My Government has done me the honour to instruct me to define my country’s position in relation to the grave problems which concern the world and the United Nations at a moment when there has been a breach of the peace in Asia and when all peoples are looking towards us in the hope that the Organization will maintain the peace and security which it pledged itself to safeguard in San Francisco.
2. The fact that representatives of the great Powers and those of the small countries take their turn to speak from this platform without distinction of rank strikingly reflects the democratic spirit of the United Nations and also offers tangible proof of the indivisibility and universality of peace, for peace is a matter which equally concerns all of us, regardless of the size of our country, its geographical position and ethnic composition.
3. On this solemn occasion, it is my duty to reassert my Government’s faith in the principles of the Charter and to analyse the causes which, among others, interfere with the machinery of the United Nations. At the same time, I shall outline our view on these problems, it being understood that we shall exercise absolute independence of judgment in voting. I realize, of course, that we shall exert not so much a material as a moral influence on the events which, by affecting the rest of the world, also affect Bolivia directly or indirectly.
4. Before dealing with the items on our agenda, I should like to say that my Government appreciates the Secretary-General’s efforts to create an atmosphere of confidence and harmony within the United Nations. It recognizes the importance of his report which, while it records the deadlock reached on specific problems, also indicates positive accomplishments. Thus the balance is still on the credit side and the hopes of my country are still nurtured by that favorable balance.
5. At this vital stage in the life of the United Nations, I should like to point out certain inconsistencies which, in my view, exist in the Charter notwithstanding the admirable spirit, intelligent structure and wide scope of that remarkable document. This analysis is based on the belief that these inconsistencies, among other reasons, help to impede the progress of negotiations which are hampered by the ideological and political division of the world. Not that the world has no right to be divided politically and ideologically, but because the pugnacity of one part of it threatens the independence and security of the other.
6. The first inconsistency arises from the fact that, while the Preamble of the Charter affirms the principle of the equal rights of nations, Article 27 of the operative part establishes a voting system for the Security Council which disregards the principle of equality set forth in the Preamble and makes power the determining factor in the United Nations.
7. The second inconsistency which troubles me is that whereas the principle of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms is enshrined in all the Articles and Chapters of the Charter, that principle, whose observance must be ensured by each State, conflicts with the provisions of paragraph 7 of Article 2, which defines domestic jurisdiction. That is a barrier which blocks our efforts to guarantee universal rights which are the basis of democracy and the vital prerequisite for the maintenance of peace and security.
8. Finally, there is another inconsistency, which does not derive from the letter of the Charter but from the facts. I refer to Chapter XII, concerning the International Trusteeship System, whose purpose is to promote peace and to ensure the economic, political and social advancement of the Trust Territories by the grant of all the freedoms, rights and guarantees likely to lead to their independence. The Latin-American countries, which have developed from the status of colonies to that of free States, are following with keen interest the progress of those territories towards liberation, but we must be careful not to fall into the trap which almost always exists when an attempt is made to speed up the process of emancipation without a careful analysis of the circumstances which qualify a territory for self-government but with political ends in view, the aim being that these populations, dazzled by freedom and an easy prey to communism, should fall under a totalitarian regime which would lead them into a form of slavery much more degrading than trusteeship, which is merely a passing phase in their progress toward independence. This is a situation in which we have to move with prudence and caution.
9. On Friday last I read an editorial in the New York Times, which publishes in its distinguished columns such excellent comments on the problems which concern the United Nations and the world. This editorial, which dealt with “expansionism” in Asia, contained an impressive list of the achievements of the so-called imperialist nations in Asia and of the territorial annexations of the Soviet Union. The conclusion is that the United Kingdom, France, the United States and the Netherlands have done a great deal for the advancement and freedom of the countries of Asia. By contrast, the USSR, which is always talking about colonialism, has virtually annexed Mongolia, has annexed Tannu Tuva outright, as well as the south of Sakhalin, and has taken over complete control of the Kuril islands; It dominates western Manchuria, controls Dairen and Port Arthur and exercises economic control over Sin-kiang, or Chinese Turkestan, as well as North Korea, which it has now catapulted into a war.
10. I think it would be sound procedure to use these three points of reference for the purpose of defining my Government’s policy and indicating its attitude to contemporary problems.
11. We, the small nations, resigned ourselves to accepting the principle of unanimity in San Francisco because we recognized that even in the most genuine manifestations of equality of rights among States, the facts were bound to weigh heavily, for clearly principles and declarations cannot remove the real fact of the existence of the great Powers. All that could be done was to give them certain privileges in return for the burdens and responsibilities which they were to assume and to trust that they would be magnanimous, that they would fulfil their obligations and be able to lead the way to< world unity, and thereby to human greatness. Accordingly, as Mr. Belaunde of Peru explained so eloquently [279th meeting], the veto was granted, so that the great Powers might be in a position to achieve unanimity and so bring about political harmony in the world. Even if we had some foreboding, we could not believe that in San Francisco we were forging the very chains which were to fetter our movements in the name of power and in terms of power.
12. Unfortunately, that is what we have come to in our five-year experience. The process of paralysis is so severe that the manipulator of the powerful magic spring had to be absent from the Security Council so that the mechanism could be set in motion to cope with the aggression against South Korea.
13. I agree with the representative of Brazil, Mr. Freitas Valle [279th meeting], that the system of the Charter is based on a division of functions, the Security Council exercising the executive powers while the General Assembly is the deliberative organ which can make recommendations. But I wonder what we can do about the persistent abuse of the veto by a permanent member of the Security Council which prevents that organ from fulfilling its functions. The only course open to us is the one pointed out by Mr. van Zeeland, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Belgium, whose moving speech we applauded on Saturday [281st meeting]. The course he recommends is to seek out all the measures and means offered by the Charter, scrutinizing and analysing its wisely worded text to find procedures which open the way to pacific action within the system of collective security.
14. That is the object of the first point in the proposal of the United States Secretary of State, Mr. Acheson [279th meeting], whose firm resolve and nobility of thought are worthy of that great democracy, the United States, and in keeping with his responsibilities. I firmly believe that the four-point proposal which he has presented is the most important and most constructive initiative taken since San Francisco, because it tends to adjust the gears so that the machine which has been slowed down can proceed, and removes the disheartening impression that we have a broken-down machine in our hands.
15. My delegation will support the United States proposal and for the same reasons will support the Chilean proposal [A/1343], which on this point is identical and hence can be amalgamated with the United States proposal. I wish to emphasize that these proposals do not seek to weaken the Security Council which all of us respect, particularly after its prompt decisions in June; but we also do not wish the Security Council to become a giant that is bound hand and foot. It would not be necessary to carry out the new measures proposed by the United States and Chile if the Council worked and fulfilled its functions, and if no excessive use of the veto were made. We understand the use of the veto in moderation, but we condemn its abuse.
16. I have said that another of the inconsistencies in the Charter is related to respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, so that by virtue of Article-2, paragraph 7, the concern for that principle which is shown throughout the Charter becomes a mere aspiration and at best has a persuasive effect. When we read those paragraphs of the Charter and realize what I have just said, we are reminded of the priest who from his pulpit threatens and exhorts the already repentant sinner kneeling in the temple, while the priest’s admonitions fail to reach the cynical and disdainful heretic passing the gates of the sacred precincts.
17. Nevertheless it would be unjust not to recognize that we have made great progress in the past two years. My country has the honour of having contributed to that progress by bringing the question of Cardinal Mindszenty to the attention of the third session of the General Assembly. I recall that with only the support of my firm convictions I pleaded for the inclusion of the item in the agenda from this very rostrum before a somewhat fearful and sceptical Assembly. The item was included. At the fourth session of the General Assembly discussion was easier and more convincing; the world had in that short interval become accustomed to accepting collective action in defence of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the Assembly had turned its eyes to the common man, realizing that the individual was the nucleus of society and that society was the substance of the State.
18. At this present session, the leader of the Chilean delegation, Mr. Santa Cruz, has proposed that we should take another step forward, and we shall resolutely follow our good neighbour along the path which its delegation has indicated with that generous spirit which inspires its exemplary democracy. For the same reasons we shall follow Chile in its initiative in economic questions, being convinced that the step proposed to us to give effect to the Assembly’s recommendations will, if approved, represent a great advance.
19. I should like to comment on the other points of Mr. Acheson’s proposal, beginning with the establishment of a security force, a peace patrol. My Government not only supports the creation of this body of observers but also, as a country which has never transgressed or uttered threats, will feel strengthened and more confident because this new collective security force will be a concrete guarantee of peace.
20. Further, my country will support the United States proposal that each Member State should designate a unit from its national armed forces, and we welcome it not only as a technical means of promoting the training and unification of the command, but as an admirable method of forming an international awareness in every citizen of every country. When he sees the flag of the United Nations side by side with his national flag waving in the calm breeze of international peace at the head of the armies which symbolize and seek to defend sovereignty, it will be brought home to every citizen that, without ceasing to be a citizen of his own country, he is a citizen of the world, and at the same time he will feel that the world is open to all.
21. The fourth point of Mr. Acheson’s proposal is judicious and necessary and my delegation will support it, having been convinced by the experience of the improvised action against the surprise aggression on the Republic of Korea.
22. The question of the de facto recognition of governments has been and remains a very controversial topic in the regional group of Latin-American States. Some believe in the effectiveness of collective action in preserving democracy and uphold the principle that governments must be based on the express will of the people; others believe that the right of peoples to govern themselves as they wish or as they can should remain untouched and free from outside supervision. I do not intend here to go into this controversial subject which has been exhaustively discussed; it would, however, be impossible for me not to refer to a new phenomenon: the effective, dangerous and widespread strategy of fomenting internal revolutions as a tactical means of achieving the transformation of the world, a new phenomenon which concerns each and every one of us and deserves to be discussed with the help of documentary evidence and in the light of the facts. This is not the right time to make that study and I shall refer merely to the merits of the case.
23. Facts show that the Soviet Union annexed the Baltic States some ten years ago by diplomatic devices. The facts also show that twice it laid hands on Poland and there are some here who could tell us something of what happened in Romania in 1945. The Security Council and the world know what happened in Czechoslovakia in 1948 and all free peoples here have a feeling of solidarity with the heroic Greek nation which has set a fine example in defending its internal and external sovereignty. The events in Korea have been impressed upon our minds by the words of Mr. Austin, whose eloquence and above all whose integrity and goodwill we respect and admire, and who produced evidence in the Security Council to show that the forces of aggression against the Republic of Korea are trained in Manchuria and armed by Moscow. In the meantime we have heard the voice of Peiping loudly spreading the incredible falsehood that the United States and the United Nations are the aggressors in Korea. Nor can we think without alarm of what is happening in Indo-China, the Philippines, Burma and elsewhere.
24. But there is even more. Wherever we look we see evidence of underground activity and the disguised intervention of the person who hides the hand that throws the stone. Thus the stability of democratic governments is constantly threatened and our families, that is, our peoples, who used to be friendly and happy, are now being divided by hates and antagonisms and our governments are forced to use their modest resources to fill their arsenals and reinforce their police instead of filling their granaries with wheat and their storehouses with meat; they must buy guns instead of ploughs and must watch the battle fronts instead of working for the general well-being.
25. Thus the message of hope which President Roosevelt, with his magnanimous smile, addressed to the world, telling us that the world would live in freedom from fear, is already a distant echo.
26. Something must be done to combat this phenomenon, which is destroying us from within. Something must be done to prevent the occurrence of what is happening in my country, where the Government, like the United Nations, is carrying on an armed struggle to save democracy and its institutions on the home front and, with the technical assistance of the United Nations, is striving to work its natural resources in the interests of raising the standard of living, of improving the social conditions and the welfare of the people of Bolivia.
27. The first idea which occurs to me is that, just as in earlier times, when their domestic jurisdiction was respected, the sovereign States signed pacts of nonaggression, in order, for example, to guarantee peace, it might now be necessary for us to begin considering the preparation of a new multilateral instrument to combat the new political phenomenon, an instrument which would take the form of a universal pact of nonintervention based on the provision in international law which permits collective action to prevent intervention; such collective action would be entrusted to the United Nations, so that President Truman’s doctrine might be further strengthened.
28. We cannot fail to point out, moreover, the way in which, in the troubled world of today, the Soviet Union is exalting the principle of absolute sovereignty, exploiting that principle which is so deeply rooted in the hearts of all peoples. And while that country attacks the freedom of other nations wherever it can, it rashly attempts, in the name of absolute sovereignty, to undermine the economic aid which the United States is giving Europe for its reconstruction and also, through its generous contribution under the Marshall Plan, in an effort to raise standards of living and improve social conditions for all mankind.
29. For this purpose, the USSR is furthering a cold war in order to force the nations to divert their newly developed resources to rearmament. I have often thought with bitterness and sorrow of the bread of which the hungry in the old world have been deprived and of the tremendous expense entailed by the highly spectacular and co-ordinated effort deployed by the United States and the United Kingdom, with all their mechanical resources, in feeding and supplying the population of Berlin by air for so long a time.
30. Fortunately, the democratic world has sufficient resources to arm itself in order to preserve peace while at the same time contributing to the advancement of under-developed countries, which likewise constitutes a guarantee of peace through the promotion of human well-being, for the honour of our civilization.
31. For that reason, we of the smaller countries are not discouraged. We have faith in the expanded programme of technical assistance of the United Nations, and in “point four” of President Truman’s programme. We have faith also in the work of the Department of Economic Affairs and the Department of Social Affairs of the Secretariat, and in the constructive work of the specialized agencies. This feeling of confidence is deeply rooted in our hearts, in spite of the fact that the USSR does not contribute to or support this work.
32. This is the proper moment to say that my country’s experience in this direction has been full, serious and constructive. That experience includes certain significant points to which I should like to draw attention. First, the Technical Assistance Mission which went to Bolivia in April of this year was composed of fourteen distinguished experts from eleven of the highly developed countries of the world. It was headed by the Deputy Minister of Mines and Resources of Canada, Mr. Keenleyside, who went to Bolivia in response to a request by the Secretary-General to the Government of Canada; Mr. Saint-Laurent, in a generous spirit of international understanding, agreed to give his colleague temporary leave of absence to enable him to serve the United Nations in Bolivia. Was not this an exemplary and heartening action?
33. The Mission arrived in my country, where it was received with lively interest by my Government, although, it must be admitted, it met with indifference and scepticism on the part of the public. Nevertheless, it went about its task with such skill and devotion that little by little it penetrated the national consciousness and awakened the interest of the people throughout the country; requests were received by the Government from many different regions, asking that the Mission should visit each of these regions in order to study actual conditions, diagnose the ills, and prescribe the remedy. In this way the United Nations penetrated into the very heart of Bolivia, and I am certain that even were a future government of Bolivia to oppose the recommendations of the Mission, it would be forced to carry them out owing to pressure of public opinion. Meanwhile, Mr. Keenleyside, a distinguished Canadian statesman, had become also a distinguished servant of the peoples of the world, since as a result of his experience in Bolivia the Secretary-General appointed him Director-General of the Technical Assistance Administration of the United Nations, an appointment that carries the guarantee of the constructive development of the programme.
34. I wish to extend my thanks from this rostrum to Canada and to all the other countries which have sent such distinguished experts to a less highly developed country, experts who have returned captivated by our vigorous land and our good-hearted and long-suffering people.
35. I wish also to express my thanks to the Secretary-General and to stress the fact that the workers who constitute the technical divisions of the Secretariat are imbued with an idealistic fervour; they represent a type of worker whose time and energy are at the service of the entire world and who will form the vanguard of future progress. Our gratitude extends also to the specialized agencies, which generously and with determination have brought practical aid to Bolivia.
36. I should like to suggest that in each of the highly developed countries a roll of honour should be established, on which would be recorded the names of the most competent experts in each country, in order that as a reward for their achievement these experts might be named as workers in the service of world economic and social progress. In this way, while at the same time, in accordance with the plan proposed by Mr. Acheson, we are organizing armed forces for the preservation of peace, we may also organize an army of civilian experts to defend peace by promoting the well-being and progress of the peoples of the world.
37. Thus it can be seen that, in spite of the cold war, the United Nations and the democratic countries are still undertaking positive and constructive action. It can be seen that despite the “cold war”, which is forcing the western democracies to devote the greater part of their resources to the armaments race, a race which they did not desire since they have no aggressive designs and are guided only by considerations of legitimate defence, those democracies believe it their duty to ensure peace through a policy of balance of power. It can be seen that they are nevertheless concerning themselves with assisting the unfortunate.
38. The action of the United Nations has awakened a new faith in the people of my country, a faith comparable to the hope aroused by “point four” of President Truman’s programme. All this leads us to believe that it is not necessary to throw the world into upheaval or to instigate fratricidal wars in order to exploit the natural resources of the world, to place them at the service of humanity, to raise the standards of living of the peoples of the world and to enhance their dignity as societies; rather, it is possible for society to evolve peacefully, without the need of communism, towards a new social ideal which is based on justice.
39. And this faith is strengthened, in spite of the insidious campaign based on the old catchphrase about Yankee imperialism and the greed of Wall Street, ideas which disturbed us in our youth, twenty years ago, but which became ghosts of the past on the day that President Roosevelt inaugurated the good neighbour policy. Today, thank God, the bogey of Yankee imperialism produces no other reaction in us than would the strident and dissonant sounds of an old clarion which once upon a time roused our energies but now merely irritates us.
40. We should ask ourselves what the Soviet Union is doing meanwhile. Is it contributing in any way to this civil mobilization for world welfare? In my opinion, it is doing the opposite; it is trying to sow distrust and dismay, because it knows that anarchy feeds on hunger. And its conduct calls forth such mistrust in us that in spite of what we have been told here in this very Assembly — that the USSR has reached such a high level of industrial development that atomic energy is used there to remove mountains — we do not dare to apply for the services of its technicians, for we are afraid that in our countries they would leave the mountains where they are and remove the governments. For the same reasons, we cannot trust the sincerity of the draft resolution [A/1376] presented by Mr. Vyshinsky, which repeats the same themes on which he based his propaganda in 1947 at Lake Success, in 1948 in Paris and in 1949 again at Lake Success. And as hope has its roots in faith, my delegation takes a sceptical view of that draft resolution and the way in which it is worded.
41. Lastly, my country reiterates its support of the measures taken by the Security Council with regard to the invasion of the Republic of Korea, rendering heartfelt tribute to those who have died on the battlefield and expressing its admiration for those who are fighting there for peace and dignity. My Government is deeply grateful to those heroes who, in the war they wage, are the soldiers of peace, under their leader General MacArthur, symbol of the greatness of the United States, a country which lends dignity to our civilization and the genius of which is shaping the progress of the world.