Before beginning my statement may I extend to Mr. Slim the congratulations of the New Zealand delegation on his election to the presidency of the Assembly. We are fully confident that under his guidance, characterized by wisdom, patience and impartiality, the sixteenth session of the General. Assembly will be greatly assisted in the completion of its manifold tasks in a manner which will redound to its credit and, we trust and pray, to the lasting benefit of the peoples of the world.
2. It is hardly necessary to remind ourselves that we are here primarily to preserve peace and security, threatened by the continued failure of disarmament negotiations, by the resumption of nuclear tests, by the crisis over Berlin, by the dangerous deterioration in Laos and South Viet-Nam, by the unresolved question of the representation of China, by the intractability of Middle Eastern problems, and by certain inflammatory racial and colonial questions. Now following the tragic and untimely death of the Secretary- General, these threats are compounded by intensified efforts to undermine the international character and independence of the United Nations itself. One need not catalogue the host of other unsolved problems familial to all Assembly Members and so ably referred to by previous speakers—problems likely at any time to endanger world peace and security.
3. Even a world so inured and case-hardened to the recurrence of crises must realize with fearful anxiety that there persists the real danger of a rupture at any moment, whether through miscalculation or mischance, with fatal consequences for mankind. New Zealand shares that anxiety.
4. Like other small countries, New Zealand has long seen its best hope of security, and the best hope for peace and progress, in world-wide co-operation among nations. This lesson, first learnt in was, has been reinforced by developments since 1945. It is true that the need for common action and solidarity has received some concrete recognition especially in the economic and social fields. But there have also been disturbing tendencies in the opposite direction.
5. Chief among these is the failure of the great Page Powers and the world community to reach agreement
on "disarmament and the regulation of armaments", as envisaged by Article 11 of the Charter. The armaments race, with a nuclear holocaust as its only prize, continues unabated. Some glimmers of hope have recently appeared: the agreement of the USSR and the United States on broad principles to govern disarmament; the publication by the United States of the most comprehensive disarmament plan yet conceived, placing the attainment of the final objective of general and complete disarmament in the framework of a continuous sequence of logical stages, each with appropriate machinery for international inspection and control. But agreement on broad principles is only a beginning; this session of the General Assembly must build upon this achievement and do all it can to ensure that some disarmament machinery is put in motion as soon as possible, and that future negotiation^ on this urgent and vital issue do not proceed, a?, they have done hitherto, in an erratic and fitful manner. This is a responsibility which is shared by all Members of this Organization, not only the great Powers. If we fail, the world will fail with us.
6. The resumption of nuclear tests has been as great a shock to New Zealand as to other Member States. This is especially so in respect of those tests which are currently being conducted in the atmosphere, with utter contempt for world opinion and with dire hazards to world health, and which, to add infamy to injury, began while negotiations on a treaty to ban such tests were still proceeding and just before a meeting of statesmen from non-aligned countries.; In the opinion of my Government, a treaty to ban tests and to enforce this ban by international "supervision, must be concluded without further delay. It cannot await the overlong-delayed agreement on comprehensive measures of disarmament. Co-operation in the more limited sphere should surely be more easy to achieve than co-operation in the wider, more complex one. The people of the world have a right to expect that a step such as this, which recent negotiations have demonstrated to be clearly feasible and practicable, should be taken immediately.
7. The renewal of threats and the creation of yet a further crisis over Berlin is another retrograde and dangerously reckless step. The freedom of the people of West Berlin must be respected and, in present circumstances, this freedom can have no sure guarantee without agreement among the four great Powers. Rights of free access to the city must be similarly protected if freedom is not to prove a sham. Negotiations on these matters should begin immediately and take into account the legitimate wishes of the people of Berlin and of Germany concerning their own future.
8. Small countries, confronted with problems such as these, must be dismayed at the increasing failure to respect international law and the rights of others.
Some tension, some conflict, perhaps, between universal values and the solution of immediate problems is probably in the very nature of things, But if we are to achieve a disarmed world we can do so only if there is respect for law and order, and a corresponding t willingness to fulfil the obligations and responsibilities inherent in international co-operation. These were the ideals which inspired those who in 1945 founded this Organization and sought to furnish it with an international and impartial civil service.
9. Most of these founders came from small, militarily, weak countries such as my own. They wished to substitute for physical power, based on brute strength and actuated by self-interest, legal and moral sanctions of universal validity. While recognizing the special interests of the great Powers, and the need for sanctions to be backed in the last resort by force, they strove? to substitute for anarchy, and the rule of the physically strong, a true and lasting international order in which all sovereign States possessed equal rights.
10. Unhappily, the full realization of this ideal has so far proved impossible. The world has become polarized between two great forces. On the one hand, there is an expansionist bloc based on a totalitarian ideology. On the other is a loosely-knit group of highly developed countries, ready and willing to share their wealth and technical skills with less fortunate peoples. It is from the latter group that the United Nations has drawn its main financial support and much of its political strength. But it is on the numerous smaller, weaker nations that this Organization depends so greatly for its moral influence, and, indeed, its survival.
11. Today, fifteen years after the Charter was written, we still find States and political groups based on force, or organized according to false concepts of racial, cultural or ideological superiority. Those colonial systems, traditional or otherwise, which are not already in the process of dissolution, have become anachronistic. If the ideals of the United Nations are right, the days of such systems are numbered. More and more are being steadily transformed, as is apparent from a glance round the Assembly. Where dangerous impediments still exist, it is our responsibility to do what we can, within the limits of our powers under the Charter, to see that political development is peaceful and rapid and that it takes place, in Africa and elsewhere, in the conditions most likely to advance the welfare of the peoples concerned and the international community as a whole.
12. In the midst of political turmoil, the strength and authority of the United Nations are of paramount Importance. The more the sense of community among Member States is strained, the more important it is to safeguard the machinery of international co-operation. The Organization can, however, only be as strong as its executive arm. New Zealand firmly opposes any weakening of that executive. This is one reason why we must reject the paralysing device of the "troika" and its variants. But such an idea is also unacceptable in principle, because it is the repudiation of the whole concept of an international impartial authority for which we have worked so long. Small countries, in particular, cannot and must not allow such an authority to be destroyed, impaired or even called into question; nor, in this nuclear age, can great Powers—although some in their pride appear at times to forget this basic truth.
13. I would emphasize that this is an urgent and crucial matter, not only for the small Powers themselves, but also for the proper functioning of the United Nations. Nor is it a new problem. Those of us who were at the San Francisco Conference in 1945 well remember the long and acrimonious discussions on the Soviet proposals, supported by the other sponsoring Powers, for the provision of four or five Deputy Secretaries-General appointed by the Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council. This was stoutly resisted by the smaller Powers because they believed that these Deputies, having received their mandate like the Secretary-General himself from the Assembly and Security Council, would have constituted a kind of "corps diplomatique" at the head of the Secretariat. To have such a group was not, it was felt, the way to secure an efficient and loyal administration. The disastrous experience of the League of Nations in its latter years was ample proof of this. Repeated votes were taken on these amendments at San Francisco, and, although the sponsoring Powers succeeded in obtaining majorities, they failed, thanks to the solid opposition put up by the smaller Powers, to obtain the necessary two thirds and the proposals were rejected. It is to be hoped that small Power solidarity can be maintained to ensure the preservation of a principle which is as valid today as it was in 1945.
14. The late Secretary-General, to whose memory and immense services to mankind the Government and people of New Zealand join in paying their solemn tribute, pointed out in the introduction to his last annual report on the work of the Organization that:
"... there is no contradiction at all between a demand for a truly international Secretariat and a demand, found in the Charter itself, for as wide a 'geographical' distribution of posts within the Secretariat as possible".
Wider geographical distribution of staff is essential and can, in fact, enhance the impartiality of the Secretariat. But this, as Mr. Hammarskjold pointed out, is something entirely different from an equal representation of ideologies or arbitrarily defined political trends. Article 100 of the Charter—included, I would repeat, at the insistence of small countries like New Zealand, against great Power opposition—clearly provides for the protection and maintenance of the international character of the Secretariat and expressly prohibits Governments from seeking to influence staff members. The high principles set forth in this Article, which have been observed so faithfully by members of the Secretariat, must not be sacrificed to the untenable proposition that there is no such thing as a neutral man.
15. It has been observed many times in this hall, and as recently as on Monday [ 1020th meeting] by the representative of Ethiopia, that the United Nations exists essentially for the protection of the smaller nations. But what happens when the United Nations itself is threatened? At this critical moment the smaller Member States must ask, not what the United Nations can do for them, but what they can do for the United Nations. While the small countries can act as conciliators and catalysts, they must take care that they do not conciliate at the expense of the United Nations itself. Nevertheless, they can do much to introduce a hopeful element of tolerance and flexibility in the conduct of international affairs. In their own way, they can sometimes set a good example by showing restraint and by scrupulously discharging their duties under the Charter. This New Zealand has tried to do, by paying its dues; by contributing to programmes of relief, welfare and development outside the regular budget; by contributing its share, in sadly limited company, to "peace-keeping" operations; and by bringing its Trust Territory of Western Samoa to independence this year.
16. Smaller States can also play a major role in easing the tension which sometimes arises between the principle of universality embodied in the United Nations and the inclination to seek the closer comfort of a regional grouping. This problem, exacerbated the political divisions which have been imported into this Organization, has become especially significant for many newly independent and less developed States.
17. New Zealand has consistently upheld a universal approach to world problems. We too have urged, as President Frondizi so eloquently argued before the Assembly [1018th meeting], that regionalism should promote universal ends of human security and well- being. We have, it is true, been a party to a number of important and, we believe, beneficent regional organizations. We have accepted participation in them and have loyally endeavoured to carry out the obligations they impose in the wider context of our belief in Charter principles. We have done so in the hope that regional approaches to problems of security and economic development might prove to be stepping stones to a universal approach.
18. Whatever high hopes are proclaimed for regionalism, unless they are inspired by still higher purposes of a universal character they may all too readily be turned to restrictive and even injurious ends. Regional sentiment has, for instance, resulted in proposals now engaging the attention of the Assembly for decentralizing certain economic and social activities of the United Nations. These may be commendable in principle, but if carried to excess they could rob the Secretariat of effective influence and undermine the powers and functions of this Organization.
19. We would reaffirm that the smaller or less developed countries have a special stake in the United Nations. As one such country, New Zealand has reason to apprehend the undermining of the real principles of United Nations membership. Our doubts and misgivings about the effects of regional consolidation, especially in the economic field, have recently been reinforced.
2Q. We have, of course, belonged, and still belong, to a preferential system which, though more liberal than some newer economic groupings, has favoured the economic growth of its members. In company with many others represented here today, we have, however, observed with mounting concern that developments within some economic blocs have not always shown that regard for universalism which is implicit and, indeed, explicit in the United Nations Charter.
21. World trade, including our trade, has for many years been confronted with the threats and consequences of inward-looking policies of countries whose social systems do not encourage free or fruitful external relationships. But if friendly countries, with whose political aims we sympathize, should threaten the future well-being of countries such as ours by the adoption of policies leading to exclusiveness, our concern Would become a desperate one. Applied without qualification, economic regionalism could have on other countries a cumulative effect similar to that of severe economic sanctions, such as used to be applied to a country defeated in war.
22. This is not the platform on which to discuss in detail New Zealand's particular problems, but the concern felt by my Government will, we know, be shared by other Member states. The question of general interest to the United Nations is the extent to which groups of Members can consistently, within the spirit of the Charter, pursue what may appear to be legitimate mutual interests to the serious damage of third parties. It is therefore with some sympathy that we read of the reservations made by President Tito at the recent Belgrade Conference in regard to economic developments both in Eastern and in Western Europe.
23. New Zealand approaches measures for regional economic co-operation, which are increasingly encouraged and assisted by the United Nations, with sympathy and understanding, especially where such measures extend technical knowledge, promote cooperation and enhance the living standards of the less developed countries. We are more than happy to endorse with our voices and our resources United Nations action to this end, for we see nothing there which conflicts with the universal aims set forth in the Charter.
24. But we are concerned lest the formation of an economic union among the industrial countries, which together are responsible for a large part of would trade and production, should seriously weaken the relative economic bargaining power of smaller countries outside the group. The wider and more powerful such regional groups, the more important it is for their members to adjust their policies in order to minimize the adverse effects which the creation of their union may have on outside countries, especially those which are small and economically weak, in the process of development, or dependent on the export of a few primary commodities or raw materials.
25. Is the moral to be drawn from current trends that small countries can look forward to no future unless they merge their economic identities in large continental blocs—those countries, that is, which have a continent available? This would be a strange conclusion to reach in the United Nations, an Organization based on the sovereignty and equality of rights of all Members, large and small. If this equality does not mean that a country which efficiently produces goods needed by mankind should be able to live and prosper without being squeezed out of existence by monster continental organizations, it is hard to see how the Charter's concern for nations large and small has any reality.
26. My Government firmly believes that the only hope for effective and world-wide international co-operation in the political, as in the economic, field lies in the United Nations. By co-operation I mean a positive working together for the good of mankind.
27. Peaceful coexistence, even if interpreted generously, is far from enough; politically motivated competition between strongly armed and mutually suspicious great Power groups all too easily increases fear and insecurity. The only hope for the United Nations is for all Members to reinvigorate the universal principles set forth in the Charter. However much
more alluring other aims may momentarily appear, it is a fact that the United Nations is a world Organization and stands for the maintenance of world principles.
28. This is the challenge which the sixteenth session of the General Assembly must face. It will be clear from what I have said that New Zealand endorses the dynamic concept of the United Nations so brilliantly outlined in what has been described as the "political testament" of our late Secretary-General. I can do no better than conclude by recalling Mr. Hammarskjold's words, when he wrote, in the introduction to his annual report on the work of the Organization:
"The effort through the Organization to find a way by which the world community might, step by step, grow into organized international co-operation within the Charter, must either progress or recede. Those whose reactions to the work of the Organization hamper its development or reduce its possibilities of effective action, may have to shoulder the responsibility for a return to a state of affairs which Governments had already found too dangerous after the First World War."
If we ignore this grave warning we shall be judged, not by this generation alone, but by such generations as may survive nuclear warfare and have painfully to strive to build a new world from the ashes of the old.