Before I begin my statement, let me join all the speakers before me in congratulating the President on his unanimous election to the high office of President of the eleventh session of the General Assembly. I do so with particular pleasure, not only because of his renowned dedication to the cause of the United Nations, so fitting to the high office of the presidency, not only because of his gracious personality, which is so highly esteemed, but also because he comes from a country and a people so closely related to mine. His high office is one upon which my Government and people can, indeed, look with pride and gratitude.
84. Our gratitude also extends to the fact that he is presiding over a General Assembly which is much larger than the previous one, due to the admission of no fewer than nineteen new Member States from Asia, Africa and Europe. This has made the United Nations more representative of the world’s peoples, marking a significant step towards the universality of the United Nations. The participation of these new Members in our common labour has certainly added to the responsibility and authority of the United Nations. Undoubtedly, it will be stimulating for the growth of international co-operation and understanding, as envisaged in the Charter. It is our earnest hope that the independent countries still outside the United Nations, and others who may soon gain their independence, will be admitted, as soon as possible, as Members of this Organization.
85. I think not all of us here appreciate the benefits — if not direct, then indirect; if not immediate, then ultimate — of bringing more countries, more representatives of sovereign nations, into the deliberations, labours and activities of this world body. The resulting wide exchange of views would not only benefit the country and people concerned, but it would serve no less our goal of co-operation and understanding among all nations, so imperative for the promotion of peace in the world. The exclusion of a nation from the work of the United Nations, in our view, can only be harmful to the cause of real and lasting peace.
86. That is why my Government regrets that the most populous country in the world and the most important factor for stability in Asia, the People’s Republic of China, is still excluded from our common effort. I am confident, however, that this underestimation of the work, purposes and influence of the United Nations will soon be rectified.
87. The eleventh session of the General Assembly has been convened at a time beset by serious dangers to world peace. The two emergency special sessions of the General Assembly, called in order to deal with the aggression against Egypt and the intervention in Hungary, have cast an ominous shadow over the start of this session. It makes only more difficult and precarious our common endeavour to maintain and promote peace. The issues at stake in these events, which have stirred up with greater intensity the unrest and conflicts in the world, are indeed so grave that they are bound to influence — if not dominate — the deliberations of this Assembly on the many items inscribed on its agenda.
88. Yet these two events — the aggression against Egypt and the intervention in Hungary — should be seen as parts or aspects of a much wider problem. They represent, in my opinion, only the violent outburst of tensions brought about by the struggle between the old concept of power — of power interests — and the new concept of the freedom and equality of nations, of the equal right of all peoples and nations to seek a better life in a new world society, of the search for a new, more respectful relationship between the weak and the strong, between the strong and the weak.
89. In the dark days of 1945, when the Charter of the United Nations was written, mankind was desperately groping for the beacon of light. A new world, a brave new world, a new society was to be found — indeed, to be created — to lift mankind out of the dark dilemma of a war-torn and war-stricken world. The causes of war were analysed, so that a remedy might be applied to do away with them forever. A charter was written to guide the new world, “to save succeeding generations from, the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind”. A new relationship between nations and peoples was prescribed, a new concept of life in larger freedom and equality for all nations, large and small.
90. Have we made much progress in this direction? The answer, I believe, is both “yes” and “no”. It is “yes” when and where the struggle of peace-loving peoples all over the world has succeeded in bringing about the new kind of relationship, the new kind of co-operation and respect for the freedom and equality of peoples and nations envisaged in the Charter. The rise of newly independent sovereign States after the Second World War, and the new relationship beginning to take shape between nations large and small, in the interest of all, are evidence of this progress.
91. The countries of Asia and Africa that last year participated in the Bandung Conference have contributed their share in this progress. They lend their strength to all those who believe that the Charter of the United Nations was not written to preserve peace on the basis of the old status quo — comfortable as it may seem to some Powers — but that it was written to create a new and durable foundation for peace, breaking up if necessary the old status quo, the old concept of life among nations where domination by big Powers could still prevail.
92. That the new concept of life and relations among nations cannot be realized without a struggle is self-evident. In its most apparent and clear-cut form, it presents itself as the struggle of colonial peoples against foreign domination. The reality of this struggle today is shown by the existence of such political problems as the question of Algeria, the question of Cyprus, the question of West Irian, the question of Goa, etc. It presents itself in problems of non-self-governing territories and, in another form, in questions such as that of racial conflict in the Union of South Africa. The severity of these problems depends on the severity of the clash between the old and the new forces.
93. It is, then, the continued existence of the old forces still at work in many parts of the world, among and within nations, which gives reason for answering “no” to the question I posed: have we progressed much in the direction of realizing the new world which we desire?
94. I am, of course, not suggesting that we have made no progress at all. Only last year, on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the United Nations Charter, the Indonesian delegation joined in expressing its high appreciation for the achievements of the United Nations in creating conditions conducive to co-operation and a better fife among nations. Credit was due to all nations, large and small. In fact, the atmosphere prevailing at that time was most conducive to encouraging a better understanding among the great Powers, so vital for the promotion of peace in this divided world. But even on that propitious occasion we did not conceal the fact that the struggle for a new world had still to be continued. A new state of mind among mankind has still to be won. In this process, the forces of the old power concept remain as dead weight which must be combated and eliminated.
95. Indeed, the war launched against Egypt by the United Kingdom and France, simultaneously with the invasion of Egypt by Israel forces, was a shocking reminder for those who believed that those old forces had already died. It was an eye-opening manifestation of the vitality and strength of those old forces, supposed by many to be long dead. Was it perhaps a last and desperate attempt to retard their decline? It may be so. Certainly, it is nothing less than folly to try to stop the process of liberalization in new Asia and new Africa, and the democratization of their relationship with the West. Trying to do so would only mean putting back the clock of history, and the clock of history cannot be put back even by the use of naked force, even by the employment of armed might.
96. The revival of the spirit of colonialism and colonial imposition, under whatever guise, by the British and French Governments — I speak here of their Governments, not their peoples — will surely do them no good. The most incredible thing is that they should think that they can apply eighteenth- and nineteenth-century methods in this second half of the twentieth century. What a great disservice they have done not only to their own prestige and interests but, indeed, to the cause of civilization and progress!
97. It is painful to note that these actions should come from countries that have produced and contributed the most outstanding ideas in Western civilization and, indeed, in the civilization of the world as a whole. Even more painful is the fact that these countries profess to belong to the leaders of the so-called “free world”, championing the cause of freedom and democracy. To that cause they have done the greatest harm.
98. Some of their friends have painstakingly tried to rationalize or condone their acts of aggression against Egypt even in defiance of the resolutions of the General Assembly. But it is gratifying to know that the United States has taken a stand which commands the great respect and appreciation of our people. A great military Power has joined with the great majority of nations in employing moral force to stop a flagrant act of aggression. We have now seen the strength of this alliance of moral force, joined with world public opinion, in defence of the Charter of the United Nations. Indeed, let us not forget that the creation of a better world is not the prerogative of the few — not even the few great military Powers — but the common task of all nations, large and small.
99. What is important in the present crisis is this alliance in spirit — the new moral force of a non-military character — that has made itself felt under the exigencies of the present crisis. This new alliance, I believe, should endure beyond the period of the present crisis. Indeed, this is what we should draw out of and treasure from the period of crisis we are living through.
100. On the basis of these considerations, I would like now to outline very briefly the position of the Indonesian delegation as regards both the situation in the Middle East and that in Hungary.
101. As to the Middle East situation, my Government has made its position very clear on numerous occasions. The complete, and unconditional withdrawal of the United Kingdom, French and Israel forces from the territory of Egypt, as called for in successive resolutions of the General Assembly, cannot be delayed any longer without further aggravating the already perilous situation. No further solution of the problems underling the recent war in the Middle East can be envisaged or fruitfully discussed before such a withdrawal has taken place. Furthermore, we are also concerned with the effects which this crisis has on our national economic life and, indeed, the economic health of the world at large.
102. But, above and beyond that, the aggression against Egypt has seriously undermined our confidence in some countries of colonial Europe. In view of our own experiences, we cannot but feel the deepest concern for the manner in which two great Powers have tried to resurrect the eighteenth- and the nineteenth-century colonial methods in an attempt to subvert the independence and sovereignty of a fellow Member State of the United Nations. Therefore nothing that we have done here, and no action we take in the future, should lead to infringement upon the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Egypt. Full respect by all nations for the independence and sovereignty of Egypt must be the first step in finding solutions to the problems underlying the crisis in the Middle East, where the ultimate goal should be the harmonizing of the legitimate interests concerned.
103. Turning now to the situation in Hungary, I believe that this question must be seen within the context of recent developments in Eastern Europe, and the relationship of the countries of that region with the Soviet Union. It is the inalienable right of every country to shape for itself its own destiny, free from all external pressures. We have watched with interest and appreciation the democratizing forces at work in the countries of Eastern Europe, made possible also by the new approach or policy adopted by the Soviet leaders in the past few years, since the death of Stalin. For many people outside the Communist world, these forces seem to be progressing too slowly. On the other hand, in the view of some groups within the Communist world itself, these developments seem to be moving ahead too rapidly.
104. But whatever the case may be, the important fact for us is that the process of liberalization is taking place, and, if allowed to develop without outside interference from any quarter, this can only be beneficial for world peace in general. Certainly we welcome the peaceful changes brought about in Poland.
105. In the case of Hungary, the process of change was, unfortunately, accompanied by violence, with the involvement of Soviet forces. It led not only to misery and destruction, but also came in the way of that very process of liberalization. We deplore this deeply, and the more so since the difficulties in Hungary were brought within the context of the cold war. The security of the Soviet Union becomes involved.
106. The United Nations, in dealing with this question, should bear in mind that no speedy and peaceful solution can be achieved so long as this question is not divorced as much as possible from the expediencies, the passions and the strategies of the cold war. Both within and without this Organization, we should aim at encouraging conditions under which the process of change can take place peacefully, resulting in stable and democratic Governments friendly to their neighbours.
107. If we look hard at the present crisis — the outbursts in the Middle East and in Hungary — we can also see that the prestige of the United Nations is here very much at stake. At least to my mind, it is obvious that what we are facing here is a crisis of big Powers. Big Powers, which under the Charter have been given the primary responsibility for maintaining peace and security, have by their use of naked force now challenged the Charter and the peace and security of nations in such an outrageous manner that it becomes questionable whether these Powers should bear the name “guardians of peace and security”.
108. This is a grave problem, and a grave challenge to the concept of the role of the big Powers in the United Nations, notably in the Security Council. Certainly, the concept on which the Charter was based has been shaken to its very foundation, and has now become a farce. However, if this crisis of the big Powers puts an end, once and for all, to the validity of war as an instrument of national policy, then it may yet be a good omen for peace. If tins crisis is, in essence, the crisis of power domination, then there exists the possibility that a new relationship for peace and harmony among nations may emerge out of it. Big Powers may be here to stay, but their role is being challenged by the new tide in international life.
109. The causes of the crisis to which I have referred have been smouldering for a long time, and within the United Nations they have just come to a sudden climax. The old status quo has become more and more untenable, and recent historic events might precipitate the arrival of a new equilibrium in the world. It was in order to attempt to direct the momentum of these vast changes in the world that, outside the United Nations, but well within its spirit and principles, such conferences as the Geneva Conference of four great Powers, the Bandung Conference and the recent efforts of the Colombo Powers were undertaken. In this connexion, the suggestion made by the President of Switzerland to call a meeting of the heads of Government of the United States, the United Kingdom, France, the Soviet Union and India may be a useful one in meeting the exigencies of the present time.
110. The new tide in international life is inexorably sweeping away the old and obsolete conception of power domination and power interests, the state of mind that has been an obstacle and a detriment to the establishment of the desired new relationship between the countries of Asia and Africa and colonial Europe. It is in this light also that the question of Indonesia's relationship with the Netherlands should be viewed.
111. I deplore the fact that Indonesian-Netherlands relations have recently deteriorated so rapidly. One of the main causes of this deterioration is, of course, the continued existence of the problem of West Irian — a part of my country over which the Netherlands seeks to maintain and preserve its obsolete colonial rule. This is a grave error on the part of the Netherlands. It has from the very beginning frustrated the development of a new relationship between Indonesia and the Netherlands.
112. The Indonesian-Netherlands Union, established at the time of the Round Table Conference in 1949, was doomed to remain nothing more than a mere paper agreement, incapable of functioning in reality. It was therefore later agreed that this still-born Union should be abolished. However, since all negotiations between our two countries ended in failure, and the Netherlands Government in the meantime had taken unilateral actions in contravention of the Round Table Conference agreements, my Government finally decided that the best course was to abolish those agreements.
113. I wish to stress here that, in so doing, my Government merely rescinded the privileged position enjoyed by the Netherlands vis-a-vis my country. By our actions we have opened the way to proper and normal relations between Indonesia and the Netherlands, on the same footing as the relations existing between Indonesia and other sovereign States.
114. It is in the hope, too, of bettering relations between my country and the Netherlands that, along with other Asian-African countries, we have again submitted the question of West Irian to the United Nations. Our aim clearly is not to create new tensions, but to find through the United Nations ways of abolishing old ones. We are therefore deeply grateful and appreciative of the support we received for the inscription of the question of West Irian in the agenda of this Assembly. At the proper time, we will, of course, explain fully our position on this question.
115. There are many other items inscribed in our agenda which are of importance to international, peace and stability. Among these are the questions relating to economic development. In this field, the United Nations has already gone forward in creating the new frame of mind to which I have referred. I am thinking here of the question of technical assistance to so-called underdeveloped countries, the establishment of the Special United Nations Fund for Economic Development, the creation of _ the International Atomic Energy Agency, the activities of the specialized agencies, etc.
116. One might feel today that discussion of these economic problems is not very important in view of the present political crisis. But I am inclined to believe that, on the contrary, the political crisis has endowed the problems of economic co-operation and mutual assistance with added importance and urgency. The problem of resolving conflicting economic interests presents itself today in an acute form. We certainly must recognize the legitimate interests of all nations and peoples. But, at the same time, it is unquestionable that all peoples have an equal right to promote their national interests, economic and otherwise, and that in no circumstances should any outside pressure be exerted against the interests of a nation or people.
117. The theoretical solution to the economic conflicts that do arise is, of course, along the lines of conciliation, co-operation and mutual understanding — the principle of give-and-take for mutual benefit. In practice, however, we have to learn first how to adopt such an attitude, such a frame of mind. This cannot be achieved in theoretical debates — useful as they may be — but only through more contact with all peoples, including those with different, ideologies. The development of closer contact among all peoples is, indeed, imperative in this divided world, whether we are thinking of promoting better economic conditions or of promoting political and social co-operation and understanding. We know, for instance, that the various conferences held in the Western hemisphere were important in this endeavour.
118. In this respect, I am happy to say that the President of Indonesia, Mr. Soekarno, recently visited many countries of North America, Western and Eastern Europe, and also the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China. President Soekarno had earlier visited many countries of Asia and Africa. I had the honour to accompany him on his recent travels and I am grateful to meet here many representatives from many lands — East and West — whose peoples I had the pleasure and privilege of meeting and knowing.
119. It may sound like a cliché, but it is none the less true that the people everywhere in the world desire and need peace more than anything else. Whether it is peace to restore the physical and mental ravages of war, or peace in which to construct and reconstruct higher standards of life for everyone, or peace to protect an existing standard of life and culture, the need is the same. That need translates itself into an overwhelming desire for a peaceful world.
120. Indeed, President Soekarno and his party returned to Indonesia with renewed conviction that the desire for peace and peaceful relations among nations, in conformity with the Purposes and Principles of the United Nations Charter, is a universal desire. The trips made have, therefore, stimulated and renewed our belief — the belief of the Government and people of Indonesia — that co-operation among peoples all over the world is possible, and that this is the way — the only way — to emerge from the present crisis to a better and more peaceful world.
121. This is the belief which we bring to the United Nations. We are convinced that this is the place in which it will find nourishment and fulfilment. We trust that, in co-operation with one another, we will move forward together into the new era that is here before us.