Hastings Ismay Quotes (1887-1965)

“Now let me explain why these countries have bound themselves together by a treaty. At the end of the Second World War the democracies, hoping and believing that the United Nations would prove an effective instrument for peace, disarmed as fast as they could. Soviet Russia did nothing of the sort. They maintained their armed strength at wartime level. They launched a world-wide campaign of lies and hatred against the free world. They turned the proceedings of the United Nations into a farce by the use of the veto. They brought under their control, one by one, the countries of Eastern Europe. The democracies realised that unless something were done, it was only a matter of time before the countries of Western Europe alse were overrun. What was to be done? How was the balance of power to be restored? No single nation could do this alone. It could be done only by combining. That is why the North Atlantic Treaty was conceived. It was signed about 4½ years ago.”

“It is my conviction that if there had been anything in the nature of a North Atlantic Treaty in the World before 1939, there would have been no second world war. It has been described as "the unnecessary war". Surely a third world war, immensely more devastating, more agonizing than its predecessors, is not only the unnecessary, it is the avoidable war. Not only can we avoid it; we must avoid it. It is in this hope that many European countries have abandoned their historic neutrality; that is why the United States of America have abandoned their historic isolationism from European affairs; that is why all like-minded nations are determined that never again shall an aggressor be given a chance - as Hitler was - of swallowing us one by one.”

“With that in mind, the partners to the Treaty have pledged themselves to develop their individual and collective capacity - I repeat collective capacity - to resist armed attack. True to that pledge, every single member of the Alliance has spent progressively more money on defence each year since the Treaty was signed. Powerful American, Canadian and United Kingdom forces are already on the Continent, standing on guard alongside their European allies. But let there be no mistake about our purpose. The military strength at which we aim is the barest minimum for defence. Their neither is, nor ever will be, any margin whatsoever for aggression of any kind on our part. If it were otherwise, is it likely that a powerful peace-loving body like the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions would have solemnly pledged their determination - and here I quote - "to support the efforts of the free nations to strengthen their defences in order to stave off aggression."”

“With that in mind, the partners to the Treaty have pledged themselves to develop their individual and collective capacity - I repeat collective capacity - to resist armed attack. True to that pledge, every single member of the Alliance has spent progressively more money on defence each year since the Treaty was signed. Powerful American, Canadian and United Kingdom forces are already on the Continent, standing on guard alongside their European allies. But let there be no mistake about our purpose. The military strength at which we aim is the barest minimum for defence. Their neither is, nor ever will be, any margin whatsoever for aggression of any kind on our part. If it were otherwise, is it likely that a powerful peace-loving body like the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions would have solemnly pledged their determination - and here I quote - "to support the efforts of the free nations to strengthen their defences in order to stave off aggression."”

“In order to get the proper perspective, we must take a quick glance at the past. Seven years ago, Western Europe faced the threat of imminent aggression by Soviet forces of overwhelming strength. In that hour of mortal danger the North Atlantic Treaty was signed. The decision to accede to the Alliance required great vision and great courage on the part of many of the members. For the United States, it meant abandoning their traditional policy of isolationism from the affairs of Europe. For Norway and others it meant abandoning their tradition of neutrality. The free world owes a deep depth of gratitude to the Statesmen of the Western Democracies in these days. Their vision has reaped a rich reward for us all. The Alliance which they brought into being saved the free world from the unfathomable disaster which threatened it. Peace in Europe has been preserved. Soviet westward expansion has been halted. A shield of armed forces has been built up which, though not yet strong enough to resist an all out attack, is at least a significant deterrent to aggression. The forces of NATO are no longer a dream, they are a reality.”

“To the occupied nations in Europe he was already the living symbol of resistance and hope. Only if Britain was victorious could they regain their freedom, and they felt that if anyone could bring about that victory, it was Churchill. Travelling in Scandinavia and the Low Countries after the war, this was the sort of thing that I heard on all sides: "You in England had no idea what Churchill meant to us. We used to sit in dark cellars with the wireless turned on as low as possible, and while one of our number patrolling the streets would keep a look out for the Gestapo, we would strain our ears to catch his every word. His voice was the only ray of light in an otherwise completely dark and hopeless world."”

“The Soviet leaders have always disliked and feared the North Atlantic Alliance, and all that it stands for. They did their utmost to prevent it being born. You will remember that just as your distinguished Foreign Minister Mr. Lange was about to leave Oslo for Washington to enquire about the North Atlantic Treaty, a Note was received from the Soviet Government inviting Norway to conclude a non-aggression pact with them. Norway made her choice. She declined the Russian offer; and on the 3rd March, 1949 decided to join the Atlantic Alliance, while making it clear that she would not allow armed forces of foreign powers to be stationed in Norway so long as the country had not been attacked or threatened with attack. Thus the Soviet failed to prevent the Treaty being signed, but this did not deter them from trying to prevent the Alliance being extended or strengthened. When there was a question of Greece and Turkey joining the Alliance, the Soviet did their utmost by a mixture of blandishment and threats to prevent their doing so. Two years ago they took exactly the same line when the question of the accession of the Federal Republic of Germany was under consideration.”

“The peoples of all our democracies are hungry for peace and security. For 20 years some of us have lived either at war or under the shadow of war. They yearn for some alleviation of the exertions and sacrifices that have been demanded of them. They hear the argument put forward that the development of nuclear weapons has rendered conventional forces obsolete and unnecessary, and that it is a waste of money and effort to continue to maintain them. They are asked by some to believe that the hydrogen bomb has rendered war impossible because it is so deadly that both sides would be annihilated. There is therefore a danger that the free peoples may be lulled into a sense of false security, and that they will succumb to the temptation to relax their efforts which are still essential, if peace is to be preserved, and if our freedom and way of life are to be safeguarded. We must therefore be very careful not to be misled by specious and wholly untenable arguments, or read more into the smiles of the Kremlin than the facts of the case warrant. After all, even Mr. Krushev has himself warned us against wishful thinking. Here is what he said at a Kremlin banquet as recently as a fortnight ago: "The West say that the Soviet leaders smile, but that their actions do not match their smiles. But I assure them that the smiles are sincere. They are not artificial. We wish to live in peace. But if anyone thinks that our smiles mean that we abandon the teachings of Marx and Lenin" (i.e. that the ultimate purpose of Soviet policy is world revolution),"or abandon our Communist road, then they are fooling themselves". In the circumstances I submit that our course is plain. If we are to achieve a lasting relaxation of tension between East and West, and with it practical measures for peace, we can only do so by maintaining our unity and continuing to build up our collective strength.”

“"Churchill owed more, and admitted that he owed more [to Ismay] than to anybody else, military or civilian, in the whole of the war."”