text: expresstheirinterests; where,inotherwords,someelmentofthephilosophy of democracy finds expre~sion internationally. Achangeinthestructure ofthe General Assembly wouldthusbeanattack.bothoninternationalism andonthe validity oftheveryideaofthelegal ~quality ofnations. Porthatmajority isnoteffective intheSecurity Council, wherethe permanent membership andvetopoweroffiveUnitedNations Members was,fromthe beginning, aconcession totherealityofmilitary andeconomic power-thatis,to thepowerbalance whichexisted in1945.Putmorekindly, thevetowasa recognition ofthespecial responsibilities forupholding peacewhichinevitablyIBeT/et A/40/PV.13 7 (President Nyerere) falluponthestrongifpeaceistoprevail intheworld. Whether thepermanent membership doesinfactinallcasesstill re~resent therealityofworldpower centresishighlyquestionableJ butthatisnotamatteraboutwhichIintendto speaktoday. But,inanycase,astheSecretary-General againpointsoutinhisextremely admirable reporttotheUnitedNations thisyear,theUnitedNationsisnotaworld Government. Nonationhas,byjoiningit,surrendered anyofitssovereignty. TheabilityoftheUnitedNations tocarryouttheinternationalist purposes forwhichitwasestablished therefore depends primarily upontheattitudes and policies ofitsMemberStates, andparticula~ly uponthoseofthevetoPowers. And Tanzania isbecoming veryconcerned aboutthedecreasing internationalism inthe attitudes andpolicies ofsomeverypowerful Members ofourOrganization, andthe consequent weakening ofthewholeUnitedNations system. Perhaps themostblatant example -andIcanonlygiveafewofmany examples -ofinternati~nal authoritarianism isthegrowing practice ofthreatening adverse consequences tosmallnations whichusetheirUnitedNations votesina mannerdispleasing toastrongPower. Weknowfromexperience thatthishasbeen happening privately forsometime.Butnoweventhesenseofpropriety hasgone; smallandpoorcountries arebeingpublicly threatened thattheywillbepunished iftheydonotvoteinaccordance withthewishesofaMemberofthisOrganization. Whatarewesupposed todowhenthesuper-Powers voteagainst ourinterests? Twenty-eight resolutions onmatters ofgreatimportance toTanzania wereconsidered inthethirty-ninth sessionoftheGeneral Assembly. Theyweremostlyconcerned withAfricanorcolonial questions andthelawofthesea.Onewaspassedby consensus; theUnitedStatesofAmerica votedagainst 17ofthemandabstained on 10.Arewethenexpected toregardthatUnitedNations Memberasanenemy? Orare wetoacceptitsassurances thatitsdisagreement istheresultofitsownBCT/at A/40/PV.13 8 (President Nyerere) judgement ontheissuesanddoesnotindicate anylackoffriendship towards us? Andif-aswehaveuntilnowdone-wearetodothelatter, f/hatexempts thebig Powersfromthesameobligation? Fornations asforindividuals, povertyisitselfdegrading enough. Dowe havetoaddtoit,byattempts toexploit thefactofpoverty todeprive theweak andthepooroftheonlythingwhichtheyhave-theirhumandignity and self-respect? Iammindful oftheSecretary-Generalis appealtoustoavoiddivisive rhetoric inthisAssembly. ButImustreassert therightofallUnitedNations Members tospeakandtovoteinaccordance withtheirownjudgement, albeitthat thejudgement ofallofusisaffected byourowninterests. TObelittle that rightistothreaten thewholestructure ofinternational co-operation; itis derogatory tothedignity oftheUnitedNations, andofourseparate States. Wewerecolonies once;wearenolongercolonies. And,speaking forTanzania, werefusetobec~~eaneo-colony ofanycountry underthesun.Wethird-world countries didnotwinourindependence -inTanzania's case,withthehelpofthe UnitedNations system-inordertosellittothehighest bidder, noreventobuy offtrouble byvotingintheGeneral Assembly atthebehestofavetoPower. We willusetheonlyrightourweakness leavestous-therighttoscreamaprotest atinternational authoritarianism andbullying. Mysecondexample ofinternational authoritarianism relatesdirectly tothe futureexistence ofhumanity. Matters related tonuclear weapons andtheir testing, aboveallothersUbjects, should ~discussed andsettled onthebasisof thecommoninterest ofallpeoples. I IIBeT/at A/40/PV.13 9-10 I(President Nyerere) ThepartialtestbanTreatyof1963 represent~d anadvancefor internationalism. Sincethentherehasjust be~ntheNon-Proliferation Treatyof 1970.Itishighlyquestionable whetherithasstopped anynon-nuclear Power-a signatory orotherwise -fromdeveloping anuclear weapons.capacity ifitwould otherwise havedoneso,ithascertainly notstopped acontinued andmassive growth inthenumber, thesizeandthevarietyofnuclear weapons inthehandsofthefive nuclear Powers. ,BHS/ed A/40/PV.13 11 (President Nyerere) Onthecontrary~ nowweevenhavetheStrategic DefenceInitiative -the threattotakenuclear andlaserbeamwarintospace. Thismatteris~"\ot e~'en
analysis: This text appears to be a speech by Julius Nyerere, the President of Tanzania, addressing the United Nations General Assembly. The speech focuses on the theme of internationalism and the role of the United Nations in promoting peace and cooperation among nations. The text highlights concerns about the decreasing internationalism among powerful nations, the use of threats and bullying to get votes, and the need for nuclear disarmament. It also touches on the theme of sovereignty and the rights of all nations to make their own decisions. Given these themes, it is likely that the speech falls under the category of international relations.