The joy and pride that my delegation feels at the election of Prince Wan Waithayakon are too sincere for me to fail to extend to him my belated congratulations. His unanimous election was the best possible proof of our confidence and a well-deserved tribute to the high qualities which he has shown during his long and brilliant career as a diplomat and statesman.
120. My object in taking part in the general debate is merely to say a few words about the recent events which have taken place since the publication of the Secretary-General’s Annual Report on the Work of the Organization [A/3137]. In my opinion the questions dealt with in this report can best be discussed in the committees, where my delegation will not fail to express its views on these matters as they come up. The recent events to which I have just referred are the Suez crisis and the situation in Hungary.
121. Let us first speak of the Suez question. Last year, during the tenth session of the General Assembly, we noted with satisfaction that there had been a relaxation of international tension. This improvement in international relations had encouraged us, with good reason, to view the future with moderate optimism, but the nationalization of the Universal Suez Canal Company produced a violent reaction on the part of certain interested parties and threatened to transform certain differences of opinion into implacable opposition.
122. Attempts were made to settle this growing conflict outside the United Nations, but these well-meaning efforts failed to achieve the desired success. We ourselves took a very active part in these attempts, both in the London Conferences of last summer and in the Five-Power Committee, and we spared no effort to solve this problem in the spirit of the Charter, that is, by peaceful means.
123. As I have just said, these efforts did not meet with complete success, but at least we had the satisfaction of having prevented an armed conflict. Our satisfaction appeared well-founded, for when the Governments of France and of the United Kingdom decided to refer the Suez question to the Security Council we thought with good reason that they were expressing their willingness to accept the decision of the Council.
124. At the end of last October, when we were hoping for an equitable solution of the Suez problem on the basis of an agreement reached in the Security Council, and when we thought that the idea of resorting to force had been definitively abandoned, we were suddenly confronted by Israel’s aggression against Egypt, followed by a violation of Egypt’s sovereignty and territorial integrity by the military forces of France and the United Kingdom.
125. What were the motives for this military intervention at a time when we seemed to be making progress toward a peaceful solution? We are right to ask this question, for at the very moment when this military intervention was taking place the Secretary-General was still offering his good offices for the purpose of exploring and defining the existing possibilities for solving the Suez problem in accordance with the requirements laid down by the Security Council. In his report [S/3596] on this subject, the Secretary-General noted that the Egyptian Government had expressed full agreement on all the questions raised in the negotiations, except for one point which, in our opinion, could also have been settled satisfactorily if the parties to the dispute had only shown sufficient goodwill and mutual understanding.
126. Our surprise was all the greater since these flagrant violations of the United Nations Charter and these attacks on the prestige and influence of our Organization, came from two States which had permanent seats in the Security Council and for that reason bore a greater share of responsibility for maintaining international peace and security. But that is not all: these are the same States that prevented the Security Council from taking the necessary steps when the question of Israel’s aggression was brought before it. Since the Council was dead-locked, there was no alternative but to refer the matter to the General Assembly itself. Therefore, we warmly supported the proposal to convene an emergency special session which enabled the Assembly to take quick action to impose a cease-fire and request the withdrawal of the invading forces.
127. While this action was being taken in the United Nations, the Iranian Government was intensifying its efforts, in co-operation with the Governments of Iraq, Pakistan and Turkey, to secure the evacuation of Egyptian territory at the earliest possible date.
128. Anxious to preserve peace in that region, the heads of the four Governments met at Teheran, where they considered the situation carefully and concluded their deliberations with a public declaration of their position in the matter. This declaration, dated 8 November 1956, condemned Israel’s aggression and called upon the latter to withdraw its armed forces behind the armistice lines immediately. It also expressed the grave concern of the four Governments at the Anglo-French military action in Egypt and their fear that that action might weaken the only world Organization which offered any hope for peace and justice to the world. It asked the United Kingdom and French Governments to end hostilities immediately, to withdraw their forces from Egypt and to respect fully the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Egypt.
129. The four Powers again declared that the Suez Canal dispute ought to be settled by peaceful negotiation and under the auspices of the United Nations. They stated that any settlement of that dispute ought to guarantee, inter alia, freedom of passage through the Canal, while respecting the full sovereignty of Egypt. While reaffirming their faith in the principles of the United Nations Charter, the four Powers expressed their condemnation of aggression of any kind.
130. Finally these Powers noted with satisfaction the message received from the Government of the United Kingdom through its ambassador in Teheran to the effect that the representations made by these Powers to the United Kingdom had had a certain influence upon the latter’s decision to agree to an immediate cease-fire.
131. We have reviewed the main points of this declaration in order to show that these four Powers, which are co-signatories of the Baghdad Pact and at the same time loyal to the principles of the United Nations Charter, did not hesitate to condemn Israel’s acts of aggression as well as the military intervention of the United Kingdom, once they had decided that the latter had acted in violation of the Charter.
132. This conduct of the four Powers clearly shows that their association under the Baghdad Pact is of a defensive character and can hardly possess the aggressive aims which have sometimes been unjustly imputed to it. Contrary to the allegations of those who believe that the Baghdad Pact is merely a device created by certain Powers for the purpose of subjugating the peoples of the Middle East, the four Parties to the Pact have proved that in reality it is an instrument of peace to be used in carrying out the aims of the Charter and that these four Powers are no less persevering than the others in opposing colonialism and defending the right of peoples to self-determination.
133. With regard to what is being done in the United Nations to settle the Suez question, I am happy to note that the Assembly took the necessary decisions as soon as the matter was brought before it and that it is closely following the subsequent developments.
134. Let us now turn to the situation in Hungary. In this matter, as in the Egyptian problem, we expressed ourselves in the Security Council in favour of convening an emergency special session of the General Assembly. Here again we had the satisfaction of noting that the Assembly acted promptly and judiciously. Here again we supported the resolutions which were taken. One of these [1007 (ES-II)] concerned assistance for the Hungarian people. So one could object to measures for the relief of human suffering. As a matter of fact, contributions are already coming in from all quarters. The other resolution [1004 (ES-II) ] was to send impartial observers to study the situation on the spot. We have heard charges and countercharges with respect to the events in Hungary. What better action could we take than call for an investigation on the spot into the truth or otherwise of what has been said on both sides? I appeal to the Hungarian Government to give a favourable reply to the Secretary-General’s repeated requests that United Nations observers should be admitted to Hungarian territory.
135. This is our position with regard to the two most important and urgent problems now before us. I should like to add that for us the cause of liberty is one and indivisible. We condemn aggression and intervention against the freedom of a people from whatever quarter.
136. We believe that the impulse toward freedom is irresistible, however great the strength of the Powers that try to oppose it, and we hope that all Governments will recognize this fact and understand once and for all that genuine friendship between nations can exist only on a basis of mutual respect for each other’s sovereignty, and that political influence imposed by force of arms can create only hatred and discord.
137. In spite of the dangers which they entail for the maintenance of world peace and security, the tragic events in Hungary and the Middle East have enabled the United Nations to make remarkable progress in certain fields the full scope of which nobody can ignore.
138. We are especially pleased to see the creation i)f the United Nations Emergency Force under the auspices of the United Nations. Although the powers of that Force are limited, they possess considerable importance. Here we should like to pay tribute to the great accomplishment of the Canadian Minister of External Affairs and the tireless efforts of the Secretary-General, who in a very short time has succeeded in organizing, pursuant to the General Assembly’s resolutions, a force considerable detachments of which are already in Egypt and ready to carry out the duties assigned to them.
139. To be sure, that Force is not the international army which was envisaged by the Charter. The Organization does not yet have an army which is capable of making its decisions respected, because the permanent members of the Security Council have been unable to reach agreement. It is none the less true that the creation of this international police force marks a great step forward and will make it easier, later on, to organize that international army without which the Organization can never enforce its decisions completely, in spite of its great moral influence.
140. We must also note a resurgence of vitality in the United Nations, which has shown itself able to mobilize world public opinion against the use of force.
141. In concluding this review, I should like to take a look at the future and tell you what lessons, in my opinion, should be drawn from the events which have just taken place. First, we all ought to make a sincere effort to solve the problem of the Suez Canal in a way which will guarantee the right of free passage while observing due respect for Egyptian sovereignty. Second, we ought to make a practical effort to bring about a fair settlement of the Palestine question. However, it is obvious that no final settlement of these two problems can be reached until the invasion forces have evacuated Egyptian territory. The United Nations will then be in a much more favourable position to assist the interested parties to arrive at a just and permanent solution.
142. We believe that sooner or later the right of peoples to self-determination in all those countries which do not yet enjoy independence will be recognized and that the colonial Powers will be better advised to abandon voluntarily an obsolete attitude which no longer meets the requirements of our time. On the other hand, we must admit the necessity of settling all problems of this kind under the auspices of the United Nations, so that the legitimate aspirations of these peoples can be realized without resorting to violence.
143. In particular, now that the Algerian question has been included in the Assembly’s agenda, fortunately without any opposition from France, an effort should be made to solve this problem in a way which will be consistent with the legitimate aspirations of the Algerian people and which will help to restore peace and security in that part of the world.
144. In spite of the recent sad events which have widened the gulf between the African-Asian peoples and the colonial Powers, we think that we ought to exert all our efforts toward bringing the peoples of Asia and Africa closer to the peoples of the West. We must, indeed, acknowledge that we urgently need the technical science and capital of the more advanced countries in order to speed up our own economic development and, in particular, our industrialization pro-gramme. The West, on the other hand, needs some of our raw materials, since without them its industry would be unable to function. We can serve our common interests only by restoring mutual confidence and sincere international co-operation. We ourselves have neglected no opportunity to contribute to that cooperation and we shall be very glad to serve as a bridge between the West and the various peoples whose cooperation is not only a guarantee of international peace and security but also helps to improve their own living conditions.
145. We are very glad that the Government of the United States is making similar efforts and is trying to convince its allies that sincere and friendly cooperation is the only course open to us, and that fortunately such a course will prove profitable to all. The United States Government has clearly understood that it is only by following such a wise policy that we can bridge the gulf between East and West.
146. In closing, I should like to repeat that it is in the interest of all of us to respect the principles of the Charter and the decisions of the United Nations. By so doing we shall help to strengthen the prestige of our Organization, which, in present circumstances, is still the sole hope of humanity. Those who complain today about some of the recommendations passed by the General Assembly might be the first to invoke them tomorrow, for if aggression is not banished forever, they may be the next victims.