YouSaid · the spoken record

Shepilov

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS SHEPILOV

lines on the record: 75
first: 1956-09-24
most recent: 1956-09-24
sittings or episodes: 1
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

“Naturally the international forces must not stay in Port Said or the general area of the Suez Canal after the withdrawal of United Kingdom and French troops from Port Said. The continued presence of United Nations forces in that area would violate the provisions of the Constantinople Convention of 1888 and would constitute a clear infringement of the sovereign rights of Egypt. It goes without saying that the United Nations forces must also withdraw from the demarcation line and from Egyptian territory in general as soon as the Republic of Egypt should consider it necessary. 83. We must not overlook the disturbing fact that influential circles in the United Kingdom and France, and certain circles in the United States, have far-reaching and extremely dangerous intentions in connexion with the dispatch of United Nations forces to Egypt.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“First, it must not be forgotten that the establishment and command of an international armed police Force, under the terms of Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, are the prerogative of the Security Council. In the present instance, this provision of the Charter has clearly been violated. Secondly, once the United Kingdom, France and Israel withdraw their armed forces from Egyptian territory there will be no need for a United Nations international police Force. 82. However, the Soviet delegation is aware that Egypt has agreed to the introduction of United Nations armed forces, with the understanding that they may be stationed along the demarcation line between Israel and Egypt which was established by the Armistice Agreement of 1948.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“The Soviet delegation considers it imperative that measures be taken to prevent Israel from further provoking its neighbours and to ensure peace and tranquillity in the Near East. 80. Surely the voice of reason must convince the United Kingdom, France and Israel that their forces must be withdrawn from Egypt without further delay, lest the situation be aggravated anew. It must be borne in mind that the sympathies of peace-loving peoples the world over are on the side of Egypt. 81. The decision taken by the first emergency special session of the General Assembly to establish a United Nations international police Force raises the following considerations.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“As long as the troops of the aggressors remain in Egyptian territory, there can be no assurance that hostilities will not break out anew. The Soviet delegation is of the opinion that the General Assembly should again categorically demand the immediate withdrawal of United Kingdom, French and Israel troops from Egypt. This is the more necessary because the Government of Israel, for example, does not wish to withdraw its troops from the Gaza Strip, having declared it “an integral part of its territory”, 79. The Government of the State of Israel has openly proclaimed its annexationist aims with regard to Egypt, including the incorporation into Israel of the Gaza Strip, the Sinai Peninsula, and the islands of Tiran and Sinafir in the Gulf of Aqaba.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“An aide-memoire [A/3370] of the Egyptian Government transmitted to the Secretary-General on 18 November states that the United Kingdom and France, instead of withdrawing their forces from Egypt, are “consolidating their positions in Egyptian territory”. The aide-memoire goes on to say: “... these armed forces are at the same time launching upon extremely provocative acts in Port Said and the Suez Canal area, which acts include indiscriminate shooting of the population resulting in many victims... To this are added the searching and looting of houses and stores, and forcing [Egyptian] labourers, under all kinds of threats, to work with the invading forces”. This situation is fraught with grave danger. 78.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“This triumph is all the more remarkable because two great Powers armed with the finest military equipment, proved unable to crush the resistance of the young Republic of Egypt, far weaker militarily than they, but strong in its indomitable spirit. That example is an inspiration to all peoples who are fighting for their freedom and independence. 77. Thus the conflagration which flared up briefly in the Near East, is dying down, but beneath the fresh ash the embers are still smouldering, and if we do not take care, they may flare up again. The Soviet Union is seriously concerned over the fact that although a formal cease-fire prevails in Egypt, the withdrawal of United Kingdom, French and Israel forces from Egyptian territory is being held up. In fact, it is reported that the interventionists are reinforcing their troops in the area.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“The Soviet socialist State does not have, and does not want, concessions, military bases or privileges of any sort in the Near East, whether political, economic or military. Any expansionist aims are totally alien to the thinking of the Soviet Government, and would be incompatible with our principles. Nevertheless, the Soviet Union, like many other Governments, is concerned that freedom of passage through the Suez Canal should be assured. 76. The delegation of the Soviet Union notes with great satisfaction that military operations in Egypt have ceased. The brave resistance of the heroic Egyptian people, whose just cause has won the moral support of freedom-loving peoples everywhere, has caused the aggressors to retreat.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“The Soviet Government declared, moreover, that its armed forces were ready to co-operate actively with those of other Governments in putting down aggression in the Near East should the United Nations so decide. 74. Vicious anti-Soviet propaganda has tried and is still trying to make it appear that these resolute steps taken by the Soviet Government against aggression in Egypt are proof of some special selfish motives on the part of the Soviet Union in that area. Slanderers have been, and are still, declaring that the Soviet Union is pursuing its own selfish aims, directed against the aims of the Western Powers and the peoples of the East. 75. Such assertions are utterly without foundation.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“At the same time, the Soviet Government proposed to the United States Government that the two make a joint effort within the United Nations, together with other Governments, to halt the aggression and prevent further bloodshed. The Government of the United States unfortunately did not support this initiative which the Soviet Union, prompted by the gravity of the situation and by its sense of responsibility for the maintenance of peace in the Near East, had undertaken. 73. Finally, the Soviet Union appealed to the United Kingdom, France and Israel to consider the dangers inherent in the situation created as a result of their attack upon Egypt, and to put an immediate end to their aggression.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“At the same time the Soviet Union recommended that the Security Council consider it essential that all Member States of the United Nations, especially the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, as permanent members of the Security Council having powerful air and naval forces at their disposal, should give military and other assistance to the republic of Egypt, which had been the victim of aggression, by sending naval and air forces, military units, volunteers, military instructors and other forms of assistance, if the United Kingdom, France and Israel failed to carry out within the stated time limits the recommendations specified by the draft resolution. 72.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“However, this resolution did not at first produce the desired effect. 71. A tragic situation resulted. Egypt, which was shedding its lifeblood and upon whose peaceful population United Kingdom and French bombs were raining down, appealed for help. Any delay might have spelt disaster for Egypt and caused the war to spread. In these circumstances the Soviet Union considered it imperative to take decisive steps. In a draft resolution [S/3736] submitted on 5 November 1956, it called upon the Security Council to propose to the Governments of the United Kingdom, France and Israel, that they should immediately cease all military action against Egypt and withdraw within three days the forces that had invaded Egypt.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“They wanted to deprive several States in the Near and Middle East of their national independence and sovereignty by taking direct military action against the Arab peoples to restore the oppressive colonial regime which the peoples of these countries had thrown off, and to regain the position, privileges and sources of wealth which the imperialists had lost in these countries. The armed attack against Egypt launched by Israel and joined in by the United Kingdom and France was, I repeat, only the first step in the realization of the over-all colonialist plan of the imperialist aggressors. 70. The first emergency special session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution [991 (ES-1)] urging the United Kingdom, France and Israel to agree to an immediate cease-fire and to withdraw all forces from Egyptian territory.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“Irrefutable facts show the attack on Egypt was only the first step in the execution of a large-scale strategic plan conceived by the imperialists. It was the intention of the colonial Powers to take advantage of the existing situation in order to foil the Egyptian Government’s decision to nationalize the Suez Canal, and to take it back into their own hands. They intended to crush Egypt for daring to assert its sovereign rights; unseat its government for refusing to go along with their imperialistic aims and bring the Egyptian people to their knees.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“It will be recalled that the Security Council affirmed the well-known six principles, agreed upon in a resolution [S/3675] which, had they been put into effect, would have brought about the complete settlement of the Suez problem by peaceful means. The Security Council’s decision was widely acclaimed as a notable achievement of the forces of peace. The United Kingdom and France voted for those principles and agreed to negotiate whit Egypt. It is now clear that this gesture was false, its purpose being to lull the vigilance of the peace-loving nations and prepare the ground for the sudden attack on Egypt. 69. The attack by the United Kingdom, France and Israel against Egypt was, of course, not motivated by the foregoing considerations, which the aggressors are now alleging in order to conceal their real aims.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“The United Kingdom and France are directly responsible before all the users of the Canal for this flagrant violation of the Constantinople Convention of 1888 on freedom of navigation. 67. Secondly, what are the legal grounds on which the United Kingdom and France have been, and are still trying to monopolize the solution of the Suez Canal problem, which concerns the vital interests of many Governments, including those of the Soviet Union, while they trample on the sovereign rights of Egypt? 68. Thirdly, what justification have the United Kingdom and France for resorting to armed force to settle a question on which the Security Council had so recently adopted a decision?”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“The argument that the aggression by the United Kingdom and France against Egypt was prompted by their desire to guarantee freedom of passage through the Suez Canal likewise fails to withstand criticism. 66. In the first place, everybody knows that the Egyptian State has in practice ensured freedom of passage through the Canal; after nationalization the Canal operated without interruption, and freedom of passage was in no way endangered. Despite what the aggressors had just been saying, they themselves, far from doing anything to ensure freedom of passage through the Suez Canal, acted so as to put this vital international waterway out of operation for a long time to come.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“The United Kingdom, French and Israel aggressors have resorted to the threadbare lie that some terrible Communist plot was being hatched in Egypt to seize the whole Near and Middle East with its vast oil resources, and that this left them no alternative but to face the danger squarely. This is another argument which does not hold up under criticism. Such an argument, which incidentally was brought up again today in Mr. Pineau’s speech, might serve as a plot for some Hollywood film, but it has no place in an analysis of the reasons for such a crime a? the armed attack by the United Kingdom, France and Israel against the Egyptian people. When the aggressors can think of nothing else to say in justification of their crimes, they habitually drag in the bogey of communism. That is by now an old story. 65.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“Are we to believe that the naval and aerial bombardments of Port Said, the brutal destruction of such thickly populated Arab quarters of Port Said as El-Tamil, El-Manakh, Abbas Street and others, served to “separate the belligerents”? Can anyone tell us that the inhuman slaughter of thousands of peaceful citizens of Port Said, primarily women and children, the shooting down by aircraft: of residents of Heliopolis who were peacefully waiting for a tram, the bombing and destruction of the Coptic church in Cairo, the destruction of the Post Office and of the Roman Catholic church in Alexandria, were carried out for the purpose of “separating the belligerents”? Everyone knows that at these points there was no contact between the “belligerents” (Egypt and Israel), hence these acts could not have served to “separate” them. 64.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“At the same time, it is perfectly obvious that Israel in attacking Egypt was playing the role of provocateur in instigating the execution of a vast carefully planned operation whose chief participants were the United Kingdom and France. Various reasons and explanations for the aggressors’ surprise attack against Egypt have been given in official documents of the United Kingdom and French Governments. These explanations do not stand up under criticism. 63. The absurd argument that the United Kingdom and France launched an aggressive war against Egypt in order to “bring hostilities to an end” between Israel and Egypt, and to “separate the belligerents” as the United Kingdom Prime Minister Sir Anthony Eden declared in his speech of 30 October 1956 [S/3711 ] does not hold water.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“In such circumstances the responsibility of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace and security becomes especially apparent. The prestige and the future of the United Nations hang in the balance, for it has taken upon itself the solemn obligation “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind”. 62. In recent weeks the entire world has fixed its anxious attention on the threatening events unfolding in Egypt. The unprovoked aggression by the United Kingdom, France and Israel against Egypt has profoundly aroused world public opinion. The treacherous, unjust and colonialist character of the armed attack by Israel, the United Kingdom and France on the Egyptian people is clearly evident to peace-loving forces everywhere.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“In Eastern Europe the Hungarian fascist conspirators, supported from abroad by international reaction, have attempted to overthrow the people’s democratic regime, to deprive the Hungarian masses of the democratic freedoms which they had won, and to reduce Hungary once more to the status of a helpless vassal of the imperialist Powers. That attempt has failed. 60. The aggression against Egypt and the fascist putsch in Hungary are links in the same chain. They clearly reveal the far-reaching and dangerous intentions of those international forces which are seeking to hold back the forward march of humanity along the road of freedom and national self-determination, to restore colonial rule in areas where it has been overthrown, and to return to power anti-popular regimes in countries where they have collapsed. 61.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“In times like these any local armed conflict can easily touch off a worldwide conflagration. In regions like the Near and Middle East, which are of paramount political, economic and strategic importance, such a conflict, if not resolved at the very outset, might well plunge the world into another bloodbath. And indeed the armed attack by the United Kingdom, France and Israel against Egypt has created a situation which threatens the cause of peace and confronts the peoples of the world with all the implications of the danger of a third world war. 59.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“But the “spirit of Geneva” was not welcomed by certain influential circles whose interests were bound up with the armaments race. Their aim was, and is, to aggravate international tensions through a policy of reckless adventure and provocation. 57. The exalted position of the United Nations obliges all of us who participate in its activities to make a sober and realistic appraisal of each new development in international affairs. Today we cannot fail to recognize that the imperialistic forces of reaction and aggression have succeeded in dealing a serious blow to the cause of peace and have markedly increased international tension. 58. Fighting has recently broken out in the Near East as the result of a conspiracy against the freedom and independence of the peoples of the Arab world.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“I do not wish to take up the Assembly’s time by enumerating all the constructive steps taken by the Soviet Government in the past few years in its struggle to bring about an easing of tension in international affairs. They are generally known. They embraced the full range of international problems, from the effort to bring about a cease-fire in Korea and Indo-China to the normalization of economic and cultural relations with most countries of the world. 55. The real reduction in international tension which was achieved, made the Geneva Conference of the Heads of Government of the four great Powers possible in the summer of 1955, marking an important step in the development of post-war international relations. The “spirit of Geneva” gave new Lope to the peoples who rejected the “cold-war” policy with all its baleful implications. 56.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)
“The eleventh session of the General Assembly has met in an international situation of great complexity. During the past few weeks the forces of aggression and dark reaction in various peaceful parts of the world have been girding themselves for an attempt to plunge humanity into an abyss of new calamities and world conflicts. 54. Not so long ago the most striking development on the international scene was the relaxation of tension. Moving forward step by step, the peace-loving countries were settling international controversies by negotiation and stamping out the smouldering embers of war. We in the Soviet Union are proud of the active part which our country played in that great endeavour.”
1956-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 11 (1956)