Ban Ki-moon Quotes

It has become impossible to give up the enterprise of disarmament without abandoning the whole great adventure of building up a collective peace system.

I agree with the many who consider freezing all sorts of weapons systems a first step in a realistic disarmament policy.

Controlled, universal disarmament is the imperative of our time. The demand for it by the hundreds of millions whose chief concern is the long future of themselves and their children will, I hope, become so universal and so insistent that no man, no government anywhere, can withstand it.

The Cold War's end pushed disarmament down most leaders' agendas. It's a sophisticated issue, which I think is one reason why it is not so hands-on to many people. It's not visceral. It's not like a starving child.

I most sincerely wish that the world in which we live be free from the threat of a nuclear holocaust and from the ruinous arms race. It is my cherished desire that peace be not separated from freedom which is the right of every nation. This I desire and for this I pray.

Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative.

In the spirit of commitment to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, we will strive to achieve real progress in disarmament and arms control.

Nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation are not utopian ideals. They are critical to global peace and security.

Arms control has to have a future, or none of us does.

In the age when the atom has been split, the moon encircled, diseases conquered, is disarmament so difficult a matter that it must remain a distant dream? To answer, yes, is to despair for the future of mankind.

Finally, a safer world presupposes the revival of the virtuous circle of non-proliferation of weapons and disarmament.

It is my strong hope that an environment will be created in which both of our countries can cooperate for the realization of a world without nuclear weapons.

Disarmament or limitation of armaments, which depends on the progress made on security, also contributes to the maintenance of peace.

A world free of nuclear weapons will be safer and more prosperous.

Even a total and universal disarmament does not guarantee the maintenance of peace.

After the Cold War ended, there was an agreement between the former Soviet Union and America to convert weapons-grade nuclear materials into reactor-grade materials. So disarmament and nuclear energy actually are strongly linked.

The relationship of the two problems is rather the reverse. To a great extent disarmament is dependent on guarantees of peace. Security comes first and disarmament second.

Nuclear weapons are infinitely less important in our foreign policy than they were in the days of the Cold War. I don't think we need nuclear weapons any longer.

I want to move to a world of no nuclear weapons but I want to do that through multilateral disarmament so that we all disarm together.

Barack Obama has injected fresh momentum into efforts - stalled for a decade - to bring about nuclear disarmament.

I appeal to the responsibility of the blocs and the major powers, not to seek security in the arms race, but rather in a meeting for joint disarmament and arms limitations.

Some might complain that nuclear disarmament is little more than a dream. But that ignores the very tangible benefits disarmament would bring for all humankind. Its success would strengthen international peace and security. It would free up vast and much-needed resources for social and economic development. It would advance the rule of law.

My U.N. five-point plan focuses on preventing proliferation, strengthening the legal regime, and ensuring nuclear safety and security - an effort that was given good momentum by the Nuclear Security Summit held in Seoul earlier this year. The world is over-armed, and peace is underfunded.

We have a moral imperative to keep up the search for something better than mutual assured destruction.

If peace should break out, what are we going to do with all these weapons.