Before beginning my remarks, I should like to refer briefly to an event which must have given satisfaction to all the representatives here. I am referring to the announcement published this morning that the Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to Mr. Ralph Bunche, a distinguished member of the United Nations Secretariat, who was the mediator in the Palestine conflict. My delegation would like to congratulate Mr. Bunche and at the same time the Secretary-General on this high honour in which we are all honoured.
71. The chief task before this General Assembly of the United Nations is to indicate clearly and precisely the road to be followed in order to prevent a war and to create a permanent foundation for peace and security, The decisions to be adopted during this fifth session of the General Assembly will decide whether these objectives are to be attained or not. And this is not only because the Assembly is the principal and most representative body in which nearly all the countries of the world are gathered, but also because the conduct of the United Nations in the face of aggression in Korea has earned it the people’s confidence and they now follow its deliberations with deep faith and are prepared to support its actions.
72. After the speeches of the United States Secretary of State and the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the USSR [279th meeting], we have before us two concrete proposals calculated, as their authors have said, to put an end to the present international tension.
73. Owing to the position of these two countries in the international community, these two proposals become the centre of our general debate and it is the duty of all the States represented here to express quite frankly their opinions thereon.
74. The representative of the United States has proposed [A/1377] that the system of collective security created at San Francisco should be strengthened and the democratic machinery within the United Nations system reinforced. The representative of the Soviet Union, condensing in one draft resolution [A/1376] his proposals of 1947, 1948 and 1949, is asking the General Assembly to condemn war propaganda, to ban the use of atomic weapons, to establish strict international control over atomic energy and to recommend that the permanent members of the Security Council should conclude a pact for the strengthening of peace and reduce their armed forces,
75. Let us first consider the USSR proposal, Although the Assembly is a gathering of States, there is not the slightest doubt that the representative of the Soviet Union has never had the intention of starting a real discussion with the other delegations. The countries represented here, the Ministers for Foreign Affairs and the other representatives, are thoroughly familiar with the difficulties caused by the USSR during the last five years.
76. Surely, then, hardly anybody can believe in the sincerity of the proposal for condemning propaganda in favour of war, when we all know that, for five years, the media of information of the Soviet countries and of all the communist parties throughout the world have never done anything but poison relations between States and portray the democratic countries as possible aggressors; when the Soviet peoples have been kept in complete isolation in order, among other things, to prevent them from finding out the falsehood of that propaganda.
77. It is hard to believe that the USSR delegation can honestly recommend the prohibition of the atomic weapon, when the records of the Atomic Energy Commission and the files in the Foreign Ministries show that the Soviet Union is the country which has opposed real international, control of atomic energy, openly refusing to allow any international authority to exercise such control on its territory.
78. It is, indeed, a bold thing to tell this Assembly that the USSR is not following a policy of expansion when it has annexed the territories of the Baltic States and is exercising complete control over about ten neighbouring countries.
79. No one can believe that the Soviet Union is serious in proposing to the General Assembly that the powers and responsibilities of the Security Council for the maintenance of peace should be strengthened, because everybody knows that it has never been possible and never will be possible for the Security Council to take any decision involving intervention in a situation in which the USSR is either directly or indirectly concerned. The forty-five vetoes cast by the Soviet Union prove all too clearly the truth of what I am saying.
80. It seems equally incredible that the USSR should again be endeavouring to argue that a pact among the five great Powers would solve the present differences and put an end to the danger of war. A year ago, fifty-three sovereign States demolished the same argument put forward by the Foreign Minister of the Soviet Union and stated clearly that the only guarantee of peace lay in the strict observance of the principles of the Charter, in the democratic application of the decisions and recommendations of the United Nations organs and in collective action by all the Member States.
81. Nor can the USSR delegation speak to the representatives at the General Assembly of the Soviet Union’s devotion to the cause of the United Nations and its cooperation in the work of the Organization. If we think of constructive international collaboration in economic and social questions, we must unfortunately confess that the physical absence of the Soviet representatives was not really noticed. They have always been absent from anything that meant understanding, aid and co-operation. The economic and social organization and arrangements of the post-war world, both within and outside the United Nations, have necessarily had to be limited from the very outset to the part of the world which was not under the control of the Soviet Union.
82. It is also clear that the USSR is not addressing its arguments to the statesmen and diplomats in this auditorium. For the Soviet Union it is of little importance that the representatives at the General Assembly do not believe in the sincerity of its statements. What really is important for the USSR is to try to fool the man in the street in Europe, Asia, America or other continents, for the man in the street cannot consult diplomatic files which would convey an accurate picture of the Soviet Union’s responsibility for the present international situation. It is to that audience that the USSR is speaking when it says that the United States attacked Korea, that the United States is threatening China and that the Anglo-American bloc created the Berlin blockade.
83. In the same way, its propaganda tries to bring the peoples of the economically under-developed areas to believe in the fallacy that independence, prosperity and the right to a life of freedom and human dignity can be attained only in a world and in an economic structure directed, and subsequently controlled, by the Soviet Union.
84. These are the trump cards which the USSR is playing before the democratic world, and we must carefully assess the significance of Soviet strategy and combat it not only with our arguments in this gathering, but also with simple straightforward actions that will touch the heart of the common man in every continent. For we believe that the decisive struggle for civilization and for humanity which we are waging in the name of the principles of liberty, social justice and economic progress laid down in the Charter will not be decided by the leaders of the world and by the representatives gathered here, but by the weight of the masses, by the pull exercised, on one side or the other of the scales, by the least-favoured classes in the industrial countries and by the peoples of the under-developed countries and areas.
85. In his analysis of the causes of the present international tension and of the reasons why peace and collective security have not been achieved through the United Nations, the United States representative stated that the primary cause was the policy followed by the Government of the Soviet Union during the past five years, and he mentioned the most dangerous manifestations of that policy.
86. My delegation fully agrees with that analysis; at the same time, however, we wish to state that in our view there are other factors contributing to insecurity and instability which are as important as the causes referred to by the United States Secretary of State. I refer to the weaknesses and flaws in our democratic system, to the social and economic backwardness of more than two-thirds of the world, and to the conditions of poverty and social injustice which it has so far proved impossible to eliminate or even to relieve to any appreciable extent by international co-operation.
87. In our opinion this session of the General Assembly must point out what measures the United Nations as a whole, or each of the Member States separately, should adopt to counteract these three causes of insecurity and danger of war: pressure, the weaknesses and defects of the democratic countries and the backward economic and social conditions in which a large part of the population of the world is living. Hence I am convinced that these measures must be taken simultaneously and that they must be equally effective.
88. The United States Secretary of State has submitted, in the name of his Government, a four-point programme intended to increase the effectiveness of the system of collective security established by the Charter. You already know the principal provisions contained in that programme. In stating its general agreement with any measure likely to improve the system of collective security and the functioning of United Nations bodies, the Chilean delegation is merely acting in accordance with the unswerving policy adopted by its Government a number of years ago and repeatedly proclaimed.
89. Five months ago my country, through the head of the State, declared that the fact that, from the time of San Francisco on, the world had been without any real and effective system of collective security, was due to the attitude of the USSR in the Security Council,_ in abusing the privilege of the veto and in making it impossible to create the United Nations armed force provided for in Article 43 of the Charter. At the same time my Government spoke in favour of making a last effort at conciliation with the Soviet Union, on a minimum basis, and said that if that should prove impossible, it would be necessary to unite the democratic world under a supplementary agreement for common defence against aggression and for the purpose of upholding and ensuring the observance of the principles of the Charter, in the political, social and economic spheres and in the sphere of the protection of human dignity.
90. The events in Korea have shown us that, as matters now stand, it is difficult to make any attempt at conciliation and that agreement is possible only if the democratic world can prove that it is capable of stopping any aggression and if the United Nations shows that it is willing and ready to defend any State or territory from aggression.
91. On 17 August 1950 my country therefore proposed that an item entitled “strengthening of democratic principles as a means of contributing to the maintenance of universal peace” should be placed on the agenda of the present session of the Assembly. The General Committee has unanimously recommended that this item ! should be included in the agenda.
92. In the explanatory memorandum [A/1343] accompanying its request, my delegation stated that it would present a draft resolution proposing that the rules of procedure of the General Assembly and the Interim Committee should be amended in order to enable the General Assembly to act more effectively and promptly to deal with any situation which might constitute a threat to international peace and security. In this respect our proposal is identical with that presented by the United States.
93. With regard, however, to improving the system of collective security, we believe that the United Nations should go further. We have proposed that the General Assembly should recommend to Member States to subscribe voluntarily to a solemn agreement pledging themselves to joint action to observe and enforce observance of the principles and purposes of the Charter. This agreement would be open to all Member States and would not exclude any that were willing to comply with its provisions. We still believe that complete and entire security can be achieved only if membership of the United Nations is world-wide and we should not take any step which would endanger that universality while there is any possibility of making it the foundation for complete security.
94. In this agreement Member States would not lay down any new principles or purposes other than those established in the Charter, but they would voluntarily give the following undertakings:
95. First, to co-ordinate their forces and resources, including their armed forces, to give effect to the decisions adopted by the competent bodies of the United Nations with a view to repelling direct or indirect aggression;
96. Secondly, to carry out and help to carry out certain important recommendations of the General Assembly relating to the maintenance of peace and security;
97. Thirdly, to co-ordinate their forces and resources to ensure economic stability and effectively to promote the development of the backward areas of the world and, for these purposes, to carry out and help to carry out certain important recommendations of the competent organs of the United Nations;
98. Fourthly, under the aegis of the United Nations, to respect and enforce observance of the fundamental rights and freedoms which are mentioned in the Charter and laid down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
99. This pact would be unobjectionable from the legal and constitutional point of view. Moreover, there is no provision in the Charter which prohibits or prevents all or any of the Members of the United Nations from agreeing on common action to defend the principles on which this Organization was founded and to enable it to carry out its functions more expeditiously; there is nothing in the Charter which prohibits all Member States or any group of them from voluntarily pledging themselves to carry out jointly or separately the recommendations of the competent organs, which, according to the Charter, are not mandatory. It would, on the contrary, constitute an important step towards a better and more dignified international life which we all desire.
100. The delegation of Chile believes that unless the democratic world clearly demonstrates the sincerity of its ideas of freedom and democracy, no measure against aggression and war can be effective. Moreover, conditions exist within the confines of democracy which seriously jeopardize human dignity and can in no way be reconciled with the principles of the Charter regarding fundamental human rights. We must make an honest and sincere collective effort to put an end to this state of affairs.
101. The continued existence of the policy of racial discrimination or of the economic exploitation of large segments of the population constitute additional factors which weaken our cause and are powerful allies of aggression.
102. The defensive struggle against aggression requires democracy to strive constantly for greater perfection. We cannot forget that arms alone do not make a cause victorious. A cause is won, above all, in the minds of men; a given objective is not attained in complete disregard of mankind. The cause of democracy will never be served through unworthy compromises involving the renunciation of its very essence. To speak of democracy will not suffice; it must be a way of life. Neither can democracy be the birthright of any given people or race. Mankind is indivisible. By the very fact that they are human beings, all men are the same. Those who say they are free cannot, therefore, think in terms of ethnical, religious or social discrimination. Hence the joint action which we are advocating must rest on the obligation to apply and enforce within our borders the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
103. We are, nevertheless, the first to realize that, if the economic conditions now prevailing in most of the world are allowed to persist, the development of democracy will be a difficult and time-consuming task. Our own Latin-American countries have shown how great an effort is needed to defend and develop democracy in the uneasy social conditions in which the inhabitants live. Hence the necessary action of the United Nations in bringing about a decisive improvement in the standard of living of the peoples of the world, even if it were not an objective expressly stipulated in the Charter, would be an indispensable means of achieving human dignity and the maintenance of peace.
104. Many are the obstacles which have so far prevented the eradication of the factors of insecurity represented by the economic and social conditions now prevailing in the world. The first is the faults we have ourselves committed: the selfishness of large sections and groups; the lack, for many years, of any decision or willingness to make of international co-operation that decisive instrument which the Charter has provided for changing the economic face of the world.
105. In fact, until “point four” was announced by the President of the United States, the great Powers had taken no serious initiative to cope with the tremendous problem arising out of the fact that two-thirds of mankind are suffering from under-nourishment, the easy prey of epidemics and diseases; that they are living under conditions which make it impossible to keep up a standard of elementary decency. Moreover, there has been another obstacle which must be mentioned: first, there was the threat of war; then came the so-called cold war and now we have the aggression committed by North Korea which has compelled all free peoples to abandon their common policy of disarmament and, on the contrary, to divert a large part of their resources to preparing their defences.
106. The financial burden of rearmament has seriously jeopardized the ability of governments to meet the urgent needs of reconstruction and development and threatens, moreover, to delay the achievement of the higher standard of living hoped for by the peoples of the world. In our opinion, the responsibility for that situation rests clearly with the Soviet Union. We believe that its responsibility is obvious, and, that its designs are premeditated. Having been forced into rearmament for defence purposes, we find that poverty in our countries must continue and that governments are hampered and unable to take any initiative towards collective improvement. Thirty or forty thousand million dollars allocated to rearmament means so many millions of dollars snatched away from the production and marketing of goods, and withdrawn from the funds set aside for giving effect to the policy of world economic development. Such a sacrifice weakens the home front, multiplies social problems and forces low-income families into desperate straits. Internal morale thus suffers a blow, faith in democracy is relentlessly sapped and the ground is prepared for the treasonable and anti-national activity of communist parties throughout the world. This is the Soviet Union’s five-year plan to achieve world domination.
107. But to confine oneself to rearmament at the cost of abandoning all action in favour of the welfare of peoples would be precisely to serve the interests of the USSR; only when superior armament is backed by armies and peoples endowed with great moral strength can aggression be contained and repulsed. Fortunately, the United States representative has stated that we must continue to fight against want while at the same time arming ourselves against aggression.
108. What do we mean by the fight against want? We mean by “want” the aggregate of social and national anxieties and aspirations. There are minimum material and spiritual needs. I have already referred to the latter. With regard to the material needs of the world, the diagnosis of the fundamental problems of mankind has already been made both within the United Nations and outside it. There has always been complete agreement about that diagnosis. It tells us of under-developed areas and under-nourished peoples. We are told that in one and the same era, in one and the same year, differences in civilization exist among peoples as a result of material limitations.
109. The studies undertaken in connexion with President Truman’s “point four” programme and the United Nations expanded programme of technical assistance, the discussions in the Economic and Social Council on full employment and the financing of economic development, the final resolutions adopted on the subject, the experiences of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development — all these enable us to obtain a clear idea of the problem, of its scope and of the best means of solving it. Some figures have been given. Qualified technicians have stated that some 2,000 million dollars annually would be needed for international cooperation in the financing and development of these backward regions. What are 2,000 million dollars compared with the tens of thousands of millions required for armaments? Having diagnosed what is needed, the next step must be the announcement of a bold new plan which would effectively promote the economic development of the under-developed regions, a plan intended not only to increase available resources but primarily to improve the standard of living of mankind.
110. Such a plan would further constitute the principal guarantee of economic stability in the industrialized countries and an essential element in achieving a stable peace. Prosperity, human dignity and peace are indivisible. Simultaneous action must therefore be taken in all these directions. Indeed it could be said that the foundations of this plan, which is designed to strengthen economic and collective security as a complement to collective political security, have been set out and debated on the international level both within the United Nations and outside this Organization.
111. The “point four” programme covers the principal elements of this action. They may also be found in the extraordinary work done by the Economic and Social Council during the past few years in connexion with its programme of technical and financial assistance for economic development, in its plans for social and child welfare and in its recommendations for ensuring full employment in the world. Moreover, the necessary machinery to carry out such a plan is in existence. All that is lacking is a decision to provide the international institutions and organs with the necessary means to carry out the plan on the scale and with the speed required by the exigencies of the international situation. This calls for boldness and willingness commensurate with the danger and the need. We can now see the need and the danger.
112. As was done in the case of Korea, where we were faced with a choice, we must, in this constructive and indispensable aspect of international co-operation, return to the spirit of the Charter.
113. The past five years have taught us a great lesson. Rather than strive for a high standard of living in a future world at peace, we must, through a splendid collective effort, seek peace through a higher standard of living for all the peoples of the world.