Article #330
Subject: President Kennedy's Sept. 20, 1963 speech to the UN
Author: Andrew W. Harrell
Posted: 11/23/2013 10:31:26 AM

Address to the UN General Assembly (September 20, 1963)



John Fitzgerald Kennedy





This transcript contains the published text of the speech, not the actual
words spoken. There may be some differences between the transcript and the
audio/video content.





Video











Word Cloud



This is a chart of the words used most frequently in this speech. The larger
the word, the more frequently that it was used.



ago agreement human long make man must nation nations now nuclear
organization our peace peaceful people responsibility rights soviet space
states treaty union united war weapons will work world years





Downloadable Materials



Audio

MP3





Mr. President--as one who has taken some interest in the election of
Presidents, I want to congratulate you on your election to this high office--
Mr. Secretary General, delegates to the United Nations, ladies and gentlemen:



We meet again in the quest for peace.



Twenty-four months ago, when I last had the honor of addressing this body,
the shadow of fear lay darkly across the world. The freedom of West Berlin
was in immediate peril. Agreement on a neutral Laos seemed remote. The
mandate of the United Nations in the Congo was under fire. The financial
outlook for this organization was in doubt. Dag Hammarskjold was dead. The
doctrine of troika was being pressed in his place, and atmospheric nuclear
tests had been resumed by the Soviet Union.



Those were anxious days for mankind-and some men wondered aloud whether this
organization could survive. But the 16th and 17th General Assemblies achieved
not only survival but progress. Rising to its responsibility, the United
Nations helped reduce the tensions and helped to hold back the darkness.



Today the clouds have lifted a little so that new rays of hope can break
through. The pressures on West Berlin appear to be temporarily eased.
Political unity in the Congo has been largely restored. A neutral coalition
in Laos, while still in difficulty, is at least in being. The integrity of
the United Nations Secretariat has been reaffirmed. A United Nations Decade
of Development is under way. And, for the first time in 17 years of effort, a
specific step has been taken to limit the nuclear arms race.



I refer, of course, to the treaty to ban nuclear tests in the atmosphere,
outer space, and under water--concluded by the Soviet Union, the United
Kingdom, and the United States--and already signed by nearly 100 countries.
It has been hailed by people the world over who are thankful to be free from
the fears of nuclear fallout, and I am confident that on next Tuesday at
10:30 o'clock in the morning it will receive the overwhelming endorsement of
the Senate of the United States.



The world has not escaped from the darkness. The long shadows of conflict and
crisis envelop us still. But we meet today in an atmosphere of rising hope,
and at a moment of comparative calm. My presence here today is not a sign of
crisis, but of confidence. I am not here to report on a new threat to the
peace or new signs of war. I have come to salute the United Nations and to
show the support of the American people for your daily deliberations.



For the value of this body's work is not dependent on the existence of
emergencies-nor can the winning of peace consist only of dramatic victories.
Peace is a daily, a weekly, a monthly process, gradually changing opinions,
slowly eroding old barriers, quietly building new structures. And however
undramatic the pursuit of peace, that pursuit must go on.



Today we may have reached a pause in the cold war--but that is not a lasting
peace. A test ban treaty is a milestone--but it is not the millennium. We
have not been released from our obligations--we have been given an
opportunity. And if we fail to make the most of this moment and this momentum-
if we convert our new-found hopes and understandings into new walls and
weapons of hostility--if this .pause in the cold war merely leads to its
renewal and not to its end--then the indictment of posterity will rightly
point its finger at us all. But if we can stretch this pause into a period of
cooperation--if both sides can now gain new confidence and experience in
concrete collaborations for peace--if we can now be as bold and farsighted in
the control of deadly weapons as we have been in their creation-then surely
this first small step can be the start of a long and fruitful journey.



The task of building the peace lies with the leaders of every nation, large
and small. For the great powers have no monopoly on conflict or ambition. The
cold war is not the only expression of tension in this world-and the nuclear
race is not the only arms race. Even little wars are dangerous in a nuclear
world. The long labor of peace is an undertaking for every nation--and in
this effort none of us can remain unaligned. To this goal none can be
uncommitted.



The reduction of global tension must not be an excuse for the narrow pursuit
of self-interest. If the Soviet Union and the United States, with all of
their global interests and clashing commitments of ideology, and with nuclear
weapons still aimed at each other today, can find areas of common interest
and agreement, then surely other nations can do the same--nations caught in
regional conflicts, in racial issues, or in the death throes of old
colonialism. Chronic disputes which divert precious resources from the needs
of the people or drain the energies of both sides serve the interests of no
one--and the badge of responsibility in the modern world is a willingness to
seek peaceful solutions.



It is never too early to try; and it's never too late to talk; and it's high
time that many disputes on the agenda of this Assembly were taken off the
debating schedule and placed on the negotiating table.



The fact remains that the United States, as a major nuclear power, does have
a special responsibility in the world. It is, in fact, a threefold
responsibility--a responsibility to our own citizens; a responsibility to the
people of the whole world who are affected by our decisions; and to the next
generation of humanity. We believe the Soviet Union also has these special
responsibilities--and that those responsibilities require our two nations to
concentrate less on our differences and more on the means of resolving them
peacefully. For too long both of us have increased our military budgets, our
nuclear stockpiles, and our capacity to destroy all life on this hemisphere--
human, animal, vegetable--without any corresponding increase in our security.



Our conflicts, to be sure, are real. Our concepts of the world are different.
No service is performed by failing to make clear our disagreements. A central
difference is the belief of the American people in self-determination for all
people.



We believe that the people of Germany and Berlin must be free to reunite
their capital and their country.



We believe that the people of Cuba must be free to secure the fruits of the
revolution that have been betrayed from within and exploited from without.



In short, we believe that all the world--in Eastern Europe as well as
Western, in Southern Africa as well as Northern, in old nations as well as
new--that people must be free to choose their own future, without
discrimination or dictation, without coercion or subversion.



These are the basic differences between the Soviet Union and the United
States, and they cannot be concealed. So long as they exist, they set limits
to agreement, and they forbid the relaxation of our vigilance. Our defense
around the world will be maintained for the protection of freedom--and our
determination to safeguard that freedom will measure up to any threat or
challenge.



But I would say to the leaders of the Soviet Union, and to their people, that
if either of our countries is to be fully secure, we need a much better
weapon than the H-bomb--a weapon better than ballistic missiles or nuclear
submarines--and that better weapon is peaceful cooperation.



We have, in recent years, agreed on a limited test ban treaty, on an
emergency communications link between our capitals, on a statement of
principles for disarmament, on an increase in cultural exchange, on
cooperation in outer space, on the peaceful exploration of the Antarctic, and
on tempering last year's crisis over Cuba.



I believe, therefore, that the Soviet Union and the United States, together
with their allies, can achieve further agreements-agreements which spring
from our mutual interest in avoiding mutual destruction.



There can be no doubt about the agenda of further steps. We must continue to
seek agreements on measures which prevent war by accident or miscalculation.
We must continue to seek agreement on safeguards against surprise attack,
including observation posts at key points. We must continue to seek agreement
on further measures to curb the nuclear arms race, by controlling the
transfer of nuclear weapons, converting fissionable materials to peaceful
purposes, and banning underground testing, with adequate inspection and
enforcement. We must continue to seek agreement on a freer flow of
information and people from East to West and West to East.



We must continue to seek agreement, encouraged by yesterday's affirmative
response to this proposal by the Soviet Foreign Minister, on an arrangement
to keep weapons of mass destruction out of outer space. Let us get our
negotiators back to the negotiating table to work out a practicable
arrangement to this end.



In these and other ways, let us move up the steep and difficult path toward
comprehensive disarmament, securing mutual confidence through mutual
verification, and building the institutions of peace as we dismantle the
engines of war. We must not let failure to agree on all points delay
agreements where agreement is possible. And we must not put forward proposals
for propaganda purposes.



Finally, in a field where the United States and the Soviet Union have a
special capacity-in the field of space--there is room for new cooperation,
for further joint efforts in the regulation and exploration of space. I
include among these possibilities a joint expedition to the moon. Space
offers no problems of sovereignty; by resolution of this Assembly, the
members of the United Nations have foresworn any claim to territorial rights
in outer space or on celestial bodies, and declared that international law
and the United Nations Charter will apply. Why, therefore, should man's first
flight to the moon be a matter of national competition? Why should the United
States and the Soviet Union, in preparing for such expeditions, become
involved in immense duplications of research, construction, and expenditure?
Surely we should explore whether the scientists and astronauts of our two
countries--indeed of all the world--cannot work together in the conquest of
space, sending some day in this decade to the moon not the respresentatives
of a single nation, but the representatives of all of our countries.



All these and other new steps toward peaceful cooperation may be possible.
Most of them will require on our part full consultation with our allies--for
their interests are as much involved as our own, and we will not make an
agreement at their expense. Most of them will require long and careful
negotiation. And most of them will require a new approach to the cold war--a
desire not to "bury" one's adversary, but to compete in a host of peaceful
arenas, in ideas, in production, and ultimately in service to all mankind.



The contest will continue--the contest between those who see a monolithic
world and those who believe in diversity--but it should be a contest in
leadership and responsibility instead of destruction, a contest in
achievement instead of intimidation. Speaking for the United States of
America, I welcome such a contest. For we believe that truth is stronger than
error--and that freedom is more enduring than coercion. And in the contest
for a better life, all the world can be a winner.



The effort to improve the conditions of man, however, is not a task for the
few. It is the task of all nations--acting alone, acting in groups, acting in
the United Nations, for plague and pestilence, and plunder and pollution, the
hazards of nature, and the hunger of children are the foes of every nation.
The earth, the sea, and the air are the concern of every nation. And science,
technology, and education can be the ally of every nation.



Never before has man had such capacity to control his own environment, to end
thirst and hunger, to conquer poverty and disease, to banish illiteracy and
massive human misery. We have the power to make this the best generation of
mankind in the history of the world--or to make it the last.



The United States since the close of the war has sent over $100 billion worth
of assistance to nations seeking economic viability. And 2 years ago this
week we formed a Peace Corps to help interested nations meet the demand for
trained manpower. Other industrialized nations whose economies were rebuilt
not so long ago with some help from us are now in turn recognizing their
responsibility to the less developed nations.



The provision of development assistance by individual nations must go on. But
the United Nations also must play a larger role in helping bring to all men
the fruits of modern science and industry. A United Nations conference on
this subject he;d earlier this year at Geneva opened new vistas for the
developing countries. Next year a United Nations Conference on Trade will
consider the needs of these nations for new markets. And more than four-
fifths of the entire United Nations system can be found today mobilizing the
weapons of science and technology for the United Nations' Decade of
Development.



But more can be done.



--A world center for health communications under the World Health
Organization could warn of epidemics and the adverse effects of certain drugs
as well as transmit the results of new experiments and new discoveries.



--Regional research centers could advance our common medical knowledge and
train new scientists and doctors for new nations.



--A global system of satellites could provide communication and weather
information for all corners of the earth.



--A worldwide program of conservation could protect the forest and wild game
preserves now in danger of extinction for all time, improve the marine
harvest of food from our oceans, and prevent the contamination of air and
water by industrial as well as nuclear pollution.



--And, finally, a worldwide program of farm productivity and food
distribution, similar to our country's "Food for Peace" program, could now
give every child the food he needs.



But man does not live by bread alone-and the members of this organization are
committed by the Charter to promote and respect human rights. Those rights
are not respected when a Buddhist priest is driven from his pagoda, when a
synagogue is shut down, when a Protestant church cannot open a mission, when
a Cardinal is forced into hiding, or when a crowded church service is bombed.
The United States of America is opposed to discrimination and persecution on
grounds of race and religion anywhere in the world, including our own Nation.
We are working to right the wrongs of our own country.



Through legislation and administrative action, through moral and legal
commitment, this Government has launched a determined effort to rid our
Nation of discrimination which has existed far too longin education, in
housing, in transportation, in employment, in the civil service, in
recreation, and in places of public accommodation. And therefore, in this or
any other forum, we do not hesitate to condemn racial or religious injustice,
whether committed or permitted by friend or foe.



I know that some of you have experienced discrimination in this country. But
I ask you to believe me when I tell you that this is not the wish of most
Americans--that we share your regret and resentment--and that we intend to
end such practices for all time to come, not only for our visitors, but for
our own citizens as well.



I hope that not only our Nation but all other multiracial societies will meet
these standards of fairness and justice. We are opposed to apartheid and all
forms of human oppression. We do not advocate the rights of black Africans in
order to drive out white Africans. Our concern is the right of all men to
equal protection under the law--and since human rights are indivisible, this
body cannot stand aside when those rights are abused and neglected by any
member state.



New efforts are needed if this Assembly's Declaration of Human Rights, now 15
years old, is to have full meaning. And new means should be found for
promoting the free expression and trade of ideas--through travel and
communication, and through increased exchanges of people, and books, and
broadcasts. For as the world renounces the competition of weapons,
competition in ideas must flourish--and that competition must be as full and
as fair as possible.



The United States delegation will be prepared to suggest to the United
Nations initiatives in the pursuit of all the goals. For this is an
organization for peace--and peace cannot come without work and without
progress.



The peacekeeping record of the United Nations has been a proud one, though
its tasks are always formidable. We are fortunate to have the skills of our
distinguished Secretary General and the brave efforts of those who have been
serving the cause of peace in the Congo, in the Middle East, in Korea and
Kashmir, in West New Guinea and Malaysia. But what the United Nations has
done in the past is less important than the tasks for the future. We cannot
take its peacekeeping machinery for granted. That machinery must be soundly
financed-which it cannot be if some members are allowed to prevent it from
meeting its obligations by failing to meet their own. The United Nations must
be supported by all those who exercise their franchise here. And its
operations must be backed to the end.



Too often a project is undertaken in the excitement of a crisis and then it
begins to lose its appeal as the problems drag on and the bills pile up. But
we must have the steadfastness to see every enterprise through.



It is, for example, most important not to jeopardize the extraordinary United
Nations gains in the Congo. The nation which sought this organization's help
only 3 years ago has now asked the United Nations' presence to remain a
little longer. I believe this Assembly should do what is necessary to
preserve the gains already made and to protect the new nation in its struggle
for progress. Let us complete what we have started. For "No man who puts his
hand to the plow and looks back," as the Scriptures tell us, "No man who puts
his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the Kingdom of God."



I also hope that the recent initiative of several members in preparing
standby peace forces for United Nations call will encourage similar
commitments by others. This Nation remains ready to provide logistic and
other material support.



Policing, moreover, is not enough without provision for pacific settlement.
We should increase the resort to special missions of factfinding and
conciliation, make greater use of the International Court of Justice, and
accelerate the work of the International Law Commission.



The United Nations cannot survive as a static organization. Its obligations
are increasing as well as its size. Its Charter must be changed as well as
its customs. The authors of that Charter did not intend that it be frozen in
perpetuity. The science of weapons and war has made us all, far more than 18
years ago in San Francisco, one world and one human race, with one common
destiny. In such a world, absolute -sovereignty no longer assures us of
absolute security. The conventions of peace must pull abreast and then ahead
of the inventions of war. The United Nations, building on its successes and
learning from its failures, must be developed into a genuine world security
system.



But peace does not rest in charters and covenants alone. It lies in the
hearts and minds of all people. And if it is east out there, then no act, no
pact, no treaty, no organization can hope to preserve it without the support
and the wholehearted commitment of all people. So let us not rest all our
hopes on parchment and on paper; let us strive to build peace, a desire for
peace, a willingness to work for peace, in the hearts and minds of all of our
people. I believe that we can. I believe the problems of human destiny are
not beyond the reach of human beings.



Two years ago I told this body that the United States had proposed, and was
willing to sign, a limited test ban treaty. Today that treaty has been
signed. It will not put an end to war. It will not remove basic conflicts. It
will not secure freedom for all. But it can be a lever, and Archimedes, in
explaining the principles of the lever, was said to have declared to his
friends: "Give me a place where I can stand--and I shall move the world."



My fellow inhabitants of this planet: Let us take our stand here in this
Assembly of nations. And let us see if we, in our own time, can move the
world to a just and lasting peace.

Article #331
Subject: prayers for us to be able to continue Pres. Kennedy's Intentions for moving the World inthe direction of Peace
Author: Andrew W. Harrell
Posted: 11/23/2013 11:36:34 AM

Meditating on President Kennedy’s legacy to World Peace today:

Thinking back on what he said at His UN speech September 1963,

“Archimedes said, ‘Give me a place to stand and I will move the world’.

‘Let us move the world for peace’.”



When he stood up in front of all the world leaders and said that those were
some pretty good shoulders

He had underneath supporting and upholding the truth of his words.



In the book of Genesis we have the Bible verse,

“ I AM the Eternal God and underneath are the everlasting arms”



Remembering him and his magnificent teachings through those words and others
he spoke while President,

Let us pray to be able to help each other stand on each other’s shoulders to
climb upward in our society

In order to reach a high place to stand, like President Kennedy had when

He made that speech, in order that we can each move the world for peace

In our own ways.



Sincerely,



Andrew W. Harrell



andrewharrell@yhwhschofchrist.org