I do not intend to delay the proceedings of this Assembly very long, but I want to take this opportunity to try to explain to you the approach of my Government to the problems and difficulties that confront the world today.
68. When I made my speech in the General Assembly this time last year,8 I confess that, like many others, I felt somewhat pessimistic about the future of the United Nations. I wondered whether it had taken root deeply enough in the hearts and minds of the people of the world for the Organization to survive, and whether it was sturdy enough to weather the inevitable international storms. At the end I came to the conclusion that this great institution, on which is set humanity’s chief hope for dealing with the world’s problems of war and peace, would recover its original impetus and spirit. That faith has been justified. The last few months nave shown with what credit the United Nations has emerged from a period of great trial. It has proved itself capable of doing what many doubted whether it could do; it has displayed the unity and determination required to take prompt and effective action against aggression.
69. Many people were taken by surprise by the recommendations of the Security Council regarding Korea. But our representatives on the Council correctly interpreted the silent feelings of millions of people throughout the world — feelings which prompted a unity in response for which the aggressors had not bargained when shaping their policy. It was clear that they had counted on being able to present the world with a fait accompli in Korea and to win a victory for aggression. But they had underestimated the almost immediate and overwhelming reaction of the rest of the world in resentment at their conduct. I have no doubt that this resentment would be felt and expressed just as keenly in the country of those who are responsible for the aggression if their people were as free to learn the facts as we are.
70. Now that this unity in resistance to aggression has been forged, we must not allow the slightest suggestion of paralysis to creep back into this Organization. We have always wished to see it endowed with a great moral authority, and the events of the last few months indicate that, among the peace-loving nations, there is a great respect for law in the conduct of international affairs, as great as in their own internal affairs. I do not think we need have any fear in the future about the response of mankind in resisting aggression. Much as we all hate the idea of war, we realize that if aggression takes place, we must resist it by force. And we must be prepared to face any emergency.
71. We must recognize that in order to deal with this latest example of aggression, the Security Council and the United Nations had to improvise, and that it was fortunate that the centre and pivot of that improvisation was a great nation like the United States. That country had the necessary power to hold the situation until the strength of the United Nations could be mobilized. I am glad that my country was able immediately to contribute substantial naval forces, which have played no mean part in the operations at sea, while United Kingdom land forces are now also in the thick of the fighting.
72. But we must not leave things to chance like that again; if we do, the world would not forgive us. Therefore we must give urgent attention to the plan put forward by Mr. Acheson on behalf of the United States Government for strengthening the United Nations machinery against aggression. I am in full agreement with its objectives and, if adopted, it will ensure that responsibility is shared by all of us, great and small alike. I am sure the United States Government will welcome constructive criticism in discussions of this plan so as to make it widely acceptable and as effective as possible.
73. We shall have before us, at this fifth session of the General Assembly, a number of grave issues which have arisen as a result of developments in the Far East.
74. The conflict still rages in Korea, but I am confident that the authority of the United Nations will prevail. However, that is really only the beginning. It is also our duty to look beyond the conflict and to find means whereby peace and unity can be restored in Korea,
75. In our view there must no longer be South Koreans and North Koreans, but just Koreans, who must be encouraged to work together to rebuild their country with the advice and the help and the support of the United Nations. It is difficult in war to see the picture in its proper perspective, but in this General Assembly we have a great opportunity to consult with one another and plan for the days that lie ahead.
76. There has been, as I have already said, an overwhelming response to the call to resist aggression in Korea and to defeat the intentions of those who sought to use force to achieve their ends, but now another test will be applied to our judgment in the settlement of Korea. Public opinion will judge us not only by the right use of our military power, but also by the sincerity and good intentions of every Member of the United Nations in the final settlement of the problem, and by the effectiveness of our actions for the rehabilitation of the country when hostilities have ceased.
77. For more than two centuries the British people were responsible for the administration of vast areas of Asia, and we believe that that long association has given us some insight into the affairs of that great continent. In accordance with the great design which underlies the conception of the Commonwealth, the peoples of India, Pakistan, Burma and Ceylon have now emerged as independent nations, controlling their own destinies and having a vital say in the destinies of Asia and the world.
78. We are proud — and I think I can say for everyone in my country that we are especially proud — that the friendship between the British people and the peoples of these new nations is firm and that we are able to work together with them in the interests of peace and economic development.
79. It is a matter of deep regret to us that Ceylon has not been admitted to the United Nations. Why should any Power try to keep a country like Ceylon from joining this Organization? Ceylon has a great contribution to make to the world, but it is kept out of the United Nations by sheer perversity. This sort of action makes for bad feeling among the nations. I have no doubt that everybody in the General Assembly, or nearly everybody, believes that the use of the veto in the case of Ceylon was a grave injustice. It is somewhat ironical that those who are responsible should claim to be the champions of the emerging peoples of Asia.
80. Here I would recall that in 1948 we tried, in a meeting of the five great Powers, to establish a code of conduct which would ensure that none of us would abuse our power to the detriment of the smaller nations. But it was of no avail. I feel that if only those charged with such heavy responsibility could agree among themselves on a code of conduct which would be tolerant, helpful and conducive to the progress of this great Organization, it would be one of the best ways of establishing confidence in the world.
81. Another problem which we shall have to deal with in this session of the General Assembly and endeavour to settle is the question of the representation of China. A vote has already been taken on the question [277th meeting], which is now to be studied by a special committee set up by the President, and approved by the General Assembly. I do not want to say anything to prejudge the conclusions of that committee. I wish to make it clear to this Assembly, however, that we do not intend to break our long-established friendship with China. I can assure the Chinese people that we look forward to the day when they will again take their proper place as one of the great Powers. The question of who shall represent them is a matter that can be fought out in this Assembly. Then we shall have forgotten these present difficulties and shall be ready to help China to fulfil her destiny, after so many years of struggle and civil war.
82. We refuse to accept the concept of a world divided into East and West. This planet is too small for that. To us, all peoples of the world are one family, and we are not going to allow a wall to be erected between us if we can help it. We are determined to follow in all our approaches to these problems the conception of the United Nations itself, which is a conception of one world dwelling in peace and contentment.
83. Another problem which is now on the agenda is that of Formosa. I do not believe that this problem is insoluble. I trust that the best constructive minds will be brought to bear on it. It need not be the subject of any bitter debate or ill-feeling. We can settle it together, just as we shall have to settle the Korean problem, and in so doing show the world that we are competent to solve such problems in a manner that will contribute to world peace and justice.
84. There exist other active or potential sources of danger, and particularly in Europe. At any moment situations may %rise which would call for action by the United Nations as well as the Powers concerned. It remains to be seen whether the whole problem of Europe can be discussed and settled in a dispassionate way and on its merits.
85. Ever since the war ended in 1945 with the victory of the Allied Powers over Nazi Germany and Japan, we have been struggling to settle Europe. We entered upon discussions with our great Allies and, like the United States and France, we were animated by a spirit of conciliation and by a profound desire to establish peace in that continent and to re-create the work of development and rehabilitation. We soon discovered, when we began discussions on the five peace treaties, that the USSR Government was simultaneously carrying out policies in Poland, Romania, Hungary and Bulgaria which seemed to us to be a clear indication of its intention to dominate those countries, to convert them into satellites, to destroy all prospects of free elections, to stage purges and political trials and to get rid of any free political expression. In so doing, the Government of the Soviet Union was disregarding agreements arrived at between the Allied Powers before the war itself terminated.
86. It soon became quite clear to us that nothing would satisfy Soviet policy except peace treaties designed to ensure that the countries of eastern Europe should be under communist regimes which were subservient to the ever expanding authority of Moscow. Looking back, I do not believe that the USSR Government ever had any sincere intention of acting in accordance with the spirit of the agreements which had been entered into during the war. Finally, in Czechoslovakia, the same end was achieved by means of a coup d’état.
87. We had the same difficulties when we tried to tackle the problem of Germany. For two years my United States and French colleagues and I strove to achieve agreement with the Russians. We enunciated principles which would have established a unified Germany, which was our aim throughout those discussions. And it is as far as my Government is concerned — I can speak with sincerity — still our aim and I believe that of my colleagues as well.
88. But it became clear that the Soviet Union Government did not want a unified Germany which was free to choose its own form of government. We wanted the Germans to choose — just as the rest of us choose — in absolute freedom. And I assert that history will not blame the western Powers for the failure to set up a united Germany as a peaceful and democratic State and bring it back into the comity of nations.
89. Now we are confronted with a divided Germany, on which we look with anxiety lest it may be the scene of another act of aggression like that which took place in Korea.
90. The present organization of eastern Germany, with its powerful militarized police force, justifies very real concern on this score. We must naturally take this into account in the shaping of our policy, and we are accused of being warmongers because we do not ignore it, for here is a threatening situation which, unless care is used, might plunge the world again into conflict. Our attitude is entirely different. We were reluctant to move a single inch towards the creation of any warlike organization, even a purely defensive one. We ran our defences down very low; our expenditure was reduced to a minimum. But we should not have been doing our duty to the world, to this Organization, and to the people, if we had not united our forces and built up our military power to resist any possible threat from the East.
91. We had to meet the terrible decision two years ago of the Soviet Union Government to try to starve Berlin. Why starve a city to get one’s way? We had to deal with it by means of the famous air-lift to prevent the starvation of those people. At any moment there might have been incidents which would have caused conflict. Happily, that particular episode for the moment is now over, but the danger has not been removed, and so we have had to make our position clear.
92. If aggression takes place, it cannot be confined to Germany. As I have said, we are eager to see a united Germany, under proper democratic institutions, which would remove this constant menace to the peace of Europe. And we are ready to devote all our energies to the recreation of sound economic conditions in that continent, and also in that country.
93. While striving for a political settlement of Europe, we have at the same time been endeavouring collectively to restore our economies and to repair the terrible devastation of war. I confess that at one moment it looked an almost impossible task;
94. Here I must once again pay my tribute to the United States and to its great soldier-statesman, General Marshall. In a quiet, simple way his message came to us in his speech of 1947, a message of hope and friendship, and I would remind the Assembly that it was likewise offered to the Soviet Union and its satellites, and to all the countries of Europe alike. Indeed some of those countries were bursting to take part in it, but were prevented. Here was a plan bringing succour and hope to millions of people, but it was immediately turned into a violent political issue, and all sorts of threats were made. But we went forward, and the European peoples who took part are today filled with gratitude for the action of the United States.
95. Subsequent events have belied the pretensions and prophecies that were made against it. It was claimed that the plan was promoted for the preparation of war, and for doing all the wicked things one can think of. As a matter of fact, the plan has been a great contribution to peace. Europe is re-emerging. Europe has not finished its contribution to humanity.
96. This present difficult phase will pass and there are two factors which will help it to go quickly. One is the determination of the free peoples of Europe to defend their liberty; the second is the growing economic prosperity resulting from the combined efforts of the western world. The one will give us peace to till the fields, to work the factories, to win the wealth from the mines, to transport it, and finally fabricate it for the use of our people. The other will give to the peoples the opportunity to express themselves and to develop the best elements of culture in the fields of science, of art and of religion that Europe has yet known. No, Europe is not despondent in spite of all its trials. We are well aware of the tasks that lie before us but we shall, we believe, be a credit to the United Nations and to the world.
97. I must now turn to the problems of disarmament and the control of atomic energy which have been raised. No country has in the past played a greater part in endeavouring to bring about world-wide agreement on disarmament than my own. One of my predecessors between the two wars, Mr. Arthur Henderson, strove very hard to achieve this end at the last great Disarmament Conference in Geneva. But he could not get the conditions which would make it possible to bring about disarmament. There were already factions growing up which, notwithstanding their talk of peace, really wanted war. And what are the conditions needed for disarmament? It cannot be dealt with merely by a resolution of the United Nations, as proposed by the Soviet Union representative [A/1376].
98. If we consider in the first instance atomic weapons, the point of dispute between us is extremely simple. As I said at the third session of the United Nations General Assembly in Paris it is all a question of confidence. Thus if one country, when entering into an agreement of the kind proposed, closes all its doors and pulls down all its blinds and will not even let you look through, can you wonder that the rest of the nations, whose citizens’ lives and liberty are at stake, say to that country: “We are quite ready to enter into an agreement, but will you please show us that your country is also carrying it out? What is there to hide if you are abiding by the agreement and honouring it? No one wants to interfere with your sovereignty. But if, by every act, you give rise to suspicion, it is impossible to get a firm basis for the establishment of the necessary confidence upon which disarmament must be built.”
99. Then there is the USSR proposal for a one-third reduction in armaments. Well, really! And we are asked to accept that as a genuine proposition. The Soviet army today is larger than the armies of all Europe, and its armaments are greater than all of ours put together. This makes it look as though this talk of peace and signing petitions and peace campaigns is really a kind of propaganda barrage to weaken the victim before launching the attack.
100. The Soviet Union Government must not be surprised if we are not taken in by it. Before there can be a change, there must be withdrawal of the fifth column from the countries of free peoples. There must be no interference in any form with other States in their evolution. Let there be real sovereignty — for it is sovereignty which the USSR claims it wants to maintain. If that can be accepted, then we might reach a stage where this problem of disarmament could be discussed in an atmosphere of absolute confidence.
101. The fact is, however, that during the last five years in which we have been struggling to get out of the morass caused by war, we have been hampered at every stage by their fifth column, which is led by the Cominform and instigated by Moscow to produce chaos, strikes and difficulties of all kinds, in order to prevent the common people from having a decent standard of life. It has been done on the basis of the philosophy that if enough chaos is created it is possible to seize power. I say with all the solemnity at my command that this is a dangerous policy which has already been carried too far for the liking of the free world. No amount of signing peace petitions, or anything of that character, can have any effect towards protecting peace.
102. It is actions, not words, that are needed. For example, we have been struggling for years now-to get agreement on a peace treaty for Austria. A year ago we appeared to be quite near to agreement. Now, for the whole year, there has been complete deadlock, and it seems that we cannot have a treaty unless we are prepared to sacrifice the whole economic future of Austria. Why go on torturing a little country like that, and not give it peace? If the Soviet Union representative were prepared to act in accordance with his proclaimed willingness to reach agreement, we could have a treaty tomorrow.
103. Meanwhile, I repeat, no amount of calling us warmongers or hurling names at us will divert us. We are determined to pursue peace and to maintain it. We are equally determined, if necessary, to fight to the bitter end for the liberty for which we struggled so hard and which we are resolved to defend.
104. Since the foundation of the United Nations, my Government's policy has been based on respect for and loyalty to the principles of the Charter. We have played our full part in the work of the General Assembly and the Security Council, and we have co-operated closely with the Economic and Social Council. We have done our best to help to establish the principles of international law and have supported the reference of controversial legal questions to the International Court of Justice. On more than one occasion we have shown our willingness to submit issues in which we were involved to the decision of the Court and to abide by the result. We have also signed the optional clause. There is, indeed, no lack of facilities for the settlement of any disputes and difficulties that arise, if there is anxiety for such settlement, and we for our part are fully determined to make full use of every one of these facilities.
105. Considerable progress has been made during the past year in the field of economic and social development. But the problems before us are still enormous. The nations which have made most progress in industrial development must be ready — as indeed they are — to assist those which, for a variety of reasons, are less advanced.
106. In the areas for which my Government is responsible we have been working on two lines. One is to pour in millions of money to help development. The second is to adjust our institutions to bring about the gradual education and development of the people, so that ultimately they may be given freedom and self-government.
107. I welcome the greater understanding of the part the United Kingdom is playing in the development of these territories, as shown by the report of the Trusteeship Council. It is very gratifying that most of the recommendations and resolutions of that Council have been adopted unanimously during its past two sessions. I have not time today to discuss these matters in detail, but in the work of the United Nations they must be given high priority and must not be overlooked on account of the other problems with which we have been occupied so far.
108. The work of the United Nations is such a vast subject that one is tempted to go on and on. One is bound to feel a thrill at having the privilege of being associated with such a tremendous institution as this. It will have its disappointments and setbacks. It will have many difficulties to overcome. But I believe that this last year has seen the Organization turn the corner. As I said earlier in my speech, it must feel stronger now because it now knows that it lives in the hearts of the people. Before, we did not know whether it was backed by governments alone. Now we know that it is the whole people which is pinning its faith in it. But that increases our responsibility, for it puts upon us the duty of a wider and a higher statesmanship than ever. The people will not fail; and we must not fail them.