The work of this session of the United Nations General Assembly is starting in more auspicious conditions than that of many previous sessions. One might say that the eighteenth session of the Assembly is weighing anchor with a light but at any rate a favouring wind.
100. Two events in the interval between this session of the General Assembly and the last have generated this favouring wind: the weathering of the crisis in the Caribbean region, and the conclusion of the treaty banning nuclear weapon tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and under water. It is difficult to overestimate the influence of these events on the policies of States and the minds of men. The crisis in the Caribbean region showed all who face reality the dangers with which the present world situation is still fraught. That was a steep, a very steep pass in international affairs. However, by restraint and the correct choice of the paths leading to the desired goal —the prevention of war— it was negotiated successfully. The well-known obligations assumed by the Soviet Union and the United States of America were the basis for an understanding between the parties, and made it possible to eliminate this international crisis, the most dangerous since the end of the Second World War.
101. Another pass in international affairs, but this time one with a gentler slope, was the conclusion of the nuclear test-ban treaty.
102. As a result, one can today see more distinctly the new frontiers still to be reached in order to achieve a further relaxation of international tension and lessen the danger of an outbreak of hostilities.
103. If the work of this session of the Assembly is to fulfil the hopes of the nations, the correct lessons must be drawn from both these events. The chief lesson is that only a course aimed at the relaxation of international tension and the strengthening of peace is in the interests of the nations, if the word "peace" is not just a resounding phrase but means specific actions and agreements directed towards the improvement of relations between States.
104. The second and no less important conclusion is that, in order to prevent recurrence of a situation in which tension in any area of the world again reaches boiling point, threatening to end in a head-on collision of the great Powers, it is necessary to remove the causes of that tension and, above all, to forbid interference in the internal affairs of other States, as each Member of the United Nations is bound to do by the Charter.
105. Today people see still more clearly the dangers of the "cold war" policy, and are voting for a start —even a small one— towards the strengthening of peace, rather than marking time and apathetically watching the threat of war grow darker. But how can this threat be completely eliminated, and what are the avenues leading to the road in international relations along which we may progress with hastening steps towards a future without war? The Soviet Government gives a clear reply to this question: these avenues are marked by a signpost reading "To the peaceful coexistence of States with different social systems".
106. The need to affirm in international relations the principle of the peaceful coexistence of the two social systems —socialist and capitalist— has been consistently upheld by the Soviet Union since the time of the great founder of the Soviet State, V. I. Lenin. The importance of peaceful coexistence, particularly in an age of nuclear power and space exploration, has been demonstrated most fully and convincingly in the speeches of the head of the Soviet Government, N. S. Khrushchev, including the speech he delivered here at the United Nations, The importance of this policy, which is in the interest of each State individually and of mankind as a whole, is year by year becoming more obvious, with the unprecedented destructive capacity of modern means of warfare and the increasingly profound awareness of the fatal consequences which would befall nations if such a war were unleashed.
107. Two decades ago people thought, looking at the ruins of cities and the ashes of villages and mourning their dead relatives, that this was the limit of the calamity of war. Today everyone knows that there are weapons of which one single blast vastly exceeds the force of all the explosives used, not only during the Second World War, but throughout the history of mankind. We also know that the numbers of hydrogen and atomic bombs are no longer counted in single units and are steadily increasing. Everyone understands that now the alternative to peaceful coexistence is destructive war. This alone obliges all those who cherish the future of nations to uphold firmly the banner of the struggle for peace, determinedly rejecting attempts to attach to the concept of peaceful coexistence a meaning contrary to this great humanist idea.
108. For the socialist countries, because of the very nature of their social system, it is as unnatural to direct their energies to conquest, to the diffusion of their views by force and to war as it would be for a worker to desire the destruction of all that was created by his labour, or for the ploughman to want his crops to die.
109. We believe many Western statesmen understand that it is one thing to uphold their ideals of the organization of society by demonstrating their advantages and fighting for the hearts and minds of men, but quite another thing to conduct relations between States standing at opposite ideological poles by inculcating these ideals with arms.
110. Yes, we who represent the countries of socialism have waged and will continue to wage a relentless struggle for the triumph of the ideals of socialism and communism. We shall accept no ideological compromise, any more than we demand that our ideological opponents shall renounce their own ideologies under threat of force. We are appealing for something else: the weapons in the struggle between the two philosophies should be not divisions of soldiers but legions of books; not nuclear bombs but the ability to produce more benefits and distribute them more fairly among the people. In the age of thermo-nuclear weapons, progress and world war are, in the words of the great Russian poet A. S. Pushkin, just as incompatible as genius and villainy.
111. To the question of what views and what ideals will ultimately triumph in a particular country and how this will come about, we Communists give a direct answer: the people of each country —and they alone— must themselves determine their fate and decide which system they prefer. The Soviet people are imbued with the unshakable belief that the example given by the Soviet Union and other countries building socialism and communism is convincing and will increasingly convince nations that this is the system which offers man the best opportunities to develop his abilities and be completely free from any kind of exploitation and oppression, want, or fear for his future.
112. However, this does not mean the imposition of one's own systems on other States, but peaceful competition, competition by example and by force of conviction, competition which completely excludes the use of force to affirm one's own views. It is on this foundation, according to the profound conviction of the Soviet Government, that relations between States should be built.
113. For forty-six years now —from the first days of the birth of the Soviet State and even before, since the very inception of Marxism as an ideology— torrents of slander have continually been poured on the advocates of a transformation of society along socialist lines. There is nothing of which they are not accused from various rostra, high and low! And, although on each occasion events have merely revealed the spiritual poverty of those who sought to smear the ideals of socialism, the same thing is continuing decade after decade.
114. Even those initiatives in international affairs which are universally recognized to be useful, taken by the great Western Powers together with the Soviet Union, are not immune from such treatment. For example, we were probably not the only one to notice that discussion of the nuclear test-ban treaty was accompanied in some seemingly respectable institutions by a tattoo of belligerent statements and attacks on the Soviet Union and its foreign policy.
115. To those who continue to ascribe to us intentions which are alien to the policy of the socialist countries, we reply: no, it is the societies in which the slaveowner oppresses the slave, the landlord oppresses the serf, and the capitalist oppresses the worker that have created and handed down to each other as though by relay a baton of international relations whereby not conviction but force resolves ideological differences and dissenters are converted by fire and sword.
116. Do not try to hand us this baton! We have started off a new relay-race in which the runners —the socialist countries and the capitalist countries— can compete on the roads of history and yet maintain peaceful relations with each other.
117. In the West they often argue along lines something like this: of course, one must willy-nilly coexist with a State belonging to a different social system, if it is powerful and well-armed. Better coexist with it and save one's skin than bring matters to a military conflict, since in such a conflict there are no winners, only losers. However, as soon as the question arises of peaceful coexistence between a strong capitalist Power and a small country, particularly a neighbouring one, there is an immediate and marked decline in willingness to pursue a policy of peaceful coexistence, and the long-outmoded methods of dictatorship and blackmail are brought into play.
118. These methods are dangerous to the cause of peace, very dangerous. They have been dangerous wherever attempts have been made to use them. It is far from superfluous to emphasize this at this time. The Soviet Government is doing so in the hope that no one will attempt to change by force the order in another country, even a small one, and that all States will strictly observe the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries.
119. The Soviet people, who are engaged in the production of the most complicated machines and instruments, in the tilling of fields and gardens, in the contraction of power stations and dams, and in the laying of canals and oil pipelines, want to live in peace with all countries and peoples. The Seven-Year Plan for the development of the national economy, which our country is successfully implementing, and the long-range targets for the development of the economy of the Soviet Union in the next two decades, established in the programme of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, are a translation into the language of figures and production quotas of the policy and plans of peaceful construction. These are the plans of peace.
120. But let no one confuse the Soviet people's hatred for war with non-resistance to the scheming of the aggressors, or with sickly pacifism. The people of our country have more than once proved on the battlefield their steadfastness and their indomitable will to victory. Our people have the kind but robust and powerful arms of workers, which can force any aggressor to his knees should he dare to encroach upon the frontiers of our homeland. The Soviet people succeeded in upholding their honour and freedom when they had to fight in the years of civil war and of armed foreign intervention launched by fourteen States. They broke the backbone of Hitler's Germany and crushed its military machine. And if the names of those who started that machine are forever accursed, and perhaps remembered only when someone wants to compare the criminal plans for the preparation of a new war with the situation some twenty years ago, this too is primarily to the credit of the Soviet people, who bore the brunt of the struggle against the fascist aggressors. Their hands will not tremble should the need again arise to defend their socialist achievements and the freedom and independence of their friends and allies.
121. The Soviet Union is invariably on the side of those who defend themselves, arms in hand, against aggression perpetrated on them, and who react to the flouting of their rights and to colonial oppression by fighting for their liberation and national independence. Many peoples know from their own experience that in their hour of trial they can always rely on firm support from the Soviet Union.
122. We cannot but rejoice that the ranks of the followers of the policy of peaceful coexistence are swelling each year, and that this policy is bearing fruit. Its main result is obvious to all: people no longer hear the blast of rockets or the explosion of nuclear bombs, and their hopes for a future without war are gaining strength.
123. It is not by accident that the more perspicacious minds of the capitalist world, including statesmen, public figures, representatives of business circles, scientists and military men, are all speaking out more and more often in favour of a policy of peaceful coexistence between the two social systems: capitalism and socialism.
124. The Soviet Government addresses this appeal to all Governments: let us develop the relations between States so that international disputes shall be settled at the conference table and not on the field of battle, and no State shall be able to use force against another whose internal structure it does not like. Let us agree on closer co-operation, including an expansion of economic and trade relations, which constitute the firmest foundation for the development of political relations between States, and on widening cultural exchanges.
125. Today it is no longer possible to imagine international life without that clear and specific objective which was stated from this rostrum on 18 September 1959. On that day [the 799th meeting] the Head of the Soviet Government, N. S. Khrushchev, put forward a programme for general and complete disarmament under strict international control. If the Western States had supported that appeal by deeds, there might have been nothing left to do today except to take some final steps towards the final elimination from the world of the last vestiges of State military machines. If there has been no agreement on disarmament up to now, the fault does not lie with the Soviet Union.
126. Our side proposed a draft treaty which would have ensured that this problem should be solved in the interests of all States. In order to bring the positions closer, the Soviet Union took a number of important steps to meet the Western Powers: it agreed to the retention by the Soviet Union and the United States of a limited number of missiles until the end of the second stage; it accepted the United States proposal for a percentage cut in conventional armaments and armed forces; and it agreed to postpone the time limit for general and complete disarmament.
127. It appears, however, that to solve the problem of disarmament successfully it is not enough merely to make sound proposals and take reasonable steps to bring the opposing positions closer. Such proposals already exist and such steps have been taken. But look at the results of the labours of the Eighteen-Nation Committee on Disarmament after a year and a half of work! At first there was no shortage of assurances about the devotion of the Governments represented on the Committee to the idea of general and complete disarmament. A great many compliments were lavished on the programme of general and complete disarmament submitted for the Committee's consideration. But hardly had the process of agreement on the specific obligations of the parties begun, when those Western States upon whom the implementation of disarmament largely depends began to talk a completely different language.
128. Instead of a businesslike discussion around the conference table, there began to gush forth a fountain of speeches, which, if they conceal anything, conceal only the unwillingness of the Western Powers to proceed to any genuine disarmament. This is how it has come about that there are, figuratively speaking, two fountains flowing in Geneva: the real one in the Lake, and the fountain of speeches in the conference-room of the Eighteen-Nation Committee. The difference between them may perhaps be that the Swiss, who are thrifty people, do not switch on the Lake Geneva fountain needlessly. But the stream of speeches in the Eighteen-Nation Committee flows almost without ceasing. This is of course ironical, bitterly ironical. But the real point is something that preoccupies humanity more than anything else, and cannot fail to do so: can the arms race be stopped and turned back, or will it pave the way to disaster?
129. The Soviet Union has not spared and will not spare any effort to open people's eyes to the danger of continuing the arms race, and to show the great advantages of a disarmed world.
130. Guided by a desire to consolidate the success resulting from the conclusion of the Treaty banning nuclear tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and under water, and to produce a break-through in the disarmament negotiations, the Soviet Government makes the following proposal: to convene in the first quarter or first half of 1964 a conference of States members of the Eighteen-Nation Committee on Disarmament with the participation of political leaders at the highest level. In the Soviet Government's view this conference should discuss both general and complete disarmament and separate measures for a further reduction of international tension.
131. If it is true, as it certainly is, that the arms race is spiralling, then it is all the more necessary that efforts to check it should spiral even more: that they should outrun the arms race, obstruct it, undermine it and eventually reduce it to nothing. This is the purpose of the Soviet Government's proposal to convene the Eighteen-Nation Committee on Disarmament at the summit.
132. Such a conference could be convened at any place convenient to its participants. The Soviet Government for its part would be prepared, for the purpose of holding such a conference, to receive the Heads of Government or State of the countries taking part in the Committee, should they so desire, in Moscow, the capital of the Soviet Union.
133. The Soviet Government is submitting one further proposal in order to do its utmost for the success of the disarmament negotiations.
134. As all representatives present here will undoubtedly recall, at the last session of the General Assembly the Soviet Government agreed to exclude from the elimination of nuclear delivery vehicles during the first stage a strictly limited and agreed number of nuclear missiles in the possession of the USSR and the United States only and situated on their own territories. It was intended at that time to preserve these vehicles until the end of the second stage of disarmament, when nuclear weapons were to be eliminated.
135. What were the motives for this step by the Soviet Union? It was prompted by the apprehensions expressed by the representatives of the Western Powers, primarily the United States, during the negotiations. Suppose, they said, during the process of disarmament and before all weapons were eliminated, someone suddenly goes and starts an aggression; might it not be better in that case to keep in store a certain number of nuclear missiles? The Soviet Government considers this apprehension to be on the whole artificial. Nevertheless, because it wished to facilitate the preparation of a disarmament treaty, it submitted to the Assembly's last session a proposal which, one would think, should have reassured the Western Powers.
136. In reply we heard: "Yes, the nuclear umbrella is a good thing, but to keep it only during the first two stages of disarmament is not quite enough. Would it not be better to carry out the final stage of disarmament under its protection?" If this were the only point at issue, and if retention by the USSR and the United States of a limited number of nuclear missiles offered better prospects for successful negotiations, then the Soviet Union would naturally be prepared to go even further to meet the desires of the Western Powers, in the hope that this would provide a way out of the present deadlock.
137. The Soviet Government states its readiness to agree that a limited number of intercontinental antimissile and anti-aircraft missiles should remain in the hands of the USSR and the United States on their own territories not only until the end of the third stage: that is, until the completion of the whole process of general and complete disarmament. Accordingly we propose that, in eliminating all nuclear weapons during the second stage, an exception should be made for nuclear warheads in missiles left for the end of the third stage. At the end of that stage, the missiles retained on both sides, together with their nuclear warheads, should be eliminated. From the very outset of the second stage, control should be established over the remaining missiles, and also over their nuclear warheads.
138. If the Soviet Union and the United States retained a limited number of missiles, the problem of confidence during the disarmament process would be solved even if Western sceptics who are extremely resourceful in erecting barriers to the disarmament process adopted the most suspicious possible attitude. We hope that our partners in the negotiations will examine the Soviet Government's new proposal in the spirit of desire to reach agreement.
139. The Soviet Government refuses to admit that mankind cannot solve the disarmament problem, and rejects the belief, often expounded by the opponents of disarmament, that human nature has implanted in it an urge to kill, burn and fight. Unfortunately, echoes of such views are very often heard from Western statesmen, even at the disarmament negotiations in Geneva.
140. If we imagine a sort of geological cross-section of the history of mankind, our mind's eye will behold layer upon layer of armaments, and of graveyards for the hundreds of millions of people they have slain. Generation after generation has passed from the stage of history, taking its weapons with it into oblivion; but each time those weapons have been replaced by others even more powerful and destructive. Nevertheless, the socialist States reject the fatalistic concept that wars are all but natural calamities.
141. For States to disarm, naturally great efforts are required; but the most important need is the desire of Governments and statesmen to achieve this goal. If it is true that man's mind and hands have created weapons, then it is doubly true that they can also destroy them.
142. It seems that, however carefully the military chapters of State budgets are calculated, it is still impossible to get a complete picture of the enormous resources thrown to the winds in the arms race. Just as nuclear fission releases gigantic forces, so would disarmament release colossal human energies and wealth which might be directed towards the development of the economy and of science, culture, education and health for the benefit of all nations.
143. At the last session of the General Assembly the Soviet Government submitted a proposal concerning an economic programme for disarmament, and submitted a draft declaration on the conversion to peaceful needs of the resources released by disarmament. The response made to this proposal strengthens our conviction that it is the duty of the Members of the United Nations to take an active part in preparing this programme.
144. We freely admit that disarmament, and especially general and complete disarmament, would be beneficial to our people and the peoples of the socialist countries. We believe, indeed we are sure, that disarmament would also render an inestimable service to the countries which have just embarked on the road of independent development and are engaged in building up their national economy. It would be no less beneficial to the socialist States than to those States which are now accelerating the arms race.
145. Everyone who speaks from this rostrum will probably advocate disarmament. But who can fail to understand that at times those speeches flagrantly contradict the deeds of the Governments on whose behalf they are made?
146. Sad as it is, it must be admitted that there is a great discrepancy between the greatness and nobility of the task of the general and complete disarmament of States, and the role played by the United Nations in its fulfilment. However unpleasant this truth may be, it is nevertheless true.
147. To a dispassionate observer, the incredible speed of the build-up of armaments which make all means of destruction used in the past seem like children's toys, must seem a crime against the world and its peoples. The military budgets the reduction of which the Soviet Union and other socialist States are advocating this very day, are being considered and approved before the eyes of all Governments and parliaments. They are endorsed, not by remote political figures, but by men whose names appear on election posters and who are voted for by the people against whom these weapons are being forged and upon whom they will fall with their full force in the event of a new war.
148. Who should be the first to raise a voice of protest against this monstrous situation in which from, year to year, or even from day to day, the military machine of States is more and more lavishly lubricated with funds extorted from the people in taxes? You will agree that the United Nations, if it were properly doing its duty as a guardian of the peace, should not be the last to make that protest. Unfortunately it is not yet doing so. No one could ever remove from the United Nations the burden of responsibility for all the woes that would befall the nations if a new war were allowed to break out.
149. We should wish all Members of the United Nations to display more concern about the present state of the disarmament talks. They should regard the situation as an alarm signal.
150. Whoever wants peace cannot be afraid of progress in disarmament, but should rather strive to find a common language with the Soviet Union, with all the other socialist countries, and with all the champions of disarmament.
151. That is the picture that should be borne in mind during the debate on the disarmament problem in the United Nations. This is how we see the task of disarmament which faces the United Nations. This is how we evaluate ways and means of fulfilling one of the greatest of tasks: general and complete disarmament.
152. The same profoundly humanitarian aims —to assure the peaceful coexistence of States and to avert the threat of hostilities— also determine the Soviet Government's approach to the problem of strengthening security in Europe.
153. Both world wars originated in Europe. The shot in Sarajevo was echoed by the din of many cannon and machine-guns on the fronts of the First World War. The provocation by the Hitlerites on the German-Polish border, prepared by a policy of revenge and the thirst for conquest, was echoed by the clank of tanks and the roar of dive-bombers on almost all the continents in which fighting took place during the Second World War.
154. Whereas in the past the wars which originated in Europe have not always begun with a clash of the most powerful States, the situation is now much more complicated. In central Europe there face one another point-blank the armed forces of the two largest military and political groups, including the forces of all the nuclear Powers. This situation alone holds great danger: some spark might start a clash between the Powers with weapons of an unprecedented destructiveness.
155. Apart from the plans being hatched on the banks of the Rhine, and the extent to which the West German revanchists consider the possible consequences to themselves of unleashing a nuclear missile war —I repeat, even apart from these— the danger of a new military explosion exists and will continue to exist until the Second World War is at last wound up. So long as the borders which have come Into existence in Europe, including those between the two German States, are not legally settled by a peace treaty, so long as unbridled propaganda continues in Western Germany for revision of the results of the victory over Hitlerite Germany and redrafting of the political map of Europe, the spectre of a new war will loom at the door of every house, for violation of borders means war.
156. The maintenance in West Berlin of the occupation regime almost two decades after the end of the Second World War is like the application of fertilizer to a political soil which, in West Germany, has generously nourished revanchism and ideas of militarism differing but little from those that inspired Hitlerite Germany on the eve of the Second World War.
157. One of the main reasons for the present tension in Europe is that the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany is doing its utmost to torpedo a German peace settlement, while at the same time pursuing a policy of enmity towards the other German State, the German Democratic Republic. It has no scruples in its choice of methods to enlist, in direct or indirect support of its claims with their threat to peace, anyone proving susceptible to Bonn's blackmail. Thus the strain which, through Western Germany's fault, exists in its relations with the German Democratic Republic is transferred to international relations as a whole, to the relations between the principal military groups of States and between the great Powers. And this is precisely what fills the revanchist leaders of the Federal Republic of Germany with joy, since they clearly bank on setting the great Powers at loggerheads.
158. Chancellor Adenauer's Government has long since won a stable and quite definite reputation: wherever proposals are made that might lead to relaxation of international tension, Bonn will inevitably try to put a spoke in the wheel to prevent them from being carried out.
159. Take, for instance, the proposal to withdraw, or even to reduce, foreign troops in Central Europe: the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany is against it.
160. Take the conclusion of a non-aggression pact between NATO and the Warsaw Treaty Organization: the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany is against this too.
161. Take the proposal of Poland, supported by Czechoslovakia, the German Democratic Republic, and later by many other States, that a denuclearized zone should be established in the centre of Europe: again the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany is opposed.
162. But when measures are discussed which aggravate international tension, such as the compilation of plans for the establishment of a multilateral or multinational NATO force giving the Bundeswehr access to nuclear weapons, the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany is found in the very forefront, even ahead of those of its allies in the NATO camp which are closest to its aspirations.
163. To no other State, probably, has the Soviet Government addressed so many proposals for an improvement of relations based on good-neighbourly principles as it has to the Federal Republic. We have consistently stressed the need for the Federal Republic to participate actively on an equal footing with the German Democratic Republic, and with West Berlin after its conversion into a free city, in international affairs and to make its contribution to the development of international co-operation and the strengthening of peace. What we have opposed and shall continue to oppose is Western Germany's present militaristic and revanchist course and its attempts to poison relations among States and prevent agreement on the most vital international problems.
164. By maintaining that a German peace treaty should be signed, not by the two German States which do exist, but only by a united Germany which does not exist, the Federal Government proves that it desires neither a German peace settlement nor the unification of Germany.
165. Of course, now that the Government of the German Democratic Republic has taken protective measures on its borders with West Berlin, the problem of the conclusion of a German peace treaty, viewed in the light of the socialist countries' immediate interests, presents itself differently from the way it did before these measures were adopted. But in the light of the fundamental need to safeguard peace and security in Europe, the conclusion of a German peace treaty has lost none of its urgency.
166. To gaze indifferently upon the present uneasy situation in Europe caused by the incomplete German peace settlement would almost mean an abject surrender to the revanchist demands of the West German militarists. We cannot, of course, speak of our former allies in the anti-Hitler coalition; but the Soviet Union's position is that Hitlerite Germany, not the members of that coalition, signed an act of unconditional surrender, and that the Powers of the anti-Hitler coalition proclaimed as their common purpose the eradication of German militarism and Nazism and the adoption of all measures required to prevent German militarism from ever again threatening its neighbours or the preservation of peace throughout the world.
167. The Soviet Union will take care to safeguard its security and the security of other States which also pursue a policy designed to root out the aftermath of the Second World War and to strengthen peace in Europe by the conclusion of a German peace treaty. It will not allow the German militarists to push Europe into an abyss and go scot-free; and if once again they brandish their weapons over the world, the Soviet Union will take all necessary measures to protect its security and to safeguard peace in Europe.
168. It is also in the interests of the German people themselves to see that the groups which determine the policy of the Federal Republic of Germany do not treat the Soviet Government's repeated warnings with the same nonchalance with which the rulers of Hitler's Germany threw millions of Germans into the crucible of war. The future of the German people does not lie in guns and bombs, but in factories, construction sites and ploughed fields. Only in a policy of peace, of which the other German State, the German Democratic Republic, is setting a good example, will the Germans on both sides of the Elbe find a better future for themselves.
169. The fact that two sovereign German States have arisen on the ruins of Hitler's shattered Empire, one of which is a socialist State, is perhaps not to everyone's liking. But even people who have hitherto failed to understand the historic significance of this fact will, we are convinced, increasingly come to appreciate that the German Democratic Republic is a reliable stronghold against aggression in the centre of Europe.
170. The Soviet Government deems it necessary to emphasize once again from this rostrum of the United Nations that the preservation in Europe of the aftereffects of the Second World War is fraught with serious danger to peace, and that a German peace treaty would therefore meet the interests of all States and of all peoples.
171. The "cold war" vice in which the nations have been gripped for many years has to some extent relaxed through the signing of the test-ban treaty, and they have begun to breathe more freely. The immediate practical result of the treaty —an end to pollution of the atmosphere, the oceans and outer space by radioactive deposits harmful to human health— is itself proof that States with different ideologies and often with contrary views on many aspects of international life have found it in themselves to perform a truly humane act. Nevertheless, if we consider the test-ban treaty in broad historical perspective, in terms of the objectives by which the United Nations must be guided in its activities —to do everything possible to help to consolidate peace and banish the threat of war— it is a good beginning but only a beginning.
172. It is clear to everyone that the cessation of nuclear weapons tests in the three environments does not yet mean the end of the arms race, and that consequently this measure does not in itself reduce the danger of war. The nations want to have firm guarantees of their security; and they cannot rest content with the test-ban treaty alone. The Soviet Government therefore considers that the more propitious opportunities arising as a result of the treaty should be utilized to the full for the settlement of other pressing international problems.
173. The General Assembly would not be doing its duty to the nations and would fail to justify the hopes reposed in it if, for its part, it did not call upon the Governments of all the world's nations to utilize this more propitious atmosphere in order to reach agreement on further measures to reduce international tension. There is no doubt that such measures would in turn facilitate solution of the problem of general and complete disarmament.
174. There are a number of possible steps which relate both to disarmament and to European security and which at the same time are of great international importance in their own right. They are well known, and the Soviet Government has repeatedly drawn attention to them. They are the conclusion of a non-aggression pact between the States members of the Warsaw Treaty organization and the countries belonging to the North Atlantic bloc, measures to prevent surprise attack and to reduce the number of troops in the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic, reduction of military budgets, and the creation of denuclearized zones in various areas of the world.
175. It would be a grave miscalculation to suppose that, because the Soviet Union and other Socialist countries advance a proposal aimed at reducing international tension, such as the proposal for a nonaggression pact, it would be on that account more advantageous for them than for the Western Powers. No; to execute such proposals would benefit all countries, including the great Powers of the West, to exactly the same degree, neither a milligramme more nor less. The chief gain for all would consist in the strengthening of international confidence, a new warmth in the international climate. The only circles which could regard this as in some way detrimental to themselves are those who, to suit their own narrow interests, want to see the nations go on living in a world where they can look at one another only from the entrenchments of the "cold war", through the observation slots of tanks, through artillery sights and submarine periscopes. But we reject such a militaristic angle of vision.
176. Every human being, whether he lives under a tropical sun or is buffeted by the north winds, whether he lives in a great city or in a remote village, feels a particular anxiety at anything which increases the probability of nuclear war.
177. Until very recently one might have had the impression that there was a sort of taboo on nuclear weapons, that States would never bring themselves to make these weapons the subject of an agreement. One significance of the test-ban treaty is that it is the first international agreement that has borne any relation to nuclear weapons.
178. What are the measures which, in the opinion of the Soviet Union, could have a positive effect in reducing the danger of nuclear war even before the complete destruction of nuclear weapons and the abolition of their stocks?
179. One such measure might be the conclusion of an appropriate international agreement on non-dissemination of nuclear weapons. The plans to bring nuclear weapons, through the military alliances of the Western Powers, within the reach of States which do not at present possess them, particularly Western Germany, remain a major obstacle to such an agreement.
180. As one of the Powers possessing nuclear weapons, the Soviet Union is also ready to make its contribution to the settlement of questions related to the creation of denuclearized zones in various regions of the world. It has no objection to giving, jointly with the Western Powers, the necessary guarantees banning the use of nuclear weapons in any denuclearized zones concerning which regional agreements may be concluded, or in individual countries declaring their territories to be denuclearized zones.
181. In recent years humanity has enriched itself by highly important discoveries the remarkable consequences of which are still difficult to appreciate properly. For the first time men have succeeded in breaking away from the earth and are confidently blazing trails into the Universe. Humanity pronounces with admiration the names of the pioneers of space flight, among them the first woman cosmonaut, Valentina Tereshkova. The conquest of the virgin tracts of outer space has begun, but these are only the first steps.
182. The Soviet Union and the United States of America are persistently working towards a solution of still more complex and tantalizing problems in this field. And the nations have a right to expect that the new environment in which man has now set foot —the limitless ocean of outer space— will never become yet another springboard of war, destruction and death. With its gaze bent upon the distant stars, mankind is full of hope that the conquest of space will serve only peaceful ends.
183. The Moscow Treaty has banned nuclear tests in outer space. Now there is another question on the agenda.
184. The Soviet Government is prepared here and now to take steps to prevent the spread of the arms race to outer space, and desires to create the best possible conditions for the utilization and exploration of space for the good of all peoples. It therefore considers it necessary to agree with the United States of America to prohibit the placing in orbit of objects carrying nuclear weapons.
185. We know that the United States Government is also willing to settle this question. And we assume that the Governments of the Soviet Union and the United States of America will continue their bilateral exchange of views regarding a ban on the placing of nuclear weapons in orbit. It would be a very good thing if an understanding could be reached on this important question and an agreement concluded. The Soviet Government is ready to do so.
186. The United Nations may be justly proud that the historic Declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples (resolution 1514 (XV)) was adopted in this hall. The solemn appeal of the Declaration to bring to a speedy and unconditional end colonialism in all its forms and manifestations has sped to the remotest corners of the earth. For the colonial peoples the Declaration has become a guiding light in their struggle for freedom and independence.
187. Until quite recently the political map of Africa and Asia was marked predominantly in three or four colours which coincided with the cartographic colours of a few Western States. Today the national flags of independent States have been raised in the overwhelming majority of the former colonial possessions.
188. The achievements of the national liberation movement are great, but the objectives set by the Declaration have not yet been fully attained. The peoples of the Portuguese colonies —Angola, Guinea and Mozambique— are waging a hard and stubborn struggle for their freedom. The African population of the Republic of South Africa is seething. The just struggle of the peoples of other territories which have not yet received independence is gaining momentum. To this day over 50 million human beings still languish in colonial slavery.
189. That is why the liquidation of colonialism must occupy a central place in the General Assembly's work at its present session. The Assembly's duty is, basing itself on the Declaration, to draft and approve decisions directed towards the prompt elimination of colonial regimes in those territories where they still persist.
190. The elimination of colonialism does not end with the destruction of the bulwarks of slavery which have been erected around entire countries and peoples. The colonial regimes are doomed, but the system of inequitable political, economic and military relations between the former colonial Powers and the newly independent countries lives on. Even the politicians of the Western Powers are forced to admit that there is absolutely no comparison between the so-called "assistance" extended by these Powers to the underdeveloped countries and the income which they derive from them. Harold Wilson, the leader of the Labour Party, recently observed that the entire expenditure of the Western Powers on "assistance" to the underdeveloped countries over the past ten years had been more than offset by the reduction in their export earnings through the fall in raw-material prices. And we may take it that the British know how to count and are good judges of profit and loss.
191. In 1965 the United Nations will celebrate its twentieth anniversary. Its honour compels it to do everything to ensure that by then the shameful colonial system has completely vanished from the face of the earth and that every people, great or small, in Africa or Latin America, is free and independent.
192. Everything that strengthens the foundations of peace makes the United Nations more viable and more efficient in widening the sphere of international cooperation. Conversely, outbreaks of "cold war" paralyse it and prevent it from rising to the needs of the times and to the nations' demands.
193. In this connexion it should be emphasized with all clarity that the authority of the United Nations and its capacity to perform the tasks which lie before it are gravely jeopardized by the continuing violation, year by year, of the rights of China, one of the permanent members of the Security Council and a founder-State of the United Nations. The Government of the People's Republic of China, and that Government alone, represents China in the international arena, and only the Government of the People's Republic of China can speak on behalf of China in the United Nations. Today, as yesterday, the Soviet Union considers that the rights of the People's Republic of China in the United Nations should be restored without delay and the representative of the Chiang Kai-shek clique, which represents no one, removed from the United Nations. Taiwan is an integral part of the People's Republic of China, while the Chiang Kai-shek clique which has established itself there is sustained only by foreign bayonets. Everyone understands that the day is coming when truth and law must triumph and Taiwan be reunited with the People's Republic of China.
194. As the Soviet Government has repeatedly stated, it is of vital importance for the better functioning of the United Nations that its structure, at present completely unsatisfactory, should be improved. Since our position on this matter has been set forth on numerous occasions, there is no need to repeat it. But this question will have to be settled sooner or later, Gentlemen, if we wish to observe and not mock elementary justice.
195. Amid all the diversity of States' interests the main channel of development of international events is quite clearly discernible. It is to be found where the two opposing currents in international politics meet: the one aimed at reducing international tension, the other at maintaining or even intensifying it.
196. The higher the mountains of atomic weapons, the more worthless appear those who do not wish to destroy them.
197. The deeper in the earth or beneath the surface of the seas men seek safe shelters for missiles and from missiles, the more obvious becomes the danger which menaces mankind.
198. The wider the sphere of preparations for nuclear war, the narrower the circle of States which are prepared to condone them.
199. The higher military budgets soar, the sharper becomes the peoples' awareness of their wants and of the need to end the burden of armaments.
200. The louder the bellicose speeches of those who support the arms race and the heightening of international tension, the greater is their isolation and the more firmly should they be rebuffed.
201. On the other hand, even a small glimmer of light on the international horizon kindles the light of hope in a thousand million eyes. Even a modest success at the conference table evokes wide and justified support.
202. Two months ago the representatives of three Powers which fought side by side in the greatest of all wars met in Moscow in order to work out an agreement on a sore subject in international life. There were varying estimates of the possible outcome of this meeting. There were the sceptics, and there were people who pinned certain hopes on it. And what did the Moscow negotiations between the Governments of the USSR, the United States and the United Kingdom show? They showed that the gulf between the complex and in many ways dangerous situation which has come about in the world, and the agreement whereby this situation may be improved, is not unbridgeable. They showed that when the sober calculation of common interests prevails, agreement becomes a reality. If the conclusion of a nuclear test-ban treaty is to teach us anything, it is above all that the great Powers, and indeed all States, can move forward —though the ways be devious and not always even, yet forward and in the right direction— towards the consolidation of peace.
203. The Soviet people categorically rejects the fundamentally unscientific notion of another war as something inevitable. This is a concept of the doomed. It cannot inspire people. If people come to feel that they have no future, that before them there lies only the abyss which can in no wise be avoided, then in the name of what will they live, in the name of what will they contribute their toil, their knowledge, their searching intellects to the cause of creation and progress? In the face of such a prospect, how can the nations be inspired to struggle against militarism, against the arms race? No; this is not our philosophy, not our idea; it contradicts the nations' vital interests, and we reject it.
204. The denial of the fatal inevitability of war, the possibility of banning it for ever from the life of society, the possibility of preventing another world war, of not allowing it to break out —these are the very ideas and conclusions which underlie the programme of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Socialism, communism with its life-affirming and profoundly humanistic world view, are by their very nature inseparable from peace. Belief in the strength of the nations and an optimistic view of their morrow strengthen the will and multiply the forces of those who do not want the disaster of war, who see in tomorrow not the twilight of human history but the dawn of a better future for the nations.
205. The fair wind favouring moves to reduce international tension, whose breath the nations are now feeling, can add new strength to efforts to save this and succeeding generations from the scourge of war, the efforts to consolidate peace. The States Members of the United Nations may rest assured that the Soviet Union will continue, as hitherto, to place its whole influence as a great Power, its whole international authority, at the service of peace among the nations.