It may, perhaps, throw some light on the situation in which my own and many other countries find themselves to say that a few days before taking part in this debate in the United Nations General Assembly, I attended a special session of the Norwegian Parliament, called for the sole purpose of appropriating considerable additional sums for national defence. The burden of armaments is increasingly heavy for our people to bear. At a time when all our efforts should be directed to the economic recovery and the social and cultural development of our country, even a small nation like Norway finds itself compelled to divert an increasing proportion of its limited resources to the equipment and enlargement of its military forces. At a time when all our attention here in the United Nations should be concentrated upon the need for vast collective and co-operative undertakings to improve the living conditions of the peoples of the world, we are faced with one all-important and elementary issue — the necessity of stopping armed aggression. No wonder that people are asking themselves: What has happened? Why do we find ourselves in such an absurd situation? Why is it that we have to sacrifice our well-being for the building up of defence forces which we would rather do without if we could?
121. The debate that we have listened to since the opening of this Assembly has, I believe, to a very great extent provided the answers to these questions. First and foremost, it has made the present situation perfectly clear: on the one side, as the world has recognized with a shock, armed aggression is being used as a means to bring about the solution of an international political problem. I am, of course, speaking about Korea. On the other side, we have seen the reaction of the major part of the world to this act of aggression: the firm resolve that aggressive war should not be allowed to pay. I am referring to the United Nations’ action in Korea.
122. In these two facts — the will to launch aggressive war, and the will to resist it — we find the key to the understanding of what is going on in my own country and in other countries that are Members of this Organization. We have become aware of dangers which our instincts of self-preservation compel us not to overlook. And this feeling of danger is the source of the policy of rearmament I referred to a moment ago.
123. The feeling of fear, which has been aroused by the use of armed force to achieve political ends, is bound to prevail in the world as long as aggressors are not condemned and effectively opposed by all Members of this Organization. We know that the condemnation of the North Korean aggressors does not command the unanimous support of Member States. We know who those Member States are who do not take part in this condemnation and who oppose the United Nations’ action in Korea. It is this policy of tolerating aggression that must bear the main responsibility for the feeling of fear which today haunts the peoples of the world. To dispel this fear and bring about an atmosphere in international relations that can reverse the present trend of rearmament and preparations for war, it is necessary that governments abandon such policies.
124. Some speakers in this debate have made reference to the peace campaign of which the so-called Stockholm Appeal is an expression. They have pointed to the support given to that campaign by millions all over the world as a proof of the longing for peace among the peoples of all countries. No one will contest the validity of this claim. Peace is the fervent desire of ordinary men and women in all lands. It is, nevertheless, very difficult to take seriously a peace campaign, the advocates of which refuse to associate themselves with the joint efforts now being made by the United Nations to restore peace in an area which for three months has been the scene of an aggressive war. I might mention that I read in the communist Press of my own country some time ago that the peace campaign was particularly successful in North Korea early this summer. I have no reason to doubt that my source is well-informed. This, indeed, was an enlightening piece of information. The spectacle of the North Korean leaders signing the Stockholm Appeal with one hand, while they were charging their guns to attack a weaker neighbour with the other, puts this whole so-called peace campaign in true perspective.
125. Nevertheless, in should be emphasized that the outlook is not all black and depressing. During the last three months a growing feeling has emerged among our peoples that we do not stand helpless in the face of aggression. The reason for this rebirth of hope is the firm and swift action taken by the Security Council. It has been demonstrated before our eyes that the United Nations is a world organization capable, not merely of passing peace resolutions, but of acting, if need be, to repel aggressors and to restore peace. The soldiers now sacrificing their lives on the Korean battlefields are making the greatest of contributions to the strengthening of the United Nations as an effective universal peace organization. We have every reason to be thankful to the United States Government and the people of the United States for having so unhesitatingly taken upon themselves the main burden of battle.
126. The United Nations action in Korea has set a precedent for the future. It will be one of the main tasks of this session of the General Assembly to lay down such principles for the functioning of the various organs of the United Nations as will enable the Organization to act with equal firmness and equal swiftness should aggression again occur in the future. It would be an intolerable and most depressing situation if we accepted the idea that the United Nations must remain impotent in the face of such acts, because of the inability of one of its organs — the Security Council — to take effective action.
127. Later on during this session, we shall have an opportunity to clarify our minds on this issue. I want, however, even at this stage, to declare the general support of my Government for the main ideas outlined by the United States Secretary of State in his remarkable speech last week, when he put forward certain suggestions for strengthening the United Nations as a peace instrument,
128. Furthermore, it is the view of my delegation that in exploring the opportunities afforded by the Charter for strengthening the Organization, we should not overlook or deal lightly with important functions assigned to the Security Council, not only as a peace enforcement organ, but equally as an instrument for mediation and conciliation, a forum affording opportunities for contact and discussion between the great Powers with the assistance of the non-permanent members. Neither should we fail to explore possible ways and means to make the Security Council operate more effectively in its role as a mediator, both between its own members and between outside parties to a dispute. Any effort at mediation is hampered by undue publicity, by procedures which instantly engage the prestige of the parties. On several occasions the Secretary-General has referred to the possibility of certain innovations in the procedure and working of the Security Council. If a situation should arise which would make them possible of realization, his suggestions ought to be given the most careful attention.
129. This General Assembly will be called upon to deal with the Korean situation in all its implications. At the moment the first task is to restore peace in the area. But the problem of finding a durable settlement that will benefit the Korean people and the cause of lasting peace in that part of the world is a wider one — one that is becoming ever more urgent as the operations of the United Nations forces succeed, as they have done so magnificently during this past week.
130. In trying to find an over-all solution, my delegation feels that we should pay the most careful attention to ideas and proposals which may be put forward by the nations of Asia themselves. The process of national and social liberation in Asia is one of the most striking features of the revolution of our time. The experience already gained by countries which have recently and successfully emerged as free nations, several of which are represented in this Organization, entitles them to play a prominent part in the solution of the Korean problem. In this connexion may I say how happy my Government is that this General Assembly, on the recommendation of the Security Council, will shortly have the opportunity of admitting the Republic of Indonesia as the sixtieth Member of our Organization. The nations of Asia may be expected to have a better grasp of the problems involved in the reconstitution as sovereign States of nations that have long been under foreign domination than have countries more distant from the scene and with a widely different background.
131. Without going into detail, I should like to stress that in the settlement which we must try to effect in Korea the United Nations should in one form or another play a very important part. I give my wholehearted support to the idea of making Korea the scene of a great joint recovery effort on the part of the United Nations and all its specialized agencies. The presence of the United Nations in Korea after hostilities have ceased should also serve to dispel fears — unfounded as they may be — which may be entertained by Korea’s neighbours.
132. In the same way as in Korea, the United Nations should play an important part in the economic and social development of all under-developed countries in Asia and in other continents. In building a firm machinery for deterring aggressors and thereby ultimately preventing war, we should not forget that this is only part of our task. It is equally important to improve radically those economic and social conditions which make nations easy victims of aggressors, who promise them a heaven on earth if they will only follow totalitarian principles. The task of the United Nations is not only a negative one, to stop aggression; it is as much the positive one, to eliminate the causes of war.
133. Looking back to the age of colonialism and imperialism, it is quite evident that the democracies did not in the past have too good a record, in the opinion of many under-developed countries, It is all the more important that the United Nations, by its decisions and by its actions, should make it quite clear that the Organization and its Members will further the political independence and the economic and social development of all under-developed countries. That is why, next to the proposals to strengthen the Organization and make its machinery more effective, one of the most important items on our agenda is the question of technical assistance to under-developed countries. I feel sure that if we all do our utmost to carry through this programme — and my own Government is prepared to take its proportionate share of such an effort — if we all do that, I am convinced that we shall have made another important contribution to prevent war and lay the foundations of lasting peace.
134. I agree with what was said by the Netherlands Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Stikker, the other day [281st meeting], that the various matters before us ought to be dealt with each on its own merits. We do not want any confusion of issues. That being said, however, I should like to state that my delegation feels that a satisfactory solution of the question of China’s representation is one of the most important problems before the Assembly. To my mind, a satisfactory solution means that China should be represented by that government which in fact exercises control over practically the whole territory of China, with the support of the overwhelming majority of the Chinese population; that means the Central People’s Government in Peking.
135. Earlier this year the Secretary-General submitted to Member Governments a 20-year peace plan [A/1304], which has now been placed as an item on the agenda of the General Assembly. Whether the world situation will take such a turn that it will be possible to find a common ground upon which to deal with the many fundamental issues covered by his plan, I do not know. However, I feel that even if no such possibility should emerge during the present session, we should never tire of exploring again and again whether there is any basis for renewed negotiations.
136. To conclude, may I express the satisfaction with which my delegation has noted the relative moderation of language that has been characteristic of nearly all speeches during this general debate. Great as our differences are, and strongly as we may sometimes feel the need for plain and even for hard words, my delegation has never thought that the constant use of violent language, which we have so often witnessed in the Assembly, has ever served any useful purpose. May this debate, then, set a pattern for our discussion when we come to the specific controversial items on our agenda.