1. In addressing the General Assembly a year ago, His Holiness Pope Paul VI said:
"...this Organization represents the obligatory road of modern civilization and of world peace ... The building you have made ... must be perfected and conformed to the demands world history will make." [1347th meeting, paras. 24 and 26]
2. The most urgent need which confronts this Organization today is, I am convinced, to stop the further dissemination of nuclear weapons; to prevent their spread to countries not now possessing them and the endless multiplication of stockpiles in the nuclear States. Fundamentally what is involved, as I see it, is whether this most marvellous scientific discovery of all time is to be a blessing or a curse; whether we have the wisdom and the will to harness and control it to produce a better standard of life for all men everywhere, or whether we are to stand helplessly by while it becomes a rampant demon for our destruction. The Members of this Assembly and world opinion generally have come a long way towards appreciating the danger involved in the spread of nuclear weapons since the draft resolution aimed at preventing it was tabled for discussion in 1958. But at our peril action must no longer be delayed. Already another nuclear Power has emerged, and several others will join the list if an international agreement is not concluded without further delay.
3. If the majority of the nuclear Powers act energetically, casting aside any relatively minor political advantages they see in further delay, and sign an agreement, it will be welcomed and signed by the overwhelming majority of our Members. I am confident that, once a formal agreement has been adopted, the pressure of domestic and world opinion will prevent the Government of any non-nuclear State proceeding on the costly and hazardous adventure of manufacturing or otherwise procuring ownership or control of nuclear weapons. In this connexion, may I say that I strongly support the suggestion made by our Secretary-General in the introduction to his annual report on the work of the Organization [A/6301/Add.1] that the impact and implications of all aspects of nuclear weapons should be explored and weighed by an appropriate body of the United Nations.
4. I can personally vouch that many wise and far-seeing men, in States technically competent and possessing sufficient resources to produce nuclear weapons, realize the vast difference in time and expenditure between developing a few provocative atomic weapons and mass-producing the huge arsenals of the sophisticated nuclear weapons and delivery systems necessary to protect their peoples against aggression by means of their own forces and equipment. These men realize that the attempt by a nonnuclear State to produce, or otherwise to acquire, a few atomic bombs might well bring about the very attack their Governments fear, and against which they hope to defend their countries. Far-sighted men in nuclear-competent States realize also that the acquisition of a national stockpile of nuclear weapons necessitates not only the diversion of skills and resources sorely needed to improve the domestic standard of life and to help their neighbours, but that the internal security of nuclear States is a nightmare to their Governments and demands ever-increasing hordes of highly-skilled intelligence agents.
5. I am compelled to concede that the retention of existing arsenals of nationally-owned nuclear weapons may be unavoidable in order to prevent the existing strategic balance from becoming unstable and touching off a nuclear holocaust. I have always believed that the nuclear States will not part with their nuclear arsenals until an effective collective system of world security has been evolved and has proved it can maintain peace. But to embark now upon a programme of acquiring nuclear weapons and the ancillary equipment is a fool's game for the poorer or smaller States. For their own safety and prosperity and for the peace and prosperity of the world, it would be better if the potential nuclear States firmly made up their minds to seek their security and prestige in improving the lives of their own peoples and those of their poorer neighbours throughout the world and in helping to build up reliable and effective United Nations conciliation and peacekeeping procedures.
6. It is, of course, dangerously easy to heap scorn on power blocs without suggesting acceptable and practical alternatives to the existing strategic balance which would require time and patience to carry into effect. I am convinced that the answer to the problem of maintaining international peace is to be found neither in the extension or perpetuation of power blocs nor in their immediate dismantlement. Hence, I venture to repeat the suggestions I have frequently made for the establishment of what I have variously described as "regional neutrality", "areas of peace" or "areas of law and limited armaments".
7. I have dealt extensively with the concept of such areas of law in the General Assembly or in the First Committee every year since 1958. The basic idea was that, as we cannot hope to secure disarmament or the establishment of the rule of international law- in all parts of the world in a single, quick and comprehensive operation, we should approach the problem area y area. I suggested that we should commence by encouraging and assisting groups of States, particularly in zones which are affected by great-Power rivalry and tension, to come together as neutral States and agree not to attack one another, to settle their differences peacefully and to limit their armaments to police level, on the condition that the United Nations, backed by the nuclear Powers, would guarantee them against aggression from outside or inside the area.
8. In 1950, after listening to the interventions of the representatives of Cambodia and Laos, I suggested in the First Committee that the organization of an area of law should lie considered for a group of countries in South-East Asia. At the 1411th plenary meeting of the General Assembly on 21 September this year, the President of the Philippines, Mr. Marcos, welcomed the peace agreement between Malaysia and Indonesia as bringing forth "a nucleus of peace and stability in a sea and an area of crisis and conflict". I fervently hope that this "nucleus of peace" will prosper and grow into a wider area of peace and limited armaments embracing the lands and seas of South East Asia including, of course, Viet-Nam.
9. In 1961, I urged (1075th plenary meeting] that the United Nations should enter into negotiation in the Far East for the purpose of securing peace between Peking and Taiwan and settling the question of the representation of both countries in the United Nations; indeed, a some what similar suggestion was made by the representative of Italy, Mr. Bosco, in the general debate at the twentieth session [1338th meeting].
10. I felt then and I feel now that if an independent Taiwan became a Member of the Assembly of the United Nations in its own right and left the China seat to be filled by the Peking Government, the establishment of an area of peace in South East Asia guaranteed by the United Nations and the nuclear Powers might be more acceptable.
11. May I also recall that, speaking in the general debate of the nineteenth session in 1964, I proposed that we should endeavour to negotiate an agreed settlement of the problem of the representation of China. I went on to suggest:
"... that the Secretary-General and the four nuclear Powers in the Security Council should be asked to negotiate with Peking and Taiwan between now and the twentieth session to find out whether agreement could in* arrived at on the following basis: that Taiwan would take a seat in the Assembly and that Peking would assume the position of a permanent member of the Security Council, accepting to in bound by the Purpose and Principles of the Charter, by a non-dissemination agreement and by an agreement that all other nuclear States would go to the assistance of a non-nuclear State attacked by a nuclear power." [1295th meeting, para. 24.] In present circumstances it might lie more fruitful to have the question of the representation of China and Taiwan explored by the Secretary-General, and I am sure it would be generally agreed that the responsibility for the difficult negotiations involved could not be placed in better hands.
12. I wish to turn now to the critical state of the finances of our Organization and to the proposals made last year by the delegations of Ceylon, Costa Rica, Ghana, Ireland, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Nepal, Philippines and Somalia to restore mandatory assessments for peace-keeping. These co-sponsors felt certain that if we were to allow mandatory assessments for peace-keeping to lapse, mandatory assessments would not last long for all other purposes of the United Nations. Let us remember, in approaching this subject, that the very life of this Organization is involved, and that it is the nest hope, and perhaps the last chance, for mankind to mobilize the skills and resources of modern civilization to safeguard peace and to promote co-operatively the interests of all States and peoples. Like a super-sophisticated satellite, bereft of a source of energy to activate its equipment, the United Nations might orbit for a time, but it would do so aimlessly, if it were deprived of its essential source of energy — finance — to make good its decisions and exert a beneficent and fruitful influence on the affairs of men.
13. A similar draft resolution will be presented again this year and I urgently appeal to all Member States to support it. And, in this connexion, may I recall that our wise and esteemed Secretary-General, in his speech at Windsor, Ontario, on 28 May last, said:
"For all these reasons Canada has, I know, a very great interest in helping to find the answer to a question which must be of the deepest concern to all who support the United Nations and who wish to see it become a more effective instrument for peaceful and constructive international co-operation. This is the question of the future of the peacekeeping operations of the United Nations — the question, in effect, whether the United Nations will find itself able to afford, both politically and financially, to undertake new operations of this kind when the need for them arises again, as it almost certainly will in our still dangerously unsettled world."
When considering these words of our Secretary-General, I would urge representatives to realize how relatively small a contribution they would have to make under our proposals. For a peace-keeping operation costing, say, $100 million, the assessment on the economically less-developed Member States would be one third of one cent per head; on the developed Member States it would range from 4 1/2 to 12 cents per head; anti on the five permanent members of the Security Council it would be no more than 13 cents per head if they all consented to the operation taking place — although the special position of this group could have the result of increasing their individual assessments with their consent.
14. Men of goodwill throughout the world seek peace, not only to avoid the horrors of war but as an "enterprise of justice", as a basis upon which to promote? the economic, cultural and social progress of all peoples without distinction of race or creed.
15. In order that the resources of the world may be developed to the full, and that fair trading conditions and additional capital should be available to the lower-income countries, the volume of international money should grow in relation to the increase in output of desirable goods and services offered for sale on the world market.
16. On 28 September 19G6, at the annual meeting of the International Monetary Fund in Washington, D.C., my colleague, Mr. Lynch, Ireland’s Minister for Finance, adverted to the fact that in 19G5 the increase in the world's monetary reserves was only about half the annual average for the preceding decade. "The practical test", he said, "of the adequacy of liquidity — domestic and international — is whether finance is available to maintain the economic growth made possible by physical resources." Mr. Lynch went on to call attention to the high interest rates and to the shortage of long-term capital needed for the economic development of smaller nations and to point out that the present difficulties will be accentuated according as the two reserve currency countries bring their international payments into closer balance; and he urged that the planning and putting into operation of a scheme of rational creation of reserve assets should not await the achievement of equilibrium by the two reserve currency countries. Finally, he stressed that reserve creation is the concern of members of the Fund and that they should all participate in the distribution of newly created reserves. Mr. Lynch was speaking in the context of the communique issued by the
Ministerial Meeting of the Group of Ten, which reported their agreement that deliberately created reserve assets, as and when needed, should be distributed to all members of the Fund on the basis of International Monetary Fund quotas or some similar objective criteria. This statement by the Group of Ten is, in my opinion, the best news that has been heard for a long time, and gives hope that, if peace can be maintained in the world, the standard of life of low-income nations can be raised significantly through a fair system of reciprocal trade and with reasonable aid from the high-income States.
17. In conclusion, I should like to say a brief word about our distinguished Secretary-General. I have had occasion in the past to speak from this rostrum of his magnificent and self-sacrificing work. It was, therefore, with a feeling of anxiety for the future of the United Nations that my Government learned of U Thant's decision not to offer himself for another term as Secretary-General. We understand, of course, the various considerations which prompted that decision, for we realize that the office makes quite exceptional demands of all kinds on the incumbent. At the same time, my delegation fully shares the views expressed by so many previous speakers. We have no doubt at all that it would be of immense value to the Organization, and it would be a source of deep satisfaction to the Irish Government, if the course of events should bring U Thant to feel that he can continue in office.