For five years the Government of the USSR has made steadfast and consistent attempts to induce the United Nations to fulfil its basic purpose — the maintenance of peace and security.
131. At the present session of the General Assembly the Soviet Union delegation has taken another important step towards strengthening peace and preventing war.
132. The “Declaration on the removal of the threat of a new war and the strengthening of peace and security among nations” [A/1376], which the USSR Government has submitted, is a continuation and development of the proposals previously made in the United Nations by the delegation of that country.
133. The Soviet Union delegation has pursued and is consistently pursuing a policy of peace and friendly relations among nations. As early as the first session of the General Assembly, the USSR Government introduced a proposal for the general reduction of armaments which formed the basis of resolution 41(I) unanimously adopted by the General Assembly on the principles governing the reduction of armaments.
134. At the second session, the question of war propaganda and warmongers was discussed on its initiative and resulted in the adoption by the Assembly of resolution 110 (II) on measures to be taken against propaganda and the inciters of a new war.
135. At the third session of the General Assembly in 1948, the Soviet Union Government, which regarded the ever increasing armaments race of the United States and other countries as a serious threat to the maintenance of international peace, proposed that the Governments of the permanent members of the Security Council should reduce their armed forces by one third within one year, and that the atomic weapon as a means of mass destruction should be prohibited.
136. Lastly, at the fourth session of the General Assembly in 1949, the Soviet Union once again raised its voice in the defence of peace and international security. It submitted the proposal for the condemnation of preparation for a new war and for the conclusion of an agreement for the strengthening of peace by the five great Powers. We know that both these proposals were rejected by the adversaries of peace.
137. If the General Assembly resolutions on the strengthening of peace and security had been carried out in good faith, they would, of course, have served as a serious obstacle to the preparations for a new war and the launching of aggression. The fact that the General Assembly had adopted decisions on the strengthening of peace and security should by itself have created an atmosphere of amity and confidence.
138. What then prevented the resolutions which the General Assembly had adopted on the initiative of the Government of the Soviet Union from being carried into effect?
139. The Soviet Union Government, adhering to the principles of international co-operation, has always stood for collective measures to safeguard peace and prevent a new war. The foreign policy of that Government has been based throughout on a desire for peaceful and friendly relations with all countries irrespective of their economic or political systems. The USSR has, from the outset, consistently and actively pursued this policy of peace in the United Nations, and it is not to blame if the General Assembly resolutions have not been carried out.
140. The main reason why the decisions taken by the General Assembly have not been implemented is the position taken in the United Nations by the United States and the United Kingdom. Disregarding the Charter and consistently violating decisions already taken, the delegations of those two countries have been hampering the normal functioning of the United Nations. By endeavouring to impose their will upon other countries, they have impeded the Security Council from taking the necessary measures for the prevention of new aggression, and have been hindering the United Nations in the elaboration of an effective system for the peaceful settlement of international conflicts. The position of these delegations is based on the mistaken and iniquitous principle of settling international conflicts by the use of force. This attitude was made clear in Mr. Acheson’s speech on “total diplomacy” which he made at a meeting of the Advertising Council at the White House on 16 February 1950. Mr. Acheson said: “The only way to deal with the Soviet Union… is to create situations of strength”.
141. In practice, this principle found expression in the creation of aggressive military-political blocs directed against the Soviet Union and the countries of the people’s democracies, in feverish military preparations and in an unbridled race for armaments.
142. The aggravation of the international situation as a result of the transition of the imperialists from threats of war to open aggression, makes it necessary for peace-loving peoples to take immediate and decisive measures calculated to strengthen peace and to prevent the threat of a new war.
143. The world-wide authority of the United Nations as a serious instrument of peace depends upon its adoption of decisions and its practical action in defence of peace.
144. People all over the world, who have suffered the horrors of the recent war, are expressing their earnest desire for peace. They expect the United Nations to engage in effective collective efforts to strengthen friendship and trust between nations. Peoples of the world know that peace can only be preserved through the united efforts of governments, principally the efforts of the five great Powers, who carry a special responsibility for the strengthening of peace. The people are following with particular attention the work of the current session, convinced that the General Assembly will find a way to solve international disputes peacefully and to ease the tension in international relations.
145. Yet it has become evident at the very beginning of the general discussion that not every delegation represented at this session intends to facilitate the solution of this problem.
146. The statement made by the representative of the United States, Mr. Acheson, gives little reason to suppose that the United States Government seriously intends to change its attitude towards international co-operation.
147. Why did the representative of the United States find it necessary to make further hostile attacks against the Soviet Union and the countries of the people’s democracies, unjustly to accuse the Soviet Union of “new imperialism” and of seeking the destruction of the non-Soviet parts of the world? Obviously such absurd contentions can have but one purpose — to divert attention from the aggressive measures of the United States, to undermine the confidence of the people in the possibility of safeguarding peace through the collective efforts of the United Nations, and to spread the conviction that a new war is inevitable.
148. The proposal submitted by Mr. Acheson, entitled “United action for peace” [A/1377]" should, of course, have included a programme for the broadening of friendly international co-operation based on the principle of the equal rights of states and the strengthening of the United Nations.
149. The Soviet Union, fully aware of its international obligations, would welcome such a programme. However, a preliminary examination of the United States proposal must lead to the conclusion that some of its aims are clearly contrary to the United Nations Charter since their purpose is to curtail the rights of the Security Council, the principal organ of the United Nations, whose primary responsibility is the maintenance of international peace and security.
150. The adoption in the present circumstances of that portion of the United States proposal would give that country a free hand to spread aggression and to prepare a new war. It would, moreover, facilitate its efforts to use the United Nations as a screen for the pursuance of the imperialistic designs of the North Atlantic bloc.
151. Following the example of the United States, several other delegations have made slanderous allegations concerning the foreign policy of the USSR.
152. Instead of conscientiously studying and appreciating the substance and significance of the Soviet Union declaration in defence of peace, the representative of Australia [280th meeting] unjustifiably accused the Soviet Union of bad faith and of attempting to impose its will upon other countries. He stressed that Australia shared the aims and principles of the United Nations and supported its actions. Such hypocritical statements are intended solely to conceal Australia’s real purposes.
153. Even before he took over his post, Mr. Menzies, the Australian Prime Minister, stated that instead of supporting the United Nations the policy of Australia should be aimed at supporting regional agreements such as the Western Union, the North Atlantic Treaty and the Pacific Pact.
154. To make it easier to carry out this plan, the representative of Australia proposes a violation of the United Nations Charter — which he modestly terms a modification of the procedure of the General Assembly. This is the real substance behind the Australian representative’s assurances of loyalty to the United Nations Charter.
155. The Chilean representative, terrified by the Five Year Plan for the development of the USSR — the diabolical Soviet plan, as he calls it in holy terror — would like to arrest the development of the Soviet Union.
156. Ignoring both history and the lessons of the recent war, some people would like nothing better than to deprive the Soviet Union of part of its territory. But their hopes are idle. Fortunately, that is not a matter within the control of the representatives of Greece or Chile, or of any other of the numerous mouthpieces of the imperialists.
157. The Soviet Union is a powerful socialist nation composed of numerous nationalities, but it does not use its power and international authority to unleash new wars and international conflicts, or for territorial conquests and the oppression of small countries. Its efforts are directed towards the development of its national economy, the improvement of the people’s standards of living and the defence of peace and security.
158. The representatives of the Yugoslav Government of Tito have once again come forward at this session [282nd meeting] as partners in the imperialist plans directed against the USSR. It goes without saying that these deserters to the camp of the imperialists have been unable to present to the Assembly any positive programme for the defence of peace. Adding their voices to the chorus of slander, striving to blacken the peace-loving policy of the USSR, these gentlemen, at the orders of their patrons, make false charges against the Soviet Government and the governments of the peoples’ democracies, accusing them of aggressive acts, of adopting a cavalier attitude towards the will of the small nations, and of forcing socialism down the peoples’ throats.
159. These malicious and slanderous accusations by the inveterate foes of peace, democracy and socialism, have already been subjected at previous sessions to devastating criticism by the Soviet delegations.
160. However hard the enemies of peace endeavour to sow mistrust in respect of the Soviet Union peace proposals and belittle their contribution towards the elimination of the threat of a new war, the Soviet Union is proving by deeds that it pursues a policy of peace and is doing its utmost to avert the threat of war.
161. We answer these opponents of the peaceful endeavours of the Soviet Union in the words of the eminent Soviet statesman Mr. Malenkov: “Let the aggressors and the venal scribblers at their beck and call prattle about the Soviet Union as they wish; we shall not cease to pursue a consistent policy of peace with all the tenacity at our command.”
162. All those who defend the cause of peace welcomed the “Declaration on the removal of the threat of a new war and the strengthening of peace and security among nations” submitted for the consideration of the General Assembly by the USSR delegation.
163. The acceptance of the Soviet Union proposals by the General Assembly would have important results.
164. First, the condemnation of preparation for war and the punishment of warmongers as criminals would place a curb on military preparations and brand the aggressors before organized world public opinion.
165. Second, the recognition that the use of the atomic weapon is incompatible with membership in the United Nations and the prohibition of its use as a weapon of aggression and mass destruction of human beings, would represent the fulfilment of the will of the people, as expressed in the millions of signatures appended to the Stockholm appeal by people of the most diverse political convictions, faiths, races and social position, and would strengthen faith in the United Nations as an instrument of peace. The USSR does not fear the atomic weapon; it proposes that its use should be prohibited because the atomic weapon is the most barbarous means for the mass annihilation of peaceful populations.
166. Third, the conclusion of a peace pact by the five great Powers would enhance the authority of the United Nations, put an end to distrust and suspicion, and create the atmosphere of friendship and harmony essential for common international action.
167. Fourth, the reduction of the present armed forces of the great Powers by one third during 1950 would be a practical step towards ending the feverish arms race and would curtail military expenditure. In addition, it would free many millions of people for peaceful construction.
168. In the thirty and more years of its existence as a State, the Ukrainian SSR has more than once been the theatre of devastating wars launched by foreign invaders. The destruction caused by the last imperialist war, begun by the German aggressors, was particularly great. The people of the Ukrainian SSR are now bending all their efforts towards the reconstruction and further development of their national economy. In the Ukrainian SSR, as in all the other Republics of the Soviet Union, new factories are being built, towns are springing up and agriculture is constantly being developed. Only recently it was announced that a second huge hydro-electric station is to be constructed on the river Dnieper to provide energy for the irrigation of the dry regions of the southern part of the Ukrainian SSR.
169. The people of the Ukrainian SSR, who have experienced the countless sufferings of war, cannot view with indifference the threat of a new war, and they therefore unanimously support the Soviet Government’s endeavours for the defence of peace.
170. The delegation of the Ukrainian SSR associates itself with the peace proposals of the Soviet Union Government as set forth in the “Declaration on the removal of the threat of a new war and the strengthening of peace and security among nations”, and calls upon the General Assembly to adopt that Declaration. This historical proposal by the Soviet Union is the surest method of supporting and strengthening peace throughout the world.