YouSaid · the spoken record

Molotov

lines on the record: 135
first: 1946-09-24
most recent: 1955-09-24
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

“Our peoples did not pour forth their precious blood in order to pave the way for new claimants to world domination. This is exactly what we should be reminded of at the present time. If the great Powers which led the struggle against the fascist aggressors keep together and if, with the support of the other nations, they refuse to allow any rift in their ranks, they will be able to do much to counteract the whetting of insatiable appetites. Otherwise the new claimants to world domination will be given a free hand for all sorts of adventures until they break their necks. We know that there are quite a number of ways in which the stronger Powers can bring pressure to bear on other States.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The disputes and struggles that are going on around the so-called veto indicates the intensification of the antagonisms between the two fundamental political tendencies, one of which consists in the defence of the principle, which we all recognize, of international co-operation among the big and small States, while the other one consists in the desire of certain influential groups to have a free hand in order to wage a frantic struggle for world domination. An attitude of neutrality in such a question is ambiguous and inappropriate. The Allies fought against imperialist Germany and imperialist Japan in order to free the peoples from fascist claimants to world domination. We did not fight in order that some other country or countries should take their place.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The success of this campaign would mean victory for a policy which would enable one group of States, led by the strongest of the Powers, to dominate the other Powers, which would then find themselves in the minority. Instead of a policy of international co-operation in the spirit of the democratic principles of the United Nations, the triumphant policy would be that of the new claimants to world domination as represented by a corresponding bloc or, if you wish, by a group of Powers to which the retention of the principle of unanimity of the great Powers already seems to be irksome.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“It is quite obvious that the repudiation of the principle of unanimity of the great Powers, and this is what is actually behind the proposal for the abolition of the veto, would mean, in fact, the liquidation of the United Nations, because this principle is the cornerstone of that Organization. Perhaps not all the participators in this noisy campaign sufficiently realize whence it is leading. But inasmuch as the United Nations is based on the principle of unanimity of the great Powers, the abolition of this principle will result in the collapse of the very edifice of the United Nations. But this is not the only question at issue.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“It is easy to see that, while the principle of unanimity of the Great Powers established in the Charter of the United Nations is entirely in keeping with the policy of strengthening normal international co-operation with the all-round development of the forms of this co-operation and competition, the retention of this principle in its integrity cannot be in keeping with the policy of achieving world domination, which is linked with aspirations towards expansion and aggression. The clash and the struggle between these two policies are now, it may be said, in the initial stage. But even this is already beginning to cause a cleavage within the United Nations. Imagine what would happen if the campaign to abolish the so-called veto were crowned with success! What would be the political consequences?”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“We must recognize that the policy of these circles, which aims at the achievement of world domination, is the direct opposite of the policy of international co-operation and the peaceful competition of social systems. We must also take into account the fact that the adherents of this imperialist and profoundly reactionary policy see the main obstacle to the realization of their expansionist plans in the Soviet Union, against which, in their impotent rage, they would be prepared to unleash all the hounds. Thus, we must reckon with two opposite trends in the development of international relations.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“Judging by certain frank statements, we must take into account, even in the new postwar conditions, the possibility of the increased influence in certain countries of such aggressive imperialist circles who, for the sake of achieving world domination, may embark upon a reckless aggression and the most hazardous military adventures. Churchill, who has sympathizers in England and in the United States, is a prophet for such imperialists. Naturally, the normal principle of international co-operation does not at all enter into the plans of such imperialist circles, who in the long run believe only in the extreme methods of pressure and violence. Their policy, in its essence, is hopelessly reactionary.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“Such a policy may not suit the plans of a government which has no confidence in the internal forces of its State and is infected with a lack of faith in peaceful means of international co-operation and competition and which prefers to draw up pretentious plans to achieve domination and to exploit other peoples. As we know, the lessons of history are not always comprehended in the manner that befits the real interests of a State. We cannot be sure that the collapse of imperialist Germany and the bankruptcy of imperialist Japan will provide the grasping imperialists with a sufficiently convincing proof of the recklessness and inevitable failure of their policy of striving to achieve world domination, which, as we know, constitutes the real substance of imperialism.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The recognition of the principles of international co-operation is of profound significance: it is an expression of the firm will to achieve universal peace and of the readiness to enter into peaceful competition in social and economic affairs, as between States and social systems. So far as the Soviet Union is concerned, there is no hesitation or doubt among our people that peace among nations and peaceful competition between them, which also means the possibility of developing ever-increasing and friendly co-operation and mutual aid between great and small States, are entirely in keeping with the interests of our country. We have no doubt, either, that this policy of developing international co-operation is also in accordance with the interests of all peace-loving countries.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“As we know, the resulting co-ordination of the war efforts of these countries and their allies, together with the achievement of extensive mutual aid between them, produced great results and ensured victory for the Allies in the war. As before, the Soviet Union is loyal to the principles of such international co-operation and is prepared to spare no effort for the achievement of success along these lines. For this reason the Soviet Union stands unshakably for respect for the United Nations, and considers that the honest and consistent observance of its Charter is essential. Naturally, such international cooperation can only be really successful if the other Powers also manifest in deeds their willingness to follow the same path.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“From the very beginning it was obvious that, for this purpose, it was necessary above all to ensure concerted action on the part of the great Powers. Moreover, it was known at that time — no less than at present — that it was a question of international co-operation in which the efforts of States with different social and political systems should be united for the sake of peace and security. The war made it particularly clear that States with widely different social structures have extremely important interests in common which they can uphold only by their joint efforts and on condition of non-interference in each other’s internal affairs. This was recognized by the United States of America, as well as by Great Britain and the Soviet Union.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The other, on the contrary, is intended to shake the foundations on which the United Nations rests and to pave the way for the proponents of a different course. From these latter now come all kinds of onslaughts, both in the form of direct attacks and in the form of flanking manoeuvres. The origins of the United Nations Organization are still fresh in our memory; from the very outset it was permeated by the spirit of democratic co-operation. The important part played by the United States of America in this matter is also well-known. The United Nations was created in order to implement such international co-operation among the great and small countries as would, in the largest possible measure, conform to the interests of all peace-loving States.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“It would also be naive to overlook the fact that the campaign has assumed a character which is definitely hostile to the Soviet Union. None of us are blind from birth; nobody here could fail to see that the downright reactionaries are already making capital out of this campaign. The dispute about the veto and the whole present discussion make it necessary to speak openly about the contradictions and the principal political trends existing in international affairs in our times. Two principal trends are struggling within the United Nations to gain influence over the main course of its work. One of those trends bases itself on the main fundamentals of the United Nations Organization and on respect for the principles underlying it.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“There are even people who represent such a procedure for the adoption of decisions within an international, organization as the most democratic one, as if the best democracy worthy of universal recognition would be to consider, in an international organization, that the vote of Honduras is equal to that of the United States of America, or the vote of Haiti to that of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, which represents a federation of sixteen Republics. It seems obvious that it is not worth while wasting words on arguments regarding this sort of “democracy.” However, this does not mean that the campaign conducted under the guise of the struggle against the veto can be ignored. It would be extremely short-sighted to regard this campaign as a fortuitous and insignificant matter.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“It is easy to foresee the results of such a renunciation. No one will now suggest that we should go back to the bankrupt League of Nations with its unanimity of all members in adopting decisions. Consequently, there is a desire to utilize the renunciation of this principle in order to impose a procedure whereby decisions would be adopted by a majority vote. Proposals to this effect have already been made here in the General Assembly.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“Of late, a wide-scale campaign has been launched against the recognition of this principle. No chance was missed of engaging in long-winded discussions of this principle, while the problem of the necessary unity of the great Powers is glossed over in every way and is constantly being replaced by the specific question of the manner in which the so-called “veto” is to be applied in deciding questions in the Security Council. What is the meaning of the campaign against the veto, that is to say, against the right of any of the great Powers not to permit a decision to be adopted in the Security Council which it considers undesirable in the interests of the maintenance of peace and international security? What will be the outcome of renunciation of the principle of unanimity of the great Powers in deciding questions of this nature?”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The hard trials of the war led the Governments of the great western Powers to the conviction that it was necessary to act in harmony against the common enemy during the war, and to the recognition of the necessity of forming such an international organization to deal with post-war problems as would maintain the profoundly progressive principle forged in the war, the principle of the unity of the great Powers which rallied around them all the democratic States. It follows from this that the principle of the unanimity of the great Powers in matters relating to the defence of peace and security is deep-rooted, and that this principle was recognized by the United Nations, which were actuated by the desire for a more reliable defence of the interests of all peace-loving States, both great and small.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The recognition of this principle reflected the desire of the United Nations to ensure co-ordination and unity of action on the part of the great Powers in counteracting any possible aggression. Before the second world war the great Powers were not animated by this desire for unity of action in defence of peace and security, and therein lay the greatest misfortune for the whole of mankind. The United States of America stood aloof from the high road, so to speak. In regard to the Soviet Union, the principal members of the League of Nations pursued a short-sighted and out-and-out reactionary policy.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“As to the Security Council, which bears the main responsibility for the maintenance of peace and for measures against aggression, the decision on questions of this nature requires not only a majority of not less than seven out of the eleven members of the Security Council but is also conditioned upon the unanimity of the five great Powers, the United States of America, Great Britain, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, France and China, whose unanimity is, so to speak, a guarantee of the interests of the United Nations as a whole. The principle of the unanimity of the great Powers was adopted not by chance, but after a thorough and lengthy discussion.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“This rendered the League of Nations ineffective, because it enabled any interested member to hinder or to frustrate altogether any proposed decision. The League proved to be powerless to take measures against aggressive Powers, which were always able to find subordinates among the members of the League. The United Nations Charter has introduced a new procedure for the adoption of decisions. It has now been laid down that the General Assembly shall adopt its important decisions by a two-thirds majority.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“It was created by the same anti-Hitler coalition that was headed by the United States of America, Great Britain and the Soviet Union, which bore on their shoulders the brunt of the struggle against our common enemy and which were anxious to create an effective international organization for the defense of post-war peace and security. At the same time, it was recognized as necessary to take into account the grave lessons of the past and, above all, the generally known fact of the impotence and failure of the League of Nations, in order to avoid repeating its weaknesses and mistakes and to create an organization which would not suffer from its principal defects. The main principle of the League of Nations was the unanimity of all its Members in taking decisions.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“In any case the General Assembly has not met in order to overlook the main trend of the development of international relations in our time. We should be interested above all to know in what direction international co-operation is developing at present. Does the new Organization contribute to that international co-operation, in the interests of the peace and security of nations, for which it was created? Are we going along the right path? That is the main question. The United Nations was created while the flames of the second world war were still raging.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The facts which I have cited concerning the Spanish question, the relationship with the World Federation of Trade Unions, the question of trusteeship and other matters that have been so far discussed, show that there are serious defects in the work of the United Nations and of its individual organs. The number of such instances could be considerably augmented. This is particularly true of the Security Council. There is a misguided desire to attribute the shortcomings of the Council’s work merely to the use of the so-called “veto.” The hubbub raised over this issue is apparently needed in order to divert our attention from the most important shortcomings in the activities of the United Nations and, in this way, to lay the blame at the wrong door. But let us hope that these attempts will be doomed to failure.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“For its part, the Soviet Union is prepared to submit this information to the Security Council and sees no reason to conceal the actual position as regards this question from the other United Nations and thereby hinder the Security Council in the execution of its duties. Unfortunately, the proposal of the Soviet Union was not adopted in the Security Council, since it was opposed by the representatives of Great Britain and the United States of America and, along with them, by the representatives of some other countries. The discussion of this important question is dragging along in the Council. Nevertheless, the Soviet Government expresses its confidence that we shall be able to reach agreement on this question and to push the matter ahead. It is essential for the General Assembly to state its weighty opinion on this subject.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The Soviet Union, on its part, is prepared to submit this information to the Security Council and sees no reason whatsoever for refusal on the part of any other Member of the United Nations to do the same. What reasons can there actually be to refuse to submit these data to the Security Council? Why should anyone of us conceal from the United Nations the actual position as regards this question? What have the Governments of the Members of the United Nations to be afraid of when they are required by the Security Council to submit the information that is needed for the implementation of the provisions of the Charter?”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“In accordance with Chapter VII of the Charter, the Military Staff Committee has already begun to examine the question of the armed forces which the Members of the United Nations must place at the disposal of the Security Council for the maintenance of international peace and security, as provided for in Article 43. In this connexion it is natural that the Security Council should know the actual situation, namely, what armed forces of the United Nations are at present stationed outside the confines of their countries and where they are situated. The submission of this information should, of course, be obligatory for all the United Nations.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“At what points in the above-mentioned territories are air and naval bases situated and what is the size of their garrisons belonging to the armed forces of other Member States of the United Nations. “3. The information to be provided under paragraphs 1 and 2 should refer to the situation as it existed on 1 August 1946.” The need for the Security Council to obtain this information seems quite obvious, not to mention the fact that the presence of armed forces of the United Nations outside the confines of their country and in territories other than enemy territories — the occupation regime for which has been specially laid down — is now giving rise to serious uneasiness among the peoples and in the public opinion of the whole world. I draw the attention of the Assembly to the situation that has arisen in this particular case.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“I shall now speak about Greece. But one cannot remain indifferent to the fact that the Greek fascists have tin-own off all restraint, thanks to the protection afforded them by the British occupation forces. Take another example. Two months ago the Soviet representative submitted the following proposal to the Security Council: “States Members of the United Nations are required to submit the following information to the Security Council within two weeks: “1. At what points in the territory of Members of the United Nations or other States, with the exception of former enemy territories, and in what number, are armed forces of other Members of the United Nations stationed. “2.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“Incidentally, the Government of the Union of South Africa has gone even further and instead of taking measures to prepare South West Africa for self-government or independence, simply demands that annexation of this territory be sanctioned, a course which, as is obvious to everyone, is entirely contrary to the Charter of the United Nations. In this connexion I will also mention India. Although India is a Member of the United Nations, and consequently, in accordance with the Charter, her relationship to Great Britain should be based on sovereign equality, have you not heard here in the General Assembly India’s appeal for support and assistance? We cannot turn a deaf ear to this situation. It is time that the just demands of India were recognized. Likewise, the Netherlands must recognize the just demands of the people of Indonesia.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“But is not the authority of our Organization being undermined by the fact that, after more than a year, it has been unable to create the Trusteeship Council which will have the duty of improving the living conditions of the peoples who inhabit the territories under mandates held by Great Britain, France, Belgium, Australia, New Zealand and the Union of South Africa, and which should promote their development in the direction of self-government and independence? But what is the situation in actual fact? Not a single step has been taken along this path by the countries which keep a firm grip on the mandates of Palestine and Tanganyika, Togoland and New Guinea, etc., and which confine themselves in the meantime to the writing of unsatisfactory drafts and insignificant declarations.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“Is it right that the terms of representation in the Economic and Social Council should be the same for this Organization as for the International Automobile Association, the National Association of Dried Fruits Retailers, et cetera? Is it not time to put right also in this field a situation which is out of keeping with the elementary principles of democracy? Let us consider now, the state of affairs in respect of the establishment of an international trusteeship system. It might be thought that someone is deliberately hindering the establishment of the Trusteeship Council.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“I will now turn to the World Federation of Trade Unions. One would think it would be quite natural for the United Nations to establish friendly ties with the World Federation of Trade Unions which has come into being in recent years and which embraces tens of millions of workers of many countries. This is particularly necessary for the Economic and Social Council, which will be unable to ensure the success of its work unless it has the support of such mass democratic organizations as the World Federation of Trade Unions. In actual fact, however, the situation is entirely different. Up to now the World Federation has not been associated with the every-day work of the Economic and Social Council. But that is not all.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“On the other hand, the proposal to sever relations with Franco was not adopted. In this way certain great Powers which set this tone took upon themselves the moral responsibility for the failure to take action in respect of a dangerous hotbed of fascism in Europe. The Iranian question arose in connexion with the time-limits on the stay in Iran of certain Soviet military units stationed there under treaty. Even when these military units had left Iranian territory, and both the Soviet and the Iranian Governments requested that the question be removed from the agenda, the Security Council refused to do so and adopted an absolutely unjustified, and frankly ill-disposed, attitude towards the Soviet Union. In acting in this manner, the Security Council made a gross mistake, which is bound to undermine its authority.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“But precisely for this reason it is in the interests of the United Nations not to hush up the existing shortcomings but to expose them from the very outset and to take care that they are not allowed to occur in the future. Naturally, this applies primarily to the Security Council since it has to deal daily with important problems relating to the defence of universal peace, in regard to which the interests and views of individual States are not infrequently in conflict. Take the question of Spain and the Iranian question. The Security Council, and still earlier the General Assembly, found nothing better than to make general declarations against Franco. The Secretary-General has rightly pointed out, in this Connexion, that this is, of course, absolutely insufficient.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)
“The general debate on the report of the Secretary-General offers us an opportunity to state our views both on individual questions of interest to this or that country and on the general questions of international co-operation. Such an exchange of views should be useful in establishing mutual understanding among the United Nations. It is also necessary in order to improve the work of the Organization and its important organs, such as the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council and others. The United Nations is only in the initial stage of its activities. There are necessarily substantial shortcomings in its work, if only because it is only beginning to apply its new principles and that under conditions which greatly differ from those of the past.”
1946-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 1 (1946)