Economic and Social Council marks victory over nazism and fascism.

Economic and Social Council marks victory over nazism and fascism

The Economic and Social Council held a solemn commemorative ceremony in New York on 8 May to observe the fortieth anniversary of the victory over nazism and fascism in the Second World War.

The meeting was held in accordance with General Assembly resolution 39/114, which declared 8 and 9 May 1985 to be "the days of the fortieth anniversary of victory over nazism and fascism in the Second World War and of that struggle against them". At the council's organizational session, held at Headquarters from 5 to 8 February, it had decided to hold such a ceremony on 8 or 9 May.

Following a statement by Council President Tomohiko Kobayashi (Japan), Council members, at the President's suggestion, observed a minute of silence.

The Council President said the realities of the world were not yet in keeping with the hopes placed in the United Nations by its founders, as demonstrated by the many armed conflicts, the violations of human right in some parts of the world, the arms race and the vast regions of poverty and misery. Faced with that situation, the international community had the responsibility to maintain international peace and security, and the major Powers had to activate their dialogue to overcome their differences.

The United Nations, he went on, had been born out of the ruins and devastation of the Second World War, and was an indispensable instrument of international co-operation, which should seek to bequeath to coming generations a better world.

Fifteen other speakers, including Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar, spoke on the occasion.

Manuel dos Santos (mozambique), on behalf of the African Group, said that the defeat of nazism and fascism was the best testimony of what men and women could accomplish when they pooled their sacrifices, resources and determination to defend the best of what they had in common.

The African continent had been one of the arenas of the Second World War. The African peoples had contributed to the downfall of the Axis Powers. There had been African soldiers in the contingents of the Allied Forces in Europe, the Middle East and South-East Asia. About 3 million people had been recruited in Africa. Their courage and endurance had made a valuable contribution to the liberation of Europe.

One would have though that, at the end of the Second World War, all those who had participated in the struggle against nazism and fascism would have benefited from the victory. That, however, had not been the case. After the War, Africa had had to struggle to regain every inch from the colonial claws. The economic strategies and plans for the reconstruction of Europe and Japan had not been extended to Africa, which was now reaping the fruits of neglect: illiteracy, disease, malnutrition and hunger.

The celebration of the end of the Second World War should constitute an opportunity to draw lessons for the present and the future, and to face honestly the fundamental challenges to the international community, one of which was the elimination of apartheid and all forms of racial discrimination and colonialism.

Saoud Bin Salim Bin Hassan al-Ansi (Oman), on behalf of the Asian Group, said the Council was meeting to commemorate the fortieth anniversary of the end of the Second World War and the victory over nazism and to remember that the United Nations had been created to defend the dignity and worth of the human person and to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.

In some countries of Asia, the Second World war had continued to be felt months after the hostilities had ended in Europe, and Japan in particular had been the victim of atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Some peoples of Asia still continued to suffer from the consequences of that war, and a clear example was the Middle East, especially Palestine and the occupied Arab territories. The efforts of the United Nations in the struggle against fascism and against all racial practices and ideologies based on racial hatred deserved strong support.

Carlos M. Muniz (Argentina), on behalf of the Latin American Group, said that it was gratifying to note that, at the end of the War with the defeat of nazism and fascism, it had been possible to create at San Francisco a system which for 40 years had demonstrated its effectiveness and which had permitted the beginning of the recovery of a devastated world, thus inaugurating a period of international cooperation. In that connection, it should be borne in mind that only the definitive elimination of the causes of a conflict would permit the development of friendly relations and cooperation between former adversaries. That was the best way of honouring the memory of those who had given their lives to preserve peace and freedom.

Latin America had the honour of having participated with great distinction in the setting up and development of the United Nations. Of the 54 original Members, 20 had belonged to the Latin American region and had had the serious responsibility of encouraging a process which was the most important achievement of the United Nations: that of decolonization, a process which it was to be hoped would be finalized in the near future.

Ole Bierring (Denmark), on behalf of the Group of Western European and Other States, said that even though the scars and memories of the War were still with those who had suffered and had survived, its end, in May 1945, had also represented the end of one world and the beginning of a new one, based on co-operation rather than confrontation. Democracy had been reinforced and expanded, and the international community had tripled with the emergence of new nation States.

While confrontation and conflicts had continued over the past 40 years, a repetition of the Second World War had been avoided. Among the reasons for that achievement, a major one was undoubtedly the new system of international co-operation inaugurated by the United Nations. That raised hopes that the lessons of the past had been learnt, but there should be no room for complacency. The capacity of the human person for good and for bad was without bounds. For that reason, on the present day of commemoration, it was necessary to renew the promise to each other to pool human and material resources in a determined effort to use to the full the opportunities offered by the United Nations to improve the conditions of mankind. It was necessary to put an end to the arms race and to seek the peaceful settlement of disputes. It was necessary to seek the triumph of justice and to use the available international machinery for the economic and social development of all peoples and for the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms throughout the world.

Ignac Golob (Yugoslavia) said that the war of liberation had cost Yugoslavia 1,700,000 human lives and constituted irrefutable proof that peoples, inspired by the ideals of independence and freedom and determined to defend them, could mould their own destiny and participate in forming the common destiny of mankind.

The victory over the Axis Powers, which had constituted the major enemy of all peoples and progress, had resulted from the united effort of all nations, without distinction as to their political, ideological or religious beliefs. That victory had made possible the establishment of the United Nations and the adoption of the Charter. The new era thus inaugurated had produced the great anti-colonial revolution in which more than 100 countries had gained independence. The policy of non-alignment was increasingly gaining influence, as were the activities of the Group of 77. The right to peace, security, equality, and equitable co-operation had been widely recognized, and the concept of the new international economic order and global negotiations had been established. The use of force had been rejected, and interventionism and the arms race had been condemned.

However, many peoples, on virtually all continents, still remained subjected to aggression and domination. Apartheid, the identical twin of nazism, was still untouched. The division of the world into blocks was being enforced and the power of deciding the fate of humanity was increasingly concentrated in the hands of the few.

Rudolf Dzipanow (Poland) said that over 6 million Poles had perished in the War. Evry day of the war had cost 3,000 lives. Poland had lost 40 per cent of its national wealth, while Warsaw had been razed. Yet the battle to save Poland from Hitler's goal of biological extinction had also been a relentless struggle against absolute evil and a starting-point on the road to a reborn nation. More than 600,000 sons of the Soviet Union had lost their lives on Polish soil, fighting side by side with the Polish people, and the sacrifice of their lives had led to the rebirth of Poland as a socialist nation within historically just frontiers.

The United Nations owed its existence to the Allied victory; its authority and effectiveness depended upon the allegiance of its members of the purposes and principles of the Charter. For a number of years, the United Nations had, with broad international support, been involved in the adoption of effective measures against Nazi, Fascist and neo-Fascist activities and other totalitarian and racist ideologies and practices based on intolerance, hatred and terror. The people of Poland recognized that the questioning of established frontiers and the spreading of racial prejudice and hatred were the modern-day version of the ideologies that had pushed mankind into the abyss of the Second World War. Warsaw had recently been the scene of an appeal by the leaders of States parties to the Warsaw Treaty for peace, mutual tolerance and respect, non-interference and peaceful coexistence.

Harry Ott (German Democratic Republic) said that the people of his country wished to convey their greetings and thanks to their liberators: to the Soviet people, and to the peoples of the United States, the United Kingdom, France and the other Allied countries. Their struggle had saved world civilization from Fascist barbarity.

In recent weeks, the German Democratic Republic had paid tribute to all the anti-fascists of various political outlooks and religions, who had died during the War. For their sake and that of all the victims and survivors of the concentration camps there could be no reconciliation with SS murderers under any pretext whatsoever. Never could those crimes be forgotten or forgiven.

The eighth and ninth days of May symbolized the victory of sanity which had prompted the creation of a common front against fascism at the Teheran, Yalta and Potsdam Conferences, despite differences of opinion and interests, and had made peace possible in Europe. Peace, security and co-operation were based upon adherence to the accords concluded by Stalin, Roosevelt, Churchill, Truman and Attlee, the numerous bilateral treaties and the Final Act of the Helsinki Conference. The key issue was the recognition of the inviolability of existing borders and of the principle of equal security for all States.

The commemoration of the victory must not be only an opportunity to recall historic events, but must also be a reminder of the obligation to oppose any attempt to resurrent fascism and the threat of war.

Boris Tsvetkov (Bulgaria) said that the War had shown that countries with different social structures could unite to achieve a common objective. The joint decisions taken at Teheran, Yalta and Potsdam in order to avert another military catastrophe and ensure lasting peace for manking were proof of that.

Since the War, it had been possible to observe the results of that spirit of joint determination during the years of detente, which had opened new horizons for the concept of peaceful co-existence. Nevertheless, recently there had arisen dangerous tendencies based on the belief that armed confrontation was the most effective way to safeguard peace. The question of the prevention of nuclear was remained unresolved and the time had come for the god sense and the feeling of responsibility on the part of the united peace-loving countries to prevail over the temptation to achieve military supremacy in order to avert a thermonuclear catastrophe.

It was important not to forget the danger of the alarming resurgence of fascism, which, instigated by the forces of social and political revanchism, took advantage of international tensions in order to achieve its own ends. The commemoration could serve as the starting point of a United Nations effort to broaden its activities against the dangerous manifestations of fascism and neo-fascism. Oleg Troyanovsky (Soviet Union), also on behalf of the Ukrainian SSR and the Byelorussian SSR, said that in these days of the celebration of the great Victory the Soviet people paid tribute to the peoples and armies of the United States, Great Britain, France, China and other States participants in the anti-Hitlerite coalition for their important contributions to the achievement of the common goal. Military units and partisan armies and units of Yugoslavia, Poland, Czechoslovakia, patriots of Bulgaria, Romania, Albania and Hungary as well as members of the Resistance movements in France, Italy, Greece, Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway, Denmark and Luxembourg played a great role in the victory. Germand and Austrian anti-fascists waged a valiant struggle against the Hitlerite nazism.

The contribution of the Soviet Union of the victory had been decisive, as Roosevelt, Churchill, De Gaulle and many others had clearly recognized.

Countries of the coalition, which fought against fascism, belonged to different social systems, however, together they had managed not only to win the victory, but also to lay down the foundations of the post-war world. Those foundations had been set forth in Teheran, Yalta and Potsdam documents.

Even during the war, countries of the anti-Hitler coalition were making concerted efforts aimed at securing peace and establishing the United Nations Organization.

The States had won the victory together because the Hitlerite fascism was perceived as a universal threat. Today, also, mankind had a common deadly enemy--the threat of a global nuclear catastrophe. The United Nations and its Member States had no more important task than preventing a nuclear war.

Teodor Marinescu (Romania) said that the participation of Romania in the struggle against fascism had been a great blow to Hitler's strategic plans and had facilitated the rapid advance of Soviet forces in that part of Europe. During the War, Romania had lost 170,000 men out of a total of 540,000.

The lack of unity and steadfastness among the anti-Fascist forces had permitted the outbreak of the World War, and the defeat of Hitler had, in turn, resulted from a great coalition. The best tribute that could be paid to those who had fallen in the flight against fascism was a policy of peace and international co-operation. The fundamental lesson of the Second World War was that countries with different social systems could co-operate among themselves if they subordinated their differences to the interest of preserving peace. At a time when the international situation had deteriorated to an unprecedented degree since the Second World War and when the existence of nuclear weapons threatened civilization and life on the planet, it was necessary for all States to redouble their efforts to halt the advance of the world towards a nuclear cataclysm and to resume the process of detente and co-operation.

Huang Jiahua (China) said that the victory over fascism had been a victory of peace over war, of democracy over anti-democratic forces, of justice over evil and of civilization over barbarism.

During the Second World War, China had fought side by side with the other allied countries, had suffered heavy losses and had made great sacrifices, thus making indelible contributions to the struggle against fascism. That victory had also helped to put an end to imperialist oppression and to promote the struggle of colonies for their national independence and freedom.

Though no new world war had broken out in the past 40 years, there had been regional conflicts, unrest in many parts of the world and violations of the United Nations Charter and the basic norms guiding international relations. The arms race between the super-Powers, in particular, posed at grave threat to international peace and security. The peoples of the world were entitled to ask the two super-Powers to carry out arms reductions with sincerity and good sense.

Dennis C. Goodman (United States) said that the burdens of the Second World War had not been confined to any one nation; all had suffered its consequences. Today, far too many people carried with them the physical and psychological scars of the conflict. However, it would be all too easy to dwell on that tragic episode, and nothing would be gained by a backward-looking approach to the current commemorative ceremony. It would be better to consider the great progress made over the past 40 years.

The achievements and benefits of post-War reconciliation and cooperation among the Western-oriented nations had been unmatched in world history. The growth of free societies, dedicated to pluralism, freely contested elections, genuined human rights and economis progress had been astounding. During the past 40 years, a third world war had been avoided, even though that had not meant the elimination of armed conflict and aggression.

Perhaps most remarkable of all was the emergence of thriving democracies dedicated to individual liberty, free enterprise and human dignity in the very nations that had been defeated in the Second World war. The horrors could not and should not be forgotten, but if a repetition of the terrible mistakes which had led to that War was to tbe avoided, it was necessary to work to ensure that tru democracy flourished everywhere.

Peter David Lee (Canada), on behalf also of New Zealand and Australia, said that all three countries had contributed wholeheartedly and vigorously to the struggle in many parts of the world during the Second World War and had sustained great losses.

Out of the ashes and devastation of that war, a determination had been forged that had animated the successful efforts to date to avoid a similar or worse catastrophe. The same determination had been at the root of the establishment of the United Nations with its aims and ideals and with its persistent search, over the years, for peace and disarmament, its significant steps toward peace-keeping and peace-making, its practical programmes of economic and social development and co-operation, and its progressive establishment of enlightened norms of human rights and international law.

On the fortieth anniversary of the founding of the United Nations, while the Organization pressed forward with its efforts in those and other important areas, it had to avoid recrimination and denigration, mustering instead all the qualities of peaceful co-operation and mutual encouragement learned from that most destructive of all wars, and thus helping to overcome the barriers of the past.

Maurizio Bucci (Italy), on behalf of the European Community, said that in the Second World War, human dignity and conscience had confronted an implacable and destructive totalitarian system; what had been at stake was freedom. Victory had resulted from the sacrifice and heroic determination of many nations.

The struggles and sufferings of the European nations and the horrors of one of the cruelest wars in the history of man had undermined rabid patriotism and selfish nationalism on the European continent, thus making possible the creation of the European Economic Community (EEC). The 10 States members of the EEC, joined together by deep bonds of friendship and by their faith in freedom, democracy and human rights, underscored the close link between the last world conflict and European integration. The process of European unification was the major politico-economic event of the post-War period and the major contribution of the past 40 years to world peace.

The EEC countries had, by their active participation and their confidence in the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, evidenced their will to overcome the remaining sources of friction among the two major world blocs and to initiate a new, more constructive phase in relations among the nations of the continent. It was indispensable to respect the Ten Principles of the Helsinki Conference Final Act.