Mr. President, allow me to congratulate you on your most welcome election to the presidency of our Assembly. It comes at a time when the United Nations is beginning its session under a sign of international relaxation, or at least what seems to be such a sign. I should like at the outset to commend the efforts of all those who directly or indirectly contributed to the happy outcome of the negotiations on the partial nuclear test-ban treaty. I do so on behalf of my country, but I think I may also do so on behalf of all my African colleagues, and in my capacity as current Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Organization of African Unity.
2. Everyone now agrees that the basic problem of our age is that of peace. Young States like ours —need I repeat it?— have a special interest in the consolidation of world peace, for we cannot meet the demands of economic growth, fix long-term objectives or put our development plans faithfully into practice in a climate of international instability and insecurity. Hence any effort to strengthen and consolidate peace should be warmly welcomed and encouraged.
3. Of course this Treaty, which my Government has signed, is only a first step as we all know. Its significance is far more psychological than real. The goal which we must tirelessly pursue is the achievement of general and complete disarmament. So long as certain Powers continue to possess weapons of mass destruction it will be difficult, nay impossible, to ask other Powers to refrain from seeking to acquire such weapons. But the Treaty will produce at any rate some immediate advantages, which are emphasized by the Secretary-General in the introduction to his annual report. In the first place, it puts an end to "the danger of ever-increasing radio-active fall-out resulting from nuclear explosions" [A/5501/Add.l, sect. II], In the second place, it is reducing East-West tension by creating a climate of confidence between the two blocs, and more particularly between the two great nuclear Powers. The reason why the great majority of non-aligned States acceded to this Treaty was certainly not that their accession could do anything to reduce the number of nuclear tests. Most of them, if not all, had neither the means nor the desire to conduct nuclear tests. It was a matter of moral attitude, of adherence to a principle. The main point was to show that the Treaty, despite its inadequacies, fits into the context of a world public opinion which is highly responsive to any measure calculated to reduce international tension. Like the Secretary-General, we are convinced that "It will require the collective effort and wisdom of all members of the international community to ensure that the momentum generated by the recent agreements is maintained until the goal of global security and freedom from fear of war is reached" [A/5501/Add.1, sect. II].
4. This appeal to the world community to continue its efforts for peace has long since met with understanding among the non-aligned countries. How many steps, since the failure of the Paris summit conference, have been taken by the African and Asian States to help reopen negotiations! As far back as 1 September 1960 the Presidents of the United Arab Republic, Ghana, Indonesia and India submitted a draft resolution calling for the resumption of contacts between East and West. In autumn of the same year, during the General Assembly's fifteenth session, the African and Asian States submitted a number of draft resolutions on various aspects of the disarmament problem: general principles of disarmament, limitation of the dissemination of nuclear weapons, prohibition of tests in certain zones, etc. Lastly, mention should be made of the active role played by the African and Asian States in the Committee on Disarmament.
5. It is true that the Moscow Treaty was due essentially to the good will of the three great nuclear Powers, which initiated it. But neither is there any doubt that the non-aligned countries, by their constant emphasis on the paramount importance of peace, substantially contributed to the creation of a favourable world trend. This is one of the most positive aspects of the policy of non-alignment when it is applied with perseverance and sincerity. The non-aligned countries have their virtues and their failings. We delivered our own self-criticism from this rostrum last year. We dwelt particularly on the fact that non-alignment was not always strictly applied. We denounced and continue to denounce certain new forms of imperialism among ourselves. But this makes it all the easier for me to say that, where the basic problem of peace is concerned, there has rarely been a discordant note among the non-aligned countries and that they have acted uniformly, perseveringly and continuously. The proof of this is the almost unanimous agreement of our States to make the Moscow Treaty, despite its shortcomings, a universal instrument. We mean to continue improving on this and we hope, with the Secretary-General, that considerations of national interest, no matter how legitimate —and it must be clearly recognized that some of them are legitimate— will not prevail over the enduring cause of world peace.
6. But in order to dispel certain national anxieties, we must very quickly go beyond the Moscow Treaty and deal with the problem of disarmament as a whole, not only by banning further nuclear tests but by calling for the destruction of existing nuclear weapons and even conventional weapons, or at least their limitation. For, as has been pointed out, the abolition of nuclear stockpiles will not protect mankind from another war unless It is accompanied by a substantial limitation on conventional weapons. In reality the present world equilibrium is due essentially to the almost equal atomic potential of the two great Powers. But who knows whether this equilibrium might not be destroyed if, once the elimination of nuclear weapons was achieved, the great Powers were left free to use their conventional weapons? In such a case we should doubtless emerge from the balance of terror, but we should perhaps fall into an imbalance which would be still more serious.
7. The problem of disarmament thus seems to us indivisible. We therefore remain staunch champions of general and complete disarmament.
8. Those are the brief remarks which my delegation wanted to make concerning the recent signs of International relaxation.
9. But how could the relaxation continue, and what would be the long-term prospects for peace, if colonialism, racial discrimination and under-development should still persist in certain regions of the world?
10. There is no doubt that decolonization has made progress, particularly in Africa in the past few years. In 1960 the French-speaking States of black Africa attained national independence. During the same period the decolonization begun by the United Kingdom continued in this part of our continent. In particular we look forward hopefully to the imminent arrival in our midst of Kenya, Nyasaland, Zanzibar and others.
11. But this picture, cheering though it is, unfortunately has a dark side. Though decolonization has made progress, there are also some stumbling-blocks. The problem of the Portuguese colonies is more acute than ever. Mr. Salazar has lacked the acumen —lacked the capacity— to take his opportunity and embark on progressive decolonization by granting internal self-government to the territories under Portuguese rule. He prefers to uphold the myth of the "Portuguese Overseas Provinces", and recently made a resounding and vehement speech reaffirming his stubborn stand and once again rejecting the principle of self-determination. He has organized meetings at Lisbon and in other Portuguese towns to demonstrate the country's support for his policy. But the meetings make no impression on us. They cannot check the irreversible process of evolution.
12. The only result Mr. Salazar will achieve, unless he thinks again, will be independence wrested from him in bloodshed. This is certainly not what the African States would wish. The majority of our States attained independence through negotiation. Today fruitful cooperation is growing up between them and their former metropolitan countries. So much the worse for Portugal if it cannot learn the lessons of these events. The combined efforts of all the African States to extirpate the Portuguese colonial hydra from our continent cannot fail. The Addis Ababa Conference gave particularly close attention to this problem. Our concerted action has already begun to produce results. On 22 September 1961 the Senegalese Government was the first to call upon the General Assembly [1012th meeting] to expel Portugal from the United Nations. At the time this looked like an inopportune move. Yet all we were asking for was that the Charter should be applied. Since Portugal was flagrantly and deliberately violating the Charter of the United Nations which it had undertaken to respect, we felt justified in calling for its expulsion. The reservations which we encountered at that time are now beginning to be discarded by many of our friends. One after another, the specialized agencies of the United Nations have acknowledged that we were right. Each in its turn, the Economic Commission for Africa, the International Labour Organisation and the World Health Organization have decided to expel Portugal. The various international conferences held during this year have adopted resolutions to exclude Portugal. One was the international conference on education; another was the United Nations Conference on International Travel and Tourism.
13. Confronted with this situation, we can only repeat the proposal we made on 22 September 1961. The United Nations must not fail in its mission by allowing the principles it lives for to be trampled underfoot. With this in mind, the African States, continuing the work begun at Addis Ababa and Dakar, will submit a draft resolution formally recommending Portugal's expulsion from the United Nations.
14. The fact is that Portugal is not merely refusing all decolonization, though this in itself is extremely serious. It is using the most barbarous methods of repression, which violate the most elementary human rights and shock the conscience of the world. Since we began discussing the problem of the Portuguese colonies in this Assembly, what have we not heard? On re-reading the statements made by the Portuguese Government's various spokesmen, it becomes plain just how patient we have been in this high international forum. At one plenary meeting in December 1960 [934th meeting], the representative of Portugal informed us that his people had been pioneers of non-racism during the last five centuries. The hypocrisy of the policy of assimilation is thus suddenly transformed into provocation. "Pioneers of non-racism ... during the last five centuries". It is we who are fools, who understand nothing, who are lagging five centuries behind Portugal! Perhaps we shall soon have to admit that the newly independent States and their former metropolitan countries have gone backwards, and that the whole process of decolonization on which France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and others have been engaged up to now, must be started all over again!
15. All that is mere frivolity, and we must not tolerate this insolent attitude much longer.
16. Yet the countries of the non-aligned world have taken a very understanding attitude on the general problem of decolonization. I would remind you that the great majority of them have avoided speaking of "immediate independence". They have taken the view that independence should be the outcome of a process judiciously begun and spaced over the necessary stages. Whenever a colonial Power has conceded this minimum at the outset, its actions have been welcomed with ample understanding and sometimes even with friendly feelings. I do not want to go back over all the resolutions submitted by the African and Asian countries, but anyone who has time to look them up will find that those countries have chosen to act through persuasion. On 22 May 1961 a five-member Sub-Committee established under General Assembly resolution 1603 (XV) was to begin an inquiry into the situation in Angola. Portugal refused point-blank to admit the Sub-Committee to Angolan territory. The members of the Subcommittee had to content themselves with going to Lisbon to collect such information as the authorities were willing to give them. In spite of everything, the Sub-Committee's report was drafted in moderate terms. It merely recommended the preparation of plans to prepare Angola for self-government and self-determination. That did not prevent the representative of Portugal from questioning the impartiality of the report and withdrawing —insolently— from the meeting. It would have been better, incidentally, if he had withdrawn for good. In the face of such facts, I believe that our patience is exhausted. Either we all agree that Portugal, by its behaviour, has excluded itself from the United Nations, or we are willing to be its accomplices in pursuing a retrogressive, inhuman policy which is dangerous to international peace and security.
17. Our proposals for Portugal's expulsion apply to South Africa as well, of course. But I should like to lay most stress on the coercive measures taken against Portugal and South Africa. What we deplore is the fact that the steps for an economic boycott have been insufficiently applied. It is above all astonishing that some of the uncommitted countries, and also, apparently, some of the anti-colonialist countries of Europe and Asia, should still maintain particularly intensive trade relations with South Africa.
18. To those countries we address a particularly urgent appeal to show their solidarity with us more effectively and more actively by ending all economic relations with South Africa.
19. South Africa must be fought vigorously. For in this part of Africa, where favourable climatic conditions have made possible a high rate of European settlement, there is a danger of seeing other non-self-governing territories go the same way as South Africa.
20. In that connexion we must give special attention to Southern Rhodesia and we should like the Administering Power to ponder the example of Algeria. To allow less than 300,000 Europeans to govern more than 3 million Africans, whatever the procedural tricks employed —such as establishing a constitution endowing the territory with a purely formal self-government which does not, in any case, meet the criteria set out in the Charter of the United Nations, and the refusal to introduce universal suffrage— to allow such a situation to arise in Rhodesia is neither courageous nor realistic. France accepted its responsibilities in Algeria by restoring peace there in difficult, and it must be admitted, meritorious conditions, particularly by overcoming forcibly the opposition of the settlers to that country's independence. We believe that any attempt to apply a different policy in Southern Rhodesia could only Increase the instability in that part of Africa and in the end undermine Africa's good relations with the West. We hope that the United Kingdom, a great Power full of common sense and realism, will understand that It Is not to its interest to withdraw from that part of Africa on tiptoe, leaving behind a situation damaging to its world reputation without even deriving the advantage of acquitting itself of the direct and indirect responsibilities which it still has in that part of the continent.
21. That is the present position in respect of the problem of decolonization. As you see, great as the progress in Africa has been, the picture still has its dark spots. That is the reason for the particularly strong stand taken at Addis Ababa by the Heads of the Independent African States.
22. A vast continent-wide organization came into being at Addis Ababa. Needless to say, that organization conforms fully to the principles of our Charter. Indeed, it is but a regional organization within the meaning of the Charter of the United Nations.
23. We are grateful to the Secretary-General for having stressed this in the introduction to his annual report,
"It is of course well known "—he said—" that regional organizations are not precluded under the Charter of the United Nations provided that 'their activities are consistent with the purposes and principles of the United Nations'. The Charter of the Organization for African Unity specifically states that one of its purposes shall be 'to promote international cooperation, having due regard for the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights'. I was also impressed "—the Secretary-General concluded—" by the recognition by the leaders of the independent African States of the basic fact of their interdependence, not only amongst themselves but as members of the international community." [A/5501/Add.1, section XII.]
24. The organization which was born at Addis Ababa and has just received structural form at the recent Dakar Conference has goals not one of which is at variance with the Charter of the United Nations: world peace, decolonization, economic and social progress. It is, in fact, a kind of relay station, an intermediary body which endeavours to put into practice the United Nations ideal, first, within Africa, then in the relations between Africa and the rest of the world.
25. The Organization of African Unity can thus reinforce the work of the United Nations. It will also, of course, make it possible to correct any part of that work which might be at variance with the Charter. In any case, we should like to state solemnly here that the consciousness of their solidarity expressed by the African States and their daily recourse to that solidarity, is but an expression of world solidarity. If we succeed in keeping the peace on our continent, we thereby help to consolidate world peace. If we succeed in finding and proposing solutions to the problem of our economic development, we make an important contribution at the same time to the urgent question of the growth of the backward regions.
26. Of course, the fact that our objectives coincide with those of the United Nations does not mean that we shall have no claims to put forward. In particular, it is only natural that the Organization for African Unity
should take over all the claims of the African States for a larger representation in the specialized institutions of the United Nations, more especially on the Security Council and the Economic and Social Council. Finally, I should like to tell the representatives of the Asian and Latin American States that the priority given to African solidarity will not make us overlook the solidarity of the under-developed world as a whole.
27. Quite on the contrary, we think that it must become an even more active solidarity, and that in all its actions the Organization for African Unity must take account of the under-developed world and of the identical and indivisible nature of many of its problems.
28. At this level the matter we have most at heart is economic growth. And what progress have we made? I must say that the annual report of the Secretary- General does not make over-optimistic reading. The essential conditions for the success of the United Nations Development Decade would hardly seem to have been fulfilled yet. For whereas the industrialized countries were asked to set aside one per cent of their national income for the growth of the developing countries, not more than one or two countries are devoting even half of that percentage to the aims in view.
29. Meanwhile the terms of trade for the countries producing raw materials continue to deteriorate, while the prices of manufactured goods rise unceasingly. Thus not only has the direct aid given by the Governments of the industrialized countries failed to reach the essential minimum, but in fact there has been no improvement in the foreign trade of the developing countries; yet, as has often been said, with improvement assistance would become less necessary. What is of even greater concern is the tendency among the industrialized countries to make themselves even more independent of the less developed countries by attempting to increase their own production of, or to find synthetic substitutes for, the raw materials. The most significant factor is the attitude of some former colonizing countries which are trying to evade their responsibilities —sometimes brutally— by ending or attempting to end the price protection on raw materials which they themselves had previously introduced. Some regional economic groupings, made up largely of former colonizing countries, think they can make up for the loss we are suffering by granting us an indemnity under the curious name of "aid to diversification", as though the single-crop system which they maintained systematically in our countries —and for which they are directly responsible— could be made to vanish with a stroke of the wand. This indemnity or pension paid to the divorced spouse does not take sufficient account of the inherent difficulties of our countries confronted by long-term growth. The situation is grave and disturbing, and we have the feeling that it is not always studied with the necessary breadth of vision. The highly industrialized countries cannot just steal away from us on tiptoe and set up closed economic clubs. That would be too easy.
30. In fact, such an attitude takes no account of the effective solidarity which unites, and will increasingly unite, all men, all countries and all nations in the world as the end of this century and the century to come draw near.
31. That is why we hope that the forthcoming United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, in the preparation of which my country has been associated will find more satisfactory solutions.
32. Unfortunately, it is not merely a question of the deteriorating terms of trade and the ever deeper pit being dug between poor countries and rich countries. An even graver phenomenon is arousing our concern. For some time now there have been signs of a growing trend of opinion in the developed countries in favour of reducing the aid being given to us, inadequate though it is. Hence the tendency to reduce loans and the occasional spectacular departure of technicians, deplorable and disturbing signs of what has been called "Carterism"; the phenomenon has become international. We believe that the alarm must be sounded, that democratic public opinion must be cautioned against a trend so fatal to the real interests of all and to international co-operation. We believe that, to ward off such a danger, every means must be used to strengthen co-operation between peoples.
33. It is for that reason that Senegal prizes highly not only traditional diplomacy, but also direct relations between one people and another, or what we call "peoples diplomacy". Such relations can be established mainly through the twinning of communes, on a non-discriminatory and entirely apolitical basis, under the auspices of the United Towns Organisation, to which all communes in Senegal and many others in Africa belong. The weaving of such a network of basic relationships will give more definite and vital support to relations between States and to the United Nations itself. It will give to international co-operation its deepest and fullest significance.
34. In the year 2000 Africa will be more heavily populated than Europe, more heavily populated than North America —not to mention Asia, where the demographic situation is one of the most disturbing. In the coming forty years the rate of growth of the population will be 143 per cent in Asia, 120 per cent in Africa, but only 58 per cent in North America and 34 per cent in Europe. Yet, by a strange contradiction, it is not the countries which have the lowest rate of demographic growth which will see their growth increase. It is thus a monstrous world, a world even more unbalanced than today's, which we are preparing for posterity.
35. How can lasting peace be envisaged under such conditions? Unless we are to deal purely in words or in catch-phrases, we must recognize that we are still far from having created the right kind of conditions for mankind's future stability. If we really believe that we are on the right road, then we are criminally naive. But how could we believe that we are on the right road?
36. The United Nations has for years been drawing our attention to this tragic situation, and that is certainly one of its most positive roles. When one thinks of the large volume of documents, studies, reports and statements dealing with development, one is astonished at the meagre practical results obtained. In the future we shall be unable to solve any political matter unless we examine its effects on the economy. The issue of peace is today set in terms of economic equilibrium. The United Nations Development Decade is a wager that peace will either be won or finally lost. That is why, despite the signs of relaxation now appearing, if we do not strive hard to find solutions to the economic problems which have arisen, that relaxation will have been but a brief lull before the storm.
37. Those are the few brief reflections which have occurred to me on the opening of this eighteenth session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, the session of the "three D's" —disarmament, decolonization and economic development— as some have called it. Beyond all that, however, there is but one problem, which is that of man and the three elements which have never changed since his arrival on this planet —security, freedom and the full flowering of our human faculties.
38. Today, however, the dimensions of that problem are much larger and the difficulties very much greater. That is why we shall be able to face up to such far- reaching responsibilities only by awakening to the fact of our solidarity and our common destiny.
39. That is why this session, more than any other, should be placed under the sign of man and world solidarity.