The People’s Republic of Bulgaria was admitted to the United Nations at a time when the policy of easing international tension had attained tangible results and when the peoples’ hopes that they would be able to live in tranquility, peacefully collaborating with each other, found solid support in the actual course of international events.
2. As we all know, this favourable development of international relations, this relaxation of international tension, is not to everyone’s liking; there are forces in the world which are interested in keeping international tension artificially alive, which oppose peaceful coexistence and co-operation between nations and which fear a triumph of “the Geneva spirit” as much as the devil is said to fear holy water. By committing acts which constitute a gross violation of international law and order, these forces have done their best to cloud the international atmosphere and to hinder the development of international relations in a spirit of peace and peaceful collaboration, and we must admit that temporarily they have succeeded.
3. The eleventh session of the General Assembly, to which the peoples of the world look for important decisions designed to strengthen peace and co-operation, was compelled to begin its work in an atmosphere of renewed international tensions. The United Nations was faced with the fait accompli of brazen aggression and gross violation of international law by three Member States of the United Nations, two of which are, into the bargain, permanent members of the Security Council, the principal organ concerned with the maintenance of world peace.
4. In the circumstances, it is more than ever incumbent upon the United Nations to show its strength and inflict a decisive defeat on the aggressors which have broken the peace and attacked the sovereignty of Egypt — a free and independent State and a Member of the United Nations — and ensure respect for international order and the triumph of the principles of peaceful coexistence and international collaboration, which are the very basis of the Charter. Today the eyes of all nations are fixed on the United Nations in alarm and anticipation. They expect us to adopt real and effective measures which will put an immediate stop to aggression, to take decisions which will definitely strengthen world peace and prevent a recurrence of international lawlessness, such as that which we have all just witnessed.
5. The Bulgarian delegation considers that all the actions and decisions of the eleventh session of the General Assembly must be aimed at reducing international tension, so that at the end of our work we shall all have cause to congratulate ourselves on real progress in strengthening international peace and co-operation. The first step to that end must be to put a stop to the aggression in Egypt, fully to restore Egypt’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and immediately to evacuate all the armed forces of the aggressors from that country.
6. The United Kingdom and France, which, as great Powers, have a special responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, must now answer to this international Assembly for one of the most heinous of crimes — unprovoked and barbarous aggression against an independent country. Everyone should long since have realized that humanity has reached a stage in its development at which the old colonialist methods can no longer be used. The polity of plunder and aggression has been unanimously and unconditionally condemned by world public opinion, including the peoples of the aggressor States themselves.
7. By its clear and unequivocal decisions condemning the aggression committed by the United Kingdom, France and Israel in Egypt, the United Nations must make the Governments of those countries realize that their actions have been censured and stigmatized by world public opinion. It must be clear to all that the position which the aggressors wish to maintain is untenable and that the conscience of mankind will not rest until the last soldier of the United Kingdom, France and Israel has left Egyptian soil. The aggressor must not be permitted to profit by his crimes. The policy of aggression against Egypt has failed, and its partisans must resign themselves to that fact.
8. Any attempts to temporize and to deceive the United Nations and world public opinion by the ridiculous symbolic withdrawal of individual battalions are doomed to failure. This is as clear to everyone as is the fact that there was a concerted plan of aggression, which included the attack by Israel’s armed forces. The attempts made here to represent the victim of aggression as the aggressor cannot really deceive anyone. By keeping up this shameful pretence, the violators of the peace are simply showing that they have no respect for the United Nations and treat its decisions with complete disdain.
9. The United Nations has condemned the armed aggression against Egypt, but its resolutions have not yet had the effect of causing the withdrawal from Egyptian soil of non-Egyptian armed forces which Egypt had not invited. The restoration of Egypt’s violated sovereignty necessarily presupposes also the complete withdrawal of the United Nations Force from Egyptian territory at the earliest possible date.
10. A dangerous tendency can be noted, however, in statements by a number of European and American statesmen, and the same tendency is evident in the way public opinion is being moulded by certain organs of the European and American Press. It is dear that, under the well-sounding pretext of net wanting to restore a status quo which constituted a threat to peace, solutions are being proposed in which respect for Egypt’s sovereignty plays no part.
11. We must not forget that the Suez Canal belongs not to the United Nations, but to Egypt. Egypt alone has the right to negotiate with whomsoever it pleases on all measures concerning the Suez Canal. Naturally, in this case, Egypt should be given the greatest possible assistance in this respect, but such assistance should not fake the form of imposing decisions reached by others or exerting pressure on Egypt in order to compel it to end by accepting decisions which it would not have accepted under normal peace conditions.
12. The representatives of the aggressors and their advocates in this Assembly have tried to defend the thesis that the need for the speedy dealing and reopening of the Canal make it imperative to accept the presence of non-Egyptian troops in the Canal zone itself. In other words, they are advocating the reopening of navigation through a Suez Canal occupied by foreign troops.
13. The United Nations should reject with equal indignation and decisiveness the attempts of the real aggressors to justify their actions by some imaginary future aggression on the part of Egypt — in other words, to represent the victim of aggression as the aggressor — and the claims made here that the United Nations should, if you please, be grateful to the aggressors because they were responsible for the establishment of the United Nations Force on Egyptian soil, although Egypt never requested or invited, any armed force to enter its territory.
14. The question of the nationalization of the Suez Canal Company has already been decided by the Egyptian Government, and that decision must be respected both by the United Nations itself and by all its Members. The question of navigation on the Suez Canal should be settled by negotiation with the Egyptian Government on the basis of the well-known six principles unanimously adopted by the Security Council on 13 October 1956 [S/3675].
15. As we have seen, instead of adopting this natural course of action, certain States which subscribed to the aforesaid six principles resorted to force in order to impose their wishes. In the face of such perfidy, we must not neglect the alarming reports which reach us from another Arab country. The Syrian representative stated from this rostrum [591st meeting] that troops were massing on the Syrian frontier in preparation for new military adventures. We have also heard the denials of those who are under suspicion of harbouring plans for further adventures. But, I ask you, how are we to ignore the fact that these alarming reports from the Syrian frontier coincide with tire attempts to turn world public opinion against Syria which have been going on for some time now? Is this being done in the interest of peace? History teaches us that attempts to discredit and denigrate the future victim are part of the preparation for every unjust military attack. In this connexion, the example of Egypt is fresh in everyone’s mind. For this reason, those who plan to do harm to Syria merely because it, like Egypt, wishes to strengthen its independence, must be warned and checked at once by the vigilant conscience of the nations.
16. In our opinion, the most pressing task of all for the present session of the General Assembly is to secure a cooling off of the heated atmosphere in the Near East.
17. _ The delegation of the People’s Republic of Bulgaria considers further that in order to fulfil its historic mission and justify the hopes of the peoples of the world, the United Nations should proceed to the practical solution of the most important problem of our day — the problem of disarmament. Otherwise our efforts to prevent future aggression and strengthen peace will not bring the desired results. We all know that wars cannot be fought without armaments. We also know that the production of armaments “for stock-piling purposes” cannot continue indefinitely. Unless it stops, the day must come when the guns, so to speak, will go off by themselves. That is why we must put an end to the armaments race. Mankind must use the achievements of science not for purposes of destruction, but for great and peaceful works. To this end we must prohibit atomic and thermo-nuclear weapons and stop their manufacture.
18. The Bulgarian delegation is convinced that the Soviet Union proposals on disarmament [A/3366] must be examined seriously and objectively. It is no longer possible to cast doubt on the sincerity of these proposals after the Soviet Union has given so many tangible proofs of its readiness to arrive at agreed decisions on disarmament questions. The Soviet Union has more than once expressed its willingness to meet the Western Powers’ proposals half-way, which is more than can be said of the Western Powers as regards the Soviet proposals. For the last few years, the world has been witnessing an odd spectacle. The Western Powers have been stubbornly defending their well-known proposals, contrasting them with the Soviet proposals; in its desire to reach agreement, the Soviet Union accepts many of the Western Powers’ proposals, and basic ones at that; but to the general surprise, as soon as the Soviet Union agrees to their proposals, the Western Powers begin to repudiate them, thereby, instead of facilitating a solution of the problem, actually hampering it.
19. The time has come to give up the practice of rejecting these proposals without valid reasons and without a real and impartial consideration of them. We were disagreeably surprised to hear from this rostrum the remark, which has by now become a cliché, that there is nothing new in the Soviet proposals. The peoples of the world can no longer take such statements seriously, and we are entitled to ask: now that so much that is new has been included in the latest Soviet proposals, will not the Western Powers, too, at last take a decisive step forward in order at long last to secure an agreed solution of this question which is of such vital importance to the fate and happiness of all mankind ?
20. We fail to understand how it is possible to belittle so important a fact as the decision of the Soviet Government and the Governments of the peoples’ democracies to reduce their armed forces, and to reduce them considerably. There are no arguments to justify the conduct of those who refuse to follow this example. What value is there in such “arguments” as that the Soviet Union by reducing its armed forces increases its military strength? The question that naturally springs to everyone's mind is why the other great Powers do not want to make themselves stronger by doing the same thing with their armies. The assertion that we must first settle controversial international political issues and only then consider general disarmament can convince no one, and can only harm the cause of peace. If we really want to settle controversial international issues, we must make sure that armaments play no part in the settlement. The less we hear the sound of arms, the more easily will these questions be solved peacefully.
21. The delegation of the People’s Republic of Bulgaria supports the Soviet proposals on disarmament and is convinced that if they are examined objectively and adopted, the danger of war can be averted.
22. In considering such important problems as disarmament, we must ask ourselves whether questions on Which international peace largely depends can be properly solved without the participation of the People’s Republic of China — a country which has been playing a leading role in the settlement of international problems in Asia and throughout the world, a country inhabited by one-fourth of the world’s population. It is high time to give back to the People’s Republic of China its lawful rights in the United Nations; this would make possible even broader peaceful collaboration among all countries and would help to give effect to the principle of the universality of the United Nations. It is intolerable to deprive the People’s Republic of China of its lawful rights in the United Nations because of the stubbornness of the Western Powers, and especially of the United States. An unrealistic policy as regards China is being imposed upon the United Nations, contrary to its own interests, and solely because there are those who dislike that vast country’s people’s democratic regime. The debate on this question held a few days ago showed that the objections to restoring the lawful rights of the People’s Republic of China were unfounded and incompatible with the United Nations Charter. There can be no doubt that this attitude does serious harm to the authority of the United Nations and reduces its ability to maintain international peace.
23. It is a well-known fact that some countries do not wish to recognize the People’s Republic of China. Of course, this is an internal question which lies within the competence of those countries. But this makes it all the more necessary for the United Nations to give China its rightful place in the Organization as soon as possible, in order to make United Nations decisions more effective and to strengthen world peace.
24. We cannot listen with indifference to statements such as those made a few days ago from this rostrum to the effect that certain groups repudiated by the Chinese people are awaiting an opportunity to “come to the rescue” of some people or other in the People’s Republic of China. The United Nations might regard such provocative statements as empty threats from the former Chinese rulers, who have been repudiated by the Chinese people, were it not for the fact that the speakers threatening the People’s Republic of China from the rostrum of the United Nations enjoy the support of powerful States which do not like the people’s democratic regime of China. This can no longer be regarded as an empty threat; it is an actual threat to peace in the Far East. The reinstatement of the People’s Republic of China in its rights in all United Nations organs would bring this situation to an end and would represent an important contribution to the cause of strengthening peace.
25. Our delegation and, we are confident, an increasing number of other delegations also, will continue to raise and bring up this question until the People’s Republic of China finally takes its rightful place in the United Nations.
26. The Bulgarian delegation considers that world peace and security do not solely depend on reaching agreement on important political problems; it believes that the strengthening of peace is also closely connected with the economic development of all parts of the world. The great disparity existing between industrialized and under-developed countries are phenomena which deserve the serious attention of the United Nations. As peace is indivisible, its strengthening necessitates not only political freedom, but also the establishment of favourable conditions for the general development of the under-developed countries.
27. Our delegation attaches -special importance to the Soviet Union proposal [589th meeting] for the consideration and adoption of agreed decisions on the most urgent economic problems relating to the development of international economic co-operation. We are sure that adoption of these practical proposals would promote the development of the economies and increase the prosperity of all countries, and would also lead to an improvement in international relations. There can be no doubt that the idea of convening an international economic conference in 1957 would meet with a favourable response from all partisans of peace and from all those who wish for a further relaxation of international tension.
28. There is no need to prove the fact that satisfactory (trade promotes the establishment of good relations and the elimination of mistrust. We are against trade restrictions and discrimination in trade. The slogan “trade, instead of armaments and military blocs” is readily understood by the workers of Bulgaria. The time has came for the United Nations to call upon its Members to abolish all restrictions to world trade.
29. Supposing that every nation could find and purchase the goods necessary to its national economy and purchase them wherever the most favourable terms are offered, that every nation could sell the goods of which its national economy has a surplus, that the intensified trade essential for a rise in the standards of living of the masses of all countries were to become a reality in the world, independently of strategic and other political considerations- — would all this not constitute a decisive step forward along the path of re-establishing confidence among .peoples and States and directing their interests towards peaceful economic competition?
30. So far as our country is concerned, it has expanded its foreign trade and the circle of its trading partners in the past few years. It is now trading with dozens of new countries in all parts of the world. There can be no doubt that the abolition of the existing restrictions on world trade, which hamper the mutual exchange of manufactured goods and raw materials, would be a highly important step towards the strengthening of international peace.
31. We believe that it would not be proper to omit any mention of the question of attempts to use the United Nations for interference in the domestic affairs of certain States, as in the case of the consideration of the so-called “situation in Hungary” and, unfortunately in the case of our own country in the past. On listening to some of the statements made, we cannot but draw the conclusion that some people still regard the United Nations as an organization of representatives and politicians who have the same political, social and economic views as their own. Moreover, some people think they are entitled to use the United Nations to oppose those who do not share their views. They are using even the rostrum of the United Nations for appeals for the “liberation” of countries which chose the path of socialism after the Second World War.
32. The People’s Republic of Bulgaria is one of these countries. In our land, the positive features of the new social system in which individuals cannot appropriate the product of society are already apparent. Conditions have been created for a moral and political unity such as the nation never knew in the past.
33. With regard to the effect of these changes in the social system on the country’s foreign policy, it should be noted that the social groups which frequently involved Bulgaria in military gambles in the past and twice brought us to the brink of the abyss have long since ceased to exist in our country and thus can exert no influence whatsoever. Is it possible in all honesty to describe the Bulgarian people as free during the period when they were oppressed by financial tycoons and fascist obscurantists dreaming of r “Great Bulgaria,” naturally at the expense of other countries and peoples? Is it possible to doubt that the Bulgarian people are free now that they have overthrown their sworn enemies and are being led forward by the social forces which, from the day of the country’s liberation from the foreign yoke to this day, have been inculcating in it a spirit of friendship and peaceful co-operation with neighbouring and distant peoples?
34. In defense of its own Charter, the United Nations cannot fail to condemn any statements and, a fortiori any acts directed towards inciting to or justifying interference in the internal affairs of countries such as ours, regardless of the quarter in which such statements and acts may originate.
35. It must be frankly stated that those who are trying to use the United Nations for interference in the domestic affairs of countries whose systems are not to their liking are rendering poor service to the cause of peace and international co-operation.
36. We are taking part in a general debate of the General Assembly for the first time and we therefore feel obliged to state that our Government, believing as it does that the peaceful coexistence of countries with different social systems is possible, is sparing no effort to establish a calm atmosphere of peaceful co-operation and good-neighbourly relations in the part of the world where Bulgaria is situated — in the Balkan peninsula, formerly known as the “powder keg of Europe.”
37. Our Government is convinced that, by pursuing an active foreign policy favourable to the cause of peace in the Balkans, at is making the best possible contribution to the strengthening of world peace. When there is no longer any need to fortify frontiers, when hands of friendship are stretched across these frontiers, there will be real guarantees of a stable and lasting peace. Such are the considerations which guide our foreign policy in respect of our immediate neighbours.
38. Our relations with our northern neighbour, the People’s Republic of Romania, are exemplary. The longstanding friendly relations between the sister nations of Yugoslavia and Bulgaria have now been re-established on the basis of consistent mutual respect for the national independence and sovereignty of both countries. The further expansion, consolidation and development of Bulgarian-Yugoslav co-operation accords with the fundamental interest of our peoples and of the cause of peace in the Balkans.
39. Our Government is making unremitting efforts to improve our relations with Greece and Turkey. We note with satisfaction that in recent years we have been meeting with a willingness on the part of the ruling (circles of those countries to establish good-neighbourly relations. However, we are not yet satisfied with what has been achieved. The very extensive possibilities for the many-sided development of economic and cultural ties with our neighbours have by no means been fully exploited, and the principles of the United Nations — the principles of peace, peaceful co-operation and general security — could be given practical application among the Balkan peoples.
40. Our Government believes that there are no controversial problems outstanding between us and our neighbours which could not be solved by means of negotiation and agreement, given good will and mutual concessions. Nor are there any such problems in our relations with any of the other countries of the world, large or small, with which we maintain normal relations, in so far as this depends on us, and with which we are prepared to expand our political, economic and cultural contacts.
41. The delegation of the People’s Republic of Bulgaria is confident that the eleventh session of the General Assembly will, despite all obstacles, succeed in settling the problems whose just solution is awaited by the peoples of the whole world. We are convinced that there is no need to revise the United Nations Charter to this end. A proper solution of the problems on the agenda of the General Assembly requires the strictest observance of all the fundamental principles of the United Nations, such as the principle of the sovereignty and self-determination of peoples. The experience of eleven years has shown that, if breaches of the international order have occurred, the reason for this is not that the Charter is inadequate, but that its fundamental principles have been violated.
42. A positive attitude on the part of the United Nations towards the solution of controversial international questions by peaceful means will promote the strengthening of confidence and the development of wide economic and cultural co-operation, and will further the relaxation of international tension and the consolidation of peace throughout the world. To this end, however, it is essential that the high-sounding words and wishes expressed here from the rostrum of the United Nations should be accepted by all and followed up by deeds. Only then will the eleventh session of the General Assembly restore to the peoples the hope of a new relaxation of international tension and of a lasting peace.