I should like, at the outset of my speech in the general debate at the ninth session of the United Nations General Assembly, to greet the delegates to this important international conference and to wish the Assembly every success in its work for the improvement of international relations. The tasks before us are important and we must make a common effort to discharge them equitably.
2. The present session opens at a particularly important stage in international developments. The end of hostilities and the armistice in Korea, the four-Power, Foreign Ministers’ Conference in Berlin, the Conference in Geneva between representatives of the five great Powers and of the other countries concerned, the armistice in Indo-China, and the final settlement of a number of other disputes have done much to improve international relations.
3. In his annual report, the Secretary-General of the United Nations makes a similar appraisal of the situation when he says [A/2663, p. xi]: “The bringing to an end of the fighting in Korea and in Indo-China has been, I feel sure, the most important development of the past year for the United Nations and, indeed, in the whole struggle for peace.”
4. For the first time for nearly twenty-five years there is no serious armed conflict anywhere in the world. It may therefore be said that the present session of the General Assembly is meeting in particularly favourable conditions and that prospects for fruitful work lie before it. Such a situation makes it-all the more incumbent upon the Assembly to make every effort to ensure that its work produces practical results that will hasten the relaxation of international tension. That is what all the peoples of the world are waiting for and what public opinion in every country demands.
5. What lies behind these events which are likely to improve the international situation? These events have been made possible by the action of all the forces which have determined to remove the danger to the world which is brought about by the policy of preparation for war, the policy of those who seek to poison international relations. Most men are filled with a desire for peace. Their realization of the danger of war has made all peoples strive harder to apply the principle, which is sound and is confirmed by history, that the most stubborn and complicated disputes may be settled peaceably if there is good will and a desire to reach agreement.
6. Many political circles, and even the ruling circles in numerous countries, have become aware of the danger involved in the policy of preparation for war. The settlement of the Korean and Indo-Chinese problems has once again shown clearly that it is possible to reach common solutions. Here I must stress that the commonsense attitude of the United Kingdom and French delegations helped to achieve an agreement ending the bloodshed in Indo-China, an agreement which was most promising for subsequent developments in the international situation.
7. These successive victories in the struggle for peace — the Korean armistice, the Berlin Conference and the Geneva Conference — have undoubtedly been made possible by the policy of peace, and the initiative taken by the Soviet Union, the People’s Republic of China and the peoples’ democracies, including Poland.
8. The policy of force is crumbling away. Those who believed that strong-arm policies would prevail over the principles of international co-operation, and that the organization of international co-operation could be replaced by a network of military agreements and aggressive pacts have failed.
9. In an article entitled “America’s new strategic situation”, the American monthly magazine Fortune, in its issue of August 1954, admits that “optimism can no longer conceal the ugly fact that the United States world system of strategic alliances is under serious stress and strain”.
10. The fact that the method of negotiation and the search for peaceful solutions produces positive results has been confirmed by experience. This must remain the guiding principle of the United Nations, which was set up to be an organization for co-operation and understanding. Teheran, Moscow, Yalta, San Francisco, Potsdam, where strenuous efforts were made to reach joint decisions without the wishes of any party being imposed by force — these mark the stages by which the allied nations came to establish the United Nations.
11. In spite of the unhappy prophets who claim that the Charter is out of date and who predict the approaching collapse of the Organization, the United Nations can and must play a constructive role in international relations. The ultimate success of the United Nations will depend on respect for the Charter and upon the way in which it is able to put its basic principles — the principle of understanding and compromise — into practice in all international disputes.
12. An analysis of recent successes in the peaceful settlement of international disputes compels the observation that the United Nations has not played the part which it could and should have played and that it has not made its contribution towards the relaxation of international tension. The positive credit balance of the past year and the progress achieved in favour of peace, co-operation and understanding must not blind us to the symptoms and dangerous trends which are still to be observed on the international scene.
13. Forces which are hostile to the relaxation of international tension and seek to poison international relations and prevent co-operation are still active. This is the purpose behind the attempt to maintain the division of Europe and to re-establish German militarism as a major force of aggression. It is also the purpose behind the attempt to re-establish aggressive blocs in South-East Asia, directed against the peace, independence and freedom of the peoples of that continent. It is also the purpose of the Western countries and particularly the United States, in maintaining and intensifying the armaments race and the preparations for atomic war. The peoples of the world must be on their guard: if they are not, the successes already achieved in the cause of peace may prove precarious.
14. In order to assess the dangerous effect of warlike forces on peaceful co-operation, it is sufficient to recall that at the Berlin Conference these forces made it impossible to reach a just settlement of the German problem, that at the Geneva Conference they managed to have the Korean talks broken off at the very moment when the compromise proposals of the USSR and the People’s Republic of China had won general support, and that they have been able to keep the United Nations disarmament discussions in a state of deadlock.
15. These forces openly reject the thesis that coexistence and co-operation between different social and political systems are possible; they disseminate a variety of provocative plans for “liberation”, using this very rostrum for their purpose, and they engage in war propaganda despite the ban placed on such activities in a General Assembly resolution.
16. There are people who would like to persuade the world that the existence of two blocs with different regimes makes war inevitable and that a collision between those two blocs is unavoidable. Coexistence, however, is a fact which must be taken into account by even the bitterest enemies of one or the other system.
17. From the time when, side by side with the capitalist system, the socialist system appeared in the world, the relations between them have become the key problem in international politics. Different approaches are possible. Coexistence may be denied, as some circles in the United States would like, and the overthrow of the socialist system may be sought by force. Such a course can only plunge the world into another bloody war, which could only end in a catastrophe for capitalism. Anyone who rejects the principle of coexistence is taking the road to war.
18. There is, however, another course. It consists in recognizing the need for coexistence and establishing relations upon the basis of co-operation, non-intervention in domestic affairs, respect for mutual interests and peaceful competition. This course would lead to economic and cultural co-operation to the benefit of both parties, and would open the door to lasting peace. Rejection of this course by certain countries creates additional difficulties for the efficient working of our Organization. The Secretary-General makes this point when he says in his annual report [A/2663, p. xii): “At present, the Organization is severely handicapped by the fact that it has to function in a world where the necessity of coexistence is as yet not fully recognized.”
19. The experience of history refutes the allegations that the existence of different political systems inevitably leads to war. In Europe, the existence of a single system before the First World War certainly did not prevent the outbreak of that war, while the outbreak of the Second World War had nothing to do with the fact that different systems existed.
20. Indeed, the experience of the Second World War shows that, despite the existence within the Western camp of certain elements hostile to the Soviet Union, States with different systems found themselves united in a coalition against Hitler and striving for one common purpose: the re-establishment of freedom and independence. Within that coalition, the armed forces of the Soviet Union secured, on the battlefield, the future of our civilization and made it possible for this Organization, whose General Assembly is now holding its ninth session, to be brought into being.
21. We must remember the lessons of the past, if only of the recent past. Last September marked the fifteenth anniversary of the outbreak of the Second World War, a tragic period in the history of many countries, among which, unfortunately, Poland occupies a leading place.
22. We have no right to forget that the outbreak of the Second World War marked the tragic outcome of the policy of blocs, of the attempts to isolate one of the great Powers, of contempt for the sovereignty and rights of small nations, of guarantees without securities, of the destruction of the then existing international organization, and of the rejection of the principle of collective security in favour of the well-known and condemned principle that might is right. Without Munich and the post-Munich policy which enabled the Hitlerites to prepare their attack on the peoples of Europe, there would not have been the ruined cities of Warsaw, Rotterdam, Coventry and Stalingrad; there would not have been the nightmare of Auschwitz and Majdanek, there would not have been Oradour and the bombing of London. Hitlerite boots would not have trodden the ancient streets of Paris and Athens; there would not have been tens of millions killed and mutilated.
23. Fifteen years ago, the Polish people, isolated and defenceless, fought heroically against the full might of the Third Reich. Sir Winston Churchill, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, recognized this fact in his memoirs, when he wrote: “France and Britain remained impassive while Poland was in a few weeks destroyed or subjugate by the whole might of the German war machine. Hitler had no reason to complain of this.”
24. Poland, a victim of the aggressive policy of German imperialism, of the policy of support for Hitlerism and of the Western Powers’ sabotage of efforts for collective security, is particularly entitled to draw attention to the grave danger of rebuilding the forces of German militarism, of establishing in Western Germany an aggressive base directed against the Soviet Union and the peoples’ democracies and of giving Germany the role of European policeman to watch over its neighbours.
25. The existence of a divided Germany in the heart of Europe will always be a source of trouble and will provide the warmongers with ample opportunities. This situation is brought about by the designs of the United States, which seeks to use the reconstituted Wehrmacht, with its former Hitlerite leaders and war criminals, who have sown death, terror and destruction in Europe, as the instrument of its aggressive plans. This situation is again reflected in the decisions of the London Conference, which would restore German militarism and make the German army the main military force of the Atlantic Pact.
26. That is why I cannot pass over in silence the statement made this morning [487th meeting] by Mr. Lloyd, the leader of the United Kingdom delegation. Its tone differed appreciably from that of most other speeches. He asked the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China to give proof of the sincerity of their peaceful policy. Such an appeal, coming from Mr. Lloyd so soon after the London Conference, is particularly surprising. The very fact, however, that he mentioned it as evidence of the relaxation of international tension shows the importance of the peaceful initiative taken by the Soviet Union and of the beneficial influence exercised by the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China on international relations.
27. On the other hand, Mr. Lloyd completely ignored the statements of a number of United States politicians and military leaders who demand a preventive war, mass bombardments and the use of atomic weapons. He also disregarded the fact that military bases are being constructed around the Soviet Union and the countries of the peoples’ democracies. From whom then should Mr. Lloyd demand evidence of sincerity in the matter of peaceful intentions ?
28. The rebirth of German militarism presents a mortal danger for peace. It is no good being lulled by the illusion that a rearmed Germany would threaten only those countries situated to the east of its frontiers. History has already proved to the short-sighted instigators of the Munich policy that no tanks or bombers have yet been invented which move only in one direction: towards the East.
29. Already the tone of Adenauer and his friends shows that their demands are much greater than the so-called “eastern claims”. The Bonn ministers do not conceal the fact that they are already hankering for certain parts of France, Belgium and the Netherlands. Adenauer’s present supporters may one day have an unpleasant surprise, for the rebirth of German militarism has always led to war, which, in spite of the desires of its instigators, has spread not only to Eastern Europe, but also to Western Europe, and the whole world. The ruling circles of the United States and their European partners should bear this in mind. Politicians who seriously believe in the guarantees so widely proclaimed by the Governments of the United States and the United Kingdom should recall the bitter experience of the pledges made during the Second World War. In this respect Poland’s experience was particularly painful.
30. The lessons of two murderous and bloody world wars have taught people to recognize the real reason for their outbreak. Nations have come to understand that they can avoid war by their own efforts if they take into their own hands the task of maintaining peace. The peoples of Europe are opposed to the rebirth of German militarism. They do not want Europe to continue to be artificially divided into hostile blocs. Rejecting the prospect of a destructive war brought about by the division of Europe and the remilitarization of Germany, all the nations of Europe are endeavouring to find a system of collective security within which, on a basis of mutual co-operation they will together guarantee each other’s independence and sovereignty, eliminate the danger of war and establish the foundations of political, economic and cultural co-operation. This system of collective security opens to the peoples of Europe the prospect of a genuinely united Europe, within its natural frontiers, a Europe linked together by the common bonds of destiny and history, culture and civilization. Such ties are stronger than agreements between general staffs, banks and stock exchanges. The struggle for a European system of collective security is the key to the struggle for the peace of the world.
31. Basing itself on past experience and with the deep conviction that only a genuine system of collective security can defend Europe and preserve it from a new armed conflict, the Polish Government fully supported the proposals submitted by the Government of the Soviet Union to the Conference of Foreign Ministers in Berlin. These proposals provide a concrete and realistic basis for the drawing up of a pact that would be consistent with the interest of world peace and that, within the framework of the United Nations Charter, would embrace all the European countries and would safeguard European peace.
32. The settlement of the German problem is essential for European security. Germany must be unified in accordance with democratic and peaceful principles which guarantee the German people the right to self-determination. Germany must cease to be a trump card in the hands of the warmongers. The unification of Germany according to democratic principles will allow the German people to make its contribution to the cause of European peace and international co-operation; it will also create the conditions necessary for peaceful co-operation.
33. On the other hand, the remilitarization of Germany, in any form whatever — according to the Brussels or London plan, the Atlantic Pact or any other form — will sow seeds of a new war. Germany’s neighbours have understood this very clearly, as is shown by the resistance of the European peoples to any attempt to restore German militarism. This resistance was reflected in the rejection by the French National Assembly of the European Defence Community. This fact was yet another factor in the relaxation of international tension. Throughout the countries of Europe, including Germany, people are more and more convinced that the time is ripe to reconsider the German problem at a four-Power conference and to allow the German people to decide their own future.
34. The United Kingdom’s attitude to the European treaty for collective security, as Mr. Lloyd described it to us today, is astonishing, to say the least. Mr. Lloyd contests the need for a European system of collective security on the grounds that the United Nations is a sufficient basis for European co-operation.
35. In spite of the existence of the United Nations, the United Kingdom participates in numerous agreements and organizations. Some of them, like the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the South-East Asian Treaty Organization have clearly aggressive purposes and run counter to the United Nations Charter, particularly to Articles 33 and 51, which the United Kingdom representative quoted. On the other hand, the European treaty of collective security is in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations and contributes directly to the achievement of its aims. It is incorrect to maintain that this treaty maintains the division of Germany. On the contrary, it provides ample possibilities for the unification of Germany, and even for the immediate participation of the German people in the efforts of the European peoples to ensure their mutual security. Within the framework of this treaty, Germany would be sovereign. The Bonn agreements and the decisions taken at the London Conference actually deprive Western Germany, for decades to come, of its right to independence and a foreign policy of its own.
36. Basing itself on the principle that the danger of aggression as a result of German militarism is a threat to all Germany’s neighbours, the Polish Government has offered France, with whom we are linked by a traditional friendship, an alliance which could become an important factor in European security. Our policy is based on the view that France, as a great Power, has a special part to play in restoring genuine unity to Europe and establishing a system of collective security for the European peoples.
37. In establishing friendly relations with the German Democratic Republic — the first peace-loving State in the history of the German people — Poland has set a practical example of co-operation with the German people. Thanks to its treaties with the German Democratic Republic and in particular to the agreement fixing the present frontier between Poland and Germany on the Oder and Neisse Rivers, the foundations have been laid for Polish-German relations on the principles of friendship and co-operation.
38. I have dwelt, to begin with, on the problems that are nearest to the Polish people, that is, the security of Europe and its central issue, the German question. I should like to add that we fully appreciate, too, the importance of Asian problems, the more so in that my Government has undertaken important international obligations in connexion with the armistice in Korea and in Indo-China. History has shown that peace is indivisible. That is why the machinations of warlike American circles in Asia constitute a threat to world peace. In spite of numerous defeats, the United States foreign policy has not given up its methods of force and continues to foment war in the Far East, seeking to deprive Asia and its peoples of the right to decide their own future.
39. The cessation of hostilities in Korea and Indo-China does not represent a complete success. We still have to achieve a final settlement of the Korean problem. Moreover, the freedom and independence of the people of the Indo-Chinese peninsula are still being subjected to serious attacks by the United States. Adventurous circles in the United States have not given up hope of starting war again in the Far East. We have to face a strategy which embraces in its warlike plans the whole territory of Asia and first and foremost, the People’s Republic of China.
40. The Polish Government is fully aware of this danger and for that reason it approaches with all due seriousness and in a spirit of responsibility, the tasks entrusted to it and to other States, by virtue of the agreements reached at Panmunjom and Geneva, of supervising the putting into effect of the terms of the armistice. We realize that the Commission in Korea and Indo-China have a very difficult task to perform and that the armistice agreements are seriously threatened. South Korea has become the scene of numerous provocations, and the Syngman Rhee clique threatens openly, and with increasing frequency, to resume hostilities. This threat is all the greater because this clique enjoys the support of influential circles in the United States. As for the peaceful solution of the Indo-Chinese problem, already during the Geneva Conference, United States representatives tried to undermine the armistice and even to extend the war in Indo-China; and when the armistice had been signed, they tried to sap the people’s confidence in the agreement.
41. The United Nations must take immediate steps to safeguard the peace in Asia. It must enable the commissions in Korea to function normally and it must do everything possible to prevent the outbreak of a new war in that area.
42. The problems of peace in Asia is closely connected with the recognition of the People’s Republic of China as a great Power, as is due to it. The People’s Republic of China has made a positive contribution to the cessation of hostilities in Korea and in Indo-China. It has shown how it is possible to settle its relations with its neighbours peacefully. Proof of that can be found particularly in the relations between the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of India, which are based on the principle of respect of sovereign rights and mutual interests, non-interference in the internal affairs of other States; reciprocal benefits, equality and peaceful co-operation. These relations provide convincing proof that coexistence and co-operation between States belonging to different systems is possible; they strengthen the possibility of maintaining peace and they express the determined will of the peoples of Asia to prevent their continent from being used to foment wars and conflicts and to poison international co-operation.
43. Contrary trends, however, were evident at the recent Manila Conference. As the peoples of Asia have quite rightly realized, the South-East Asian Treaty Organization is aimed directly against peace and security in Asia, against the liberty and independence of peoples who no longer wish to live under a colonial yoke. The South-East Asian Treaty Organization is a flagrant violation of the armistice agreement in Indo-China. The people of India are making a valuable contribution to the preservation of peace in Asia and m the world. Poland warmly welcomes the efforts of the peace-loving people of India, who have done much to solve Asian problems.
44. The last few months have brought out the position of the People’s Republic of China as a great Power more forcefully than ever before. Our Organization cannot function normally without the People’s Republic of China. The submission by the United States of draft resolutions which preclude the discussion of this question is a manoeuvre which cannot conceal this fact. To sabotage the question of giving the People’s Republic of China its rights as a great Power in the United Nations is tantamount to sabotaging peace.
45. In connexion with the Chinese problem, I should like to touch briefly upon the question of Taiwan. It is obvious to any impartial observer that the American occupation of Taiwan is a grave threat to peace in Asia. Taiwan is an integral part of China. This fact has been recognized by international agreements, such as the Cairo Declaration of 1943. It is an indisputable fact that Taiwan belongs to China. The occupation of Taiwan by United States troops at the time the United States embarked upon the war in Korea was a flagrant violation of the rights of the Chinese people. Only by the restoration to the People’s Republic of China of its sovereign rights over the island of Taiwan will the threat to peace in the Far East be eliminated.
46. In dealing with Far Eastern problems I cannot disregard a question which is of direct concern to Poland and at the same time contributes to international tension. Since the United States occupied the Island of Taiwan, the Pacific has become the scene of a number of piratical acts against merchant vessels which were carrying out their peaceful missions. Kuomintang bands, assisted by the United States air force and navy, have seized a number of ships, which they escorted to ports on the island of Taiwan, holding their crews by force and plundering their cargoes. British, Dutch, Danish and Greek merchant ships, and those of a number of other countries, too, have fallen victim to such attacks. The Polish merchant ship Praca was attacked on 4 October 1953, and the Prezydent Gottwald on 13 May 1954. On 23 June 1954, the Soviet tanker Tuapse was stopped. Despite the protests addressed to the United States Government, under whose protection and direction the Kuomintang units carry out their activities, the vessels have not been returned, and there is no guarantee that peaceful shipping will be safeguarded from such attacks in the future.
47. These illegal activities on the part of the United States authorities and the Kuomintang gangs, violating the freedom of navigation on the high seas, violating the rights of foreign flags, violating universally recognized principles and customs of international law, are an additional threat to peaceful relations in the Far East. Our Organization must take energetic action in this connexion in the interests of international peaceful co-operation. It is for that reason that the Polish delegation supports the proposal of the Soviet Union delegation that this question should be included in the agenda of this session, so that it can be discussed and the necessary measures adopted to ensure the freedom of navigation in the Far East and to facilitate peaceful and normal trade relations.
48. There is one problem which requires a special effort on our part at this session: it is that of removing the threat of the use of weapons of mass destruction and achieving an effective reduction of armaments. The American policy of preparing an atomic war and the armaments race contribute to international tension. History has proved many times that the stockpiling of weapons leads to armed conflict.
49. At the present time this question is all the more Passing because weapons of mass destruction have been perfected to such a degree that they are a threat to mankind. Bomb explosions, from Nagasaki and Hiroshima to the tests carried out this year, the tragedy of the Japanese fishing boat Fukuriu Maru and its crew, give us some idea of the threat that these weapons of mass destruction mean to the world and to every living thing.
50. During the past few months there has been an upsurge of world public opinion, to a degree hitherto unknown, against the threat of atomic war which hangs over us. The recent American tests were followed by a wave of resolutions of protest, demanding an international agreement prohibiting nuclear weapons. This wave surged through the world, from Japan across India and the other Asian countries, until it reached the countries of Europe: Italy, France, Sweden, the United Kingdom; it also reached the American hemisphere. At this time it is appropriate to recall the recent resolution on the prohibition and control of nuclear weapons adopted by the World Council of Protestant Churches, which met at Evanston. Nobody can maintain that it is impossible to reach an understanding on this problem.
51. Ever since the United Nations came into being, the Soviet Union has constantly taken the lead in proposing the prohibition of the use of atomic energy for military purposes; it is continually submitting new proposals to serve as a basis for an agreement and for joint action. The present proposals of the Soviet Union, which reflect, the will to reach an understanding on this vital problem, prove once again that agreement is possible.
52. It is the action of the United States that stands in the way of an agreement. The United States, which originally thought that it possessed a monopoly, and later a commanding position, in the field of atomic energy, refuses to co-operate in any action whatever that might mean the prohibition of weapons of mass destruction. The United States shows no inclination to reach an understanding or compromise. The real United States position with respect to weapons of mass destruction is typified by the fact that United States military leaders and politicians, such as Radford, Baruch and others, regard the atomic weapon as a conventional weapon of the United States Army.
53. Today nobody can say that the Soviet Union proposals are prompted by that country’s desire to deprive the United States of its superiority in atomic weapons. The Soviet Union, moreover, is in the forefront of the countries which are undertaking research in the field of atomic energy; it has shown the world, by practical examples, the possibilities that the peaceful use of atomic energy open up for mankind. The atomic power station which was recently put. into operation in the Soviet Union, mark's the beginning of a new era that brings to mankind, not death and destruction, but wellbeing and happiness for all. The use of atomic energy for peaceful purposes in the Soviet Union has aroused hope in the hearts of millions of people; it has strengthened them in their conviction that it is possible to eliminate the threat of an atomic war.
54. During the discussion it was stated that the lack of international confidence made it difficult to reach agreement on the subject. This way of stating the problem is not correct and is only a pretext for shirking any agreement.
55. The American politician James Warburg emphasizes this point in his article in the Christian Science Monitor of 16 August 1954, entitled “Wanted: A New Look at Disarmament”: “But it is in our interest, if possible, to wipe out of existence the inhuman weapons which we have created and which history has now turned against us. To say that we cannot contemplate such a step ‘until tensions are relaxed’ is to put the cart before the horse. Tensions will not relax appreciably so long as man’s greatest scientific advance serves merely to threaten the human race with extinction.”
56. The “atomic pool” plan submitted by the United States Secretary of State during the general debate on 23 September [475th meeting} completely ignores the problem of the use of atomic energy for military purposes, and consequently it cannot solve the basic problem that this question presents in present conditions. Even Mr. Patterson, the United States representative in the Sub-Committee of the Disarmament Commission, commenting on President Eisenhower’s proposals, stated on 15 June 1954 that they would not prevent the continued stockpiling of fissionable war materials. Moreover, the plans for the peaceful utilization of atomic energy, submitted by the United States Secretary of State, sound rather strange in view of the fact that he considers the atomic weapon to be “the great shield, the supreme deterrent” in United States strategy.
57. It is obvious that today the questions of the prohibition of atomic weapons and the peaceful use of atomic energy cannot be separated. These two questions are interdependent and closely linked. The Polish delegation will consider the United States proposal in detail, and will submit its opinions on the subject during the discussion in committee.
58. The threat of a war in which atomic weapons would be used is not, however, the only danger that hangs over the world and stands in the way of international co-operation. The armaments race in conventional weapons undoubtedly presents a grave danger. The armaments race is a burden which weighs heavily upon the nations and makes their economic development still more difficult. In 1953, the countries of Western Europe spent over $11,000 million on armaments; apart from any other considerations, that sum is double the amount that they spent for the same purpose in 1950. There is a significant statement in that connexion issued by the Commission des comptes et des budgets economiques de la nation, whose President at that time was Mr. Mendes-France, the present Prime Minister of France. In its report for 1954, this Commission comes to the conclusion that the country is concentrating on a military, and therefore unproductive, economy. As a result of this policy, sources of great wealth in the countries of Western Europe are being diverted to unproductive ends, owing to the steady growth of armaments production. Taxation accounts for one-third of the national revenue.
59. The problem of disarmament is linked also with the question of liquidating the military bases maintained by the United States on the territories of other States, which threaten the security of the Soviet Union, the People’s Republic of China, the peoples’ democracies, and the independence and sovereignty of the States on whose territories they have been established. War hysteria and war propaganda whipping up hatred against other nations are other grave factors which aggravate international tension. The United States information agency and its subordinate bodies are particularly active in this field. Such an atmosphere is a further obstacle to the settlement of the important questions for which United Nations bodies are responsible.
60. This session of the United Nations General Assembly has before it some constructive proposals submitted by the Soviet Union, which go to the very heart of the problem of the prohibition of weapons of mass destruction and the reduction of armaments, and thus open up new possibilities for the United Nations in this field. The USSR proposals are for the conclusion of a convention on the reduction of armaments and the prohibition of atomic, hydrogen and other weapons of mass destruction; they specify the proportion of reduction, and lay down time limits. They are based on the present armaments situation and take into account the development, within the last few years, of various types of weapons of mass destruction, which makes the problem of prohibition a matter of even greater urgency. They provide a definite programme of work for the Disarmament Commission, on the basis of which, provided there is good will, it will be possible to reach full agreement, particularly among the great Powers. To put the principles of disarmament into effect requires, first and foremost, agreement among the great Powers.
61. The USSR proposals take fully into account the stage reached in the work of the United Nations on disarmament problems and on the prohibition of weapons of mass destruction. They are simply a continuation of the efforts which the Soviet Union has made hitherto in this connexion, and they are designed to break the deadlock in the Disarmament Commission. At the same time, they take into consideration the positions of other parties, so that agreement can be reached more easily and more rapidly. The adoption of the USSR proposals would enable the Disarmament Commission to start work immediately, and on the basis of such broad and specific programmes of action, to reach a decision in the hope of achieving positive results within a comparatively short time.
62. The USSR proposals provide that in the course of six months or one year. States shall reduce their armaments to the extent of 50 per cent of the agreed levels from the strength existing on 31 December 1953. In the present situation, when the armaments burden is particularly heavy, this reduction would have an immediate effect on the life of the people in the countries engaged in the armaments race.
63. The USSR proposals are not confined to the problem of reducing armed forces and armaments but are designed also to end the armaments race; they provide for a corresponding reduction in military budgets. They strike at the very heart of the problem of weapons of mass destruction by providing for the prohibition of the use of atomic weapons in armed conflicts, for the prohibition of the production of weapons of mass destruction, and for the use of all existing atomic materials for peaceful purposes. The USSR proposals provide for an effective control to ensure the strict observance of the articles of the convention and to prevent any violation or abuse with respect to disarmament or the prohibition of weapons of mass destruction.
64. The Chairman of the United Kingdom delegation expressed certain doubts this morning concerning the drafting of the USSR proposals, adding that he would nevertheless study them in detail when they were discussed in committee. The Polish delegation hopes that a closer study of the USSR proposals, which bear witness to a profound desire to reach agreement, will induce the United Kingdom delegation to give them its wholehearted support. The hope with which the troubled world welcomed the USSR proposals, which was reflected during the general debate of this session, will be an argument in favour of their adoption.
65. The Polish delegation fully supports the USSR proposals, deeply convinced that the reduction of armaments and the prohibition of weapons of mass destruction will remove from the international scene a serious obstacle to international co-operation and remove a factor which aggravates international tension. We are convinced that the adoption of the USSR proposals will open the way to the use of atomic energy for peaceful purposes and will unfold new prospects for economic development and international trade.
66. Last July, the People’s Republic of Poland celebrated the tenth anniversary of its establishment. On this tenth anniversary of its independence, the People’s Republic of Poland took just pride in its achievements, which fully testify to the peaceful aspirations of our Government and our people.
67. The power of the people has enabled Poland to develop. It has transformed our country, which was backward economically, into a country in which industry and agriculture are developing apace. Our Government’s primary concern is to satisfy as fully as possible the needs of the population and to raise constantly its standard of living. We are achieving this aim by means of an industrial production which is four times as high as it was before the war, enabling our agriculture and our consumer goods industries to develop rapidly.
68. Hand in hand with the economic development of the country and the reconstruction and development of our towns and villages destroyed by the war, we are expanding our activities in order to satisfy the cultural needs of the workers. These efforts are characterized by the total elimination of illiteracy, the extension of the network of elementary, secondary, vocational schools and universities and by the opportunity afforded to millions of people to benefit from the cultural achievements of our country and the artistic and cultural wealth of other countries. Thousands of persons, representing the public opinion of other countries, of various professions and various political beliefs, may see for themselves the development and the improvement in the standard of living of our country and the great progress the Polish people has made during the last ten years.
69. Apart from its extensive cultural exchanges, Poland maintains very broad trade relations with many countries, irrespective of their political systems. Suffice it to say that during the period from 1949 to 1953, the five years during which United States economic discrimination was at its height, we concluded with capitalist countries 126 agreements and trade pacts for a total sum of over 11,000 million roubles.
70. The foreign policy of the People’s Republic of Poland is closely linked with its conciliatory internal policy and is a direct result of it. Our policy is based on our desire for peace. Our relations with other countries are founded on the principle of mutual respect and co-operation. The friendship between Poland and the Soviet Union was born of and strengthened by the tragic experiences of the war. The Soviet Union’s disinterested and fraternal assistance has made it possible to speed up the reconstruction of our country, and has enabled us to achieve a level of development which we never knew in the past. The friendship between the Polish people and the Soviet peoples has been strengthened by our common struggle for peace. We have extended and strengthened our relations with the People’s Republic of China, the peoples’ democracies and the German Democratic Republic. We should like to see the close co-operation which existed between the Allies in the struggle against fascist aggression during the last world war continued in the United Nations. We are convinced that, if such co-operation continued, the United Nations could become an instrument for achieving lasting peace and a forum for friendly co-operation among peoples.
71. We are doing everything within our power to make our contribution to the cause of peace as great as possible. Our foreign policy is based on the principle that the Polish people is not alone in its desire for peace, but that this desire is universal, irrespective of the systems under which nations live. We are convinced that peaceful coexistence is a historical necessity, corresponding to the interests of the development of humanity as a whole, in spite of those who devote all their efforts to poisoning international relations.
72. The present international situation provides the United Nations with the opportunity of achieving positive results on the questions on the agenda of the ninth session. We have the possibility of settling several controversial problems, which would undoubtedly contribute to a relaxation of international tension and would enhance the authority of our Organization.
73. During this session, the Polish delegation will do everything in its power to contribute to the strengthening of the principle of negotiation and spirit of understanding in order to ensure the fullest possible cooperation in the accomplishment of the work awaiting the United Nations.