rejection of the procedure and possibilities of a peaceful settlement of outstanding disputes.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“When, early this year, the Foreign Ministers of the two countries met in Rawalpindi in pursuance of the agreement reached at Tashkent, their meetings ended with the following joint communique, issued on 2 March 1966: "The two sides proposed for discussion and settlement subjects to which they attached high priority in the interest of peaceful and good neighbourly relations between India and Pakistan. The Pakistan side pointed out the special importance of reaching a settlement of the Jammu and Kashmir dispute. Both sides agreed that all disputes between India and Pakistan should be resolved to promote and strengthen peace between the two countries." The hopes which were thus raised have, unfortunately, not been fulfilled.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Immediately after reaffirming the obligations of the two parties to settle their disputes by peaceful means, the Tashkent Declaration solemnly stated that the interests of peace in their region were not served by the continuance of tension between the two countries. In a later paragraph, the Declaration recorded the pledge of both countries to "take measures to implement the existing agreements between India and Pakistan". The Declaration also indicated the manner in which the signatories would discharge these obligations and implement the Declaration. In its article IX, provision was made for periodical meetings to discuss and negotiate the settlement of all outstanding issues, differences and disputes between them. 57.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The reality is that as long as this dispute remains unsettled, the destinies of the two peoples will remain overshadowed by uncertainty and fear. 56. The Tashkent Declaration recognized this reality. The first commitment undertaken by both sides in this Declaration was that "both sides will exert all efforts to create good neighbourly relations between India and Pakistan in accordance with the United Nations Charter". The Declaration added: "They reaffirm their obligation under the Charter not to have recourse to force and to settle their disputes through peaceful means". It is plain that the Declaration reinforces the obligations of both parties under the Charter of the United Nations.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“We want to call a halt to the race in armaments which threatens to nullify the efforts of both countries for the progress and prosperity of their peoples. We are willing to co-operate in this endeavour and in many other ways for the benefit of the two peoples. That has been our policy towards India; that remains and will continue to be our policy towards it. 55. Peace can never be established by an evasion of realities. The reality of the India-Pakistan situation is that it is the dispute concerning the disposition of Jammu and Kashmir which has brought the two countries twice to armed conflict within the span of one generation and prevented them from having a rational and neighbourly relationship.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“I take this opportunity to pay a tribute to the Soviet statesman whose peace-making efforts made possible the signing of this joint declaration. The Tashkent Declaration of 10 January 1966 promised to open the way to a peaceful settlement of the Kashmir dispute and to put an end to the continuous conflict which has plagued relations between the two countries. 54. That the Declaration could be a turning point in the affairs of the region is beyond question. This was the intention with which Pakistan signed the Declaration, and this is the spirit which has animated our attitude and policy towards India since it was made. We wished that our two countries would make a new beginning in our mutual relations; we desire to resolve the dispute between our two countries in a manner which would be honourable to both and just to all concerned.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Talks on disarmament have gone on for years with little to show by way of progress. Even as these interminable discussions continue at Geneva, a new and more immediate peril, that of an uncontrolled and uncontrollable proliferation of nuclear weapons, threatens to overtake the world. 53. Peace in our sub-continent remains troubled and uneasy. A year ago at this time my country had resisted an invasion from its neighbour, India. In January of this year, at the invitation of Chairman Kosygin, the Prime Minister of the Soviet Union, the President of Pakistan met the late Prime Minister of India, Mr, Lai Bahadur Shastri, in the city of Tashkent and signed a declaration to restore peace between Pakistan and India.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The end of colonialism over a large part of the globe seems only to have given a new lease of life to the remaining pockets of foreign rule in Africa and elsewhere. Nor has the disappearance of classical colonialism eliminated domination in other forms. The United Nations Development Decade is more than halfway through and it is already clear that the targets set for it, modest as they were, will not be achieved. The will to co-operate in the social and cultural spheres has not strengthened the desire among nations to live in peace with each other. The International Co-operation Year was marked by an armed attack by a Member State, one of the sponsors and authors of the resolution on the International Co-operation Year [resolution 1907 (XVIII)] upon the territory of another.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“That policy imposed a disability, not on the People's Republic of China, but on this Organization. To persist today in preventing the People's Republic of China from taking its rightful place in the United Nations and all its organs, on whatever pretext or by whichever strategem, is to ignore the realities of the world situation. The absence of the real representatives of China from the United Nations is the most important single cause of the decline of its effectiveness and the inability of the world community to deal realistically with the problem of disarmament and to settle the many conflicts and tensions in Asia. 52. Sessions of the General Assembly are times of annual stock-taking. As we look around, we see the world in a troubled state and the United Nations itself in crisis and anguish.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“The sense of dedication, the impartiality, the keen perception of world affairs and the modesty which combine in U Thant's character and personality are qualities which this Organization can ill afford to lose. We join with other delegations in expressing the hope that he will reconsider his decision and will find it possible to continue to serve this Organization in this difficult period. 51. It is necessary to recognize in the very first place that this Organization cannot perform its essential tasks of maintaining world peace and furthering international co-operation if it does not include within its fold all the nations of the world. The arguments advanced to keep the door of this Organization locked against the People's Republic of China never had any justification in logic or basis in law.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Would it be possible for South Africa to treat with contempt the resolutions passed by the United Nations if some amongst us did not regard the resolutions of this world Organization and even solemn international agreements as scraps of paper? 49. It is clear that all over the world, power is triumphant over principles; force has the better of reason; the uneasy truce and the status quo take the place of peace and progress. Against this background, U Thant's decision to lay down the reins of his high office comes as a warning that this Organization might be heading towards ineffectuality and insignificance. 50. U Thant has served this Organization with distinction.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“In brief, it was meant to further the basic purpose of the United Nations which is to eliminate force as an instrument of policy and to open the way to peaceful settlement of disputes. If we witness, as we do, a gradual erosion of the peacekeeping functions and responsibilities of the Organization, it would be unfair to put the blame upon any one factor or on any one group of Powers or even on the great Powers alone. Can one say that the Security Council as a whole has shown the sense of purpose and decisiveness which would lead to effective action? Have not others, interested in holding on to their ill-gotten gains, flouted at will the resolutions of the Security Council and the very principles of the Charter?”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Attempts to maintain international order by establishing the hegemony of one or two or even three world Powers will lead not to peace and progress but only to a balance of power which, by its nature, cannot but remain precarious. 48. To say this is not to ignore the existence of power as a factor in world politics or to ignore the reality that great Powers have special and world-wide interests to defend and to protect. The United Nations Charter has itself recognized that reality by giving the power of the veto to the five permanent members of the Security Council. But the veto was intended to prevent the use of the Organization by one group of great Powers for imposing its will on another. It was meant to encourage and induce settlement between them by compromise.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“In the realm of law, however, the two are equal and must be treated as equals. Their equality resides in the inherent right of States and nations to live and develop in accordance with their wishes and without interference from outside. Only through such a notion of equality of nations is it possible to stabilize international security. Unless the small countries can be protected against the poor or arbitrary will of the great and unless the ambition of the would-be-great can be curbed, it will be impossible to establish the rule of law which is the principle underlying the whole concept and structure of the United Nations Charter.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“Fanfani added further lustre to its illustrious traditions. 46. We are meeting in this Assembly at a time of crisis and foreboding in international affairs. In its history, the United Nations has no doubt faced many severe tests, particularly those to which it was subjected by the events of 1950 and 1956. But never before has the whole atmosphere of world affairs been laden with so much tragedy, corroded by so much anguish as today. Never before has there been such a feeling of utter helplessness. 47. One tends sometimes to lose sight of the fact that this Organization is founded on the principle of the equality of all nations, great and small. It is easy to deride the notion of equality between a nation which possesses the means to extinguish life from earth and another of far humbler physical dimensions or technical achievement.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)
“44. Mr. President, may I once again convey to you the felicitations of the Pakistan delegation on your election to this high office. It is specially gratifying to us to see the Chair occupied by the representative of a country which is not only our neighbour, but is bound to us by imperishable affinities of faith and culture. Those bonds are forged through centuries and they last to the end of time. By your personal qualities, you have won the esteem and respect of all your colleagues. For this Assembly's tasks, those qualities provide an ample insurance of success. 45. I must also express our very respectful appreciation to Foreign Minister Fanfani for his wise and skillful captaincy of this Assembly's deliberations during the twentieth session. By his conduct in this office, Mr.”
1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)