80. If we cast our thoughts back over the period since the thirteenth session of the United Nations General Assembly, we cannot fail to note one characteristic and highly encouraging feature. On the basis of a careful analysis of events, it may confidently be said that a warm current has already forced its way into the turbulent and storm-swept ocean of international affairs, overcast as it is by the leaden clouds of the "cold war". This current is daily becoming stronger and is bringing about an improvement in the climate of international relations. There is growing hope among the nations that peace can be preserved and that the threat of a devastating nuclear war can ultimately be eliminated from human affairs.
81. Many unsolved problems, of course, still lie ahead, but there is every reason to believe that the idea of the inadmissibility, and I, emphasize this word inadmissibility, of a world war its becoming ever more deeply rooted in the minds of the people and their governments. The forces of peace and international co-operation are rapidly gaining strength.
82. The idea of the inadmissibility of war was reflected in the communique published after the meeting between Mr. Khrushchev and Mr. Eisenhower. I should like to quote that part of the communique: "The Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR and the President of the United States agreed that all outstanding international questions should be settled, not by the application of force, but by peaceful means through negotiation".
83. It would be difficult, indeed almost impossible, to over-estimate the importance of this agreement from the point of view of the development and strengthening of international co-operation. It strikes at the very roots of the insidious and senseless "position of strength" policy and paves the way for the settlement of controversial issues from "positions of good will”. It consequently offers better opportunities for restraining militarist elements, which, in some countries, are fabricating dangerous plans for new wars. The exchange of visits between Mr. Khrushchev, the Head of the Soviet Government, and President Eisenhower of the United States is rightly regarded by the peoples as a valuable and auspicious first step towards the normalization of relations between the Soviet Union and the United States. It gives us genuine satisfaction to note that the General Assembly is apparently unanimous in taking a favourable view of the exchange of visits. The representative of Colombia, for instance, enthusiastically acclaimed the meeting between the leaders of the two great world Powers, the USSR and the United States, and the representative of Denmark said that the meetings could mark the beginning of a new era in international relations. These sentiments were echoed, in one way or another, by the representatives of Belgium, Saudi Arabia, Norway, Iran, Yugoslavia, Japan, Jordan, Burma and other States.
84. It can now be said with certainty that nowhere in the world have people failed to appreciate the great significance of the exchange of visits between Mr. Khrushchev and Mr. Eisenhower, or to express serious, and I may say justified, hopes that the process of establishing normal relations between countries ha; entered upon a new phase. The significance of this exchange of visits undoubtedly extends beyond the mere matter of relations between the USSR and the United States. It will benefit all nations and States, irrespective of their size or social and political systems. It means that the work of the United Nations, in which all the changes taking place in the world are reflected, is assuming the purposeful and effective character envisaged in its Charter, and that its Member States will be able to devote their efforts, not to winning propaganda victories or votes, but to achieving unanimous decisions in the interests of what is most important in the world — peace for the people.
85. We recall that, prior to Mr. Khrushchev's visit to the United States, many pessimistic forecasts and unwarranted misgivings were expressed. Allowing their imagination full rein, some politicians even visualized their countries crushed under the wheels of a Soviet-American agreement. It is now obvious that these gloomy forebodings were unfounded.
86. The Government of the Ukrainian SSR regards the perceptible narrowing of the gulf between the United States and the Soviet Union as an important step towards the stabilization of international peace. The Ukrainian Government has repeatedly shown itself to be an ardent champion of the settlement of controversial problems by negotiation, a fact which was, incidently, noted by Mr. Macmillan during his visit to the Ukraine last spring.
87. It is an undoubted fact that the trend towards a healthier international climate has become more marked. We cannot, however, adopt an indifferent or heedless attitude towards the counter-current which is also perceptible in international relations., I refer to that unnatural phenomenon of our times, the "cold war".
88. Viewed subjectively and objectively, the cold war, in all its manifestations, can only increase international tension. It undermines the foundations of world peace and, with ominous persistence, paves the way for the outbreak of an actual "hot war", whose catastrophic consequences, for mankind are difficult even to predict. Like a fearful scourge, it now threatens all nations, large and small.
89. In this connexion, we should like to emphasize one point which, in our view, is of vital importance. The cold war, directly or indirectly, affects all countries of the world, including those which are economically under-developed, and leaves its mark everywhere. In this cold war atmosphere, Western countries view the needs of under-developed countries and small nations from the narrow standpoint of their military pacts, and. assess those needs primarily in the light of their own strategic plans, disregarding the true, vital interests of those countries and nations.
90. The events of recent years eloquently demonstrate that, in circumstances of international tension, the cold war policy deprives nations of opportunities for democratic progress, gravely exacerbates the internal political situation in many countries and fosters dangerous conflicts, which, in other circumstances, would not have arisen or would have been settled by normal, peaceful means. Many of the representatives present in this hall from Latin America, Africa and Asia could, no doubt, provide impressive examples to illustrate what I have just said.
91. We are often told that the United States is the unfailing champion of peaceful changes in the world. If that is so, the United Nations has a right to expect the statesmen responsible for the conduct of United States foreign policy, not only resolutely to condemn, but to renounce the cold war policy in all its many forms.
92. I must remind you, however, that advocates of the cold war are quite vociferous in the United States. They try to convince Americans, although ultimately they probably fail to convince even themselves, that the cold war is not an evil, but something desirable. Only recently, a Senator — if I am not mistaken Senator Byrd — declared (and I quote from the Congressional Record of 1 May 1959): "The only way to prevent a third world war is to wage unceasing and unrelentless cold war". Surely an extremely candid and eloquent statement! We are invited to throw burning matches into a drum of petrol and an attempt is made to convince us that such an action will prevent fire.... Unfortunately, Mr. Byrd's imprudent statement was to the liking of his fellow-Senators.
93. Nor can I pass over in silence those actions of the United States which are designed to foster enmity between peoples — one of the objectives of the cold war. I refer to blatantly unfriendly acts on the part of influential circles in the United States such as the adoption by Congress of that notorious resolution calling for the "liberation" of the allegedly "captive nations", including the Ukraine. Thus, with a stroke of the pen, the sponsors of the resolution created new geographical entities on the map of the USSR, and then included them in the list of countries requiring "liberation". They cannot of course lay claim to originality. Anyone even slightly acquainted with history must know that the office of Alfred Rosenberg dealt in similar inventions and drew up insane plans for the dismemberment of the Soviet Union and the enslavement of its peoples. This incident therefore not only reveals that remarkable and astonishing ignorance described by Mark Twain, but also suggests a spiritual affinity for German fascist ideology on the part of the sponsors of this resolution. In our opinion, it is most unwise and unfitting for the legislative body of a country like the United States to allow itself to be led by superannuated political charlatans, who only recently were helping the Nazis to exterminate the peaceful inhabitants of the Ukraine, Byelorussia, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia.
94. I feel I must remind those worthy and forgetful Senators, and also the traitors who advised them, that the Ukrainian people have twice experienced the great joy of liberation — at the time of the great October Socialist Revolution and, later, when the fascist hordes were driven from its native land. The Ukrainian people is free, and that freedom is guaranteed by the Constitution of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Constitution of the USSR, and I would advise our would-be "liberators” to digest that fact.
95. In our opinion, it is the duty of the United Nations, as the embodiment of the principle of the peaceful coexistence of States with different social and political structures, to oppose any attempts to fan the cold war into a conflagration. That is all the more reason why we should not allow the fourteenth session of the General Assembly to become, so to speak, a barrier blocking the circulation of warm currents in international politics.
96. I should like to ask quite candidly: what are the motives of those who are trying to force the General Assembly into a discussion of the so-called question of Tibet? It may of course be said: concern for human rights. But it is precisely that concern which underlies the national policy of the Chinese People's Republic in transforming Tibet and helping the Tibetans to emerge from the dark dungeons of feudalism and to enjoy all those rights which, I may say, are still no more than a dream for the inhabitants of certain parts of Asia, Africa and the Pacific. Those advocating the examination of the so-called question of Tibet are not, in fact, demonstrating their concern for human rights, but merely their desire to adhere to past practice, when the General Assembly was used as an instrument of foreign policy by certain States, and the seal of its authority was set on the cold war policy.
97. It is also a matter for serious regret that the same motives underly the adoption, by an insignificant technical majority, of a resolution precluding settlement of the question of the representation of the Chinese People's Republic in the United Nations. This merely serves to emphasize that the United Nations has so far proved incapable of correctly appraising the true situation or acting in the interests of the real majority of the peoples, and that it has failed to take an important step that would strengthen its authority. It is pointless to cherish the illusion that the question of China's representation in the United Nations can be swept aside by a formal majority vote. The illusion will disperse like the mist at sunrise, but the question of China's representation will never lose its immediacy until it is finally settled in the United Nations.
98. Now I shall say a few words about the German question. The Ukrainian people, whose land has more than once in the course of history been incorporated by militarists — and not only German militarists — in what has been termed Germany's "Lebensraum", is particularly concerned, like certain other nations, that a correct solution should be found to the German question. Our people, who, twice in the space of one generation, have been overrun by German armed forces and who suffered severely as a result of the destruction wrought by the Nazis, cannot fail to support, and indeed wholeheartedly support, the endeavours of the Soviet Government which, if viewed objectively and without prejudice, have but one aim: to bar the way to the resurgence of an aggressive militarist Germany, which would be a constant threat to its neighbours and to the whole world.
99. West German militarism is again becoming the dominant power factor in Western Europe, and eagerly awaits the time when it will be allowed to possess the most destructive types of modern weapons.
100. To revive the notorious warlike national spirit, books and periodicals praising Hitler and preaching revenge and the "Lebensraum" theory are being published extensively throughout Western Germany, while West German youth, at best, remains ignorant of the monstrous crimes of Nazism. Theodor Oberländer, a former butcher of the Ukrainian people and at present a Minister at Bonn, is now inculcating the following idea in young Germans (and this is something we should bear in mind): "There is land waiting for us in Russia. There we shall be able to strike root...." He goes on to say: "We must train people with a capacity for colonization". There are already people in Western Germany who are looking forward to future opportunity to carry out plans for the dismemberment and enslavement of the Ukraine.
101. During his term of office, former United States Secretary of the Treasury Morgenthau quite rightly emphasized the role of the German monopolies in equipping fascism with file material basis for the realization of its wild plans. He wrote as follows: "Hitler must have remained a figure of fun if it had not been for Krupp and Thyssen and Hugenberg. Heavy industry alone permitted a man born for slapstick comedy to convert himself into Wagnerian tragedy."
102. Today, persistent efforts are once more being made to provide the West German revenge-seekers with an adequate material basis for the earliest possible realization of their criminal designs. But those who cherish the idea of using German militarism to unleash a new war should not forget the instructive lessons of the recent past. In the last war, the Ukrainian people demonstrated that they, together with all the peoples of the Soviet Union, know how to stand up for themselves, to defend their way of life and their right to live as they wish, in the fraternal family of peoples of the USSR.
103. Neither the peoples of the Soviet Union nor all the other peoples of the world have the right to close their eyes to the fact that, today, the activities of adventurers coupled with revenge-seekers, may lead to the outbreak of general war with dire consequences for all peoples. For that reason, the Ukrainian people and their Government fully support the USSR proposals for the elimination of the vestiges of war in Germany.
104. Although bloody battles abound in the past history of mankind, war as such is an unnatural phenomenon, alien to human nature; it is certainly not something eternally inherent in man. The idea of establishing peace on earth was born even earlier than Plato's dream of an ideal federation of States solving all their problems without recourse to arms.
105. The first attempt to take practical steps for the prevention of war was made, as you know, following the establishment of the League of Nations. Unfortunately, this attempt proved unsuccessful and ultimately tragic. If the Soviet disarmament plans had been adopted, the subsequent course of events would probably not have culminated in a new world war. This human tragedy was highly instructive, however, since it provided the most cruel but convincing proof that the Soviet Union, which more than thirty years ago had introduced proposals for total disarmament, had been right, and the Western countries, which had treated the Soviet Union's proposals with sarcastic derision and contempt, had been tragically wrong.
106. In our day and age when man is mastering the most powerful forces of nature, taming the atom, sending a rocket to the moon, creating new planets, and overstepping the limits of the earth in daring exploration of the universe, in these truly stirring times, man has within his power the solution of such vast and important problems as the permanent elimination of war — that ruthless destroyer of the products of human genius. Settlement of the problem of eliminating wars is not only over-due, but indispensable because of the creation of forces so destructive that, if they are brought into play, they can bring mankind to the verge of catastrophe. An absolutely new situation has arisen, and that of course means that proposals made with regard to disarmament must be assessed by entirely new criteria.
107. States are diverting huge resources of materials and equipment to the senseless armaments race and exposing man himself and the fruits of his labour to the danger of annihilation. As several speakers have already said from this rostrum, literally hundreds of millions of men and women are being prevented from taking up useful creative activity. It has been estimated that, if all military expenditure was switched to productive purposes, in something like ten years these resources alone could finance the building of a new country with towns and gardens, a country in which more than 100 million people would be assured A a high standard of living.
108. In the light of what I have just said, the proposal introduced at the present session of the General Assembly [799th meeting] by Mr. Khrushchev, the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, on general and complete disarmament by all States within four years, is a remarkable contribution to the cause of peace and international security. This proposal is inspired by an ideal which mankind is seeking to achieve, and yet it is far removed from sterile utopianism.
109. The implementation of the Soviet plan would remove all the obstacles hitherto encountered in considering questions of partial disarmament, and would clear the way for the institution of really comprehensive and complete control. The international control organ, which is to be established under this proposal and in which all States will participate, will be called upon to exercise effective control on a scale corresponding to the different stages of phased disarmament. General disarmament will guarantee the complete security of all States and will eliminate even the possibility of armed conflicts between nations.
110. I must frankly admit, however, that my delegation has been concerned by the quite active attempts to belittle the significance of the Soviet disarmament proposals. The arguments used against the idea of general and complete disarmament even include the assertion that the Soviet proposals should be rejected because they do not guarantee that people will not fight each other even if knives and sticks are their only weapons. Such arguments reflect the theory — which we regard as extremely questionable — that man is eternally predisposed to discord and wars and that human society has not progressed beyond the stage of savagery in its attitude towards war.
111. Of course, we cannot accept these apologies for arguments. The idea that man cannot abstain from fighting, that people will be bound to come to blows even if the only available weapon is an inoffensive table knife, such an idea, if you will forgive my frankness, might perhaps have carried some weight during that period of the middle ages when obscurantist forces darkened European civilization and before the Renaissance had heralded the powerful impact on life of humanist ideas. Today, however, in the middle of the twentieth century, it is impossible to persuade us that man of the age of the atom and interplanetary travel is indistinguishable from prehistoric man armed with a cudgel, and that atavistic instincts are more powerful than the intelligence which has brought contemporary civilization into being. The humanist philosophy of our time teaches an entirely different, lesson. Speaking on 16 May 1951 in the Kremlin, Mr. Khrushchev said: "Man was not created in order to destroy his fellow men. The desire to kill is alien to man's nature, to his spiritual qualities.”
112. Others argue that the idea of general and complete disarmament should not be taken seriously because it is not new and merely repeats the proposals introduced by the Soviet Union in the League of Nations. At the present time, we do not propose to discuss how the present proposals of the Soviet Union differ from its past proposals, or how much the present historical situation differs from the conditions of thirty years ago. General and complete disarmament always was, is, and will be new; that is to say, it will be an urgent and acute problem for us until humanity has found a final solution to it. The crux of the matter is this: do the necessary practical conditions exist for the formulation and settlement of the problem of general and complete disarmament, quite apart from the implementation of those partial measures which also are provided for in the Soviet Government's declaration? In our opinion, they do.
113. Two years ago, the General Assembly, as you know, adopted a resolution calling upon States to respect and observe the principles of peaceful co-existence [resolution 1236 (XU)]. Against the background of an unrestricted armaments race, peaceful co-existence is usually tantamount to armed co-existence, which involves the risk of the principles of peace being violated in one or another part of the globe. Against a background of general and complete disarmament, peaceful co-existence would be the great boon to which the innermost thoughts of the people of the whole world aspire.
114. In conclusion, I should like to assure the General Assembly that my delegation will co-operate with other delegations to the full extent of its powers and in the spirit of the United Nations Charter so that the fourteenth session of the General Assembly may fulfil its obligations.