PRESS
DEPARTMENT OF STATE

September 24, 1973

No. 343

CORRECTED COPY
AS DELIVERED
TEXT

ADDRESS BY
THE HONORABLE HENRY KISSINGER
SECRETARY OF STATE
BEFORE THE 28TH UNITED NATIONS ASSEMBLY
SEPTEMBER 24, 1973

Mr. President, Mr. Secretary General, Distinguished Delegates, Ladies and Gentlemen:

I come before you today -- confirmed in office but two days ago -- as probably the world's most junior Foreign Minister. That President Nixon should ask me as my first official act to speak here for the United States reaffirms the importance that my country attaches to the values and ideals of the United Nations.

It would be idle to deny that the American people, like many others, have sometimes been disappointed because this Organization has not been more successful in translating the hopes for universal peace of its architECTS into concrete accomplishments.

But despite our disappointments, my country remains committed to the goal of a world community. We will continue to work in this Parliament of Man to make it a reality.

Two centuries ago, the philosopher Kant predicted that perpetual peace would come eventually -- either as the creation of man's moral aspirations or as the consequence of physical necessity. What seemed utopian then looms as tomorrow's reality; soon there will be no alternative. Our only choice is whether the world envisaged in the Charter will come about as the result of our vision or of a catastrophe invited by our shortsightedness.

The United States has made its choice. My country seeks true peace, not simply an armistice. We strive for a world in which the rule of law governs and fundamental human rights are the birthright of all. Beyond the bilateral diplomacy, the pragmatic agreements and dramatic steps of recent years, we envisage a comprehensive, institutionalized peace -- a peace which this Organization is uniquely situated to foster and to anchor in the hearts of men.

This will be the spirit of American foreign policy.

This attitude will guide our work in this Organization.

We start from a bedrock of solid progress. Many of the crises that haunted past General Assemblies have been put behind us. Agreement has been

For further information contact:

PR #343

-2-

reached on Berlin; there is a ceasefire in the Middle East; the Viet-Nam war has been ended. The rigid confrontation that has dominated international life and weakened this Organization for a quarter of a century has been softened.

The United States and the Soviet Union have perceived a commonality of interest in avoiding nuclear holocaust and in establishing a broad web of constructive relationships. Talks on strategic arms limitation have already produced historic accords aimed at slowing the arms race and ensuring stratetic stability; we have, today, resumed negotiations on this subject. The positive results we hope for will enhance the security of all mankind.

Two decades of estrangement between the United States and the People's Republic of China have given way to constructive dialogue and productive exchanges. President Nixon has met with the leaders of that nation; we have agreed to an historic communique that honestly sets forth both our differences and our common principles; and we have each opened a Liaison Office in the capital of the other.

Many other countries have seized the initiative and contributed -- in substance and spirit -- to the relaxation of tensions. The nations of Europe and North America are engaged in a conference to further security and cooperation. The two German states have taken their place in this Assembly. India, Pakistan and Bangladesh have begun to move toward a welcome reconciliation. North and South Korea are at last engaged in a dialogue which we hope will lead to a new era of peace and security.

Yet these achievements, solid as they are, have only made less precarious the dangers and divisions inherited from the post-war era. We have ended many of the confrontations of the Cold War; yet, even in this room, the vocabulary of suspicion persists. Relaxation of tensions is justified by some as merely a tactical interlude before renewed struggle. Others suspect the emergence of a two-power condominium. And as tension between the two original blocs has eased, a third grouping increasingly assumes the characteristics of a bloc of its own -- the alignment of the non-aligned.

So the world is uneasily suspended between old slogans and new realities, between a view of peace as but a pause in an unending struggle and a vision of peace as a promise of global cooperation.

In 1946 James Byrnes, the first Secretary of State to address this Assembly, spoke of how the United Nations could help break down habits of thinking in national isolation and move toward "universal understanding and tolerance among all peoples."

The United States will never be satisfied with a world of uneasy truces, of offsetting blocs, of accommodations of convenience. We know that power can enforce a resigned passivity, but only a sense of justice can enlist consensus. We strive for a peace whose stability rests not merely on a balance of forces, but on shared aspirations. We are convinced that a structure which ignores humane values will prove cold and empty and unfulfilling to most of mankind.

The United States deeply believes

-- that justice cannot be confined by national frontiers;

-- that truth is universal, and not the peculiar possession of a single people or group or ideology;

PR #343

-3-

-- that compassion and humanity must ennoble all our endeavors.

In this spirit we ask the Assembly to move with us from detente to cooperation, from coexistence to community.

Our journey must begin with the world as it is and with the issues now before us. The United States will spare no effort to ease tensions further and to move toward greater stability.

-- We shall continue, in the spirit of the Shanghai Communique, our search for a new relationship with the People's Republic of China.

-- We shall work to promote positive trends elsewhere in Asia. The uncertain peace in Indochina must be strengthened; the world community cannot afford, or permit, a relapse into war in that region.

-- We shall continue to pursue vigorously the building of constructive relations with the Soviet Union.

-- We shall strive to promote conciliation in Europe. In the negotiations beginning next month we shall seek a reduction of the military forces that have faced each other for so long across that divided continent.

-- We shall give new vigor to our policy of partnership in the Western Hemisphere.

-- We shall honor our pledge to promote self-determination, economic development, and human dignity across the continent of Africa.

-- We shall press on with strategic arms limitation talks. We consider them crucial for security and stability in this period.

-- We shall search for solutions to the worldwide problem of conventional weapons, which drain our resources and fuel the fires of local conflict.

In these efforts, the United States will be guided by fundamental principles:

-- We have no desire for domination. We will oppose -- as we have consistenly opposed throughout this century -- any nation that chooses this path. We have not been asked to participate in a condominium; we would reject such an appeal if it were made.

-- We will never abandon our allies or our friends. The strengthening of our traditional ties is the essential foundation for the development of new relationships with old adversaries.

-- We will work for peace through the United Nations as well as through bilateral relationships.

We recognize our special obligation, as a Permanent Member of the Security Council, to assist in the search for just solutions in those parts of the world now torn by strife such as the Middle East. While we cannot substitute for the efforts of those most directly involved, we are prepared to use our influence to generate a spirit of accommodation and to encourage the parties toward practical progress.

(w)

PR #343

-4-

But progress on the traditional agenda is not enough. The more we succeed in solving political problems the more other and perhaps deeper challenges emerge. As the world grows more stable we must confront the question of the ends of detente. As the threat of war recedes the problem of the quality of life takes on more urgent significance.

We are in fact, members of a community drawn by modern science, technology, and new forms of communication into a proximity for which we are still politically unprepared. Technology daily outstrips the ability of our institutions to cope with its fruits. Our political imagination must catch up with our scientific vision. This is at the same time the greatest challenge and the greatest opportunity of this Organization:

> The pollution of the skies, the seas and the land is a global problem.

The increased consumption of cereals and protein has reduced world food reserves to dangerously low levels.

The demand for energy is outrunning supply, and the need for technological innovation is urgent.

The growth of the world's economy is inhibited by restrictive trading blocs and an insufficiently flexible international monetary system.

The exploitation of the resources of the ocean beds which is essential for the needs of burgeoning populations requires global cooperation lest it degenerate into global contention.

Challenges of this magnitude cannot be solved by a world fragmented into self-contained nation states or rigid blocs.

I do not intend, today, to cover the whole agenda of international cooperation. Rather, I shall speak briefly of some illustrative areas of common action. I pledge the readiness of the United States to solve these problems cooperatively and to submit proposals aimed at their resolution.

1. A world community requires the curbing of conflict.

The United Nations, in its 28-year history, has not always been idle in this sphere. In Indonesia, the Indian subcontinent, the Middle East, the Congo, and in Cyprus, it has shown its ability for effective fact-finding, mediation and peacekeeping missions. This central aspect of the United Nations' work must be strengthened. On a small planet, so bound together by technology and so interdependent economically, we can no longer afford the constant eruption of conflict and the danger of its spread.

Yet, in recent years, we have found ourselves locked in fruitless debates about the inauguration of peacekeeping operations and over the degree of control the Security Council would exercise over peacekeeping machinery -- an impasse which ensured only that permanent peacekeeping machinery would not come into being. Each peacekeeping unit we have formed to cope with an emergency has been an improvisation growing out of argument and controversy.

PR #343

-5-

We should delay no longer. The time has come to agree on peacekeeping guidelines so that this Organization can act swiftly, confidently and effectively in future crises. To break the deadlock, the United States is prepared to consider how the Security Council can play a more central role in the conduct of peacekeeping operations. If all countries concerned approach this problem with a desire to achieve a cooperative solution, the United Nations can achieve a major step forward during this session.

2. A world community must have the widest possible membership.

The exclusion of any qualified state denies representation not only to governments, but to peoples. Membership in this body should be a step toward reconciliation, not a source of conflict. The time has come for North and South Korea to be offered their rightful places here, without prejudice to a future evolution toward unification.

In this spirit also, we support the permanent membership of Japan in the Security Council.

3. A world community must assure that all its people are fed.

The growing threat to the world's food supply deserves the urgent attention of this Assembly. Since 1969, global consumption of cereals has risen more rapidly than production; stocks are at the lowest levels in years. We now face the prospect that -- even with bumper crops -- the world may not rebuild its seriously depleted reserves in this decade.

No one country can cope with this problem. The United States therefore proposes:

-- That a World Food Conference be organized under United Nations auspices in 1974 to discuss ways to maintain adequate food supplies, and to harness the efforts of all nations to meet the hunger and malnutrition resulting from natural disasters.

-- That nations in a position to do so offer technical assistance in the conservation of food. The United States is ready to join with others in providing such assistance.

4. A world community cannot remain divided between the permanently rich and the permanently poor.

Let us therefore resolve that this Assembly, this year, initiate a search -- drawing on the world's best minds -- for new and imaginative solutions to the problems of development. Our search must be candid and realistic, but it must also be free of peremptory demands, antagonistic propositions, ideological confrontation, or propagandistic rhetoric -- or we will surely fail.

The United States is prepared to join in this new search, providing freely of the experience gained over two decades. We have learned not to exaggerate our capacity to transform nations -- but we have also learned much about what progress is possible.

PR #343

-6-

We will participate without preconditions, with a conciliatory attitude and a cooperative commitment. We ask only that others adopt the same approach.

In this spirit the United States is willing to examine seriously the proposal by the distinguished President of Mexico for a Charter of the Economic Rights and Duties of States. Such a document will make a significant and historic contribution if it reflects the true aspirations of all nations; if it is turned into an indictment of one group of countries by another it will accomplish nothing. To command general support -- and to be implemented -- the proposed rights and duties must be defined equitably and take into account the concerns of industrialized as well as of developing countries. The United States stands ready to define its responsibilities in a humane and cooperative spirit.

5. Finally, a world community must harness science and technology for the benefit of all.

We must begin to match our remarkable technological skills with our equally remarkable technological needs. We must find the means for the cooperative and judicious development of our energy resources. We must responsibly confront the problems of population growth, which are fast pushing humanity towards the limits of what our Earth can sustain. We must embark on a new scientific revolution to increase agricultural productivity in all lands. No field of human endeavor is so dependent upon an open world for its advancement, no field is so in need of international cooperation to cope with its potential dangers.

Mr. President, fellow delegates:

Are we prepared to accept the imperatives of a global society and
infuse our labors with a new vision? Or, shall we content ourselves with
a temporary pause in the turmoil that has wracked our century? Shall we
proceed with onesided demands and sterile confrontations? Or, shall we
proceed in a spirit of compromise produced by a sense of common destiny?
We must move from hesitant cooperation born of necessity to genuine
collective effort based on common purpose.

It is a choice no country can make alone. We can repeat old slogans or strive for new hope. We can fill the record of our proceedings with acrimony or we can dedicate ourselves to dealing with man's deepest needs. The ideal of a world community may be decried as unrealistic -- but great constructions have always been ideals before they can become realities. Let us dedicate ourselves to this noblest of all possible goals and achieve at last what has so long eluded us: true understanding and tolerance among mankind.

**********

Several Suggestions for U.S. Opening Speech

at the

United Nations General Assembly

**Introduction** (Some of these ideas are not new but, in the form suggested, they would take on special force coming from H.K.)

It is not surprising that 28 years after the United Nations was founded, this General Assembly should both face -- and reflect -- a world of nation states radically different from that which emerged from World War II.

The membership of the United Nations is in large part a consequence of the enormous success of decolonization -- and of the fundamental drive of the independence movement.

The membership also now, with the admission of the Federal Republic of Germany and of the German Democratic Republic, reflects a universality which at long last moves us beyond the legacies of World War II.

But the world we now see before us reflects, even more fundamentally, an international community drawn by science, technology, and new forms of communication into a proximity for which we are still politically unprepared. The global interdependencies with which we are now confronted and with which we must now deal on a daily basis, bear little relationship to the nation-state system which emerged from the last war.

We are finding that no nation can, with impunity, any longer pollute the air space and water of its neighbors -- and that the quality of our global life requires international action.

- 2 -

. We are finding that increased international consumption of cereals and proteins has reduced world reserves to precarious levels, that these shortages are likely to continue for some time, and that therefore new international cooperative measures are required.

. We are finding that the world's need for energy is outrunning ready supply, that technological innovation is urgent, and that international cooperation is required if anticipated world consumption needs are to be met.

. We are finding that trade and international monetary affairs need new approaches if international trade is to flourish and if the principal trading currencies are to be kept in some effective balance.

. We are finding that the political relations between states have not kept pace with the changed context in which these basic functional problems are presented -- and with the needs for concerted international action.

One response to the scientific, technological, and economic developments, of which these issues are a reflection, has been an enormous increase in bilateral relationships -- at all levels -- between Members, large and small, of the United Nations.

Other responses have been undertaken on an international basis by the UN itself, by one of its affiliated agencies, or by other international organizations.

These basic issues, however, and many related ones, all of them international in scope and impact, are still outrunning our ability to develop the necessary means of dealing with them. In many areas we

- 3 -

still lack the expertise, and in others, we have not found the way
to mobilize the administrative and program talent, and the political
skill, for an effective assault.

One must quickly add that both the interrelated problems
themselves, and the need for concerted international action, are un-
precedented. There is no <u>Institute for Advanced Study of How to</u>
<u>Organize the International Community</u> with internationally agreed blue-
prints of how to develop effective international institutions. But the
fact that the scope and complexity of the issues and the expert manage-
ment needs are unprecedented should not be a cause for discouragement.
It is important that the United Nations not undertake too much. But
it is also essential that it not undertake too little.

Several Basic Suggestions to be Made in the Speech

1. It is important that the United Nations not undertake
too little in the political field.

(a) Relations between the world's larger powers are important. During the 1950's there were many speeches urging the great powers to compromise their differences and get together. Now some progress has been made. But there are scores of political issues that can only be resolved within a larger context. There are some who believe that issues are exacerbated by being brought into the UN. Sometimes this has been true. It is up to the Members -- to <u>all</u> the Members -- to see that this does not take place. The steady development of the capacity of the United Nations to handle threats to international security is too important for the Organization to respond to the many proffered detours.

- 5 -

2. It is important the United Nations not undertake too little in the economic and social field.

(a) The time has come for a further internationalization of aid. The World Bank has already expanded its lending. There could now be a modest increase in the activities of the UN Development Program. (Congress has not come through with the expected U.S. increase. The speech should signal renewed Administrative effort to make the funds available.)

(b) UN Population Year (1974) and the planning for the Bucharest Population Conference, should provide the occasion for an extension of UN population programs.

(c) The UN Program on Narcotics is beginning to show results and should be strengthened. The U.S. should provide additional matching funds.

(d) The United Nations activities in the economic and social field now account for about 85% of its budget. In addition the work of the UN specialized agencies is largely in the economic and social field. The total annual "UN family" expenditures in these areas are sufficiently large, and the basic issues involved have changed sufficiently since the end of World War II, that we should be alert to ways of improving the administrative structure. This may at some future date involve the need for a review of UN agency mandates to make certain they are in accord with an international system that is undergoing rapid transformation -- especially in the economic, scientific and communication fields.

LSE

[y] 8th draft

Mr. President, Mr. Secretary General, distinguished delegates,
ladies and gentlemen:

I come before you today -- confirmed by the Senate and sworn in
by President Nixon just two days ago -- as probably the world's most junior
Foreign Minister. The fact that I am here in this forum before I have even
had an opportunity to visit my new department underlines the importance
the United States attaches to this institution.

In 1946 another Secretary of State -- James Byrnes -- addressed this
Assembly. He spoke of how the United Nations "can help to break down
habits of thinking in national isolation and go far to bring about understanding
and tolerance."

Twenty-seven years later, that vision remains unrealized, but there
is now a new necessity that we can move toward it together.

The architects of the United Nations -- fresh from a conflict in
which the dangers they had faced were overwhelming and the moral issues
unambiguous -- sought a structure that could cope with easily distinguishable
threats to the peace. They planned for an organization in which the
Permanent Members of the Security Council, supported by a consensus of
nations, would act "to enforce the peace." The veto was not regarded as
an impediment to security, for the great powers were expected to be allies
in peace -- and for peace -- as they had been allies in war.

2

(Y)

But fundamental changes swept the globe soon after this body was created, overtaking these original assumptions. The world split into two opposing camps -- each regarding the other as irretrievably hostile. A third grouping emerged, at first defined by its refusal to take sides, but, in time, developing all the characteristics of a bloc of its own. The founders of the United Nations had not foreseen that the Permanent Members would themselves be in confrontation, or that the world's most populous nation would not be represented at all. Nor had they expected that the rapid progress of decolonization would more than double the membership of this organization and change its character and concerns.

For more than two decades we moved from crisis to crisis. The threat of war was pervasive. There were periods of hope, but they proved transitory. The prospects for a safe and stable planet continually gave way to confrontation of purpose and battles of will. And the United Nations reflected the world outside. The shrillness of debates increased with their sterility.

Thus, most previous spokesmen for my country have addressed this Assembly against a backdrop of conflict and tension. One day short of twelve years ago, President Kennedy spoke here in the midst of the Berlin crisis. Other speakers followed in other years, with the threat of war dominating our concerns -- whether in the deserts of the Middle East or the jungles of Southeast Asia. And President Nixon in 1970 devoted a major portion of his address to the precarious relationship then existing between the two nuclear giants.

3

Today we meet at a more promising time. Many of the crises that haunted past General Assemblies have been put behind us. Agreement has been reached on Berlin; there is a ceasefire in the Middle East; and the Vietnam War has been ended. The rigid confrontation that has dominated international life and weakened this organization for a quarter of a century has been softened.

The United States and the Soviet Union have begun to organize a community of interest in avoiding nuclear cataclysm and in establishing a broader web of relationships. We have met twice at the summit. Talks on strategic arms limitations have already produced historic accords aimed at slowing the arms race and ensuring strategic stability; we have, today, resumed negotiations to further these goals, which will benefit all mankind.

Two decades of estrangement between the United States and the People's Republic of China have given way to constructive dialogue and productive exchanges. President Nixon has met with the leaders of that nation; we have agreed to an historic communique that honestly sets forth both our differences and our common aspirations; and we have each opened Liaison Offices in the capital of the other. Today, no major country is excluded from this chamber.

Others, too, have seized the initiative and contributed -- in substance and spirit -- to the relaxation of tensions. Four Power agreement on Berlin has removed that city as a potential source of conflict between East and West;

4

the two German states have taken their place in this Assembly; North
and South Korea are at last engaged in a dialogue which we all hope will
lead to a more secure life for that divided people.

In short, we have learned to live with the world which emerged
from the Second World War -- a world ~~so~~ contrary to the expectations of
the founders of this organization. But while there have been major strides
toward peace, much remains to be done, even within the framework we
have known for almost three decades:

-- We have slowed the nuclear arms race, but we have neither
stopped it nor reversed it.

-- We have not yet found a way to control the technological advances that could, over time, threaten the stability of the agreements already made.

-- We have left untouched the burgeoning inventories of conventional
arms.

-- We have kept local conflicts from erupting into world conflict,
but we have failed to remedy their causes. In Southeast Asia
war has been replaced by uncertain peace. In the Middle East
a tenuous ceasefire is continually threatened by outbursts of
armed conflict.

-- While relations between governments have improved, the realization
of individual aspirations and liberties has not kept pace.

5

This record makes clear that we meet at a moment when we have eased the worst threats to the peace; but we have not yet made the breakthrough to a world where such threats could never reappear. We have ended many of the confrontations of the Cold War; yet its slogans are still with us. Too often the relaxing of tensions is justified as merely a tactical pause before renewed struggle. So familiar has the post-war world become that even detente has grown unsettling; reducing the risks of war is interpreted by some as two-power condominium.

It is therefore important that we understand each other's purposes. The United States remains committed to the vision that produced the United Nations. We are not content with a planet of managed crises, of uneasy truces, of offsetting blocs. We seek genuine peace, not an armistice. We shall strive for a world of cooperation, not merely of coexistence. We aim for an environment where settlements are based on justice, not strength. Our ultimate goal is for nations to share their hopes instead of controlling their fears, to build consensus instead of maintaining a balance of power, to focus on common purposes and endeavors.

The first task is to expand the hopeful beginnings of recent years. The risks of conflict must be eliminated if we are to move on to a new world where peace is more than the absence of war. We will persevere with energy and conviction the course that has brought us so far.

6

-- We will continue, in the spirit of the Shanghai Communique, our search for a new relationship with the People's Republic of China.

-- We will work to encourage positive trends elsewhere in Asia.

-- We will pursue vigorously our efforts to build more constructive relations with the Soviet Union.

-- We will seek to diminish tensions in Europe. A conference on security and cooperation is now in progress. Next month the Western allies will meet in Vienna with the Soviet Union and its allies to negotiate a reduction in the forces that have for so long faced each other in the heart of Europe.

-- We will press on with strategic arms limitation talks. We consider them potentially decisive for the whole evolution of the post-war period.

-- We will search for a solution to the worldwide problem of conventional weapons, which drain our resources and fuel the fires of local conflict. And we will seek a treaty prohibiting the production of chemical weapons, as we ourselves have ceased their production.

In pursuing these tasks my country will continue to be guided by some fundamental principles:

-- The United States has no aggressive designs. It will oppose -- as it has consistently throughout this century -- any nation that seeks to dominate weaker neighbors. We have not been asked to participate in a condominium, and we would reject such an appeal if it were made. We seek a detente shared universally by all here represented.

7

-- We will never abandon our friends or our allies. Rather, we will continue to strengthen the ties that have bound us together in partnership for almost three decades. Broadened relationships with old friends are essential to the development of new relationships with old adversaries.

-- The United States recognizes its special obligation, as a Permanent Member of the Security Council, to assist in the search for solutions just to all sides in areas still torn by conflict such as the Middle East. But we cannot substitute our efforts for those most directly involved. Nations -- and above all the contending parties -- have a stake in the general peace. We will do what we can, but we can do little for those who remain unwilling to compromise. We will, however, strongly support any move towards serious negotiations. We urge all sides to consider the futility of a policy based on confrontation.

-- We recognize that peace must touch people as well as nations and that stability which ignores humane imperatives will be empty and cold. While the achievement of fundamental rights is primarily a matter for individuals and countries, it is also a concern of mankind.

This traditional agenda would accelerate the easing of tensions. But our challenge goes deeper. Two centuries ago the philosopher Kant

8

predicted that perpetual peace would come to the world eventually -- either as the result of man's moral aspirations or as the consequence or technological necessity. What seemed utopian then now looms as tomorrow's reality; soon there will be no alternatives to the world envisaged in the Charter drawn up a generation ago. Our choice is only whether it results from our vision or is imposed on us by a catastrophe.

We are already an international community drawn by science, technology, and new forms of communication into a proximity for which we are still politically unprepared. Our challenges are global in scope. They bear little relationship to those of the world of two-and-one-half decades ago and to the slogans of many current political groupings. The assumptions and hopes of the founders of the United Nations are, thus, far more applicable now than they were when the Organization was created. A whole range of issues now cannot be solved without international action:

No nation can ~~with impunity,~~ pollute the air and water of its neighbor. ~~with impunity.~~

The increased consumption of cereals and protein has reduced world food reserves to precarious levels.

The world's demand for energy is outrunning ready supply, and the need for technological innovation is urgent.

The growth of the world's economy is challenged by restrictive trading blocs and an insufficiently flexible international monetary system.

14

For example, in the area of medical science the findings of laboratories throughout the world are not being distributed with the promptness and thoroughness which all our peoples deserve. Despite the effective efforts of the World Health Organization in eradicating malaria and smallpox, recent outbreaks have demonstrated that much more remains to be done. The latest preventive medical techniques must be made available to all nations through the United Nations, the World Health Organization and our other multinational institutions. The United States pledges its full cooperation in a renewed assault on disease.

Mexico and the United States recently concluded an agreement which will result in the practical application of our latest water desalinization technology. Because of this agreement the benefits of American technology will be felt by ~ millions in both countries who depend on the waters of the Colorado River.

Other nations as well are making significant progress in the development of desalinization methods. The dissemination of this newly acquired knowledge must be made available to all.

The United States is prepared to share its experience with others.
We therefore propose that the United Nations establish a liaison
group to follow the progress of the Colorado River project and to develop
with us the means by which the benefits of this experience can be
shared with the world community.

15

food prices skyrocket in response to overseas demand. Normal patterns
of trade and price relationship have been distorted. Nations have had to
face the stark possibility that dependable food supplies might not be available
within acceptable price ranges. Clearly, no one country can by itself cope
with this worldwide problem. Let us, therefore, turn to international
cooperation.

We propose:

- That a World Food Conference be organized under United Nations auspices to discuss ways to maintain adequate food supplies, and to harness the efforts of all nations to meet the hunger and malnutrition resulting from natural disasters.

- That, in the interim, governments cooperate urgently to bring to fruition the Food and Agriculture Organization's plan to encourage all nations to improve their food stockpiling capacity.

- Finally, that nations in a position to do so offer technical assistance in the conservation of food. For example, this might include help in planning or erecting storage facilities, and instruction in how to combat losses resulting from infestation and spoilage. The United States is ready to join with others in providing such assistance.

These are by no means the only issues that deserve the attention
and imagination of the United Nations. We must rid the world of terrorism;
we must find the means for the cooperative and judicious development of our

19

These are by no means the only issues that deserve the attention
and imagination of the United Nations. We must rid the world of terrorism;
we must find the means for the cooperative and judicious development of
our energy resources; we must establish a law of the sea that preserves
our common domain; we must improve the efficiency of the agencies of the
United Nations; and we must protect our air, our waters and our land --
for pollution respects no frontiers.

Mr. President, fellow delegates, just as frontiers can no longer
contain our problems, so too must they not restrict our solutions.

The choice is ours -- a
peaceful world that we shape creatively or a peaceful world that comes as
the product of cataclysm. It is a choice we must make together; for
together we will bear the burden of failure or the glory of success.

The task is ours -- it is, as it has always been, to shape a better
world. If the ideals of the United Nations now seem unrealistic, then it is
reality we must change -- not our hopes. We must move fromhesitant
cooperation born of sheer necessity to genuine collective effort born of
common vision.

The decision is ours. We can fill the record of our proceedings
with acrimony and go home satisfied that we have had our say. Or we can
dedicate ourselves to deal realistically with the pressing problems that afflict

16

(N)

material and energy resources; we must establish a law of the sea that preserves our common domain; we must improve the efficiency of the agencies of the United Nations; and we must protect our air, our waters and our land -- for pollution respects no frontiers.

Mr. President, fellow delegates, just as frontiers can no longer contain our problems, so too must they not restrict our solutions. I have proposed a realistic course of action for the United Nations that would transcend particular motives in the interest of meeting global needs. Let us collect our talents and unify our will.

I have spoken of the fundamental choice before us -- a permanent peace or a temporary pause in the turmoil that has marked our century and blackened our history. It is a choice that no one of us can make alone. It is a choice that all of us must make together; for together we will bear the burden of failure or the glory of success.

The principles and objectives of this Organization are as valid today as they were twenty-seven years ago. Our task today, as then, is to shape a better world. If the ideals of the United Nations now seem unrealistic, then it is reality we must in the long run change -- not our hopes. We must move from easing the symptoms of tension to eliminating the causes of tension. We must move from reluctant cooperation, born of sheer necessity, to genuine collective effort, born of common vision.

Success requires an act of will; but will alone is not enough. There must be a clear sense of direction to chaperon our daily decisions -- on the

11th Draft

(N)

That President Nixon should ask me to present the American position to this Assembly as my first official act reaffirms the American commitment to the values and ideals of this institution. The founders of the United Nations thought of a world at peace supported by the shared aspirations of mankind. The United States has no higher goal. We seek the United Nations should strive for a world of justice, a world free of强項 the country which strongly supports this. We believe too in the rule of law and the importance of fundamental human rights. The birthright of all.

It would be idle to deny that the American people, like many others, have been disappointed that this organization has not been more successful in translating into concrete accomplishments the hopes of its founders. Substantial achievements there have been. But too often the United Nations has been an arena where rivers of resolutions have flowed as if words were the only reality. Too often the anguish, the

7

-- We shall work to promote positive trends elsewhere in Asia. The uncertain peace in Indochina must be strengthened; the first tentative steps towards reconciliation in Korea should be encouraged.

-- We shall pursue vigorously the building of constructive relations with the Soviet Union in all fields.

-- We shall strive to foster conciliation in Europe. A conference on security and cooperation is now in progress. Next month, negotiations will begin on the reduction of forces that have faced each other for so long in the heart of the continent.

-- We shall reexamine urgently our relationships with the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean, and give new vigor to our hemispheric policy.

-- We shall continue to honor our pledge to foster self-determination, economic development, and human dignity across the continent of Africa.

-- We shall press on with strategic arms limitation talks. They consider them crucial for the whole evolution of this period.

8

-- We look forward to a world increasingly able to devote its resources to the tasks of peace rather than to weapons of war. My country will continue to be guided by some fundamental principles.

The United States has no desire for domination. It will oppose -- as it has consistently throughout the century -- any nation that chooses this path. We have not been asked to participate in a condominium, and we would reject such an appeal if it were made.

We will never abandon our friends or our allies. The broadening of traditional bonds is essential to the development of new relationships with old adversaries.

We will work for peace through the United Nations as well as in our bilateral relationships. To those nations now locked in confrontation with their neighbors let it be said that the United States recognizes its special obligation, as a Permanent Member of the Security Council, to assist in the search for solutions just to all sides. While we cannot substitute for the efforts of those most directly involved, we are determined to use our constructive influence to generate the necessary spirit of accommodation between the parties and to encourage it if it gives hope for practical progress. It is our conviction that while all nations have a responsibility to consult their own interests, they also have a stake in the general peace. These principles apply particularly to the Middle East.

9

But as we make progress on the traditional agenda of this body, we must turn to our deeper problems. As the world grows more stable we must answer the question of detente for what end? As the threat of war recedes the quality of human life takes on added significance.

In facing these issues we will be forced to confront the root fact of the present world, which is at one and the same time the greatest challenge and the greatest hope for this body.

We are in fact, members of a community drawn by science, technology, and new forms of communication into a proximity for which we are still politically unprepared. Our problems are global in scope. They bear little relationship to those of a generation ago. They cannot be solved on a national basis, and many cannot be dealt with even regionally. As a result, the ideals of the founders of the United Nations are far more applicable.

- 10 -

today than they were when the Organization was created. Technology has outstripped our values. A world community is coming into being out of practical necessity. We must now build the institutions that reflect our necessities. Our political imagination must catch up with our scientific vision.

No nation can, with impunity, pollute the air and water of its neighbor.

The increased consumption of cereals and protein has reduced world food reserves to precarious levels, creating a global food shortage.

The demand for energy is outrunning ready supply, and the need for technological innovation is urgent.

The exploitation of the resources of the ocean beds essential to the food security of the world if our burgeoning populations are to be fed. In the face of burgeoning populations requires global agreements.

Challenges of this magnitude cannot be solved by a world divided into self-contained nations, states or rigid blocs -- be it two or three.

There has been, to be sure, an enormous increase in bilateral relationships between members, large and small, of the United Nations. Other responses have been undertaken by the UN itself or its affiliated

- 11 -

But the issues continue to outrun our ability to develop the institutional means for dealing with them.

I do not intend, today, to cover the whole agenda of possible responses to these challenges. Rather, I shall speak briefly of some illustrative areas of common action. Further, I pledge the readiness of the United States to examine these problems cooperatively. During the course of this Assembly, we will be prepared to submit proposals aimed at the resolution of at least some of them.

The United Nations, in its 28-year history, has not always sat idly by in the face of conflict. In Indonesia, in northern Greece, in the Indian sub-continent, in the Middle East, in the Congo, and now in Cyprus, it has shown its ability to conduct effective fact-finding, mediation, or peacekeeping. We must find a way to strengthen this aspect of the United Nations' work. The fabric of our international life is now too technologically based, and too economically interdependent, to permit interstate quarrels to erupt into violence.

The ability of the United Nations effectively to deal with this problem has been circumvented by endless debates about the control of peacekeeping machinery, how it can be carried forward. In the process, we have started and other procedural matters. It should be exercised over the sterility of arguing over the control of what does not exist.

- 12 -

In order to break this deadlock, the United States is prepared to examine anew the role of the Security Council in the conduct of peacekeeping operations. In consultation with the Permanent Members of the Security Council and those governments which traditionally have provided forces, we are prepared to assure that the United Nations will be able to undertake peacekeeping operations with speed and efficiency. ~~all~~ *during* the countries concerned approach this problem in a cooperative spirit, the United Nations can achieve a major step forward *at this session*.

We further recommend that the membership of the United Nations be expanded. The exclusion of any qualified state denies representation not only to governments, but to people. Membership in this body should be a step toward reconciliation, not a source of conflict. The time has come for North and South Korea to be offered their rightful places here, without prejudice to a future evolution toward unification.

- 13 -

We also believe that the permanent membership of the Security Council should be expanded to include Japan.

The growing threat to the world's food supply, especially the urgent attention of this Assembly. Since 1969, world consumption of cereals has risen more rapidly than production; stocks are at the lowest levels in years. We now face the prospect that -- even with bumper crops -- the world may not rebuild its seriously depleted reserves in this decade.

Clearly, no one country can cope with this problem. Let us, therefore, turn to international cooperation. We propose:

- That a World Food Conference be organized in 1974 under United Nations auspices to discuss ways to maintain adequate food supplies, and to harness the efforts of all nations to meet the hunger and malnutrition resulting from natural disasters.

The struggle against poverty must also be high on our agenda, for real peace -- in the sense of a true world community -- cannot come about if the world remains divided forever between the permanently rich and the permanently poor.

It is time, therefore, that the United Nations foster a common search for new and imaginative approaches to the problems of economic

- 14 -

development -- not on the basis of harsh demands, but in a spirit of cooperation. The United States is ready to participate in this effort without preconditions, and with an open mind. We ask only that others adopt the same attitude.

There is almost no field in which the new spirit of open-mindedness that I have urged in this Assembly is more necessary. The problem of development requires a candid, searching examination in a spirit of true cooperation. It cannot be based in peremptory demands, antagonistic propositions or ideological confrontation. A world moving towards a sense of community cannot be ignored; a world torn by an answer to confrontation will never find the right language for it.

In this spirit the United States is willing to examine seriously the proposal by the distinguished President of Mexico for a Declaration of the Economic Rights and Duties of States. Such a declaration would be significant if it reflects consumer aspirations; it is counterproductive if it turns into an indictment of one group of countries by another. Rights and duties must apply to both industrialized and developing countries. A fair balance between expectations and needs is the concern of all nations. The United States stands ready to deal with it in a conciliatory and cooperative spirit.

As my last example, Mr. President, let me cite the challenge of harnessing man's science and technology for the benefit of all. No field of human endeavor is so dependent upon an open world for its development;

- 15 -

no field so in need of international cooperation to cope with its excesses.

We must begin to match our remarkable technological skills with
our equally remarkable technological needs. We must find the means
for the cooperative and judicious development of our energy resources.
We must responsibly confront the problems of population growth, which
are fast pushing humanity towards the limits of what our Earth can
sustain. We must embark on a new revolution aimed at increasing
agricultural productivity in all lands. On all these issues the United
States is now engaged energetically to produce recommendations for
the consideration of all concerned parties.

16

Just as frontiers no longer contain our problems in any field, so they also must not restrict our solutions. I have listed some concrete issues that face this organization; and the agenda for this mission is replete with many more. I have defined the attitude of the United States towards this body and towards our efforts to construct a more stable peace. And I have given some examples of the directions in which we are prepared to move.

Above all I have sought to describe the spirit that must guide us. The basic issue before us is whether we are prepared to accept the imperatives of a global society, thereby to infuse our labors with new vision, or whether we shall content ourselves with a temporary pause in the turmoil that has wracked our century. We must choose between a world community growing out of man's creativity, or a world community produced by a cataclysm, resulting from lack of it. It is a choice that my country cannot make alone. It must be made by all of us in this chamber; together we shall bear the burden of failure or the glory of success.

The task is ours -- as it has always been to shape a better world. The ideal of a world community may be decried as unrealistic, but great institutions must of necessity be ideals before they can become reality. We must move from hesitant cooperation born of slow necessity to genuine collective effort based on common hopes.

The decision is ours. We can repeat old slogans or strive for new hope. We can fill the record of our proceedings with acrimony or we can

17

dedicate ourselves to dealing with the deepest needs of mankind. My
country's choice is clear: to work with all our colleagues in this
chamber to achieve what has so long eluded us, and truly bring under-
standing and tolerance to all mankind.

- 6 -

My country in short is not content with making conflicts
more bearable; it seeks to end them. We seek to transcend ideological
hostility, not to control it.

We offer this Assembly our readiness to move from coexistence
to cooperation.

Our journey must begin with the world as it is. We shall spare
no effort to ease tensions and to move toward greater stability.

7

-- We shall reexamine urgently our relationships with the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean and give new vigor to our hemispheric policy.

-- We shall press on with strategic arms limitations talks. We consider them crucial for the whole evolution of this period.

8

-- We look forward to a world increasingly able to devote its resources to the [tasks] of peace rather than to [war] weapons of war. My country will continue to be guided by some fundamental principles.

9

But as we make progress on the traditional agenda of this body, we begin to face our deeper problems. As the world grows more stable we must answer the question of detente for what end. As the threat of war recedes the quality of human life takes on added significance.

We are in fact, members of a community drawn by science, technology, and new forms of communication into a proximity for which we are still politically unprepared. Our problems are global in scope. They bear little relationship to those of a generation ago. They cannot be solved on a national basis and many cannot be dealt with even regionally. As a result the ideals of the founders of the United Nations are far more applicable.

The increased consumption of cereals and protein has reduced
world food reserves to precarious levels creating a global food shortage.

The exploitation of the resources of the ocean beds essential
in the face of burgeoning populations requires global agreements.

Challenges of this magnitude cannot be solved by a world divided
into self-contained nations, states or rigid blocs -- be it two or three.
There has been, to be sure, an enormous increase in bilateral
relationships between NATIONS, large and small, of the United Nations.
Other responses have been undertaken by the UN itself or its affiliated

- 11 -

institutions) But the issues continue to outrun our ability to develop the institutional means for dealing with them.

I do not intend, today, to cover the whole agenda of possible international actions. Rather, I shall speak briefly of some illustrative areas of common action. Further, I pledge the readiness of the United States to examine these problems cooperatively. During the course of this Assembly, we will be prepared to submit proposals aimed at the resolution of at least some of them.

Resolution of this problem has been prevented by endless debates about the control of peacekeeping machinery, how it can be started and other procedural matters. In the process, we have overlooked the sterility of arguing over the control of what does not exist.

- 12 -

In order to break this deadlock, the United States is prepared to examine anew the role of the Security Council in the conduct of peacekeeping operations. In consultation with the Permanent Members of the Security Council and those governments which traditionally have provided forces, we are prepared to assure that the United Nations will be able to undertake peacekeeping operations with speed and efficiency. If the countries concerned approach this problem in a cooperative spirit, the United Nations can achieve a major step forward at this session.

- 13 -

The growing threat to the world's food supply deserves the urgent attention of this Assembly. Since 1969, world consumption of cereals has risen more rapidly than production; stocks are at the lowest levels in years. We now face the propsect that -- even with bumber crops -- the world may not rebuild its seriously depleted reserves in this decade.

-- That a World Food Conference be organized in 1974 under United Nations auspices to discuss ways to maintain adequate food supplies, and to harness the efforts of all nations to meet the hunger and malnutrition resulting from natural disasters.

- 14 -

There is almost no field in which the new spirit of open-mindedness that I have urged in this Assembly is more necessary. The problem of development requires a candid, searching examination in a spirit of true cooperation. It cannot be based in peremptory demands, antagonistic propositions or ideological confrontation. A world moving towards a sense of community will not be able to ignore this problem; a world torn by confrontation will never find the right language for it.

In this spirit the United States is willing to examine seriously the proposal by the distinguished President of Mexico for a Declaration of the Economic Rights and Duties of States. Such a document would be significant if it reflects Consumer aspirations; it is counterproductive if it turns into an indictment of one group of countries by another. Rights and duties must apply to both industrialized and developing countries. A fair balance between expectations and needs is the concern of all nations. The United States stand ready to deal with it in a conciliatory and cooperative spirit.

- 15 -

16

Just as frontiers no longer contain our problems in any field so they also must not restrict our solutions. I have listed some concrete issues that face this organization and the agenda for this mission is replete with many more. I have defined the attitude of the United States towards this body and towards our efforts to construct a more stable peace. And I have given some examples of the directions in which my country is prepared to move.

Above all I have sought to describe the spirit that must guide us. The basic issue before us is whether we are prepared to accept the imperatives of a global society thereby to infuse our labors with new vision or whether we shall content ourselves with a temporary pause in the turmoil that has wracked our century. We must choose between a world community growing out of man's creativity or a world community produced by a cataclysm resulting from lack of it. It is a choice that my country cannot make alone. It must be made by all of us in this chamber; together we shall bear the burden of failure or the glory of success.

The task is ours -- as it has always been to shape a better world. The ideal of a world community may be decried as unrealistic -- but great institutions must of necessity be ideals before they can become reality. We must move from hesitant cooperation born of slow necessity to genuine collective effort based on common hopes.

17

dedicate ourselves to dealing with the deepest needs of mankind. My
country's choice is clear: to work with all our colleagues in this
chamber to achieve what has so long eluded us and truly bring under-
standing and tolerance to all mankind.

11th Draft

[Y]

Lord comments

That President Nixon should ask me to present the American
position to this Assembly as my first official act reaffirms the American
commitment to the values and ideals of this institution. The founders
of the United Nations thought of a world at peace supported by the
shared aspirations of mankind. The United States has no higher goal.
They want us to see that this body would
The United Nations should strive for a world of justice, My country
strongly supports this. We believe too in the rule of law and the
importance of fundamental human rights. The United States is
dedicated to these principles.

- 2 -

remained untouched,
turmoil and the promise of the real world have been drowned in
rhetoric and confused by tired slogans.

But I am here to say on behalf of my country that we remain
committed to the ideals of a world community and that we are prepared
to work in this Parliament of Man to make it a reality,
eluded us.

Two centuries ago, the philosopher Kant predicted that perpetual
peace would come to the world eventually -- either as the result of man's
moral aspirations or as the consequence of technological necessity.
What seemed utopian then now looms as tomorrow's reality; soon there
will be no alternatives to the world envisaged in the Charter drawn up a
generation ago. Our choice is only whether it results from our vision
or is imposed on us by a catastrophe.

In this quest, tired formulas cannot be our guide. The greatest
issue before this body is whether we can draw our inspiration from
where we must go rather than from where we have been. We have
perpetuated a past of fear and confrontation we can no longer
the choice between a past of fear and managed crises or a future moved
by a spirit of cooperation.

The United States has made its choice. My country seeks true
peace, not an armistice. We know that reconciliation must start in
the hearts and not only the minds of men. We recognize the difference

- 3 -

between the management of crises and the advent of genuine cooperation. We are determined to move from detente to community.

Further diplomacy, the isolated steps
move to pages
more comprehensive
beckons an institutionalized peace.

This will be the spirit of American foreign policy. will animate

a

We can start from the bedrock of solid progress.

The United States and the Soviet Union have begun to forge a community of interest in avoiding nuclear cataclysm and in establishing a broader web of relationships. Our leaders have met twice at the summit. Talks on strategic arms limitations have already produced historic accords aimed at slowing the arms race and ensuring strategic stability; we have, today, resumed negotiations on this subject for the benefit of all mankind.

Two decades of estrangement between the United States and the People's Republic of China have given way to constructive dialogue and productive exchanges. President Nixon has met with the leaders of that serious exchanges.

- 4 -

nation; we have agreed to an historic communique that honestly sets forth both our differences and our common aspirations; and we have each opened a Liaison Office in the capital of the other. Today, no major country is excluded from this chamber.

Others, too, have seized the initiative and contributed -- in substance and spirit -- to the relaxation of tensions. The two German states have taken their place in this Assembly; India, Pakistan and Bangladesh have begun to move toward reconciliation; North and South Korea are at last engaged in a dialogue which we all hope will lead to a more secure life for that divided people.

Yet these achievements, solid as they are, have only made less risky the world which emerged at the end of World War II, so contrary to the expectation of the founders of the UN. We have ended many of the confrontations of the Cold War; yet, even in this room, its vocabulary persists. Relaxation of tensions is justified by some as merely a tactical interlude before renewed struggle. Others describe it as the beginning of a two-power condominium. And paradoxically, as relations between the two original blocs have eased, a third grouping increasingly assumes the characteristics of a bloc of its own -- producing the paradox of an alignment of the so-called non-aligned.

So the world is uneasily suspended between old slogans and new realities, between the notion of peace as a pause in an unending struggle and the vision of peace as a promise of global cooperation.

- 5 -

In 1946 another Secretary of State -- James Byrnes, ______ addressed this Assembly. He spoke of how the United Nations could help break down habits of thinking in national isolation and move toward universal understanding and tolerance among all peoples.

The time has come to put these hopes into effect. And there is no more natural, or potentially effective instrument, of global reconciliation than the United Nations. [The United States in recent years has pursued a very active bilateral diplomacy with many countries. But these dramatic initiatives are but the stepping stones in a quest for universal peace.] The United States is committed to the vision that produced the United Nations. We will never be satisfied with a world of managed crises, of uneasy truces, of offsetting blocs. We know that power can enforce resigned tranquility, but only a sense of justice can produce consensus. We are striving for a world whose ultimate security depends not on a balance of forces, but on a community of shared aspirations. We are convinced that a stability which ignores humane values will prove cold and empty to most of mankind.

My country deeply believes that

- justice cannot be confined by national frontiers;

- truth is universal and not the peculiar attribute of an ideological regional or geographic grouping;

- compassion and human concern ennoble all our technical concerns.

- 6 -

My country, in short, is not content with making conflicts more bearable; it seeks to end them. We seek to transcend ideological hostility, not to control it.

7

CJD

-- We shall press on with strategic arms limitation talks. We consider them crucial for the whole evolution of this period.

8

-- We look forward to a world increasingly able to devote its resources to the tasks of peace rather than to weapons of war. ~~My country~~
will continue to be guided by some fundamental principles.

The United States has no desire for domination. It will oppose -- as we have it has consistently throughout the century -- any nation that chooses this path. We have not been asked to participate in a condominium, and we would reject such an appeal if it were made.

We will work for peace through the United Nations as well as in our bilateral relationships. To those nations now locked in confrontation with their neighbors let it be said that the United States recognizes its special obligation, as a Permanent Member of the Security Council, to assist in the search for solutions just to all sides. ~~While We cannot substitute for the efforts of those most directly involved, we are determined to use our constructive influence to generate the necessary spirit of accommodation between the parties and to encourage it if it gives hope for practical progress. It is our conviction that while all nations have a responsibility to consult their own interests, they also have a stake in the general peace. These principles apply particularly to the Middle East.~~

- 10 -

The pollution of the seas, the skies, the lands and the land
No nation can, with impunity, pollute the air and water of its
neighbor. Thousands of national boundaries.

The exploitation of the resources of the ocean beds is essential
soon be scenes of either cooperative exploration or
in the face of burgeoning populations requires global agreements.

The exploitation of the resources of the ocean beds will
soon be scenes of either cooperative exploration or
in the face of burgeoning populations requires global agreements.
The exploitation of the resources of the ocean beds is essential
not to be solved by a world divided

Other responses have been undertaken by the UN itself or its affiliated body and

- 11 -

agencies. But the issues continue to outrun our ability to develop and on institutions, the institutional means for dealing with them.

I do not intend, today, to cover the whole agenda of possible multilateral international actions. Rather, I shall speak briefly of some illustrative areas of common action. Further, I pledge the readiness of the United States to examine these problems cooperatively. During the course of this Assembly, we will be prepared to submit proposals aimed at the resolution of at least some of them.

The United Nations, in its 28-year history, has not always sat idly by in the face of conflict. In Indonesia, in northern Greece, in the Indian sub-continent, in the Middle East, in the Congo, and now in Cyprus, it has shown its ability to conduct effective fact-finding, mediation, or peacekeeping. We must find a way to strengthen this central aspect of the United Nations' work. The fabric of our international life is now too technologically based, and too economically inter-dependent, to permit interstate quarrels to erupt into violence.

In recent years there have been Resolution of this problem has been prevented by endless debates about the control of peacekeeping machinery, how it can be started and other procedural matters. In the process, we have overlooked the sterility of arguing over the control of what does not exist.

- 12 -

- 13 -

- 14 -

development __________ not on the basis of harsh demands, but in a spirit of cooperation. The United States is ready to participate in this effort __________ a conciliatory attitude without preconditions, and with an open mind. We ask only that others __________ do the same, adopt the same attitude.

There is almost no field in which the new spirit of open-mindedness that I have urged in this Assembly is more necessary. The problem of development requires a candid, searching examination, in a spirit of true cooperation. It cannot be based *only* on peremptory demands, antagonistic propositions or ideological confrontation. A world moving towards a sense of community will not be able to ignore this problem; a world torn by confrontation will never find the right language for it. We are

In this spirit the United States is willing to examine seriously the proposal by the distinguished President of Mexico for a Declaration of the Economic Rights and Duties of States. Such a document would be significant if it reflects *common* consumer aspirations; it is counterproductive if it turns into an indictment of one group of countries by another. Rights and duties must apply to both industrialized and developing nations. *These must be a fair balance*

countries. A fair balance between expectations and needs is the concern *must be struck* will display *of all nations*. The United States stand ready to deal with it in a conciliatory and cooperative spirit. *The United States will approach this issue* will be cooperative and generous.

- 15 -

11th Draft

PUR
[4J]

RUPMAN

America and the World Community

The United Nations should strive for a world of justice. My country
strongly supports this. We believe too in the rule of law and the
importance of fundamental human rights.

PAP

It would be idle to deny that the American people like many
others have been disappointed that this organization has not been more-
successful in translating into concrete accomplishments the hopes of
its founders. Substantial achievements there have been. But too often
the United Nations has been an arena where rivers of resolutions have
flowed as if words were the only reality. Too often the anguish, the

- 2 -

But I am here to say on behalf of my country that we remain committed to the ideals of a world community and that we are prepared to work in this parliament of men for that true peace which has so far eluded us.

Two centuries ago, the philosopher Kant predicted that perpetual peace would come to the world eventually -- either as the result of man's moral aspirations or as the consequence of technological necessity. What seemed utopian then now looms as tomorrow's reality: soon there will be no alternatives to the world envisaged in the Charter drawn up a generation ago. Our choice is only whether it results from our vision or is imposed on us by a catastrophe.

In this quest, tired formulas cannot be our guide. The greatest issue before this body is whether we can draw our inspiration from where we must go rather than from where we have been. We have the choice between a past of, at best, managed crises or a future moved by a spirit of cooperation.

-3-

Beyond the individual, pragmatic agreements of recent years
beckons an institutionalized peace.

This attitude will guide our work in this Assembly.

The United States and the Soviet Union have begun to perceive commonality of interest in avoiding nuclear cataclysm and in establishing a broader web of relationships. [Our leaders have met twice at the summit.] Talks on strategic arms limitations have already produced historic accords aimed at slowing the arms race and ensuring strategic stability; we have, today, resumed negotiations on this subject for the benefit of all mankind.

Two decades of estrangement between the United States and the
People's Republic of China have given way to constructive dialogue and
serious exchanges. President Nixon has met with the leaders of that

- 4 -

nation; we have agreed to an historic communique that honestly sets forth both our differences and our common aspirations; and we have each opened a Liaison Office in the capital of the other. [Today, no major country is excluded from this chamber.]

Others, too, have seized the initiative and contributed -- in substance and spirit -- to the relaxation of tensions. The two German states have taken their place in this Assembly (India, Pakistan and Bangladesh have begun to move toward reconciliation, North and South Korea are at last engaged in a dialogue which we all hope will lead to security, peace, and conciliation on that divided peninsula... a more secure life for that divided people.)

Yet these achievements, solid as they are, have only made less the dangers and divisions inherited from the postwar period -- a risky world which emerged at the end of World War II, so contrary to the expectation of the founders of the UN. We have ended many of the confrontations of the Cold War; yet, even in this room, its vocabulary of suspicion persists. Relaxation of tensions is justified by some as merely a tactical interlude before renewed struggle. Others describe it as the beginning of a two-power condominium. And paradoxically, as tension between the two original blocs has eased, a third grouping increasingly assumes the characteristics of a bloc of its own -- producing the paradox of an alignment of the so-called non-aligned, -- and we face the tragedy of new confrontations, dashing our new hopes for a world of stability and cooperation.

So the world is uneasily suspended between old slogans and new realities, [between the notion of peace as a pause in an unending struggle and the vision of peace as a promise of global cooperation.]

- 6 -

7

The uncertain peace in Indochina must be strengthened; the world cannot afford a renewal or intensification of war in Indochina. The first tentative steps towards reconciliation in Korea should be encouraged.

-- We shall strive to foster conciliation in Europe, in the conference on security and cooperation is now in progress, and in the Next month, beginning next month, negotiations will begin on the reduction of forces that have faced each other for so long in the heart of the continent.

-- We shall reexamine urgently our relationships with the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean and give new vigor to our hemispheric policy, of partnership in the Western Hemisphere.

-- We shall press on with strategic arms limitations talks, whose success is considered crucial for the whole evolution of this period.

8

We will never abandon our friends or our allies. The broadening of derives first from our traditional ties of heritage and mutual interest traditional bonds is essential to the development of new relationships with with our friends. In seeking to reduce tensions with adversaries, we are old adversaries. seeking to extend our ties of friendship, not to abandon them.

9

(Y)

# The New Dimensions of World Diplomacy

making

political

is not

enough.

But as we make progress on the traditional agenda of this body, The more we succeed in the political dimension, the more we are confined with our deeper challenges. As the world grows more stable, we begin to face our deeper problems.

In facing these issues we will be forced to confront the root fact that moral necessity and physical necessity come of the present world, which is at one and the same time the greatest together, and face us with an unprecedented agenda in the challenge and the greatest hope for this body.

final quarter of this century.

We are, in fact, members of a community drawn by science, technology, and new forms of communication into a proximity for which we are still politically unprepared. Our problems are global in scope. They bear resemblance to those of a generation ago. They cannot be solved on a national basis and many cannot be dealt with even regionally. As a result the ideals of the founders of the United Nations are far more applicable.

This stark new reality of the present world is at one and the same time the greatest challenge and the greatest opportunity for this organization.

- 10 -

- No nation can, with impunity, pollute the air and water of its neighbor.

- The increased consumption of cereals and protein has reduced world food reserves to precarious levels, threatening a global food shortage.

- The demand for energy is outrunning ready supply, and the need for technological innovation is urgent.

- The growth of the world's economy is inhibited by restrictive trading blocs and an insufficiently flexible international monetary system.

- The exploitation of the resources of the ocean beds, essential in the face of burgeoning populations, requires global agreements on a global scale.

- 11 -

An International Agenda
institutions. But the issues continue to outrun our ability to develop
the institutional means for dealing with them.

I do not intend, today, to cover the whole agenda of possible
international actions. Rather, I shall speak briefly of some illustra-
tive areas of common action. Further, I pledge the readiness of the
United States to examine these problems cooperatively. During the
course of this Assembly, we will be prepared to submit proposals
aimed at the resolution of at least some of them.
In the political arena,

In the political arena,
The United Nations, in its 28-year history, has not always
sat idly by in the face of conflict. In Indonesia, in northern Greece,
in the Indian sub-continent, in the Middle East, in the Congo, and
now in Cyprus, it has shown its ability to conduct effective fact-finding,
mediation, or peacekeeping. We must find a way to strengthen this
aspect of the United Nations' work. The fabric of our international
life is now too closely interwoven
to permit interstate quarrels to erupt into violence.

There have been
Resolution of this problem has been prevented by endless
course,
debates about the control of peacekeeping machinery, how it can be
started and other procedural matters. In the process, we have
overlooked the sterility of arguing over the control of what does
not exist.

- 12 -

- 13 -

- 14 -

development (not on the basis of harsh demands, but in a spirit of cooperation.) The United States is ready to participate in this effort without preconditions, and with an open mind. We ask only that others adopt the same attitude.

The magnitude of the task of social change requires that we almost no field in which the new spirit of open-mindedness collaboration. It requires the mobilized effort and contribution of that I have urged in this Assembly is more necessary. The problem of both the developed and the developing. There is a joint development requires a candid, searching examination in a spirit of true responsibility. No results will come from cooperation. It cannot be based in peremptory demands, antagonistic propositions or ideological confrontation, or propagandistic rhetoric. A world moving towards a sense of community will not be able to ignore this problem, a world torn by antagism. See a solution. confrontation will never find the right language for it.

In this spirit the United States is willing to examine seriously the proposal by the distinguished President of Mexico for a Declaration of the Economic Rights and Duties of States. Such a document will make an historic contribution. The true responsibilities of all nations; significant if it reflects consumer aspirations; it is counterproductive if it turns into an indictment of one group of countries by another. Rights and duties must apply to all industrialized and developing countries. A fair balance between expectations and needs is the concern of all nations. The United States, ready to deal with it in a framework of accommodation and cooperation, will accept its responsibility, in a conciliatory and cooperative spirit.

As my last example, Mr. President, let me cite the challenge of harnessing man's science and technology for the benefit of all. No field of human endeavor is so dependent upon an open world for its development.

- 15 -

is
no field so in need of international cooperation to cope with its excesses.
A

We must begin to match our remarkable technological skills with
our equally remarkable technological needs. We must find the means
for the cooperative and judicious development of our energy resources.
We must responsibly confront the problems of population growth, which
are fast pushing humanity towards the limits of what our Earth can
sustain. We must embark on a new revolution aimed at increasing
agricultural productivity in all lands. On all these issues the United
States is now engaged in preparing its own ideas, which it will present
for the consideration of all concerned parties.

16

(VI)

Just as frontiers no longer contain our problems in any field, so they also must not restrict our solutions. I have listed some concrete issues that face this organization, and the agenda for this session is replete with many more. I have defined the attitude of the United States towards this body and towards our efforts to construct a more stable peace. And I have given some examples of the directions in which my country is prepared to move.

Above all I have sought to describe the spirit that must guide us. The basic issue before us is whether we are prepared to accept the imperatives of a global society, at a moment of unique opportunity, thereby to infuse our labors with new vision, or whether we shall content ourselves with a temporary pause in the turmoil that has wracked our century. We must choose between a world community, shaped by humane and of stagnation, that will be menaced once again, produced by a cataclysm, resulting from lack of it. It is a choice that my country cannot make alone. It must be made by all of us in this chamber; together we shall bear the burden of failure or the glory of success.

The decision is ours, We can repeat old slogans or strive for new possibilities. We can fill the record of our proceedings with acrimony, or we can

17

(N)

dedicate ourselves to fulfilling the deepest needs of mankind. My own

11th Draft

That President Nixon should ask me to address the American
people of this country to this Assembly as my first official act demonstrates
the American
commitment to the values and ideals of this institution. The founders
of the United Nations thought of a world at peace supported by the
shared aspirations of mankind. The United States has no higher goal.

It would be idle to deny that the American people like many
others have been disappointed that this organization has not been more
successful in translating into concrete accomplishments the hopes of
its founders. Substantial achievements there have been. But too often
the United Nations has been an arena where rivers of resolutions have
flowed as if words were the only reality. Too often the anguish, the

- 2 -

In this quest, tired formulas cannot be our guide. The greatest issue before this body is whether we can draw our inspiration from where we must go rather than from where we have been. We have the choice between a past of shortfalls managed crises or a future moved by a spirit of cooperation.

between the management of crises and the advent of genuine cooperation. We are determined to move from a spirit of détente to a true compatibility.

- 4 -

- 5 -

In 1946 another Secretary of State -- James Byrnes -- addressed this Assembly. He spoke of how the United Nations could help break down habits of thinking in national isolation and move toward universal understanding and tolerance among all peoples.

The time has come to put these hopes into effect. And there is no more natural or potentially effective instrument of global reconciliation than the United Nations. The United States in recent years has pursued a very active bilateral diplomacy with many countries. But these dramatic initiatives are only the stepping stones in a quest for universal peace. The United States is committed to the vision that produced the United Nations. We will never be satisfied with a world of managed crises, of uneasy truces, of offsetting blocs. We know that power can enforce resigned tranquility, but only a sense of justice can produce consensus. We are striving for a world whose ultimate security depends not on a balance of forces, but on a community of shared aspirations. We are convinced that a stability which ignores humane values will prove cold and empty to most of mankind.

- truth is universal and not the peculiar attribute of a regional or geographic grouping;

- 2 -

But I am here to say on behalf of ~~my country~~ that we remain
~~will continue~~ committed to the ideals of a world community and that we are prepared
~~will continue~~ to work in this parliament of men for that true peace which has ~~far~~ far eluded us.

Two centuries ago, the philosopher Kant predicted that perpetual
peace would come to the world eventually -- either as the result of man's
moral aspirations or as the consequence of technological necessity.
What seemed utopian then now looms as tomorrow's reality; soon there
will be no alternatives to the world envisaged in the Charter drawn up a
generation ago. Our choice is only whether it results from our vision
or is imposed upon us by a catastrophe.

In this quest, tired formulas cannot be our guide. The greatest
issue before this body is whether we can draw our inspiration from
where we must go rather than from where we have been. We have ~~must~~ choose the choice between a past of, at best, managed crises or a future moved by a spirit of cooperation.

- 3 -

- 4 -

Yet these achievements, solid as they are, have only made less risky the world which emerged at the end of World War II so contrary to the expectation of the founders of the UN. We have ended many of the confrontations of the Cold War; yet, even in this room, its vocabulary persists. Relaxation of tensions is justified by some as merely a tactical interlude before renewed struggle. Others describe it as the beginning of a two-power condominium. And paradoxically, as relations between the two original blocs have eased, a third grouping 'increasingly assumes the characteristics of a bloc of its own -- producing the paradox of an alignment of the so-called non-aligned.

- 5 -

In 1946 another Secretary of State -- James Byrnes -- addressed this Assembly, He spoke of how the United Nations could help break down habits of thinking in national isolation and move toward universal understanding and tolerance among all peoples.

The time has come to put these hopes into effect. And there is no more natural or potentially effective instrument of global reconciliation than the United Nations. The United States in recent years has pursued an active bilateral diplomacy with many countries. But these dramatic initiatives are but the stepping stones in a quest for universal peace. The United States is committed to the vision that produced the United Nations. We will never be satisfied with a world of managed crises, of uneasy truces, of offsetting blocs. We know that power can enforce a resignation, but only a sense of justice can produce consensus. We are striving for a world whose ultimate security depends not on a balance of forces, but on a community of shared aspirations. We are convinced that a stability which ignores humane values will prove cold and empty to most of mankind.

-- justice cannot be confined by national frontiers;

-- truth is universal and not the peculiar attribute of a single people, group or nation, regional or geographic grouping;

-- compassion and human concern ennoble all our technical concerns.

- 6 -

11th Draft

[Y]

That President Nixon should ask me to present the American position to this Assembly as my first official act reaffirms the American commitment to the values and ideals of this institution. The founders of the United Nations thought of a world at peace supported by the shared aspirations of mankind. The United States has no higher goal. The United Nations should strive for a world of justice. My country strongly supports this. We believe too in the rule of law and the importance of fundamental human rights.

- 2 -

- 3 -

beckons an institutionalized peace,

- 4 -

Yet these achievements, solid as they are, have only made less risky the world which emerged at the end of World War II, so contrary to the expectation of the founders of the UN. We have ended many of the confrontations of the Cold War; yet, even in this room, its vocabulary persists in changing. Relaxation of tensions is justified by some as merely a tactical interlude before renewed struggle. Others describe it as the beginning of a two-power condominium. And paradoxically, as relations between the two original blocs have eased, a third grouping increasingly assumes the characteristics of a bloc of its own -- producing the paradox of an alignment of the so-called non-aligned.

- 5 -

The time has come to put these hopes into effect. And there is no more natural or potentially effective instrument of global reconciliation than the United Nations. The United States in recent years has pursued a very active bilateral diplomacy with many countries. But these dramatic initiatives are but the stepping stones in a quest for universal peace. The United States is committed to the vision that produced the United Nations. We will never be satisfied with a world of managed crises, of uneasy truces, of offsetting blocs. We know that power can enforce resigned tranquility, but only a sense of justice can produce consensus. We are striving for a world whose ultimate security depends not on a balance of forces, but on a community of shared aspirations. We are convinced that a stability which ignores humane values will prove cold and empty to most of mankind.

- 6 -

(Y)

We offer this Assembly our readiness to move from passiveness
to coexistence.

But this is a long road we must travel. It will require patience worthy of the noble goals we seek. It will require fair-minded compromise rather than one-sided demands which can only deepen deadlocks. In short, it will require statesmanship of a high order if our goal is to be pursued instead propaganda, we are to be disciples of progress instead of prisoners officiple propaganda.

7

(N)

For our part:

8

(N)

9

But as we make progress on the traditional agenda of this body we begin to face our deeper problems. As the world grows more stable we must answer the question of detente for what end. As the threat of war recedes the quality of human life takes on added significance.

We are in fact, members of a community drawn by science, technology, and new forms of communication into a proximity for which we are still politically unprepared. Our problems are global in scope. They bear little relationship to those of a generation ago. They cannot be solved on a national basis and many cannot be dealt with even regionally. As a result the ideals of the founders of the United Nations are far more applicable

9th Draft

[N]

My presence here today is meant to reaffirm the fact that the U.S. Government and its people continue to regard the United Nations as an embodiment of some of their most cherished ideals and values. The ideal is a world at peace. The values include respect for constitutionalism, for the rule of law in international affairs, for the sanctity of international agreements and a firm dedication to fundamental human rights.

What is the main challenge before this Assembly? It will face its usual agenda of unresolved problems -- some vital, some produced by ideological disputes, some by the threat of human necessities. These are important. And the United States will take a position on them.

But today, I want to address a more fundamental problem still. Many of the crises that haunted past General Assemblies have

- 2 -

The United States and the Soviet Union have begun to organize
a community of interest in avoiding nuclear cataclysm and in establishing
a broader web of relationships. We have met twice at the summit.
Talks on strategic arms limitations have already produced historic
accords aimed at slowing the arms race and ensuring strategic
stability; we have, today, resumed negotiations to further these
goals which will benefit all mankind.

Two decades of estrangement between the United States and
the People's Republic of China have given way to constructive dialogue
and productive exchanges. President Nixon has met with the leaders
of that nation; we have agreed to an historic communique that honestly
sets forth both our differences and our common aspirations; and we -
have each opened Liaison Offices in the capital of the other. Today,
no major country is excluded from this chamber.

- 3 -

conflict between East and West; the two German states have taken
their place in this Assembly; North and South Korea are at last
engaged in a dialogue which we all hope will lead to a more secure
life for that divided people.

We thus meet at a curious moment. We have ended many of
the confrontations of the Cold War; yet its slogans are still with us
even in this room. Relaxing of tensions is sometimes justified as
merely a tactical interlude before renewed struggle. As the tensions
diminish, the fear forms that the two opposing groupings may unite
in an attempt to produce a condominium and to impose their will on
the rest of the world. And paradoxically as the tensions among the
original blocs have diminished, a new bloc has grown up technically
non-aligned, in reality closely aligned to each other and with increasing
characteristics of a bloc of its own. So the world is uneasily suspended
between old slogans and new realities between the vision of peace as
an interlude in an unending struggle and the notion of peace as world-
wide cooperation.

In 1946 another Secretary of State -- James Byrnes --
addressed this assembly. He spoke of how the United Nations could
help break down habits of thinking in national isolation and move toward
universal understanding and tolerance among all peoples.

- 4 -

I would be less than candid, however, if I did not say that the American people, like many others, have been disappointed that the United Nations System has not been more successful in translating the hopes and visions of its founders into more concrete accomplishments. We have not overlooked some of the important successes as well as the tragedies that the United Nations has averted. We recognize that the United Nations family has made its contribution, that it is making an increasing contribution to the process of economic development.

But, I ask, as do many others, is this enough? Is the United Nations destined to become an arena where the rivers of resolutions flow with little result while the tragedies and crises and challenges of the real world remain immune to meaningful attention from these great halls. To those who are disillusioned and despair of what history will write about this international assembly, I can give you one pledge from my government:

United States policy will continue to be based on the view that multilateral and bilateral diplomacy are complementary elements of a single quest. My government, with the cooperation of others, has managed to ease the danger that a global war will again scourge mankind. But there is a compelling need to institutionalize the agreements between and among governments which have set the winds of promise astir in the world.

- 5 -

The United States remains committed to the vision that produced the United Nations: where the permanent members of the Security Council supported by the consensus of nations would cooperatively maintain the peace. We are not content with managed crises, of uneasy times and offsetting blocs. We seek peace, not an armistice. We know that power can enforce the tranquility of the graveyard, but only a sense of justice can produce consensus. We are not looking for a world whose ultimate security depends on a balance of forces but one held together by shared aspirations. We know that a peace which does not reach the level of humane values will seem cold and empty to most of mankind.

Two centuries ago the philosopher Kant predicted that perpetual peace would come to the world eventually -- either as the result of man's moral aspirations or as the consequence of technological necessity. What seemed utopian then now looms as tomorrow's reality; soon there will be no alternatives to the world envisaged in the Charter drawn up a generation ago. Our choice is only whether it results from our vision or is imposed on us by a catastrophe.

In this quest, the tired slogans of yesteryear cannot be our guide. The greatest issue before this body is whether we can divest ourselves of old doctrines -- whether we can draw our inspiration from where we must go rather than from where we have been.

- 6 -

It is in this spirit that the United States will approach its
foreign policy and the work of this assembly.

Of course, our journey must begin with the world as it is.
We shall spare no effort to ease tensions and to move the world
toward a stabler peace.

-- We shall work to encourage positive trends elsewhere in Asia. The uncertain peace in Indochina must be strengthened; the first tentative steps towards reconciliation in Korea will be encouraged.

-- We shall pursue vigorously our efforts to build more
constructive relations with the Soviet Union.

-- We shall do our utmost to diminish tensions in Europe.
A conference on security and cooperation is now in progress.
Next month, the Western allies will meet in Vienna with
the Soviet Union and its allies to negotiate a reduction
in the forces that have for so long faced each other in
the heart of Europe.

-- We shall press on with strategic arms limitations talks.
We consider them potentially decisive for the whole
evolution of the post-war period.

- 7 -

-- We shall search for a solution to the worldwide problem of conventional weapons, which drain our resources and fuel the fires of local conflict.

-- We shall seek a treaty prohibiting the production of chemical weapons, as we ourselves have ceased their production.

-- The United States has no desire for domination. It will oppose -- as it has consistently throughout this century -- any nation that seeks to do so. We have not been asked to participate in a condominium, and we would reject such an appeal if it were made.

-- We will never abandon our friends or our allies. Broadened relationships with old friends are essential to the development of new relationships with old adversaries.

-- We will work for peace through the United Nations as well as in our bilateral relationships. To those nations now locked in confrontation with their neighbors let it be said that the United States recognizes its special obligation, as a Permanent Member of the Security Council, to assist in the search for solutions just to all sides. All nations

- 8 -

have a responsibility to their own interests, but they
also have a stake in the general peace. While my country
cannot substitute for the efforts of those most directly
involved, it is willing to use its constructive influence
if the necessary spirit of accommodation between the
parties gives hope for practical progress. This principle
applies particularly to the Middle East where the basic
problem is how to reconcile the needs of sovereignty
and security.

But our challenge goes deeper. It is not enough to ease tensions; the causes must be removed. Our goal is not to make the Cold War more bearable but to eliminate it; not to operate a world based on rigid divisions but to transcend them. We seek, in short, cooperation, not confrontation.

This objective reflects the nature of the international environment. We are, in fact, members of an international community drawn by science, technology, and new forms of communication into

- 9 -

> No nation can, with impunity, pollute the air and water of its neighbor.

Challenges of this magnitude cannot be solved by a world divided into blocs -- be it two or three. This is our attitude towards the global issues before us:

> A peaceful world must be an open world. We either undertake concerted global action or we retreat into irrelevance. I will not

-10-

cover the whole agenda of possible international actions but rather
give some examples of areas of concern. But the United States
stands ready to examine together with other nations these problems
of common concern and will in due course submit specific proposals
to that effect.

Challenges of this magnitude cannot be solved by a world divided into
blocs -- be it two or three. The tired slogans of previous, even success-
ful, struggles, cannot cope with this reality. Thus, the issue of greatest
consequence for this body is whether we can divest ourselves of yester-
day's prejudices; whether we draw our inspiration not from where we
have been but where we must go.

It is in this spirit that the United States will approach the agenda of
the Assembly. This is our attitude towards the global issues before us:

A peaceful world must be an open world. We either undertake con-
certed global action or we retreat into impotence.

An effective role for the UN in an open world requires:

- That we strengthen the political role of the Organization.

- That the pressing problems of hunger and poverty receive
  priority attention.

- That the fruits of scientific and technological development be
made available to all mankind.

Let us begin by improving the institutional strength of the United Nations.

A policy which excludes any qualified state denies representation not only
to governments, but to people. The admission to membership of the two
German states at this General Assembly is an historic step toward the
objective of universal UN membership. The time has come for North and
South Korea to be offered their rightful places here, without prejudice to a

10

future peaceful evolution toward unification. But it would be a sad commentary
if the question of admission should become a source of conflict rather than
another step toward reconciliation and normalization.

The United States also believes that the permanent membership of
the Security Council should be expanded to include Japan.

Equally important is the United Nations' role in keeping the peace.
We have for too long debated among ourselves how peacekeeping operations
should be inaugurated and conducted, about the role of the Security Council,
and the role of the permanent members. This Organization can make a
major contribution to the settlement of disputes between nations. But it
requires placing a common dedication to peace above individual efforts to
achieve tactical successes.

Accordingly, the United States proposes that the United Nations
look anew at the obstacles which have hitherto prevented agreement on the
development of effective guidelines for peacekeeping operations. For our
part, we are prepared to search for ways to strengthen the authority of the
Security Council over such operations.

A peaceful world cannot be one in which there is a scarcity of food
or where there is poverty in the midst of plenty.

For the better part of a decade the United States and others have
acted on the assumption that, in global terms, mankind had put food
shortages behind.

11

But this year that assumption has been seriously challenged. Since
1969, world use of cereals has risen more rapidly than production. As a
result of recent crop failures, stocks are at the lowest levels in years.
We now face the prospect that -- even with bumper crops -- the world may
not rebuild its seriously depleted reserves in this decade.

In such a situation changes in yield in major producing areas can
have major effects in world markets. Because we in the United States have
kept our markets open to foreign purchasers, we have seen food prices
skyrocket. Normal patterns of trade and price relationship have been
distorted.

- That, in the interim, governments cooperate urgently to support the Food and Agriculture Organization's plan to encourage all nations to improve their food stockpiling capacity.

- That nations in a position to do so offer technical assistance in the conservation of food. For example, this might include help in planning or erecting storage facilities, and instruction in how to combat losses resulting from infestation and spoilage. The United States is ready to join with others in providing such assistance.

12

We recognize that real peace -- in the sense of a true world community -- cannot come about if the world remains divided forever between the permanently rich and the permanently poor.

But the old remedies have not worked. The economic assistance policies followed in the 1950s and '60s, for all their successes, engendered resistance in donor and recipient nations alike. New answers must be found -- answers that recognize that economic development is a long-term problem, and that the national dignity of those who receive assistance must be preserved.

The United States has already begun to shift the emphasis of its assistance efforts toward multilateral institutions; it will continue to do so. We will, for example, request our Congress to authorize a substantially increased US contribution to the International Development Association as part of the scheduled replenishment of funding for that organization.

But this is only a beginning. It is time that we joined together, here in the United Nations, in a common search for new and imaginative approaches to the problems of economic development -- not on the basis of harsh demands, but in a spirit of cooperation. The United States is prepared to enter this effort with no conditions, and with an open mind. We ask only that others adopt the same attitude.

In this spirit, the United States is prepared to consider a Charter of the Economic Rights and Duties of States which would represent a fair balance between the needs and rightful expectations of both industrialized

13

and less developed countries. Such a Charter should serve a meaningful
purpose -- not as an indictment of one group of nations by another, but
as an expression of common aspirations. Our objective must be a
document free of slogans; a document universally acceptable and universally
applicable.

Finally, Mr. President, no issue more deserves our immediate
attention -- and our immediate action -- than that of harnessing man's
science and technology to derive common gain and avoid common disaster.
No field of human endeavor is so dependent upon an open world for its
successes; no field so in need of international cooperation to cope with its
excesses.

The United Nations is the logical place to undertake the enormous
tasks of concerting our efforts and wisely distributing the results of our
technology.

14

Mexico and the United States recently concluded an agreement which
will result in the practical application of our latest water desalinization
technology. Because of this agreement the benefits of American technology
will be felt by millions in both countries who depend on the waters of the
Colorado River.

-15-

In many other areas as well we must begin to match our remarkable technological skills with our equally remarkable technological needs.

We must find the means for the cooperative and judicious development of our material and energy resources. We must responsibly confront the problems of population growth, which are fast pushing humanity towards the limits of what our Earth can sustain. We must embark on a new revolution aimed at increasing agricultural productivity in all lands.

The proper role of the United Nations must be that of generating concrete solutions to the problems created by our accelerating technological development --problems that have no respect for national frontiers. But more, it must be that of finding and giving expression to the necessary collective will to reduce the political obstacles to genuine cooperation.

Mr. President, fellow delegates: just as frontiers can no longer contain our problems, so they must not restrict our solutions. I have listed some concrete issues that face this organization, and the agenda for this session is replete with many more. But I have purposefully dwelt on attitude and spirit. For our fundamental challenge is not the catalogue of specific tasks. It is to recognize the imperatives of a global society and to infuse our labors with this vision. This will determine our success with practical problems.

If we fail to do this, if we bind ourselves to established patterns, the progress of recent years could prove fragile, and the future will overwhelm us.

If we transcend the familiar and consult a more sublime guide, we will expand what has been achieved, and we will shape our fate.

The choice is ours -- a peaceful world that we build creatively or a peaceful world bequeathed by cataclysm. It is a choice we must make together, for together we will bear the burden of failure or share the glory of success. If the ideals of the United Nations now seem unrealistic, then it is reality we must change -- not our hopes.

We must move from hesitant accommodation born of sheer necessity to genuine cooperation born of common vision. In this way, we can one day realize what has so long escaped our grasp and truly bring "understanding and tolerance" to all mankind.

9th Draft

My presence here today is meant to reaffirm the fact that the
U.S. Government and its people continue to regard the United Nations
as an embodiment of some of their most cherished ideals and values.
The ideal is a world at peace. The values include respect for consti-
tutionalism, for the rule of law in international affairs, for the
sanctity of international agreements and a firm dedication to funda-
mental human rights.

- 2 -

- 3 -

- 4 -

- 5 -

- 6 -

- 7 -

- 8 -

- 9 -

- 10 -

8th draft

2

3

4

In short, we have learned to live with the world which emerged
from the Second World War -- a world so contrary to the expectations of
the founders of this organization. But while there have been major strides
toward peace, much remains to be done, even within the framework we
have known for almost three decades:

5

It is therefore important that we understand each other's purposes. The United States remains committed to the vision that produced the United Nations. We are not content with a planet of managed crises, of uneasy truces, of offsetting blocs. We seek genuine peace, not as an armistice. We shall strive for a world of cooperation, not merely of coexistence. We aim for an environment where settlements are based on justice, not strength. Our ultimate goal is for nations to share their hopes instead of controlling their fears, to build consensus instead of maintaining a balance of power, to focus on common purposes and endeavors.

6

(N)

The unceasing努力 in India must be strengthened, and the first initiative in Korea will be encouraging.

As we seek to diminish tensions in Europe, a conference on security and cooperation is now in progress. Next month the Western allies will meet in Vienna with the Soviet Union and its allies to negotiate a reduction in the forces that have for so long faced each other in the heart of Europe.

We will press on with strategic arms limitations talks. We consider them potentially decisive for the whole evolution of the post-war period.

In all this we look forward with great hope.

device for domination.

7

(N)

-- The United States has no aggressive [or hegemonic] designs.

It will oppose -- as it has consistently throughout this century -- any nation that does We have not been asked to participate in a condominium, and we would reject such an appeal if it were made. We seek a detente shared universally by all here represented.

-- We will never abandon our friends and allies. Rather, we will continue to strengthen the ties that have bound us together in partnership for almost three decades. Broadened relationships with old friends are essential to the development of new relationships with old adversaries.

-- We will work for peace through the United Nations as well as in our bilateral relationships. To those nations now locked in confrontation with their neighbors let it be said that the United States recognizes its special obligation, as a Permanent Member of the Security Council to assist in the search for solutions just to all sides. But my country cannot substitute its efforts for those most directly involved. All nations have a responsibility to their own interests, but they also have a stake in the general peace. We will do what we can, but we can do little for those who remain unwilling to compromise.

to me its constructive influence of the necessary spirit of accommodation between the parties given hope for partial progress. This principle applies particularly to the medium but where the case of sovereignty and security

7

8

10

11

12

13

14

-15-

The proper role of the United Nations must be that of generating concrete solutions to the problems created by our accelerating technological development - problems that have no respect for national frontiers. But more, it must be that of finding and giving expression to the necessary collective will to reduce the political obstacles to genuine cooperation.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Executive Secretariat

MEMORANDUM

September 23, 1973

TO: S/S - Mr. Pickering

SUBJECT: Secretary's Trip to New York, N.Y., Sunday, September 23, 1973

The Secretary will attend the United Nations General Assembly.

The Operations Center (ext. 21512) will be aware of the Secretary's whereabouts throughout his stay in New York and will assist, if necessary, in contacting him.

AIRCRAFT

MAC Convair No. 42817. The pilot will be Major Herbert C. Needham (home phone: 336-8959).

FLIGHT SCHEDULE

The aircraft will depart Andrews Air Force Base at 6:00 p.m. on September 23 and will arrive at Marine Terminal, LaGuardia Airport, at 6:50 p.m.

The Secretary will return to Washington Wednesday afternoon, September 26.

PASSENGERS

Secretary Kissinger
Ambassador John Scali
Senator George D. Aiken
Mrs. Aiken
Congressman Thomas E. Morgan
Mrs. Morgan
Congressman William S. Mailliard
Mrs. Mailliard
Ambassador Robert J. McCloskey
Mr. Thomas R. Pickering
Mr. Lawrence S. Eagleburger
Mr. Richard P. Campbell
Mr. Peter W. Rodman
Miss Irene G. Derus
Mrs. Jane M. Rothe
Mr. J. Ready
Mr. G. McLeod
Mr. W. Driscoll
Mr. J. Doyle
Mr. J. Edwards
Mr. W. Bothe