YouSaid · the spoken record

Shah

lines on the record
64
first
1995-04-11
most recent
1997-05-21
sittings or episodes
8
sources
un-security-council

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. “Without the presence of the Secretary-General's representative as Co-Chairman, along with the presidency, the existing balance between political responsibility and operational control, which is so necessary to make such consultations effective, will be missing. We do not believe that granting this task to a subsidiary body of the Council or keeping the Secretary-General' s representative on the sidelines will enhance the effectiveness of such consultations. Notwithstanding our satisfaction over the present modality of consultations, we believe that certain improvements and streamlining will greatly enhance the effectiveness of the Council's decision-making capacity. In our View, consultations should be held on a regular basis and not necessarily just before the mandate is about to expire or needs extension.”

    1995-12-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3611 (1995) · source

  2. “This process has now been in operation long enough for us to review its effectiveness and to consider improvements. As one of the principal troop-contributing countries of the United Nations since its birth, our views would, I trust, be taken into account in a spirit of cooperation and constructive contribution. With regard to the modalities of the system of consultations with troop contributors, my delegation has found the existing mechanism, involving meetings with troop contributors being co-chaired by the President of the Security Council and the representative of the Secretary- General, quite satisfactory. The Security Council and the Secretary-General are two important agents responsible for the implementation of the Council's decisions.”

    1995-12-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3611 (1995) · source

  3. “I begin, Mr. President, by congratulating you on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for the month of December 1995. Your acknowledged diplomatic skills and experience will be a great asset to the Council's work under your presidency. The Council is considering today an issue that has assumed particular importance following the increased involvement of the United Nations in recent years in peace- keeping operations all over the world. The growing complexity of the operations authorized by the Council requires effective consultations between the Council and troop-contributing countries if the Council's mandates are to be successfully implemented. The system of consultations, set in motion following the Council's statement of 4 November 1994, were the first concrete manifestation of this requirement.”

    1995-12-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3611 (1995) · source

  4. “India will continue to pursue, both in the United Nations and outside, its unrelenting efforts to work towards non-proliferation and the elimination of nuclear weapons, even if yet another discriminatory and non-universal resolution emerges from the Security Council at the end of this debate.”

    1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source

  5. “Half measures, such as the draft resolution presented by the permanent five, which attempt to offer security assurances to a certain category of countries are no substitute for permanent security and, in fact, may give a wrong message. One would hope that by offering a draft resolution of this kind, the nuclear-weapon States are not telling the non-members of the NPT that they, the nuclear-weapon States, are free to use nuclear weapons against them, because this would have implications which are too frightening to contemplate. Let me reiterate that India is firmly committed to the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. India will not subscribe to the NPT so long as it is a discriminatory Treaty whose objective is not to prevent proliferation of nuclear weapons so much as to prevent proliferation of nuclear-weapon countries.”

    1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source

  6. “Despite General Assembly resolution 49/73, adopted overwhelmingly, the Conference on Disarmament's Ad Hoc Committee on Effective International Arrangements to Assure Non-Nuclear-Weapon States against the Use or Threat of Use of Nuclear Weapons has not been re- established during the current session of the Conference on Disarmament. While that must clearly be our priority, it is unfortunate that we are today discussing a draft resolution, to be passed by the Council, which is discriminatory, is riddled with ifs and buts and falls short of the requirement for a binding international legal commitment. It bears repetition to say that the only security against the threat or use of nuclear weapons is a binding international legal convention on the elimination of nuclear weapons.”

    1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source

  7. “Unless the international community acts, and acts quickly, to commit itself to the elimination of nuclear weapons, 25 years hence there will be more nuclear weapons, in more countries, than there are today, despite the extended NPT. What we should be debating today is not an interim measure to preserve the balance of terror as a sop to the security concerns of a category of non-nuclear-weapon countries, but a universal treaty commitment for time-bound destruction and elimination of nuclear weapons; that is, if the nuclear- weapon Powers are serious about indefinite security for all.”

    1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source

  8. “At the forty-ninth session of the General Assembly, the international community decided to seek an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on whether the threat or use of nuclear weapons is permissible under international law in any circumstances. This was an initiative taken primarily by the non-aligned countries, which do not possess nuclear weapons. India supports this initiative, and maintains that use of nuclear weapons would cause such indiscriminate suffering and destruction that it is contrary to the rules of international law and the Charter of the United Nations. It is said that those who ignore the lessons of history are condemned to re-live them. Twenty-five years after the NPT came into force, there are today many more nuclear weapons placed in more countries than in 1970.”

    1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source

  9. “10) I recall these categorical views of the important nuclear-weapon States so that this body can dispassionately judge the utility of the kind of security assurances that have now been offered. Twenty-seven years later, I must reiterate that what my distinguished predecessor stated then is equally true today. In my delegation's view, it is the clear responsibility of the nuclear-weapon States that are also permanent members of the Council to go to the assistance of any State that is threatened with or is the victim of nuclear attack, and not merely those that might be signatories to the NPT.”

    1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source

  10. “Ambassador Berard of France stated, in this room: "My Government reiterates that the real problem is that of the elimination of atomic weapons; the nations of the world will not receive the guarantees of security to which they are entitled until the nuclear powers agree to embark upon the road towards nuclear disarmament and until they reach that goal." (S/PVJ430, para. 51) Ambassador Kuznetsov of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics stated: "The fact is, the nuclear weapons will still not disappear with the conclusion of the Treaty on Non- Proliferation; the possibility of an outbreak of nuclear war in the world will remain even against non-nuclear-weapon States." (ibid., para.”

    1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source

  11. “108) He further clarified that, while the permanent members of the Security Council have a special obligation and responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, they are: " precluded from adopting a discriminatory approach in situations involving the security of States, including that arising from the threat or the use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon States." (ibid.) In the debate 27 years ago, many countries supported the logic of this approach.”

    1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source

  12. “At the l433rd meeting of the Security Council, India's permanent representative had said, "I should like to emphasize that any security assurances that might be offered by nuclear-weapon States could not and should not be regarded as a quid pro quo for the signature of a non-proliferation treaty." (S/PV.J433, para. 107) He added, "The basis for any action by the Security Council for the maintenance of international peace and security is the Charter of the United Nations. Any linking of security assurances to the signature of a non-proliferation treaty would be contrary to its provisions, because the Charter does not discriminate between those who might adhere to a particular treaty and those who might not do so." (ibid., para.”

    1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source

  13. “Today's debate takes us back to June 1968, when the Security Council adopted resolution 255. The nuclear- weapon Powers were then canvassing for signatures to the proposed Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Today, in a repeat of history, they are canvassing for votes for indefinite extension of the NPT. It is particularly disheartening that in this post-cold-war age, which provides the ideal opportunity for achieving complete and genuine nuclear disarmament, all that the most powerful countries in the world can think of are half measures aimed at preserving the balance of terror on the one hand and power by nuclear weaponry on the other. May I recall that, when resolution 255 was passed by the Security Council in 1968, India was a member and abstained in the voting on the resolution.”

    1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source

  14. “Mr. President, I should like to begin by congratulating you on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for the month of April. Your acknowledged diplomatic skills and experience are particularly reassuring as we consider today a matter of fundamental importance to all nation-States. While maintenance of peace and security is the primary responsibility of the Security Council in the United Nations, preservation of national security is the primary responsibility of all governments of States Members of the United Nations. For those of us who are committed to the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, a debate on the question of security assurances against nuclear weapon attack is a welcome development, even though my delegation is sceptical about the motivation which has prompted this debate today.”

    1995-04-11 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3514 (1995) · source