YouSaid · the spoken record

Skrzeszewski

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS SKRZESZEWSKI

lines on the record: 140
first: 1952-09-24
most recent: 1954-09-24
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

“It is also the purpose of the Western countries and particularly the United States, in maintaining and intensifying the armaments race and the preparations for atomic war. The peoples of the world must be on their guard: if they are not, the successes already achieved in the cause of peace may prove precarious. 14. In order to assess the dangerous effect of warlike forces on peaceful co-operation, it is sufficient to recall that at the Berlin Conference these forces made it impossible to reach a just settlement of the German problem, that at the Geneva Conference they managed to have the Korean talks broken off at the very moment when the compromise proposals of the USSR and the People’s Republic of China had won general support, and that they have been able to keep the United Nations disarmament discussions in a state of deadlock. 15.”
1954-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 9 (1954)
“The positive credit balance of the past year and the progress achieved in favour of peace, co-operation and understanding must not blind us to the symptoms and dangerous trends which are still to be observed on the international scene. 13. Forces which are hostile to the relaxation of international tension and seek to poison international relations and prevent co-operation are still active. This is the purpose behind the attempt to maintain the division of Europe and to re-establish German militarism as a major force of aggression. It is also the purpose behind the attempt to re-establish aggressive blocs in South-East Asia, directed against the peace, independence and freedom of the peoples of that continent.”
1954-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 9 (1954)
“In spite of the unhappy prophets who claim that the Charter is out of date and who predict the approaching collapse of the Organization, the United Nations can and must play a constructive role in international relations. The ultimate success of the United Nations will depend on respect for the Charter and upon the way in which it is able to put its basic principles — the principle of understanding and compromise — into practice in all international disputes. 12. An analysis of recent successes in the peaceful settlement of international disputes compels the observation that the United Nations has not played the part which it could and should have played and that it has not made its contribution towards the relaxation of international tension.”
1954-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 9 (1954)
“In an article entitled “America’s new strategic situation”, the American monthly magazine Fortune, in its issue of August 1954, admits that “optimism can no longer conceal the ugly fact that the United States world system of strategic alliances is under serious stress and strain”. 10. The fact that the method of negotiation and the search for peaceful solutions produces positive results has been confirmed by experience. This must remain the guiding principle of the United Nations, which was set up to be an organization for co-operation and understanding. Teheran, Moscow, Yalta, San Francisco, Potsdam, where strenuous efforts were made to reach joint decisions without the wishes of any party being imposed by force — these mark the stages by which the allied nations came to establish the United Nations. 11.”
1954-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 9 (1954)
“These successive victories in the struggle for peace — the Korean armistice, the Berlin Conference and the Geneva Conference — have undoubtedly been made possible by the policy of peace, and the initiative taken by the Soviet Union, the People’s Republic of China and the peoples’ democracies, including Poland. 8. The policy of force is crumbling away. Those who believed that strong-arm policies would prevail over the principles of international co-operation, and that the organization of international co-operation could be replaced by a network of military agreements and aggressive pacts have failed. 9.”
1954-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 9 (1954)
“Many political circles, and even the ruling circles in numerous countries, have become aware of the danger involved in the policy of preparation for war. The settlement of the Korean and Indo-Chinese problems has once again shown clearly that it is possible to reach common solutions. Here I must stress that the commonsense attitude of the United Kingdom and French delegations helped to achieve an agreement ending the bloodshed in Indo-China, an agreement which was most promising for subsequent developments in the international situation. 7.”
1954-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 9 (1954)
“That is what all the peoples of the world are waiting for and what public opinion in every country demands. 5. What lies behind these events which are likely to improve the international situation? These events have been made possible by the action of all the forces which have determined to remove the danger to the world which is brought about by the policy of preparation for war, the policy of those who seek to poison international relations. Most men are filled with a desire for peace. Their realization of the danger of war has made all peoples strive harder to apply the principle, which is sound and is confirmed by history, that the most stubborn and complicated disputes may be settled peaceably if there is good will and a desire to reach agreement. 6.”
1954-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 9 (1954)
“In his annual report, the Secretary-General of the United Nations makes a similar appraisal of the situation when he says [A/2663, p. xi]: “The bringing to an end of the fighting in Korea and in Indo-China has been, I feel sure, the most important development of the past year for the United Nations and, indeed, in the whole struggle for peace.” 4. For the first time for nearly twenty-five years there is no serious armed conflict anywhere in the world. It may therefore be said that the present session of the General Assembly is meeting in particularly favourable conditions and that prospects for fruitful work lie before it. Such a situation makes it-all the more incumbent upon the Assembly to make every effort to ensure that its work produces practical results that will hasten the relaxation of international tension.”
1954-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 9 (1954)
“I should like, at the outset of my speech in the general debate at the ninth session of the United Nations General Assembly, to greet the delegates to this important international conference and to wish the Assembly every success in its work for the improvement of international relations. The tasks before us are important and we must make a common effort to discharge them equitably. 2. The present session opens at a particularly important stage in international developments. The end of hostilities and the armistice in Korea, the four-Power, Foreign Ministers’ Conference in Berlin, the Conference in Geneva between representatives of the five great Powers and of the other countries concerned, the armistice in Indo-China, and the final settlement of a number of other disputes have done much to improve international relations. 3.”
1954-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 9 (1954)
“III “The General Assembly “Declares that participation in the aggressive North Atlantic bloc, which has brought about an ever growing armaments race and has aggravated international tension, is incompatible with membership in the United Nations; “Calls upon the Governments of the United States of America, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom, France and China, to conclude a peace pact designed to bring about reduction of the armaments of the great Powers and the strengthening of peace among the nations; and “Calls upon all other States to adhere to the peace pact.””
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“II “The General Assembly, “Desiring to avert the threat of a new world war, “(a) Recommends to the Governments of the United States of America, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom, France and China — the permanent members of the Security Council — to reduce their armed forces by one-third within one year, including their air forces, naval forces and auxiliary forces, and to submit full data on their armaments, and further recommends to the Security Council that it call as soon as possible an international conference for the carrying out by all States of the reduction of armed forces; “(b) Calls for the adoption without delay of a decision on the unconditional prohibition of atomic weapons and other weapons of mass destruction and the establishment of strict international control over the observance of that decision by all States; “(c) Calls on all States which have not acceded to or ratified the Geneva Protocol of 17 June 1925 on the prohibition of the use of bacterial weapons to accede to or ratify that instrument.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“has caused untold suffering and misery, “Recommends to the parties engaged in the war in Korea: “(a) The immediate cessation by the parties of military operations on land, at sea and in the air; “(b) The return of all prisoners of war to their homeland, in accordance with international standards; “(c) The withdrawal from Korea of foreign troops, including this Chinese volunteer units, within a period of from two to three months and the peaceful settlement of the Korean question on the principle of unification of Korea, this unification to be achieved by the Koreans themselves under the supervision of a Commission, with the participation of the parties immediately interested and of other States, including the States which have not taken part in the war in Korea.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“The delegation of Poland submits for the consideration of the General Assembly the following draft resolution (A/2229), which proposes measures for the prevention of a new world war and the maintenance of peace and co-operation among the nations: “Measures to avert the threat of a new world war . and to strengthen peace and friendship among the nations I “The General Assembly, “Considering that the war in Korea has already entered its third year and.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“The best proof that Poland is serving this great cause, and Intends to serve it unfalteringly, lies in the provisions of our new fundamental law, the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Poland, adopted by our Parliament on 22 July 1952. It lays down that the Polish nation and all the organs of authority of the working people of Poland must try, in the spirit of the Constitution of our People’s Republic, “to intensify the friendship and co-operation between nations, in the alliance and brotherhood which today link the Polish nation with the peace-loving nations of the world, in their endeavours towards a common aim — the prevention of aggression and the consolidation of world peace”. 110.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“We have raised them because we believe in the possibility of peaceful co-operation among countries with different political systems. The socialist countries have already stressed this possibility many times and have affirmed it by their actions. 109. We have raised these problems as the delegation of a country which has already been the victim of brutal aggression, a country whose people have known the atrocities of war as few peoples have known them at any time in their history. Today, as our wounds are healing and we are building a new life on the ruins of yesterday, the basis of our foreign policy has become the struggle to safeguard our independence by safeguarding the peace.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“At the same time, the Government which has used this weapon refuses to recognize and abide by the existing prohibitions, Use of the bacterial weapon is a grave crime against mankind; and the General Assembly will not be doing its duty if it does not condemn those who use the weapon and issue a warning to any who dare to use it in the future. 108. Such are the main problems confronting the General Assembly at the seventh session, and on which it must take a stand. We have raised the problems of the cessation of hostilities in Korea, of disarmament, of the conclusion of a peace treaty among the great Powers, of the prohibition of weapons of mass destruction, and of the condemnation of the North Atlantic Treaty.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“In the circumstances, the United Nations, faced by the fact of the use of bacterial weapons in Korea and China, has an urgent task before it: to condemn all actions of this kind, to confirm the existing prohibition, and to recommend to all who have not already done so that they should accede to and ratify the Geneva Protocol. Humanity, determined on progress, demands this, as conferences of non-governmental organizations have already demanded it, among them the Conference of the International Red Cross, which unanimously adopted a resolution to that effect at Toronto a few months ago. It is significant that the country against which bacterial warfare has been waged — the People’s Republic of China — lately acceded to the Protocol.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“History has shown that Japan did not do so because it intended to use the weapon in the fulfilment of its plans of aggression, and that it did indeed use it to a certain extent. This was brought out at the trial of the war criminals at Khabarovsk. As for the United States, its representatives, well before that time, were reluctant to recognize the prohibition of the weapon of mass destruction and emphasized several times that their Government was not bound by any international, agreement, To this day, the United States has not ratified the, Geneva Protocol. As late as 1947, President Truman withdrew the draft ratification from the Senate. 107.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“It should be recalled that in the Hague documents of 1899 and 1907 it was declared that belligerents did not have an unlimited right to inflict losses upon their adversaries. As a result, the use of expanding projectiles containing poisonous or corrosive gases was prohibited. With the ever more rapid development of science, a new and dangerous weapon, the bacterial weapon, was added to the arsenal of potential weapons of war. In line with the steps already taken, the Geneva Protocol of 1925 confirmed the prohibition of the use of bacterial weapons. It should be recalled that among the great Powers of that time, only two, Japan and the United States, have not ratified the Protocol.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“It should also be recalled that, on 3 April 1952, General Bullene, chief of the chemical corps of the United States Army, asked the Senate to increase the appropriations for bacteriological research and drew attention to the need for mass production of bacterial weapons. Two years ago, in November 1950, the American periodical, Nation's Business, deplored the fact that United States atomic scientists had been able to test their product in a dramatic demonstration whereas “our germ scientists, who had labored just as hard and maybe more effectively, were denied their demonstration”. Two years later, the United States Army turned these genocidal dreams into reality in Korea and China. 106. This occurred despite existing prohibitions of the use of this weapon of mass extermination.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“If these undeniable facts are compared with the official statements of United States generals and statesmen about the need to use bacterial weapons, it becomes clear that this criminal policy is practised knowingly and that the United States does not hesitate to employ one of the most atrocious weapons of mass extermination, primarily against the defenceless civilian population, It is enough to recall the statements of Merck, chief of the military research centre, and of Rosebury and Kabat, professors of bacteriology attached to the notorious Camp Detrick, and other statements.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“Last January, public opinion throughout the world was staggered by the news that the United States Air Force had used bacterial weapons in Korea. At the end of February came news of bacterial attacks on Chinese territory by United States aircraft. The fact that this weapon had been used was confirmed in the official communiques of the Korean and Chinese Governments. The communiques contained data so appalling that some people in the western countries doubted their veracity, Nevertheless, special commissions composed of authoritative and competent persons — distinguished scholars from various countries, men of differing Religious and political opinions — have confirmed the facts beyond any doubt. The commissions examined an immense quantity of factual material and heard eye-witnesses of the crime. 105.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“For these reasons, the Polish delegation feels that this burning question must be settled at the present session. The General Assembly faces the grave task of taking effective measures to bring about the prohibition of the production and use of atomic weapons, by establishing effective and simultaneous control. 103. There is a further problem which must be dealt with in connexion with measures to dispel international tension. Over humanity today hangs the threat not only of the use of new technical discoveries for purposes of destruction, but also the use of other means of mass extermination already known in the past. This problem was brought before the United Nations as a result of the use of bacterial weapons by the forces of the United States in Korea and China. 104.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“The day after the opening of the present session, Mr. Pace, United States Secretary of the Army, praised certain new types and models of the murderous atomic weapon to representatives of the Press. 101. Millions of simple people throughout the world are protesting against these threats and this policy of blackmail, united in the single desire not to see the threat of awful destruction and death hang over their homes but to be allowed to live and work in peace. The peoples of the world demand that the production and use of the atomic bomb shall be prohibited. It must be realized that the threat now being made with regard to China and Korea may tomorrow turn against other nations. As for those who brandish the atomic weapon, they clearly do not reflect that that weapon can strike them too. 102.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“Not long ago Senator Aiken declared before the United States Congress: “The United States needs an air force for strategic bombing capable of launching repeated atomic attacks on objectives anywhere in the world.” A few weeks ago, on 18 September 1952, one of the leaders of the American Legion called for the immediate use of the atomic bomb in Manchuria, north of the Yalu River, American politicians and military men are threatening to use the atomic bomb. Possessed by the desire to destroy, they demand increased production, General James Doolittle, a former chief of the American Air Force, speaking in Detroit on 30 August 1952, assured his listeners that it was possible now to produce a bomb which, dropped from a single aircraft, would have the explosive force of all the bombs dropped during the Second World War.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“The firm proposals of the USSR on the question were again sabotaged and no progress was made in the matter. 99. Meanwhile, the United States has taken advantage of the present state of affairs, and of the fact that the atomic bomb is not prohibited, to stir up fear and insecurity and so maintain and increase the existing international tension. The United States Government has itself cynically described its attitude as atomic diplomacy. The purpose of this diplomacy is to create panic among nervous persons by brandishing the atomic weapon. Once again experiments are being carried out on a vast scale. Bigger and more destructive bombs are being produced and there are constant threats to Use them. 100.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“Compelled by the pressure of public opinion to submit counter-proposals, the United States has sought to conceal its real intention of keeping its hands free where the production of atomic bombs is concerned. The matter was ultimately referred to the recently established Disarmament Commission, but there again the United States made the attainment of any genuine agreement impossible. The United States there attempted to divert attention from the crux of the problem to questions of secondary importance, such as the disclosure and verification of armed forces and armaments. The idea of proceeding by stages again came up. Information about the atomic bomb was obviously to be divulged only at the last stage, which was not clearly defined.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“The Soviet Union's possession of the atomic weapon has in no way affected its unremitting struggle to secure the prohibition of the use of this devastating weapon of mass destruction. We are witnesses to the fact that the USSR has always given and is giving the maximum evidence of its goodwill and has made a series of concessions which could contribute to agreement in this matter. Its proposals found expression in the new plans submitted to the sixth session of the General Assembly, in the draft resolution relating to the simultaneous introduction of prohibition and of a system of ensuring observance of the prohibition [A/2068], The Polish Government warmly welcomed those proposals. 98. But all these efforts to reach agreement have so far encountered the ominous opposition of the United States.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“But it is obvious to everyone that no relaxation of the tension can be achieved without a substantial reduction of armaments, absolute prohibition of atomic weapons and the establishment of genuine international control. The People's Republic of Poland, which has constantly associated itself with the other democratic countries in the peace camp in supporting the initiative of the Soviet Union, has since the outset consistently called for the immediate prohibition of atomic weapons, the establishment of an effective international system for ensuring observance of this prohibition and research into methods of utilizing this new technical achievement for peaceful purposes, to the benefit of mankind. 97.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“It is difficult to believe that the sponsors of this absurd and cynical plan did not realize that its effect would be to postpone the question of prohibiting the manufacture of atomic weapons indefinitely and frustrate all effective measures of control. The proposal for the solution of the atomic energy problem by so-called “stages” has already found a place in the, alas, not very glorious pages of our Organizations history. 96. By maintaining that there could be no question of disarmament or of prohibiting weapons of mass destruction until an atmosphere of confidence was established, the United States delegation deliberately created a vicious circle.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“Through the fault of the United States, fruitless and sterile discussions have been in progress for over six years on the prohibition of atomic weapons and an effective system of ensuring observance of this prohibition. 95. The objective of the many versions of the famous Baruch plan, which do not in fact differ substantially one from the other, was not to secure the prohibition of atomic weapons or to establish a system for ensuring that the prohibition was really observed. Its purpose was to subordinate the economy of other countries, and first and foremost that of the Soviet Union, to the United States atomic super-trust.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“Those in control of this war machine have recently shown themselves particularly active in organizing provocative military manoeuvres directed against Member States of the United Nations. On the basis of its aims and structure and of the activities so far undertaken within its framework, we are bound to conclude that the North Atlantic Treaty is contrary to the Charter and that participation in it is incompatible with membership in the United Nations. This is another problem to which the General Assembly must give its attention. 94. My delegation also considers that no relaxation of the international tension is possible so long as the threat of the use of weapons of mass destruction hangs over mankind. Effective measures must therefore be taken to remove this danger also.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“They are at variance with the principle of collective security and have nothing in common with the arrangements customarily described as regional pacts. 93. The North Atlantic Treaty, which was set up under the guise of a defence pact, is such a pact of aggression. From the very first days of its existence, the Treaty; has served as a pretext to organize an army of aggression, to establish military bases and to increase armaments. This Treaty, to which certain Members of the United Nations are signatories, is directed against other Members of the Organization. As we know, the so-called European army is being organized and a unified command of land, sea and air forces is being established under this Treaty.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“Already at previous sessions, one of the great Powers — the USSR — has expressed its readiness, in a series of resolutions and proposals, to enter into negotiations with a view to improving relations among the great Powers; it has also proposed the conclusion of a five-Power peace pact, the need for which is even greater today than it was in the past. 92. While recommending that the great Powers should conclude a peace pact and appealing to all States to strengthen international co-operation, the General Assembly must at the same time condemn all attempts to draw up pacts of aggression which are in fact contrary to the provisions of the United Nations Charter and incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Organization.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“The Polish delegation considers it the duty of the great Powers to give an assurance to all of us, as well as to their own peoples, that they will unite their efforts to maintain peace. 91, But words are not enough. If this assurance is to have any value, it must be embodied in a solemn international instrument, which is binding on the parties to it. Is there any room for doubt that this would help to ease the tension and that it would be greeted with a sigh of relief by millions of men throughout the world? We are demanding the action for which provision has been made in Article 106 of the Charter. The action we are demanding is a logical consequence of the present international situation.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“The absence of unanimity has made it impossible to reach a settlement of the question of disarmament and of the prohibition of atomic weapons; it prevents the settlement of burning questions; and, lastly, it makes it impossible to admit to the United Nations fourteen States which have waited so long for admission to our debates. 90, Today, therefore, it is particularly necessary to restore that co-operation. Obviously, such co-operation neither does nor can take the form of forced decisions, of attempts to by-pass the requirements of the Charter, to weaken the role of the Security Council or to substitute various illegally established bodies for the Council. The great Powers must arrive at agreed decisions on the basis of the unanimity rule.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“The duties and rights of the great Powers were recognized by giving them permanent seats in the Security Council and by accepting the need for unanimity among them as essential to the effective working of the Organization, Recent events have taught us that, whenever the great Powers have reached agreed decisions, the crucial problems of international politics have been properly solved. The tension has then relaxed. Today, we are faced with the absence of any such unity. The United States is stifling co-operation and precluding the settlement of many problems confronting the United Nations.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“Co-operation among the great Powers is a matter of concern to all States and we all, I think, recognize the need for co-operation among those who bear the main responsibility for peace. We remain faithful to the principle of the equality of all Member States of the United Nations, At the same time, it must be recognized that certain States play a predominant role by reason of their economic and military potential and the power they represent. The role of those Powers was clearly revealed in the Second World War, and was recognized when the United Nations, was brought into being.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“Acheson spoke yesterday, since their authors did not aim at reducing armaments, but at securing or maintaining the domination of the North Atlantic bloc by pursuing their own armament effort. The Polish delegation considers that it is the fundamental duty of the United Nations to prepare and carry into effect a genuine disarmament plan. A disarmament conference should be convened to study the disarmament of all States, 89, We also consider that the source of the present international tension lies not only in the absence of a disarmament plan jointly prepared by the great Powers, but also in the failure of those Powers, through the fault of the United States, to co-operate in other aspects of international policy.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“The proposals pompously described as the three-Power (United States, United Kingdom and France) disarmament proposals, submitted to the sixth session of the General Assembly [A/C.1/66T], were revealed to be a spurious plan from the start of the discussions which took place during that session, and this was even more evident during the detailed discussions in the Disarmament Commission. In the absentee of any obligation to reduce armaments during the period of the armaments race, the proposed checking of armaments is not merely devoid of meaning, but would in fact amount to sanctioning the armaments race. The same applies to the so-called disarmament plans, and in particular to the plan of which Mr.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“The assumption that the reduction of armaments must be initiated precisely by those States is therefore sound. The Soviet Union has already expressed its willingness to undertake a reduction of its armaments. It is now time for those Powers which have not yet done so to give concrete evidence of their readiness to co-operate in effective action to reduce armaments. 88. By taking this first step, the United Nations can make a considerable contribution towards an immediate relaxation of national tension and to the lightening of the burden which weighs on the world economy.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“The proposal was referred to a newly established commission [resolution 502 (VI)}, the Disarmament Commission, but has remained unstudied in consequence of the action of the United States delegation. Another year has thus elapsed, during which a further increase of armaments has served only to heighten international tension; for no relaxation of that tension is possible without a reduction of armaments. 87. A start must be made forthwith on a general disarmament plan, and the first step in that direction must be the proportionate reduction of the armaments and armed forces of the great Powers, No proof is needed that the armed forces of the great Powers play a predominant role and that a disarmament initiated by those States would lead to a substantial and effective relaxation of international tension.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“Despite this resolution, no progress whatsoever has been made in the disarmament problem during the past six years. The problem has been discussed at each successive session of the General Assembly, At these sessions one of the great Powers, the Soviet Union, has put forward concrete proposals which, if adopted, would have made possible an immediate reduction of armaments and armed forces and the use of vast material resources and reserves of human energy for peaceful ends. 86. The unremitting efforts of the USSR and of the countries of the peace camp have come to naught as a result of the opposition of the United States, the Power responsible for the initiation of the present armaments race. The latest evidence of this was the rejection of the Soviet Union proposal submitted to the sixth session of the General Assembly [A/2068].”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“It is the duty of the United Nations to seek a peaceful solution of the Korean problem through the unification of Korea by the Korean people themselves; it should do so with the help of a commission on which, in addition to the countries directly concerned, other States, including some which are not taking part in military operations, should be represented. 85. Korea is a glaring example of the consequences of the policy of aggression and the armaments race. That is why a reduction of armaments is a prerequisite for any action to secure a relaxation of international tension. As long ago as 1946, the General Assembly, on the initiative of the USSR, adopted a resolution [41 (I)] affirming the need to reduce armed forces and armaments as soon as possible.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“This war does not concern the Korean people alone, but has become an international problem, since its continuation constitutes a threat to the peace, particularly in Asia and the Far East. Faced with this situation, the General Assembly must recommend the immediate cessation of military operations on land, at sea and in the air, the repatriation of all prisoners in conformity with tie principles of the Geneva Convention and the withdrawal, within a period of two or three months, of all foreign forces as well as of the detachments of Chinese volunteers. 84.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“And it is precisely this question of prisoners of war which the Government of the United States is using as a pretext to prevent the conclusion of an armistice, to undertake the systematic sabotage of the talks and finally to adjourn them, as it recently did in the most shameful manner, without fixing a date for their resumption. This step was obviously taken with a view to confronting the General Assembly with a fait accompli. 83. The United Nations cannot tolerate such a state of affairs. It must not allow appalling wars of destruction to continue. We should recall the disillusionment and indignation with which ordinary peoples throughout the world are following the discussions in the United Nations, unable to understand why it should indulge in sterile debate while thousands of innocent men are losing their lives every day.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“The history of the prison camps in South Korea, where terrorism, violence, starvation and murder have become the daily lot of the Korean and Chinese volunteer prisoners, is a dark page in the history of recent years. Koje has become the scene of the martyrdom of Korean patriots and Chinese volunteers. A few weeks ago, on Cheju, fifty-two prisoners who dared to hoist their national flag on one of their national holidays were brutally murdered. Only yesterday the American Press reported that eleven prisoners in the Koje camp had been injured following alleged insubordination.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“While the devastation spreads from day to day, the ruins pile up and innocent men fall victim to the United States Air Force, Mr. Acheson talks of the future reconstruction of Korea. This is the United States contribution to the reconstruction of Korea announced by Mr, Acheson. 82. The problem of the prisoners of war is a particularly shameful chapter in the history of the Korean conflict and of the Panmunjom talks. The procedure for settling the problem should not, however, be in doubt. There are clear and unequivocal international agreements on the question of the treatment of prisoners of war. All that was necessary, one would have thought, would have been to apply these agreements, the signatories to which include the United States Government, Not so, however.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“With that object in view, it violated the neutral zone on several occasions and spread false rumours and provocative charges against the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea, the object being to create a variety of pretexts for breaking off the armistice talks. After the failure of these provocative activities, the United States went on to acts of brutal destruction. The bombing of towns and villages, the annihilation of the civilian population, the devastation of a country already in ruins and, finally, the provocative air attacks on the power-stations and plants on the Yalu River — which caused so much concern to the allies of the United States — were of unprecedented violence. It was quite obvious to the allies of the United States that these air attacks were an attempt to extend the conflict or even to start a new war. 81.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)
“The heavy casualties sustained by the contingents of its allies in pressing forward the aggression in Korea are of np concern to the United States Government. It has even remained unmoved by its own lengthening casualty lists, by the fact that several thousand young Americans have lost their lives in an unjust war. The Ignited States is engineering the failure of the talks on the cease-fire problem. After it had been compelled, by the pressure of world public opinion, to accept the Soviet Union proposal, the United States at once set itself to prevent the talks from reaching a successful outcome.”
1952-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 7 (1952)