Condemnation of Soviet Activity in the Congo

[Rezim]

John Fitzgerald Kennedy
President of the United States of America

Good evening, ladies & gentlemen,

Late yesterday, I received a report that showed a high degree of interference in the United Nations mission in the Congo, as well as the internal politics of Congo-Leopoldville itself. The report details that the Soviets have been infiltrating the Congo in all its major centres - Leopoldville, Stanleyville, and Elizabethville. The reports include that Soviet-marked aircraft had arrived in Stanleyville, delivering weapons and advisors to pro-Soviet Gizenga forces in Eastern Congo-Leopoldville.

Further reports provided state what has been suspected previously - that the bombing of the Leopoldville airport was an act of sabotage. Not only was it an act of sabotage, but the burned remains of one of the devices used appeared to have signs of Soviet-origin. Further to this, the perpetrators of this horrific act originate from Elizabethville, coincidentally the same location of recent anti-Tshombe and anti-United Nations activity that has recently increased in the country.

As a founding member of the United Nations, we condemn unequivocally and call upon the Soviet Union to cease their activity in Congo-Leopoldville. What the Soviet actions in the Congo are showing is a complete disregard for the Congo’s sovereignty, and a complete disregard for the peacekeeping operation that is now threatening the lives of peacekeepers from many African nations, as well as those from Sweden, Ireland, India, and Canada. The stoking of the flames of open rebellion against a young government based out of Leopoldville is rogue behaviour from the Soviet Union. We call upon other nations of the world to condemn this blatant assault on the Congo and the United Nations itself.

Premier Khrushchev, end this blatant disregard for international law and norms.

[Zealous]

Statement by the Ambassador of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics to the United States
Washington, D.C. – Early May, 1961

Ladies and gentlemen,

Permit me to congratulate the United States on what must be one of the most extraordinary coincidences in modern diplomatic history.

Just as an American aircraft carrier—the size of a small state, I might add—sets course for the coast of Africa, we are suddenly treated to the discovery of urgent new information, inflammatory accusations, and righteous declarations. One might almost believe these were planned—if, of course, we did not have it on impeccable authority that this is all just a matter of timing.

What a fortunate coincidence, indeed, that such revelations should arrive not a day before the fleet turned around, but precisely once it was on its way—its jet engines warming, its flight deck cleared, and its message unmistakable.

It is, of course, another coincidence that this performance comes just as the Soviet Union is carrying out the largest military drawdown in its modern history—publicly, transparently, and verifiably. An act meant to reduce tensions, not escalate them. A gesture of good faith, which, if we are honest, has been received in Washington with all the enthusiasm one shows for an empty teacup.

And what a remarkable coincidence that the spotlight suddenly turns back to the Congo—just as global attention was beginning to drift toward more awkward questions. Questions about the fate of Patrice Lumumba. Questions that, for reasons one can only presume are accidental, remain unanswered, unexamined, and, for now, unspeakable.

Now, I am not here to speak in riddles. But I do observe that we are living in an age where rumour wears a uniform, and hearsay wears a badge. Where the serious work of diplomacy is too often replaced by convenient press leaks, theatrical deployments, and finger-pointing with one hand while the other reaches for the flight deck.

We have been told the presence of this fleet is not a threat. That it is merely precautionary. One wonders: do such precautions now require more firepower than the air forces of most independent nations?

And then there is the tone. We have heard officials in this young administration embrace a vocabulary not of statesmen, but of pamphleteers. What was once a debate among equals is now conducted in the voice of scandal sheets and street-corner speculation.

Still, we are patient. We are not panicked. We know that the world is watching—not just the headlines, but the movements. Not only the words, but the choices behind them.

And so, the question now is simple—not for us, but for those who find coincidence a most convenient policy tool:

Will the United States choose diplomacy, or abandon it in favour of whatever arithmetic summoned an aircraft carrier to the shores of West Africa?

We are willing.
And we are waiting.

[Kane]

Gunnar Jarring
Kingdom of Sweden Ambassador for the USA
Washington D.C.

Let me send you a letter from Dag Hammarskjöld in response to the recent press conference issued by President John F. Kennedy of the United States of America.

I would like to add that, as Ambassador of the Kingdom of Sweden, I subscribe to everything that Mr. Hammarskjöld indicates in this letter and that our nation’s position is fully in line with the arguments contained therein.

---

From: Dag Hammarskjöld
To: All Ambassadors and representatives to the UN
Subject: UN Sec-Gen letter to all UN members.

Mr. President, esteemed delegates and ambassadors,

I speak to you not as Secretary-General, but as a son of Sweden. And as one of many who lie awake at night fearing that this crisis may slip beyond diplomacy, beyond reason, beyond return.

Sweden rises not to point fingers, but to raise a flag. A flag of alarm. A flag of peace.

We speak today with no agenda but that of humanity. No ambition but that of responsibility. And no weapon but that of truth.

Just days ago, two Swedish peacekeepers lost their lives in the streets of Elizabethville. Not as soldiers in a war, but as peacekeepers in a mission of hope. Today, over two hundred civilians lie dead in the smoking ruins of Léopoldville’s airport. What began as a mission to preserve peace in a new nation now trembles on the edge of a continental war.

We will not allow this mission, our mission, to be twisted into a vessel for foreign ambitions.

Let me be absolutely clear:

Sweden condemns the bombing of Léopoldville International Airport in the strongest possible terms. We note that, on the ground, an investigation was launched immediately under the authority of the local ONUC command, including contributions from the nations deployed with technical personnel and forensic analysts.

Security and diplomatic measures are being discussed and will be presented to this assembly once they are decided under the consensus of the ONUC mission command.

But let us ask plainly:

• Will the United States confirm that the USS Independence battlegroup, now en route to African waters, will be placed under direct UN command upon arrival? Or does it intend to act unilaterally while docked beneath the UN’s shadow?
• Will the Soviet Union admit what now seems undeniable, that Soviet aircraft delivered arms and personnel to Stanleyville, and if so, will it commit, clearly and unequivocally, to halting that flow immediately?

These are not rhetorical questions. These are questions of war and peace.

Until they are answered, Sweden proposes the following measures be adopted with immediate effect:

1. That the airspace of the Republic of the Congo be restricted exclusively to authorized UN operations, registered local flights, and internationally scheduled commercial traffic.

• Any unauthorized incursion shall be treated as a violation of international peace, and, if necessary, intercepted.
• Sweden commits to deploying, within three months, an aerial detachment to monitor and enforce this restriction under UN command. We call upon other neutral nations to join us. In the meantime, and if USA agrees to detach the Independece under strict UN command, patrols will be launched from the battlegroup.

2. That any foreign person or operative found within Congolese territory who has not entered via legal, registered ports of entry be considered an unlawful combatant and subject to detention, international investigation, and potential prosecution under international humanitarian law.
3. That a neutral coordination mechanism be immediately established within ONUC, composed of forces from non-aligned nations, to oversee civilian protection, prevent miscommunication, and restore trust with the local population and the three different Congolese factions.

Let us not delude ourselves: the Congo is on the precipice of full civil war. Every bullet fired, every bomb dropped, every false flag waved, brings us closer to losing this mission and the credibility of the United Nations itself.

As things stand, UN peacekeepers are being perceived, falsely, as invaders and occupation forces. If we answer this perception with more troops, more weapons, and more grandstanding, we will not prevent war… we will start one. And that war will not last months. It will last years.

We do not need a new Vietnam. We do not need an African Sarajevo; let us not repeat the mistakes of 1914, when a local tragedy escalated into a global catastrophe.

We need diplomacy. We need discipline. And above all, we need decency.

As a symbol of this need, I direct your attention to the attached documents.

You will find photographs taken during the firefight in Elizabethville by Swedish photojournalist Ingemar Wahlström, embedded with our forces at the time of the incident. These are not headlines. These are not figures. These are lives. Burned, broken, bleeding.

Let these images remind us of what is at stake.

Sweden does not ask for applause. We ask only for restraint. For accountability. For action rooted not in ideology, but in humanity.

Let us not betray the hope that brought us to the Congo. Let us not betray those who wear the blue helmet. Let us honor the presence of every soldier who wears the UN blue, not with fleets and finger-pointing, but with reason, restraint, and resolve. And above all, let us not betray the people we swore to protect.

Thank you.

---

For any questions regarding this statement, we refer you to our offices in Washington D.C. or directly to the office of the Secretary General of the United Nations.

[Zealous]

Statement by the Ambassador of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics to the United States
Delivered at the United States Presidential Press Conference Venue – June 1961

Ladies and gentlemen,

It seems we have gathered once again in a rather unusual setting—where world affairs are discussed not at the United Nations, but from behind a podium in Washington. One begins to wonder if press conferences are now considered binding instruments of international law.

I have listened with great attention to the words of the Secretary-General of the United Nations—who, speaking not just as a diplomat but as a son of Sweden, offered what was perhaps the only true moment of dignity in this otherwise improvised tribunal.

We in the Soviet Union heard his voice, and though we may not align on every detail, we recognize in it something genuine: alarm, grief, and the heavy burden of conscience that too many in this room seem eager to discard.

We respect it. And more than that—we welcome its spirit.

But we must also remind those here—and particularly those who now confuse press attendance with international consent—that the Soviet Union does not, and will not, engage in the arbitration of world affairs through press microphones, however gilded the room in which they stand.

Now, to the proposals raised.

Yes, let there be investigation. Let there be inquiry. Let the events from the illegal removal of Prime Minister Lumumba to the present moment be examined—not selectively, but in full. Not for theatre, but for truth.

But if there is to be a true inquiry, let it be impartial. Let it be honest. And let it be conducted not under the spotlight of a press secretary or the shadow of an aircraft carrier, but within the proper chambers of the United Nations—where all states, large and small, have a seat, and no one holds the floor by default.

The Soviet Union is not afraid of inquiry. We are not afraid of facts. And we are certainly not afraid of dialogue.

What we will not accept is a world where one nation launches accusations from behind a press podium, then demands that others defend themselves like contestants in a game show—while its own ships steam toward African waters with no mandate, no invitation, and no clarity of purpose.

If the Soviet Union is to be expected to withdraw any instructors or material—confirmed or alleged—then we insist on parity. Let the United States be subject to the same standard. Let its advisors, agents, and covert personnel—many of whom never crossed a registered port of entry—withdraw as well.

No nation holds the moral high ground simply by speaking first. Nor by speaking loudest.

To the Secretary-General’s suggestion of neutral airspace control and monitoring mechanisms: we are prepared to discuss these ideas. But not here. Not under the authority of a single state acting as master of ceremonies in its own theatre.

Let us return to the only table that matters: the United Nations. Let all voices be heard—not filtered. Let all agreements be written—not implied. And let all decisions be taken in the open—not delivered as afterthoughts to media spectacles.

To those who have come here in good faith—perhaps unaware of the full nature of today’s proceedings—we extend no blame. But we do extend an invitation: join us, in demanding that real diplomacy happen where it belongs, and not at the beck and call of those who mistake the echo of their own declarations for consensus.

We are not here to perform. We are here to govern.
We are not here to escalate. We are here to resolve.
We are willing.
And we are waiting.

[C.D.Phil]

Ambassador Johannes L. van der Merwe
Ambassador of the Republic of South Africa to the United States
Press Conference – South African Embassy, Washington, D.C.

Ladies and gentlemen,

I stand before you today not only as a diplomat—but as a witness to a great and growing danger.

What happened in Elizabethville was not a diplomatic misunderstanding. It was not a rogue incident. It was an omen. A glimpse into what happens when communist ambition meets a continent in flux—and finds no resistance.

Swedish peacekeepers, operating under the flag of the United Nations, were ambushed. Pursued. Killed. Not by a disciplined army or a recognized government, but by a Soviet-backed militia—trained, armed, and emboldened by Moscow’s invisible hand.

Let us speak without euphemism: Soviet aircraft have landed in Stanleyville, delivering arms and advisors to forces loyal not to the Congolese people, but to the Kremlin. The bombs that tore through Leopoldville bear Soviet markings. These are not “freedom fighters”—they are agents of destabilization. The Congo is not their homeland—it is their beachhead.

This is no longer an internal African matter. This is a Cold War battlefield, and the Congo is now on the front line.

South Africa has long warned that communism, once rooted, spreads like wildfire. Africa, with its young states and fragile institutions, is fertile ground for ideological exploitation. What we see now is the Soviet Union exploiting instability to inject chaos—and carve up the continent for its own imperial aims.

We mourn with the Swedish people. But mourning must turn to action. To fury. To resolve.

We urge the United States government—and the American people—to recognize what is at stake. If the Congo falls, if this Council of Nations fails to act decisively, then Moscow will not stop at Stanleyville or Elizabethville. From Cairo to Cape Town, the red tide will rise.

The Republic of South Africa calls for:

• An international inquiry into Soviet involvement across the Congo;
• A coordinated denunciation of Soviet interference in African sovereignty;
• The strengthening of the United Nations peacekeeping mission, with real authority to defend itself;
• And unwavering support for Congo-Leopoldville—the sole legitimate Congolese government.

We are not asking for charity. We are not asking for war. We are demanding clarity, conviction, and courage.

Let history show that South Africa did not stay silent. That we called this threat by name. That we refused to let our continent become a pawn in Moscow’s ambitions.

To our allies in Washington: your leadership matters now more than ever. Africa is watching. The free world is watching. The time to act is now—before the jungle burns red.

Thank you.