YouSaid · the spoken record

Goldberg

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS GOLDBERG

lines on the record

123

first

1965-09-24

most recent

1967-09-24

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

1. “And I put the question: will they refrain from putting forward clearly unacceptable terms; and are they prepared to assume the obligations of the United Nations Charter, in particular the basic Charter obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State? 49. The world — and my Government — will listen most attentively for a helpful response to these questions. We hope it will come soon — the sooner the better.”

   1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

2. “Indeed, they have brought their country to a degree of isolation that is unique in the world today, an isolation not only from the United States and its friends and allies, but from most of the non-aligned world, and even from most of the Communist nations. Many, not only the United States, have sought improved relations and have been rebuffed. 48. At this moment in history, therefore, the basic question about the relation between Communist China and the United Nations is a question to which only the leaders in Peking can give the answer.”

   1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

3. “In addition to the expulsion of the Republic of China, there are also demands to transform and pervert this Organization from its Charter purposes — some of them put forward as recently as yesterday. 47. What can be the cause of this attitude? We cannot be sure, but we do know that it comes from a leadership whose stated programme is to transform the world by violence. It comes from a leadership which openly proclaims that it is opposed to any discussion of a peaceful settlement in Viet-Nam. It would also seem that these leaders wish to isolate their country from a world, and from a United Nations, that they cannot transform or control.”

   1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

4. “It is in the light of these facts and of our ardent desire for a better atmosphere that the United States has carefully considered the issues arising from the absence of representatives of Peking from the United Nations. 46. Two facts bear on this issue and on the attitude of my country towards any attempted solution. First, the Republic of China on Taiwan is a founding Member of the United Nations and its rights are clear. The United States will vigorously oppose any effort to exclude the representatives of the Republic of China from the United Nations in order to put representatives of Communist China in their place. The second fact is that Communist China, unlike anyone else in the history of this Organization, has put forward special and extraordinary terms for consenting to enter the United Nations.”

   1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

5. “And we have expressed our hope to see representatives of Peking join us and others in meaningful negotiations on disarmament, a nuclear test ban, and a ban on the further spread of nuclear weapons. 45. But the international community, if it is faithful to the Charter and our resolutions, cannot countenance Peking's doctrine and policy of intervening by violence and subversion in other nations, whether under the guise of so-called wars of national liberation against independent countries, or under any other guise. Such intervention can find no place in the United Nations Charter nor in the resolution of the General Assembly. Yet dozens of nations whose representatives are seated in this hall have had direct experience of these illegal activities.”

   1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

6. “Let me say to this Assembly categorically that it is not the policy of the United States to isolate Communist China from the world. On the contrary, we have sought to limit the areas of hostility and to pave the way for the restoration of our historically friendly relations with the great people of China. Our efforts to this end have taken many forms. Since 1955, United States representatives have held 131 bilateral diplomatic meetings at Geneva, and later at Warsaw, with emissaries from Peking. We have sought without success to open numerous unofficial channels of communication with mainland China. We have made it crystal clear that we do not intend to attack, invade or attempt to overthrow the existing regime in Peking.”

   1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

7. “Now I turn to another problem related in part to the first, the problem of how to foster a constructive relationship between the mainland of China, with its 700 million people, and the outside world. The misdirection of so much of the energies of this vast, industrious and gifted people into xenophobic displays, such as the extraordinary, difficult to understand and alarming activities of the Red Guards, and the official policy and doctrine of promoting revolution and subversion throughout the world — these are among the most disturbing phenomena of our age. Surely among the essentials of peace in Asia are reconciliation between nations that now call themselves enemies and, specifically, a peaceful mainland China. 44.”

   1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

8. “Such a position can only further delay a peace which we all desire and fervently hope for. The only workable formula for a settlement will be one which is just to the basic interests of all who are involved. In this spirit, we welcome discussion of this question either in the Security Council, where the United States itself has raised the matter, or here in the General Assembly, and we are fully prepared to take part in such discussion. We earnestly solicit the further initiative of any organ, including the Secretary-General, or any Member of the United Nations whose influence can help in this cause. Every Member has a responsibility to exercise its power and influence for peace, and the greater its power and influence, the greater is this responsibility. 43.”

   1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

9. “Some argue that regardless of different views on who controls the Viet-Cong, it is a combatant force and, as such, should take part in the negotiations. Our view on this matter was stated some time ago by President Johnson, who made it clear that, as far as we are concerned, this question would not be an insurmountable problem. We therefore invite the authorities in Hanoi to consider whether this obstacle to negotiations may not be more imaginary than real. 42. We offer these proposals today in the interests of peace in South-East Asia. There may be other proposals. We have not been and we are not now inflexible in our position, but we do believe that whatever approach finally succeeds, it will not be one which simply decries what is happening in Viet-Nam and appeals to one side to stop while encouraging the other.”

   1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

10. “There is no basis for such a fear. The United States stands ready to withdraw its forces as others withdraw theirs so that peace can be restored in South Viet- Nam, and favours international machinery, either of the United Nations or other machinery, to ensure effective supervision of the withdrawal. We therefore urge that Hanoi be asked the following question also; would North Viet-Nam be willing to agree to a time- schedule for supervised phased withdrawal from South Viet-Nam of all external forces, those of North Viet- Nam as well as those of the United States and other countries aiding South Viet-Nam? 41. A further obstacle is said to be disagreement over the place of the Viet-Cong in the negotiations.”

    1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

11. “We are prepared to order a cessation of all bombing of North Viet-Nam the moment we are assured, privately or otherwise, that this step will be answered promptly by a corresponding and appropriate de-escalation on the other side. We therefore urge before this august Assembly that the Government in Hanoi be asked the following question to which we would be prepared to receive either a private or public response: would it, in the interests of peace, and in response to a prior cessation by the United States of the bombing in North Viet-Nam, take corresponding and timely steps to reduce or bring to an end its own military activities against South Viet-Nam? 40. Another obstacle is said to be North Viet-Nam's conviction or fear that the United States intends to establish a permanent military presence in Viet-Nam.”

    1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

12. “Let it be recalled that there was no bombing of North Viet-Nam for five years during which there was steadily increasing infiltration from North Viet-Nam in violation of the Geneva accords, during which there were no United States combat forces in Viet-Nam and during which strenuous efforts were made to achieve a peaceful settlement. Let it be further recalled that twice before we have suspended our bombing, once for thirty- seven days, without any reciprocal act of de-escalation from the other side and without any sign from them of a willingness to negotiate. Nonetheless, let me say that in this matter the United States is willing once again to take the first step.”

    1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

13. “We are ready to negotiate a settlement based on a strict observance of the 1954 and 1962 Geneva Agreements, which observance was called for in the communique which was recently issued by the Warsaw Pact countries at Bucharest. We will support a reconvening of the Geneva Conference or an Asian conference or any other generally acceptable forum. At the same time, we have also been soberly considering whether lack of agreement on peace aims has been the sole barrier to the beginning of negotiations. We are aware that some perceive other obstacles, and I wish to make here today three proposals with respect to them. First, it is said that one obstacle is the United States bombing of North Viet-Nam.”

    1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

14. “We seek to assure for the people of South Viet-Nam the same right of self-determination to decide its own political destiny, free of force, that the United Nations Charter affirms for all, and we believe that reunification of Viet-Nam should be decided upon through a free choice by the peoples of both the North and the South without outside interference, the results of which choice we are fully prepared to support. 39. These then are our affirmative aims. We are well aware, as we have studied them carefully, of the stated position of Hanoi on these terms. But no differences can be resolved without contact, discussion or negotiations, For our part, we have long been — and remain today —ready to negotiate without prior conditions. We are prepared to discuss Hanoi's four points, together with any points which other parties may wish to raise.”

    1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

15. “We do not ask of North Viet-Nam an unconditional surrender or indeed the surrender of anything that belongs to it. Nor do we seek to exclude any segment of the South Viet-Namese people from peaceful participation in their country's future. 38. Let me state affirmatively and succinctly what our aims are. We want a political solution, not a military solution, to this conflict. I repeat: we want a political solution, not a military solution, to this conflict. By the same token, we reject the idea that North Viet-Nam has the right to impose a military solution.”

    1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

16. “It is because of the attempt to upset by violence the situation in Viet-Nam and its far-reaching implications elsewhere, that the United States of America and other countries have responded to appeals from South Viet-Nam for military assistance. Our aims in giving this assistance are strictly limited. We are not engaged in a holy war against communism. We do not seek to establish an American empire or a sphere of influence in Asia. We seek no permanent military bases, no permanent establishment of troops, no permanent alliances and no permanent American presence of any kind in South Viet-Nam. We do not seek to impose a policy of alignment on South Viet-Nam. We do not seel; to overthrow the Government of North Viet- Nam. We do not seek to do any injury to mainland China nor to threaten any of its legitimate interests.”

    1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

17. “of another State, or interfere in civil strife in another State". It would be hard to write a more precise description of what North Viet-Nam is doing and has been doing for years in South Viet-Nam. Certainly, the prohibition of the use of force and subversion — both by this resolution and by the Charter itself — must apply with full vigour to international demarcation lines that have been established by solemn international agreements. This is significantly true not only in Viet-Nam but also in all divided States, where the recourse to force between the divided parts can have far-reaching consequences. Furthermore, solemn international agreements, specifically the Geneva Agreements, explicitly prohibit recourse to force as a means of reunifying Viet-Nam. 37.”

    1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

18. “Let it be noted that this attack by North Viet-Nam contravenes not only the United Nations Charter, but also the terms of General Assembly resolution 2131 (XX), adopted unanimously only last December — the resolution entitled "Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of their Independence and Sovereignty". That resolution declares, among other things, in its operative paragraph 1, that: "No State has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the internal or external affairs of any other State." It further declares in operative paragraph 2 that: "... no State shall organize, assist, foment, finance, incite or tolerate subversive, terrorist or armed activities directed towards the violent overthrow ...”

    1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

19. “The Geneva Agreement which established the demarcation line is so thorough in its prohibition of the use of force that it forbids military interference of any sort by one side in the affairs of the other. It even forbids civilians to cross the demilitarized zone. In 1962, at the Geneva Conference, military infiltration through Laos was also forbidden. Yet, despite those provisions, South Viet-Nam is under an attack, already seven years old, by forces directed and supplied from the North and reinforced by regular units — currently some seventeen identified regiments — of the North Viet-Namese Army. A manifest purpose of this attack is to force upon the people of South Viet-Nam a system which they have not chosen by any peaceful process. 36.”

    1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

20. “a source of grave concern and is bound to be a source of even greater anxiety, not only to the parties directly involved and to the major Powers but also to other Members of the Organization" [A/6400]. 33. My Government remains determined to exercise every restraint to limit the war and to exert every effort to bring the conflict to the earliest end. The essential facts of the Viet-Nam conflict can be stated briefly. 34. Viet-Nam today remains divided along the demarcation line agreed upon at Geneva in 1954. To the north and south of that line are North Viet-Nam and South Viet-Nam. Provisional though they may be, pending a decision on the peaceful reunification of Viet-Nam by the process of self-determination, they are none the less political realities in the international community. 35.”

    1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

21. “We have concluded that, rather than attempting to review the many questions on the agenda to which we attach importance, we could make a more useful contribution by concentrating on the serious dangers to peace now existing in Asia — particularly the war in Viet-Nam — and by treating that subject in a constructive and positive way. 32. The conflict in Viet-Nam is first of all an Asian issue, whose tragedy and suffering fall most heavily on the peoples directly involved. But its repercussions are world-wide. It diverts much of the energies of many nations, including my own, from urgent and constructive endeavours. It is, as the Secretary-General said in his statement of 1 September: "...”

    1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

22. “With all their troubles and aspirations, they put great faith in our Organization. They look to us not for pious words but for solid results: agreements reached, wars ended or prevented, treaties written, co-operative programmes launched — results that will bring humanity a few steps, but giant steps, closer to the purposes of the Charter, which are our common commitment. 31. Realizing this, the United States has considered what it could say in this general debate that would improve the prospects for such fruitful results in the present session.”

    1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

23. “It needs him as a Secretary-General who conceives his office in the full spirit of the Charter as an important organ of the United Nations, endowed with the authority to act with initiative and effectiveness. The Members, in all their diversity and even discord, are united in their confidence in him. His departure at this crucial time in world affairs and in the life of the United Nations would be a serious loss both to the Organization itself and to the cause of peace among nations. 29. We reiterate our earnest hope that he will heed the unanimous wishes of the membership and permit his tenure of office to be extended. His affirmative decision on this question would give all of us new impetus to deal with the many great problems on our agenda. 30. The peoples of the world expect the United Nations to resolve these problems.”

    1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

24. “27. As the General Assembly convenes in this twenty-first year of the United Nations, we of the United States of America are aware, as indeed every delegation must be, of the great responsibilities which all of us share in the work of this world Organization. No one, I am sure, feels these responsibilities more, or more keenly, than the Secretary-General, U Thant. In the past five years, he has filled his office with distinction and effectiveness. And indeed this is the most difficult office in the world. We know how much selfless dedication and energy have been exacted from him on behalf of the world community, and we can well understand how the burdens of his office led him to his decision not to offer himself for a second term as Secretary-General. 28. But the United Nations needs him. It needs him as a person.”

    1966-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 21 (1966)

25. “President Johnson said: "We seek to establish a harmony between man and society which will allow each of us to enlarge the meaning of his life and all of us to elevate the quality of our civilization." 109. Out of our diversity, the welcome diversity of nations and peoples, let us be one in our determination to elevate the quality of all our lives and to build a great society of and for all men.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

26. “I said the other day that I am optimistic about the fate of this Organization, and I am optimistic because if we had not created this great Organization twenty years ago, we would be creating it out of necessity today. 106. The road to world order, the road to a rule of law in the world, is not an easy one. It will continue to be ardour and beset by agonizing hurdles, painful decisions, difficult compromises and, at times, disheartening setbacks. Travelling the road will demand the most from each of us. I pray that we shall be equal to the task. 107. I hope also that twenty years from now, when the General Assembly convenes in plenary meeting, it can look back on a generation of achievement that we are beginning today. 108.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

27. “the post of high commissioner for human rights [A/5963]. We think this is an important first step in implementing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and we shall give this proposal our enthusiastic support. 104. We can, out of this debate, out of the divergent views expressed here, distil a consensus. As long as we strive for such, a consensus and accept the methods of reason and understanding on which consensus is built, we will strengthen the fabric of this great community of the United Nations. By its very nature, this must always be a community whose doors are open to those who would turn their backs on chaos, threat and violence and seek legitimate ends through peaceful means. 105.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

28. “But with the decision of the United States Supreme Court in 1954, and with the subsequent decisions — in which I hope you will not deem it amiss if I take great personal pride and satisfaction since I participated in some of them—and the passage of the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965, the United States Government has put into concrete form and terms its full and complete commitment to the principle of full human rights, of freedom and equality for all our people. 103. The United Nations also has a significant role in promoting, in the words of the Charter, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all. Much has already been done, but the United Nations has not done enough in this area, and we believe much more will be necessary. We are therefore very pleased that the Government of Costa Rica has proposed the creation of.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

29. “In our concern for the rights and freedoms of nations, we must not neglect the rights and freedoms of individuals, those who, after all, are the basic unit of any nation. The test of any country’s dedication to human rights is, if I may respectfully suggest, not what that country says in the General Assembly for all the world to hear, but what it does at home for all the world to see. 102. Our record, like that of other countries, is far from perfect.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

30. “We applaud this historical development and we are deeply committed to its success. 100. Of course, among the dependent peoples now remaining in the world, whose aspirations for self-determination command our fullest sympathy, are some very small areas with very limited resources. Whether they will be able to meet the requirements of the Charter that Members be not only willing but also able to carry out their obligations, may require early consideration, as the Secretary-General has indicated. But I repeat, we support the historical development of all people being able to gain their self-government or independence, when they desire it, by the principle of self-determination. 101.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

31. “The effect upon his lot, his fate, his well-being, will remain the final measure of our successes and our failures. And if we talk about the competition between States, we mean the only worthwhile competition, as to which system, which society best improves the lot of man and upgrades human dignity. 99. We are well past the midpoint — indeed, in sight of the end — of what history may record as the most exciting and predominantly peaceful revolution in human affairs; and this is a movement vitally linked to the dignity of human beings — the movement of self-determination. This movement has seen people in the past few decades assert and gain their right to be free from colonialism, their right to self-government and independence, and their right to be free from control by other peoples.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

32. “I recognize that we are not alone in acknowledging the need for action in these areas. I have singled them out because the United States plans to take or join in specific action on each of them — not in the vague future, but in the months ahead. Faster progress in the Development Decade is a central aim in our foreign policy. 98. I come now, in conclusion of these thoughts, to the source from which they derive: our determination to enrich the lives of human beings — domestically in our drive to create a great society, internationally in our support for fundamental freedoms and human rights for peoples everywhere. The ultimate object of United Nations activities, the ultimate object of any organized society — domestically or internationally — is man, the individual.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

33. “To help get on with these jobs, we support the increased target of $200 million for the new United Nations Development Programme, on the understanding that the arrangements worked out will be satisfactory to both the developed and developing countries. 96. We are ready to join, in practical and concrete ways, in a further expansion of multilateral efforts to supply capital for development through regional development banks and international institutions such as the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the International Development Association, on the assurance that there will be sound administration, as well as appropriate contributions from others. We would be prepared to increase the amount of capital flowing through multilateral channels. 97.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

34. “The United States will continue to make special efforts under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade to reduce tariffs on items of special interest to those countries. We shall also participate actively and constructively in the work of the New United Nations trade machinery. It is our hope that in dealing with the hard and difficult problems of trade, developed and developing countries will proceed in a spirit of partnership. There must be a free and sustained dialogue and a common search for ways and means by which we can develop mutually beneficial trade patterns. 95. Of course, experience shows that we need a much greater investment in the development of that most important resource of all — trained people — and must provide more assistance to the educational efforts of the developing countries.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

35. “We thus fully support the proposal for an expanded World Food Programme and are prepared to examine further with other developed countries ways of adapting our domestic agricultural abundance, to meet the world’s food deficit while it exists. 92. More action is required to limit excessive population growth. We support the programme now under way whereby United Nations agencies provide advisory services and training in family planning to any country asking for such assistance. 93. We must all do more to help accelerate industrial growth in the developing countries, a question to which the General Assembly will, I am sure, give special attention, 94. We must also speed up and intensify our efforts to enlarge the export earnings of the developing countries, and to counteract excessive fluctuations in those earnings.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

36. “While the possibility of creating a just world society may be contingent on success or failure in such fields as disarmament and peace-keeping, our capability of creating it will depend on the efforts we spend not just to prevent disaster but to build healthy economic conditions everywhere. 91. We are near the midpoint of the United Nations Development Decade. Progress has been made, and this has to be acknowledged, but we all need to do more and to do it better. Much more has to be done, in particular, to increase food production in the developing countries. If current population trends continue, food production will have to be tripled by the end of the century to provide an adequate diet for all.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

37. “That principle is one to which we fully subscribed then and to which we fully subscribe now. 88. Since then the General Assembly has laid down valuable ground rules for activities in space and on celestial bodies. In accordance with these rules, our space activities have been, and will continue to be, non-aggressive, and peaceful and beneficial in character. 89. But these rules are not enough. Instruments from earth have already reached the moon and photographed Mars. And man will soon follow. Accordingly, we suggest that the United Nations begin work on a comprehensive treaty on the exploration of celestial bodies. 90. But while we aim for the stars, we must also explore maximum resources to promote economic and social well-being here at home.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

38. “Over seven years ago, the United States inscribed the first item to appear on this Assembly’s agenda concerning the peaceful uses of outer space, and introduced a draft resolution, co-sponsored by twenty States, which became the first space action this body had ever taken. That draft resolution was introduced in the First Committee (986th meeting) by the then Majority Leader of the United States Senate, Senator Lyndon B. Johnson of Texas, and as President he continues his interest, dedication and devotion to that principle. By adopting that resolution [1348 (XIII)] the General Assembly went on record as recognizing that — and I quote from the first preambular paragraph — "it is the common aim that outer space should be used for peaceful purposes only".”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

39. “Nevertheless, I am firmly convinced that the United Nations might also develop additional mechanisms which would allow the parties to a stubborn dispute to use a United Nations body of mediation or conciliation. 86. Above all, our basic charge of peace-keeping under the Charter is to join together to assure peace and security. We must continue this quest for collective security and we must renounce collective futility if we are to perform our Charter functions. 87. There is one area in which we have been seeking to promote co-operation well before any dispute arises. That is in the peaceful uses of outer space.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

40. “It is, if I may say so, an item in which I take a keen personal interest, for the greater part of my adult life has been spent in intimate association with the process of third-party settlement of the differences and disputes which arise between a free labour movement and free employers. I have often seen disagreements become aggravated or prolonged not because they were irreconcilable, but simply because the parties involved could not agree upon the go-between. And we in our own country have now developed machinery, such as the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, which has filled this gap and in so doing has greatly advanced the pacific settlement of labour disputes in our own country. 85. I know also that machinery which is successful on the national level cannot always be transposed to the international level.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

41. “It had atrophied too long. We must develop workable methods to resolve disputes before they reach the point of potential or actual conflict. If the United Nations is to serve its primary purpose, it must be an instrument for the reconciliation of differences and not merely a forum in which they manifest themselves. Too often has the United Nations had to demonstrate its capacity for quenching fires when it might better have helped to prevent them in the first place. 83. For this reason we welcome the initiative of the United Kingdom in introducing an agenda item on the peaceful settlement of disputes [A/5964]. The United States will eagerly participate in exploring the many paths it may open. 84.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

42. “Means must therefore be found to pay for future peace-keeping operations — means which allocate the burden fairly. In cases where this cannot be done by assessment of every Member, we must find some' other means, including assessment of those willing to be assessed, non-obligatory apportionment, or voluntary contributions. 82. Less dramatic but equally important is machinery to promote peaceful change and to allow the satisfaction of just claims. Without a strong international institution able to help in doing this, nations, like individuals, are tempted to take matters into their own hands. We consequently believe it is time to breathe new life into Article 33 of the Charter, a provision of the Charter referred to specifically in the Security Council resolution [211 (1965)] adopted just the other day in the Kashmir, dispute.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

43. “We believe also that the military staff — now inadequate - supporting the Secretary-General needs to be strengthened. The added experience and burdens of Kashmir and Cyprus in particular have conclusively demonstrated that the military staff available to the Secretary-General at Headquarters is overburdened, and we must provide him with an enlarged staff whose size is commensurate with the tasks we entrust to him. 81. The peace-keeping capacity of the United Nations is too basic to its purposes and to its very existence to allow it to be frustrated by any one Member. For this reason, we continue to believe — and in this we are joined by the overwhelming majority of United Nations Members — that the General Assembly must retain its residual authority to initiate peace-keeping operations when the Security Council is unable to act.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

44. “A more rapid movement toward disarmament would unquestionably decrease anxiety throughout the world. But if we are to progress towards a just world community, we must also constantly improve our international machinery for curbing conflict and resolving disputes. 79. The experience in Cyprus, the continuing aggression in South-East Asia, the shock of violence erupting in Kashmir, all lead to an inescapable conclusion: there is an urgent need to strengthen the United Nations capacity to keep the peace. 80. We urge as one such step the continued development of a flexible United Nations call-up system along the lines proposed by the Secretary-General. We hope that Member States in all regions of the world will earmark and train units for such purposes.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

45. “The United States is ready to transfer 60,000 kilogrammes of weapons grade U-235 to non-weapon uses if the Soviet Union would be willing to transfer 40,000 kilogrammes. If the USSR accepts this proposal, each of us would destroy nuclear weapons of our own choice so as to make available for peaceful purposes such amount of fissionable material. 76. Moreover, the United States Government stands ready, if the Soviet Union will do likewise, to add to this transfer associated plutonium obtained from the destroyed weapons, in an agreed quantity or ratio, and to place the material thus transferred under the International Atomic Energy Agency or equivalent safeguards. 77. We make these proposals in the interest of rapid and equitable progress in reducing the nuclear threat and as a practical demonstration of our dedication to this end. 78.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

46. “First, we should take steps to halt the accumulation of strategic nuclear delivery vehicles. We should continue to explore a freeze on the number and characteristics of strategic nuclear offensive and defensive vehicles. If progress is made in this field, the United States would also be willing to explore the possibility of significant reductions in the number of these carriers of mass destruction. 74. Secondly, the United States proposes a verified halt in production of fissionable material for weapons use and the transfer of fissionable materials to peaceful purposes. In connexion with such a halt in fissionable material production', we now propose the demonstrated destruction by the United States and the Soviet Union of a substantial number of nuclear weapons from their respective stocks. 75.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

47. “We want to let each of them see this installation for himself, and we hope that this invitation will be accepted, 71. Let me say clearly that we do not want inspection for the sake of inspection or for any ulterior motive. Let me also say that we are not inflexible. We do insist on the minimum amount of inspection necessary in the present state of science to give confidence to all that a comprehensive test-ban treaty is actually being observed. But we will insist only on a number and type of inspection which are essential to the attainment of this objective. 72. While pressing ahead, then, on non-proliferation as our very first priority, we must also take steps to reduce the dangers stemming from the high level of nuclear capabilities. There is no reason to wait. We are prepared to take practical steps here and now. 73.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

48. “Scientists cannot distinguish between all quakes and underground nuclear tests. But the science of detection is not static and our vigorous research programme indicates the possibility of a substantial improvement in seismic detection capabilities. Furthermore, the United States is now also establishing in the State of Montana a large-aperture seismic array which we hope will hasten major advances in the science of detection. 69. We stand ready to make the results of our experimental study available to scientists everywhere and to assist in the construction of similar facilities in other countries. 70. The United States will shortly issue invitations to a large number of Members of the United Nations to send qualified observers to visit our Montana detection site on 12 and 13 October 1965.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

49. “Nuclear proliferation can be stopped, but we must act now. Agreement on this issue clearly is of overriding importance to world peace and security. 67. We recognize, moreover, that as more and more nations face frankly up to this issue, they must make momentous decisions about their own security. And we understand their concern. As President Johnson has indicated, we believe assurances of support against threats of nuclear blackmail should be available to nations which have forsworn a nuclear capability of their own. Action by the General Assembly may be a useful part of such assurances. The United States is prepared to work towards this end: action by this Assembly. Also of great aid in deterring the continuous proliferation of nuclear weapons will be agreement on a comprehensive test-ban treaty. 68.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)

50. “Most of all, we should concentrate on immediate practical steps to reverse the arms spiral. 66. The first priority — and I repeat, the first priority — in this effort must be given to halting the spread of nuclear weapons. If we do not face this problem squarely, now, the opportunity may disappear forever. That is why the United States has submitted to the Eighteen-Nation Committee on Disarmament the full draft of a treaty binding its signers from taking any action to increase the number of States and other organizations having the power to unleash nuclear weapons. My Government has fully committed itself to that underlying policy and urges that this draft become an actual treaty as soon as possible. We hope that other nuclear Powers will accept the same commitment as an international agreement.”

    1965-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 20 (1965)