YouSaid · the spoken record

Awadalla

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS AWADALLA

lines on the record

64

first

1969-09-24

most recent

1969-09-24

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

1. “This hope will be realized when the countries of Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean recognize that the interests of their peoples are best served by their marching together, alongside the democratic forces all over the world, towards freeing themselves from the shackles of neo-colunialism; when they realize that the only way to attain real independence and true freedom for their people is through being united. 84. Only in their unity is there hope.”

   1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

2. “To strengthen its hold over such countries, neo-colonialism has directed its attention mainly to the sources of information and instituted broadcasting stations, libraries and scholarships wherever its agents have had the chance to do so. 82. On the strategic level, the forces of neo-colonialism have military bases and aggressive alliances that encircle the globe in the name of collective security. This is the extent of the danger that the emergent countries of the third world have had to face. 83. Yet there is hope—hope that people everywhere will awaken to this danger and combat the rapacity of the imperialists and their new weapons of oppression. There is hope that the inherent weakness of neo-colonialism will lead to its final end as the inherent weaknesses of capitalism bring about its downfall.”

   1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

3. “It is true that on the political level many of the leaders reared by the colonial Powers who failed to live up to the aspirations of their people were overthrown and replaced by others who were more responsive to the needs of their countries and the national aspirations of their people. Yet, wherever the people were not vigilant, the agents of neo-colonialism have been active in the other direction, foisting decadent and corrupt leadership upon the people and engineering the overthrow of progressive governments in order to install régimes sympathetic to the neo-colonialist aims. 81. The methods which these agencies, such as the Central Intelligence Agency, follow in the realization of their despicable aims include all kinds of subterfuge, such as incitement to riot, strikes and assassinations.”

   1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

4. “The fallacy that the developed countries should concentrate on the manufacture of industrial goods while the developing or under-developed countries should devote their labour to extractive industries and raw materials seems to have taken hold to such an extent that it has become an accepted tenet of national economic planning in some countries. 79. The machinery of capitalist foreign aid has been used extensively to further these neo-colonialist aims and to foster a state of future dependence for a number of years to come. In this connexion one must mention the unprincipled use of economic aid as one of the weapons of Zionist infiltration into Africa. 80.”

   1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

5. “In many cases they drew up the constitutions of the newly independent countries and built up the leaders to whom they were to hand over the reins of power. They instituted regional organizations through which they exercised great influence in order to safeguard their interests, and they made absolutely certain of the dependence of the economies of the newly independent countries on their own. That has been the insidious and dangerous work of neo-colonialism since the end of the last war. 77. The economies of many independent countries have been infiltrated by the agencies of capitalist exploitation in such a way that it has become difficult for those countries to envisage a future where they can achieve any measure of self-sufficiency. 78.”

   1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

6. “Let us hope that in the area of peaceful reconstruction and development the United Nations will be able to fulfil the promise of its early years. 75. The oppressed people of the world will not be completely free unless they shake off the stranglehold of neo-colonialism—the major oppressive force of our day. Direct colonial rule has now all but disappeared from the face of the earth. Since 1945 over sixty countries of Asia, Africa and the Caribbean, inhabited by over one third of mankind—have become independent. This has been the era of the great dawn of freedom all over the world. 76. But the imperialist Powers were not willing to allow freedom to see the light of day. They resorted to all available means to suppress it.”

   1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

7. “We sincerely hope that this Treaty will open a new chapter in disarmament negotiations and will inspire members of the enlarged Conference of the Committee on Disarmament to direct their efforts towards achieving concrete and effective measures for arms control. 74. My Government fully endorses the resolutions and the Declaration of the Conference of Non-Nuclear-Weapon States, dealing with questions of universal peace—in particular, the security of non-nuclear-weapon States, cessation of the nuclear arms race, general and complete disarmament and the exploration of the means of harnessing nuclear energy exclusively for peaceful purposes. That is an area in which the United Nations can achieve a great measure of success. Let us hope that it will not be deterred from pursuing that end.”

   1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

8. “The total destruction of mankind that may be caused by nuclear war makes such a war differ from a conventional conflict not only in kind but also and most seriously in scale. It is now well established in amply documented evidence that even those who survived the immediate destruction of a nuclear war would be exposed to radio-active contamination, while the future generations would suffer different and grave disabilities. 72. It is discouraging to note that while the progress in disarmament has been very slow, nuclear technology has proceeded at a formidable pace and is now within the reach of a growing number of countries. 73. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons [resolution 2373 (XXII)/ has been a significant landmark on the path towards achieving complete disarmament.”

   1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

9. “Its inhuman treatment of the captured Namibians, who had been resisting the illegal South African authorities, is contrary to all accepted standards applicable to prisoners. 70. The United Nations has declared the presence of South Africa in Namibia illegal, has condemned South Africa for not complying with United Nations resolutions and has affirmed the territorial integrity of the territory. But since condemnation has been without result, the United Nations must now proceed to adopt appropriate steps to deal with the South African refusal to comply with the provisions of its resolutions. 71. It is our unshakable belief that the traditional notion ”let him who desires peace prepare for war” is inconceivable in the era of nuclear weapons.”

   1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

10. “The authorities of Pretoria are enacting legislation leading to the dismemberment of the territory by the creation of sixteen Bantustans, leaving the rich and more developed part of Namibia under the control of the white minority while the indigenous population lives in transit camps and native reserves. Over eighty-one resolutions adopted by the United Nations on the territory have been met with total disregard by the South African Government. The South African authorities’ refusal to comply with United Nations resolutions rendered the United Nations Council for Namibia powerless. The Government of South Africa is carrying out a war of genocide and repression against the Namibians.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

11. “Yet all our pleas and exhortations have fallen on deaf ears. Indeed, there has been an intensification of these policies and an extension of their application to other territories. Both Namibia and Southern Rhodesia are now in the grip of this repugnant system. 69. The situation in Namibia remains unchanged; the Government of South Africa illegally continues to administer the territory and consolidate its control further by implementing measures leading to the integration of the territory into the system of apartheid, in contravention of United Nations resolutions.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

12. “Again, it is left to the people of Zimbabwe to intensify its struggle for freedom; and again, the United Nations will have a clear obligation, in accordance with its Charter resolutions, to give that people all possible assistance. We in the Sudan are pledged to give the peoples of Zimbabwe all the assistance necessary to enable it to attain its right of self-determination and independence. 68. The African population in South Africa continues to live under the inhuman system of apartheid instituted by the minority racist régime of Pretoria, which stands condemned by all the world for the pursuance of policies that are contrary to all standards of decency and justice. The General Assembly, the specialized agencies and the Security Council have repeatedly condemned the policies of apartheid of South Africa.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

13. “It did not come as a surprise to us that while the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of the United Kingdom as recently as yesterday [1759th meeting], was warning the Members of this Assembly against unrealistic proposals and precipitous action concerning the situation in Southern Rhodesia, there was jubilation in the white racist circles in Salisbury on the return of the United States Consul-General to his post, which is interpreted, according to The New York Times of yesterday, 22 September 1969, ”as a small token of American approval”. The action taken by the United States and the interpretation of that action in Salisbury is more important and more significant than the pious hopes expressed by the United Kingdom. 67.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

14. “However, Britain has made it quite clear that it is not ready to use force nor ready to agree to a total embargo for political, legal and economic reasons, and insists, together with its Western allies, that the United Nations should pursue the present course of action of denying recognition and maintaining sanctions against the illegal régime. To us, the present course is unacceptable because it is deceitful and ineffective. 66.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

15. “While economic sanctions have failed to topple the Smith régime, the fascist Rhodesian front is proceeding with the enforcement of a system of apartheid more repugnant than the South African system, having severed all links with Britain and declaring that the country would become a republic with a proposed racist constitution depriving the African population of their fundamental human rights and conferring title to half the land upon 5 per cent of the population—that is, the white minority. 65. We consider that the only effective solution of the Rhodesian question short of the immediate use of force to end the rebellion is the imposition of mandatory sanctions on the whole of southern Africa.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

16. “Before the unilateral declaration of independence, the United Kingdom had challenged the competence of the United Nations to deal with the situation in Rhodesia, but once the unilateral declaration of independence was announced Britain sought the help of the United Nations. The United Kingdom did not heed the appeals of the Afro-Asians to act promptly and to deal effectively with the rebellion through the use of force The United Kingdom resisted even the idea of using force and embarked on a series of abortive negotiations with the rebels before resorting to the ineffective application of economic sanctions. 64.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

17. “The continued defiance of this principle and the persistence in ignoring resolutions of the United Nations should alert this Organization to the need for more resolute action in support of the real forces that will bring the downfall of Portuguese colonialism in Africa. I refer to the forces of the African liberation movements in those Territories. 62. The tragedy of Rhodesia continues to unfold in a manner similar to the Palestine tragedy. Like the Zionists, the white minority in Southern Rhodesia are appropriating the land and depriving the indigenous people of Zimbabwe of their birthright to their homeland. As a result of the hesitant policy of the United Kingdom, the United Nations has been forced to resort to measures which have continued to be inappropriate and inadequate to deal with the situation. 63.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

18. “It will be recalled that frequently in recent months the military forces of Portugal have crossed the borders of independent African States, on the assumption that they have a right of pursuit. They have thus infringed upon and violated the sovereignty of those countries, whose response has often been quick and immediate. Yet the incursions continue, 61. Portugal stands condemned before the United Nations family and before world public opinion for its defiance of the United Nations resolutions and for its refusal to accept the universal principle of the right of peoples to self-determination and independence—a principle enshrined in the United Nations Charter and in the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples [resolution 1514 (XV)].”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

19. “We believe that the realization of prosperity on a wide scale and the attainment of peace and freedom for the people of the world everywhere are closely connected. We in the Sudan have realized that as Africans our freedom and independence will remain incomplete as long as parts of the African continent remain under colonial domination. 59. In the three African Territories of Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau), Portugal continues its domination of the African inhabitants. Portugal has over 60,000 soldiers in Africa engaged in the brutal suppression of movements for national liberation of the African inhabitants. The war waged by Portugal against the people in those three African Territories is a conflict that constitutes a real threat to peace and security in the area. 60.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

20. “To attempt to exclude certain countries can be motivated only by factors that have nothing to do with the good of mankind or the effectiveness of the United Nations. The Secretary-General has recently reiterated the thesis first put forward in the introduction to his annual report last year in support of true universality and emphasizing the need for the divided countries to take part in the work of the United Nations. The case of the German Democratic Republic, with its great industrial potential and capability of assisting in the area of multilateral economic aid, may well be cited in illustration of this point. This Organization cannot continue to ignore the existence of the German Democratic Republic and the contribution that it is capable of making towards the enhancement of the effectiveness and prestige of this Organization. 58.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

21. “it is therefore not only in furtherance of the dignity and prestige of this Organization that the People’s Republic of China should assume its lawful rights of membership, but also in the interests of humanity. This is now especially true since the People’s Republic of China is one of the five nuclear Powers of the world. 57. The United Nations can continue to ignore China only at its own risk and peril. Furthermore, the admission of China to the United Nations will not only be a source of strength to the Organization but will also herald the admission of other countries that have an effective impact on world affairs but that still remain outside the United Nations. No country is too unimportant to make a contribution to the work of this Organization.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

22. “The case of the restoration of the lawful rights of the People’s Republic of China in the United Nations is based on considerations of historical fact, of legal right, and of a correct appraisal of the political realities of our present world. 56. The Government that succeeded to the treaty obligations of the Charter of the United Nations after the establishment of the Organization was the Government of the People’s Republic of China, and not the Government of Chiang Kai-shek in Taiwan, The Government that ought to assume the privileged position and obligations of a great Power is the Government that is now in effective control of almost 4 million square miles of the land mass of Asia, inhabited by one fourth of the total of the world population.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

23. “We also believe that in the world of today, which is characterized by fundamental and rapid changes in the relationships of nations and peoples having different cultures and social systems, our efforts should be geared towards transforming the United Nations into a universal organ capable of drawing together the multifarious interests of humanity in general, and act towards allowing it to deteriorate into an instrument of policy for those who already wield too much power and exert unlimited influence. 55. It is our conviction that only the achievement of true universality can save this Organization from falling victim to its own shortcomings. We cannot conceive of the realization of that universality without the restoration of the lawful rights of the People’s Republic of China in the United Nations.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

24. “The United Nations, having grown out of the pain and turmoil of the Second World War, out of the fight against fascism, should have continued to be an Organization that united all the forces that had fought against oppression and injustice. Yet this was not to be, in spite of the awareness that in order to be able “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war”, “... we are expected”-in the words of the late Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld —“to succeed where our predecessors failed”. 54. We in the Sudan believe that the United Nations is capable of such achievement.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

25. “Woodward even signed a written confession on behalf of the United States Government on 23 December 1968, admitting guilt for that inexcusable infringement of the sovereignty of another State. 52. It is, however, a matter of great concern that the United States presence in South Korea is justified in the name of the United Nations; it is regrettable that the United Nations should tolerate this abuse of its name. 53. Yet one is heartened and encouraged to see that in Viet-Nam and in Korea, as well as in the Middle East, the tide is turning and the era of imperialist domination is constantly receding. One would wish that the United Nations had played an active role in bringing to an end this unhappy state of affairs.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

26. “That is certainly the case in South Viet-Nam and is true of the Chung Hee Park régime in South Korea; it is certainly the case in many other parts of the world. 51. In South Korea the United States has supported its presence by advancing the palpably false claim that its armed forces are there to deter aggression. It should be obvious that that is a bogus claim, since it is the very presence of foreign troops in South Korea that has been the major source of tension in the area, The incursions of the American spy-ships and airplanes into the territory of the Democratic Republic of Korea have sometimes been deliberately provoked in order to see, as one observer put it, how other side reacts. The case of the spy-ship Pueblo is too recent and too well known to need any comment. Major-General Gilbert H.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

27. “Some of us cannot but feel that the world would be a better place if it were free of American orbiting spies in the sky, tree of their intelligence ships, free of their military bases, their loaded aid, and the pervasive machinations of the Central Intelligence Agency—free, in short. of all the devices and intrigues that United States imperialism has been employing to impose its will on the world in the name of “freedom”. It is curious that the brand of freedom advocated by the United States is always espoused by leaders who are discredited in their own countries, and embraced by reactionaries and quislings—men who have had a history of dishonest collaboration with foreign Powers occupying their countries.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

28. “The President of the United States tells us that: “the people of Viet-Nam, North and South alike, have demonstrated heroism enough to last a century” [ibid., para. 61]. Let me say that they have demonstrated that heroism mostly in their relentless struggle against American domination. They certainly now deserve to live in peace. Let the United States unconditionally withdraw its troops so that the Viet-Namese may live in peace. The land is theirs and they ought to be masters of their own destiny. 50. It is ironic that the President of the United States should state without qualification that his country has not turned away from the world. Some of us cannot help but wish that it had.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

29. “Coming from the President of the major Power that is intervening now in South Viet-Nam that is indeed an amazingly ironic statement. One fails to comprehend the logic that permits the Americans to accept that the activities of the South Viet-Namese Liberation Front, even if aided by the North Viet-Namese, can be considered as unjustifiable foreign intervention, while the American military machine, aided by Australian, South Korean, New Zealand, Thai and Filipino forces, can legitimately and justifiably bring death and destruction to the poor people of Viet-Nam. If we are to exclude foreign interference we must recognize that it is the interference of the United States that must come to an end. It is the interference of the United States which is hindering the Viet-Namese from determining their own future. 49.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

30. “It becomes obvious, therefore, that in this context the recent withdrawals of United States troops dwindle to insignificance and do not in themselves warrant any response from the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam or the National Liberation Front of South Viet-Nam. American troop reduction does not represent a reduction of military activity or an abatement in the bombing and destruction that the heroic people of Viet-Nam have endured all these long years. 47. The President of the United States declared before this Assembly on 18 September 1969 that what the United States wanted for Viet-Nam was not important--what was important was what the Viet-Namese themselves wanted. He declared that the South Viet-Namese had “the basic right to determine their... future” without “outside” intervention [1755th meeting, para. 54]. 48.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

31. “The number of United States troops and their allies, before the recent token withdrawal, represented a numerical superiority of men under arms of the order of seven to one. The allied forces of aggression in South Viet-Nam have had, in addition to overwhelming numerical superiority, a superiority in fire-power, excluding the B-52 operations, amounting to about one hundred to one. It has been reliably estimated that the superiority of the allies over the Viet-Namese patriots in helicopter-transport facilities, in communications and electronics, has amounted to about one thousand to one. 46.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

32. “To maintain a position that Israel should extend its territory in the Arab lands that it now occupies is to support the contention that armed conquest is capable of supporting rights or concessions. It is regrettable that the President of the United States should hold the position that the map of the Middle East has to be modified in order to appease Israeli ambitions. It is lamentable that he saw fit to declare this before the Assembly. 45. For some years now the United States has been fighting a brutal war in Viet-Nam. The United States has committed more of its armed forces to that war than it did in Korea, more in fact than it has done in any other war, except the two world wars.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

33. “It is for the United States to choose between a foreign policy dictated purely by domestic considerations and one pursued in conformity with the exigencies of foreign realities. 44. Finally, we reject the implication in the policy declaration of the President of the United States before this Assembly when he said: “We are convinced that peace cannot be achieved on the basis of substantial alterations in the map of the Middle East” [1755th meeting, para. 65]. Let us sound the warning here that peace cannot be achieved on the basis of any alterations in the map of the Middle East: to maintain a position that contradicts this is to contravene the provisions of Security Council resolution 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967, which calls for the complete withdrawal of the Israeli forces from the occupied areas.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

34. “The United State Government has maintained some traditional friendships with certain ruling circles in the Arab world in the mistaken belief that such a course of action is sufficient to give it that grip over affairs that is necessary for the protection of American interests in the Middle East. 43. Let there be no misapprehension about the fact that such a course of action is pregnant with considerable dangers to those very interests that the United States Government seeks to safeguard. The Arab peoples everywhere do not have any illusions about this. It is for the United States to choose between amity with a nation of 100 million in an area of great strategic importance and animosity to that nation.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

35. “Ultimately, it will be the loser since the Arabs are inexorably moving towards the full attainment of their inalienable right to live in freedom in the Arab homeland; and while the United States supports the cause of foreign domination and reaction, the Arabs have come to realize that their destiny lies in the solidarity of the progressive forces in the Arab nation supported by all the peace-loving countries of the world. 42. Let it be clear to the Government and people of the United States of America that the policy pursued by the Unites States Government in the Middle East can lead to nothing but the alienation of the Arab people.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

36. “Let me say that we reject that suggestion that seeks to impose on the Arabs a permanent position of inferiority and subservience. 41. We, as a part of the Arab nation, are convinced that our struggle against the colonial occupation of Palestine by the Zionists will be long and arduous. The United States, in supporting injustice and upholding usurpation has irrevocably identified itself with the immorality of the Israeli occupation.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

37. “The suggestion by the President of the United States for arms limitation, if Security Council resolution 242 (1967) providing for the withdrawal of Israel is not implemented, amounts to an endorsement: of the Israeli position and a sanction of its continued occupation of the Arab land in contravention of the Charter of the United Nations and specific resolutions of the Security Council. It did not come as a surprise to us that that should be the position of the United States on this issue, since it is part of the declared policy of the United States that‘Israel should maintain a clear superiority in armaments over the Arabs. The suggestion that there should now be some arms limitation convinces us that the United States is now assured that it has provided Israel with the means of maintaining that superiority. 40.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

38. “United States, through its delivery of the Phantom jets and other weapons of aggression to Israel, has helped to spur rather than deter the armaments race in the area. The seriousness of that action will be fully realized when we consider that Israel has nuclear capability based-on nuclear reactors such as that at Demona, which is capable of producing enough plutonium for the manufacture of several nuclear weapons. It is an open secret that Israel possesses this.capability as well as the means of delivery. 38. We have no doubt the ultimate purpose of Israel’s nuclear capability, nor do the Israelis themselves leave any room for doubt in the matter, since they have rejected the application of the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards system and have not accepted the agreement on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. 39.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

39. “We expect the United States of America, which is a major Power and a permanent member of the Security Council, to bring its prestige and influence to bear so that the dangerous situation in the Middle East does not develop into what President Nixon, in his statement of January 1969, feared would be ”a major explosion” that could very well involve “a confrontation between the nuclear Powers”. 37. The President of the United States in his speech before this Assembly on 18 September 1969 [1755th meeting] stated: that in case of failure to reach agreement on a settlement in the. Middle Hast. the great Powers should endeavour to contain the conflict by limiting the supply of arms to the belligerents. Yet the.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

40. “We heard the President of the United States proclaim from this rostrum last Thursday, 18 September, that the Security Council resolution of 22 November 1967 “charts the way to that settlement” [1755th meeting, para. 64]. Our understanding of that resolution differs from that of the President of the United States. We consider a resolution of the Security Council not as a working paper but as a solemn decision that requires implementation, especially in conditions where the threat to the peace is so palpable.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

41. “Professor Willard Oxtoby of the University of Yale described the genesis and conditions of the commitment of the Government of the United States to Israeli policies in the following terms: “In this country, any question of Israel’s right to exist, or of her actions today in any field, is immediately targeted as anti-Semitism... anything short of total commitment to the rightness of Israel’s cause is interpreted as anti-Semitism.... In our country, this a characterization which I would say, certainly in government, is considered far worse than being a communist.” 35. In these conditions it is idle to suppose that the Arab cause, no matter how just, would receive the support of the United States Government. This has been demonstrated time and again, during the last two decades. 36.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

42. “Further, in the conditions that prevail in the United States of America, where the Zionists wield such an inordinate influence in business and government circles, the attempt at the adoption of an even-handed policy towards both the Zionist State and the Arabs was bound to come to grief. 33. Mr. David Nes of the State Department, in an address delivered on 18 April 1969 at the Conference on World Affairs of the University of Colorado, entitled “Our Middle East Involvement”, revealed the extent of this influence. He stated that 20 per cent of key positions in the State Department were held by Jews, most of them presumably sympathetic to the Israeli position. 34.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

43. “At the beginning of the present administration, it was proclaimed that a more even-handed policy would be followed by the Government of the United States on this issue, but in actual fact, this has been the period when Israel was enabled by the United States to maintain and even extend its aggression. The territorial integrity of all States that the United States Presidents have pledged to uphold is being violated, with the active help of the Government of the United States, in the Israeli occupation of the Arab lands. 31. In this connexion, it is interesting to consider that over the past twenty years the volume of economic aid, both private and public, that has flowed from the United States into the Israeli coffers exceeded a total of $4,000 million, or about $1,200 for every one of the citizens of Israel. 32.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

44. “Yet, we have witnessed during the last few months that the Government of the United States has bent every effort to support the Israeli position of continued occupation and provocation, even to the extent of supporting its defiance of the resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly of the United Nations. 29. In major declarations of policy on the Middle East issue, four successive Presidents of the United States have pledged that their country would defend the right of every State in the area to peace and security and the maintenance of its sovereignty and territorial integrity. 30. The United States has not fulfilled that pledge. Its commitment has been one of unreserved support for Israeli aggression. Its commitment has been just one-sided.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

45. “The Palestinian struggle is directed towards the achievement of a free and democratic State that does not exclude the Jews of Palestine. This surely is an endeavour that is worthy of support, not only by the Arabs but by the United Nations itself. It is a sad reflection on this Organization that it has not seen fit to view this dispute in its proper perspective, in order to be able to discharge its primary responsibility in bringing about a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. 28. The President of the United States of America declared on 27 January 1969 that he considered the Middle East “a powder-keg”’ that needed to be defused, He stated that he was “open to any suggestion that may cool it off and reduce the possibility of another explosion”.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

46. “The Palestinians see the Palestine of the future as a State the citizens of which are equal, without regard to race or religion; a State in which the Jewish community would be given the right to live as equal citizens, as they had always lived amongst the Arabs, free from that abominable state of persecution to which they had been subjected in Europe throughout the ages. 26. If this position is construed as being incompatible with the existence of the state of Israel, the fault lies with the State of Israel, which was established by an act of illegality fostered through aggression and unlawful occupation, a State in which the Arabs are treated as second-class citizens who are made to pay for sins that they never committed. 27.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

47. “The Palestinians have demonstrated that they do not wish to be colonized by Israel, and they have a right, like every colonial people, to wage a war of liberation against colonial domination by Israel. They aspire to live as a free people in a free Palestine. 25. The people of Palestine envision a country unlike present-day Israel, which is a colony of aliens supported by world Zionism and nurtured by the United States of America and its imperialist satellites. The Palestinians entertain no claim of racial exclusiveness. They do not envisage a State based on any single religion or faith.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

48. “In the face of his strong affirmation regarding the need for negotiations between the Arabs and the Israelis, one might indeed ask the Foreign Minister of Israel whether he does or does not consider himself or his State bound by the resolutions of his party congress regarding the permanent retention by Israel of the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip and a considerable part of the eastern and southern Sinai Peninsula. If he does consider himself bound by these resolutions, how is it possible for him to maintain that there is nothing that is not negotiable between Israel and the Arabs? How does he want us to believe that he or his State can wriggle out of the resolutions in the drafting of which he himself took a major part? 24.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

49. “They will be our citizens for a very long time.” The Foreign Minister of Israel, who maintained in his address to this Assembly on 19 September [1757th meeting] that there was nothing which was not negotiable, expressed a different and contradictory position to the Knesset when he said, in reply to a parliamentary question on 12 May 1969: “Three demands which Israel will not waive are a permanent presence at Sharm El Sheik, a unified Jerusalem... and a Golan Heights for ever out of Syrian hands.” It appears, therefore, that Mr. Eban has a different mantle for every occasion, since his statement in the Knesset excludes Sharm El Sheik, Jerusalem and the Golan Heights in no uncertain terms from even the possibility of negotiation. 23.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)

50. “The Arab States were right—and within their rights—to declare at Khartoum on 1 September 1967 that their basic commitment and conviction entailed non-recognition of Israel, no negotiation with Israel and no surrender of the rights of the people of Palestine. 22. The Israeli leaders have since indicated that they intend to retain Arab territory occupied since June 1967. As recently as June last, Moshe Dayan proclaimed: “This is our homeland and if I say homeland I mean also Nablus and Jericho.... We consider the Golan Heights part of Israel.... We must treat the Palestinians living on the West Bank as a government treats its citizens.”

    1969-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 24 (1969)