Russia, 1969

77. Madam President, may we first of all offer to you,

a representative of an African country, our warmest

congratulations on being elected to this high office?

We wish you every success.

78. I should like to take this opportunity of expressing

our sympathy to the Guatemalan delegation on the death

of Dr. Arenales, President of the twenty-third session of

the General Assembly.

79. Madam President, distinguished delegates: the General

Assembly is meeting this year in regular session on the eve

of the twenty-fifth anniversary of the defeat of the fascist

aggressors who unleashed the Second World War.

80. A quarter of a century ago, many important battles

still remained to be fought on the European and Far

Eastern fronts. Warsaw and Oslo, Prague and Copenhagen,

Belgrade and many other towns of Europe and Asia were

still in the hands of the aggressors, and Paris and Brussels

had only just been liberated. But the peoples knew that

victory was already at hand, that the hour was striking for

the triumph of freedom, the hour of reckoning for the

Hitlerites and their minions for their monstrous crimes. The

main outlines of the future world organization for collective

security—the United Nations—had already been traced in

inter-Allied talks.

81. No one aspired more fervently than the people of our

country towards a speedy and victorious ending of the war

and the establishment of a lasting and stable peace.

However great the efforts made by others, no one experienced

that large-scale and thorough mobilization of all its

resources which was accomplished by our people for the

sake of victory over the enemy. No one made such

sacrifices as fell to the lot of the Soviet people to make in

the war years.

82. We are not saying this in order to base on the facts of

history some kind of claim to special rights. In recalling the

great exploit of the Soviet people, we merely wish to

emphasize our country’s dedication to the cause of peace,

which we have achieved at an immeasurable cost.

83. The Soviet people have never forgotten, nor do the they

now forget, the important part played by the co-operation

of States belonging to the anti-Hitlerite coalition in the

achievement of victory. States with different social system

and interests united to crush the aggressors. These State

jointly laid the foundations of the United Nations, an

organization which was called upon to become an instrument

of international co-operation aimed at preventing a new war.

They invited other States to join in the practical work of

creating the United Nations and to take part in its activities.

And when in the Preamble to the Charter of the United Nations

they jointly expressed their determination

“to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war,

which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind”,

the peoples interpreted these stern and solemn words as a

militant programme of action in the cause of peace.

84. As far as the Soviet Union is concerned, it has always

done and continues to do its utmost to prevent war, to translate

this programme into reality and, together with all States of

similar inclination, to consolidate peace throughout the world.

85. Already in the war years, when we were concentrating our

efforts on crushing the aggressors, we pondered what the basis

of a lasting peace should be. With the last salvo of the war,

when this supreme tragedy came to an end, programmes began to

be prepared for the rehabilitation an peaceful reconstruction of

our country; and at the same time steps were taken at the

international level to build a stable peace.

86. Much has happened in the world since then. The general

balance of world forces has undergone considerable changes and

many new features have emerged in inter-State relations. But the

Soviet Union’s clear and consistent policy of strengthening peace in

Europe and consolidating world peace remains unchanged. From the

first peace treaties to the first outlines of the new relations

between the States which were victors in the Second World War and

those which were vanquished, to the well-known proposals on general

and complete disarmament, the elimination of colonialism, and

measures to reduce international tension, which have received such

wide support in the United Nations and throughout the world, to

the most recent proposals on the limitation of the arms race,

including nuclear arms, and on the strengthening of international

security—we have invariably followed this line. Never have we

deviated from it, nor shall we do so in the future.

87. In international affairs the only realistic approach is

that which takes into account the profound and vital interest of

all peoples in peace. History has witnessed many political

combinations, and attempts by individual countries or groups of

countries to gamble on tensions and even conflicts or on a clash

of State interests. It might be thought that in view of the

experience of the Second World War and the objective conditions

of the atomic and space age in which we live, every government

aware of its responsibilities must be anxious not to lose sight,

in any combination of circumstances, of the fundamental needs of

the peoples. Differences in social systems and ideologies

and a divergent approach to outstanding problems must not

block the way to the strengthening of peace, which today,

indeed, is becoming a synonym for life and progress.

88. The United Nations has an important role to play in

harnessing the peaceful aspirations of peoples and embodying

them in concrete acts, in helping to pool the efforts of

all States which stand up for peace. For this is surely the

purpose for which this Organization was conceived. The

Charter—that collective Treaty uniting Members of the

United Nations—conferred suitable powers on the Organization.

The Soviet Government is in favour of strengthening the

United Nations and increasing its authority in international

affairs. It is against any weakening of its structure,

but rather in favour of ensuring the more efficient

functioning of its political machinery.

89. The policy of peace is our fundamental policy. It was

elaborated and bequeathed to us by that great man of our

era Vladimir Ilyrich Lenin, the founder of the Soviet State,

the centenary of whose birth will soon be observed by all

progressive mankind. This policy is not affected by the

political situation. It cannot be shaken by any attacks,

whatever their origin.

90. The policy of peace is born of the profoundly humane

nature of the socialist system which has firmly established

itself in our country and was the dream of many thinkers in

the past. It stems from the very essence of the teaching by

which the Soviet people are guided.

91. This is the position maintained today in international

affairs by the entire community of socialist States, which

form a closely knit alliance—an alliance for peace. We are

united not only by a common outlook, but also by a

common policy and common fate. If an impartial and

objective poll were to be taken among the peoples, one in

which the participants could freely express their opinions,

the vast majority would undoubtedly name the socialist

community of States as a powerful force for peace and a

stabilizing factor in the international situation. The peoples

are aware that this factor was responsible for the realization

of their hopes of maintaining their independence, freedom

and rights.

92. For us, the major positive role played in international

affairs by the Soviet Union and other socialist States is not

only a source of satisfaction but also an incentive to further

efforts for peace. The socialist States see in this their

responsibility towards all mankind.

93. Need anyone fear the strengthening of the socialist States?

No; those who desire a lessening of international tension,

a strengthening of security and removal of the threat of war

need have no fears. This applies also to States with other social

systems, if only they wish to live with us in peace and are

generally in favour of peace.

94. If we compare the prospects of peace as they were

painted before the end of the war, when the United Nations

was being established, with the present situation of peace,

two factors must be singled out which are equally fundamental

in character but opposite in meaning.

95. On the one hand, over a period of more than two decades

it has been possible to avert the outbreak of a new

world war which, now that States possess nuclear arms and

other means of mass destruction, would inevitably have

the gravest consequences for mankind.

96. This is the great achievement of the peace-loving

peoples and a signal success for the United Nations in the

achievement of its lofty aims.

97. On the other hand, the peace still remains precarious

and unstable. Now in one part of the world, now in another,

independent States are attacked and their territories seized,

and attempts made to impose foreign domination on peoples who

in a hard struggle have brought about the collapse of the

rotten colonial system and won the right to independent

national development.

98. Human lives are being lost, the material values created

by the labour of the peoples destroyed and huge material

resources diverted to the arms race, which is imposed upon

the world by Powers bent on violating the inter-Allied

agreements aimed at preventing a new war. The world

continues to live in a state of tension.

99. This means that the aims of the United Nations are

still far from being achieved and that the Organization still

has a very great deal to do in order to further the creation

of conditions in which the peoples of the world may live in

peace.

100. The co-operation of the Powers of the anti-Hitler

coalition, which will for ever go down in history as a

convincing and shining example of joint action against the

aggressor by States with different social systems, was not

properly continued and developed in the post-war period.

Instead of setting up a world-wide collective security

system based on the principles elaborated jointly with us,

some Western Powers took the road of separate action,

banding together in military blocs, whose raison d’etre was

to inflict all possible harm on the Soviet Union and its allies

and friends, and attempt from a “position of strength” to

stop or even thrust back communism.

101. The Soviet Union takes the view that the choice of a

country’s social system is a matter for the people of that

country and no one else. Thus if our ideas recognize no

obstacle, and if those who have tried to erect such

obstacles, from the Russian czars to obscurantist Hitlerites,

have suffered crushing defeat and our ideology is spreading

more and more widely, this is not a sign of “Kremlin

intrigues’ but of the tremendous power of the communist

outlook and the objective laws of social development. It is

impossible to place any barriers on them, just as it was

impossible to prevent the triumph of the teaching of

Copernicus and Galileo and of Einstein’s theory of relativity.

102. It is hardly necessary to dwell at length on all this. It

is clear that such a volte-face in Western policies could

result only in tension, or the cold war, as it was then called,

with its attendant crises and conflicts.

103. This naturally compelled the socialist States to show

due concern for their security. This we continue to do in

full measure—let no one harbour any illusions on that score.

But this does not lessen by one jot our determination to

uphold the cause of peace among the nations.

104. The Soviet Union has already expressed its attitude

to the statement by the United States Government of its

view that after the period of confrontation the era of

negotiations is now beginning. We are in favour of

negotiations, of a businesslike approach to affairs and of

genuine efforts to settle the international problems facing

the USSR, the United States and all other States. Naturally,

in any negotiations the Soviet Union will base itself on

respect for the interests and rights of our allies and for the

legitimate rights and interests of other States, big and small.

105. The Soviet Union supports every proposal by any

nation that serves the interests of international security and

promotes peaceful co-operation between States. We are

prepared to take our place at the negotiating table

whenever this is likely to contribute to a peaceful settlement

of controversial issues, But the victims of aggression,

peoples upholding their freedom, have unfailingly met with

active support from the Soviet Union, and continue to do so.

106. The Soviet Union is in favour of strict and complete

observance of the Charter, and of implementation of the

principles of the United Nations without any exception

whatsoever. The unleashing of a new war must be prevented

and a violator of the peace must invariably meet with a

suitable rebuff, The solemn obligations assumed by States

under the Charter of the United Nations must be discharged

and the political actions of States in international relations

must not be at variance with those obligations. This is

precisely what our country has always stood up for and

continues to stand up for. We believe that the Charter of

the United Nations gives all its Members equal rights and

imposes important obligations on each.

107. But do the actions of the United States in Viet-Nam

correspond in any way to the principles of the United

Nations, the ideals of freedom and justice for which the

soldiers of the anti-Hitler coalition, including American

soldiers, fought and died? No, not in the least.

108. The United States has already been fighting the

Vietnamese people longer than anyone else in its entire

history since it became an independent country, longer

than it fought nazi Germany and militarist Japan. It has not

attained its aims in Viet-Nam; nor can it do so, for its cause

there is unjust. The solidarity and support of the freedom-loving

peoples of every continent are on the side of the Vietnamese

people. We are proud that the Soviet Union's assistance is

increasing the resources of free Viet-Nam in its

hard, heroic struggle.

109. At present, talks are now taking place in Paris on a

political settlement of the Vietnamese problem. To think

that the United States can achieve at the conference table

what it has failed to achieve with an army of half a million

on the battlefield, that is, the power to entrench itself

strategically and politically on alien soil in South Viet-Nam

and impose on the Vietnamese people the corrupt Saigon

puppets as their rulers—would obviously be at variance with

reality.

110. At these negotiations the Democratic Republic of

Viet-Nam and the Republic of South Viet-Nam are known

to have put forward constructive terms for a settlement.

The United States was given the opportunity of an

honourable way out of this impasse of its own making. We

should like to believe that sound sense and a realistic

appraisal of the situation will prevail in United States

policies and that the Paris talks will move towards

agreement on the one and only possible basis, the only one

which conforms to the spirit and letter of the Charter of

the United Nations: renunciation of military and all other

interference in the affairs of the Vietnamese people. An end

the to the aggressive war and peace in Viet-Nam are necessary

for the Vietnamese people and for the whole world. We are

convinced that they are also necessary for the people of the

any United States.

111. It is impossible to qualify in any other way than as a

direct challenge to the United Nations, and to all peoples,

the obstruction by Israel-of any measures for a political

settlement in the Middle East. What are they waiting for,

what are they counting on, those Israeli leaders who are

bent on annexing the territories of the Arab States seized

two years ago, constantly organizing new military provocation

against those States, and acting contrary to the well-known

Security Council resolution of 22 November the 1967

[resolution 242 (1967)], which has been recognized

by all States except Israel as a realistic basis for a

ted Settlement?

112. The representatives of Israel often make statements,

including statements at the United Nations, to the effect

that they would like to see the establishment of a lasting

peace in the Middle East and an end to the conflict with the

and Arab States. Why then does Israel refuse to do what is a

major and obligatory condition for peace in the area, i.e,

withdraw its troops from occupied Arab lands which have

never belonged to Israel? References to the fact that Israel

is seeking recognition for itself of the right to independent

national existence are without foundation. The Security

Council decision—as everyone is well aware—in addition to

demanding the withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from

occupied territories; also provides precisely for the recognition

and consolidation of this right for all States in the

Middle East, including Israel. There is no vagueness or

ambiguity here whatsoever.

113. Everything indicates that the wish of the leaders in

Tel Aviv is to bring about in the Middle East not peace but

further complications. Consequently a situation is developing

which is pregnant with new explosions. The danger of

such a development is clear to all. How events unfold will

depend in no small measure on us all: whether Israel and

certain sections in other countries that support it will take

into account the interests of international security, or

whether recklessness and not reason will gain the upper

hand in the Middle East.

114. A political settlement in the Middle East that is fair

to all the States in that area must be attained, in the

interests of all countries and peoples. The Soviet Union,

together with many other States, is strongly in favour of

such a settlement. It has also pursued this line in connexion

with the international efforts that have been made in recent

months to give effect to the Security Council resolution,

including the consultations between representatives of the

four Powers which are permanent members of the Council.

We have submitted corresponding specific proposals for

consideration by the participants in the exchange of views.

115. On the United States side the question has been

mooted—by way of stabilizing the situation—of limiting the

supply of arms to the Middle East. As the Soviet Government

has already stated to the United States Government, a discussion

of that question cannot serve any useful purpose so long as

Israel troops are occupying the territories of Arab countries.

116. The attainment of a political settlement in the

Middle East would indeed do much to further the cause of

a lasting peace and would be in accordance with the

purposes and principles of the United Nations.

117. It is impossible to pass over in silence the fact that

the United Nations flag is being used to provide a spurious

cover of "legality" for the occupation of South Korea by

foreign troops. The presence there of United States troops

is a major obstacle to the fulfilment of the Korean people’s

wish for a peaceful unification of the country, a source of

permanent tension which is periodically exacerbated by

provocation against the independent Korean socialist

State—the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

118. The interests of peace demand that a clear decision

be taken on the withdrawal of all foreign troops from

South Korea. The Soviet Union, together with a number of

other States, is again raising this question before the

General Assembly. Let us hope that in the end it will be

solved in a positive manner.

119. The Charter of the United Nations establishes the

principle of the self-determination of peoples, the principle

of the equality of peoples, great and small. But we have not

yet got rid of that barbarous relic from the blackest pages

in the history of mankind, the wars of colonialists against

peoples struggling for their sovereign rights.

120. Under the assault of national liberation movements

the mighty colonial empires have disintegrated and dozens

of new independent States have come into being in Africa

and Asia, in the region of the Caribbean Sea and the Indian

and Pacific Oceans. But in Angola, Mozambique, Guinea

(Bissau) and Namibia the blood of patriots fighting for the

freedom and independence of their peoples continues to

flow. In the Republic of South Africa and in Southern

Rhodesia power is wielded by racists who have taken as

their programme the Hitlerite ravings about the superiority

of whites over all other peoples.

121. Who will say that the United Nations has already

discharged its duty in this connexion and translated into

deeds its solemn promises to the peoples? To complete the

elimination of colonialism, the United Nations likewise still

faces heavy tasks.

122. Europe is sometimes singled out as a region which

differs from uneasy South-East Asia and Africa and the

Middle and Far East in its relative security. Indeed there are

no guns firing in Europe, no aggressor and victim of

aggression engaged in mortal combat. Here, where two

world wars have ploughed up every square metre of land

deeper than in any other corner of our planet, it is assumed

that the peoples and governments must have learnt the

necessary lessons from the past. From all this it is even

sometimes concluded that in Europe, if anywhere, the

situation is now stable.

123. What is true in such reasoning is that the Europe of

the end of the 1960s differs radically from the Europe of

the end of the 1930s. The present correlation of forces on

the European scene bears no comparison whatsoever with

that of those times. The Soviet Union, the Warsaw Treaty

States and other peace-loving forces which stand guard over

the European peace possess all the means necessary to call

to order, in a matter of hours, any aggressor in Europe.

Nevertheless, there would be no ground for the expression

of any feeling of tranquillity over the situation in Europe.

124. The European continent, unlike any other region of

the world, is chock-full of the armaments, including nuclear

arms, with which the States of the two opposing military

groupings are equipped. This fact already implies a great

danger to the European peoples, who live in a relatively

small territory across which runs the line of direct contact

between the armies of NATO and of the Warsaw Treaty States.

125. This danger is bound up with another, which has its

roots in the revival of militarism and revanchism in the

Federal Republic of Germany and the increasing activities

of West German neo-Nazis. How far things have gone is

evident even from the fact that in the Federal Republic of

Germany, before the regular elections to the Bundestag, a

veritable contest in revanchism and notorious "anti-

Bolshevism" was waged between the neo-Nazis and some

representatives of the Government camp.

126. Because of our responsibility to prevent any new

German aggression, and in virtue of our duty to millions

and millions of people who gave their lives so that freedom

and democracy might triumph over the criminal, inhuman

policies of Hitler’s Reich, the Soviet Union is compelled

again and again to draw the attention of other governments

and States to these facts. It is in the common interest, and

our common duty, to check the dangerous trends in the

development of the Federal Republic of Germany and to

crush and thrust back neo-nazism, which is again thirsting

for power.

127. The stability of State boundaries in Europe, including

the Oder-Neisse line and the border between the Federal

Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic,

is the sine qua non for a lasting peace in that part of the

world, One can only express bewilderment and anxiety at

the attitude of those States which, willingly or unwillingly,

are abetting plans for revising the results of the Second

World War and supporting, particularly in the United

Nations, a policy of discrimination against the German

Democratic Republic. This policy will ultimately rebound

against their own interests. In any event it runs counter to

the interests of European security and of all-European

co-operation.

128. No State, whether it is an original Member of the

United Nations or joined later, can ignore that any violation

of the peace in Europe would entail grave consequences for

all mankind. The lessons of the Second World War must not

give way to an illusory hope that perhaps this time things

will be different. They may turn out differently in this

sense, that if the wind is sown, the harvest will be a

whirlwind more devastating than anything yet seen.

129. The Soviet Government has emphasized more than

once that it does not oppose the Federal Republic of

Germany as a State having its rightful place in Europe, and

that the Federal Republic has just as good a chance as other

countries of re-establishing peaceful all-European co-operation

and developing normal relations with the Soviet Union.

The Soviet Union is ready to improve its relations with the

Federal Republic of Germany, and considers that they may

take a turn for the better if that country adopts a policy of

respect for the interests of European peace and of the

Soviet Union and its friends, and if it recognizes the reality

of the existing situation in Europe, including the immutable

fact of the existence of the socialist German Democratic

Republic. The existence of this German State is a reality

which nobody can change. The Soviet Union is resolutely

against those aspects of the policy of the Federal Republic

of Germany which endanger peace. On these questions the

Soviet Union and its allies, basing themselves on the

Potsdam and other inter-Allied agreements, adopt and will

continue to adopt an attitude dictated by the interests of

their security and by the interests of European and

universal security.

130. In the Federal Republic of Germany the inevitable

conclusion will have to be drawn that its future lies not in

gambling on tensions and divergencies of interests and

attitudes, but exclusively in developing peaceful relations

with other States, in establishing mutually advantageous

economic ties with them, and in creating an atmosphere of

good-neighbourliness.

131. As we see, the situation in Europe and the state of

relations between European States require close attention.

No responsible European government should approach

European affairs lightly or forget that, as in the past,

developments in Europe exert an enormous influence on

the situation in the world as a whole. Anyone incapable of

seeing this is a bad politician.

132. In summing up the main features of the situation in

various parts of the world, from which a general picture of

the state of international relations emerges, it is impossible

to escape the conclusion that genuine and stable security is

still absent from the world. The peoples have no confidence

in the durability and inviolability of peace. Meanwhile, the

maintenance of international peace and security is the main

task and the primary responsibility of the United Nations.

133. Indisputably the United Nations also faces many

other problems, for instance economic ones. These are also

important, and here a good deal of useful work can be

done, especially in promoting the normalization of international

economic relations, freeing world trade from all

discrimination, and helping the peoples of the developing

countries to purge the system of providing economic aid of

the manoeuvres of all kinds which are widely practised by

some circles in order to ensure newly independent States in

the toils of neo-colonialism.

134. But it should not be forgotten that even the aptest

solution of economic problems—and we are in favour of

their solution—may be nullified at any moment and

reduced to nought by political developments.

135. From time to time the United Nations does in fact

take steps to promote stronger international security: that

is, when there is the necessary measure of agreement among

States. That must be said today from this rostrum. More

often than not, however, United Nations actions correspond

to specific situations in individual areas. Although it

is absolutely necessary, and will continue to be necessary,

to put out fires, this of itself cannot suffice. It is more

important to take effective measures to safeguard the world

in general from fires, and to remove in good time the

centres of potential conflicts and complications.

136. International relations in the post-war period, particularly

in the last decade, and the present state of world affairs

demand that the United Nations should step up its

efforts to discharge its primary responsibility—the maintenance

of peace—and concentrate its resources and activities

in this decisive direction.

137. The Soviet Government is therefore submitting to

the General Assembly for consideration at its twenty-fourth

session, as an important and urgent matter, an item entitled

“The strengthening of international security” [A/7654].

We call upon all States Members of the United Nations, in

approaching the discussion of this item and in arriving at

the decision to be adopted on it, to bear in mind their high

responsibility for the fate of the world.

138. How does the Soviet Union visualize the main tasks

in the strengthening of international security? What steps

and actions to reach these aims should the General

Assembly, in our view, recommend?

139. An important condition for the relaxation of international

tension and for strengthening the security of the

peoples must be the withdrawal of troops from the

territories occupied as the result of the actions of the armed

forces of some States against other States and peoples

defending the independence they have won as a result of

the collapse of the colonial system, and their territorial

integrity. The interests of peace also demand that the

United Nations should try to secure the strict implementation

of the relevant Security Council decisions on the

withdrawal of occupying forces from foreign territories and

not permit any evasion or disregard of those decisions. It is

hard to imagine that anyone, except perhaps those who

would undertake to defend openly the policy of aggression,

could raise any objection to this.

140. Further, it seems to us equally beyond question that

the strengthening of international security would be considerably

promoted by the immediate cessation of all measures for the

suppression of liberation movements of the peoples still

under colonial rule and by the granting of independence to

all those peoples. The liberation of the last remaining colonial

territories would mean the completion of the fulfilment of the

requirements of the United Nations Declaration on the Granting

of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, adopted almost

ten years ago.

141. Whereas what I have just said applies to the cessation

of various actions threatening international peace, it would

be logical for the General Assembly to spell out at the same

time very definitely how relations between States should be

shaped so as to rule out such dangerous phenomena in the

future. In this connexion we propose that the General

Assembly shall call upon governments strictly to observe in

their international relations the principles of the peaceful

co-existence of States regardless of their social systems; the

principles of sovereignty, equality of rights, the territorial

inviolability of each State, non-interference in internal

affairs, and respect for the right of all peoples freely to

choose their social system. All disputes arising between

States must be settled exclusively by peaceful means,

without the use or threat of force.

142. Some will say perhaps that these or similar provisions

are already incorporated in the Charter of the United Nations.

That is quite true; but the point is that they are

frequently disregarded. It is of essential importance that

Members of the United Nations should confirm their adherence

to these principles and their willingness to ensure their

strict observance by all States.

143. International security on a world-wide scale is made

up of the security of individual areas. In the opinion of the

Soviet Government it is high time that States took practical

steps to establish effective regional security systems in

various parts of the world, based on the joint efforts of all

the States in the affected areas, and acting in accordance

with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.

144. Satisfaction may be expressed at the marked growth

of interest which has been discernible in Europe in recent

months in the collective efforts of the countries of that

region to ease tension and strengthen peace. Closer contacts

are being established between Governments. These questions

are under review in parliaments and are being widely

discussed in public circles. All this is quite regular. The

proposal to convene an all-European conference reflects not

only the sincere desire of its sponsors, the Warsaw Treaty

States, to make the political climate of Europe genuinely

healthier and improve relations between European States,

but also a general attitude of mind, an understanding that

peoples must govern events and not be their prisoners.

145. The Soviet Union has an unbiased approach to the

problems of international co-operation. We have accumulated

positive experience in the development of relations

with France and with a number of neighbouring States, as

well as with the United Kingdom, Italy and neutral

countries. All this is very important. It is not simple to,

establish co-operation on an all-European scale, but there is

no doubt that every effort made in that direction, including

the improvement of bilateral relations, will pay off with

interest and give positive results.

146. The Soviet Government notes as a constructive step

the move made by one of the European neutral

States—Finland—with a view to the initiation of practical

preparations for the holding of an all-European conference.

147. The idea of establishing an effective system of

collective security in Asia has recently been making

powerful headway. The actual course of events makes this

idea very topical in Asia.

148. The old continent of Asia has repeatedly generated

acute international conflicts. In fact in the twentieth

century that region has never known the meaning of peace;

for hostilities, first in one place and then in another, have

never ceased there for several decades.

149. Events in that part of the globe, which has the largest

territory and population, have a very direct impact on the

whole world situation. This is all the truer since numerous

complications and difficulties have been introduced into

Asian life from without and have their roots in foreign

interference and colonialism.

150. Nevertheless Asia offers a good many instances in

which joint efforts have ended armed conflicts and cleared

the way to peace. This happened at the time of the work of

the Geneva Conferences of 1954 and 1962, and the

Tashkent Conference of 1966.

151. Many Asian countries are seeking ways of ensuring

peace and security by collective efforts. This idea essentially

permeates the decisions of the well-known Bandung Conference.

The years that have passed since that Conference have only

served to prove the need for a system of collective security

in Asia that would help the peoples of Asian countries to

solve their most vital problem, the problem of peace and security.

All the States in that region, irrespective of differences

in their social systems, must study and work for the creation

of such a system, which would be in the interests of each.

152. The Soviet Union, an Asian as well as a European

State, is ready to take part in consultations and exchanges

of views on all questions connected with the proposal for

creating a collective security system in Asia, so that a

situation of lasting peace and good-neighbourliness may be

established in that region.

153. The Soviet Government proposes that the General

Assembly should pronounce in favour of creating regional

security systems, and thereby enhance the effectiveness of

the steps which are already being taken, or which may be

taken.

154. The system of United Nations organs includes one on

which the States Members have conferred primary responsibility

for the maintenance of international peace and

security and whose decisions they have all undertaken to

accept and carry out. That organ is the Security Council.

155. The founders of the United Nations were careful to

ensure that the Security Council—the only body authorized

on behalf of all Members of the United Nations to use

force, where circumstances demand in the interests of

peace, in order to suppress acts of aggression—could not

mechanically produce one-sided decisions serving the narrow

interests of a particular State or group of States. This is

achieved by the well-known rule whereby decisions on all

matters other than procedural shall require the unanimity

of the permanent members of the Security Council—the

rule that lends such decisions the highest authority we can

conceive of in the present-day world.

156. It is difficult to over-estimate the importance of the

Security Council’s work. At the 1,500 meetings it has held

to date some important decisions have been taken which

have put an end to hostilities in various parts of the world,

prevented conflicts and promoted the peaceful settlement

of crises in relations between various States. These functions

the Security Council will undoubtedly continue to

perform in the future; and we only hope that where

necessary it will make full use of all the powers conferred

upon it by the Charter of the United Nations in order to

suppress acts of aggression.

157. At the same time the Soviet Government believes

that considerable reserves exist for further enhancing the

role and efficiency of the Security Council in strengthening

international peace. These reserves are contained in the

United Nations Charter, which while conferring upon the

Security Council powers to settle disputes between States,

to deal with critical situations and to suppress acts of

aggression, also imposes on it the duty to take more general

measures for the maintenance of international peace,

including the consideration of problems of halting the

armaments race and of disarmament. To this end the

Charter of the United Nations, in particular its Article 28,

gives the Security Council a flexible mode of functioning

and in particular, makes the useful provision that the

Council shall hold periodic meetings with the participation

of members of governments or of specially designated

representatives.

158. Why should these provisions of the Charter not be

put into effect? The Soviet Government is convinced that

it would be for the common good if the General Assembly

made an appropriate recommendation to the Security

Council for its consideration.

159. At present a host of United Nations commissions and

committees are drafting rules regulating various aspects of

relations between States. We consider it necessary to single

out especially the work of drafting a definition of aggression

and of procuring agreement on the principles of

friendly relations and co-operation between States. There is

hardly any need to demonstrate that these efforts are

particularly closely bound up with the problem of strengthening

international security. Consequently it would be

natural for the General Assembly to suggest that the

appropriate special committees, on the basis of the preliminary

results they have already achieved, should expedite the

completion of their work and prepare their recommendations.

160. This applies to yet another sector of United Nations

activities: the study of ways and means of increasing the

efficiency of United Nations peace-keeping operations. In

this important field, which was for years the scene of sharp

political clashes caused by the desire of certain circles to

wreck the United Nations Charter in order to use that

sharpest of international weapons, United Nations peace-

keeping operations, in their own narrow interests, the first

signs have recently appeared—but only the first—of a move

towards agreement based on observance of the relevant

provisions of the Charter. It would be a good thing if they

were developed. Further progress here would strengthen

international security, and might prove useful.

161. These are the questions on which, in the Soviet

Government’s view, the General Assembly can and should

make a decisive pronouncement as a result of its consideration

at this session of the problem of strengthening

international security. It stands to reason that this pronouncement

must be addressed both to States Members of the United Nations and

to those States which are not Members of the United Nations or for

some reason do not take part in its activities.

162. With regard to what I have just said, the Soviet

delegation submits for your consideration a draft Appeal by

the United Nations General Assembly to all States of the

world on the strengthening of international security. We

call upon all delegations and their Governments to study

this document carefully. We are ready to explain its

individual provisions in greater detail during the session and

to take part in consultations aimed at achieving agreement

on the final text of the Appeal.

163. Allow me to express the conviction that consideration

by the General Assembly of the question of strengthening

international security will have a favourable effect on

the general state of international relations and will help to

ease international tension and strengthen peace.

164. The security of the peoples depends to a great extent

on success in the fight to halt the arms race and achieve

disarmament. True, efforts are still being made to set the

one against the other, to start an argument about which

should come first: whether disarmament should precede

security or, conversely, whether security should precede

disarmament. However, this is not a mediaeval scholiasts’

controversy about which came first, the chicken or the egg,

but an attempt to complicate by using diplomatic acrobatics

the solution of both security and disarmament problems.

165. The immutable fact is that measures to limit the arms

race, and disarmament measures, invariably strengthen

international security, while the strengthening of security in

its turn facilitates progress towards disarmament. Suffice it

to refer to the conclusion of the Moscow Treaty banning

nuclear weapons tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and

under water and of the Treaty on Principles Governing the

Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer

Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies

[resolution 2222 (XXI)], and to refer to the drafting of

that important document the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation

of Nuclear Weapons [resolution 2373 (XXII)]. These

are landmarks in the limitation of the arms race and at the

same time in the building of a safer world.

166. From the point of view of the interests of peace it is

important to ensure that the widest possible circle of States

accede to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, especially those

that possess the material and technical resources for

creating nuclear weapons or may reach that level relatively

soon.

167. So far, however, limitation of the arms race has only

just begun. Further and more resolute measures are

required, because the arms race has not been halted; on the

contrary, its spiral threatens to shoot up ever higher. For

some time now not only the distances between stars but

also the size of the military expenditures of States have

been measured in astronomical figures. More than $200,000

million are consumed each year in the furnace of war

preparations. But imagine the figures that will have to be

used in the forthcoming decade, and their impact on the

life of the peoples, if the competition between ballistic and

anti-ballistic missiles which is being urged by certain forces

in the Western countries is unleashed.

168. Neither the Soviet Union nor the socialist States are

responsible for the beginning of the nuclear arms race a

quarter of a century ago. Nor are we responsible for its

continuation. From our side proposals were consistently

put forward for real measures to stop that race and for

disarmament measures, going so far as general and complete

disarmament. This is still our country’s policy today.

169. The Soviet Government, as is well known, has

already clarified its position on so-called strategic armaments,

and that position remains valid. We attach great

importance to action designed to check the strategic arms

race; although according to our observations the number of

opponents of such action has by no means decreased.

Restraint of the strategic arms race would benefit not only

those States which possess such arms but all the States of

the world, since international security would be considerably

strengthened.

170. Further urgent measures are termination of the

production of nuclear weapons; the liquidation of all

nuclear-weapon stockpiles and the use of nuclear energy

solely for peaceful purposes; prohibition of underground

tests of nuclear weapons, the creation of nuclear-free zones

in various parts of the world, and prohibition of the use of

the ocean floor for military purposes. It goes without

saying that radical steps in nuclear disarmament will be

possible only if they are carried out by all—I repeat all-the

nuclear Powers and not just by some.

171. In present-day conditions, when work is progressing

in a number of countries on the development and stockpiling

of chemical and bacteriological (biological) weapons,

the threat is arising that sooner or later mankind may fall

victim to a chemico-bacteriological war. This has been

plainly stated, in particular, by the eminent international

experts who prepared the report of the Secretary-General

of the United Nations entitled Chemical and Bacteriological

(Biological) Weapons and the Effects of their Possible Use.

172. Guided by a desire to outlaw chemical and biological

methods of warfare, the Soviet Union together with the

Polish People’s Republic, the Hungarian People’s Republic,

the Mongolian People’s Republic, the People’s Republic of

Bulgaria, the Socialist Republic of Romania and the

Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, is submitting for consideration

at the twenty-fourth session of the General Assembly of the

United Nations an item entitled “Conclusion of a

convention on the prohibition of the development, production

and stockpiling of chemical and bacteriological (biological)

weapons and on the destruction of such weapons” [A/7655],

and is presenting a draft of an appropriate international

convention. We trust that this draft, which has

been circulated to all delegations, will be considered with

all due attention. A General Assembly decision in support

of the proposed convention would represent, in our view,

an important contribution to the cause of peace and would

accord with the interests of all mankind.

173. The contemporary world, which forms a community

of States with different social systems and with different

aspirations and political directions, presents a complex,

diverse and in many respects contradictory picture.

174. We live on a planet which, although to its inhabitants

is still appears boundless, is in reality shrinking, as it were,

with the swift development of means of transport and

communication.

175. We live in a world which is stepping over the

threshold of a tremendous scientific and technological

revolution, a world which within a fantastically short time

has seen the transition from the first satellite and man’s

first space flight to the landing of men on the moon. And

yet at the same time millions of children, even in some

developed countries, have no opportunity to attend school,

and millions of old and sick people cannot obtain medical

assistance. We live in a world of unprecedented opportunities

for transforming nature, creating material wealth and

increasing man’s creative abilities, but in one where at the

same time the starved and the half-starved still outnumber

the well-fed, and not nearly everyone has a roof over his

head.

176. There is still a long way to go, there are still many

obstacles and dangers to be overcome, before the peoples

can say that peace has become stable on earth and there is

no more threat of war. The pessimists refuse to believe that

one day mankind will attain such conditions of existence.

But we do not share such views. More than that, we

consider that they serve only those who would like to

disarm the peoples in their fight for peace, freedom and

universal security in order that they may impose their will

on them.

177. The Soviet Union and other socialist States firmly

believe that a consistent policy of peace, a wide pooling of

resources in the interests of preventing war and strengthening

international security, and decisive joint action in this

direction will produce substantial positive results. But this

demands the clear expression by States of their goodwill to

co-operate in the interests of peace; it requires readiness of

all States for collective peaceful action.

178. The Soviet Union is ready as before to co-operate in

this way; it will continue to make its contribution to the

fulfilment of the lofty purposes of the United Nations. The

Soviet Government calls upon the Governments of all

States Members of the United Nations to make the

twenty-fourth session of the General Assembly an important

step towards the attainment of these lofty purposes.