YouSaid · the spoken record

SHUKAIRY

lines on the record: 192
first: 1957-09-24
most recent: 1961-09-24
sittings or episodes: 3
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

“We are fully aware of the positions of the major Powers with regard to Berlin. We are cognizant of their apprehensions. But this is the more valid reason for the United Nations to step into the arena before the contesting parties stand ready on their pads—and what pads—launching pads, nuclear launching pads. If there is any international problem which calls for an immediate solution within the framework of the United Nations, it is the question of Berlin— and the question of Berlin first and foremost, 79. But what sort of a settlement could be worked out by the United Nations? We do not advocate any particular solution, but one thing should be clear and definite: the solution must be based on the principles of the Charter and not on the convenience of this major Power or that major Power.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“By taking the lead, Bertrand Russell has served the cause of peace more than all of the policy-makers of the Western world, including his distinguished jailer, the Foreign Minister of the United Kingdom. I am sorry that the distinguished jailer is not here with us in the Assembly hall. 78. The second horn of the dilemma is the question of Berlin. To be fair and precise, it is the dilemma itself. Although it may shatter the peace of the world and dynamite the United Nations, strangely enough this question has never been examined by the United Nations. It was left to the monopoly of the big Powers. The forensic argumentation for this paradox we all know, but the overriding aspect of international peace should not escape our attention. Berlin has become the trigger that may touch off a world conflagration at any moment.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Bertrand Russell was sentenced to jail and from his jail he has spoken, as though to this Assembly, in these solemn words: "The populations of the East and West, misled by stubborn Governments, in search of prestige... tamely acquiesce in policies which are certain to end in nuclear war... Our ruined, lifeless planet will continue for countless ages to circle aimlessly around the sun, unredeemed by the joys... which have given value to human life. Thus spoke Bertrand Russell from his jail to this Parliament of Man. 77. Bertrand Russell was convicted under the law of the United Kingdom—I would not say rightly, or wrongly. But under the law of nations, I can positively say that he stands acquitted. Nay, he stands honoured and esteemed with remarkable veneration.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Men in all walks of life are alive to the dangers of radio-active fall-out. Such people deserve our greatest respect and admiration wherever they may be. We are particularly delighted to refer to those groups who are known as the marchers in the United States and those groups who are known as the sitters in the United Kingdom, who recently led the campaign in support of nuclear disarmament. Of special mention, high above all, is Bertrand Russell, the genius brain of the English-speaking world. ..Bertrand Russell is the giant hero of this holy crusade. He merits the respect and sympathy of the world in leading this campaign against nuclear armaments .”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“This is their advocacy, this is the theme by which they have resisted the African-Asian request to halt French explosions in the Sahara. To refresh the memories of those whose memories need to be refreshed, I would simply refer to the statement of the United Kingdom which was made on 5 November 1959, and to the statement of the United States which was made on 9 November 1959. Both of these statements should be brought to the memory of those who are forgetful—forgetful enough here either by chance or by intention—and to find mindfulness here from this rostrum to speak of the harmfulness and the dangers of fall-out resulting from test explosions. 76. The picture, however, is not entirely gloomy. On the whole, the Western nations, and this is a fact which we must admit, are fully conscious of the perils of nuclear experimentation.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“It should be recalled that in explaining their position on French testing in the Sahara, the representatives of the United States and it United Kingdom contended that test explosions are not harmful. It was an advocacy marked with ability, we should admit, if it only commanded veracity, scientific and skilful veracity. We render thanks to the United States and the United Kingdom that they have not claimed these explosions to be useful, and for this benevolence we must all be thankful and, I would say, grateful. We cannot fail to remember that in those statements to the First Committee on the subject, the representatives of the United Kingdom and the United States cited their explosions in Maralings in Australia and in Nevada in the United States. For what? As evidence of the harmlessness of nuclear explosions.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“The language of the resolution [1379 (XIV)] on the matter was very soft, very gentle, and, I would say, very clean—certainly cleaner than the bomb which the French exploded in the Sahara. But, in spite of the solicitations of the African-Asian peoples, the United States and the United Kingdom supported France in that ignoble adventure. 75. They have not heeded the angry protestations of the international community nor have they cared a snap of their fingers for the safety of mankind. For our part we, the non-aligned nations, are fully justified in having taken the position we have taken vis-à-vis the test explosions of the Soviet Union. This has been our consistent position from which we have not flinched one single iota. But what legitimate complaint can the Western Powers make in this matter?”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“If resumption of explosions is condemned by the West as dangerous to peace and detrimental to human safety, it must be condemned at all times, against all nations and under all circumstances. Principles are principles. They are not commodities of trade, to be hoarded at will and displayed in showrooms at pleasure. The West cannot at random invoke principles on one occasion and entirely disregard the very same principles on another occasion. What is wrong for the Soviet Union should be equally wrong for France, no matter how France may be fashionably enticing or seasonably luring to some of the Powers represented here in the Assembly. 74. We all remember how the United States and the United Kingdom resisted, from this forum of the General Assembly, the African-Asian request addressed to France to halt nuclear testing in the Sahara.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Such a stand on the part of the non-aligned nations was quite understandable, for the Belgrade Conference was a congregation of peoples who speak their minds independently and who think freely. 73. But it was highly amazing—highly amazing, indeed —for the major Western Powers to protest the Soviet explosions. We do not hesitate for one single moment to join with the West, as the representative of Canada wanted us to do, in voicing the most unshakable opposition to the actions of the Soviet Union when they merit opposition. But we cannot be a party with the West at their convenience. We cannot play their chorus at their mere pleasure or share an orchestra of their own, started when they will and silenced when they will.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“We are against nuclear testing whether it be by the Soviet Union or by the United States, whether it be in Siberia or in Nevada. Resumption of nuclear tests is a double-edged danger. It leads to the contamination of the world atmosphere and it intensifies the armaments race. A race for what? Simply to make arms more effective and more destructive, causing the highest toll, at the lowest and cheapest cost. 72. It is a matter of record that the spark in this regard has been touched off by the resumption of nuclear explosions on the part of the Soviet Union. The event provoked a great deal of fear all over the world. At the Belgrade Conference, -2/ the leaders of the non-aligned countries expressed their serious apprehensions in unmistakable terms.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“I do not wish to place before the Assembly the great volume of scientific evidence on the hazards of fall-out and the daggers of atmospheric contamination resulting from nuclear and thermo-nuclear explosions. The records of the United Nations are conclusive evidence in support of placing an everlasting moratorium on testing— never, never under any circumstances, to be resumed. 71. It was therefore quite understandable that the world at large was stirred by the resumption of nuclear explosions first by the Soviet Union and later by the United States. We are not here to define the responsibility for the failure of the Geneva Conference on the question: that would be too long and tedious a story to relate at this moment.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“For no historian shall remain to record history, and no readers shall survive to read history. Should nuclear war take place, God forbid, the dreadful holocaust shall destroy anything and everything and reduce this world to nothing. 69. In tracking the course of events, two menacing factors rush to our minds—the resumption of nuclear test explosions and the deterioration of the situation in Berlin. The first is a perennial question on the agenda of the United Nations, as the representative of Canada rightly observed in his able statement a while ago, and the latter, the question of Germany, is a chronic topic of, or, I would say, a chronic headache to, the four major Powers. 70. The question of nuclear test explosions is too well known to the Assembly to call for elaboration.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“In the prelude of disaster,, it is fruitless to support any claim, it is meaningless to uphold any contention, and, lastly, it is pointless to justify any action. Should a nuclear war take place, no incrimination or historic attribution shall avail. Who started the war, who fired the first bomb, who was on the offensive and who was on the defensive—all these questions are irrelevant and inadmissible, they are out of the question. At the end, there shall be the dreaded vacuum, a state of nothingness. There shall be no United Nations to resolve any dispute, there shall be no Nuremberg trials to determine the guilt, pronounce the condemnation or order the execution. There shall survive no judge to judge, no prosecutor to prosecute, no witness to testify and no audience to attend. Not even history shall exist to relate history.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“My intention is simply to warn this august body of the peril of all perils that faces all in all and saves none at all. For it is no hallucination that we may be meeting here for the last time, and it is no stretch of the imagination that ours may be the last of the sessions. It may be the end of the United Nations, should there survive any of these nations, or a feeble, degenerated and debilitated fragment of a nation, in a scorched, devastated, desolate island on this earth. 68. With this smell of war, there is also going on a war of argumentation and justification. A heap of protests, memoranda and ultimata are being exchanged by the great Powers in an endeavour to uphold a position or justify an action. But all this is vain—rooted in vanity.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Never has the dome of this Assembly been so heavily loaded with heavy clouds of tension, mistrust, intimidation and, what is more, the threat of a nuclear war, a war that would leave this planet a melting heap of debris With no human life. 66. This session, therefore, must be the session of the brink, for we are just at the sharp edge between war and peace, on the blade of the precipice between survival and extinction and, in plain words, between existence and non-existence. 67. I am not here at the rostrum to terrorize the Assembly, nor is it my intention to make capital of the panic now prevailing in the minds of all peoples, both the haves of nuclear weapons and the have-nots. The world community is already plagued by panic to the point of saturation.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“It should go into history with a lively name, a name that echoes the fears of mankind all over the world, a name that should whip the United Nations, and indeed this General Assembly, to decisive action supported by effective sanctions. 65. And what name could this session be awarded if we are to consult our profound apprehensions—the apprehensions of all, of father and son, of man and woman, of infant and old, from every creed and from every race? No great labour is required and no genius need be invoked. Ours is the most dreadful of all sessions. Never has the United Nations, since its establishment, faced such a dreadful gloom.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“True as it is in accordance with our established practice, yet such a nomenclature is a dull expression very far behind the march of events. Just to name it the sixteenth regular session and to act frigidly or timidly is not only to ignore the anguish under which the world is groaning, but also to escape our primary responsibility for world peace, order and security. 64. With its heavy impact, even history has restricted this routine, seriatim procedure. On more than one occasion, the United Nations sessions were named after the events of the day. Hence we had the Congo emergency session, the Middle East session, the special Bizerta session, the Palestine sessions and the Korean session. Now, with anxiety as universal as it is, it becomes incumbent that this session should follow suit.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Permit me to begin with the non-controversial, and I would say outright, the topic of the election of the President. As he pointed out in his statement, his election was a great honour paid to himself and to his country. But it was also a great honour to the United Nations in its hour of trial. It seems as though this critical session has provided a rendezvous with his exemplary ability, unimpeachable impartiality and profound devotion. He brings to the Chair the enlightened traditions of Tunisia, the languishing aspirations of Africa and the skilful arts of the gentleman, Mongi Slim. Our congratulations therefore go to him, to his country and to the United Nations. 63. In the calendar of the United Nations, ours is the sixteenth regular session.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“With President Eisenhower and Prime Minister Khrushchev, the participation of the leaders of positive neutrality in the summit conference will not only bring a new approach, a new outlook, but will be a coordinating, stabilizing and mediating force, able to compose the differences of East and West in the best interests of peace — but peace with justice. 176. Such would be a balanced summit conference — the world, the whole world, in miniature. Such a summit, with such participation, will mark a new chapter in the history of international relations. Indeed, we could embark on a new era, an historic era which we pray will lead mankind on to a high road of peace- peace to those living and to those unborn — to the present generation and to all generations to come. God grant it may be so.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“There are other nations whose contributions could be immeasurable and are highly necessary. 174. With Mr. Eisenhower and Mr. Khrushchev, there must be at the summit conference some other leaders who have distinguished themselves not only as national heroes but as international figures dedicated to the cause of peace and justice. We propose that the summit should include those leaders who have preached and practised the policy of positive neutrality, the policy of independent thinking and independent and free judgement. At the present moment, I shall not propose their names. They are too well known. At this stage we should concentrate our efforts on bringing the proposal home to the minds of the Assembly. Once that stage is reached, the Assembly will have no difficulty in making the choice. That will not be a problem. 175.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“The "Big Four" cannot agree in their air-tight division. 172. The Western "Big Three" are, in fact, the United States, and the United States only. This is a vibrant reality, and it should not be denied. Neither the United Kingdom nor France should be ashamed to admit it. With all due respect, the United Kingdom and France have little to say when the United States is at the summit conference. The two giants, the United States and the Soviet Union, can talk to each other with full authority, representing two diametrically opposed worlds. 173. But the two giants should not be left alone, since the chance for agreement is meagre — and meagre indeed. We have to look to another force. The vital issue of war or peace is not the monopoly of the mighty and the powerful.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“And this will be the reason for the failure of any future summit conference if we continue in the same manner. 170. So far, the summit conference is conceived in one shape, and one shape only: the participation of the "Big Four" — the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, the United States and France. Such a composition, with all due respect, is a failure. It has been a failure and will continue to be a failure. It will lead us nowhere. I venture to say that it will lead to a fiasco, in continuity and in perpetuity. 171. The "Big Four", being what they are, cannot agree. Three of them are on one side of the table as a majority, with a superiority complex, and the fourth is on the other side of the table, with an inferiority complex. How can we hope that the "Big Four" will agree? This is no time for miracles or magic-making.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Khrushchev were very cordial and pleasant, but subsequent events have proven that the warring David of the Bible did not leave Camp David in peace. 168. Again, the Paris Summit Conference, which had raised high hopes, was closed before it was opened. No purpose will be served by examining the causes. At the present moment, bygones are bygones; and if a condemnation is pronounced it will be Mile. 169. Today, the idea of a summit conference is gaining ground, particularly so when many leaders have come to the United Nations. They are at hand here in New York. We stand for a summit conference — but what kind of a summit conference? I say in what manner, for it was the manner that was the major reason for the failure of the past summit conference.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“The United Nations, in spite of its success in some political, economic and cultural matters, has failed in the great issue of war and peace. The United Nations is torn in this East and West conflict. The issue of war or peace cannot be decided by votes — by a majority on one side or a minority on the other side. We have to look for another pattern within another framework to find a solution to this burning issue. 167. Surely, a summit conference is the way out. But what summit is it? What kind of a summit? In the past we had a summit meeting which generated the "Geneva spirit", only to find that it had evaporated before the "Big Four" returned home. Again, the Camp David meetings between Mr. Eisenhower and Mr.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“On the question of the prohibition of atomic weapons and on the question of disarmament, no progress has been made, except for the voluminous literature of plans and counterplans, arguments and cross-arguments and acrimony versus acrimony. 165. Similarly, the explosive political problems of the world stand today as far from solution as ever. The questions of Germany and Berlin, the Far East and the Middle East are growing in magnitude and complexity. At present we have something more. Africa has been thrown into the cold war; and we have teen told from this rostrum, in all frankness, of the danger of war by miscalculation. 166. This is a situation which is too intolerable for the peoples of the world.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“I intended to deal with this problem at the end of my statement, because in this vicious circle, which is holding the international situation in a state of strangulation, the end and the beginning can be at any given point. You need only break through. 163. Without being unduly pessimistic, it maybe said the present international situation seems to engender tension, suspicion and anxiety. This is the fifteenth year since the end of the Second World War, but the hopes and expectations for world peace have not been realized. It is true that we are not at war, but it is tragically true that we are not at peace. The world is simply held under the shadow of an armed armistice, broken in flames that flare up every once in a while. 164.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“The people of Palestine, the Arabs and Jews, determined to live in peace together, would establish the independent State of Palestine, worthy to occupy its seat in the United Nations — a State representing no aliens but all the legitimate citizens of the country, Moslems, Christians and Jews alike. The Holy Land, sacred to the three great religions, would again become the land of peace, the land that has given the world the message of peace. 162. Let me turn now, with all alertness, to the colossal problem which cuts through each and every international problem of any dimension. To say no more, it is the question of the general international situation, regarding which we have a proposal to make.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“He has become eager to go home, outside Palestine. He, too, wants repatriation. Israel to him is a life of exile. These are his conclusions. 160. No less than 170,000 Jews — and this is the figure to which I invite your attention — 170,000 Jews have left Israel in the last few years. If this proves anything, this Jewish migration from Israel does certainly prove that 170,000 Jews have reached those conclusions. The number is rising, all in the direction of migration, migration only if exit permits could be given by Mr. Ben Gurion to those wretched people, the victims of the greatest deception of our age. 161. With such an approach, conditions would be brought back to normal.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“To him, this experiment of creating Israel, in spite of all colourful paintings, has proved to be a failure. Israel lacks viability; Israel cannot survive indefinitely through outside assistance. Politically, economically and socially, it is impossible for Israel to fit in within the pattern of the Middle East. Israel, a mass alien infiltration, is neither Asian nor African, any more than the aliens that set foot in Africa or Asia with the advent of colonialism. 158. The Arab States did not and will not recognize Israel. This is their sovereign right. Neither will they have any dealings with Israel in any manner. 159. The creation of Israel has multiplied many times the very evils which it sought to avoid. The whole experiment has failed. That is how the ordinary Jew in Israel is thinking. He is right, by all means.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“But if we are here to make peace with justice, as strongly suggested by President Eisenhower, then the solution will commend itself to the United Nations on its own merits. 156. The master key to the solution lies in repatriation. The refugees must go back to their homeland. This is their inherent unassailable right, which has been recognized and reaffirmed by all the resolutions adopted by the General Assembly at each and every session. 157. On the other hand, we have to remember that thousands and thousands of Jews now in Israel have discovered that they have been deceived. They are not at home, for Palestine is not their homeland. Israel has proved to be, for them, a lamentable deception. The Jews in Israel are at last finding the truth themselves. By instinct and experience, the Jew Israel has come to many conclusions.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“In fact, the very creation and establishment of Israel was the culmination of aggression and expansion. 154. Yet the question may be asked, what is the solution, what is the way out? This is a pertinent question that should be answered honestly and seriously. I say seriously, for the issue is one of peace or war, not only for the Middle East, but for the world at large. If there is any testimony required, let me recall the Israel war in 1956, which virtually placed the world right on the brink of war. 155. So what is the solution? If we are to take the present situation as a starting point, I have no solution to offer. Neither will there be any solution if we are to abide by the de facto situation as a starting point and let events drift to their destined fate, for that would be no solution or answer to the question.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“They did not for a single moment deem it proper to declare that the people of Palestine also are there to stay and to stay in their homeland. 153. Yet we are bound to ask what is meant when the saying goes — and this is an American saying — when the saying goes that Israel is there to stay. Does it mean that Israel is there to stay, to usurp Arab lands and properties, to entice the millions of Jews of the world to migrate to a country which they have never known? Does it mean that Israel is there to stay, to commit aggression of all sorts and expansion in all directions? This is what it means for Israel to stay. Israel, with the Zionist programme inherent in its basic policy, running in its very veins and arteries, is dedicated to aggression, pledged to expansion.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“They have spoken of industry thriving, of agriculture progressing, of the desert blossoming, and the rest of the Zionist propaganda. 151. Hearing all this, one is led to think that Vice- President Nixon and Senator Kennedy are running for election in Israel, for the presidency of Israel, and not for the presidency of the United States. From these statements, it seems as if the whole world is Israel and Israel is the whole world. 152. The Arab peoples, 80 million, with the immaterial and spiritual power, occupying as they do their strategic sub-continent, mean nothing to the United States. To Vice-President Nixon, in his official capacity, not as far as elections are concerned, and his rival, Senator Kennedy, it was sufficient to declare that Israel was there to stay, and that is all — that is enough.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“The difference is only one of degree and one of tone. Hence, no matter who wins, we can take those pledges to be the cornerstone of United States policy with regard to the Palestine question. In fact, they reveal nothing basically new, except that the United States has not profited from its bitter experience in Palestine, a policy which has alienated the feelings of the Arab world, and which, if continued, is bound to lead to irreparable damage. 150. In substance, Vice-President Nixon and Senator Kennedy have declared that he who is elected to the White House will not hesitate to support Israel. They have stressed that the Suez Canal should be opened to Israel shipping. They have praised the efforts of Israel in every field of political and economic life.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Let us not develop their habits; let us not speak their language. We, the small nations, who are sworn to defend the cause of freedom, should not make justice a matter of just slogans. 148. Of similar danger, with reference to the Palestine question, are the statements uttered from another rostrum by Vice-President Nixon and Senator Kennedy, the two candidates for the United States presidential election. I shall not speak on the matter except in the context which reflects the policy of the United States on the question, so that I shall not be out of order. 149. Vice-President Nixon — and in view of his responsible authority I can refer to his statement — is not at variance with Mr. Kennedy on a number of matters of foreign policy, and they have both made public pledges to Israel in identical terms.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“A small nation, any nation represented here in this Organization, could fall victim to political realities. Its peace may be endangered, its territory may be threatened, its political independence usurped. 147. How should such a situation be resisted if we are called upon to recognize it as a political reality? Colonialism and imperialism have coined many phrases — and I say coined with full purpose — coined many phrases, many arguments to defend their position. "We must recognize the political realities," is one of their arguments, one of their defence lines. Colonial Powers are in the habit of falling back on such arguments. They take refuge behind such a slogan when it is not their pleasure to do justice or undo injustice. This has become the habit of the colonial Powers.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Should we, then, accept aggression; should we abide by violation; should we bow to colonialism as a political reality? We cannot accept a situation which is the culmination of injustice and aggression. We cannot accept a situation which is the fruit of aggression or a flagrant denial of inherent rights, God-given rights. This is too dangerous a stand to accept or to defend. 146. We must warn all the small nations, from this rostrum, they must be on their guard, on the lookout, lest they fall victim to political realities. We, the small nations, survive not through our might, but through our right; we exist by justice, not by convenience or expedience. Let us not waver, let us not defeat the very principle that gave rise to our being. This is a world of wonders and surprises.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Before we speak of non-attack, let us attack the problem down to the roots. Let us talk plainly; let us apply our minds properly; let us think conscientiously. We cannot simply be asked to recognize the political realities without scrutiny and without balanced evaluation. To recognize the political realities, I am afraid, is a colonial expression — rather, it is a colonial philosophy which has crept, regrettably, into our minds. 144. We should not be misled by such a maxim which does not take account of the justice of a cause. An aggression can be a political reality. A violation of the Charter, of human rights, and of the fundamental principles of freedom democracy and justice could be a political reality. Colonialism and imperialism, after gaining root, do give rise to political realities, and how often they did. 145.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“President Eisenhower referred to this episode — and I quote — as one of the problems "troubling" the United States and the nations of the world. 142. Well, this is a contrast for us to consider, for us to ponder. If the imprisonment of two members of an aircrew is of great concern and should so disturb the United States as to compel President Eisenhower to bring the matter before the notice of the United Nations from this rostrum, how much more perturbed, how much more inflamed and tormented must be the Arab feelings, to see a whole people of their kith and kin lead a life of exile in misery, in hardship, in distress and in isolation. And we come here to be told that we should face the political realities of the situation. 143. May I invite your attention to this point.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Let us not speak — and I urge this with all humility — if we cannot speak justice. 140. A proposal to guarantee non-attack between the Arab States and Israel is prima facie alluring and attractive; but only to those who do not know or those who are immune to knowing. Nevertheless, when they begin to know they will realize the magnitude of the problem; they will sound its depth and they will sense its stirrings and feel its agitations; and it is only when you feel it profoundly that you can judge, and that you can judge judiciously and equitably. 141. Let us take just one instance, without making a finding in respect of its merits. In his statement before the Assembly, President Eisenhower has referred in the most moving words to the imprisonment by the Soviet Union of two members of the crew of the American aircraft shot down last July.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“They fought the British with bravery and chivalry, for a period of thirty years, to achieve their liberty and independence. 138. They sent their delegations to London and to Geneva in the days of the League of Nations to express their national aspirations. They have been represented here in the United Nations. A number of resolutions on Palestine, adopted by the General Assembly and the Security Council, have been addressed to the people of Palestine. Their peoplehood has been recognized and their national existence has never been denied. 139. This is the case of the people of Palestine in its virgin simplicity and in its full reality. It is the cause of a people and their right to their homeland. Let no one dare from this rostrum to deny the people their existence as a people, their indestructible right, their right to their homeland.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“This is not the problem; this is not the context of the problem, as suggested by President Nkrumah. In the main, the problem is one that belongs to the people of Palestine, not to the Arab States. It is true that the Arab States are one in their support of the cause of Palestine. It is their cause, their national cause; but the main party is the people of Palestine. 137. It is they who are to decide for themselves. The people of Palestine are not a flock of sheep that could be ignored so easily — neither could their existence as a nation lie entirely dismissed. The people of Palestine, an ancient Arab nation, are with no little contributions to world civilization. As part of Arab awakening, they started their national movement long before many nations represented in this Organization had stood on their feet.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“No one with a clear conscience and with a minimum of the feeling of human brotherhood can deny to the people of Palestine the right to repatriation, the right to go back to their homes, to live their lives in their homeland. 135. Many here present have been refugees, or political exiles away from their homeland, longing in agony, in anguish, to go back home. So they know what it means to be a refugee — to be in exile. It means nostalgia at its worst. It means despair at its peak. It means hate, and the right to human hate. It means war and the right to war — in defence of the fatherland and all that the fatherland stands for. 136. It is not a matter of seeking measures to guarantee that there will be no hostilities between the Arab States and Israel.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“In a word, they were making history when many a country was not on record in the annals of history. 133. These people of Palestine have now been living in exile for more than a decade, away from their homes, dispossessed of their properties; and, what is more, beholding thousands and thousands of Jewish immigrants occupy their houses, seize their farms, usurp their towns and villages, and lay hands on incalculable possessions — the toil, the sweat and the labour of generation after generation. 134. If we are to face the realities of the situation then, this is the real situation. This is the tragic situation which must capture our minds and our hearts.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Here is a case of a people who have lived in their land for generations and generations, since time immemorial. Palestine is their home, just as Ghana is the home of its people, and just as any homeland is the home of its people — adored in love, worshipped in affection and consecrated by sacrifice. 132. This people, the people of Palestine, have lived their lives in their homeland. They built their mosques, their churches and their synagogues — they established their towns and their villages. They have made great fortunes and accumulated treasured possessions. In their country, they have breathed their hopes and aspirations. They admired their glories, and they bewailed their defeats. They sang their joy; and to the graveyards they carried their fathers, their grandfathers and all those they had loved.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Again, I stress "people" precisely because the Palestine case is the problem of a people, a whole people, clamouring to live in dignity in their homeland, just as the people of Ghana are living in dignity in their homeland and enjoying their pleasures at home, under the leadership of their hero. President Nkrumah. 130. Let us brush aside resolutions and records — although they do support our cause; let us set aside the Charter, although its principles are on our side; let us leave aside all the dictates of law, justice and democracy, although they all corroborate our cause. Leave all that, and let us speak in human terms — in terms that even a man in the street can easily understand, can fully comprehend, and can readily grasp. 131.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Neither shall I place before the Assembly a whole file of extracts from the reports of the United Nations Mediator, Count Bernadotte, of Mr. Bunche or of the Palestine Conciliation Commission — all of which disclose Israel's defiance and refusal to abide by the United Nations resolutions, a defiance attended by adamant ingratitude and rebellion. 129. AH that is history. I shall discard it for the moment. I shall confine myself to one major fact which will dispose of the whole issue, a fact which I hope will commend itself to the mind and heart of President Nkrumah, a great hero of a great people. I stress "people", for "people" is not an expression; it is not a term: it is a concept of life, a concept of human existence; it is the highest, indeed the most sacred, embodiment of human society.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“He will not answer it because he has no answer to offer — at least no reasonable, logical and just answer. Neither shall I advance the irrefutable argument that the United Nations in 1947 had no right to partition a country against the will of its people, any more than the United Nations now has any authority to partition the territory of the Congo or, for that matter, the territory of any people now represented in the United Nations. I shall not refer to the seventy-five resolutions (what a large figure!) so far passed by the United Nations on various aspects of the Palestine question. Nor shall I invoke the numerous General Assembly resolutions urging the repatriation of the refugees — resolutions which Israel has resisted time and time again. 128.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“Likewise, it is not my desire to speak of the Palestine Mandate of 1922, which was intended by the League of Nations as a sacred trust of civilization to prepare the people of Palestine to become independent, like other Arab countries — Lebanon, Jordan, Syria and Iraq — which are now fully sovereign and independent and are worthily represented in the United Nations. 127. Similarly, I shall not attempt to put the United Nations and the Assembly in the dock. I shall not put this devaluating question to Mr. Harold Macmillan: Where is the independent State of Palestine, whose creation was entrusted to the United Kingdom, as the Mandatory Power, by the League of Nations? I shall not put the question because Mr. Harold Macmillan will not answer it.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)
“This statement by President Nkrumah has made it imperative that the crucial issue of the Palestine question be placed squarely before the United Nations and before world public opinion. President Nkrumah is a great national hero, whose impressions about the Palestine question do call for a frank statement on the matter — a statement of solid fact taking care of the merits, the justice and the equities of the whole case, 126. I shall not dig deep into the archives of the history of the problem. I do not propose to speak of the illegality of the Balfour Declaration of 1917, under which the British promised to offer the Jews a country which none of them owned and neither possessed.”
1960-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 15 (1960)