1. The unanimous vote of this Assembly in electing you, Sir, as its President expressed its recognition of the contribution you have made to the United Nations ever since the early days at San Francisco. I have therefore the greatest pleasure in presenting to you the heartfelt congratulations of the Panamanian Government and of the delegation, of Panama, over which I have the honour to preside at this fourteenth session of the General Assembly, on this signal honour.
2. This general debate must of necessity be, as it were, a balance-sheet of the action taken and the work done on behalf of international peace and security in the period between the regular sessions of the General Assembly and, to widen the scope somewhat, over the years in which our Organization has existed. It must be a kind of examination of conscience: a dispassionate and forthright analysis of the situations now threatening world peace, and at the same time an impartial and sincere assessment of our own behaviour in regard to those problems which have remained unsolved despite many years of study and to those which are of more recent origin.
3. Only after this process has been duly carried out can we arrive at a rational and exact understanding of the items on this General Assembly’s agenda. Many of them are familiar, a legacy from past sessions, although their importance is no less today, despite the time that has gone by, and our obligation to study them and to find the speediest and most equitable solution possible remains the same. One might almost say that, as time goes by, our obligations and our responsibility to those items which have figured constantly on the agenda of the various sessions of the General Assembly increase, for many of them involve matters of vital importance to the peoples of the world and we cannot afford to postpone them indefinitely.
4. Agreement on these difficult matters, through mutual concessions, would strengthen the world’s faith in the United Nations, make the Organization's position firmer and more worthy of respect, and give greater authority to its efforts to settle international problems.
5. If the United Nations is successfully to carry out the task of preserving international peace and justice entrusted to it by the Charter, the Member States must grant it greater and wider jurisdiction in matters connected with international relations, particularly where those relations may endanger international peace and harmony.
6. The question of United Nations jurisdiction is very tricky in view of the implications of any usurpation of power and in view of the consequences which would undoubtedly ensue from any policy designed to curb its powers and attributes drastically, making it an inactive and consequently a useless body.
7. Time and time again we have witnessed a trend towards reducing the United Nations’ field of action by a somewhat excessive amplification of the concept of the domestic jurisdiction of States. Even in cases of flagrant aggression and the violation of the most elementary principles of international law, the legitimate principle of non-intervention in matters essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of States has been invoked in order to bar the way to lawful action by the United Nations. Even where this has not been the result, the honour and the sense of justice with which the United Nations has acted have been called into question, as well as the good faith of its decisions. Naturally, this has involved the danger of discrediting its authority and thus its prestige.
8. It should be borne in mind that this policy contains elements of discussion which might in the long run considerably weaken the trust of the peoples of the world in the United Nations. If we sincerely believe in the effectiveness of collective action, if we are convinced that the United Nations exists and must continue to exist as a centre for co-ordinating the efforts of all nations in the attainment of the purposes laid down in the Charter, we should reflect upon the disservice which would be done to each and every one of us by a continuation of this policy of fragmentation.
9. The Republic of Panama maintains today, as it has always done, an unvarying position in defence of the principle of non-intervention in the internal or external affairs of any other State. As I had the honour to state from this rostrum during the thirteenth session of the General Assembly [749th meeting], my country, which, as a small Power, cannot ignore the dangers arising from disregard of the principle of non-intervention, is ready to comply with its duty whenever there is any question of repelling an act or even a threat of intervention against any State, whether or not it is a Member of the United Nations. We recognize the full scope of the principle of the domestic jurisdiction of States, but we cannot agree that the exercise of this principle should extend as far as Action which might impair another State’s territorial integrity or political independence.
10. The principle is laid down in Article 2, paragraph 7 of the Charter, that nothing contained in it shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any State, or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the Charter. The paragraph goes on to say that this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter VII.
11. The action with respect to threats to the peace, breaches of the peace and acts of aggression referred to in Chapter VII is thus the only form of intervention acceptable under the juridical system established in the Charter. That is because in such a case there would be no question of intervening in matters within the domestic jurisdiction of States, for any breach of the peace, or act of aggression, would affect the whole international community and it would be the duty of the international community to condemn and reject it.
12. Of course, any such act must have its origin in the individual will of a State and must be the result of an attitude or a course of action adopted by a specific State or States in exercise of the faculties inherent in its sovereign capacity. It is equally incontestable that the freedom of action of a sovereign State in no case entitles it to disregard the sovereign rights of another State, still less to subject that State to offensive interference in matters within its sole jurisdiction, particularly if such interference is an attack upon its position as an entity in international law.
13. If such action takes place, the act or acts which have injured the rights of the other State or States according to international law cannot be regarded as falling within the domestic jurisdiction of the State concerned; they come within the sphere of international conduct, and are not covered by Article 2, paragraph 7 of the Charter.
14. If this were not so, the provision would become a shield for aggressor States and would open the door to unconscionable abuses in the field of international relations.
15. The Preamble to the Charter begins by proclaiming the determination of the United Nations to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, and all its subsequent provisions are designed to further this objective.
16. In accordance with the terms of reference laid down for them by the Charter, the various organs of the United Nations collaborate in the preservation and promotion of peace by methods which may be divided into two clearly defined categories: the first is international co-operation without distinction of any kind, covering both the Members of the Organization and States which have not yet become Members, in the common task of improving economic conditions in the economically weaker countries, raising to a decent level the standard of living of all human societies peopling the earth, and promoting a renascence of confidence among the nations to the point where a sane approach will be possible to even the thorniest political problems.
17. This method will have the virtue of bringing about a peace fashioned to the pattern of the times, the peace which the world of today demands, free of the taint of war, a peace born of regenerative labour and of human understanding and fraternity, rather than of the waste of lives and arms on the field of battle. It will be a peace which has no knowledge of war, which has no need of war to justify its existence, a peace arising out of prosperity, not out of devastation and death.
18. The second method, which we may call that of vigilance and repression, is specially entrusted to the Security Council, for use in the case of threats to the peace, breaches of the peace and acts of aggression, to use once more the terms of the heading to Chapter VII. This method is particularly applicable in the case of crises and it will be effective in deterring aggression and preventing it from turning into world-wide conflict, but it cannot bring about the establishment of a flourishing and lasting peace.
19. The so-called limited wars, confined to specific areas which are the victims of aggression, are not only a breach of the peace, but also a severe hindrance to the method of international co-operation, which holds out more promise of bringing about international harmony than the method of vigilance and repression, the results of which are bound by their very nature to be more precarious.
20. Unfortunately, the post-war world seems unable to escape these limited conflicts which, while short of total war, are quite as harmful both to the region where they take place and to the interests of the world at large.
21. The Korean war, the effects of which are still being felt by the noble Korean people, as the direct victim of that unfortunate military adventure, and are continuing to influence East-West relations, is an example of modern wars of aggression. Born of an apparent conflict between neighbouring and even brother nations over matters which appear to be exclusively of an internal nature, these limited wars immediately give the more powerful countries an opportunity to intervene, each one as it sees fit, and in many cases with the scarcely concealed intention of establishing zones of influence to their own advantage. Such zones of influence, if consolidated, would lead to a deepening of the differences between the great Powers and would become starting points for new and continued conflicts.
22. It would be an illusion to claim that we are living under a rule of peace while such limited wars, which in truth may one day lead to the outbreak of a devastating nuclear war, continue to occur.
23. It would be an illusion to claim that we are living decisive influence of regional organizations should make itself felt whenever the countries concerned form part of these organizations. The Charter does not exclude their existence and, what is more, even recognizes their unquestionable importance when it states in Article 52, paragraph 2, that the Members of the United Nations entering into such arrangements or constituting such agencies shall make every effort to achieve pacific settlement of local disputes through such regional arrangements or by such regional agencies before referring them to the Security Council.
24. Such intervention on the part of regional organizations does not deprive the Security Council of the authority conferred on it by Article 34, which refers to the pacific settlement of international disputes, nor does it deprive the Members of the United Nations of their right, under Article 35, to bring to the attention of the Security Council or of the General Assembly, any situation likely to endanger international peace or security.
25. According to the Charter, it would be a very sound practice for the maintenance of pacific relations among nations if regional organizations would always have the first opportunity to act whenever an international situation of a local nature arose, regardless of its seriousness.
26. It is perfectly elementary that a local problem must always be of greatest interest to the States which are members of a regional organization, since political, economic and social conditions in each of the member States are likely to have repercussions on regional relations, which in turn are based on the proximity of these States to each other and on their consequent community of interests. In the search for a solution, consideration must very often be given to those emotional reactions of nations that have been determined by many years of living together over the course of history and can be weighed and evaluated only by those nations and men by whom they have been shared. Under such circumstances, it is easier and also more urgent for them to seek and achieve a solution to the problems of the region.
27. With the continued operation of regional organizations, a firm tradition will be developed and a regional system of law will be maintained, which the very prestige of the States of the region will oblige them to defend and to preserve, since their authority in the concert of nations will depend on this.
28. The Organization of American States may with justifiable pride present to the judgement of the international community its exemplary policy of understanding conciliation in the realm of regional problems. Its existence and the action that it has taken in problems which are basically American in character have been of incalculable value in reinforcing the stability and prestige of the United Nations.
29. In a world of civilized nations which must live and must make their way within a system of law, it is essential to increase faith in international relations. For this to be, nations must have the conviction that their obligations will be only those which they have assumed and that their rights will be maintained inviolate and will be given the fullest possible recognition.
30. It is well to recall here that the Charter of the Organization of American States embodies the principle that "international order consists essentially of respect for the personality, sovereignty and independence of States, and the faithful fulfilment of obligations derived from treaties and other sources of international law". It also states that "good faith shall govern the relations between States".
31. Compliance with the Charter, as a multilateral treaty, is the most edifying demonstration of goodwill that we can give in this respect. In the very Preamble, the peoples of the United Nations state that they are determined to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained.
32. Just as in civil society the good reputation and credit of individuals are dependent on the honesty with which personal commitments are fulfilled, so in relations among nations confidence and harmony must be developed and maintained by just actions and good faith as manifested by the fulfilment of the obligations assumed by States.
33. Non-fulfilment of treaty obligations not only create situations that are harmful to good relations among States and the Governments of States but also undermines the basic conditions for living together in friendship. This evil, in the long run, is the greatest and the most to be deplored, because the loss of confidence and friendship between nations is often more difficult to repair than the material damages resulting from the non-fulfilment.
34. The effects which I have just pointed our are even more distressing when the non-fulfilment of a contractual obligation originates with a great Power in its relations with a lesser Power, for in this case there is the danger that any interpretation by the great Power of the obligations that it has assumed which is favourable to itself and any line of conduct based on that interpretation will be conceived by national conscience as being solely determined by that nation’s might. Such a feeling would be fatal to friendly relations between Governments and peoples, and a stage would be reached in relations between States in which acrimonious and resentful feelings world be difficult to control.
35. No State may take upon itself the right to interpret a contractual obligation unilaterally, or to impair its validity by means of legislative or administrative acts, or to reduce its effectiveness in order to deprive to the other contracting party of the rights and advantages to which it is entitled. In the progressive Order of international law, such conduct would represent a flagrant disregard of treaty obligations and would provide a very poor basis for contractual, relations.
36. In the fulfilment of any treaty the paramount consideration must be good faith, and the interpretation of a treaty must be equitable and correct with regard to both the letter and the spirit.
37. At the thirteenth session of the General Assembly, I expressed the conviction that the abolition of the discriminatory practices prevailing in the Canal Zone against the rights of Panamanian employees and workers would bring about a new era favourable to the strengthening of the firm and sincere friendship which should unite the Governments of the Republic of Panama and of the United States of America and their respective peoples. I also said that the nation of Panama was confident that the implementation, by the Executive Branch of the United States, of the supplementary legislation enacted by the United States Congress in fulfilment of certain contractual obligations between that country and the Republic of Panama would lead to faithful compliance with the principles contained in the Memorandum of Understandings Reached, attached to the Treaty of Mutual Understanding and Co-operation which was concluded in 1955 and provides that Panamanians employed in the Canal Zone are entitled to equality of treatment and of opportunity as specified in that instrument.
38. It is with sincere regret that I am obliged to state on this occasion that the Panamanian nation has the disturbing feeling that the repeated disregard by the authorities of the Panama Canal Zone, in Panamanian territory, of the universally accepted principle that all persons are entitled without discrimination to equal pay for equal work is a barrier to the satisfaction of one of the vital requirements of its economic welfare and social tranquillity.
39. Because of the sincerity which characterizes our relations with the Power to the north, we could not remain silent about a particular situation damaging to relations between Panama and the United States. This situation, arising precisely from the interpretation given to some of the obligations assumed between Panama and the United States, has resulted in the non-fulfilment of these obligations.
40. Because of a unilateral interpretation of such obligations, disadvantageous to Panamanian interests, the increased trade in the Canal Zone, protected by exemptions from import duties on both luxury items and primary necessities, is very injurious to the Panamanian market.
41. Panama regrets that its representations in this connexion to the Government at Washington have so far not received the welcome which they rightfully deserve and which was to be expected in view of the democratic spirit of our natural ally and friend.
42. Like all under-developed nations, Panama looks to organized international co-operation for its economic rehabilitation. In this connexion, there should be every reason to expect greater and more concrete understanding on the part of the great nation to the north because of the interests which we share as partners in the work of the inter-oceanic canal which lies in a territory over which Panama is sovereign.
43. If international co-operation is to find its greatest expression and to reach its greatest heights at the regional level, Latin America must recognize, in formulating its aspirations for economic development, that it shares with the United States the historical responsibility imposed by the common destiny of the American continent and the obligation to play a fraternal part in the progress and defence of America as a whole.
44. It was out of this feeling that international economic co-operation should be planned and intensified at the regional level, to extend subsequently to the terrain of universal co-operation, that arose our original welcome and sympathetic support for the "Operation Pan-America" proposed by Mr. Juscelino Kubitschek, the President of Brazil. Our attitude in this matter coincides with general feeling in America.
45. We do not ignore the inevitable relationship between the economies of all countries, regardless of their political systems. Interdependence in this aspect of human activity is already a self-evident truth. Nevertheless, we think it is useful to stress the fact that in any building the foundation must come first; the foundation of international economic co-operation can be no other than the results achieved by regional economic co-operation. That does not mean that the former must be delayed, pending the achievement of the latter as a preliminary stage. Both should go forward side by side, helping each other in their joint maintenance and progress.
46. America is on the verge of a vigorous policy of economic expansion. The threshold has already been crossed and, with the establishment of proper technical resources, a great step forward has been made towards a solution of the fundamental problems.
47. In May of this year, the city of Panama was the setting for the eighth session of ECLA. Stress was laid at that meeting on the importance of long-term problems, as well as those which offer prospects of more immediate solution. Scientific programming in each country and in each special case is essential for these long-term problems. Only in this way will it be possible to make full use of each collectivity's resources.
48. One of the items which received most attention was that of the establishment of the Latin American common market. This resulted in the adoption of resolution 6 (II) of the Trade Committee of ECLA, which states in its operative paragraph that the Committee decides to intensify efforts conducing to the increase of economic co-operation among the countries of the region, with a view to constituting a Latin- American common market.
49. Although the vast scope of this plan prevents it from receiving immediate unconditional support, the terms of resolution 6 (II), adopted in Panama, show clearly the importance attached to it by the Latin American countries and their determination to give it the most careful attention. Our attitude already represents a decisive step forward in this delicate matter and shows that there is a trend in favour of it.
50. The study carried out by ECLA on the economic development of Panama shows beyond all question that national production has been increased to a point at which it has been possible to halt the importation of several important food products and a number of manufactured goods. Moreover, various sectors of production have begun to be developed and a truly national economy is beginning to emerge.
51. Panama is very much aware of the fact that a continuous effort is needed to maintain and to raise the level of living of our people and to solve the serious problem of unemployment. The Government presided over by Mr. Ernesto de la Guardia Jr., the Panamanian Head of State, has worked increasingly at this task since its first days in office.
52. At the beginning of my speech I referred to the legacy which this session of the Assembly, like previous sessions, has received from its predecessors in the way of items that still need to be settled. Among them the problem of disarmament, by reason of its magnitude, has the chief claim upon the attention of all States, Although its solution depends upon the great Powers, since it is they who must make concessions in terms of strength in order to mitigate or eliminate present international tension and thus permit of universal disarmament, it is undoubtedly the task of the small Powers to spur, on the parties directly concerned, by means of the constant public examination of this delicate question; by suggesting formulas which might smooth over difficulties and open the way to conversations and thence to negotiations; and by displaying an understanding attitude towards the serious difficulties which must necessarily be encountered by the great Powers in their consideration of this problem so vital to their own interests.
53. We are delighted that, during the Conference recently held in Geneva on the Berlin question by the Foreign Ministers of the four great Powers, the theme of disarmament was touched upon. Although this Conference was not held within the jurisdiction of the United Nations, we understand that any agreement which might have been arrived at there would have been submitted to the United Nations for consideration and approval, since it is entitled under the Charter to act in matters of disarmament.
54. Any opportunity of bringing the great Powers together in this aspect of international policy should be welcomed and we were therefore most favourably disposed towards the Geneva conversations. We are confident that by one or other of these means this problem will ultimately be settled in a way which will secure peace for mankind.
55. The case of Germany is another of the questions which concern the whole international community. This is not a matter of generosity but one of justice, quite apart from the fact that the solution of this problem would greatly help to strengthen peace in Europe and consequently in the world at large. Even if the most elementary principles of international equity were not involved, the unfavourable influence that the present division has on the disarmament negotiations would be sufficient argument on behalf of German unification.
56. There can be no valid reason for denying a nation which is a model of organization and whose contribution to universal culture is inestimable for the whole civilized world the power to govern its own destiny, free from external influence, and the right to decide its political future. as it sees fit. We hope that the disagreements between the great Powers which are helping to keep the German nation divided will disappear in the face of the supreme interest of international peace and security.
57. My country is not one of the chorus of pessimists. On the contrary, Panama, as a small Power, is aware that the United Nations constitutes the most solid day-to-day guarantee of the rights of those countries which have no modern weapons of war with which to make those rights respected for themselves. It is this same faith which explains the presence in this hall of the representatives of many States which have no other weapons for their defence than those provided by international law and justice. If we could not rely upon the powerful arsenal that the law provides for us, any position we might adopt here would be a vain pretence.
58. However, although we are not among those who despair over the delay in settling some of our problems, we still appreciate at its true worth the impatience of those nations which are striving above all to obtain their most elementary rights in the shortest possible time.
59. In the countries with rudimentary economies, subject to almost inhuman privation and suffering, it is impossible to tell people who are in the grip of poverty and hunger that they must wait a quarter of a century, a decade to even five years before their pressing needs can be satisfied.
60. We know that the world economic situation, like the social and political situation, must evolve gradually and that its evils cannot be corrected with the wave of a magic wand. We know that in order to build solidly the United Nations must first raise a scaffolding; we cannot, however, trust in the work of time alone, for we are sure that still greater difficulties will spring up at every step and still greater obstacles will have to be overcome if, as the years go by, these problems are allowed to take on new and complicated shades and to turn into monsters that are difficult to bring under control.
61. The achievements standing to the credit of the United Nations at the present moment give us the right to require still more of it. This is not criticism; it is faith in its powerful capacity to bring to the world a definitive and permanent peace, provided that the tools which the Charter has placed in its hands are used with a sense of justice and without any mental reservations.