YouSaid · the spoken record

VYSHINSKY

lines on the record: 673
first: 1947-09-24
most recent: 1954-09-24
sittings or episodes: 8
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

“In the pages of these newspapers and magazines provocative appeals are made day after day for attacks on other countries, which, they say, are threatening the security of the United States, although these Press organs, as well as their owners, know very well that no one proposes to attack the United States and that the United States is not in the least threatened. For example, it should be noted that such Press organs as the New York Herald Tribune, and several other similar organs, principally of the Hearst Press, systematically reproduce all kinds of provocative articles, and drum into the minds of their readers the necessity “of military action if Europe collapses or if it falls under the control of the Soviet Union.” There are quite a number of such statements.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“It is well known that the biggest capitalists in the United States own or control important organs of the Press, magazines, newspapers, newsletters and have their own publishing houses which flood the book market with their literature. This entire Press, at the behest of its masters, is agitating fiercely in favour of launching a new war, is disseminating all manner of insinuations and falsehoods appropriately devised to arouse hatred of the Soviet Union and the other new democratic eastern European nations.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Their statements re-echo the ready-made utterances of such inveterate reactionaries as the notorious American Legion at whose recent convention several members, drunk with war hysteria, shouted that “no one should make the mistake of imagining that America would not draw the sword if circumstances required it”. War psychosis, war hysteria, serves its purpose by spreading its destructive influence. The reactionary politicians engaged in warmongering are emulated by numerous organs of the American reactionary Press in the hands of such newspaper magnates as Morgan, Rockefeller, Ford, Hearst, McCormick and others. It is well known that Morgan controls the magazines Time, Life, and Fortune, published by the well-known publishing house, Time, Inc., in which, the largest shareholder, incidentally, is the firm of Brown Brothers, Harriman & Co.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“It is a provocative attempt to divert attention from the real warmongers and to cloak their warmongering activities by demagogic calumnies about a worldwide social revolution and other ravings designed for the credulity of simpletons. Those are the instigators of a new war from the ranks of United States politicians, men who have no scruples, not only in making deliberately slanderous attacks on the Soviet Union and fomenting hatred against the USSR, but who systematically urge the inevitability and necessity of a new war, who systematically play the part of propagandists and fomenters of a new war.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Dulles called for a tough foreign policy towards the Soviet Union, claiming that if the United States refused to take this course and continued to reckon on the possibility of reaching some compromise with the Soviet Union, war would be inevitable. In this speech Mr. Dulles boasted that no country since the fall of the Roman Empire had possessed such a vast superiority in material power as the United States and he called on the United States to use this power in order to achieve its aims. Not bad advice, certainly, from a member of the United States delegation to the United Nations! The meaning of these, statements is clear. In some cases it is open, in others poorly disguised instigation to war against the USSR.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Harwood, Vice-President of the industrial firm, Cutler-Hammer, Inc., declared, according to the newspaper, Journal-American, that the atomic bomb is a poor weapon because it destroys an excessive amount of property instead of slaughtering only people. The same Mr. Harwood made the following cynical statement in so many words at a meeting of the American Professional Institute at Milwaukee: “Although this may sound heartless, the type of weapon which we should possess, if we have to wage a war, is a weapon which will kill people only. In the next war such a weapon will do away with the need for rehabilitating a country or property on such a large and expensive scale.” Finally, I must mention the name of Mr. John Foster Dulles, who is so well known to everyone. In his speech on 10 February last at Chicago, Mr.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Brooks, Senator from Illinois, had no scruples in telling the Senate cynically on 12 March last that, if the United States had followed the advice given before the war by the Republican Party and “had allowed the Germans to destroy Russia, there would be no need for the present Truman Doctrine.” He added that the United States had helped the Soviet Union during the war, but might now be forced to wage war on the Soviet Union. 7. General J. R. Deane, formerly head of the United States Military Mission to the USSR, stated in his book that the United States’ military programme should be framed in such a way as to cope with the special situation which a war with Russia might involve. 8. Mr. P. B.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“McMahon, former Chairman of the Joint Congressional Committee on Atomic Energy, said in Congress that the United States “should be the first to drop atomic bombs, if an atomic war could not be avoided”. In another of his speeches he said that, if it was impossible to agree on international control of atomic energy, the United States had four possibilities: first, to accumulate vast. supplies of atomic bombs; secondly, to begin war immediately; thirdly, to establish an international control body without the Soviet Union, and fourthly, to fix a date for the coming into force of international control and to declare any country that refused to accept it guilty of “aggression”. 6. Mr. C. W.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Earle urged that “the most appalling types of weapons should be prepared in secrecy” and that the Russians should be told that “as soon as the first atomic bomb was dropped on us (the United States), we would destroy every village in Russia.” 4. Mr. C. A. Eaton, Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs, published an article in the American Magazine in which he stated: “We can still blockade Russia psychologically. If we do not succeed, we must smash her by armed force.” Where did this statement appear? It appeared in the American Magazine. Who made it? It was made by the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. A Chairman like that will have a fine foreign policy! 5. Senator B.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Jordan said that the United States “must produce lots of atomic bombs and drop them, whether or not there were reasons to believe that a particular country was producing armaments.” 3. Mr. G. H. Earle, the former United States Minister to Bulgaria, made the provocative statement in the House of Representatives Committee on the Investigation of un-American Activities that the United States should use atomic bombs immediately against any country which refused to agree with the United States plan for an inspection system. Using a scare story about Soviet “jet-propelled bombs fired from submarines,” Mr.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“When the estimates proposed for the “aid” to be given to the Greek and Turkish Governments were being discussed in the House of Representatives on 7 May, Mr. William Dorn, a member of the House of Representatives, made the cynical statement, worthy of a hardened warmonger, that “400 million dollars would not stop the Soviet Union. That could only be done by a big air force and by bombing potential industrial centres in the USSR, the industrial areas in the Urals and other vital zones.” This was said in the United States House of Representatives by a man who regards himself as a representative of the American people. 2. The President of the National Industrial Conference Board, Mr. Virgil Jordan, made slanderous references to the Soviet Union. In a moment of expansiveness Mr.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The exponents of this propaganda are not only high- ranking representatives of influential American industrial and military circles, influential organs of the Press and highly placed politicians, but also official representatives of the United States Government. It is no mere accident that the most vehement instigators of a new war are persons who are closely connected with trade, industrial or financial trusts, concerns and monopolies. There is no need to mention many of them. It is enough to refer to a few — not of course, to them as individuals, to their personal views or their personal qualities etc. — but mainly to the social groups and institutions and the industrial, technical and educational societies, the views and interests of which these people represent. 1.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“They explain the stubborn resistance shown to the reasonable demands made to prohibit the production of atomic weapons and to destroy stocks of atomic bands, in the production of which huge financial resources have been invested. The quest of the capitalist monopolies for profits, the efforts made to preserve and expand at all costs those branches of war industry which enable them to earn large profits, cannot but influence the direction of foreign policy and so strengthen the military, expansionist and aggressive tendencies of this policy to satisfy the evergrowing appetites of the influential monopolist circles. Such is the soil in which propaganda for another war thrives in the United States.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Such capitalist monopolies as the Du Pont Chemical Trust, the Monsanto Chemical Company, the Westinghouse Corporation, the General Electric Company, the Standard Oil Company and others which hold complete sway in this field are among those most closely associated with work in the field of utilization of atomic energy. Before the war they used to maintain the closest cartel connexion with the German trusts, and many cartel agreements provided that exchange of information would have to be renewed after the war. All these facts sufficiently explain the exceptional interest taken by various capitalist monopolies in the production of atomic weapons.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“It should be noted that the capitalist monopolies, which secured for themselves decisive influence during the war, have retained that influence even since the war ended, making skilful use for this purpose of the thousands of millions of Government subsidies and grants and the protection which they invariably received and are still receiving from various Government bodies and institutions. They have been helped in this by the close association of the monopoly concerns with Senators and members of the Government, who themselves are very often either directors or partners in these monopolies. Such a situation has left its mark on the industrial, scientific and technical activities concentrated in the laboratories of various big firms, joint stock companies, trusts and concerns. This is also true of research in the field of atomic energy.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“It is no mere accident, therefore, that in his book, World Monopoly and Peace, in which he mentions “the disequilibrium” and “radical economic disintegration” observable in capitalist countries, James Allen quotes, from the report of a Government organization which carries out research on this question, the judgment upon which he bases his conclusion that “only under war conditions can the present economic system secure approximately full employment.” Such a candid admission hardly calls for comment. It speaks eloquently enough for itself.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“According to this magazine, these profits were four times greater than the average profits for the period 1936 to 1939. Trade profits, as John Steelman, Director of the Board of Economic Stabilization, has stated, reached the highest point in their whole history in October 1946. Thus, war is not really so distasteful to those social groups in certain countries which are clever enough to exploit the miseries of war for profit.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“According to the Department of Commerce figures, the net profit of these corporations for the six years of the war (from 1940 to 1945 inclusive) amounted to $52,000 million. These profits were earned from human blood, devastated towns, millions of widows and orphans mourning their lost breadwinners. The magazine Economic Review (published by the Congress of Industrial Organizations) cited in its No. 11 of 1946 some interesting figures of the increased profits earned, after deduction of taxes, by fifty companies in the years 1945 and 1946. These figures show that certain monopoly concerns made exorbitant war profits of 200 to 300 per cent, or even more. In some cases the profits were as high as 500 or nearly 800 per cent, (for example, the Atlantic Sugar Refining Company).”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“In this propaganda for a new war the most active role has been assumed by representatives of American capitalist monopolies, representatives of the biggest firms and of leading branches of American industry and banking and stock exchange groups. These are the groups which found the Second World War — as, in its day, they also found the first — an occasion for earning huge profits and accumulating great fortunes. If we compare the five pre-war years (from 1935 to 1939 inclusive) with the five years of the Second World War (from 1940 to 1944 inclusive), it will be found that the profits of all United States corporations for the five pre-war years amounted, after deduction of taxes, to $15,300 million and for the five years of the Second World War the profits of these corporations, after payment of taxes, amounted to $42,300 million.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“In fanning the flames of a new war and inciting their adherents to fight against certain States, the incendiaries of the new conflagration hope to achieve their ends within the limits of a local war. They are evidently unmindful of the experience of past wars, which shows that in these days every new war inevitably develops into a new world war. They forget that a new world war, with all the senseless devastation which it will bring upon many and many a town, with its annihilation of millions of people and of the immense material wealth accumulated by human labour, would descend upon mankind like a terrible scourge and would set it back many decades.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“With some justification, the well-known American radio commentator Leon Pearson, in a recent statement, had to admit that, “American officers are being slowly and carefully prepared for the next world war in which the enemy will be Russia.” Such is the work of the instigators and propagandists of a new war. For fear of a new depression, they provoke a new war, and in this way they hope to divert the imminent threat of a slump and avoid the loss of their privileges, The promoters of a new war cherish the insane plan of establishing their domination, by armed force, over those countries which are fighting for their independence and which deny the right of other Powers to intervene in their internal affairs, and they try to dictate to them their own canons of domestic and foreign policy.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Many facts show that in certain States — and this applies especially to the United States — a war psychosis is being encouraged by the actual adoption of practical measures of a strategic nature, together with such organizational and technical measures as the construction and organization of new military bases, the rearrangement of armed forces in accordance with plans for future military operations, the expansion of the output of new armaments, and feverish work on the improvement of weapons. At the same time military blocs are being formed; military agreements for so-called mutual defence are being concluded; steps are being taken for the standardization of armaments, and plans for a new war are being elaborated in general staff offices.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“This indeed is laying the fault at the wrong man’s door! Truly, as a Russian proverb says, “They wield the whip themselves and do their own howling”. Preparations for a new war are being carried on literally before the eyes of the whole world; in fact, the propagandists and warmongers do not even attempt to conceal it. They openly threaten peaceful countries with war, although they make every attempt to lay on them the responsibility for igniting a new conflagration of war. The preparation for a new war, as a number of signs show, has emerged from the stage of mere propaganda and psychological manipulation; from the stage of a war of nerves.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“If anybody in the Soviet Union dared express in statements, in however small a degree, such a criminal thirst for further human holocausts, such statements would be decisively rejected and publicly condemned as criminal and socially dangerous. Yet these gentlemen, whose trade is to bait the Soviet Union and the other democratic countries of Eastern Europe, and to bait the consistent democrats and opponents of another war in other countries, are not at a loss for lying and slanderous inventions, manufactured by these inciters and warmongers and spread all over the world through countless channels of information. They constantly preach the inevitability and even the need for a new war, using as a cover the alleged necessity to counteract the aggressive policy of the Soviet Union and the other countries of Eastern Europe.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The Soviet Union is busy on peaceful construction, immersed in the peaceful work of which it has such an abundance: work to restore the regions devastated by war, to strengthen and develop the Soviet national economy, which suffered from the grievous effects of the war forced on the Soviet Union by the Hitlerite bandits. In the Soviet Union, a land of socialist democracy, where a new life is being peacefully built up, there is not, and cannot be, anything even remotely reminiscent of what is going on in some countries which regard themselves as democratic and progressive and yet tolerate such a disgraceful thing as war propaganda, as poisoning the minds of the public with the venom of hate for mankind and enmity towards other people.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Of course, they know very well that they are lying, that the Soviet Union is not threatening, to attack any country, that the Soviet Union is devoting its energies to rehabilitating the regions ravaged and devastated by war, to the restoration and further development of its national economy. The propagandists and warmongers operating in the United States, as well as in England, Turkey, Greece and certain other countries, know very well that in the Soviet Union all our people — workers, peasants, and intellectuals — unanimously condemn all attempts to foment a new war. Such a thing would, indeed, be impossible in the Soviet Union.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“From the pages of the American Press this propaganda for a new war, together with pleas for faster and better preparations for war, flows unabated. A whole series of newspapers and magazines, particularly American, cry day after day in every possible key about a new .war and systematically pursue this baneful psychological campaign to mould the public opinion of their countries. The warmongers carry on their propaganda under the screen of a clamour for the strengthening of national defence and the necessity for combating the danger of war which, they claim, threatens them from other countries. In every way and by every means the propagandists and warmongers try to frighten politically ill-informed people with fairy tales and malicious inventions about an attack on America which is allegedly being prepared by the Soviet Union.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“For a long time past there has been waged in the Press, especially the American Press and the Press of countries like Turkey, which follow obediently in the wake of the United States, a furious campaign designed to prepare world public opinion for a new war. Every method of psychological effect is brought into play: newspapers, magazines, radio and cinema. This propaganda for a new war is conducted under a great variety of flags and pretexts; but however different the banner or pretext the essence of the propaganda remains the same: to justify a mad race for armaments, including atomic weapons, in the United States; to justify the boundless ambitions of influential circles in the United States to realize their expansionist schemes, which centre around the insane idea of world hegemony. .”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“We want to be certain that the stern lesson given to the aggressor States in the recent Second World War shall not pass without trace and that the fate of the severely punished aggressors in the past war shall serve as a terrible warning to those who, in neglect of the obligations which they have undertaken to develop friendly relations between peoples and strengthen peace and security throughout the world, are secretly and openly preparing for another war. Fanned by the efforts of the militarist and expansionist circles of certain countries, especially of the United States, the war psychosis is gradually spreading and is assuming an ever more threatening character.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The attempts of these enemies of mankind to establish world domination on a firm basis failed completely as a result of the historic victory of the democratic countries led by the Anglo-Soviet-American coalition. The two traditional hotbeds of war were destroyed. We want to be sure that they are destroyed forever, that the task set by the Allies of completely disarming Germany and Japan will be completed and that these countries will never again threaten freedom-loving peoples with war and aggression.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The USSR delegation considers it essential to raise in the General Assembly the extremely important question of measures against the ever- increasing propaganda for a new war, in certain countries. More than two years have elapsed since the United Nations Charter was signed in San Francisco and subsequently ratified by fifty-two States, thus inaugurating the work of a new international association having as its task, to guarantee the peace and security of nations, to develop and strengthen international co-operation for the economic and the social progress of peoples. The establishment of the United Nations goes back to the period when the chief enemy of democratic countries, Hitlerite Germany, was destroyed and the day of the complete defeat of Japan was near.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“By virtue of that circumstance, these functions cannot be transferred to any institution, however it may be called, without committing a direct and blatant breach of the United Nations Charter with which, naturally, the USSR delegation cannot possibly agree and against which it will resolutely protest. I repeat that, if the above-mentioned new proposals as well as old proposals in a new guise are submitted by the United States delegation for the General Assembly’s consideration, the USSR delegation reserves the right to analyse these proposals in greater detail and at greater length and, when they are discussed in substance, to secure their rejection as contravening the principles, aims and objects of the United Nations and as proposals which, if adopted, would merely undermine the very foundations of the United Nations.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Marshall proposes to set up a permanent committee of the Assembly to be known as the “Interim Committee on Peace and Security”. Although reservations were made in the United States proposal that this committee would not deal with questions which are the province primarily of the Security Council and special commissions, there can be no doubt that the attempt to set up an Interim Committee is nothing less than an ill-concealed attempt to replace and by-pass the Security Council. This Committee’s functions — the consideration of “situations and disputes endangering friendly relations” — are none other than the functions of the Security Council as laid down particularly in Article 34 of the Charter.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Instead of taking steps, in accordance with the Moscow Agreement on Korea, to work out the prescribed arrangements and to submit them for the joint consideration of the four Governments — the United States, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom and China — the United States Government prefers to violate its undertakings and attempt to cover up its unilateral and entirely unjustified action with the authority of the General Assembly. The USSR Government cannot agree to such a violation of the Agreement on Korea and will insist on the rejection of Mr. Marshall’s proposal as it contravenes the obligations undertaken under the Three Power Agreement on Korea. For “the purpose of devoting constant attention to the Assembly’s work” and settling questions of a “permanent character,” Mr.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Marshall submitted a proposal which is a direct violation of the Moscow Agreement on Korea concluded by the three Foreign Ministers in December 1945. In this Agreement the United States and the USSR undertook jointly to prepare a solution of the problem of unifying Korea into an independent democratic State. Mr. Marshall’s new proposal is a violation of the obligations undertaken by the United States and is therefore unjustified and unacceptable.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“They go much further than the conclusions of the majority of the Commission,1 which were not supported by nearly half the members of that Commission, and which do not withstand criticism even if the most cursory examination is made of the data on which these conclusions are based. It will not be hard to prove that this majority report on the so-called Greek question is full of contradictions and farfetched misinterpretations which deprive the conclusions of the majority of any significance whatsoever. The Korean question. After describing the situation, quite arbitrarily and incorrectly, as though the ineffectiveness of the work of the USSR-United States Commission on Korea should be attributed to the USSR element, Mr.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The USSR delegation feels obliged to deal with some of these questions, for instance, the question of the threat to the independence and territorial integrity of Greece. Leaving in abeyance a full discussion of this question until the Assembly deals with the item in its proper order on the agenda, the USSR delegation nevertheless feels it should merely point out that there were absolutely no grounds for raising this question at all. The charges brought by the United States delegation against Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Albania are entirely arbitrary and without proof.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“This is in full conformity with the special responsibilities of these Powers for the maintenance of universal peace, and guarantees the protection of the interests of all States, Members of the United Nations, great and small. The Soviet Union considers itself bound to oppose resolutely any attempts to weaken this principle, under whatever pretexts they may be masked. I have a few more words to say on the statement made by the Secretary of State of the United States of America, General Marshall. This statement dealt with questions which have often been discussed. Most of them are included in the Assembly’s agenda as separate items and I shall therefore have an opportunity of expressing my views in the right order and at the right time. New problems were also raised in General Marshall’s statement.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The policy of the USSR with regard to the United Nations calls for strengthening that body, extending and reinforcing international co-operation, unfaltering and consistent observance of the Charter and the implementation of its principles. The United Nations can be strengthened only by respecting the political and economic independence of States, and the sovereign equality of peoples and by the consistent and absolute observance of one of the most important principles of the United Nations: the principle of great Power agreement and unanimity in settling the highly important problems of the maintenance of international peace and security.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The unsatisfactory condition of the work of the United Nations is not accidental; it is the result of the attitude adopted towards the Organization by several of its Members and, particularly^ by the United States of America and the United Kingdom. Such an attitude neither promotes the strengthening of the Organization, nor serves the interests of international co-operation. On the contrary, it tends to weaken and undermine the United Nations and this undoubtedly fits in with the plans and intentions of reactionary circles in the aforementioned countries under whose influence this policy is being pursued.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The fact that these agreements with their defects formed the basis for the organization of the Trusteeship Council naturally could not fail to influence the attitude of the USSR delegation towards the election of members to the Council which is to be set up on the basis of these agreements. The USSR delegation still holds the view it expressed in this connexion at the Assembly meeting of 13 December 1946. The delegation of the USSR, which is a permanent member of the Trusteeship Council, would like to hope that these violations of the Charter committed in negotiating the Trusteeship Agreements will be remedied, as this would undoubtedly facilitate the Trusteeship Council’s performance of its tasks. It is self-evident that this would be in the interests both of the United Nations as a whole and of the populations of the Trust Territories.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The stubbornness of the United States and United Kingdom members of the Council on this question is the more noteworthy in that it could not be shaken even by the Secretary-General’s fully justified opinion that there was no reason for the Council to deal with the so-called Iranian problem. With reference to the Trusteeship Council, the USSR delegation also considers it essential to point out the following. At the meeting of the General Assembly on 13 December 1946, the USSR delegation criticized the Trusteeship Agreements for former mandated territories submitted for the Assembly’s ratification, because both the preparation of these agreements and certain articles contained in them were not in conformity with the requirements laid down in the Charter of the United Nations.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“In this connexion, also it is to be noted that certain influential Powers, while failing to show due interest in clearing up the unsatisfactory state of affairs as regards a settlement of the Spanish question and the other questions I have mentioned, are particularly interested in the Iranian question, which is still being "retained on the Security Council’s agenda eighteen months after it was completely settled and even after Iran itself had asked that it be removed from the Council’s agenda. We must also note the stubborn insistence of the representatives of the United States and the United Kingdom, at all costs and against all reason, to retain the Iranian problem on the Security Council’s agenda for certain apparently specific motives.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The unprovoked military attack by the Netherlands on the Indonesian Republic has aroused the righteous indignation of all decent people. Yet has the United Nations given proper protection to the Indonesian people? We all know that this has not been done. As a result of the Security Council’s consideration of the Indonesian question, certain States made considerable efforts to minimize the importance of what was happening in Indonesia and to force upon the Security Council a resolution on this question which cannot possibly be considered as sufficient protection of the legitimate interests of the Indonesian Republic, the victim of aggression. Obviously, such decisions cannot but undermine the authority of the United Nations, which is surely the very body called upon to ensure the maintenance of peace amongst the peoples.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“The fact that certain members of the Organization have failed to implement important decisions of the Assembly is also noteworthy: in the Spanish question there is Argentina; in the questions of discrimination against Indians in South Africa, and the establishment of trusteeship over the former mandated Territory of South West Africa, there is the Union of South Africa. The General Assembly cannot ignore such actions by certain Members of the Organization which, frustrate the achievement of the purposes of these resolutions and which diminish the authority of the United Nations. In this connexion, I must refer to the events taking place in Indonesia. These events can only be called an act of aggression against the Indonesian people by a Member State of the United Nations.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“British troops are still in Egypt against the will of that country; in Greece in disregard of that country’s constitution; in Transjordan which has applied for membership in the United Nations. United States troops are still in China, a condition which is anything but conducive to the establishment there of internal peace and tranquility. Foreign troops should not be in non-enemy territories unless their presence there is required for the protection of communications with former enemy territories while the latter remain under occupation. The strengthening of universal peace and mutual confidence between countries demands a rapid and effective solution of the problem of evacuating from the territories of non-enemy States foreign troops which are not protecting communications with former enemy countries.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“I need only recall these facts to show the utter incompatibility of this policy of the United States, and of the British and French Governments which support it, with the fundamental principles of the United Nations. It is also impossible to regard as normal, in the mutual relations between Members of the United Nations, a situation in which foreign armed forces continue to be stationed on the territory of Member States of the United Nations and to act as a means of political interference in the internal affairs of those States. This situation creates relations of inequality and dependence between States, which contravene the Charter of the United Nations.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“Moreover, this Plan is an attempt to split Europe into two camps and, with the help of the United Kingdom and France, to complete the formation of a bloc of several European countries hostile to the interests of the democratic countries of Eastern Europe, and most particularly to the interests of the Soviet Union. An important feature of this Plan is the attempt to confront the countries of Eastern Europe with a bloc of Western European States including Western Germany. The intention is to make use of Western Germany and German heavy industry (the Ruhr) as one of the most important economic bases for American expansion in Europe, in disregard of the national interests of the countries which suffered from German aggression.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“It is common knowledge that, in spite of the hardships and difficulties of post-war economic rehabilitation, not all the countries of Europe have agreed to such an infringement of their sovereignty, such interference in their internal affairs, and those countries which took part in the notorious negotiations in Paris on this problem are gradually beginning to understand the danger of their situation and are realizing more and more the true nature of these proposals for relief. It is becoming more and more evident to everyone that the implementation of the Marshall Plan will mean placing European countries under the economic and political control of the United States and direct interference by the latter in the internal affairs of those countries.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)
“In bringing forward this plan, the United States Government apparently counted on the cooperation of the Governments of the United Kingdom and France to confront the European countries in need of relief with the necessity of renouncing their inalienable right to dispose of their economic resources and to plan their national economy in their own way. The United States also counted on making all these countries directly dependent on the interests of American monopolies, which are striving to avert the approaching depression by an accelerated export of commodities and capital to Europe.”
1947-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 2 (1947)