Skip to content

Results:

1 - 10 of 53

Documents

October 2, 1957

Memorandum by Frank Aiken [on an Interview with Scott McCleod and the Taoiseach]

Aiken made an immediate impression on his arrival in the Twelfth Session of the UN General Assembly in September 1957. He adopted an impartial posture of assessing each issue on its merits and campaigning to remodel international politics around self-determination, humanitarianism, and peace. His exhortation was that only the UN had the moral authority and political legitimacy to put forward global solutions. While he did not propose nuclear disarmament measures specifically, his intent was signaled by his recommendation for a mutual drawback of foreign forces (including their nuclear weapons) in central Europe and his endorsement of a proposal to discuss the representation of China in the United Nations. The Eisenhower administration was hostile to Aiken’s course as outlined in the U.S. ambassador’s audience with Taoiseach Eamon de Valera and Aiken in Dublin on 2 October. The record underlines the Irish concerns about accidental nuclear war due to the proximity of opposing U.S. and Soviet forces in central Europe.  

June 14, 1968

Report of the Representative of Mexico, Ambassador Alfonso García Robles, 22nd Session of the United Nations General Assembly (Part Two), First Commission

Alfonso Garcia Robles explained how the Mexican delegation tried to gather the support of the Latin American countries for the NPT draft. These countries prepared and presented modifications to the NPT text, and the United States and the Soviet Union accepted some of these proposals. Garcia Robles reported that the Argentinian and Brazilian representatives said they recognized the value of the NPT but would not support it if it kept its clause prohibiting peaceful nuclear explosions. The Ambassador also reported the Soviet positive reactions toward the Treaty of Tlatelolco. Garcia Robles recounted the skepticism of some delegations toward the NPT. He recommended not to sign the NPT in 1968 unless the Soviet Union signed Protocol II of the Treaty of Tlatelolco, which includes negative security assurances.

December 3, 1956

Middle East (Situation): Debated in the Commons Chamber, Monday, 3 December 1956

In July 1956, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser (1918-1970) nationalized the Suez Canal Company, surprising the world. The government of France, in whose capital of Paris the company was headquartered, and the British government, the company’s plurality shareholder, sought to reverse nationalization in court, but failed—even though they clad their case in the language not of imperial self-interest but, rather, of international public interest. The time in which such language was somewhat acceptable, even at home, was passing, and the Suez Crisis played a big part in this final act.

At the same time, the two governments early on after the canal nationalization decided to remove Nasser by force, for re-compensation was not their central concern. France believed Nasser was enabling the FLN, which in 1954 had started Algeria’s War for Independence, and Britain wanted some say in the canal, which had for decades been its worldwide empire’s “swing-door,” as a member of parliament, Anthony Eden (1897-1977), called it in 1929. In August 1956 France began discussing a joint operation with Israel, which wanted Nasser gone, too, and the Red Sea opened for Israel-bound ships. In early October the two were joined by Britain. On the 29th, Israel invaded the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula. On the 30th, France and Britain gave Israel and Egypt a 12-hour ultimatum to cease hostilities, or they would intervene—and Anglo-French forces bombed Egyptian forces from the 31st and on November 5-6 occupied the canal’s northern tip. Although a power play, “Operation Musketeer,” like the court case, could not be an open imperial move anymore, then, and did not present itself to the world as such. No matter: especially in colonies and postcolonial countries, people were outraged.

More problematically for France and Britain, Washington was incredulous. This Middle Eastern affair triggered the worst crisis of the 1950s between America’s rising international empire and Europe’s descending empires, and indeed clarified and accelerated that descent. President Dwight Eisenhower (1890-1969) fumed that Prime Ministers Anthony Eden and Guy Mollet (1905-1977) had disregarded his administration’s opposition to military action. Worse, they had deceived him about their intentions. And worst, their attack on Egypt undermined the supreme US tenet: Soviet containment. The Americans were by association tainted by their NATO allies’ imperialist move while the Soviets looked good—on November 5 they offered Egypt troops and threatened to nuke London, Paris, and Tel Aviv—and that although they had just repressed an uprising in Hungary.

On the very day of the ultimatum, October 30, Eisenhower washed his hands of that move on live US television, and the US mission at the UN organized a cease-fire resolution vote in the Security Council. France and Britain vetoed it. Although sharing its European allies’ emotions about Nasser, the US administration withheld critical oil and monetary supplies from them to bring them to heel and withdraw from Egypt—after which, it promised, they would be warmly welcomed back. It ceased most bilateral communications and froze almost all everyday social interactions with its two allies, even cancelling a scheduled visit by Eden. And it badgered its allies at the UN, supporting an Afro-Asian resolution that on November 24 called Israel, Britain, and France to withdraw forthwith. On December 3, the British Foreign Secretary Selwyn Lloyd took the floor in the House of Commons.

October 4, 1982

Excerpts of Talks between Leading Comrades and Foreign Guests (No. 8)

A Chinese Communist Party digest summarizing recent meetings held between Deng Xiaoping and UN Secretary-General Pérez de Cuéllar and French National Assembly Speaker Louis Mermaz.

1968

Directives to the Delegation of the USSR at the XXIII Session of the General Assembly of the UN on the question about the Memorandum of the Government of the USSR about Some Urgent Measures for the Termination of the Arms Race and Disarmament

This document contains a list of directives to the Soviet delegation at the 23rd Session of the UNGA which focus on a Soviet government memorandum that was submitted by the Soviet government for addition to the session's agenda. The initial directives instruct the delegation to emphasize the urgency that, to the Soviet government, befits the serious need to terminate the arms race and start making concrete steps towards disarmament. Later directives call attention to discussions held between the Soviet government and those of other socialist countries, as well as additions to the resolution of the UNGA proposed by Western countries that the Soviet government finds unacceptable. Nonetheless, the delegation is to bring the Memorandum to the attention of the Eighteen Nation Disarmament Committee (ENCD) for consideration.

September 1968

Letter by A. Gromyko to the General Secretary of the UN U Thant

Gromyko asks U Thant to include the "Memorandum of the Government of the USSR on Some Urgent Measures to End the Arms Race and Disarmament" on the agenda of the 23rd Session of the UNGA. He also extolls the signing of the NPT as an opportunity to create better conditions for the termination of the arms race and as a starting point for further international agreements on the issues of disarmament and the termination of the usage of nuclear weapons. Gromyko also asks Thant to share the Memorandum in the capacity of an official document on the UNGA.

September 1968

About the Major Proposals Put Forward by the Soviet Union for Inclusion of the Agenda of the Day at the XXIII Session of the UNGA

This memo contains a list of items on the agenda in preparation for the XXIII Session of the General Assembly. Some of the listed items on the agenda include instructing Gromyko to put the "Memorandum of the Government of the USSR on Some Urgent Measures to End the Arms Race and Disarmament" on the agenda of the 23rd Session of the UNGA and approve the directives of the delegation of the USSR to the 23rd Session of the UNGA. This memo also includes a list of logistical preparations for the Soviet delegation, including approving a list of advisers and experts for the Soviet delegation, as well as means of transportation to the 23rd Session in New York for the USSR, Ukrainian SSR, Belarussian SSR, and potentially the Mongolian SR upon request.

March 1968

Telegram, 'To the Soviet Representative'

Sent to the Soviet representative to the General Assembly of the United Nations, this document lists the nations to which the representative must pay the most attention at the UN meeting. The document also underlines how the Soviet representative should speak with members of the American delegation in reference to any diplomatic collaboration on the NPT.

1968

CPSU CC Decree, 'Regarding the Location of the NPT's Signing'

A resolution from the CPSU CC about the location at which the NPT will be signed. The resolution approves the guidelines for Soviet delegates at the 22nd session of the United Nations General Assembly.

September 18, 1947

Text of Speech Delivered by A.Y. Vyshinsky at the General Assembly of the United Nations, September 18, 1947

The Soviet Union's response to George Marshall's September 17, 1947, speech at the UNGA. Vyshinsky offers the Soviet Union's position on arms control, nuclear weapons, the UN, Korea, Greece, and other issues raised by Marshall

Pagination