UN General Assembly
1966

13. This brings me to the third argument, which we grant has a certain measure of validity, namely that a debate on Viet-Nam might drive some of the great Powers further apart, whereas a progressive rapprochement is essential to the cause of peace. But this argument can also be set aside if United Nations intervention is planned in such a way as precisely to avoid the negative reaction which such intervention might create. I am referring particularly to a bitter debate on the substance, or the alleged substance, of the question, full of accusations and counter-accusations. While I do not wish to suggest specific solutions, I wonder whether the United Nations could not present a vigorous appeal or judgement in a resolution without debate —deliberately without debate. This, plus a mandate given to the chief official of the Organization, could combine the vehement expression of will, inexorable universal will, with the diplomatic tact of the Secretary-General, to the extent that his personal interventions were considered desirable.