YouSaid · the spoken record

THIAM

lines on the record: 305
first: 1961-09-24
most recent: 1967-09-24
sittings or episodes: 7
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

“The overwhelming majority of us Africans are convinced of the fruitlessness of certain struggles between spheres of influence. At the dawn of the interplanetary era, all of us who live on the planet Earth must undergo a change of outlook. We must create a movement of universal solidarity transcending peoples, races and continents. Today all political problems of any importance are indivisible. To believe that one, part of humanity can live in peace and tranquility and, the other in disorder and chaos is an illusion. To suppose that the wealthy section of mankind cp remain indifferent to the misery of the remainder is to deceive oneself. We are all irremediably involved in the same adventure. The duty of universal solidarity is basic to the twentieth-century world.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“My delegation reserves its right to speak on particular questions during the course of the session as the various items on the agenda are taken up. We shall make clear our position, which remains unchanged, on the admission of China to the United Nations. We support the admission of continental China, on condition of course, as we have always stated, that it does not imperil the existence of Nationalist China unless that country should decide otherwise. We consider that divided countries should be the subject of a general discussion and that certain clear principles should be established as a result of such a discussion. Where special circumstances preclude self-determination, other solutions should be found which will permit the peaceful consolidation of the existing situation. 39.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“Two years ago, in this hall, we defended a federal solution to the Congolese problem. We continue to believe that the territorial integrity of the Congo must be maintained and that the Katangese secession must be ended. The integrity of the Congo is, however, fully compatible with a federal system-under which the provinces would have an adequate measure of autonomy. We are therefore glad that a United Nations plan based on a federal arrangement has now been put forward. We shall support this “plan unreservedly, and we ask our Congolese brothers to accept it in their own interests and in the interests of peace in Africa. 38. These are our views on the problems which have engaged our particular attention. I have tried to be brief and specific, confining myself to setting out positions of principle.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“Ata time when the authority and prestige of the United Nations are under attack, we should avoid giving ammunition to the Organization's opponents, “ 36. The Conference of Heads of State of the Afro- Malagasy Union, held0 some weeks ago at Libreville, took a very definite stand on this problem. The Libreville Conference held that self-determination should be exercised during the transitional period and not after West New Guinea has been placed under Indonesian administration. We have no objection to an association or even a merger of West New Guinea with Indonesia. That is not the problem. But where the defence of principles is concerned, our Organization must stand firm if it wishes to maintain its prestige. 37. Finally, while on the subject of colonial problems, would like to Say a few words about the Congo.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“When one country, is claimed by another, self-determination should precede the transfer of that country to the State that claims it; but when, as in the case of West New Guinea, the country is handed over to Indonesia, we feel that there is no self-determination, whatever precautions have been taken, even if there is an interim period under the United Nations. The most surprising thing is that such an operation, which is nothing but a disguised annexation, should be carried out under cover of the United Nations. We must say that we find this incomprehensible. 35. Certain precedents are dangerous, and certain principles must remain Sacrosanct if we wish our Organization to be respected and to enjoy the unanimous confidence of all peoples.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“While on the subject of decolonization; I should like to say a few words about West New Guinea, Although the United Nations has approved it, we cannot pretend that we are not astonished at the recent concluded agreement on West New Guinea (A/5170, annex). We are just as much opposed to abdications which fail to solve the colonial problem as we are to an obstinate refusal to decolonize. We have always said that we were to favour of self-determination for West New Guinea; but if there is to be real self-determination, certain forms must be respected and certain conditions must be imposed.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“This year the twelve States of the African and Malagasy Union will unanimously and persistently demand the expulsion not only of Portugal, but of South Africa. If in the best interest of the colonized people, independence is to be prepared and organized, the colonial Power must at least accept this in principle; but Portugal: rejects the very principle of decolonization. In doing so, Portugal openly violates the principles of the United Nations Charter. A member of an organization must either accept its rules and regulations or resign. We shall demand the expulsion of South Africa for the same reasons. The United Nations is a universal organization founded on respect for peoples and races. A State which does not accept these principles has no place among us. 34.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“The links that bind us have been strengthened. Because of its national character, its culture, which Is our common heritage also, because of the great ideals it represents, France is now on the path traced for it by Destiny, the path of a people, of a nation, that is indispensable to the world because it has a feeling for what is human and universal. 32. We hope that the rest of Africa will soon be de-colonized and that, in particular, the United Kingdom will shortly reach an equitable solution of the disturbing problem of the Rhodesias. 33. We must still consider the case of the Powers which resist decolonization. Our attitude to them is still as uncompromising as ever. Last year my delegation demanded the expulsion of Portugal from the United Nations.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“From this rostrum, we can assure France and General de Gaulle, its amazing leader, of our warmest sympathy and of our admiration for the courage with which it has settled the colonial problem, particularly in Algeria, where it was extremely complex and painful. Today all the French-speaking countries represented in this Assembly are establishing fresh relations with Franco, 31. These relations will be all the more fruitful as they are based on free consent and mutual respect. We have always felt that a prepared and Organized independence, acquired through negotiation, with mutual respect for the interest of the two parties, is the most fruitful. Those colonial Powers which still refuse to decolonize should ponder France's example. Its influence and its prestige, far from being restricted to France proper have grown.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“I should like to take this opportunity to welcome1 the representatives of Rwanda and Burundi, Jamaica, and Trinidad and Tobago, who will soon be followed by those of Algeria and Uganda. There are some European Powers who have already taken the path towards decolonization. There are even some who have decolonized all the African countries which used to be under their domination. 30. This is the time to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's. In accordance with the undertakings that it gave immediately after the war, France has restored full sovereignty to nearly all the African countries that used to be its colonies. Whatever difficulties there may have been from time to time over de-colonization, France deserves our friendship our respect and our esteem.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“It is true that the disappearance of colonialism would contribute to peace, which is perhaps why the Africans attach so much importance to decolonization. It is also true that in Africa there are colonial Powers Which far from having decolonized, have not even accepted the principle of the liberation of the colonized peoples. All this has provoked very violent reactions among Africans and is still doing so; but they should not be taken too seriously. Our attitude to the colonial problem has always been fairly flexible. 29. It is a fact that in recent years some progress has been made with decolonization in Africa. There are more States Members of our Organization every year, and Africa is becoming increasingly important numerically in the United Nations.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“We must rethink all our political concepts in the light of the fundamental imperative of peace, and we must make what modest sacrifices we can to further the cause of peace. Any criticisms and suggestions that we may make to the great Powers will have point and weight only in so far as they consider our conduct exemplary. 27. This self-criticism enables me to speak with, freedom about the second problem which affects all of us, that of decolonization. Some observers have said that in Africa the colonial problem is still a major concern of Governments. They say that the Africans are more interested in that than in peace. The controversies about giving decolonization priority over peace that occurred at the Belgrade Conference last year may have given a false impression. 28.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“More than once — and we will return to this point — we have seen States of the uncommitted world with designs upon their neighbours, which they actually tried to annex. In many cases, they have not hesitated to ask the great Powers to help them achieve their ends. All this must emphatically be denounced as we said before. 26. The only capital at the disposal of the uncommitted world is moral capital. It must conduct itself in an exemplary manner if it wishes to acquire influence0and to keep it in the world. Our policy of non-alignment, of which we speak so often, is questioned by those who watch our doings, perhaps because we do not always suit our actions to our words, or because we do not keep strictly to one line of conduct.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“Which will stop the armaments race and make it easier to secure peace by outlawing weapons of mass destruction. That presupposes that the countries of the uncommitted world will agree first to play the game among themselves; and this is where I want to examine our conscience. 24. It is an unfortunate fact that, even within the uncommitted world, there are still some sources of conflict. Some African or Asian States dream of becoming military Powers, when they cannot even provide their peoples with a reasonable living. We have not yet clearly defined the rules of international morality, which would place our relations on a basis of confidence, friendship and solidarity. Many of us encourage subversive groups, just to annoy our neighbours. We fight imperialism abroad, but we do nothing to abolish it at home. 25.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“On these bases, the existing groups — the Monrovia group and the Casablanca group — can and must come together before long and act in concert if the perils threatening us are to be avoided. African unity many not be the only prerequisite for peace but it can help to create a favourable trend and reduce the danger of conflict. We think that our Asian brothers should be working in the same direction. Here you have "the weight of the uncommitted world"; needless to say there will be obstacles in our path. 23. But if we make peace cur paramount consideration, if we deliberately refuse to play the game of either of the opposing blocs, if we have the support of the peoples of all countries, who all, regardless of the continent in which they live, long for peace and wellbeing, we may be able to start an irresistible trend”.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“After lengthy controversy about its meaning, the form and the content of African unity, the different points of view seem to be coming very much closer. All Africans now recognize that in the immediate future African unity cannot mean the fusion of all components into a single State organization. It could not even mean, again in the near future, a huge federal type organization, because that would imply some degree of supernationality, which it would be impossible to achieve, in present circumstances, at the level of the continent or even of a major portion of it. 22. It is now generally realized, however, that African unity is a unity of aspirations, a community of views, which is reflected in a concerted policy and in consolidated action on the part of all the independent African States, based on respect for their sovereignty.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“If the Powers which have the major responsibilities in the world were to refuse to accept these ideas, based on common sense, we, the uncommitted nations, should endeavour to organize in order to ensure for ourselves the broadest possible protection. It cannot be too often reiterated that our greatest misfortune Would be to be divided, split into two blocs, for in allowing this we should extend the cold War instead of restricting it, and so increase the chances of a hot war. We should first organize at the level of our-respective continents and then at the level of the uncommitted world. 21. As far as Africa is concerned, you are aware of the efforts to achieve unity which have been going on for the past year.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“The cessation of nuclear tests followed by general, progressive and controlled disarmament are the prerequisites of peace. It must be realized, however, that while disarmament would obviate the possibility, of military conflict, it would not settle all disputes. At present we are in the throes of an intense ideological conflict. But an ideological conflict is not fatal if neither side tries to impose its ideology by force. There must be ideological diversity if humanity is to progress. Peaceful coexistence merely means that the competition between East and West must be peaceful competition, each ideology striving for victory on its own merits and without pressure or violence. 20.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“Yet how can one speak optimistically of disarmament when it has not even proved possible to arrange for the discontinuance of nuclear tests? On this point also, our position is clear. We condemn all nuclear tests, whoever conducts them. Last year much was said0 about the denuclearization of Africa. Of course, we welcome any proposal aimed at limiting the nuclear testing zones in the world. But that is not the fundamental problem, Africans will net be protected by the mere fact of a decision that Africa should be a nuclear-free zone. The problem must be dealt with as a whole. The only resolution to which we could agree would be one condemning nuclear tests not only in Africa but also in Asia and any other part of the world. 19.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“We Would even say that as peace is indivisible in the world today, the young States are just as much interested in a solution as are the great Powers. We therefore have our word to say in any negotiations on disarmament. Whether the solution be sought within or without the United Nations, it directly concerns the uncommitted world. 17. We have read with interest the reports of the Conference of the Eighteen-Nation Committee on Disarmament; and we have followed that Committee’s laborious efforts to find a solution. But We cannot refrain from reiterating here our regret that no French-speaking African country was represented in that Committee, and we consider that that omission might be rectified in the future. 18.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“We understand the suspicions of those who fear that inspection and control maybe misused and that, instead of serving the cause of effective disarmament; they may on the contrary become a means of espionage. But it should not be impossible to organize genuine and effective inspection in conditions that would eliminate all risks for the country in which control or inspection are being carried out. Those are mere details on which it should be possible to reach agreement, given the sincere will to do so. If the great Powers are not able to arrive at such agreement through direct negotiations, then the uncommitted world should take unanimous positive action and should consider and propose reasonable solutions. 16.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“Some Powers want o disarmament but oppose inspection; others want disarmament with inspection. Common sense dictates that any agreement on disarmament must be accompanied by a strict system of inspection, on condition, of course, that inspection does not amount to espionage. On this point we fully endorse the statement made in March 1961 by the Prime Ministers of the Commonwealth countries: "Disarmament without inspection would be as unacceptable as inspection without disarmament. Disarmament and inspection are integral parts of the same question and must be negotiated together; and both must be made as complete and effective as is humanly possible." 15. These dear principles must guide our search for any solution of the disarmament problem.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“If the great Powers are really conscious of their duties to the needy and wish to liberate Sufficient resources to come to their assistance, the best solution would be for them to devote part of their military expenditure to organized assistance to the uncommitted world. Clearly the achievement of such a solution must depend upon disarmament. If, as we believe, peace can be consolidated through disarmament, why is every effort being made to establish peace by other means, including the mass accumulation of armaments? There lies the whole problem. Between a costly peace and an inexpensive peace, common sense requires us to choose the second — that is peace through disarmament. Moreover, the great Powers are apparently agreed on the principle; but the fundamental element of confidence is lacking.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“The prerequisite of peace is disarmament. Some may dispute this elemental truth by quoting the saying "If you want peace, prepare for war". In fact, the attitude of the great Powers is dictated by the strategy of dissuasion. To the balance of peace without terror they seem to prefer the balance of terror — perhaps because they think it more effective. They think that the only way to maintain peace is to produce and stockpile weapons of mass destruction. It is the system of armed peace. We shall not speak of the well-known controversies on the effectiveness of the strategy of dissuasion, we would only say that even if peace could be obtained in that way it would be a most costly peace, swallowing up the major part of the resources of mankind. 14. Would it not be better to establish peace by less costly means?”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“While some Powers have finally resolved their colonial problems, and others, let us hope, are about to resolve theirs, there are also some who refuse to admit even the principle of decolonization. The essential problem, however, which conditions the future of mankind, the development of the backward areas, has been more the subject of Words than of positive action. 12. We have already defined more than once, in this hall, the general principles of our international policy. We shall not revert to them, but should merely like to state, as briefly and clearly as possible, our attitude towards certain problems, either because of their importance for world peace or because they concern us more or less directly. These problems are disarmament, peaceful coexistence, the building of Africa and decolonization. 13.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“to reduce things to their true proportions to give our debates a humane quality and to introduce serenity and calmness in this forum. 10. It is true that this session of the General Assembly opened in an apparent calm and one would be tempted to believe that in the past year we have made considerable progress in the solution of the problems of the day. But a brief examination of our agenda reveals that there is still fire under the embers. The problem of peace, or more specifically the problem of disarmament and peaceful coexistence, is far from solution. Nuclear tests have been resumed. The Berlin wall still stands as the most tangible sign of mankind’s present tragic situation. 11.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“Being neither able nor willing to produce and stock weapons of mass destruction, deliberately turning our backs on, this deadly game of the nuclear Powers, preoccupied as we are by the demands of development, the uncommitted countries can and must play a beneficent role in the world by seeking and proposing human solutions, that is, just and reasonable solutions to the problems of bur time. To the philosophy of power we must oppose the philosophy of wisdom; to violence, conciliation and compromise, but with no compromise of principle, "The weight of the uncommitted world" — which is now" a recognized fact — must be a moral weight. That is why, in the discussion of the important problems which are the subject of our present meetings, our contribution will be.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“For two years now the post of Secretary-General and Presidency of the General Assembly have been entrusted to African-Asians. Does that betoken malice or confidence on the part of those who give us these heavy responsibilities? We cannot tell. We prefer to be optimistic and consider the honour as a sign of confidence. But if the great Powers, in giving us those responsibilities, had ulterior motive and were saying to each other: "Let us get them with their backs to the wall", it would then be for us to prove that we young nations are highly conscious of our role in the world.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“Mr. President, allow me first of all to congratulate you most warmly on your election to the Presidency of our Assembly. 8. The election of an Asian, following that of an African, to the Presidency of this high international tribunal demonstrates, without a doubt, the importance of the non-aligned world and its increasing influence among twentieth-century mankind. Le poids du tiersmonde is the title of a recent book dealing with the problems of the under-developed countries. It is an indisputable fact, and it is the conclusion reached in that book, that the uncommitted world is now in the front line of history. But precisely because the uncommitted world is, playing an increasing role in world affairs, because it is assuming ever-increasing responsibilities, it must be conscious of the new obligations which the situation imposes on it. 9.”
1962-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 17 (1962)
“The future of the United Nations is the future of mankind. That is why, more than ever before, we shall fight to the limit of our strength, for we know that our own fate is linked to that of this great Organization of peoples. 76. These are the reflexions that my delegation wanted to present at the opening of the sixteenth session of the General Assembly, a session which is proving to be of particular importance. I said at the beginning of this statement that since we dispersed in the spring of 1961 a number of difficult and alarming questions have appeared on the international scene. Peace itself is at stake and without peace none of the dreams of the twentieth century can be realized. Yet despite the difficulties, the perils and the dangers, we are still confident of the final triumph of man and of the values he represents.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“A well informed journalist wrote, a few days ago; "If the great Powers were to persist in their refusal to respond to the vague longings of all peoples for an organization capable of laying down the law, defending their independence and promoting their welfare, the United Nations would sink into incoherence and impotence. In that event international relations would be based on force alone, through the fault of those great Powers that are called reasonable; and human society, assuming it escaped a war of annihilation between East and West, would be doomed to anarchy and to the most varied forms of economic or ideological slavery." 75. It is in the consciousness of that danger that we are making tremendous efforts to prevent the United Nations from foundering in the storm unleashed by the powerful ones of this world.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“One cannot claim to be the friend of the small Powers and yet act against their most obvious interests. When all is said and done, our membership in the Security Council is not only in our own interest but also, and above all, in the general interest. The cold war paralyses everything, prevents the United Nations from functioning normally, reduces the debates in the Security Council to a dialogue of the deaf. The great ones of this world are most decidedly not the wisest of this world. If they fail to understand the role that the small Powers can play in the world balance of power, and if they persist in their formidable obstinacy, the world will be heading in a dangerous direction that may be fatal to the human race.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Although the unanimity rule does allow of the effective solution of some problems once general agreement has been reached, in most cases it paralyses the Assembly. It allows disputes to drag on unsettled, becoming worse, and consequently to develop into threats to peace. 74. Finally, there is one more problem which it is the imperative duty of the Assembly to resolve during the present session. I refer to the enlargement of the Security Council and of the Economic and Social Council. As we have already said, these two organs should reflect the new composition of the Assembly by including representatives of the Asian and African continents. This question, which was skilfully evaded last year, should be solved before the end of the sixteenth session. This is a test.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“I understand the reasons advanced by certain States for its retention. They fear that a group of Powers, having a majority, might utilize that majority to obtain decisions to their own advantage. But it must be said that the United Nations is no longer what it was when it was founded and will become less and less so — i.e., it is no longer an Assembly in which, in practice, two great opposing blocs confront each other. The presence of the non aligned world in this Assembly has brought about a great change in the facts of the problem. We must not allow the fear of doing an injustice to lead us to commit even greater injustices. The veto is responsible for the no admission of continental China and of Mauritania. It is, coming more and more to be a weapon of the cold war, and this makes it dangerous.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“If the Assembly really assumed its responsibilities, and if its officers took the implementation of its decisions in hand, we think everyone would be satisfied and above all, the advocates of the "troika". What they really want is to prevent one single person from taking over all the responsibilities of the executive. If a special committee were set up to attend to the implementation of the Assembly's decisions, we think their demands would be satisfied. 72. Of course all these are merely suggestions. A more detailed technical study would certainly be necessary. In any case, it seems to us that if the Secretariat were deprived of all political functions, there would no longer be any reason to oppose the idea of a single Secretary-General. 73. We also feel, but in a different context, that the right of veto should be abolished.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“For want of clear-cut decisions, the Secretary-General was very often compelled to fill our place. We sincerely think that this evil will not be remedied simply by installing a three headed Secretariat. The reform should toe designed to separate' the administrative functions very clearly from the political functions. The Secretariat must become a strictly administrative organ, whose duty it is to ensure the internal operation — I repeat, internal — of the United Nations and its specialized agencies. The political responsibility must be assumed by the General Assembly or by the Security Council. 71. We think that this procedure will make it possible to avoid leaving everything in the hands of a single all-powerful personage^ while the General Assembly continues to be a precinct where, for the most part, only verbal furies are unleashed.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“It has never been possible to reach a general agreement on the meaning of the United Nations mission in the Congo and on the precise nature and limits of its action. So true is this that some countries have refused to share in financing the United Nations operation in the Congo and the question will arise again, even more acutely, when it comes to the Katanga expedition. The Secretary-General has been the scapegoat blamed for action that was merely the consequence of our own dereliction. He has been left to act as he thought fit, because our discussions rarely ended in definite actions; because sniping between the great Powers — and, I must admit, between the small ones like ourselves — over the question of the Congo consistently prevented agreement on any specific point.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“In practice, moreover, such a solution would be likely to paralyse the action of the United Nations, for it would be a source of delay in the implementation of decisions and a source of disputes. 70. As things are today, the General Assembly has the right of control over the actions of the Secretary; General. If this right has not always been exercised, it is the Assembly1 s own fault, let us admit it frankly. If the Secretariat has gradually encroached on the powers of the Assembly, it has been because the Assembly has allowed itself to be dispossessed. Instead of keeping to its purely administrative role, the Secretariat has progressively become a political organ. But that is the fault of the Assembly, which has not always effectively assumed its political responsibilities. The example of the Congo is very illuminating in this respect.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Reasons of principle play as important a part in our attitude as do practical considerations, To ask for the executive organ of the Secretariat to be composed of officials representing the countries of the East and the West and the neutral countries is to overlook the fact that representation in the United Nations is based on States, not on ideological groups. Moreover, while it would be relatively easy for both the East and the West to find a common representative for their group, would it be the same for those customarily termed neutrals? And, even assuming that were possible, would not such neutrals run the risk of very soon ceasing to be neutral? Would they not be accused of having become partisans?”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“The United Nations will be transformed from a body expressing the interests of all its Members into an organ of a group of States, pursuing the policy of that group rather than the policy of ensuring peace throughout the world. The first result of this will be to engender a lack of respect for the United Nations; but subsequently it may lead to the disintegration of the Organization, as happened in the earlier case of the League of Nations." [799th meeting, para, 98.] 69. While we are in agreement with these remarks, we have reservations about the proposals of the Soviet Union for the reorganization of the United Nations, and especially those relating to the powers of the Secretary-General.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Instead of consistently supporting the authority of the United Nations, so that it will really be the most authoritative international organ and the Governments of all countries will always come to it when they have to solve vitally important problems, some States try to exploit it in their own narrow interests, An international organization cannot, of course, act effectively on behalf of peace if within it there is a group of countries whose policy is to impose the will of certain States upon others. A policy of this kind will undermine the foundations of the United Nations, If matters continue to develop in this direction — in the direction of what might be called factionalism — the result will be to make relations between States worse rather than better.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Some absent themselves from our proceedings; others attend, but in a negative or hostile spirit, while yet others are perfectly willing for the United Nations to continue so long as it becomes or remains a tool of their policy. 68. Mr. Khrushchev, the Head of the USSR Government, admitted, in a major speech made before the General Assembly at its fourteenth session: " ... not all the States Members of the United Nations have the necessary respect for that body, in which mankind places so many hopes.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“That is why, as we have already said from this rostrum on a different occasion, we are particularly interested in any effort to strengthen the United Nations, to endow it with more authority and more resources, to correct its weaknesses — which, it must be admitted, are our own weaknesses. In that same spirit, we oppose any action designed to jeopardize its existence or to impair its authority. 67. Various trends are becoming manifest in this respect and they merit our most careful attention. While the non-aligned countries, as a whole, favour the maintenance and strengthening of the United Nations, others, for reasons we cannot fathom, are adopting a highly disturbing attitude.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“No one can evade it, neither East nor West, neither the colonialists nor the anti-colonialists, What is involved here, beyond all the transitory conflicts, is the permanent interest of mankind. 65. In this immense effort, the United Nations has a primary role to play. In spite of its weaknesses and its inadequacies, no one can gainsay the great contribution the United Nations has made to the progress of mankind since the end of the Second World War. Whether in the matter of peace, of decolonization or of economic development, the United Nations has marked out new roads and worked out principles whose human and universal value no longer requires emphasis. 66.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“That is why we wholeheartedly support the idea of multilateral aid. We shall revert to this important problem during the economic discussions. There are a number of measures that we consider essential, not only in relation to aid, but also in relation to guarantees for investments and the necessary stabilization of commodity prices, 64. Underdevelopment is the most agonizing problem of our day. If we wish to resolve it, we must undertake an immediate crusade, placing the problem in its true context, which is not exclusively colonial, at least in the classical sense of the word. The true problem is increasingly becoming that of hunger, Once again, confronted by this problem, the whole of mankind is equally involved.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“That is why, in our opinion, a crusade should be undertaken forthwith which, eliminating the cold war, the ideological battles and the conflict of interests, would place itself in the perspective of tomorrow and would begin at once to try to solve this agonizing problem. 63. There can of course be no denying the efforts that have been made during the last few years, especially by the United Nations, to provide assistance to the underdeveloped countries on an ever-increasing scale. It has been strongly emphasized that such aid must be free from every trace of political interest. Obviously there would be no point in condemning colonialism if assistance to the underdeveloped countries were to serve as an Indirect means for the introduction of a new colonialism, more hateful than its prototype.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“The starving countries will pass from the status of sub proletariat to the consciousness of their solidarity in poverty." The clash of ideologies and the conflicts between differing political and economic systems will very soon be a thing of the past. Our salvation lies in the combined efforts of all countries, whether they belong to one bloc or the other, in fighting the battle against hunger. 62. This is the price that must be paid for the peace and stability of the world. Unless this collaboration is established, we must expect to see the present conflicts between different ideologies and different political or economic systems replaced by new conflicts between the rich countries and the poor ones. The principles of Marxist theory would then be very much changed.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Whether we like it or not, the dispute between West and East is obsolete, or in any case it will very soon be obsolete, probably by the end of the twentieth century. 61. The Marxist theory of the class struggle within a given society will soon be replaced by the conflict between the rich countries and the poor countries. A specialist who has made a particular study of this question said to us: "Make no mistake about it: to an undernourished Indian there is no difference between a French proletarian and a rich Frenchman. The struggle between social classes in the West is fading out. The difference between the level of living of an English bourgeois and that of an English workman is far less than the gulf that separates the English workman from his Indian counterpart.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“It would be hard for the cold war to find favourable ground here. East and West assume equal responsibility before the disinherited peoples. In forty years, the earth will be populated by 6,000 million people. Population growth is proceeding at a dizzying pace. It took many centuries to reach the 2,500 million level; it will take less than 50 years more to reach 6,000 million. Unless there is a change in the present situation, three quarters of mankind will be living in poverty, while the other quarter, mostly of the white race — and I emphasize this — will be living in opulence. Thus East and West have a common responsibility in this matter. They can meet it only by agreeing to disarm and to place at the disposal of mankind the capital and the work which today is devoted to the manufacture of atomic bombs and hydrogen bombs.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)
“Here, it is true, we are in a domain where dependence is often less apparent. But let us make no mistakes: from the moment that all the formal criteria of independence are present, the new States find themselves at grips with the burning problems of economic development. It is only by revising the economic relations that once bound them to their former metropolitan country that they can cope with those problems. 60. Today, however, the aspects of the problem are changing considerably. The growth of the underdeveloped countries falls within a context far broader than that of the relations between colonizers and colonized. It is a world problem, of so broad a scope that it concerns not merely the colonizers, or former colonizers, but all the countries which are well ahead in economic development.”
1961-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 16 (1961)