1. The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR, like other delegations, attaches great significance to the eighth session of the General Assembly, which has met at a time when all countries can see before them real prospects of friendly co-operation, of achieving a settlement of controversial international issues. Ordinary people throughout the world are impatiently awaiting a further relaxation of international tension and the removal. of the threat of a world war. Because of the particular responsibility; it owes to these ordinary people, the United Nations must set to work most earnestly and attentively to study and solve the problems before it, so as to prevent any further increase of tension in international relations.
2. The question naturally arises: what has the United Nations done in its eight years of existence, how has it acquitted itself of its tasks?
3. As one who took part in the San Francisco Conference and who has attended all the subsequent sessions of the General Assembly, I must say bluntly that the United Nations has not fulfilled its promises, and has not accomplished the tasks imposed upon it by the Charter for the maintenance of peace and security throughout the world and for the strengthening of international co-operation, although it certainly could and should have done so.
4. It must be recognized that at the present time the United Nations finds itself in an impasse because proper solutions have not yet been found for fundamental international problems. Unfortunately, the United Nations is still not an all-embracing international organization, since many countries are not yet represented in it. Nor can it be regarded as normal that, for almost four years now, representatives of the 500 million Chinese people, representatives of that great Asian Power, the Chinese People’s Republic, have not been admitted to the United Nations. Such a state of affairs not only undermines the authority of this great Organization but also prevents it from solving successfully the most important international problems, especially those questions which concern Asia and the Far East. There can be no serious talk of a settlement of many international problems without the participation of the People’s Republic of China.
5. From the very outset of our Organization’s practical activity it became clear that the United States representatives did not intend to observe those articles of the Charter which were designed to defend and strengthen peace and security throughout the world. Utilizing a mechanical majority, the United States delegation brought about the failure of a number of most important proposals designed to strengthen peace, and even endeavoured to cloak the destructive, aggressive war against the peaceful population of Korea under the flag of the United Nations. That is why the United Nations has been unable to solve such grave problems as disarmament, the prohibition of the atomic weapon and other types of weapons of mass destruction, and so on. All too often, despite proposals put forward by the Soviet Union delegation and other delegations, the United Nations engaged in sterile debates on questions which had no connexion at all with the maintenance and preservation of peace.
6. If we glance at the history of the United Nations, we see that literally on the day after the signing of the Charter attacks began to be made upon the rule of unanimity among the five great Powers in the Security Council, the so-called “veto”, and these attacks are still continuing. The story of this struggle is known to all and I shall therefore not dwell on it.
7. A fresh campaign to undermine the foundations of the United Nations Charter — the principle of unanimity, one of the most important principles of the United Nations — was launched by Mr. Dulles in his speech before the General Assembly on 17 September [434th meeting]. Mr. Dulles tried to persuade us that the Security Council was unable to function because, as he put it, of “an excessive award of power to the permanent members of the Security Council”. United States diplomacy is now openly raising the question of revising the Charter of the United Nations. This is being done because, as long as the principle of the unanimity of the five great Powers exists, the Security Council cannot be transformed into a political instrument to be used by some Powers against others. Those who attack that principle are trying to get a free hand in order to turn the United Nations into an instrument of war. It is obvious that unless there is unity among the five great Powers which are called on to bear the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, normal international relations cannot be restored, and that their lack of unity cannot fail to bring about a further aggravation of relations among all countries of the world. History shows that the real reason for the unsatisfactory work of the United Nations is not the principle of the unanimity of the great Powers, but the endeavour of some States, and primarily the United States, to circumvent the clear and explicit provisions of the Charter. That is why the attempts made by certain States to revise the Charter, to shake its very foundations and to undermine the principle of unanimity, are weakening the United Nations, thereby impeding it in the fulfilment of its basic tasks with regard to the maintenance of international peace and security, and preventing the Organization from settling these problems successfully and in a manner worthy of the United Nations.
8. It is well known that the Security Council has already been relegated to the position of a secondary organ and has become inactive; witness the meagre report [A/2437] it has submitted to the General Assembly for study. But it is inadmissible that the Security Council should remain inactive. It is essential to create all the conditions necessary for it to become an organ capable of ensuring the peaceful settlement of disputes and dangerous situations of every kind; it must be made capable of eliminating everything that impedes the strengthening of friendly relations among States, the attainment of peace and the removal of the threat of a breach of the peace. As is. well known, the Security Council has been used to cloak foreign intervention with a mantle of legality and to falsify history. It acted shamefully in branding as the aggressor a country which had been the victim of aggression.
9. The question of the forthcoming political conference on Korea continues to preoccupy the peoples of the world. The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR supports the proposals of Mr. Chou En-lai, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China [A/2469] and Mr. Li Don Gen, the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea [A/2476] concerning the nature and composition of the forthcoming political conference on Korea, and considers that it is necessary to rectify the mistaken decision adopted by the General Assembly on 28 August 1953. The political conference should be organized as a round-table conference, but any decisions taken by the conference should have the agreement of both belligerent parties in Korea. All the States which fought in Korea on either side, including the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea and South Korea, should take part in the conference, and the following States should also be invited: the Soviet Union, India, Indonesia, Pakistan and Burma. Any discussion of this question without the participation of the Governments of the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea and the People’s Republic of China is unthinkable.
10. Some delegations have claimed that these countries had no connexion with the Korean question and have tried to persuade us that their participation in the political conference would still further complicate the problem. But is it possible to achieve a firm and lasting settlement of the Korean problem and other controversial Far Eastern questions without taking into account the views of such Asian countries as India, Indonesia, Pakistan and Burma? Surely these countries are no less interested in the successful solution of the Korean problem than, say, Colombia or Australia, Turkey or Greece? There is no doubt that for a speedy and successful settlement of the Korean problem, the participation of India, Indonesia, Pakistan and Burma in the work of the political conference is essential.
11. There is a great deal of talk in the American Press concerning the prospects for the work of the political conference on Korea. Special publicity is given to the utterances of Mr. Syngman Rhee who, according to Press reports, is again threatening to resume the war in Korea if the political conference does not succeed in uniting “his country”. He has declared that he would use the armistice to prepare for an offensive whenever that might be necessary, and that if foreign Powers were not ready to help the South Koreans, they would march to the North alone. There is every justification for asking why this puppet has let himself go to the point of giving open provocation for a new world war. Why, Mr. Dulles, do you allow this gentleman to poison the air with his provocative speeches on the eve of the political conference on Korea? The blunt answer must be that those responsible for Syngman Rhee’s provocative statements are the reactionary and aggressive forces in the United States, which are endeavouring to poison the international atmosphere and are resorting to intimidation in an attempt to impose their will in connexion with the settlement of the Korean problem at the forthcoming political conference.
12. A. few words about Mr. Dulles’ speeches will not come amiss. I imagine that all who are present in this hall will have read, for example, Mr. Dulles’ speech at the American Legion Convention on 2 September 1953. The essential portion of that speech was in the nature of a threat to the Government of the People’s Republic of China of what would happen if it dared to support the just proposals of North Korea at the forthcoming political conference. Mr. Dulles deemed it necessary to state that if the Government of North Korea attempted to violate the armistice terms — although it is well known that it is Syngman Rhee who is preparing to violate those terms — then the United States Government and its fifteen allies would not only resume the war in Korea but would extend that war beyond the frontiers of Korea and commence direct attacks on Manchuria. After such a statement, it is no wonder that the American Legion Convention adopted a resolution calling for the resumption of the war against North Korea and the employment of weapons of every kind, including atomic bombs, if the forthcoming conference with ultimatums, in order to end in failure.
13. It is no wonder, then, that Mr. Syngman Rhee allows his tongue such licence. The United States Senator, Mr. Knowland, — who is now travelling in Asia, made a similar statement before the so-called National Assembly of South Korea in Seoul. Obviously such statements, made even before the conference is convened, can hardly create an atmosphere conducive to the peaceful solution of the Korean problem; on the contrary, they encourage Syngman Rhee to present the forthcoming conference with ultimatums, in order to wreck its work.
14. The General Assembly, if it wishes to carry out the will of the peoples who have sent their representatives here, should declare that the utterances of the so-called South Korean President constitute political blackmail and incitement to a new war, and should condemn his actions. We must remember that the armistice in Korea is only the first step along the difficult road to the final settlement of the Korean problem.
15. In his speech on 17 September, Mr. Dulles tried to shift the whole blame for the delay in calling the conference on Korea on to the Governments of the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea and the People’s Republic of China. It is well known, however, that the real responsibility for the delay in convening the political conference rests with the United States which, the provisions of the Armistice Agreement notwithstanding, proposed that the conference should be convened merely on a bilateral basis, without the admission to it of the representatives of the neutral States I mentioned earlier.
16. Like the rest of mankind, which wants peace, the Byelorussian people welcomed with joy and satisfaction the signing of the armistice in Korea, and regard that armistice as a great victory for the heroic Korean people and the valiant Chinese volunteers. The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR will co-operate in every way to ensure that the temporary armistice may be followed .by a permanent agreement for a lasting and stable peace in Korea. This will enable the Korean people to return to peaceful work and by its own efforts to solve the questions relating to the unification and internal structure of the Korean State.
17. The report of the Disarmament Commission [DC/32] has also been submitted to the General Assembly for consideration. It indicates that the Commission has not held a single meeting since the General Assembly adopted its resolution on the matter [resolution 704 (VII)] on 8 April 1953. True enough, the hope is expressed in the report that the latest international events will create a more favourable atmosphere for a fresh study of the question of disarmament, the immense importance of which, as of other questions relating to the maintenance of peace, is recognized by all. The report has nothing to say concerning the reasons for the Commission’s inactivity. Its Chairman, Mr. Kyrou, of Greece, prefers to pass the matter over in silence.
18. I think that the main reason for the Commission’s inactivity has been the United States delegation’s unwillingness to take part in — I might even say, opposition to — any discussion of the concrete proposals submitted by the USSR, delegation on the prohibition of the atomic weapon and the reduction of armaments, proposals designed to avert the threat of a new world war and to strengthen peace and friendship among nations. The United States delegation continue to insist on the now long obsolete Baruch plan, the plan for the collection of information on armaments in other countries, with the object of delaying the adoption of concrete and effective decisions on the reduction of armaments, and, in the final analysis, to submerge the issue in endless talk. By asserting that its Plan will lead to a satisfactory solution of the question of the reduction of armaments and even of the prohibition of atomic weapons, the United States seeks to camouflage its rearmament programme and its preparations for a new world war. This is confirmed by ® resolution adopted by the United States Senate on 17 July 1953 and communicated to all Members of the United Nations. You have read this resolution. Its purpose is to try to convince us that the United States is in favour of the reduction of armaments and the prohibition of the atomic weapon. It is also designed to counter the growing dissatisfaction with the present United States foreign policy, which is aimed at unleashing a new world war, a dissatisfaction which is perceptible among the peoples of Europe and even among a section of the ruling circles in the countries of Western Europe.
19. It is no accident, therefore, that Mr. Attlee, the leader of the British Labour Party, stated on 19 September 1953 that the foreign policy of the United States was the cause of the steady deterioration of the international situation and was very dangerous. Those were Mr. Attlee’s words.
20. At the present time, the United States is indulging in a frenzied attempt to manufacture more atomic weapons than anybody else. The American Press reports that a $9,000 million atomic industry has been built up in the United States. The United States budget for 1953-1954 contains an appropriation of $2,700 million for the production of atomic and hydrogen bombs. All these facts are evidence of the atomic armaments race in the United States with which American ruling circles are endeavouring to intimidate the peace-loving nations.
21. The progress achieved in research in the field of atomic and hydrogen weapons should strengthen our conviction of the need to put a stop to the armaments race and to prohibit these weapons forthwith. The General Assembly should declare the unconditional prohibition of atomic and hydrogen weapons and of all other types of weapons of mass destruction, and should instruct the Security Council to take immediate steps to prepare and implement an international agreement which would ensure the establishment of strict international control of the observance of that prohibition.
22. In the countries of the North Atlantic bloc the dangerous armaments race is continuing at an ever- increasing rate, undermining the economic structure of these countries, hampering the progress of humanity and increasing the threat of a new world war. Lest you think these are mere words, let me cite some figures.
23. According to the New York Times of 21 May 1953, General Ridgway declared that the European army would consist of 132 divisions, of which 60 were to be raised by the end of the current year and 72 by the end of 1954; while by the end of 1954 the air forces of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization would have 9,500 aircraft available. The United States Government has promised the Adenauer Government to arm and equip the twelve divisions now being constituted in West Germany. Amongst other types of heavy equipment, 2,360 tanks are to be delivered to Western Germany. Today’s issue of the New York Herald-Tribune reports that NATO is bringing one airfield into operation a week. It reports further that by the end of the year 120 airfields will be in operation as compared with the 60 NATO airfields available at the beginning of the year, and that, when that programme is completed, the construction of airfields will be continued. Here are some concrete figures. In the United States, military expenditures have increased from 43 per cent of the budget in 1947 to 73 per cent of the budget for 1954. According to the New York Times of 4 August 1953, the monthly output of military production now amounts in value to $4,000 million, as against $300 million in 1950-1951.
24. The armaments race which is going on in the United States and the other countries which belong to the North Atlantic bloc is not only increasing international tension but is becoming an ever-growing menace to the maintenance of peace throughout the world. The widespread network of military, air and naval bases which is being set up by the United States throughout the world constitutes a serious threat to peace and to the national independence of many States. The establishment of these bases increases the threat of a new world war, undermines the national sovereignty and independence of States. For example, the American periodical, U. S. News and World Report, of 27 February 1953, featured an article under the typical heading: “U.S. sinks billions in bases”. It is evident from the information given in this article concerning United States military bases scattered throughout the world, that this network of bases represents a threat to the peoples of the world, and that their existence is incompatible with the strengthening peace. The General Assembly must put an end to such a situation.
25. That is why the delegation of the Byelorussian SSR warmly supports the draft resolution of the Soviet Union [A/2485/Rev. I] which states that the General Assembly should recommend to the five permanent members of the Security Council, the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, France and China, which bear the chief responsibility^ for the maintenance of international peace and security, that they reduce their armed forces by one-third within one year, and, with a view to the alleviation of the burden of military expenditure, should recommend to the Security Council that it call as soon as possible an international conference for the carrying out by all States of the reduction of armaments. The General Assembly should recommend to the Security Council that it take steps to ensure the elimination of military bases in the territories of other States, considering this a matter of vital importance for the establishment of a stable peace and of international security.
26. Recent international events bear witness to the fact that very large masses of the population in all parts of the world are convinced that it is both possible and necessary to settle international disputes and controversial questions by peaceful means.
27. The policy of strength which is now being pursued and the trend to war connected with it, the armaments race and the resulting militarization of the economy, the artificial severing of profitable trade relations between East and West, have brought some States, especially in Western Europe, to an impasse. It is no wonder that, even in the countries of the North Atlantic bloc, the peoples are demanding that their governments should change their policy and bring it into harmony with the national interests of those countries, and that this movement has gained greatly in strength. The peoples are refusing to have confidence in governments which want to pursue their irresponsible policy of aggravating the international situation. The peoples of the whole world ardently desire the relaxation of international tension, the clearing of the international atmosphere, and the removal of the threat of a world war. The peoples of the Western countries, which have been drawn into the cold war, have grown weary of high taxes, of eternal anxiety for the morrow. The peace-loving peoples in all countries are demanding the peaceful settlement of outstanding controversial questions by negotiation among the great Powers.
28. In this connexion, it must be noted that reactionary circles often use the word “negotiations” to mask their real designs. They attach to their proposals for “negotiations” conditions clearly calculated to make the proposed negotiations impossible in practice, or else, when the negotiations are already under way, they stipulate conditions which will nullify the results. Examples of this are their attitude in regard to the forthcoming political conference on Korea, or their demand, before opening any negotiations on Germany, for an agreement on the revival of German militarism. The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR considers that the General Assembly must above all things insist on the peaceful settlement of controversial issues, and call upon the States concerned to conclude agreements which' will help to bring about a relaxation of international tension.
29. Speaking in the General Assembly on 18 September [436th meeting], the representative of Australia unblushingly slandered the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China. In his desire to denigrate the foreign policy of the USSR, he spoke of everything, from the mythical Iron Curtain down to “the great thaw ... in the Ice Age of Soviet politics”. Such idle verbage about the non-existent aggressive intentions of the USSR is aimed at hiding the truth about who is really to blame for the present international tension. It is mendacious to allege that the Soviet peace proposals are merely a strategem, and that the post-war history of the USSR is evidence of its aggressive intentions. Mr. Malenkov, the President of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, has said the following: “For the Soviet Government, for all of us Soviet people, the strengthening of international peace and security is not a matter of strategems and diplomatic manoeuvring. It is our guiding principle in the field of foreign policy.”
30. The whole world knows that the aggressive aspirations of reactionary circles in the United States and in certain other countries are the cause of the present international tension. The representatives who have spoken here are well aware of this, but they still try to justify United States foreign policy to world public opinion, and to discredit Soviet foreign policy, the policy of peace and friendship among nations.
31. A serious threat to peace and to the peaceful settlement of international questions is the campaign of propaganda for a new world war which is being conducted in a number of countries. Its constituent elements are war hysteria and malicious slander directed against the Soviet Union and the democratic camp, even to the point of open appeals to overthrow the existing governments of the countries in that camp. In some countries, and particularly in the United States, the provisions of the General Assembly resolution [110 (II)] of 3 November 1947, containing a condemnation of propaganda “which is either designed or likely to provoke or encourage any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression”, are being rudely trampled under foot. Statements designed to intensify the war hysteria are being made by prominent political leaders in the United States, such as Senator Wiley, Senator Bridges, and others. Blackmail based on the atomic bomb and the hydrogen bomb has received especially wide publicity. On 19 June 1953, the British periodical, the Spectator, stated the following: “The pressure on the State Department to indulge in diplomacy by atomic threats or, as it is more politely known, in ‘preventive diplomacy’, is very strong.”
32. Statements of this kind are arousing the just indignation of world public opinion. The common people throughout the world are demanding that the governments of a number of countries should take decisive steps to put a stop to the propaganda which is being conducted in those countries with the aim of inciting enmity and hatred among nations and preparing a new world war. The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR entirely and unreservedly endorses these legitimate, timely and just demands.
33. I should like now to touch on the work of the Economic and Social Council during this period. As is well known, the Council has been dealing with questions of international trade. The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe convened a special conference of experts on questions of trade between the countries of Western and Eastern Europe; the fourteenth congress of the International Chamber of Commerce was held in Vienna, and other conferences have been held.
34. What have these conferences shown? They have shown that the present trade situation is extremely detrimental to many countries of Western Europe, since, under pressure from the United States, they have been compelled to interrupt their trade with the USSR, the peoples’ democracies and the People’s Republic of China. It should be pointed out that, prior to the Second World War, approximately one-third of the total trade of the countries of Western Europe was carried on with the Soviet Union and the countries of Eastern Europe, from which they imported foodstuffs and raw materials and to which they exported their industrial products.
35. According to figures quoted in the Economic Bulletin for Europe which appeared in July 1953, exports from Eastern Europe to Western Europe in 1952, were approximately one-quarter of what they had been in 1938. The destruction of the traditional trade relations between the West and the East is disorganizing the economies of a number of Western European countries, particularly the United Kingdom, France and Italy, and the foreign trade deficits of those countries have never been as high as they are now.
36. The militarization of the economy and the difficult international trade position are leading to increased unemployment, a higher cost of living, heavier direct and indirect taxation, and inflation, with a consequent drop in the standard of living of the masses. According to figures given by the Economic Commission for Europe, which are based on Official sources only, the cost of living is soaring in the countries of Western Europe. In September 1952, for example, the subsistence minimum had increased by 45 per cent in France as compared with September 1949, by 35 per cent in Norway, 28 per cent in Sweden, 27 per cent in Greece, 22 per cent in the United Kingdom and 21 per cent in the Netherlands. These figures show that the standard of living of the masses is falling, while at the same time the burden of taxation, the full weight of which is borne by them, is being increased. The Economic and Social Council has not taken all the necessary measures to promote — and I stress the word “promote” — international economic and social co-operation based on the principle of equality of rights.
37. The General Assembly must help to restore normal international trade. As regards trade with the People’s Republic of China, it is the United States that is attempting to prevent such trade. This attempt is doomed to failure. In the present state of international relations, any calculations based on the possibility of isolating the People’s Republic of China in some way are merely reactionary utopian ideas entertained by people who have divorced themselves from life and lost all sense of reality. Life itself is more and more insistently raising the question of a return to a peace economy and this is possible only if peaceful relations between States are developed. The task of the United Nations is to do everything possible to bring about a return to a peace economy and to promote international co-operation and the establishment of friendly relations among States.
38. The Soviet Union has repeatedly introduced in the United Nations a series of proposals designed to strengthen international peace and security, friendship among nations and international co-operation. The draft resolution [A/2485/Rev. 1] submitted by the delegation of the Soviet Union under the heading “Measures to avert the threat of a new world war and to reduce tension in international relations” aims at creating even more favourable conditions for further action to avert the threat of a new world war. The Soviet Union, anxious for the development of peaceful co-operation between States, attaches great importance to the strengthening of good-neighbourly relations with all States. On 9 March 1953, Mr. Molotov, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the USSR, made the following statement: “Our foreign policy has no aggressive aims and for its part does not admit of intervention in the affairs of other States. Our foreign policy is known throughout the world as a pacific foreign policy; its unchanging aims are to defend, to maintain and to strengthen international peace, and to combat preparations for war and the unleashing of a new war; it is a policy which aims at international co- operation and the development of business relations with all countries which are themselves striving for the same end. Such a foreign policy is in the vital interests of the Soviet people and, at the same time, of all other peace-loving peoples.” That is the Soviet Government’s general line on question of foreign policy.
39. The concept of the struggle for peace is close to the hearts of and easily understood by all peoples and all progressive men and women, who are vitally interested in the maintenance of peace throughout the world. The present stage in the development of international relations is especially important and imposes special responsibilities. We all well know that the peoples ardently desire peace and profoundly detest war. It is our duty to assist in the settlement of controversial international questions and to prevent the improvement now detected in the international atmosphere from giving place to a fresh intensification of tension. We must see to it that the United Nations fulfils its duty and returns to the path laid down for it in the Charter, that is, the path of promoting the pacific settlement of all international disputes on the basis of respect for the sovereign rights of all nations.
40. The United Nations must take note that, side by side with the peace-loving forces in the world, there are forces which are pursuing the path of war and carrying out an aggressive policy. These reactionary circles are carrying out the policy of the cold war and are engaging in international acts of provocation of all kinds.
41. The Byelorussian people, like all other peace- loving peoples, is vitally interested in averting a further aggravation of international tension. The Byelorussian people, who endured directly the onslaught of Hitler’s armies, does not want mankind to be plunged again into the maelstrom of a new world war.
42. The United Nations must do everything necessary to achieve a satisfactory solution of such fundamental problems as the reduction of armaments, the prohibition of the atomic and hydrogen weapons and other types of weapons of mass destruction, and of other important questions designed to strengthen international peace and security. The peoples of the whole world expect the United Nations to take effective and constructive action to strengthen international peace and security. Hundreds of millions of people live in faith and hope that there will be a further reduction of international tension. It is our duty to justify these generous hopes of the peoples.
43. The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR warmly supports the proposals of the USSR delegation and calls upon representatives at the eighth session of the General Assembly to support them also. These proposals are aimed entirely and exclusively at reducing international tension and strengthening peace throughout the world. By adopting these proposals, the General Assembly will fulfil its duty in the matter of averting the threat of a new world war and reducing tension in international relations.