YouSaid · the spoken record

Solis

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS SOLIS

lines on the record: 78
first: 1962-09-24
most recent: 1963-09-24
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

“If, by some misfortune, this confidence is betrayed, Panama will tenaciously continue its already sixty-year-old unequal fight to achieve its objectives with the weapons of reason, justice and international law. 75. But time works in favour of Panama as it does in favour of all the weak nations, and those who oppose the Panamanian aspirations are uselessly trying to oppose the march of time; we shall soon find them by the wayside, tired and weary and we shall leave them behind. 76. The faith of Panama in its destiny and in its future is the same faith that we have placed in this great Organization. It is the same faith that this Organization has earned from all weak nations. It is the same faith that all mankind has placed in a brilliant and permanent future of justice and peace.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“For they think the Zone is a feudal territory of their own which will be handed down indefinitely from father to son; they have a typically colonialist mentality, as though the Canal Treaty had been only a pretext for the United States Government to acquire a piece of land in the heart of Latin America, and they cleave to the Panamanian soil of the Canal Zone, because neither here in the United States nor anywhere else would they be able to live with the privileges, advantages and comfort which they enjoy there at the expense of the Panamanian economy. 74. President Kennedy has told the President of Panama, by word and in writing, of his desire to solve the points at issue regarding the Canal and the Treaties governing it, and Panama has confidence in the desire for justice and in the fighting blood of President Kennedy.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“But I cannot end without reaffirming the serene confidence that Panama has in its destiny and in the justice of our cause, and that sooner or later we shall receive full redress for our just claims. 73. When we see Mr. John F. Kennedy, the President of the United States, fighting whole-heartedly, and in doing so jeopardizing his political interests, to defend the Negroes of his own country against the injustices of the Whites, we in Panama cannot but think that, in order to hear our claims, he will also have to fight the North Americans living in the Canal Zone.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Another point that I think worth making is that the Panama Canal functions as a commercial enterprise, producing income for the United States Treasury, and its operation does not cost the United States taxpayer one cent. On the other hand, the operation of the Canal produces for Panama, which lent its territory for its construction no financial compensation for the concession, since the Treaty of 1955 inflicted greater losses than the annuity stipulated in that same Treaty. 72. I should not continue in this vein because the list would be interminable, and I do not wish to mention the advantages and benefits that the United States has derived from the Canal, since they are well known to the whole world.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“In the first of these categories, 95 per cent of the employees are North Americans and 5 per cent are Panamanians; in the second category, 95 per cent of the employees are Panamanians and 5 per cent are North Americans. Surely, this is enough to prove that discrimination against the Panamanian worker has always existed in the Canal Zone. 70. The United States spends about $80,000,000 a year in Panama, throughout the Canal Zone, in return for services and on the purchase of Panamanian products. But Panama returns to the United States, in payment for imports and services, about $100,000,000 a year. That fact is that, because of the Canal, there is no drain of dollars from the United States to Panama. 71.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Thus, it is proved that until 1956 Panama received, as payment for the Canal, no more money than it would have received from the railroad had the Canal never been built. From 1956, Panama began to receive $1,500,000 a year for the Canal. In order to receive that annuity, Panama had to agree, in that same Treaty of 1955, to reduce by 75 per cent the import tax on foreign liquor that was taken from Panama to the Canal Zone. At the same time the maritime conferences, controlled by North American shipping interests, raised freights to Panama. The reduction of the import duty and the rise in freights represented for Panama a greater loss than the sum of $1,500,000 that Panama began to receive from 1956. 69. In the Canal Zone, there have always been two categories of employment —one with high salaries, and one with low wages.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The Panama Railroad Company paid an annuity of $250,000 for the concession of the railway, and that concession was assumed by the United States Government by virtue of the Treaty of 1903. During the nine years that followed the signing of that Treaty, the United States did not pay Panama any annuity for the Canal or for the railway. When those nine years had elapsed, the United States began to pay Panama $250,000 a year, that is, the same amount which the railway paid previously. When President F. D. Roosevelt devalued the dollar, he agreed that, as from 1934, the United States would pay Panama an annuity of $430,000 as devalued, equivalent to 250,000 gold dollars before devaluation. Therefore, there was no increase in the annuity paid. In the Treaty signed in 1955, the United States agreed to pay an annuity of $1,930,000.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Therefore, it is a fact proved by the word of the President of the United States himself that the correct interpretation of the Treaty on the part of the United States Government was that the Canal Zone would not be an independent colony within the body politic of Panama, that it would not compete with Panamanian trade, that it would not undermine the national prestige of Panama, and that the United States would exercise in that zone only the functions necessary to build, maintain and exploit the Canal. But a visit to the Canal Zone would be sufficient to convince anyone, at first glance, and without having to delve into the matter, that what goes on there is precisely the opposite of what the President of the United States promised Panama in 1904. 68.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“"We do not have the slightest intention of setting up an independent colony in the centre of Panama or of exercising governmental powers other than those necessary to enable us to build, maintain and exploit the Canal adequately and with security, in accordance with the rights granted to us by the Treaty; and what we least want to do is to hamper or hinder the trade and prosperity of the people of Panama." Secretary Taft went to Panama and fully complied with the instructions received from his President, making the necessary representations to the Panamanian Government. 67.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“When the United States Government tried, in 1904, to govern the Canal Zone as though it were a dependency of the United States, the reaction in Panama was so violent that President Theodore Roosevelt had to send the Secretary for War, William H. Taft, to Panama. From the letter of instructions given by the President to his Secretary for War, I quote the following: "The people of Panama have become unnecessarily alarmed at the establishment of a government in the Canal Zone. Apparently they fear that we may establish in part of their territory an independent and competitive community that will prejudice Panama's trade, reduce its income and diminish its prestige as a nation.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“In that letter he said: "As it stands now, as soon as the Senate has voted upon it, we shall have a Treaty that in its main aspects is very satisfactory, amply advantageous for the United States, and we must confess, whether we like it or not, that it is not so advantageous for Panama. You and I know well how many points there are in it that any Panamanian patriot would reject." Therefore, it is a fact, proved by the words of Secretary Hay, that, when the United States Government pushed through the signing of the Treaty in Washington without waiting for the opinion of the Government of Panama, it did so in the knowledge that the Treaty was disadvantageous to Panama and would be unacceptable to any Panamanian patriot. 66.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“I shall limit myself to mentioning, succinctly and without comment, some very interesting facts which perhaps are not known to all, so that, once and for all, I may wipe out the myth of the advantages which Panama has derived from the Canal. 65. When, in the United States Senate, the treaty with Panama was submitted for ratification —a treaty signed in Washington, without the Panamanian Government's knowing its text— some Senators opposed ratification. Then the Secretary of State, John Hay, coauthor and signatory of the Treaty, sent a letter to Senator Spooner, asking him not to cause any delay in ratification.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Panama's international problems apart from those due to its membership of the Organization of American States, are bound up with the existence and operation of the Canal cut through the Isthmus of Panama by the United States Government pursuant to existing treaties that do not take into account the interests and just aspirations of Panama, and that are a permanent source of differences that have clouded the friendly relations that should exist between these two nations, and will continue to mar them until those treaties are revised. 64. I shall not tax the patience of the Assembly with a lengthy dissertation on the history of relations between Panama and the United States, or on the contents of the treaties between the two countries, nor even on the injustices that these treaties mete out to Panama.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The Republic of Panama has the same difficulties of development common to all nations not highly developed and, from the technical organizations of the United Nations, we have received and continue to receive valuable, timely and efficient financial and technical assistance of great help and benefit to us, and we are pleased to recognize this. The benefits received by Panama deserve our gratitude and strengthen our faith in this Organization. 63.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The small nations should not wait for the great Powers spontaneously to recognize their rights and just aspirations, or to offer them, gratuitously, the assistance which they so urgently need, because the wait might be, and usually is, a long one. 61. Here, in the United Nations, all States are equal. Here, in the General Assembly and in the meetings of its specialized agencies, a decision is made by a vote in which all Members are equal, concerning any action to be taken by these international organizations on all world, regional or national issues within their competence. Here, common interests combine to unite and strengthen one another, and antagonistic interests meet to find a solution to their differences. 62.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The problems of peace, considered as the original causes which produce the seeds of war, affect the small nations more closely than the great Powers, because it is in the small nations that these seeds germinate; because their problems of growth are the same; because they lack individually the resources and means indispensable for solving such problems by themselves at a rhythm compatible with the growth of their populations; and because only their unity and solidarity can obtain for them the influence and means necessary for obtaining from international bodies the assistance which they need for the adequate and rapid solution of their vital needs.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“So long as there is discrimination, so long as racial or religious persecution exists, poisoning the souls of men with hatred and rancour, there can be no peace. When all these political, social and economic inequalities have been removed, peace will be assured and excessive armaments will disappear because they will be superfluous. 60.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“So long as there are communities stagnating at precarious levels of life simply because they lack education, organization and the necessary means and assistance to achieve the results indispensable for a better life, there can be no peace. So long as there are economically strong nations purchasing products and raw materials from underdeveloped countries at a low price and selling them manufactured goods at a high price, so long as there are nations that increase their national income by exploiting less fortunate countries, and so long as the workers of under-developed countries are badly paid so that the workers in the more developed nations may receive high wages, there can be no peace.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Until the oppressed peoples are given back their freedom, however, until the pressing needs of the great masses of the populations with inadequate living standards are satisfied, and their justified desire for a better life has been fulfilled, so long will the permanent seeds of war find here a propitious soil, awaiting a favourable moment to germinate and spread their roots to other regions. Thus, local disputes would mount up into major regional or world crises to be settled only by recourse to arms, that is to say, by war. 59. So long as there are national systems of government imposed and maintained by force, violating the freedom of citizens and fundamental human rights, there can be no peace.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“For these, civilian substitutes would have to be ready since, otherwise, there might be domestic upheavals even greater than those which disarmament might have solved. 58. The treaty banning nuclear weapon tests is most welcome. Also, may we be able to welcome —and the sooner the better— new agreements for the total prohibition of atomic weapons and for the progressive reduction of armaments to a minimum compatible with the internal security of each State.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Wars are the result of the lack of political, economic or social balance which, failing timely solutions, leads inevitably to situations of grave crisis where the only outlet seems to lie in preparing for a settlement by force when a peaceful arrangement is no longer possible, because the atmosphere has become too heated. Then, when belligerence has become the current policy, it brings with it a specious prosperity because the war industries absorb a great amount of capital, raw materials and labour. Thus, at all levels of the social structure, vested interests emerge which have to be considered when disarmament is planned because it would lead to the indispensable dismantling of the war industries.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“But this alleviation of world tension does not mean that the problems and critical needs afflicting four-fifths of mankind have disappeared; nor have they diminished in importance and intense urgency. The free nations have almost unanimously acceded to the Treaty, and all of them pray fervently that this may be only the first step, to be followed by another, the prohibition of all atomic weapons and, finally, general disarmament. 57. Thus we seek a world freed from the terror of war, a world of permanent peace. But the fact is that it is not armaments that cause war.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Yet in solving their own difficulties, in serving their own interests and averting their own dangers, they may save humanity from the risk of atomic war for their own good and for the good of all the peoples of the globe. But this does not mean that the Treaty concluded between Washington and Moscow will solve the difficulties besetting other nations, especially the smaller and less developed countries, which are the immense majority, as is shown by a glance at the membership of the United Nations. 56. It is true that the Treaty banning nuclear weapon tests is a sedative for people all over the world, for minds tormented by what seemed to be the immediate threat of global destruction.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“This coincidence of ideas and purposes between the two foremost world Powers, with the ultimate goal of settling their differences in peaceful coexistence or co-operation, shows quite clearly that the probability of a nuclear war is now sufficiently remote to justify the restoration of a climate of calm and peace of mind. 55. This removal —which may or may not be permanent— of the nuclear danger is the result of an agreement between the great Powers that possess these weapons of annihilation and are struggling for the world hegemony of opposing and irreconcilable ideologies. The United States and the Soviet Union are not the whole world.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“For his part, the President of the United States said [1209th meeting] that the American people believed in self-determination for all peoples; that people must be free to choose their own future, without discrimination or dictation, without coercion or subversion; that there must be a freer flow of information and people from East to West and West to East; that the two nations should concentrate less on their differences and more on the means of solving them peacefully and that the best weapon providing security for both nations was peaceful co-operation. 54.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Soviet Union said [1208th meeting] that the people of each country —and they alone— must themselves determine their fate and decide which system they preferred; that all States should observe the principle of noninterference in the internal affairs of other countries; that the example given by the Soviet Union was convincing, but did not mean the imposition of one's own system on other States, that the Soviet example meant peaceful competition, competition by example and by force of conviction, competition which completely excluded the use of force to affirm one's own views, and that the need to affirm in international relations the principle of the peaceful coexistence of the two social systems —socialist and capitalist— had been consistently upheld by the Soviet Union. 53.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Whether we continue along this road depends upon the good faith and determination of the nuclear Powers that negotiated the Treaty. But continued and tenacious endeavours for the progressive reduction of the risk of war and the strengthening of peace will, as the Secretary-General says, largely depend upon "the collective effort and wisdom of all members of the international community". 51. Of no less, if not of greater importance than the Moscow Treaty, which confines itself to the partial prohibition of nuclear tests and is of uncertain duration, are the statements which we were pleasantly surprised to hear in this General Assembly, from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Soviet Union and the President of the United States of America. 52.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The significance of the Treaty is most aptly appraised in the following two paragraphs in the Secretary-General's annual report to the Assembly: "If this Treaty is followed by agreement on other measures aimed at lessening international tension and establishing confidence among States, it may be the beginning of a new era of better understanding between nations, and create a more favourable international climate that would facilitate progress towards general and complete disarmament and the goal of stable international peace and security, which remains the primary purpose of the United Nations … "It will require the collective effort and wisdom of all members of the international community to ensure that the momentum generated by the recent agreements is maintained until the goal of global security and freedom from fear of war is reached." [A/5501/Add.1, section II.] The first step has been taken.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“It is true that a direct telephone line cannot avoid a deliberately provoked act of war, that the Treaty referred to does not prohibit the manufacture, possession, transport, installation and use of nuclear or thermo-nuclear weapons, and that the Treaty may, in certain circumstances, be terminated at three months notice. But despite these undoubtedly ominous facts, the two events to which I have referred are the first steps taken with a clear desire to prevent situations that might lead to nuclear war. They are useful steps designed to open up wider possibilities and are conducive to the preservation of peace through the prohibition of war. 50.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“By contrast, the present session is beginning its work in a tranquil atmosphere, with minds unruffled, as a result of two recent events which have miraculously eased world tension, cleared the horizon, restored confidence and renewed flagging hopes for peace. 49. I refer to the installation of direct telecommunication between the White House and the Kremlin, which is an effective step toward avoiding the unleashing of war by error, accident or imprudence, and to the Treaty banning nuclear weapon tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and under water, which was signed by the United States, the Soviet Union and the United Kingdom and acceded to by some 100 free countries.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“The meetings of the seventeenth session of the General Assembly took place last year in a heavy and sombre atmosphere of fear. There was universal uncertainty and anxiety, since everyone was aware of the fateful risk of imminent war that would spread over the world in which tested thermo-nuclear weapons of apocalyptic destructive power would be used without restraint. Those meetings ended without sign of any easing of the situation, and the world was left in suspense at the sinister possibility that an accident, an error, an act of imprudence or a deliberate decision might press the button and set off the first bomb and thus provoke a chain reaction of successive explosions that would annihilate humanity in the greatest holocaust ever seen in history. 48.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“When the United Nations was founded eighteen years ago, it had only fifty-one Members; today it has 111, and many more countries will be admitted as they achieve independence. Owing to such rapid growth the structure of the Organization's various organs, which was perhaps appropriate in earlier years, is now quite indefensible. Wider membership in these organs is an urgent need, if the African-Asian groups, which, taken together, constitute half the Organization's total membership, are to be adequately represented. To enlarge the membership of the various organs of the United Nations would merely mean giving effect to the principle of universality and applying it proportionately to representation in each of those organs. 47.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“In addition, the Special Committee set up in November 1961 to examine the situation with regard to the implementation of the declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples has already studied conditions in twenty-eight of those countries and has recommended immediate independence for at least eleven of them. 44. Notwithstanding the work of these bodies, the General Assembly has so far not received any recommendation from the Security Council for the admission of new Members, and therefore such admission does not appear on the agenda. 45. The process of decolonization should be speeded up in order to achieve that universality which the United Nations requires, if it is to carry out to the full the task for which it was created, if it is to be a true world organization. 46.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“At the last three sessions of the General Assembly the following numbers of newly independent States were admitted to membership of the Organization: seventeen in 1960, four in 1961, and seven in 1962. Since the seventeenth session, no newly independent State has been proposed for membership. Yet the report submitted by the Committee on Information from Non-Self-Governing Territories mentions sixty such territories, that is to say sixty territories which in one way or another are subject to foreign domination or administration.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“In your task you will be able to count on the invaluable assistance of U Thant, the dedicated, able and irreplaceable Secretary-General, who continues to apply the standards and directives laid down for the greater prestige of this Organization and for all time by Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold, his unforgettable predecessor, so prematurely and tragically taken from us. 43. Universality is and should be the goal of the United Nations, and the most expedient means of reaching that goal is decolonization. Yet this eighteenth session of the General Assembly is marked at the very outset by a slowing down in the liquidation of colonial regimes.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“At the Congress of Panama of 1826, inspired, convened and supported by Bolivar, the principles of international law and the foundations for an association of nations, which were laid down, are now included in the United Nations Charter, for they are immutable and will never lose their validity, so long as relations among States are guided by law, justice and international co-operation. 42. Venezuela and Panama have traditionally been united and inseparable in their international policies, and that would be sufficient to explain why we express to you, Mr. President, such heartfelt congratulations and why we are convinced that, with your great qualities, your ability and your experience, you will guide our debates with the tact, the wisdom, the firmness, and the skill shown by Sir Muhammad Zafrulla Khan, your predecessor.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“I should like to begin my statement by expressing the deep and heartfelt pleasure of Panama at your election to preside over the debates of this eighteenth session of the General Assembly. The practice of choosing the representative of a small country for such a high office is in itself a very agreeable and sound one. On this occasion one of the countries of the Latin American group has been chosen, and to add to our satisfaction, the country selected is our sister republic, Venezuela, the birthplace of the Liberator, Simon Bolivar, under whose glorious leadership Venezuela and Panama emerged almost simultaneously from the Spanish colonial world. 41.”
1963-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 18 (1963)
“Only in this way can we succeed, each and every one of us, in carrying out our duties and responsibilities to ourselves, in the depth of our own consciences, to our fellow men in our social behaviour during our period on earth, to mankind as a whole, of which we form a part, and to God in eternity.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“The delegation of Panama reaffirms its faith in the United Nations and in the ability of this Organization to fulfil, its mission of peace and security among nations. 160. The Republic of Panama remains faithful to the Purposes and Principles proclaimed in the San Francisco Chapter; it confirms its unshakable resolve to spare no effort and to do its utmost to collaborate in the strengthening of this Organization and of its authority in the regulation of international relations; and it urges all Member States in particular the small nations, to unite in a solid front in order to put an end to the atmosphere of danger, uncertainty and fear which characterizes the present time and to replace it with an atmosphere of confidence, calm, sincere cooperation, wellbeing and progress which will make it possible to restore peace of mind and thereby ensure the increasing and lasting happiness of all the peoples of the world, without distinction as to region, race, colour or creed.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“In view of President Kennedy's conciliatory and sincerely friendly attitude, however, the Panamanian delegation considers it wise to wait patiently, in the sincere and0 frank hope that it has found a North American leader who, with a clear vision of present and future problems, will be able to reach an agreement which will guarantee the permanent establishment between the two Governments of the same relations of respect, esteem , and sympathy which exist between their two peoples. 158. The delegation of Panama cannot fail to record its Government's sincere gratitude for the expressions of sympathy and support with respect to this question of the Panama Canal which it has received from other Governments, and in particular from those of its Sister-nations of the inter-American system. 159.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“President Kennedy, in a gesture which revealed his high statesmanship, his clear view of international problems and his quality as a just man, acceded to the request of the President of Panama and agreed to an open discussion on all the points connected with the Canal with which Panama had expressed dissatisfaction. 157. It has been the custom frequently followed by representatives of Panama abroad to make use, whenever they have had an opportunity to do so of all international tribunals — including this one the highest of all — to expound in detail their just claims and protests against the Government of the United States on Account of the Panama Canal and the treaties which govern it.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“Roosevelt a treaty was concluded which removed from the 1903 Treaty certain clauses which were shameful both to Panama as a small nation and to the United States as a powerful one .“Further changes were obtained by Panama in another treaty concluded in 1955, but the basic provisions of 1903, which are the cause of the resentment felt by the people of Panama still remain. 156. At the, beginning of his administration, Mr. Roberto F. Chiari, the present President of Panama, personally addressed the President of the United States, Mr. John F. Kennedy, informing him that it was impossible to continue relations on die basis of the Treaty of 1903 and inviting him to initiate a discussion of all the existing differences with a view to reaching solutions which would be just and equitable for both parties.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“Its struggle against this iniquitous treaty, which is prejudicial to Panama's dignity as a sovereign State, began on the very day on which it was signed, has continued without pause or respite and will go on until Panama’s Just claims are satisfied, although it will not fall to recognize the rights and privileges to which in all justice the United States of America is entitled. 155. Panamanian diplomacy achieved its first triumph in 1936, when during the administration of President Franklin D.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“Because of the form and the circumstances in which this Treaty of 1903 was signed, and because of the humiliating, injurious, unjust and inequitable terms for Panama which were included in it, relations between the Republic of Panama and the United States Government have not been Cordial, although Panama has always scrupulously fulfilled the obligations which it entered into, with the specific object of preserving the necessary moral authority which would enable it to seek a better understanding. 154.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“Relations between the two States are governed, basically, by a "treaty concluded in 1903, when colonies and the occupation of small countries by powerful ones was. a common practice in the world, that is to say, by a treaty which does not conform to the principles, precepts and rules of law, justice and, international morality which are universally accepted today. 153.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“If such campaigns or movements are carried out, however, the other States in the system have not only the right but also, the duty to take whatever, action may, be necessary to eliminate the danger which this communist government represents for their institutional life, their internal law and order and their security. 151. True representative democracy, exists in those countries where the system of government, whatever it may be, by which they are ruled is freely chosen and expressly maintained by the will of the majority of the peoples and where the right of other peoples to the same free self-determination is respected. 152. Within its own borders the Republic of Panama is faced with international problems arising out of the existence on its territory of the Panama Canal, built, operated and ruled by the United States of America.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“But this in itself does not constitute a danger to the internal peace of that country, or to the peace of the continent", or to World peace, if such a government remains within its own frontiers, with the approval and acceptance of its own, people freely expressed without fear or pressure, and if such a government refrains from organizing campaigns or movements of propaganda, infiltration, subversion or other measures aimed at undermining, weakening or overthrowing the system of representative democracy of the, other inter-American countries or threatening their security or existence.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“Under the conventions of the inter-American regional system, the observance and operation of representative democracy is a prerequisite for membership in the system. All the inter-American States have committed themselves to defend, their regional system against any act or intervention from within or outside the continent which might undermine, weaken, subvert or destroy that political system. 150. For the reason given above, the establishment of a communist government in an American country necessarily places that country outside the inter-American system.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“This is the basic tenet of Self-determination ...” [1019th meeting, paragraph 48.]. 147. With regard to the principle of non-intervention, this can only refer to unilateral or individual intervention by one State in the internal affairs of another State because collective interventions are contemplated and expressly regulated in both the United Nations Charter "and the Inter-American-Treaty of Reciprocal-Assistance. 148. The Latin-American concept of non-intervention is directed not only against armed intervention but also against any form of foreign intervention inside the frontiers of another State whether it is of an economic, ideological, doctrinal, political or other character. 149.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“This was very ably, clearly and concisely explained by two illustrious Latin American representatives during the general debate at the sixteenth ordinary session of the Assembly. 145. The representative of Brazil, Mr. Arino de Melo Franco, expressed himself as follows: "But self-determination, to be genuine, pre-supposes the free exercise of the people's will, in the only possible form — namely, the expression of the will of the majority." [1011th meeting, paragraph 16.] 146, A few days later, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Chile, Mr. Carlos Martínez Sotomayor, reaffirmed that same idea in the following words: "For we firmly believe that representative democracy is the best system of internal government; we likewise hold that the fate of peoples cannot be determined without consultation of their sovereign will.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)