37. Mr. President, allow me to join in the congratulations which have been offered to you on the occasion of your election to an honourable and responsible office and, at the same time, to express Poland's respect for your country. Ghana, and the group of States with which it associates its efforts in international politics, has become an important factor contributing to the peace and progress of the world.
38. Today, peace and progress are indissolubly linked. That is how we understand the resolutions adopted by the Cairo Conference.
39. The final elimination of all forms of colonial dependence, respect for the sovereignty of peoples and for their right to choose the form of development and way of life which suit them best, equitable division of labour and of the fruits of labour among nations, co-operation and peaceful competition in keeping with those principles, the settlement of international disputes by negotiation, disarmament, lasting peace — this is the approach which not only can protect us all from nuclear disaster, but will also place at the service of mankind the most progressive ideas and the mightiest resources of modern science and technology.
40. Peaceful coexistence, thus understood, constitutes one of the basic principles of Poland's foreign policy. Together with our neighbours and allies, we are determined to pursue this policy of peaceful coexistence with no less persistence than before.
41. Peaceful coexistence, however, does not depend on us alone. It depends on the other parties, on all parties concerned. It is an inescapable fact that any action contrary to the principles of peaceful coexistence undermines confidence in this coexistence, particularly among those against whom it is directed. Unfortunately, the policy of the Western Powers has been and continues to be characterized by such actions.
42. Hence, while working resolutely for the cause of peaceful coexistence, it is not without concern that we ask where the West is now heading.
43. We are not, of course, trying to ignore the positive side of the picture. We know that there is a growing awareness in the Western countries, too, of the fact that a nuclear war can bring no advantage to any nation, to any social class, or to any family. We know that the system based on the so-called "policy from a position of strength" is disintegrating. I used the word "system" because I mean the whole concept underlying the word policy of the United States, with regard to the socialist countries and to the emancipation movement of the peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America and of Western Europe as well. This whole concept was doomed because it was contrary to the inexorable forward march of the forces of socialism, contrary to the irreversible process of decay of colonialism, contrary to the economic laws of the capitalist world itself, and, finally, contrary to the sense of self- preservation innate in mankind, whose conscience is awakening in the face of the growing threat of a nuclear catastrophe.
44. The point is, what conclusions are being drawn in the West, particularly in the United States, from the bankruptcy of the system based on the policy of a position of strength? Notwithstanding the underlying motives, which may be different from ours, we are interested to see that there are signs showing that a search is being made for a new course of action — more realistic and more compatible with the requirements of peaceful competition. Pronouncements to this effect have been made by prominent statesmen in the West, including the United States.
45. We welcomed, not without hope, the Moscow partial test-ban treaty — the agreement not to station nuclear devices in outer space — and other similar agreements. But we are looking for more convincing evidence of a new approach and for still more meaningful agreements. These would seem to be all the easier to attain since the people of the United States, at the recent elections, expressed themselves in favour of relaxing tension and against "brinkmanship".
46. However, we note that certain powerful groups profiting from armaments, from colonial, semi-colonial and neo-colonial exploitation and from their dominant position in Western Europe, persistently continue to uphold the policy of "positions of strength", and attempt to restore it in its most acute forms. The pressure from these groups continues in all possible forms and on all continents. Suffice it to mention the most flagrant examples. As regards Cuba: contempt for the principle of sovereignty, brutal pressure, subversion, continuing threats. As regards the Congo: a bloody and revolting military crusade in the classic old colonialist tradition. As regards South Viet-Nam: long years of armed intervention in a futile undertaking aimed at breaking the people's will, and now, in order to break the deadlock, acts of aggression against the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam and threats to spread the war to the territory of that country; those who make these threats must realize the resolute opposition which they will encounter and what the consequences may be. As regards Europe; plans for the creation of a multilateral nuclear force designed to subordinate Western Europe and directed against the socialist countries.
47. These are closely related events which have implications for the relations between the-East and the West, between the West and the "third world", and even within the West itself.
48. It is our deep conviction that, if all those who work for peace and for the independence of nations and all those with common sense in Western Europe and the United States understand the present situation in time, it will be possible to stop the dangerous chain reaction of tension, acts of violence and the arms race, and to set off another chain reaction, that of "detente", agreements and disarmament.
49. I need scarcely dwell upon the importance of maintaining peace in Europe for the cause of peace throughout the world. This year was marked by two anniversaries: the fiftieth anniversary of the First World War and the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Second World War. Today, in that same continent of Europe, shaken as it is by political controversies, two powerful forces confront each other and two arsenals belonging respectively to the two opposing groups of States and containing the most modern means of instant and mass destruction.
50. On several occasions I have had to utter a warning from this rostrum, inspired not by resentment but by the experience of my nation in the course of its tragic history and by a sober analysis of the international situation. I would be only too glad if there were no longer any reason for such words of warning.
51. But, I regret to say, we are now facing a new danger. I mean the danger of the spread of nuclear weapons in Europe itself, for the time being under the guise of the multilateral nuclear force. If this danger materialized, the discussion of a universal treaty on the non-dissemination of nuclear weapons would be a futile exercise. It should also be fully realized that setting up a multilateral force would have even more serious consequences. It would upset the balance between the two sides — if not the military balance, at least the political one. In such an eventuality, no one could expect the socialist countries to refrain from taking appropriate measures.
52. The creation of a multilateral force would usher in a new period of tension and a new phase of the aims race in Europe. The present division of the world into two opposing military blocs would become wider and more acute, despite the unflagging efforts of Poland and all the socialist countries to replace that division by a system of collective security. It would make any agreement between East and West more difficult, to say the least. The value of the long disarmament negotiations might also be questioned, if they were to be nothing but a lulling accompaniment to unilateral military moves and an accelerated arms race.
53. As has always happened in the past, whenever steps to arm West Germany have been taken within NATO, we are now being told that the creation of the multilateral force would prevent West Germany from acquiring independent armaments.
54. What a strange line of reasoning that is. If it is true that the Federal Republic does not want independently to become the possessor of nuclear weapons, why does it reject the proposal for a denuclearized zone in Central Europe? Why is it reluctant, to put it mildly, to accept the proposal for the "freezing" of nuclear armaments in that area? There is no guarantee that the Federal Republic of Germany would not use the multilateral force to strengthen its position within the Western Alliance still further or that playing upon the controversies between its allies, it would not secure for itself independent control over nuclear weapons.
55. In point of fact, the proposed creation of the multilateral force is only one part of the entire, more than obsolete, policy of the Western German Government and of the policy of the Western Powers on the German question. This policy can be summed up as follows: the arming of West Germany; non-recognition of the German Democratic Republic; and constantly renewed territorial claims by the Federal Republic of Germany against Poland and Germany's other Eastern neighbours, while West Germany's allies — with the exception of France — dodge the issue when it comes to recognizing the finality of the Polish- German frontier. This policy ultimately creates the false and, at the same time, extremely dangerous illusion that the road eastward lies open to imperialism.
56. We are aware that many West Germans desire peace and good relations with neighbouring countries. However, the present policy of the Federal Republic of Germany and of its allies is based on the most expansionist West German elements; it counts on them, encourages them and strengthens them.
57. It is being alleged by statesmen of the Federal Republic and its allies that the purpose of that policy is the self-determination and reunification of the German nation. There are no two roads to the unification of Germany. The road followed by the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany is not the road leading to self-determination, but the road of preparation for the annexation of the German Democratic Republic. That is why we are faced with the refusal to conclude a peace treaty with the two German States; that is why a non-aggression pact between the States members of NATO and the Warsaw Treaty is rejected. A policy aimed at annexation cannot lead to the unification of Germany. It can lead only to the brink of the abyss.
58. There is no real prospect for the reunification of Germany other than by a historical process that can develop only in an atmosphere of relaxed tension, in a Europe, where mutual security and confidence are strengthened, which could lead to closer cooperation and a gradual rapprochement between the two German States; the means of achieving this have been proposed by the Government of the German Democratic Republic.
59. The Federal Republic of Germany, by making unification a prior condition for the acceptance of any proposal for relaxing tension and disarming Europe, is trying to create a vicious circle out of the issues involved — the relaxation of tension and disarmament and the question of Germany's unification.
60. The renunciation of nuclear weapons by Germany and the Central European countries, recognition of the existence of two German States and recognition of the finality of Germany's frontiers are essential requirements, and their fulfilment, far from being incompatible with the aim of unification, constitutes a starting-point for a move in that direction. Furthermore, their fulfilment is an urgent necessity for the maintenance of peace in Europe.
61. The peaceful development of mankind can be best safeguarded by general and complete disarmament. Poland participates in the work of the Eighteen- Nation Committee on Disarmament. It is not our fault that the Committee's activities have not yet led to any successful results. We remain ready to participate in any negotiation which might bring us closer to a solution of this extremely important problem. We view favourably the very interesting suggestion, recently made by the non-aligned States at the Cairo Conference, that a world disarmament conference should be convened. We also welcome the proposal of the People's Republic of China for the complete destruction of nuclear weapons, or at least an effective ban on their use.
62. It is of paramount importance that the efforts to achieve general and complete disarmament should be made in an atmosphere of relaxed tension and coupled with at least partial and regional disarmament measures. That is the essential purpose of the proposals contained in the memorandum [A/5827] submitted here a few days ago by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the USSR, Mr. Andrei Gromyko.
63. We believe that the most urgent measures are those which would enable any further proliferation of nuclear weapons to be prevented. The idea of non-dissemination is simple: the nuclear Powers should in no way, either directly or indirectly, facilitate the nuclear armament of other countries, and the nonnuclear States should forgo the production and acquisition of nuclear weapons. It is in that spirit that we state our readiness to take part in the preparation of a universal treaty on the non-dissemination of nuclear weapons.
64. At the same time, we support the idea of establishing nuclear-free zones in different regions of the world. To halt the race for weapons of mass destruction in the regions where the risks of an explosion are the greatest is a particularly pressing matter. These are the reasons which prompted the Polish Government to put forward its plan for the denuclearization of Central Europe. This plan has lost none of its urgency. But time is short. The minimum requirement is to halt the nuclear arms race in that region. To that end, Mr. Gomulka recently advanced a new proposal to "freeze" the existing nuclear potential at its present level in the territories of Poland, Czechoslovakia and the two German States. Other States would be able to accede to such an agreement. This plan is simple and it does not endanger the security of any party.
65. We are also ready to enter into constructive negotiations on methods of exercising the proposed control, the scope of the "freeze" of nuclear weapons and the relationship between this "freeze" and the size of conventional forces.
66. We also believe that the time has come to examine the problem of European security as a whole. We ought to study the advisability of convening a conference of all European States for this purpose, with, of course, the participation of the Soviet Union and the United States. If deemed useful, preparations for such a conference might be made by representatives appointed by the Warsaw Treaty Organization and NATO, and possibly, if so desired, by representatives, of European States not belonging to either of the two groups.
67. Besides disarmament, we have to deal with another crucial issue of our times: the final elimination of colonialism and of the consequences of long years of dependence to which the peoples of three great continents have been subjected. As long as this problem remains unsolved and the liberated countries are not economically and socially developed, their independence cannot be fully safeguarded. As long as this problem remains unsolved, prospects for the normal development of the world economy and the elimination of all sources of conflict will remain bleak.
68. This last task can be accomplished by improving world trade as a whole and by organizing economic co-operation between the developing countries, the developed capitalist countries and the socialist States on the basis of new principles. None of these essential elements of contemporary international economic relations can be disregarded.
69. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development has been one of the most important events in this sphere in recent years. In spite of some shortcomings, some vague formulations and the inadequacy of a number of proposed measures, the Conference has brought many lasting values into international relations, and it can therefore be regarded as a real success for the United Nations. For the first time in history, an effort has been made to bring about a radical change in the international division of labour through the accelerated development of the economically weak countries and through the diversification of their economies and trade.
70. Let me assure the General Assembly that the Polish Government will do its utmost to ensure that the recommendations of the Conference will not remain a dead letter. We shall continue to expand our trade relations with the developing countries as well as with the capitalist countries. But we trust that the various obstacles and discriminatory practices now existing will cease to hamper mutually advantageous trade.
71. We attach great importance to the promotion and extension of all forms of bilateral co-operation and economic, cultural, scientific and technical exchanges, and to the political contacts necessary for better mutual understanding. Our policy of improving and strengthening bilateral relations has met with a favourable response in many countries, on all continents. It goes without saying that such a policy is beneficial to both sides; but it is obviously also of universal value. After all, good bilateral relations are, in the aggregate, part and parcel of over-all international co-operation; they enrich and strengthen it and are the essential factor in peaceful coexistence.
72. The changes taking place in the world find their reflection in the life of our Organization, though not always in time or completely. Much has changed since the foundations of the United Nations were laid at San Francisco. Since then, the influence and position of the community of socialist States in the world have grown. As a result of the collapse of the colonial system, dozens of nations have been able to join our Organization. This year we warmly welcome to our midst the representatives of Malawi, Malta and Zambia.
73. In view of the general international situation and the activities of our Organization, the absence in the United Nations of the representatives of a lawful Member State and a permanent member of the Security Council, the absence of those who alone, to the exclusion of all others, are authorized to represent the one and indivisible Chinese State, appears even more absurd. This point cannot fail to be understood even by those who find it expedient or necessary to continue to oppose a solution to this question, which is crucial to the role that the United Nations can play in international life. I feel sure that realism will triumph over hypocrisy and glib demagoguery. The sooner this happens the better.
74. With regard to the States which are not yet Members of the United Nations, we believe that the admission of the two German States — the German Democratic Republic and the Federal Republic of Germany — to our Organization should be hastened. In any case, as the Secretary-General, U Thant, has pertinently suggested in the introduction to his report to this session [A/5801/Add.l], no country or State should be deprived of the opportunity to send observers to United Nations Headquarters or be discriminated against as far as contacts with our Organization are concerned.
75. For all Members of the Organization, great and small, the Charter of the United Nations is the basis for joint action to ensure peaceful coexistence. The proper functioning of the United Nations depends, of course, on the concerted action of the great Powers. But there is a close interdependence between the actions of the great Powers and those of all the other States. None of us can shirk his share of responsibility.
76. Gone are the days when the provisions of the Charter could be interpreted unilaterally by those who had long taken advantage of the automatic majority. Hence, it is all the more necessary today to examine and apply effectively the provisions of the Charter relating to the maintenance of international peace and security, including the provisions for the establishment and operation of United Nations forces. That is why we fully endorse the proposals contained in the Soviet memorandum of 13 July 1964 [A/5721].
77. There is no doubt that the United Nations can and must play a greater practical role in the strengthening of peaceful coexistence.
78. The year 1965, which will mark the twentieth anniversary of the signing of the Charter and of the beginning of the work of the United Nations, is to be celebrated as International Co-operation Year. We would like to hope that at this session the General Assembly will overcome its temporary difficulties and prepare the ground for this co-operation.