As the main purpose of the United Nations is to strengthen peace and international security, the delegation of the Byelorussian SSR feels it must state its views on the fundamental issues of the contemporary international situation.
27. It should be noted that, through the efforts of the Soviet Union and other peace-loving countries, the international situation at the moment is somewhat more relaxed than it was last year, notwithstanding the stubborn resistance of aggressive circles among the Western Powers. Nevertheless, we have over the past few months witnessed a revival of the forces of aggression in a number of areas in the world. By generating new conflicts they are endeavouring to plunge mankind into a vortex of fresh disasters.
28. Recent events in the Near East and in the Middle East are the result of a conspiracy by aggressive circles in the West against the freedom and independence of the Arab peoples. The aggression against Egypt, the armed struggle which the French colonialists are conducting against the Algerian people, the British aggression against Oman, the bombing of the cities of Yemen by British aircraft, the attempts to strangle the independent Republic of Syria and other events have shown that the aggressive forces will stop at nothing in their efforts to maintain colonial rule in that area. They are resorting to armed force, ignoring the fact that at the present time local military conflicts may develop into a major conflagration.
29. The General Assembly has the duty to bar the road to the forces of aggression and war and to promote efforts designed to reduce international tension and establish an atmosphere of confidence in relations between States. The security of individual States and international security as a whole will be achieved not by the formation of military groupings and the continuation of the cold war, but by the combined efforts of all States, large and small, for the strengthening of universal peace.
30. The representatives of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and several other countries who spoke before me are pursuing a different course, that of increasing mistrust between States. They are endeavouring to intensify the "cold war"; they are in effect opposing any relaxation of international tension. They are utilizing the so-called Hungarian question to this end, and have succeeded once again in having it included in the agenda of the current session. They are endeavouring to intervene in the internal affairs of the Hungarian People’s Republic, once again to let loose a torrent of slander against the Soviet Union and the peoples' democracies.
31. As in the past, the delegation of the Byelorussian SSR will resolutely oppose any efforts at United Nations intervention in the internal affairs of Hungary. The United Nations Charter gives no one the right to intervene in the internal affairs of other States.
32. We know that the United Nations is based upon the principles of the peaceful coexistence of States with different social and political systems. The Organization was conceived as a centre for concerting the actions of States, where the Member States might express their views, where decisions might be taken on questions of peace and security, of economic, social and cultural co-operation, taking into account the interests of all.
33. The Soviet Union and many other States consistently adhere to these fundamental principles of the United Nations. This is attested by the draft declaration concerning the peaceful coexistence of States submitted by the Soviet Union [A/36731 at the present session. The draft contains an appeal to States to be guided in their relations with, one another by the following principles: mutual respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty, non-aggression, non-intervention in one another’s domestic affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence. Whereas these principles are winning an ever greater measure of recognition among States, the representatives of the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Canada and other countries who have spoken from this platform have either ignored these principles, endeavoured not to notice them or have opposed them because they proclaim the sovereign right of every State to freedom and independence and express the most cherished hopes of the peoples of all nations of the world.
34. Speaking here on 25 September [687th meeting], Mr. Casey, the Minister for External Affairs of Australia, grossly distorted these principles by attributing to the Soviet Union some special interpretation of the concept of peaceful coexistence. Mr. Casey spoke here as an ardent enemy of the principle of the peaceful coexistence of States with differing social and political systems. He evidently wishes that the American-Australian system were the only one in the world. However, that is not for him to decide. Whether he likes it or not, he will have to reckon with the existence of a world-wide" socialist system.
35. Forty years of the history of the Soviet State have fully confirmed that for the Soviet Union the policy of peaceful coexistence is not a matter of tactics or diplomatic manoeuvring, but the general line of Soviet foreign policy in its relations with all States. The great founder of the Soviet State, Lenin, said: "We favour alliances with all States, excluding none." The efforts of the representatives of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and a number of other countries to distort and vilify the peaceful foreign policy of the Soviet Union are therefore futile.
36. At the present time, among the unresolved international issues preoccupying the peoples of the entire world, no question is more important than that of the reduction of armaments and armed forces, the prohibition of the manufacture and use of atomic and hydrogen weapons and the elimination of the threat of a new war. People all over the world do not want the air raid sirens to rouse the children out of their sleep. They wish to labour in peace and to enjoy all the advantages of contemporary civilization and culture. If the United Nations could settle the question of disarmament, a link would be forged in a chain leading to a radical improvement in the entire international situation.
37. We understand the concern and alarm shown here by the representatives of a number of States over the armaments race, since it affects the vital interests of all peoples. At the same time we have been called upon to listen to speeches by the representatives of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and others who have not only failed to show any concern and alarm, but have, on the contrary, endeavoured in every way to prove that disarmament was a practical impossibility. On the pretext of an alleged "Soviet threat", they regard atomic and hydrogen weapons as the basis of their military strength and are therefore seeking to prevent the discontinuance of nuclear weapons tests and to retain the right to use them. In the United States and the United Kingdom, it is widely maintained that it will be possible to initiate real negotiations with the Soviet Union only after a sufficient quantity of atomic and nuclear bombs have been accumulated.
38. These same representatives allege that the Soviet Union has been making its disarmament proposals for propaganda purposes only. It is strange, but a fact nevertheless, that when the Soviet Union makes real and specific disarmament proposals, the Western Powers declare this to be propaganda. But let us endeavour to put these proposals to the test. The future will show whether they are propaganda or represent the firm resolve of the Soviet Union to bring about real disarmament.
39. Let the Governments of the United States, the United Kingdom and the USSR, which possess atomic weapons, be called upon to assume in the first stage, at least, a temporary obligation not to use atomic and hydrogen weapons, so that, if a broad international agreement on disarmament has not been achieved at the expiration of a five-year period, the United Nations will again consider the question of the obligation of States to refrain from using nuclear weapons. This is a real proposal.
40. Let the Governments of the United States and the USSR be called upon to reduce their armed forces gradually, in three stages, to 1,700,000 men, and the Governments of France and the United Kingdom to 650,000 men, and to reduce their military budgets by 15 per cent in the first stage.
41. Let us call upon the Governments of States which maintain numerous military bases on the territories of other countries to follow the example of the Soviet Union in liquidating their military bases. This would help to put an end to the armaments race, increase confidence among States and terminate the "cold war".
42. In his speech to the Assembly on 24 September [685th meeting], the representative of the United Kingdom, Mr. Lloyd, endeavours " to paint in rosy hues the position of the Western Powers in the Sub-Committee of the Disarmament Commission, and on the other hand to vilify the attitude of the Soviet Union on disarmament questions. This was an example of Mr. Lloyd's firmly rooted habit of seeking to shift the blame.
43. The Prime Minister of Canada, Mr.Diefenbaker, whose country is a member of the Sub-Committee of the Disarmament Commission, also undertook the thankless task of distorting the Soviet Union's clear position on disarmament. In his speech of 23 September [683rd meeting] he turned the facts upside down when he alleged that the Soviet Union had refused to meet the Western Powers halfway on disarmament and that it had even refused to consider the Western proposals.
44. Nothing could be more absurd than such an assertion. As the representative of a country which is taking part in the Sub-Committee's activities, Mr. Diefenbaker really knows very well that the Soviet Union not only considered the Western proposals seriously but on repeated occasions took steps to meet the Western Powers half-way. By his speech, Mr. Diefenbaker has once again shown that Canada and the other three Western Powers are refusing to reach an agreement on disarmament, the prohibition of atomic and hydrogen weapons and the suspension of tests of those weapons.
45. Mr. Diefenbaker vainly endeavoured to prove here that the North Atlantic bloc was not an aggressive bloc. But this is a waste of effort, like trying to show that black is white. No peace-loving utterances about the North Atlantic bloc will enable Mr. Diefenbaker to conceal the obvious fact that at the present time the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is the chief instrument in the preparation of a new world war.
46. To form a clearer notion of the position of the Western Powers, including the United Kingdom and France, on disarmament questions, let us turn to the work of the Sub-Committee of the Disarmament Commission which has just come to an end.
47. We have closely followed the work of the Subcommittee over a period of more than five months, and we have studied the documents submitted by the representatives of the Western Powers as well as by the representatives of the Soviet Union. The Byelorussian people, like all the other peoples of the world, expect the participants in the negotiations to find ways to reconcile their positions, to display the necessary patience, wisdom, goodwill and desire for agreement, and to exert every effort in their search for ways to break the disarmament deadlock.
48. The peoples’ hopes were unfortunately disappointed. The question naturally arises, therefore, of the responsibility for the fact that no practical results were achieved in the work of the Sub-Committee and that it failed to deal successfully with the problems before it.
49. The responsibility for preventing a settlement of the disarmament problem lies, of course, with the representatives of the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Canada who, as became clear in the course of the Sub-Committee’s work, want neither a general nor a partial reduction of armaments, nor even a temporary suspension of the testing of nuclear weapons. While they paid lip-service to disarmament, they made every effort to steer the Sub-Committee away from the settlement of this vitally important problem. They talked about disarmament in order to cover up the continuing atomic and hydrogen weapons race.
50. As we know, the Soviet Union has, since 1946, striven tirelessly in the United Nations for a settlement of this important problem. The purpose of every Soviet proposal in the United Nations has been to end the armaments race, to achieve substantial reduction of armaments and armed forces, to prohibit atomic and hydrogen weapons and to use atomic energy for peaceful purposes only.
51. The Soviet Government's latest proposals of 18 March, 30 April and 14 June 1957 [DC/112, annexes 1, 7 and 12] with respect to a reduction of armaments, the prohibition of atomic and hydrogen weapons, a temporary suspension of the testing of nuclear weapons and the removal of the threat of a new war contain a number of fresh elements which provide a basis for the settlement of controversial questions. These proposals constitute a great contribution to the cause of peace and pave the way to a practical settlement of the disarmament problem.
52. The Soviet Union went some distance to meet the position of the Western Powers by accepting their proposals with respect to conventional armaments. We would have thought that the Western Powers would, in turn, have agreed to discontinue the use of atomic and hydrogen weapons and to prohibit them completely. The peace-loving peoples awaited these measures and expected not words but deeds from the Western Powers. However, their hopes were dashed. Alleging that the Soviet proposals were unduly broad, the representatives of the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Canada claimed that a programme of partial measures would have a better chance of succeeding.
53. Taking these views into account, the Soviet Union submitted new proposals for the Sub-Committee's consideration. The Soviet Union proposed that, irrespective of other disarmament problems, the testing of nuclear weapons should be suspended for a period of two to three years. I shall not dwell on these proposals since they have been set out in detail by Mr. Gromyko, Chairman of the Soviet delegation [681st meeting].
54. On their side, what are the Western Powers proposing? After long delays and repeated postponements of the Sub-Committee’s meetings, Mr. Stassen, the representative of the United States, speaking on behalf of the Western Powers, submitted their so-called new proposals on 21 August 1957. Having considered them carefully, our delegation has come to the conclusion that these new proposals submitted by the Western Powers fail to remove any of the previous obstacles to a disarmament agreement. Insisting upon their previous conditions, piling reservation upon reservation like ice flows during the spring tides, the Western Powers are making every effort to prevent a discontinuance of nuclear weapons tests and to retain the right to use them.
55. They forget that the destruction which would result from a new war fought with modern weapons would not spare any country in any continent. We should also bear in mind that the level of atomic radiation in the world is constantly increasing as a result of the testing of nuclear weapons. World public opinion is deeply concerned over this fact.
56. Allow me to give a few examples. Charles-Noel Martin, the French atomic scientist, recently submitted to the Academy of Sciences in Paris a scientific study on the harmful effects of atomic explosions. In it he analysed the physical, biological and climatic phenomena resulting from the explosion of extremely powerful atomic and hydrogen bombs. He indicates in his study that over the past twelve years a total of 140 tests were conducted, thirty of them since May 1956. The energy released by these explosions is equivalent to the destructive power of from 6,000 to 7,000 atomic bombs of the type dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
57. In this connexion, I should like to recall that in August 1957 twelve years had elapsed since the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were subjected to the first atomic bombings in the history of mankind.
58. Mr. Fujiyama, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan, speaking from this rostrum on 19 September [680th meeting] during the general debate of the current session of the General Assembly, rightly called attention to the unspeakable tragedy which would result from a nuclear war and said that settlement of the question of discontinuing the testing of nuclear weapons was urgently required.
59. Thousands of scientists in Europe, America, Asia and Africa favour the discontinuance of the testing of nuclear weapons and the removal of the threat of an atomic war. In August this year a large group of Byelorussian scientists issued a statement on the question of discontinuing the use and testing of nuclear weapons. In their statement these scientists called attention to the fact that the testing of nuclear weapons on an ever increasing scale now threatens the life and health not only of the present generation but also of future generations.
60. That is why the General Assembly must seriously consider the item entitled "Effects of Atomic Radiation" proposed by the delegation of Czechoslovakia [A/3614 and Add. 1]. It is the view of all peace-loving people that a settlement of the problem of disarmament, the prohibition of atomic and hydrogen weapons and the discontinuance of the testing of those weapons, must not be delayed.
61. A real opportunity for a decision on the discontinuance of the testing of nuclear weapons will be provided at the current session. The draft resolution submitted by the delegation of the Soviet Union provides for the discontinuance under international control of the testing of atomic and hydrogen weapons for a period of two to three years. The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR fully supports that proposal because it reflects the hopes and demands of the peoples throughout the world.
62. The United States and the United Kingdom nevertheless refuse to stop testing nuclear weapons. Thus, in the statement he made on 19 September [680th meeting], Mr. Dulles, in effect, spoke in favour of continuing such tests, for he invited United Nations observers to attend a forthcoming test. Naturally, we want to know the purpose of the United States proposal. Does it not want to continue to test nuclear weapons in its territory with the blessing of the United Nations and to avail itself of the high status of that Organisation to cover up its refusal to discontinue the testing of nuclear weapons? The United Nations cannot and must not lend itself to that scheme.
63. What are the reasons for the opposition of the United States to a settlement of the disarmament problem and, in particular, to the discontinuance of the testing of nuclear weapons? They may be found in the fact that the American monopolists are prepared to sacrifice hundreds of millions of human lives in order to receive huge profits which, according to Congressman George Mahon, a member of the United States House of Representatives, are sky-rocketing.
64. According to the newspaper Daily Mirror of 24 September 1957, President Eisenhower told the National Security Council that the United States was maintaining "the most powerful military establishment in our peacetime history".
65. Profits earned by American corporations increased from $23,500 million in 1946 to $43,600 million in 1956. The well-informed Magazine of Wall Street referred to 1955 and 1956 as the "golden years" of business. That is why the American monopolists are making every effort to maintain the existing international tension and to prevent a settlement of the disarmament problem.
66. One must agree with Mr. Evatt, the leader of the Australian Labour Party, who wrote in the issue of the magazine Tribune of 27 June 1957 that "the influence against disarmament exercised by tremendously powerful capital interests embedded in armaments manufacture...will be found no less sinister than the activities of the notorious arms ring which helped forward the rapid growth of Hitlerism and Fascism between World War I and World War II".
67. The Byelorussian people are vitally interested in an early settlement of the disarmament problem because their country has been laid waste by German militarism twice within a period of twenty-five years in the present century. During the Second World War alone, the total damage sustained by the Byelorussian SSR amounted to more than one-half of its national wealth. In the post-war period the Byelorussian people carried out a huge construction programme to remove the tragic consequences of the war-time devastation and to rebuild its destroyed towns and villages.
68. Industry has not only been restored but has been reconstructed on an entirely different technical basis. Heavy industry has been developed considerably, particularly machine-building, and now includes new branches such as the building of tractors, motor-cars, instruments and so forth. By 1956 industrial production in the Byelorussian SSR was 2.7 times greater than in the pre-war year of 1940 and 22 times greater than before the revolution.
69. The Byelorussian people are vitally interested in a lasting, durable peace which would allow the peoples of the world to engage in peaceful, constructive work.
70. The Byelorussian people warmly support the Soviet Union Government's proposals on disarmament and the easing of international tension. These proposals reflect the ardent desire of the peoples of the Soviet Union to prevent a new world war, strengthen peace and security throughout the world, and establish confidence and co-operation among peoples. The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR hopes that the USSR proposals will commend themselves to the States Members of the United Nations.
71. I should like now to refer to the situation in West Germany. We do so because the Western Powers have artificially linked the disarmament problem to the question of the unification of Germany.
72. We wish to call the General Assembly's attention to the growing threat to European peace and security represented by the West German revanchists. The Byelorussian people, one of Germany’s closest neighbours, cannot remain indifferent to the remilitarization of West Germany currently undertaken by the Adenauer Government.
73. It is well known that both the First and Second World Wars, unleashed by German militarists, began in Europe. Now, barely twelve years after the surrender of Hitlerite Germany, the West German militarists under the leadership of the Adenauer Government are once again emerging as a real threat to European security. Nurturing ideas of revenge, the Adenauer Government joined the aggressive North Atlantic bloc, introduced compulsory military service and created insurmountable obstacles to the unification of Germany. Disregarding the vital interests of the German people, the Adenauer Government subordinated the domestic and foreign policy of the Federal Republic of Germany to the demands of the ruling circles of the United States which are actively reviving German militarism, the deadly foe of the peoples of Europe.
74. As the whole world knows, the Adenauer Government has undertaken the formation of a West German armed force. Measures have been taken to form twelve divisions, a number subsequently to be increased to sixty. West Germany already has its own air force and navy. Military schools have been set up in the Federal Republic of Germany. Orders have already been placed for the delivery of 5,000 tanks to the Federal Republic of Germany.
75. The aggressive nature of the West German army is evident from the fact that it is being trained under the direction of former generals such as: Heusinger, Milch, Meister, Osterkamp, Ruge and others, and that former SS officers are serving in it. Military cadres are being trained at a rate which will in future provide military leaders for 200 West German divisions. Already 50,000 unit and company commanders, platoon leaders, not to speak of senior staff, are receiving instruction. Out of the total of 37,000 million marks which the Federal Republic of Germany is spending in 1957-1958, no less than 9,000 million marks are for military expenditures. In the first quarter of 1957 alone military expenditure was nine times higher than during the same period in 1956.
76. It should also be pointed out that the United States is establishing installations in the Federal Republic of Germany for the launching of guided missiles. The concentration by the Western Powers of various types of nuclear weapons on the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany and their plans to equip the West German army with atomic weapons is tantamount to the conversion of the Federal Republic of Germany into the main European armed camp and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s basic stronghold in Europe for conducting an atomic war. Atomic warfare on German soil can end only in disaster on an unheard-of scale for the people of Germany. However, the Adenauer Government, disregarding all this, has entered into an alliance with the most aggressive circles in the United States. The Bonn-Washington axis has become a political and military reality. The war industry in West Germany has been rebuilt once again with the financial assistance of the United States. That country, as we see, is following a course which constitutes a serious threat to the cause of world peace.
77. The revanche forces are becoming ever more influential in Western Germany. A proof of this is the existence of 1,118 soldiers’ and officers’ associations, forty-five of which are officially recognized as having formed part of the SS, Hitler’s true and faithful servants. In the Federal Republic of Germany twenty-seven newspapers and forty-seven periodicals of Fascist character and tendency are published. An unbridled and large-scale propaganda for revenge is being carried on.
78. Official leaders of the Federal Republic of Germany are indulging in brazen threats of revanche directed against the Socialist countries. Let me illustrate this by an example. On 14 June 1957, Mr. Oberlander, Minister of the Bonn Government, openly outlined the Western German imperialists’ programme of conquest at a meeting of the Christian Democratic Union in Berlin. "In Russia," he said, "land is waiting for us. We must take root there. We must liberate not only the 17 million people of the German Democratic Republic, but also the 120 million people inhabiting the European part of the Soviet Union and the peoples’ democracies.... We must constantly impress this upon our young people and train them accordingly."
79. In the face of such statements we cannot but watch the warmongers with increased vigilance. In this connexion I would point out to the representatives of the United Kingdom, of France and of other Western European countries that these statements seem to us to echo the aggressive appeals of Hitlerite propaganda for living space for German militarists before the German armies invaded France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark and Norway. Who can vouch that German militarists will not do the same again, if the European nations do not take timely steps to restrain the West German forces of revenge?
80. The facts show that the ruling groups of the Federal Republic of Germany and the forces behind them have not learnt the lessons of history or where the interests of the German people lie. They are not guided by the German people’s national interests or by the interests of peace, but by the desire to pander to the militarist and revanche tendencies of certain groups among the West German armed forces. This is borne out also by the Adenauer Government’s rejection of the proposal made by the Government of the German Democratic Republic that the German Democratic Republic and the Federal Republic of Germany should form a confederation on the basis of an international treaty. Yet in present conditions this proposal constitutes the only realistic approach to a peaceful settlement of the German question. The Byelorussian people welcome and approve the proposal which the Government of the German Democratic Republic has made to regularize relations between-it and the Federal Republic of Germany.
81. As you are aware, the years since the war have seen great changes throughout the world. The most important historical event during that period is the creation and consolidation of the People’s Republic of China, the eighth anniversary of which will be celebrated tomorrow by the 600 million people of China and by all progressive mankind. But it is a most abnormal situation that for eight years the representatives of that great Power, the People’s Republic of China, have been refused admission to the United Nations. The Organization is suffering irreparable damage as a result.
82. In Asia, Africa, in the Near-East and in the Middle East, more than twenty sovereign States have emerged which until recently were colonies or semi-colonies. Most of them are now Members of the United Nations; However, for political reasons, the Western Powers are blocking the road for the admission of one of the oldest Asian States, the Mongolian People’s Republic. The Byelorussian delegation has repeatedly declared that the Mongolian People’s Republic’s application for admission to membership should be granted. In connexion with the message sent on 8 July 1957 by the Great Khural to the parliaments of all Members of the United Nations concerning the admission of the Mongolian People’s Republic to the United Nations, the delegation of the Byelorussian SSR, on behalf of the Supreme Soviet and Government of the Byelorussian SSR, affirms its resolute support for this legitimate desire of the Mongolian people. It will consistently press for the admission of the Mongolian People’s Republic to the United Nations.
83. The attainment of independence by many Eastern States has considerably, altered the world political situation. But many millions of people in colonial and dependent countries are still fighting to obtain self-government and independence.
84. The colonial powers do not wish to accept the fact that the peoples of the colonies have ceased to be their subservient tool and they therefore strive by all means to delay the collapse of the colonial system and to intimidate the peoples that are gaining their freedom The reactionary groups of the colonial powers do not wish to acknowledge the historical processes by which the peoples of the East are freeing themselves from the old colonial dependence; they do not wish to renounce the treaties imposing inequality on these peoples by force of arms. These groups disregard world opinion, which is calling for an end to colonial adventures: they wish to restore their domination in the former colonial countries by the use of armed force. They wish to entrench themselves in important sectors of the Middle East by setting the Arab peoples against each other. The representatives of colonialism are in the habit of talking about the "civilizing mission" of the administering Powers in the colonial countries. The policy of neo-colonialism is generally camouflaged by false declarations about what is called economic and cultural "assistance" to backward and under-developed countries.
85. In truth, however, the United States, the United Kingdom and France are restricting the national and sovereign rights of the countries in this area, interfering in their domestic affairs, setting up military bases and attempting to incorporate the Near Eastern and Middle Eastern countries forcibly into the system of military blocs. They cover up these actions by inventing the tale of a threat to these countries emanating from the USSR.
86. In his statement f680th meeting] in the general debate on 19 September 1957, Mr. Dulles tried to show that the Soviet Union is attempting to subjugate the Middle East and to use it as a basis for its domination over Europe, Asia and Africa. Such disgraceful fabrications and inventions are necessary for those who, each year, obtain more than 100 million tons of oil from the Near East and the Middle Eastern countries, sell them at exorbitant prices on Western European markets and elsewhere and who are bent on perpetuating this inequitable situation. Suffice it to say that the net profits which the American monopolists obtained from oil in the Near East and the Middle East in 1955 amounted to $1,900 million.
87. Mr. Dulles went so far as to make the absurd allegation that a small country like Syria with its 4 million people was threatening Turkey and its other neighbours. As the saying goes, the wolf himself cries wolf. Mr. Dulles wished to intimidate the General Assembly by saying that the Eisenhower doctrine would be applied to Syria, that is that there would be armed intervention in the Middle East. You are aware that the United States are rushing arms to Israel, Jordan, Turkey and Iraq by air. This has profoundly alarmed the Arab countries, because they realized that the United States is working for the instigation of war in the Middle East. Needless to say, the Arab countries would become a battlefield, and armed conflict could not be confined to that area.
88. Mr. MacDonald, the representative of New Zealand, also made a completely false statement on 23 September 1957 [683rd meeting], when he repeated Mr. Dulles’ assertion that the Soviet Union was trying to establish its domination in the Middle East. Mr. MacDonald was displeased to find that the Arab countries were not opposing the alleged Soviet Union penetration into the Middle East, a process occurring merely in his imagination. He is well aware that the Soviet Union in no way threatens the Arab countries. On the other hand, such a threat is clearly contained in the Eisenhower doctrine and emanates from aggressive groups in the United States.
89. The Arab peoples themselves appreciate that the Soviet Union desires peaceful coexistence and friendly co-operation with all Arab countries. Unlike the United States, the United Kingdom and France, the Soviet Union consistently advocates the strengthening of peace and security in the Near East and the Middle East and does not interfere in the domestic affairs of the sovereign States of that region. It is sympathetic to the national liberation movement among the Arab peoples.
90. The United Nations should join the defenders of the Near Eastern and Middle Eastern security; it should condemn the formation of military blocs by the United States and the United Kingdom in that area, the establishment of military bases by them and their interference in the domestic affairs of these countries.
91. The United Nations should see to it that the idea of force is buried once and for all in relations between States; that in its place the concept of peaceful cooperation triumphs, based on confidence and mutual understanding between States, irrespective of their social and political structure. It should promote the solution of hitherto unsettled international issues by means of negotiation and agreement between the States concerned with due regard to the rights and interests of those States.
92. Never before has the United Nations borne so heavy a responsibility for the maintenance of peace and th6 future of peoples as in our day. World opinion expects the work of the United Nations to be fully consistent with the noble Purposes and Principles of its Charter, designed for the maintenance of universal peace and security.
93. Like other peace-loving peoples the Byelorussian people are vitally interested in preventing a new deterioration in international relations. The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR is confident that the General Assembly will fulfil its duty toward humanity by removing the threat of a new world war and strengthening peace throughout the world.