UN General Assembly
1956

I should have thought that the representatives of countries which have undergone imperialist rule would have been the first to recognize Soviet actions and words for what they are: an instance of the colonial method and outlook in its most arrogant and ruthless phase. This is true even in detail. The representative of India, who is learned in history, will recall, for example, one technique of nineteenth century imperialism which we have now seen revived by the Soviet Union representative. That technique was to refute allegations of atrocities by solemnly reading out affirmations from your own local colonial officials that they had seen no such atrocities. The Foreign Minister of the Soviet Union stood at this rostrum the other day and read out dispatches from station-masters who, very naturally, said that they had seen no deportations. They were not free to say anything else. How is it possible not to hear in that reply the authentic accents of the worst kind of colonialism?