96. In the introduction to his annual report the Secretary-General, after making an objective survey, free from complacency, of present conditions in the international situation as it appears at this time, when the representatives of the States Members of the United Nations are meeting in New York at the Assembly’s twenty-first session, pointed out that “These are conditions which, even if they strongly underline the need for the United Nations, are at the same time not conducive to the most effective action of which the Organization is capable” [A/6301/Add.1, p. 1]. In other words, our Organization, because of international realities, the evolution of which it can influence favourably only in so far as the Member States, particular: the great Powers, provide it with the means to do so, has not lived up to the hopes aroused by its creation twenty-one years ago. This pertinent observation, the obviousness of which some people try too hard to deny, very opportunely brings out the reasons prompting certain circles, despite their good intentions towards the United Nations, to talk about its demise.
97. No one has expressed better than U Thant the anguish and genuine anxiety felt by all who believe in the United Nations and in the universal values it represents. In the letter in which he announced his grave decision not to seek a further term of office [A/6400], U Thant clearly and explicitly stated his reasons for that decision. The Government of the Republic of Guinea fully sympathizes with those reasons. We are, indeed, convinced that the United Nations will continue unendingly to labour under the quasi-permanent crisis resulting from the lack of consonance between the actions of Member States and the Purposes and Principles of the Charter until such time as just, equitable and speedy solutions are found to the war in Viet-Nam, to the dangerous problem of the liberation of southern Africa, to the question of the planning, execution and financing of peace-keeping operations and to the pursuit of effective and just means for the elimination of under-development. Plain common sense shows that without a sincere and unanimous will to put an end to behaviour and acts which seriously impede the normal, harmonious development of peace — that is to say, interference in the domestic affairs of other States, giving rise to conflicts involving more or less bloodshed, and the enslavement of one people by another — the United Nations will never become that magnificent instrument for peace and international co-operation but, on the contrary, will tend to become a mere forum for echoing contradictions and antagonisms, as well as pious hopes, and a factory for the mass production of quickly forgotten resolutions, while it slides irretrievably into the abyss of being ignored and discredited, to suffer an inglorious death.
98. Nevertheless, we all want the United Nations and all its organs to survive and function vigorously and effectively, because we realize that its disappearance would toll the knell of international co-operation and the fruitful dialogue of States with one another; that would be the prelude to the chaos and disaster which would inevitably take hold of the international community, for this is the time when man, with the weapons of mass destruction he has accumulated, holds in his own hands the greatest threat to his own survival, development and well-being, whereas he could, instead, become the architect of the greatest happiness that mankind in its entirety has ever known, if he but used aright the vast wealth of scientific and technological knowledge he has acquired.
99. It is for this reason that all responsible men in all States are duty-bound to turn their minds in the most serious possible way to the main causes of conflict, whether open or latent, so that through an objective and courageous analysis of them they may be able to devise ways and means of reducing these conflicts and progressively eliminating them from the face of the earth.
100. All who have spoken in this general debate have been unanimous in recognizing that of all the conflicts convulsing the world today, the war in Viet-Nam is the most dangerous and the most disturbing, because it could spark off a general conflagration extending well beyond the frontiers of South-East Asia and involving a great part of Asia, perhaps even unleashing a third world war. In other words, the war in Viet-Nam is creating the conditions for a situation which could call into question the very reasons which prompted the creation of our Organization immediately after the Second World War “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind”. No people has known so much of this “untold sorrow” as the martyred people of Viet-Nam, a people which, for a quarter of a century, has been the victim of every form of aggression, from that of Japanese fascism in its desire for territorial expansion, to the aggression generated by an ideological crusade following on an outright colonial war. One might be tempted today to seek the causes for this grave breach of the peace in South-East Asia, this direct threat to world peace embodied in the semi-colonial war now ravaging Viet-Nam and threatening the other parts of former French Indo-China, that country which was so badly decolonized, but which, nevertheless, set in motion the process of the downfall of the French colonial empire. One might also be tempted to apportion the blame among the parties to this conflict. The conflict in Viet-Nam could, indeed, have remained within the limits of a civil war engaging the political factions of a country seeking its stability and its own road to development in social justice, had it not been for the direct intervention of the United States of America on the side of one of these factions. We may deplore the state of affairs that led to tills direct intervention by one of the two greatest military and economic Powers of the world in the imbroglio in South Viet-Nam, an intervention that has gone beyond its original bounds to take such violent and abominable form as the bombing of the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam, the fatherland of President Ho Chi Minh, that apostle of decolonization and of independence for enslaved countries. Reality, however, cannot be ignored. It consists in a courageous and determined quest for means of ending this foreign intervention, so that the Viet-Namese people may at long last know peace and security. Among the numerous proposals made for this purpose, the three-point programme suggested by Secretary-General U Thant merits particular attention. This three-point programme consists in the cessation of the bombing of North Viet-Nam, the reduction of military operations and the inauguration of negotiations in which all the belligerents would take part, including the National Liberation Front of South Viet- Nam, which, without any doubt, is more representative in the political scene in South Viet-Nam than is the junta of generals. For us, this three-point programme would constitute a reasonable approach in so far as the negotiations contemplated lead to the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Viet-Nam and to the effective exercise of the right of self-determination by the Viet-Namese people as a whole, with the aim of achieving its real independence and unity in accordance with the 1954 Geneva Agreements.
101. The war in Viet-Nam, with its trail of victims-among them, the detente, decolonization and the development of the “third world”-gives us a living example of the great dangers inherent in foreign intervention in the domestic affairs of sovereign States and of the absolute necessity scrupulously to respect the provisions of the Charter in this respect and those of the Declaration, adopted at the twentieth session of the General Assembly, on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty [resolution 2131 (XX)]. The Viet-Namese tragedy also teaches us the imperative lesson that we must respect international agreements, such as the one concluded in Geneva in 1954 by the parties to the conflict in Indo-China and by other Powers capable of guaranteeing the peace, security and neutrality of Viet-Nam. In the forefront of those Powers is the People’s Republic of China, for the security of that great country is constantly threatened by any conflict which has part of Asia as its theatre and involve a great Power whose relations with China and unfriendly and even amount to provocation.
102. It is obvious, moreover, how absurd is the policy of trying to keep the great Republic of China outside of all international organizations directed to the maintenance and development of peace and to the achievement of fruitful international co-operation-a Republic which, whether one likes it or not, casts its shadow not only over the whole of Asia and over all questions concerning that part of the world, but also over all the great topical problems for which solutions are sought both in the United Nations and elsewhere. It is plain that our Organization will not be able to function fully and discharge its responsibilities effectively so long as States, for ideological reasons or in order to maintain hegemony, violate the principle of universality, which remains one of the essential and ultimate purposes of the United Nations. As the Secretary-General so well put it in the introduction to his annual report:
“It is impossible, moreover, to view some of these outstanding problems— whether it is the position of the United Nations with regard to the crisis in South-East Asia, or the lack of progress in disarmament-without relating them to the fact that the United Nations has not yet attained the goal of universality of membership, In the long run the Organization cannot be expected to function to full effect if one fourth of the human race is not allowed to participate in its deliberations.” [A/6301/Add.1, p. 15.]
103. The considerable harm caused to us by the attitude of those States which, with so little clear reasoning oppose restoring to the People’s Republic of China its legitimate rights in the United Nations could not be brought out more eloquently. In this math' — it must be clearly realized that there exists only one China, with a part of its national territory, the island of Taiwan, occupied by a regime which would have already been swept out of that temporary refuge but for the support of foreign military forces. This means that the prerequisite for restoring to the People’s Republic of China its lawful rights in the United Nations is the expulsion of the representatives of the Chiang Kai-shek regime from all the bodies in which it claims to speak on behalf of China and, accordingly, depriving it of its seat as a permanent member of the Security Council, a seat reserved for the great Powers alone. The absence of the People’s Republic of China from the United Nations, it must be said, does great disservice to the interests of our Organization and the international community than to those of the great country victimized by this insufferable ostracism.
104. Our hope would be that all States whose existence cannot be doubted may, no matter what juridical considerations there may be regarding the different interpretations of their international status, be associated with the work of our Organization. It is not natural that in the divided countries only those parts which are recognized by the West should enjoy the status of observers in the United Nations, while the other parts are simply ignored. Such a state of affairs impels certain circles to treat our Organization as an instrument of Western policy, whereas our will is that the United Nations should be the instrument of no country or group of countries, but only of the whole international community.
105. Because the search for solutions capable of strengthening the peace-keeping efforts of the United Nations has reached deadlock in regard to both their conception and their execution and financing, there is an uneasiness in the Organization today, which it would be vain to pretend not to see. Apart from the question of financing itself, there is the more important question of the usefulness and efficacy of the United Nations in its main task of maintaining international peace and security. While we hope that voluntary contributions will soon alleviate the budgetary deficit, it looks as though we shall have to continue making efforts, not only through the intermediary of the Special Committee on Peace-keeping Operations, but also at the level of the General Assembly itself. In this connexion it would be advisable, in our opinion, to show a little more interest this year in the Irish initiative, which at least has the merit of offering practical suggestions for possible solutions to the question of peace-keeping operations as a whole. In the same connexion we should be gratified at the results of the work of the Ad Hoc Committee of Experts to Examine the finances of the United Nations and the Specialized Agencies. Its recommendations [A/6343] will, when they have been examined and approved by the General Assembly, help towards sounder management of the finances of our Organization. The achievement and maintenance of peace, as well as the development of international co-operation, are conditioned by other factors, among which the fight against under-development is not one of the least. The disastrous economic situation of the developing countries, a situation characterized by a constant decline in the prices of primary commodities, which at the same time are in competition with synthetic products manufactured by the developed countries, should cause us all, developed as well as under-developed countries, real concern. The failure of the United Nations Cocoa Conference and the United Nations Sugar Conference has been a most convincing illustration of the negative attitude of certain industrialized countries when it is a question of contemplating the stabilization of primary commodity prices. Here we must pay a tribute to the experts of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development for having proposed practical solutions in relation to the questions of compensatory financing, solutions designed to prevent the development programme of the developing countries from being upset by unforeseen losses of export revenue.
106. Moreover, the growth rate, for which a target of 5 per cent was set for the United Nations Development Decade-a target which was in any case too low, in view of the vast needs of the developing countries — has not passed the 4 per cent mark. Aid to the developing countries from developed countries fell from 0.83 per cent in 1961 to 0.69 in 1965. These figures give an idea of the distinct slow-down in the transfer of capital from developed to developing countries.
107. Be that as it may, it should be said here that external aid, however useful, can be no more than a support for local efforts at economic development. The economic development of the developing countries must depend essentially on national efforts. Let us remember in this connexion that there can be no real economic development without the will to develop and awareness of what it implies. As President Ahmed Sekou Toure said recently, awareness of the need for development, the will to development and the mental outlook required for development are determining forces in their influence on the object and content of the choices promoting the evolution of man and society. Such awareness, such will, such a mental outlook are achieved only when young States devote themselves to transforming the social and economic structures inherited from the colonial system and imperialist exploitation. This necessary social revolution must not be effected for the profit of a feudal oligarchy with a set mentality of exploiting the majority of the people, whose well-being must be the ultimate concern.
108. In too many countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America, these oligarchies continue to set up as agents for foreign interests in contempt of the fundamental interests of the peoples, through a neo-colonialist or neo-imperialist economic policy. So long as such economic policies persist, there can be no reasonable expectation oi political stability, which is tire essential condition for any economic development, this, far from consisting in the spectacular display of apparent but artificial well-being of a privileged class, is, on the contrary, an imperative requirement, a long-term commitment expressed, not through extravagant achievements affecting no qualitative transformation of a given society, but through the material, spiritual and moral satisfaction of all the components of that society in an harmonious and balanced development.
109. In the majority of the under-developed countries, most of them characterized by micro-economies, economic development, which must be based on criteria of profitability and the market, can find its full meaning only in regional economic integration. To be viable, national economies must necessarily expand their markets. This policy of regional integration, to which my Government fully subscribes, within the framework of the Senegal River Riparian States Committee, the West African free exchange zone and the Organization of African Unity, must be conceived primarily for the betterment of the peoples inhabiting the region concerned. In the specific case of Africa, the OAU provides encouraging stimulus for the introduction of this policy of integration into the practice of African planners, in close co-operation with the Economic Commission for Africa. We hope that, with the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, this policy of regional integration will be implemented on a steadily expanding scale, at the level of geographic regions-which must not be confused with zones of influence or with linguistic, cultural or merely neo-colonial preserves.
110. But can we really allow ourselves to think of harmonious economic development without being somewhat concerned about the political stability which is the condition for it? The recent upheavals in certain African States have not, no matter what attempts are made at mystification in order to conceal their true character, been such as to promote this harmonious economic development, not to speak of all the harm that they have done to Africa in its fight against colonialism and racialism, the scourges of our continent. So long as racialism and colonialism persist in Africa, that continent will never be Hole to make its full contribution to the quest for peace. For decolonization and the elimination of racism constitute, before disarmament and the non-proliferation of nuclear and thermonuclear weapons, the major problems of Africa and the inescapable prerequisites for the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security in that great continent situated at the crossroads of other continents, the stability and security as well as the development of which it influences in large measure.
111. Belated decolonization of the rest of the African continent, achieved only through violence, might have incalculable consequences for the peace and security of the whole comment, a situation that will not fail to have the greatest repercussions throughout the world. The phase which the African revolution of liberation is now passing through is one which should be a constant source of anxiety to all who are devoted to the cause of world peace.
112. Behind the bastions which they have erected for themselves, mainly in southern Africa at the frontiers of the two Congos, Zambia, Tanzania and Malawi, the upholders of white supremacy are resolutely engaged in a policy of violence towards the overwhelming African majority in order to perpetuate their system of exploitation and of exorbitant, illegitimate privileges. The behaviour of these settlers, whether in Mozambique, Angola or Rhodesia, whether in South West Africa or in South Africa, indeed in the three territories under British Mandate Bechuanakmd, which has now become Botswana, Basutoland, which has now become Lesotho, and Swaziland-clearly prove that there is a de facto, if not de jure alliance among the colonialist and racist forces in this rich and attractive part of the African continent; their role in the ferocious economic exploitation of the wealth and the people clearly proves that they are nothing but mercenaries, policemen richly paid to defend the interests of Financial and economic circles and of certain Western Governments.
113. There are accordingly good grounds for seeing the situation of the colonies and semi-colonies of southern Africa as a single problem, the solution of which calls for a single struggle. The character of that struggle is henceforth dictated by two factors: one is the obstinate refusal of the settlers to contemplate a fruitful dialogue with the nationalist forces in order to find a negotiated solution to the problem of the liberation of these countries, while the other is the helplessness of the United Nations caused by systematic obstruction on the part of the? great Western Powers, which are members of the Security Council, of any positive action capable of setting in motion a process of peaceful liberation. In other words, this struggle has now become an armed struggle, methodically organized and resolutely supported by all freedom-loving States; in keeping with the resolutions of the General Assembly, States-all States-are invited to give material and moral aid to the liberation movements in Africa. By systematically aiding the armed struggle in Angola and Mozambique we create the best possible conditions for the development and success of the same struggle in Rhodesia, South West Africa and South Africa. As Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, the Prime Minister of Singapore, recently said, “. .. let a national liberation front in the image of the Viet-Cong be constituted in Rhodesia-and I would add, to some extent throughout southern Africa-with the support of the African countries and all their friends, and the solution of the problem of the liberation of southern Africa will be accelerated thereby'’. If this is done, it is to be hoped only that no great Power will try and Find I know not what kind of communism in it, or will come and take part in this struggle on the side of the oppressors in the name of a so-called “defence of freedom”.
114. As far as we are concerned, we are aware that no one, not even the United Nations, is going to liberate Africa for the Africans. On the contrary, Africa will be liberated by the Africans. That is why, rather than merely blaming and denouncing the non-African Powers, the Africans must examine their own consciences and find effective methods of assisting the liberation movements which will have to be organized as a consequence. That is the price that must be paid before the United Nations will take decisive measures, after factories, dams, mines and plantations belonging to the trading and economic partners of South Africa, Portugal and Rhodesia, or financed by those partners, have exploded or been burnt under the devastating blows dealt by African-type Viet-Cong. It must be unequivocally said that peaceful solutions to the problem of liberating southern Africa are becoming more and more elusive so tar as the international community is concerned. One does not need to be an expert in violence to understand that armed struggle is becoming more and more imperative as the sole solution to this grave problem.
115. The United Nations, for its part, can still continue to alert world public opinion and perhaps prepare to face, in the more or less near future, the chaos and devastation which will ravage these bastions of white supremacy. Does the United Kingdom ask for United Nations sanctions against Rhodesia? Let them be granted. Does the Portuguese Government ask to have conversations with the Secretary-General about its colonies? Let those conversations take place, provided their object is to find ways and means for the effective exercise of the right of self-determination of the Portuguese colonies. Does South Africa seek to engulf the world in a torrent of mendacious and malicious propaganda? Let it be thwarted by United Nations action and let our Organization persist in seeking peaceful solutions to the problem of apartheid within the framework of Chapter VII of the Charter concerning enforcement measures.
116. None of this alters the fact that the war in southern Africa, which, we fear, will become more and more a racial war, has already started in Angola and Mozambique and must henceforth move towards Cape Town, with the assistance of all the States, throughout the world, that love freedom and desire and brotherhood of man and with the blessing of the United Nations. This war of liberation has already thrown Portugal out of half the territory of so-called Portuguese Guinea. There is no doubt that Portugal will suffer its Dien Bien Phu in this small enclave of western Africa which has been arrogantly driven into the heart of the Republic of Guinea with all the attendant provocation and intrusions which are liable to entail a violent confrontation between the Portuguese soldiery and the Guinean forces.
117. We, for our part, had real hopes for the independence of the three territories under British Mandate-Basutoland, Swaziland and Bechuanaland. We believed that the international community had only to give its material and moral support to those countries for them to preserve their independence and territorial integrity and that it had only to help their economic and social development for them to enjoy real independence and exert a salutary influence over South Africa, through the example of democratic societies, free of all discrimination, which they would give. But we cannot suppress our grave disquiet at the trend apparent in those countries which have Governments that seem anxious to become the accomplices of South Africa and Portugal -countries for which a Head of Government has already become the spokesman, during a humiliating visit to the former Prime Minister of South Africa, Mr. Verwoerd. We address an appeal to those States to show courage and determination to safeguard their independence and to trust the international community and their African brother States. It is certainly not by becoming or by acting as disguised Bantustans that they will aid the victory of the African cause and the achievement of their peoples’ legitimate aspirations.
118. Recent colonial events have thrown French Somaliland, one of the last colonial possessions of France, into the forefront of world concern. That territory, which occupies a geographical situation of obvious strategic importance, has the right, like all other colonial territories, to enjoy complete and unrestricted independence. To those who see fit here and now to engage in blackmail against the peoples of that small country, threatening it with what they call “Guinean-type” independence, we would loudly proclaim that, for our part, we wish French Somaliland a “Guinean-type” independence, for it is real, genuine independence, which has allowed Guinea to destroy all the structures and set about eliminating all the after-effects of colonialism, so that the Guinean nation can consistently and harmoniously develop in a real national democracy. “Guinean-type” independence will always be regarded by discerning Africans as a boon offered to a people anxious to free itself completely and to develop according to its own methods and in its own interests.
119. In regard to the decolonization of Africa, we are deeply convinced that the African States, in the difficult phase which they are going through, must become vigilant and must faithfully apply the decisions of the Organization of African Unity without hesitation or evasion. That is the only way we shall give strong, unswerving support to our brothers in southern Africa and elsewhere in their effort to free themselves from the oppression and exploitation of which they are victims.
120. The Government of the Republic of Guinea was one of the first to express publicly its great admiration and its unreserved support for our Secretary-General, U Thant. That shows how much we regret his decision not to seek another term of office. Nevertheless, as I had occasion to say at the beginning of this statement, we agree with the reasons given by U Thant. We consider that, rather than renewing their confidence in U Thant and reiterating their appeals to him to remain in office, Member States should evince a little more justice towards him and a little more respect for his conscience by giving him reasons and means to stay. We believe that there are States, in particular certain great Powers, which have those means. We say to them: find those means for U Thant and give him those reasons unequivocally, and we do not doubt that the Secretary-General will remain at his post. If, unhappily, those great Powers are not furnish any real proof of their will to persuade the Secretary-General to reverse his decision, then we shall undergo a much more serious and prolonged crisis. Indeed, whoever may be elected to succeed U Thant, he too will have to be given grounds of assurance that he will be able to discharge his high functions as Secretary-General under conditions and with the means that seem to have been so lacking to our Secretary-General during the last part of his term of office.
121. These were U Thant’s words in concluding the introduction to his annual report.
“At the same time, I believe that the ideological differences that have divided the world are beginning to show signs of losing their sharp edge, and 1 approach the end of my term of office with some confidence that, over the years, the United Nations will prove to be the means by which mankind will be able not only to survive but also to achieve a great human synthesis.” [A/630l/Add.1. sect. X.]
That is also the hope of the Government of the Republic of Guinea and my delegation expresses the most fervent wishes for its realization in the interest of the human race and in the interest of future generations.