54. Mr. President, your election constitutes a just recognition of your qualities as a statesman of strong personality, firm principles and great diplomatic ability, qualities we have had the good fortune to appreciate during your international career in the service of Latin American unity and of our common principles. We Chileans feel honoured to have you presiding over this Assembly and we wish you every success in your delicate duties.
55. When a Foreign Minister of a country like Chile makes a long journey to attend a General Assembly of the United Nations in the international situation prevailing today, there are many people in our countries who will ask themselves: Whose interests are served by these speeches and debates? If principles continue to be violated, if what was laid down at San Francisco is not applied, if a policy of force again prevails, trampling underfoot many oft-proclaimed rights, if there is no check to the arms race, if the United Nations Development Decade shows how wealth is increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few, why continue meeting and talking? It is difficult to find an answer that will satisfy people and enable them to retain their faith, if the major decisions which are meant to determine the conditions under which future generations on and beyond the earth will live are adopted for reasons of prestige or in defence of national interests and not in the light of the effect they will have on mankind. It is difficult to answer those questions if respect for reason becomes the inheritance of the weak.
56. Chile has pledged unlimited support to the United Nations in the task of building up international law and making it mandatory, because we consider it desirable that there should be an impartial authority able to enforce it. Chile believes that this is the forum of free men who, like us, are not backed up by power or by the will to dominate, but earnestly desire to live in a peaceful and co-operative world. Chile wishes to believe in this tribune in order to have the opportunity to put forward the claim to equal rights for all States, an objective which has not yet been achieved. But we are deeply concerned to note that instead of moving towards these goals, we are moving away from them; that the United Nations, which we could now call “our last hope", is becoming weaker.
57. If the Assembly has any value, it is because it allows the free expression of universal public opinion and enables the voice of a watchful world conscience to be heard, to which the big Powers and those who unlawfully use force must defer.
58. Today more than ever we need a strong and active United Nations. But recent experience shows that the proliferation of its activities, to which we have thoughtlessly contributed, has to a large extent served as a means for concealing non-compliance with the resolutions adopted and, above all, of concealing the vacuum left by the failure of those who have the power to change events to take political decisions. We thus get carried away by endless analyses and discussions on economic questions or problems such as outer space or the sea-bed, about which we can still talk and dream. But we are in fact left out of all vital political discussions.
59. It is because of this same paradox, which borders on irony, that this worldwide democratic Assembly, whose essential purpose should be the prevention of war, all wars, will discuss neither the situation in Viet-Nam, nor the events in Czechoslovakia, nor the Middle East, nor the horrible tragedy of Biafra.
60. These threats to world peace emerge as inevitable cycles, and the spiral of fear tends to paralyse the leaders of small nations. In this context, they seem to have been assigned the sad role of victims.
61. As the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Federal Republic of Germany, whose absence from this supposedly universal Organization we once again deplore, rightly stated a few days ago: “He who has power, particularly atomic power, does not necessarily have either morality or wisdom on his side".
62. Here we, the smaller countries of the world, are face to face with the great actors and authors of history, or rather I should say, we are under them. Our fate is gambled with and perhaps lost, without our consent and in a dangerously unjust fashion. The example is pernicious and contagious, both internationally and nationally.
63. We know that both agreements and disagreements between the great Powers and fluctuations in the temperature of the war are facts which we, the small countries, are forced to recognize as inevitable. Since they involve us all, we must tackle them vigorously, because from both a moral and a political standpoint they are matters of common concern and fall within the legitimate sphere of action of every country, without exception. This critical situation calls for a reorientation of the motives which led to the establishment of this world forum.
64. Two years ago in this very same Assembly we said:
“The history of mankind has been, to a considerable extent, the history of the irresponsible exercise of power, and high-sounding words were used in an attempt to justify the immoral and barbarous instinct for domination” [1424th meeting,para. 30].
The history of these high-sounding words is approaching its definitive crisis. At the present time no social, economic or ideological concept is capable of bringing about peace. Formulas such as “capitalism", “socialism", “free world", are either too ambiguous or are open to the interpretation imposed by certain leaders in particular circumstances in order to justify their own power situation.
65. An increasingly frustrated world realizes that this world Organization does not meet the fundamental needs of mankind. We believe in the legitimacy of the United Nations as a political organization. Chile feels absolute respect for all the legal, political and moral obligations that have been built into this system. We have proved this by our deeds.
66. We know very well that the Charier established for certain nations privileged positions which carry greater responsibilities. But the present realities of international life, and those which may be predicted from current events and from the attitudes of the privileged nations towards these, go far beyond the express understanding set forth in the Charter, in the resolutions and in the exercise by the United Nations organs of their powers. The events that are being precipitated with the participation or in the presence of the countries with the greatest privileges and the greatest responsibilities contradict these responsibilities and exceed these privileges. If the situation of the community of nations has changed so much over this period of time as to prevent them from properly fulfilling the obligations they have all undertaken in their several degrees, it is time to revise the Charter and the international legal and political system. Until this is done, the countries affected by present and threatened by future events can and must, in our opinion, set aside ideology and search practically and actively for essential points of agreement.
67. We believe that some countries belonging to geographical regions and political zones have been drawn apart by recent historical events but nevertheless have points of contact of which we are not yet fully aware. These are to some extent negative, since they consist in the simultaneous “NO!” which those countries utter or feel in response to the acts of those who in fact make decisions for the community of nations. But they also have an overriding positive meaning, in the growing capacity of those countries on the political outskirts to play, in their relations with the great Powers and each other, leading historic parts in which they can correct grandiose expressions and create facts along constructive lines.
68. We note with interest that, along with the present lawful groupings of States in all the organs of the United Nations, forces of political action are being generated by combination to defend vital principles of international coexistence and to press specific points of common interest. The use of flexible machinery and the absence of ideological intolerance would increase the effect of contacts between countries anxious to promote an international climate of peace and freedom from threat, so as to speed the development of their economies and societies.
69. If we became aware of those contacts and created simple and practical instruments, we could set up effective defences against the newer forms of imperialism and, what is more, create a political force capable of interpreting, representing and leading the great majority of mankind that no longer accepts the law of force but demands respect for justice and believes in the equality and dignity of man. Two or three fundamental principles could emerge in strength and unite separate continents, start a practical dialogue with decision-making centres, and lay the foundations of a new era that could redeem the present deplorable situation.
70. The United Nations was born as a political instrument, to prevent a repetition of the intolerable events of the decade from 1935 to 1945, which inflicted all the suffering of which mankind is capable.
71. The absolute destructiveness of the nuclear deterrent compelled the great Powers by its mere existence to replace political and military confrontation throughout the world with seemingly more peaceful and positive means in which the political motive was “development”. Economic acts then became the only means of preserving peace, which seemed to be threatened only by underdevelopment. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) was the great common forum that gave this situation legal sanction. In its context we could state that international problems multiplied precisely on that human frontier-gap between prosperity and poverty, between development and lack of science and technology. But the delusion that we should gain security through development has been rudely dispelled. Here we are, back at the Assembly, again involved in political problems and facing the stark fact that the most virulent political schemes, under the guise of possible war — the more cruel and unjust for being partial and limited to the stage chosen by the users of men — and under the guise of less probable peace dominate the interests of the great and the needs of the poor.
72. We therefore seek the unity of those who love peace and do not wish to practice the politics of war or force. This quest demands the commitment not only of the governments but also of the world’s moral and intellectual forces and of the young, who express their discontent with the present but do not realize that the international scene is where their future is really at stake.
73. The background for our deliberations on economic matters is the failure of the United Nations Development Decade, the decade in which only the developed countries have prospered.
74. My Government feels that this General Assembly should conduct a serious and responsible analysis of the causes of the present crisis in international co-operation, in order to determine realistically just what we can expect from the second and much-needed United Nations Development Decade. There are several reasons why the first failed. Basically, there was strong intellectual resistance to the proposed measures, a lack of understanding by the prosperous countries, a lack of unity among the developing nations and a progressively inefficient international machinery.
75. Thus in the first place the concepts of planning, assimilation of technology, preference and others met when they were first proposed with heated opposition. Now they have been accepted; but a good part of the Decade was consumed by the process of making them acceptable. Only recently, in response to the demands of those of us who are determined to grow, has a complex institutional device been set up to deal with the whole problem of development. This led to the creation of UNCTAD, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), the Advisory Committee on the Application of Science and Technology to Development, the UNCTAD/GATT International Trade Centre, and other agencies.
76. Secondly, the industrialized countries showed a deep incomprehension of the underlying causes determining development. The “affluent society” has never been able to grasp, or even witness, the drama of underdevelopment; and its leaders have faithfully reflected the led. There have been gestures, concessions acceptance of principles; but basic attitudes have not changed. The wealthy peoples remain deeply selfish, and New Delhi has given the latest and most painful proof of this fact.
77. The international institutions of economic, financial and cultural development must no longer be dominated by persons who apply standards quite incommensurable with the social conditions of the developing world. This is a subtler but no less harmful form of colonialism than the old one.
78. Thirdly, we must acknowledge that the developing countries have been singularly incapable of exerting any form of constant, intelligent or imaginative pressure on the developed countries. The reason is that the countries of the “third world” are shy of each other. The three continents treat each other with suspicion and mistrust. The circumstantial unity achieved on certain occasions has quickly vanished, and so the vocal pressure exerted on the developed countries has not been convincing. It is therefore
doubly necessary to seek and find the points of political contact among the developing countries, about which I have spoken earlier.
79. Fourthly, we feel that the international machinery has lost its speed and flexibility and hence much of its efficiency in dealing with development questions.
80. The technical complexity of the issues and political indecision have caused a bewildering increase in the number of meetings, and these meetings have confronted governments with a tremendous volume of documentation. For example, between 1960 and 1967 the number of meetings held by the United Nations increased by nearly 100 per cent, from 2,769 to 5,388, equal in 1967 to about 20 meetings every working day.
81. In this tremendous proliferation no account at all is taken of the lack by the developing countries of enough qualified personnel and money to send representatives all over the world to attend each of these meetings. We feel that this cannot go on. It is therefore the General Assembly’s duty to define the goals, content and measures of the action to be taken in the Second United Nations Development Decade, and above all to correct the errors that led to the failure of the First Decade in the four areas I have mentioned.
82. My Government feels that the final objective of the Second Decade should be to establish a new international economic structure, based on the principle of a fair specialization that will give every nation — large and small — an equal share of the fruits of progress in world economic development.
83. We feel that in technology it is necessary to destroy the myth that the developing countries are doomed by nature to promote only labour-intensive activities with a low rate of investment. A “technological leap” is possible, but we do not want a pure and simple transfer of technology; we want conditions under which we can assimilate technology which for us is an entirely different thing.
84. As a first step it would be necessary to channel towards the poorer countries part of the investment in research that the developed countries make in their own territory. This implies the creation in the developing world of a scientific infrastructure that could eventually help to create a technology in keeping with our own needs.
85. By the same token, the nature and function of international private capital must be redefined. As the development process advances, the contradiction between economic independence and foreign investment becomes more and more evident and acute. Machinery must be set up for internationalizing private capital so as to erase its political bias, name, nationality and influence, while at the same time preserving for the investor its essential quality — profitability. In this regard, the recent decisions of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development are encouraging.
86. But we must insist that there is, above all, a problem of attitude. The repeated failure of the schemes and models that people of the industrialized nations try to impose on the developing world, either in the economic or in the human life of our countries, proves that their attitudes must not continue to dominate the international agencies.
87. In monetary matters, the Bretton Woods Agreements of 1947 must be amended to meet the needs of the developing countries. They were devised chiefly for the reconstruction of Europe; their draftsmen did not foresee the phenomenon of development. This is the same problem, but in its most critical aspect.
88. In the realm of thought, another idea is important to the Government of Chile. That is, to make the principle of tariff privileges general. The principle has already been accepted; but we must go even further: we must ensure that the international juridical order shall always prescribe two standards: one for developed and another, more favourable, for developing countries. We all know that, when two nations differ considerably in economic power, equality before the law is simply legalized injustice. The principle of protecting the weak has long been a part of the internal juridical structure of most, if not all, countries. We must now transfer it to the law of international relations.
89. None of these measures, however, will have any meaning unless the international structure of political power is so changed that the developing peoples can really participate in decision-making and in the agencies. If the problem now facing all our countries is full community participation in decisions and in the fruits of progress, if our youth is rebelling because it demands participation in its own institutions, then international life, to be effective, must be based on majority participation. This calls for a political decision, a political foresight that the great Powers must urgently consider.
90. Chile’s international policy gives Latin America a fundamental priority. The Latin-American countries have for a long time been constructing, together with and in regard to the great Power of the continent, a body of principles, rules and practices aimed at reconciling the hitherto divergent interests of the hemisphere’s two great blocs. To that end they have for some time been organizing a specific system of measures for defending and defining purely Latin American interests; and some of these measures have already become law.
91. In this regard the Latin-American countries have some fundamental postulates which they cannot forget or evade in any circumstances and which they must in fact reaffirm constantly, both to other regions and to their own. I am speaking of principles that are universal but have originated in Latin America, where they are particularly valid and timely. So also, to give only two examples, are the principles of non-intervention and the right of asylum. But Latin America must now broaden its aims. I refer to our need, drawing on our common cultural experience in which human and social values coincide with our common demands for freedom and social justice, to build up those elements of political action that will enable us not only to defend our people’s interests but also to manifest them effectively to the rest of the world.
92. These interests are essentially identical. Only thus shall we be able, using the power given us by our population, our resources and our positive will, to participate in the decisions now made behind our backs. The impact of our participation can be decisive since, although we belong to the West because of our common experience of fundamental values, our inadequate development gives us a definite feeling of brotherhood with the East and with Africa.
93. We feel that a dynamic and creative system of coexistence has two essential needs. The first is to recognize the diversity of internal political solutions, subject always to true respect for human rights. The second is to eliminate the mutual distrust that has largely sterilized our action. It is necessary to overcome these suspicions in a united movement not only against traditional handicaps but also against increasingly serious common problems. The great Powers must, for their part, respect our independent search for our own forms of economic and political organization, and not impose schemes and solutions irrelevant to our true situation. Only thus would international political, economic and financial institutions work with an understanding of our realities and interests.
94. I must now turn to certain specific problems. Mankind has recently been shaken by events in Czechoslovakia. Zealously defending the principle of self-determination, of every country’s right to seek its own form of political and economic organization—the golden rule of international life — Chile deeply deplores the tragic situation of another poor nation which has had its sovereignty infringed by force. By a supreme paradox, in virtue of this very principle of non-intervention, this problem will not be debated here; but this situation cannot deprive us of the right to point out that a rule governing the matter is stated not only in the United Nations Charter.
95. In December 1965, only three years ago, some countries, including the Soviet Union, submitted to the Assembly for its consideration a formal and categorical definition and condemnation of any threat to free determination. Chile co-sponsored this draft resolution and helped to improve its wording. The General Assembly adopted it as resolution 2131(XX). It is well to remember that at that time we all agreed that -
"...armed intervention is synonymous with aggression and, as such, is contrary to the basic principles on which peaceful international co-operation between States should be built,”
that -
“The strict observance of these obligations is an essential condition to ensure that nations live together in peace with one another, since the practice of any form of intervention not only violates the spirit and letter of the Charter of the United Nations but also leads to the creation of situations which threaten international peace and security”;
and that -
“Every State has an inalienable right to choose its political, economic, social and cultural systems, without interference in any form by another State.”
96. That was only a short time ago, and already the definitions written by our hands are being erased by our elbows. This is a sad lesson for the small countries who come here to build law and who trust that it will be respected, since that is our only guarantee. The explanations always given have not been convincing. We can only hope that the former situation will be restored and that those who wish to determine their own way of living — the most essential right of man — will be able to do so soon. If this does not happen, then everything said here will be meaningless and futile.
97. Not only are we entitled to speak of this matter, but we do so with the moral strength given us by our categorical condemnation some years ago of another violation of the same principle in America. Ignoring what some might call diplomatic discretion, we adjudge that act to be a violation because any breach of an essential principle, no matter where it may occur, affects us as free men.
98. We also vigorously opposed, both in our regional organization and here, the concept and the practical consequences of the so-called “ideological frontiers”. We now have the same attitude towards the resurrection of this concept. It is a serious step backward that we cannot pass over without a formal complaint, because application of this concept would bring about unlimited abuses.
99. We note with regret that the official peace talks being held in Paris between the United States and North Viet-Nam have not yet been fruitful. Their continuance indicates an interest in finding a solution to this cruel martyrdom, but at the same time proves that all the death and suffering is pointless, even strategically, because neither side’s position is changed. We hope that this will be the last year that we shall have to come to this Assembly without having seen this conflict resolved according to the free will and choice of the people of Viet-Nam. The persistence of this war has produced a moral fatigue throughout the world that will do more than any other factor to bring it shortly to an end.
100. Perhaps we are on the threshold of a new period of aggravation of international tensions. In recent times not only have existing conflicts continued and worsened, but new and discouraging situations have arisen. We see the great Powers, spurred by the latest developments in their powerful technology and the persistence of their old apprehensions, about to plunge into a race with new and more costly arms: multiple-headed nuclear rockets and anti-ballistic missile systems. At the same time, however, there are some encouraging developments, the best of which is perhaps the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which encourages international co-operation in the development of peaceful applications of atomic energy. This should take place under conditions that would enable each country to have an independent nuclear technology.
101. Every moment in history presents both grave threats and commensurate opportunities. If we all realize our responsibilities, if those who have the power to destroy themselves and strip the world bare desire to banish terror, poverty and ignorance, then never will mankind have stepped more quickly from the greatest danger of its history to its most formidable creative force. It will take this step only if we are faithful to truth and loyal to our agreements.