29. Mr. President, I wish to congratulate you personally and on behalf of the Yugoslav delegation upon your election to the Presidency of this General Assembly session. This election is an expression of the high regard in which you are held and a tribute to your country, with which Yugoslavia maintains relations of deep friendship and fruitful co-operation.
30. I should also like to welcome the admission of Guyana to the United Nations and to extend to it our best wishes for progress and prosperity.
31. We are happy to see Indonesia among us again. We have always felt that that great country had a constructive role to play in the United Nations.
32. We were very pleased at the twentieth session that the work of the General Assembly had returned to normal, although we were aware that its difficulties had not yet been fully overcome. During the year since then, however, the activity of the United Nations has not been extended, and the Organization has at times been relegated to a secondary role in the major trends of international life. It has not been uncommon to see certain Member States exposed to great pressure and attempts at foreign interference, while the United Nations was not in a position to defend them. If we do not make renewed efforts to apply the principles of the Charter, if peace and security cease to be our major concern, the United Nations will be unable to accomplish its mission.
33. The facts and views which the distinguished Secretary-General, U Thant., has set forth in the Introduction to his Annual Report on the Work of the Organization [A/6301/Add.1] only confirm the gravity of the situation facing the United Nations and the need to restore confidence in its ability to meet the demands of our time.
34. Needless to say, the unfavourable state of international relations is inevitably reflected in the work of the United Nations; but that does not explain everything. We have experienced crises in the past, but the United Nations was in a better position than it is today to intervene to maintain peace. But in recent years we have noticed a growing trend to solve major political issues outside the world Organization.
35. What is the cause of this situation? In our opinion, it must be sought first of all in the reluctance certain Powers have expressed to see the United Nations play a more active role. No one can deny the special responsibility of the great Powers, particularly in matters of war and peace, and the Charter contains the necessary provisions on their rights and duties. Thus, these Powers, more than any other nation, can truly protect their legitimate interest within the framework of the Organization. But at the same time, they are duty bound to act in the spirit of the Charter and to help the United Nations, despite its shortcomings, to become a more effective organization in the search for solutions to problems affecting all States. Attempts by certain Powers to impose solutions on other countries can neither lead to a stabilization of the international situation nor can it in the long run ensure their own interests.
36. We are deeply convinced that all countries need the United Nations, be they great or small, rich or at a less advanced stage of development. The world Organization can function successfully only as a democratic body based on the principles of peaceful coexistence and international co-operation founded on equality. Without such a foundation, its future would be highly doubtful.
37. Major international problems cannot adequately be solved without the participation of the greatest possible number of countries and without representation of all regions of the world. In this connexion, the fact that the People's Republic of China is not represented here constitutes the Organization's major shortcoming. Neither other States nor the United Nations can, without endangering peace and their own interests, challenge the right of the People's Republic of China to participate in world affairs on an equal footing. In accordance with this idea, Yugoslavia supports the right of the Government of the People's Republic of China to represent that country in this Organization.- In the belief that universality is essential to the United Nations, Yugoslavia has always favoured the admission of all States. We believe that conditions are now ripe for divided countries as well to join the United Nations, if they so desire.
38. The present international situation can only ai-ouse our deep concern for peace and security and, in general, for prospects for future development. The fact that the great Powers realize that a nuclear war would be a catastrophe for all is of little consolation to us. The fact that the nuclear Powers tend to avoid direct conflict has not prevented power-hungry forces from resorting to all kinds of pressure, including that of arms. This policy of force is particularly evident in Asia and Africa, where imperialist interests are in permanent conflict with the aspirations of people who wish to free themselves from every kind of subordination.
39. The general debate has shown once again that the Viet-Namese war is the major current problem. Although military operations are restricted to a specific area, this war is an international problem,
not only because the interests of the great Powers are involved and because it is a threat to peace in general, but also because this conflict reflects the great dilemmas of our time. The failure thus far of foreign intervention to break the will of the Viet-Namese people, who are determined to be free, again confirms the fact that force cannot prevent people from attaining national independence and from choosing their social system, if they are firmly determined to do so.
40. It is not our intention to propose solutions, but we feel we must state our position on the most important current issues. My country, which also has waged a difficult struggle for independence, has from the outset supported the right of the Viet-Namese people to settle their own domestic affairs. That is why we condemn foreign intervention and the bombing of the territory of the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam, a sovereign and independent country.
41. We have always believed that it was possible to end this war and at the same time to guarantee that the Viet-Namese people would attain the legitimate goals of their struggle — independence and the freedom to choose their domestic regime. We have felt that it was up to the United States, whose armies are on foreign soil, to make the first move, namely, permanently to halt the bombing of the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam and to recognize the National Liberation Front as a partner in the negotiations. We thought it would then be possible to seek a solution on the basis of the Geneva Agreements. If we are to look forward to a political solution, we believe it is essential to pave the way for the departure of foreign troops.
42. My Government expressed this conviction on 21 January 1966. It still considers that this is the key problem for future negotiations and that the United States must promise to withdraw its military forces from South Viet-Nam within a specific period of time. What assurance would the Viet-Namese people — who have been waging an unequal struggle for two decades — have of attaining the objectives of their struggle, if negotiations were held while a foreign military presence remained, with no prospects for its withdrawal? Similarly, we feel that all the parties involved must declare their willingness to accept whatever domestic political solution the people of South Viet-Nam may freely choose, without foreign interference.
43. In this context we believe it possible to strengthen peace and the independence of countries in South-East Asia. For we are convinced that the Viet-Namese people and the other people of this region want neither, war nor enslavement to any foreign Power. By enabling the Viet-Namese people freely to decide their future, we would restore peace and stability to the entire region, thus serving the long-range interests of all States. If foreign troops withdraw from this area once known as Indochina and if the countries there refrain from participating in military alliances, anew era of development and co-operation could begin.
44. The independence of Viet-Nam is in the interest of the entire international community. We do not believe that the American people really want this war, nor that its termination can really endanger
United States interests, nor that the exercise of self-determination by the Viet-Namese can damage the prestige of the United States. Quite the contrary, the continuation of this war is what threatens the prestige of the United States and, I would venture to say, of all other Governments and the United Nations itself; for if we cannot prevent such a destructive war, similar situations will arise sooner or later in other more vast regions, thus finally sweeping us all towards the abyss of war. I believe that our only alternative is to make every effort to avoid such a danger.
45. Although the Viet-Namese war rightly concerns all nations, decreased tension and the thaw in the cold war in East-West relations, which developed several years ago, pave the way for new achievements. Their material basis lies in the domestic development of many countries, in the increased determination of peoples to live in independence, and in their strengthened economic capacity. On the whole the changes which have occurred in the general balance of power established after the war represent a positive development. The entry of new independent States into world affairs can only hasten the day when international relations will truly be based on democratic principles.
46. We are also witnessing important changes in military and political groupings. The obstacles to broader co-operation and to an independent policy are decreasing. This is particularly true in Europe, where formerly division had been greatest and where many countries, despite their membership in alliances, have embarked on economic and political co-operation in the belief that thereby they are serving their own interests and are fostering the stabilization of peace in Europe.
47. We have no illusions that the major difficulties have already been overcome. Serious problems remain unsolved, but there is a growing awareness in all countries that the future does not belong to military blocs, although we cannot expect them simply to disappear. The strengthening of peace in Europe can only help to improve the situation in other areas as well. At the same time, favourable conditions are emerging which should encourage European countries to give more aid to the developing countries.
48. My Government, which has never believed in the utility or the future of military blocs, has for many years been pursuing a policy of extended bilateral co-operation and is participating actively in efforts now under way to seek solutions at the European level. We feel that the resolution adopted in 1965 on improving good-neighbourly relations among European States [resolution 2129 (XX)] reflects new tendencies in Europe and is a valuable contribution to co-operation among countries on that continent. In the spirit of that resolution, its sponsors are now preparing a meeting of representatives of European parliaments.
49. Recent contacts show that the Governments of the sponsoring countries are ready to consider opportunities and to take initiatives in political, economic, social and other areas. Conditions clearly are favourable and new paths are being opened to us.
50. In another part of the world, unfortunately, the colonialists and their allies have entrenched themselves, particularly in southern Africa, from where they are attempting to relaunch their attack. In our opinion, either all African peoples will be free or emancipation itself will be endangered throughout the world. The peoples of Southern Rhodesia, of the colonies under Portuguese administration, and of Aden, South Africa and South West Africa are forced to struggle for their basic rights, and it is our duty to help them win independence. We cannot hide our disappointment at seeing the International Court of Justice turn a deaf ear to the claims of the South West African people, who are anxious to win their freedom from the South African racists. Racial discrimination and apartheid defy the entire international community. The United Nations must therefore consider appropriate measures and institute a programme of action.
51. The only realistic course to follow to maintain peace and eliminate foreign domination is for us to apply the principles of the Charter and of active and peaceful coexistence. That is precisely the purpose of the policy of non-alignment, which develops cooperation among independent countries and opposes all hegemony and any form of monopoly in international affairs.
52. The way in which this policy is expressed has varied according to the particular period and circumstances of international life. Its value, however, has never been challenged by events. Today, as in the past, the non-aligned countries face essentially the same dilemma: they must either fight for peace and strengthen their own independence, or fall back to a subservient position. It is easy to understand that they choose the path of independence, no matter what obstacles they may find there. It is well to note that many newly independent countries have adopted this policy and that the actions of other countries, which are still members of military alliances, are marked by tendencies similar to those of the policy of non-alignment.
53. The many problems facing the newly independent countries and the developing countries in general, and the various pressures and interference from outside, impose on the United Nations the obligation to contemplate a broader plan of action in political, economic, social and educational spheres, so that the international community may more effectively assist these countries. We feel that the time has come, at this session, to discuss the problem and to draw up the guidelines for joint action.
54. The new international development policy, whose groundwork was laid down at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development held in Geneva in 1964, still has not been followed up by practical measures. While we do not doubt the complexity of this process, we feel that the lack of political will on the part of certain industrialized countries is the main reason for the lack of any significant progress. This continuing situation gives rise to serious concern, because better understanding, stability and peace cannot be ensured unless very tangible progress is achieved in the execution of international development policy. That is why these issues become increasingly urgent. The second United Nations Conference on Trade
and Development, to be held next year, will undoubtedly be of decisive importance in this area. We can rightly expect it to mark a turning point in the study of development problems, and above all in the pursuit of efforts already under way.
55. The lack of political will has prevented agreement from being reached on the very important matter of disarmament. The arms race has imposed on the great Powers and the whole world a burden which we all must bear, for the atmosphere of instability and uncertainty has led even the poorest countries to allocate increasing sums for arms. We all speak of the need to disarm. It is high time we took practical steps. We must continue our efforts to conclude agreements on those partial measures on which some convergence of views has already emerged. Firstly, the dissemination of nuclear weapons must be halted. We must then seek out new possibilities for discussing general disarmament. The resolution which the General Assembly adopted at its twentieth session calling for a world disarmament conference in which all States would participate [resolution 2030 (XX)] pointed out one such possibility.
56. We are convinced that through a common effort we shall be able to accomplish the most urgent task of today: to ensure peace and tackle the real problems of our time. The obstacles are great, but the role of the United Nations and our common responsibility are still greater.