Israel

At the beginning of my remarks, I should like to associate my delegation, as indeed the people of Israel, with the tribute paid from this rostrum to that great South African, Jan Christiaan Smuts. The world has lost in him a statesman of outstanding courage, creative spirit and bold vision. Israel and the Jewish people mourn the passing of a distinguished humanitarian, whose consistent friendship and support were to them an unfailing source of moral strength. The name of Field Marshal Smuts will forever illumine the record of mankind’s struggle for justice and freedom. 102. The fateful question which overhangs this Assembly is whether the world will survive the present political cleavage or whether it will be engulfed. The question is, can rival systems coexist peacefully or must their struggle end in deadly clash? Based on conflicting philosophies and divergent ways of life, can they achieve a balance of self-restraint and mutual tolerance, leaving it to peaceful evolution to resolve the issue — or will they be irresistibly driven to a war of total annihilation? Will all nations, whatever their political doctrine, find an overriding common purpose in the preservation of civilization and of life itself, or is mankind to give up all hope? Will scientific progress serve as an instrument of salvation or as a weapon of suicide? 103. Let us be honest and frank. There is no complete certainty in an optimistic answer. Dangers will not be banished merely by pious wishes. The challenge to survival must be sternly taken up, and a collective effort at self-rescue is by no means certain to fail. The more determined the effort, the greater its chances of triumph. 104. To divide the world into two camps is to oversimplify the issue. Even among the countries adhering to the Soviet pattern, uniformity is by no means absolute. In other parts of the world, there prevails a wide diversity of constitutional regimes and social orders. It is fallacious to draw the dividing line between imperialism and true brotherhood of peoples. Imperialism is not an attribute of social philosophy but a product of physical might. Nor is it true to represent the issue as of capitalism versus socialism. The claim of communism as practised in the Soviet Union to be accepted as the only true form of socialist society is widely contested. On the other hand, in many a country of orthodox democracy, patterns of life rightly claimed to be socialistic are progressively emerging. Far-reaching social progress is being achieved without any resort to violence or curtailment of liberty. 105. The point at issue is not how this or that system is to be appraised, and which is superior to the rest, but whether a system rightly or wrongly held to be superior by some governments should be imposed by force on other countries, either through invasion from outside or through subversion from within. 106. Here is the crux of the problem. It is not a question of mere ethics whether such an imposition would be iniquitous or just. The crucial point is that an attempt to spread a regime by fire and sword across the frontiers of any State or to instigate it by interference conjures up immediately the nightmare of world catastrophe. The present international order is a highly delicate organism balanced precariously on the brink of a precipice. Any violent shock may spell disaster. In these highly sensitive times every military move, indeed every act of statesmanship, must be judged by reference to its effect on world peace, not merely because war is an evil but because peace and survival have become synonymous. 107. The young democracy of Israel draws its inspiration from ancient origins; at the same time it is its ambition to emulate the best in modern society. Freedom is the very breath of Israel’s existence and development. Its democracy is based upon full political and cultural liberty in its internal life and on unrestricted contact of its citizens with the world outside. To defend these freedoms against any menace Israel is ready to fight with the same determination as it fought for its independence. 108. But much as Israel cherishes these principles of true democracy and hopes that they may prevail everywhere, it fully recognizes the right of other nations to work out their salvation and to fulfil their destiny along different lines. Mutual tolerance of divergent political civilizations is the corner-stone of world security, Scrupulous non-interference in the internal life of others is the universal shield of peace and stability. 109. The preponderance of the great Powers in world affairs places on them the brunt of responsibility for the preservation of international peace. This special position of the five permanent members of the Security Council is specifically recognized in the Charter. Just because the international divergencies are most sharply pronounced in their relationships and in view of the decisive effect of their behaviour on the fate of the whole world, their restraint and sense of responsibility must serve as examples to all. Accordingly, any initiative in uniting the five great Powers for a concerted endeavour on behalf of universal peace, such as has been urged here by several representatives, and notably by the representative of the Soviet Union [279th meeting'], is to be heartily welcomed by all other nations. It is obvious that such an endeavour, if successful, is the surest and the shortest way to the goal. 110. But approval of a method does not always signify faith in its success. Although it may be taken for granted that none of the great Powers is actually bent on war, positive agreement among them may or may not be forthcoming. In practice it seems today fairly remote. Yet the world passionately wants peace and must exert every possible effort to achieve it. Its fate cannot be left to depend on the fortuitous chance of a five-Power agreement. If there is no unanimity between the few, then the majority of the many must take such action within the terms of the Charter as may prove possible and effective. Even then a five-Power accord would be an invaluable buttress for peace, but failing and pending such an accord, an alternative effort is imperative. In any case, nothing can absolve the great bulk of States, medium-sized and small, from their own share of responsibility for the effective maintenance of a world-wide system of collective security. 111. Outbreaks of aggression are unfortunately a feature of the post-war world. Invasion has occurred against Israel, and the Security Council failed to muster the requisite majority to check it. It happened in Korea, and this time the Security Council took action with the full approval of most States Members of the United Nations. In an hour of extreme emergency the United Nations has stood the test of action. But if the Security Council is again to be paralyzed by permanent deadlock, what is to happen to the authority of the United Nations? Is it to be discounted as a bulwark of peace until the great Powers reach an understanding? It would be a dark day indeed in the life of scores of nations — nay, in the life of humanity at large — if despair of United Nations capacity to protect the world against the calamity of war should ever enter men’s hearts. 112. The dilemma is inescapable. Either a way must be found, free of hazards, to activate the United Nations against aggression, or the world must look for other remedies, leaving the international Organization to decay through futility. 113. It is for this reason that the proposals adumbrated from this platform by the United States delegation [279th meeting] deserve very serious study. The only development which might render such study premature would be the renewal of full co-operation among the five great Powers and the proven capacity of the Security Council in its fully representative composition to deal swiftly and effectively with threats to the peace of the world. 114. To be fully effective, the United Nations must be complete. The present position, when a considerable number of independent and fully sovereign States find themselves outside this great framework of international discipline and responsibility, is unjust, anomalous and harmful. The delegation of Israel questions the wisdom of a course which, rather than admit certain States deemed undesirable, prefers to exclude a larger number of States which are by all counts fully qualified. In the present state of the world it is but natural that the schism prevailing inside the Organization should be reflected also among those seeking admission. The immediate inclusion of all eligible candidates would add no structural complexity to the United Nations, while the gain resulting from its completeness is patent. 115. The question of the representation of China is a most notable case in point. Much as Israel’s conception of democracy may differ from that upheld by the new Chinese Government, for reasons similar to those adduced so cogently here by the representatives of India, Sweden [285th meeting], the Netherlands [281st meeting] and Pakistan [283rd meeting], Israel is among the sixteen States which have recognized this government. My delegation feels that it would be unwise for the United Nations, in disregard of compelling realities, artificially to bolster up a regime of the past, which has lost its hold on the territory and people it claims to represent. If the new regime in China is ready sincerely to uphold its obligations under the Charter, prospects of peace in Asia and throughout the world would be enhanced by its admission. 116. There is but one exception which my delegation must urge to the principle of universal participation in organized international society. That exception concerns Germany, east and west, as well as other countries where the regimes once allied to Nazism still prevail. The people of Israel, and Jews throughout the world, view with consternation and distress the progressive re-admission of Germany to the family of nations, with her revolting record intact, her guilt unexpiated and her heart unchanged. 117. Judging by all accounts, the evil spirit of Nazism still dominates the German mentality. The Press of the world reverberates with brazen declarations of unreformed and unrepenting wickedness on the part of the new apostles of the resurgent Nazi doctrine. The alarming reappearance of mass organizations, Nazi in spirit, is a salient feature of the situation. Beneath the new thin crust of apparent peacefulness, the fierce flames of old hatreds are still burning. Having exterminated the bulk of European Jewry and reduced the surviving remnant in Germany itself to an insignificant number, the Nazis now vent their rage on the dead by desecration of cemeteries and destruction of tombstones. 118. The appeasement now practised in both parts of Germany outrages the sacred memory of countless martyrs, betrays the sacrifices sustained in the overthrow of Nazism and sows the seeds of new aggression, savagery and horror. The danger is now imminent that the only real beneficiary of the present world crisis will be the very country which by brutal violence provoked the last world war, forced the peace-loving peoples of the world to take up arms in defence of peace and democracy and was the direct cause of the establishment of the United Nations for the prevention of such calamities in the future. 119. The holocaust perpetrated by Germany in Europe may well serve as a marginal comment on the discussion of the grave problem of atomic energy. The atomic bomb is a fearful weapon, yet it did not need that device of wholesale annihilation of life to put to death in cold blood six million Jews — men, women and children — and an almost equal number of members of other enslaved peoples. Crematoria, gas chambers and even ordinary firing squads proved as effective instruments of mass extermination as the atomic weapon. There is no end to organized mass brutality and the infliction of suffering on innocent people that can go on unhindered during a war behind the front and inside barbed-wire fences. 120. The scourge to be adjured, condemned, outlawed, prevented, resisted and defeated is aggressive war. The use of the atomic weapon is but one hideous corollary of that basic evil. The effective outlawing and prevention of aggression by strict adherence to the Charter and determined action to ensure it should precede the prohibition of this and other instruments of mass destruction. 121. The crucial question remains, which will prove stronger — the forces which disrupt the world or the framework established for its unity? This question cannot be answered by words. It is a challenge both to our vision and to our practical statesmanship. Only our effective capacity to act in concert can meet it. 122. But the task is not merely that of swift reaction to aggression. The evil should be attacked at its roots. It is the sources of discontent, strife, rebellion and armed intervention that must be eliminated. Constructive endeavours are the radical remedy, while police action is a. mere — though often indispensable — palliative. The evils to be fought and stamped out are poverty, disease and ignorance. 123. It has rightly been stressed during this debate that the real end of all our efforts is the well-being of the individual and of masses of individuals. The immense continents of Asia and Africa teem with hundreds of millions of human beings steeped in degradation and misery. The denial to them of the blessings of civilized life darkens the world’s horizon with a grave and ever present menace. Even if the present world conflict were peacefully resolved, as long as glaring inequalities of wealth and knowledge remain perpetuated on a gigantic scale, the peace of the world will be in jeopardy. The removal, or at least the reduction, of these inequalities, is at once the most challenging and the most felicitous task of world statesmanship. 124. The harnessing of the United Nations to great projects of economic development and the utilization of the world’s scientific and technological resources for the benefit of all is for the time being in its very inception. In his statesmanlike and imaginative memorandum, outlining a twenty years’ programme for peace [A/1304], the Secretary-General clearly discerns the vital bearing of social and economic welfare on the prospects of international security. He portrays the United Nations not only as a barrier against aggression, but also as a positive instrument of economic emancipation and progress. In this direction lies the greatest positive promise of the United Nations for the future of mankind, first and foremost for the undeveloped, the under-developed and the economically and socially backward areas of the world. 125. For its part, the State of Israel, within its very limited capacity and with all too inadequate help from outside, has embarked upon an ambitious phase of reconstruction and rehabilitation. It has done so to consolidate its position and to fulfil its historic mission. As a result, the whole aspect of our country is changing under our very eyes. Our population has risen by 75 per cent within the last twenty-eight months. Masses of Jews, driven by misery and fear and drawn by the promise of freedom and dignity, are entering and settling down. Their very evacuation to Israel eliminates sources of weakness and danger to the Jewish people and the world. Large numbers of them are uplifted in the process from the depths of destitution and backwardness to greater productivity and civilized ways of life. 126. To render this possible, all the latent natural resources of the land are being developed at an accelerated pace, and the fruits of science and technology are vigorously applied. The country is shaking off its age- old lethargy and the people are advancing towards higher forms of living. 127. If our neighbours would heed the call of the Security Council and make peace with us, instead of confusing the issue by false charges and prolonging the plight of Arab refugees by delaying a settlement, our constructive endeavours could have merged with theirs for the benefit of the entire area of the Middle East. Be that as it may, what is being achieved, or at least attempted, in the field of development within the narrow confines of Israel, carried out single-handedly by one small State, could certainly be repeated on a vast scale by an international pooling of efforts wherever multitudes of people crave for better health, education and creative activity. 128. We are faced with a two-fold task. Firmness in dealing with aggression wherever and by whomever it may be committed, with bold foresight in attacking the twin human ills of poverty and ignorance, should be the watchwords of the United Nations. There can be no real progress without peace. There can be no permanent peace without progress. The attainment of both is the essence of the international Organization. The two are united in the hope of mankind.