YouSaid · the spoken record

Rapacki

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS RAPACKI

lines on the record: 182
first: 1957-09-24
most recent: 1964-09-24
sittings or episodes: 6
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

“It would be best of all, we think, if everything were changed to accord with the just arguments his statement contained about the need for negotiation, conciliation and justice, and with certain other ideas — if we have understood them correctly. 72. I come back now to the principal question: which are the Germans and what are the German hopes that various Western statesmen are afraid to disappoint? What hopes would be disappointed by the conclusion of a peace treaty with the two German States, by the recognition of the existence of two German States, by the transformation of West Berlin from a "front-line" city and a military base into a free and demilitarized city? What hopes are these that would be disappointed? The hopes cherished by certain Germans of seeing the German Democratic Republic annexed by the Federal Republic of Germany?”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“But one can also base oneself on the most aggressive and militant forces, arouse and fan their hopes and build an imperialist and aggressive State — as the Federal Republic of Germany has been doing up to now. 71. One can also follow Lord Home's example and play on the passions of the chauvinist wing of German public opinion and on the sentiments of other circles. But the Chairman of the United Kingdom delegation would have done better to make some changes in his statement of yesterday: he should either have corrected several passages in that statement, particularly the one dealing with Berlin, or have deleted, to the satisfaction of all housewives, the harsh adage that "men who ... stir the pot of trouble when it is simmering . . . are knaves".”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“In spite of that, they do not always succeed in disentangling themselves from that policy and they fail to do so because certain circles, and especially militarist circles in various countries, have not given up their old plans and because in many cases they are themselves unable to discard the old cold-war concepts. They consider, for example, that they cannot lose their prestige in the eyes of the Germans and cannot disappoint the latter's hopes. 70. We, however, know that there are different Germans; we know that it is possible to base oneself on the peaceful forces of the German people, that it is possible to build a peaceful German State — as the German Democratic Republic is doing.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“Today the Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, skillfully exploiting his French partner's dreams of power, is challenging the principal NATO allies and is heading directly towards hegemony over the whole of Western Europe. The Federal Republic of Germany has become the most stubborn and aggressive force of the cold war; it is preventing the West from taking more realistic decisions; it is carrying its allies along in its own speculative policy. 69. There are doubtless many Western statesmen who now realize the enormous danger inherent in the policy which the West has pursued up to now with regard to Germany and are aware of the ever-increasing cost their countries will have to bear to the advantage of their German ally and competitor.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“It is already clear that the policy based on positions of strength towards the socialist countries and the entire Western conception of a "solution" of the German problem on the basis of that policy were and still are unrealistic. Such an unrealistic policy could offer only one real prospect — that of a dreadful catastrophe. 67. At the same time it is now plain that the Federal Republic of Germany has not confined itself to serving as the vanguard of the West; on the contrary, it has broken free and has become the most powerful State in the Western part of the European continent. How faded now are the illusions, sincere or pretended, of those who used to claim that, within the framework of the various Western groupings, they could contain and direct the expansionism of the revived West German imperialism. 68.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“It is not our fault, therefore, that the German problem has now entered a critical phase and that its solution can no longer be deferred. Here, too, the essence of the problem is the choice that must be made between the policy of strength and peaceful coexistence. 65. For many years the Western Powers — and the Federal Republic of Germany itself — tended to use the German problem as the highest trump card in their policy of strength towards the socialist countries and to transform the Federal Republic of Germany and West Berlin in all respects into a springboard against the socialist countries. They have succeeded in this aim, but the international situation has by no means developed as anticipated by the authors of the Western plan with regard to Germany. 66.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“If this aggressive colonialist policy towards Cuba were to achieve its purpose, that would mean a great strengthening of the forces that are ready to push the United States onto the path that is most dangerous for all Latin America, for the entire world, for the United States itself and for everyone. This cannot therefore be permitted. 63. We hope that the attitude of the peoples and the good sense of the responsible statesmen will make it possible to direct the course of events towards peaceful coexistence. 64. We have presented — from this rostrum, in particular — Poland's views on the German problem; we have ceaselessly warned against the dangerous manner in which it is developing; we have submitted and supported proposals which could have changed the course of that development.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“The United States Government, on the other hand, is unwilling to recognize the existence of the new Cuba, Which is not threatening it. It was unwilling to recognize it even long before Cuba chose the path of socialist development. Some North American circles, disregarding the voices of reason that are also to be heard in their country, simply refuse to accept the fact that Cuba is independent and has ceased to be an area for exploitation by them. 61. The problem is thus neither a local problem nor a dispute between East and West. What is involved here, in fact, is a problem of principle, that principle relating to the sovereignty of peoples and their mutual relations. It is a question of choice between the colonialist policy of strength or positions of strength and peaceful coexistence. 62.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“Cuba has no armed forces capable of or trained for aggression, and does not intend to establish any. 57. Cuba, it is true, does possess defensive forces; but it was the United States itself which showed Cuba the need for such forces. 58. Cuba does not and cannot threaten the United States or any other country. On the other hand, entire United States armies are stationed in the immediate vicinity of the socialist countries and there are hundreds of United States and other nuclear and air bases nearby directed against those countries. 59. Of course, we do not want to be threatened. We are opposed to the existence of foreign bases in the territories of the various countries, but at the same time we patiently seek solutions based on common agreement. 60.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“But no socialist State is asking the people who are its neighbours or the population of West Berlin to change their social system, Poland and other socialist States maintain friendly relations with the neutral countries and correct and often even good relations with a number of NATO countries. We wish to maintain and develop these relations. 55. But there are some in the United States who appear to think that the principles of the normal coexistence of peoples ought not to be applied, at least to the American continent. That, perhaps, is what they have in mind when they speak, in the year 1962, of the Monroe Doctrine. However, no one is compelled to endorse their attitude, 56. Cuba is said to threaten the United States; but it is well known that there are no foreign bases on Cuba, other than the United States base at Guantánamo.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“The problem of Cuba provides a dramatic example of the clash between the criteria of the policy based on positions of strength and the criteria of peaceful coexistence. The outcome of this clash may have very serious repercussions for the cause of peace. 54. Why is the United States unwilling to admit the existence of the new Cuba? Why does it refuse to maintain normal relations with it? The Cuban people, it is true, wish to build a socialist society in their country. But are they not entitled to do so, just as the American people are entitled to live under a capitalist system? Not even ninety miles separate certain capitalist States and the socialist States that are their neighbours. West Berlin is situated in the very heart of the German Democratic Republic.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“The masses are becoming increasingly aware of the situation and of the solutions that must be adopted and their desire for peace is becoming stronger every day. At the same time, realism and common sense are also gaining ground. If it were not so, there would have been no agreement on Laos nor a peaceful settlement of the problem of West Irian. Nor would there have been any progress towards decolonialization. 52. But the basic factors in the international situation and the course of events cannot long continue to evolve in opposite directions. We have entered a period when a decisive choice has to be made between the policy based on positions of strength and peaceful coexistence, 53.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“We see the efforts to solve the majority of the most important international problems meeting with resistance; the unceasing West-German provocations in Berlin; a serious situation further deteriorating in South Viet-Nam because of the open and continuous intervention of United States troops; the situation in the Congo; the situation in South Korea; the resumption of activity by the notorious spy aircraft over the territories of various States; and, lastly, the extremely dangerous policy of intervention conducted by the United States against Cuba. 51. It can thus be said that events are taking a dangerous course, At the same time, however, it is common knowledge that the forces of peace and independence are growing steadily.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“It is the interests bound up with armaments and the exploitation of the economically weak countries that are supporting this old policy, which is further advocated by the fanatical champions of anti-communism and colonialism. 48. Narrow-mindedness, shortsightedness and blindness are arrayed against common sense, realism and a clearer insight into the future. 49. In these circumstances the following questions arise: are there any limits to the subservience shown by the various governmental circles in the West to the most militant groups and the most dangerous trends? How far does their loyalty or their subservience to the positions-of-strength policy go? There are facts that give a disturbing answer to these questions. 50. What do we see at the present time?”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“The object has been by operating from a position of strength or by actually using force, to contain and push back socialism and to stifle the aspirations of the peoples for liberation from colonial dependence. 46. Today the policy based on positions of strength has no material basis. Unrealistic though it is, it is still extremely dangerous. It is dangerous to peace and hence dangerous for all, including the ruling classes in the West. 47. It would appear that an ever increasing number of serious statesmen in the West understand the situation. But a different policy, a new policy which would take into account the realities and necessities of our times, has not yet emerged. That is why use of old criteria is still prevalent in the West.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“The cause of peace is today indissolubly bound up with recognition of and respect for the sovereignty of peoples and with the abolition of dependence and of colonial exploitation in all its forms. 44. If we all accept this as our starting point we can solve all international problems. An ever increasing majority of the human race is in favour of accepting this principle. This is the starting point for the international policy of the socialist States and many non-aligned States take a similar position. 45. It is otherwise in various Western countries and more particularly in the most powerful of them. For many long years the policy based on positions of strength has been the official doctrine of the United States in this matter. This policy has underlain the activities of NATO and other associated military groups.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“The international situation has now entered a special phase. The great international problems have matured and demand a solution more urgently with each day that passes. Some of them have been waiting for a solution too long already. I shall here mention only the problem of disarmament, the German problem and the problem of the liquidation of the last vestiges of colonialism. 42. We must be able to take decisions so that events should not spontaneously turn against us all. It is true that the world is divided — in some respects, indeed, more deeply than ever before. But at the same time it is more than ever before united by the common interest in surviving, in avoiding a nuclear catastrophe. 43.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“The failure of such a concept of the United Nations when confronted with the facts was the background of the human drama of Dag Hammarskjold. 112. One fact, however, gives grounds for optimism: it is that the more clearly the contradictions of today's torn and divided world appear, the more the nations are united in their desire for peace. Such optimism will be well founded if the desire for peace is translated into active work for peaceful coexistence. 113. Poland's entire home and foreign policy serves that course. My country is living, working and developing its activities in the conviction that common sense and a persistent will to peace will defeat blind and narrow egotistical interests, which in any case history will not allow to prevail.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“It is difficult to discuss such a position, since it is based on premises which are acceptable neither to the socialist States nor to any other State which is unwilling to regard the United Nations as the instrument of any one of the parties. 111. We also know, however, that there are persons and circles whose view of the United Nations is that of a world parliament and government adopting and implementing resolutions through a supranational Secretariat. Those are unrealistic and dangerous ambitions. If the United Nations were to follow that path, and turn aside from the most important of its time tasks, it would find itself outside the stream of life, it would lose its whole importance and would be completely paralysed.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“The United Nations can become the instrument for closing the gap between the positions of the decisive world Powers on issues of crucial importance. That is all, but in fact it is a great deal. 109. That is the basis of our conclusions regarding the structure and organization of the United Nations. Those conclusions were expounded at the fifteenth session of the General Assembly by Mr. Khrushchev the Prime Minister of the Soviet Union [869th meeting, paras. 275-285] and are unreservedly supported by Poland, 110. We know that there are Powers which do not like these conclusions, simply because they reduce their influence inside the Organization to its correct proportions.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“If the universal longing for peace is to be satisfied, practical solutions must be found to the principal world problems: the abolition of colonial dependency, the expansion of international economic, scientific and cultural co-operation and the introduction of general and complete disarmament. 106. The work of the United Nations must be based on the common objective of consolidating peace and must be directed towards the implementation of specific measures for attaining that end. 107. In international relations it is effective power which counts and that power is concentrated in the three main world groupings. That being so, attempts to impose important decisions on one of those groupings with the aid of the United Nations is damaging ' to both the cause involved and the United Nations. 108.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“The United Nations must unite all States to that end. The major gap here is the absence of the People's Republic of China, which discredits and paralyses the United Nations. Nothing can justify the presence here of these gentlemen from Taiwan, Indeed, they no longer even manage to represent the United States properly. As for the interventions which they make in the name of China, they leave the impression that in our Organization surrealism has taken the place of realism. The rights which belong to the People's Republic of China must be restored to it as soon as possible during the sixteenth session. 103. We should also have liked to welcome among us the representatives of the noble, courageous and humane Mongolian nation. 104. The United Nations must become a true world organization. 105.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Poland would warmly welcome the creation of atom-free zones in other parts of Europe and elsewhere in the world. We support the proposals already made to that effect by Romania, the People's Republic of China and Ghana. 100. We shall continue to play an active part in all attempts to facilitate and speed up work on our main task, which is the achievement of general and complete disarmament, 101. Mankind is today more divided than ever, but it is also more closely linked than ever before by the supreme common interest of avoiding atomic war and safeguarding peace. It is that that should determine the starting-point, the direction, the methods and the structure of the United Nations, which must be based not on what divides the nations, but on what unites them, what will be decisive for their future. 102.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“In stating the Polish delegation's support for those proposals, I should like once again to draw attention to the initiative of the Government of the People's Republic of Poland in proposing the creation of an atom-free zone in Central Europe, a proposal presented from this very rostrum on 2 October 1957 H and explained in detail in the Polish memorandum of 14 February 1958 which was transmitted to the Governments concerned, and in subsequent documents and statements. 98. Apart from the important direct effect which it would have on the situation in Europe, the establishment of such a zone could facilitate negotiations on general and complete disarmament. It could also provide a wealth of practical experience in the field of control. 99.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Poland was and still is in favour of any measures that will slow down the armaments race as soon as possible. What is important is that the efforts devoted to that end should be genuine efforts, that they should effectively strengthen security and not merely give the dangerous illusion of doing so, and finally that any steps taken should facilitate, and not merely be a substitute for general and complete disarmament. The Soviet memorandum of 20 September 1961 [A/ 4892] does in fact put forward a number of proposals along those lines. 97.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“American disarmament plan shows that it involves this Very danger. The elimination of the most horrible weapons at the very first stage would simultaneously hasten the final cessation of nuclear weapons testing. 95. The Polish delegation has already given its views on this matter and will do so again in greater detail in due course. In short, however, it can be said that so long as the armaments race, particularly the race for nuclear weapons, continues, and so long as international tension and the threat to the security of nations continue to grow, a lasting suspension of nuclear weapons testing will be impossible. The question of testing cannot be examined realistically if it is divorced from that of general and complete disarmament. 96.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“So long as there is a danger that the means of mass extermination will be used, the dilemma—control of disarmament or control of armaments—can basically be reduced to the following alternatives: disarmament and security or a speed-up in re-arming and an ever-growing threat. 94. This difference of opinion is linked to yet another one. We consider that the possible use of weapons of mass destruction must be eliminated during the first stage of disarmament. This would lead to a hew situation which would make the other problems of disarmament, including that of control, much easier to solve. The alternative—postponing the elimination of the most modern weapons until the last stages of disarmament—would produce the opposite effect and could well result in modernization of the armed forces instead of disarmament. An initial study of the.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“There still remains, however, the fundamental contradiction, which can be summed up in the following question: Is it control of armaments or control of disarmament that should be adopted? Poland's position on this matter was expounded in detail and explained in Vladislav Gomulka's speech at the fifteenth session of the General Assembly [874th meeting]. Control of armaments is unacceptable if only because no Power can agree to reveal its defence system. There is another thing: the control of modern lightning-action weapons of mass extermination would not avert a preventive war or surprise attack; on the contrary it would increase the danger, It would speed up the race for modern armaments, instead of slowing it down. 93.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“I now come to the third key problem of international relations, that is to say the question of disarmament, An analysis of the balance of forces in the world of today leads to the conclusion that it is possible to avoid war, But life constantly reminds us that war is still possible. It is the historic task of the present generation to make it impossible, i.e», to carry out general and complete disarmament. 91. The idea of general and complete disarmament is rapidly gaining ground. As for practical steps 3 almost no progress is being made. The Polish delegation is glad that the Soviet Union and the United States have agreed on the principles which should guide future disarmament negotiations [A/4879]. Their positions have moved closer together on certain essential points. 92.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Lastly, there is a fourth and decisive requirement if the under-developed countries are to make good their economic backwardness and put foreign aid to the best use: the application by the nations concerned themselves of principles and procedures enabling them to mobilize their own resources and themselves to determine the direction to be taken by their country's development for the benefit of the whole nation. I shall not dwell on this question, since it is for the countries concerned to settle it themselves. 89. Thus it is that the question of the complete ; independence and rapid advancement of the developing countries is connected in all its aspects with the fundamental problems of the struggle for peaceful co-existence. 90.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“The use of aid for such purposes can be ensured by an appropriate attitude on the part of the nations concerned, by the development of their relations with all countries, and by peaceful competition. 87. Thirdly, aid to developing countries must be as extensive as possible. But little more can be done in this field as long as the burden of the armaments race continues to weigh on the economy of the developed countries. The solution is general and complete disarmament. 88.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“If, therefore, we really have the progress of the under-developed countries at heart, the second requirement is that the aid supplied should be genuine aid. It is possible to give or lend large sums for the development of enterprises which will not only fail to improve the economic structure of the country but will even weaken it, which will not only fail to raise the standard of living of the population but may even lower it as a result of price fluctuations on the world market, which, far from reducing the economic dependence of the country, will increase it still further. 86. Furthermore, it is not unusual for such aid to have political and military strings attached. Genuine aid, however, must help to modernize the country's economic structure, to industrialize it and consolidate its independence.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Those are useful and progressive processes. Our opinion is different when it comes to certain processes of integration in Western Europe, and above all the Common Market. The political bases and practical activities of this association are resulting in a decrease in trade between East and West and to an intensification of the division of Europe; they are thus strengthening the cold war elements in the world economy. At the same time the Common Market is drawing the former colonial countries into its orbit by forcing them to go' on playing their erstwhile role of complement and reserve for the economies of the imperialist countries. This sort of integration is consequently becoming an element of neo-colonialist policy. 85.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“The development of international economic cooperation is becoming an increasingly important factor for peaceful co-existence and is particularly important for nations freed from colonial dependence. 82. The elimination of imbalance in the world economy is not only a requirement of justice but also a necessity created by the development needs of the whole world economy. 83. To achieve this, the first necessity is to refrain from placing obstacles in the way. On this subject I should like to devote a few words to the question of economic integration. 84. We are not opposed to those processes of integration whose goal is a more rapid expansion of productive forces and a rise in the general standard of living—above all in the developing countries—as well as an extension of commercial relations and co-operation with the whole world.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Hence the fantasies about alleged communist colonialism, based, I feel, on a lack of respect for the intellectual level of the audience, For my part I have too great a respect for this audience to embark on a serious discussion of arguments of this kind. The purpose of these fantasies is only too clear; to sow confusion and discord in the ranks of the anti-colonialist forces. 80. But there is more to it than that: there is an echo of what is called "the policy of liberation", which is one of the main elements of the policy based on positions of strength. This policy, though discredited, is still a threat to peace. And yet we have had an opportunity, even quite recently, of seeing what miscalculations underlie this policy of "liberation" of those who are free, and what harm it does. 81.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“See how all the affairs of this world are bound up together! The General Assembly should once again—and still more categorically—condemn colonial wars and interference. An early date should be set for the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples. The memorandum by the Soviet Union [A/4889] concerning the implementation of the above-mentioned Declaration contains proposals which in the opinion of the Polish delegation should serve as a basis for General Assembly resolutions in this field. 79. It is a difficult and thankless task to defend colonialism from this rostrum. That was why it was easier to have recourse to methods which I would rather not go into.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“By an overwhelming majority, the Assembly adopted a declaration, sponsored by forty-three Asian and African States, on the granting of independence of colonial countries and peoples [resolution 1514 (XV)], 77. But the colonizers are not relinquishing Mozambique, or Portuguese Guinea, or West Irian, or Rhodesia, or Kenya, or Uganda, or the still-dependent Territories of the Near East, or the Pacific Islands, They stop at nothing in the Congo. They are still waging an endless and bloody war in Algeria. And it is not long since blood flowed at Bizerta. The colonialists' answer to the Angolan nation's aspirations to liberation is a war of extermination. 78. All the States responsible for these facts are members of NATO. To a greater or lesser extent they all profit from the aid and solidarity of this alliance.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“The final abolition of colonialism and its consequences is today intimately bound up with the struggle for peaceful coexistence. This is how the socialist States see it. It was the key idea of Bandung where the ten principles of peaceful co-existence were proclaimed. It was the same idea which brought together in Belgrade2/ twenty-five States differing from each other in numerous respects and which led them to adopt resolutions in common. Poland greeted this conference and its results with sympathy and appreciation, despite certain differences of opinion, ,76. At its fifteenth session, thanks to the initiative of the Soviet Union, the General Assembly broached the problem of the definitive abolition of colonialism.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“The right of self-determination was supposed to justify Hitler's annexation of Austria. It was in the name of the right to self-determination that Hitler's columns moved into Czechoslovakia and invaded Poland, 72. We shall never accept such an interpretation of the right to self-determination. There is no right in the world which can justify preparations for fresh aggression and another war. 73. The second problem which endlessly gives rise to new conflicts, crises and local wars, and keeps the whole world under the threat of war is that of colonialism, 74. The abolition of colonialism has never been the exclusive business of the dependent peoples. It was and remains the common business of all the forces of national and social liberation. It is entirely due to this fact that the colonial system is breaking up, 75.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“More and more often we hear Bonn speak of the right of the German nation to self-determination. The right to self-determination is a sacred right of each nation, and that is why we cannot accept the unjustified use of the words "self-determination" for purposes contrary to the essence of this concept. Yet the concept of self-determination is abused even from this rostrum. This is done, for instance, to defend the colonial regime in West Irian. The right of the German nation to self-determination, as Bonn understands it, constitutes a similar abuse, The purpose of this version is to justify imperialistic expansion. 71. This conception, however, is not new. It was in the name of the Germans' right to decide their own destiny that Hitler organized his famous plebiscites.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“If peace is to be ensured in Europe, these problems must be solved in one way or another. 67. With regard to the question of a peace treaty, I should like to recall the firm stand taken by the Polish Government, which has intimated that if the Western Powers refuse to sign a peace treaty, we and the other States which see fit to do so will sign such a treaty With the German Democratic Republic, which will have serious practical consequences. 68. We are glad to note that contact has been established between the United States and the Soviet Union concerning the present crisis. 69. Poland has always considered that in response to the Soviet Government's willingness the Western Powers should in their turn have declared themselves ready to negotiate as soon as possible, We regret that they have not done so earlier. 70.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Non-recognition of the obvious fact that the German Democratic Republic exists can only be interpreted as support for the plans for its annexation. 65. Recognition of the definitive character of the existing German frontiers is vital to the peace of Europe. The unrealistic but dangerous hopes of revenge-seekers of all kinds must be finally dispelled. The armaments race, particularly with relation to nuclear weapons and rockets, in this part of Europe must be stopped. Poland abides by its proposals for an atom-free zone together with the possibility envisaged in our plan of restricting other armaments on the territory of the two German States and of Poland and Czechoslovakia. We should like these fundamental problems to be resolved on the basis of a peace treaty with the two German States. 66.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“The Polish delegation takes the view that it would be possible to settle the question of West Berlin on the basis of new principles which would replace the occupation status and which would provide for the rights and the interests of the people as well as of those of all the States concerned. If the Western Powers really feel strongly about the freedom of the inhabitants of West Berlin, it is difficult to understand why the proposal to make West Berlin a free city is encountering much opposition. 63. The settlement of the Berlin question can satisfy both parties if at the same time we remove the main threat to peace in Europe. 64. It is thus essential to insure respect for the sovereign rights of the German Democratic Republic.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“The propaganda of territorial claims made by the Federal Republic of Germany against Poland has become increasingly provocative. The sabotage of the German Democratic Republic, particularly by West Berlin, has reached disquieting proportions. 39. The events of the spring of 1960 and the spring of 1961 have clearly shown the danger of provocative action on the part of Western militarist circles, 60. The problems of Berlin and of Germany are nearing their critical stage. 61. The question of Berlin can and must be settled. We should like to have it settled by agreement and in3 such a way as to constitute the starting point of a new evolution in Europe towards the easing of tension, security and peaceful coexistence. We would like the present crisis over Berlin to be the last one on the substance of the German problem. 62.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“It was therefore essential to eliminate from the policy of the Federal Republic of Germany and NATO with regard to the German problem at least that factor which constituted the most direct threat to peace, that is to say West Berlin, which has become the main instrument of sabotage and of gradual preparation for the annexation of the German Democratic Republic and a potential centre of provocation on a world scale. 58. It is now almost three years since the proposal concerning Berlin was made. Meanwhile the army of the Federal Republic of Germany has become the strongest in Western Europe. It has been equipped with rockets; bases for manoeuvres have been granted to it in Western Europe; it has been trained in the use of nuclear weapons.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“It was only in deference to the interests of Chancellor Adenauer that the Western Powers rejected that idea. 55. In 1957 Poland submitted a proposal for the establishment of an atom-free zone in Central Europe. It was rejected without discussion. 56. At the end of 1958 the Soviet Union, in agreement with the German Democratic Republic, Poland, Czechoslovakia and the other socialist States, proposed the conclusion of a peace treaty which would write the final page of the history of the Second World War and would lay the basis of a final peaceful solution of the German problem. Once again, this was refused. 57.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“That is why we are not isolated. The policy of reconstruction and mobilization of the forces of German imperialism is not supported by. any nation. It is no secret that, apart from the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany, all the Western Governments already have serious apprehensions concerning this policy. The stubborn determination to defend and carry out this policy is simply a waste of effort. That is patent proof of the extent to which the Atlantic Treaty countries have been drawn into the vicious circle which they have themselves created. 54. Not that there has been any lack of warning on our part. For years we have been proposing an alternative solution. The socialist States have for a long time been advocating summit talks on the German problem.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“It is a policy of encouraging the German revenge-seekers to undertake a new "Drang nach Osten". 50. Hitler's aggression and occupation cost Poland 6 million victims, 6 million men, women and children killed, shot, tortured and asphyxiated in the gas chambers. 51. Over 30 million human lives were lost in the Soviet Union, Poland, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia and other countries to the east of Germany. 52. Let no one be under any illusion. Let no one think, that the socialist States will remain passive in the face of the policy of preparing further aggression and another war. We are not defending only ourselves. We are also defending the peace and ^security of the nations of Western Europe who themselves Suffered grievous losses during the last war; similarly we are defending the existence of the German nation itself. 53.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“of the German policy of the Western Powers, as it was developed in the past and as it is now being pursued', are the rearmament of the Federal Republic of Germany, the non- recognition of the German Democratic Republic and reluctance to recognize the definitive character of Germany's eastern frontiers. In fact it is a programme for the reconstruction and mobilization of the aggressive forces of German militarism against the socialist States. > 49. It is a policy which tends to encourage the revenge-seeking forces of Bonn to try to annex the German Democratic Republic, the first German State to have eliminated aggressive forces in that part of Germany, which has renounced any territorial claims against its neighbours and which is adopting a policy of peace and friendship towards them.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“But the fact that this imperialism has reappeared, that it has attempted to gain the hegemony of Western Europe, and that it has become a force likely to endanger world peace, is due to the policy of the Position of strength, a policy blinded by anti-communism and raised to the status of an official formula by previous United States Governments. 47. German imperialism was to have been a card for NATO to play against the socialist camp. Little by little, however, it is NATO which is becoming more and more a card in the game of German imperialism. 48. The fundamental elements.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)