Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

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.