1. This being the first occasion on which my delegation has spoken at this twenty-first session of the General Assembly, I should like to express to you, Mr. President, my sincere felicitations on your unanimous election to your important post.
2. I should like further to take this opportunity to express our thanks to the Secretary-General, U Thant, for the outstanding service which he has performed during his term of office. His performance has been recognized by all Member States, and my Government wishes to associate itself with the unanimous appeal to him to remain in his position for another term.
3. The United Nations has been functioning for over twenty years with considerable positive results which it is not necessary to enumerate at this session. On the other hand, it has failed in some of its tasks or been unable to achieve the desired results. No individual is perfect and able to fulfil all his ambitions, and the same applies to groups and organizations. None of them can fully realize all its expectations. When evaluating performance, one should look first at the successes rather than the failures. One task successfully completed may suffice to justify the existence of the organization which carried it out. The evaluation of an organization such as the United Nations is often determined by emotional attitudes rather than practical performance, which latter, in my opinion, should be the decisive factor in making such an evaluation.
4. The tasks of the United Nations may be divided into two groups: current problems that require immediate solutions, and long-range questions. The current problems may vary greatly, but the most important consist of preventing armed conflict between nations, either by forestalling it or, if it has already begun, by halting it. The United Nations has faced problems of both kinds, some with success, others with failure. I believe the success to be so important as to render the United Nations invaluable to mankind, in spite of the problems which it has so far been unable to solve.
5. Which, then, are the problems of the present moment? Viet-Nam; the tense International situation; the relations between Israel and the Arab States; Cyprus; Rhodesia; apartheid; the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples; and assistance to newly Independent nations.
6. The question of disarmament, and especially of the banning of nuclear weapons, will no doubt take a long time to solve and is not, therefore, exclusively a problem of the moment, although it is of supreme importance.
7. In short, it might be said that the solutions to these problems fall into two categories: first, prevention or de-escalation of armed conflict and, second, aid for the developing nations towards a better life — and this applies to all nations to a different degree. I shall not discuss these particular problems further. That has been done so well by speakers who have preceded me that I have little to add. We all wish that the war in Viet-Nam could stop; that world tension could diminish, that Arab- Israeli relations could improve; that apartheid could disappear; that the standard of living could be raised in both the developing and other countries. Indeed, the United Nations is constantly seeking solutions to these problems by means of such measures as seem most likely to succeed.
8. Although, as I said, I shall not discuss these questions in detail, I should like to comment on some of them.
9. We Icelanders have for centuries been an unarmed nation, maintaining no armed forces of our own. For this reason we have been unable to contribute troops to the peace-keeping operations of the United Nations, Nevertheless, Iceland has shown its support of these activities by contributing money for this purpose. During the past year, for example, Iceland contributed the equivalent of almost half a United States dollar per inhabitant of our country. Peace-keeping is one of the most important activities of the United Nations and has brought results which indicate that, in many instances, it should be strengthened still further. In the opinion of the Government of Iceland, it must be regretted, therefore, that so far some States Members of the United Nations have been unwilling to participate in this activity by making appropriate financial contributions and have thus endangered the solvency of the Organization.
10. It would be preferable for the United Nations to have at its disposal a mobile military force which could be sent wherever and whenever it might be needed to prevent the outbreak of hostilities. The financing of such a force should not be an insurmountable obstacle to 119 nations, since individual States maintain for themselves armies of scores of thousands or millions of men with the most modern equipment. Such a force probably could not prevent conflict between great Powers, but it should be able to forestall limited wars, which are always in danger of spreading and becoming confrontations of the great Powers, with the gravest of consequences.
11. The allocation of the cost of peace-keeping activities among individual States is, of course, a difficult task, yet not so difficult as to be impossible, as long as the will is not lacking.
12. Peace-keeping must always be the principal task of the United Nations because, without peace, everything else loses its purpose. If the peace is lost and war breaks out, United Nations endeavours for a better life are meaningless. Therefore, its primary aim must be the preservation of peace.
13. Second to this task is, indisputably, the so-called war against hunger. It has often been stated that a large part of the human race receives insufficient nourishment for maintaining life. Special attention has been called to the fact that certain vital food ingredients, such as protein, are seriously lacking. A great effort has been made to solve this problem, on the initiative of the United Nations, but without satisfactory results.
14. The reason why I mention this is that my country, Iceland, is a large producer of fish and thus a supplier of the food most needed. In this respect, two important facts have come to light: in the first place, a large percentage of the fish catches in many parts of the world is used for animal fodder instead of for direct human consumption. From discussions with Dr. Sen, Director-General of FAO — a specialized agency in the United Nations family which has done very useful work — I have learned that FAO is interested in changing this situation. For that purpose we must have technical and scientific research, and this must have our support, for the benefit of those who suffer from lack of protein. I have no doubt that this work will lead to great results if it is given sufficient support. The second fact, no less a cause of anxiety, is that the introduction of new and advanced technology in fishing has Increased the danger that the fish-stocks can no longer withstand such exploitation. Already there are unmistakable signs of depletion, for example in the North Atlantic, where in many areas the catch per unit of fishing effort has diminished even if the total catch has grown, owing to greatly increased participation in the fishing. That is a real danger, if it is not forestalled. The United Nations has previously dealt with that problem and I should like to call attention to the fact that action may again become necessary if over-fishing is to be prevented.
15. One of the problems with which the United Nations has successfully dealt is that of the Law of the Sea. In that field a great deal of work has been done by the United Nations — in the Sixth Committee, in the International Law Commission and in United Nations-sponsored international conferences held at Rome in 1955 y and at Geneva in 1958 and 1960. When that work was started, coastal jurisdiction over fisheries was disastrously inadequate and, in the case of Iceland, for instance, depletion of fish-stocks was imminent. Through the work of the United Nations in that field, twelve-mile fishery limits became overwhelmingly recognized as a general rule and valuable coastal resources were saved, at least temporarily. The value of that work in the United Nations deserves mention. Although that is a fact, it must at the same time be realized and admitted that further work is required and that the existing methods and solutions must be further utilized and fortified.
16. In many areas of the oceans of the world intensified fishing and more effective fisheries techniques have resulted in diminishing yields per unit of effort. The development in some of the big fisheries in the North Atlantic gives rise to great concern. There has been a substantial increase in the fishing effort in the years since the war, but that has not been accompanied by a similar increase in the total catch and in several cases there has been a marked decrease in the total catch. That holds particularly true for the stocks of cod in the North Atlantic Ocean, which is the most important species of demersal fish in that area. The stocks of cod in the Barents Sea, Iceland, Greenland and Newfoundland areas all show more or less clear signs of over-exploitation. The cod stock around Iceland can be taken as a typical example. Already in 1952 the first steps to protect that species and others were taken through the closure of several important nursery grounds and that area was extended in 1958. Those measures have been of undeniable value for several species, but, as far as the cod is concerned, the conclusion is inevitably that the measures taken were insufficient and came too late. Scientific investigations show that a substantial part of the present catch consists of small, immature fish taken outside the present fishery limits. Mesh regulations have not given sufficient protection for the stocks in the area, so the next step obviously must be to make arrangements for a further reduction of the fishing effort, particularly with regard to small immature fish. As far as international co-operation through the Atlantic Fisheries Commissions can save the situation, such action should be started without delay. All aspects of the problem and ways and means for solving it are now under study in my country. Experience has shown that these problems can be solved through international co-operation. At any rate, I would repeat that the record shows that the United Nations can count its work in that field among its constructive and valuable achievements.
17. Fisheries may not seem a very serious problem on the world scene, yet they are an important element in the war against hunger, which must be one of the major tasks of the United Nations now and in the future, We are all occupied by the crises of the day which frequently are so difficult that the United Nations seems powerless to resolve them—or at least some of them. But some of the less pressing questions, with which the United Nations can deal much more effectively, may in the long run become great issues of our time.
18. I shall make no proposals at this time, but I do take the liberty of pointing out that the problem of conserving the resources of the sea does exist, and requires solution. The Icelanders have been a fishing nation for centuries. We have been able, in times of peace and in times of war, to provide others with abundant and nutritious food. But we have always followed the basic principle of not depleting the fish- stocks and protecting the young and growing fish in order to secure continued, natural fishing with increasing rather than decreasing yields. It seems to me that an international effort for that purpose is needed. I can see no organization more likely than the United Nations to take the initiative in the matter. The United Nations must again pay attention to this question, as it has done previously with good results.
19. We in Iceland feel very strongly that we can contribute most to the welfare of humanity by urging international co-operation for constructive exploitation of the riches of the oceans. We feel that the matter is urgent and important. For that reason I have taken the time of this Assembly to discuss it.