Chapter VIII. of the Charter of the United Nations, entitled "Regional Arrangements", was written at San Francisco with a strong sense of reality. It provides that nothing in the Charter precludes the existence of regional arrangements or agencies for the maintenance of peace and security consistent with the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Regional arrangements have now acquired a much greater value as a result of the international crisis imperilling the system of collective security, which has sprung from the disagreement between the permanent members of the Security Council and the consequent arbitrary use of the veto.
The recent Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance, signed on 2 September at the Conference for the Maintenance of Continental Peace and Security at Rio de Janeiro, reiterates the harmony which exist between the inter-American system and the purposes and principles of the United Nations, and reaffirms the provisions of the Charter on those matters concerning the maintenance of international peace and security which can be dealt with by regional action.
I should like to draw the Assembly’s attention for a few moments to a point which Ecuador considers to be of the highest importance for the future of the peace and security of America, a point which is related to the inter-American regional agreement in so far as it concerns the possible consequences resulting from one or more permanent members of the Security Council exercising the power of the veto.
The Treaty of Rio de Janeiro consecrates finally the provision contained in the immortal Act of Chapultepec, namely, that in, America an attack against one State is an attack, against all, so that all States are entitled to use the right of legitimate self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations. In virtue of this Article, nothing in the Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence in the event of an armed attack against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.
The Treaty of Rio adds that the measures of legitimate self-defence may continue until the Security Council of the United Nations has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. In other words, if the Council inactive, the legitimate collective self-defence imposed as an obligation within the inter-American system will continue; if the veto paralyses the Council’s action when it is called upon to assist an American State which is a victim of the collective action taken in legitimate self-defence must go on.
What I have just said refers exclusively to the situation created by an act of armed aggression. The other aspect which has to be considered is that of non-armed aggression and threats of aggression. In that case the advisory body will meet immediately to agree on the measures to be taken to meet the aggression if it comes, and in any case on the measures which should be taken for common defence and the maintenance of the continent’s peace and security. Moreover, those measures, like others taken or proposed in a case of armed aggression, must be brought to the knowledge of the Security Council of the United Nations. It is at this point that there appears the possibility of a veto hindering regional action and frustrating the effectiveness and the defensive and peaceful aims of the inter-American system. The veto of a single country in the Security Council can paralyse the whole system of measures devised by the inter-American plan for the preservation of peace when it is threatened.
This is yet another reason why a country belonging to the inter-American system is bound to oppose the unlimited and sovereign power of the veto in the hands of the permanent members of the Security Council. The American Republics want the peace and security which will permit them to collaborate fully for the common good. They seek the peaceful settlement of their disputes, for we are convinced that the time of aggression between brothers in America has passed. As those are the ideals which the nations of America pursue, it is natural that we should fear the possibility of an external and arbitrary power effectively hindering their realization. This is another reason why it is necessary at the proper time to bring about a reform of the unlimited and arbitrary veto.
Without attempting to achieve at one stroke the ultimate ideal which would be that of an organization guided entirely by justice and equity, for the good both of the Organization and of others, an endeavour should be made to act in accordance with some objective standard in order to improve the fabric of international relations as much as possible.
For this reason the delegation of Ecuador supports the proposals which aim at reducing the scope of the veto. We consider it imperative that the veto should be excluded from Chapter VI of the Charter on pacific settlement of disputes, and that the requirement of the unanimity of the permanent members of the Council should be eliminated from the procedure for admitting new Members, as has been proposed by the delegations of the United States of America and Australia.
It has been well said more than once from this platform that the present international disorder cannot justly be ascribed to the immoderate use of the privilege of the veto, but that this fault is rather a symptom of a deeper and more essential disorder, of a world divided into implacably hostile camps.
The San Francisco Charter enshrines those lofty principles of international morality without which, I repeat, it will be impossible to achieve those goals of peace, security, brotherhood and progress for which we all long and for the achievement of which our international Organization exists.
The principle above all principles, the fundamental origin from which an effective and flourishing organization of nations must spring, is clearly and definitely laid down in the Charter, which says that the Members of the United Nations, in order that the rights and benefits resulting from membership may be ensured to all, shall fulfil in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the Charter. In other words, members are bound by the Charter to respect the pledged word, which derives its value from that minimum of confidence necessary in every social relationship. If the Members of the United Nations, and especially the permanent members of the Council, do not all fulfil this fundamental duty of loyalty, of respect for the pledged word and for the obligations which they undertook when they signed the Charter and which preclude abuse of the veto and extreme nationalism detrimental to every effort directed towards the common good, there will be no effective international organization, nor any peace, security or justice, The evil is not so much in the machinery as in the quality of the men who are called upon to work it and upon whom the fate of future peace depends. The evil lies in preferring might to right and exclusive self-interest to, the interests of others.
Nevertheless, a certain review of ways and means may do something to curb from without the inordinate self-will of certain States. The Security Council has unfortunately not succeeded in attaining the prestige and the exalted place which it should occupy in the world organization and which same day it must achieve. On the other hand, the General Assembly is increasing its reputation and prestige day by day, and appear as the centre of guidance and action of the United Nations, ass the organ of the general opinion and the conscience of the world. It is necessary, and the world requires, that the guiding influence of the Assembly should make itself felt with the greatest force in the Security Council itself. This singularly important function could be assisted by Secretary of State Marshall’s proposal to establish an interim committee on peace and security, consisting of representatives of all the Members of the United Nations, to act during the interval between the second and third sessions of the General Assembly. Foreign Offices are bound to give careful study to this important American suggestion.
Our Organization’s two years of life have been a reflection of the troubled world in which we have lived since the San Francisco Conference. Deep down, however, everyone is crying for and peace, and that cry inspires us with a new faith.
At the same time, side by side with the political work of the United Nations, there are its economic and social activities. The Charter imposes on us the obligation to watch over fundamental human rights and the dignity and worth of the human person, to work towards equal rights of men and women and to promote social progress and better the standards of living of our peoples.
The reports of the Secretary-General and of the Economic and Social Council show us the valuable activity which has been developed in these fields. My Government is following this activity with close interest, and we have the greater hope for its success inasmuch as international economic balance and the raising of the economic and moral standards of men constitute the ultimate foundations of peace. The Government of Ecuador hopes for the speedy establishment of the Economic Commission for Latin-America which the Chilean
delegation proposed with such insight and acumen at the last session of the Economic and Social Council.
I shall conclude with a word of hope that this second session of the Assembly of the United Nations will give humanity a little of the security which it demands and needs, and will bring some serenity to the minds of men.