1. My delegation would like to join with the many that have preceded it in discharging its first and pleasant duty of paying a tribute to Mr. Maza and congratulating him on his election to this high office. My country is bound to his by ties of friendship and the desire for greater understanding. I myself had the happy privilege of being the guest of his Government last year in the Chilean capital. We are very happy that his election to this high office has met with the unanimous approval of all the sixty delegations present here.
2. My delegation would also like to take the opportunity of paying a tribute to our previous President, Mr. van Kleffens, who carried out the duties of his office with great impartiality and dignity.
3. I feel sure that I express the sentiments of my Government and people in saying that the people of India and our Government have been deeply moved by the news of the illness of the President of the United States. I must refrain from saying anything which might strain the margin of propriety by appearing to appraise the life and work of the head of a State, but I think I shall not be in error in saying here that our people look to President Eisenhower as a man of goodness and compassion and a lover of peace. We would therefore like to express these sentiments on behalf of India, and to wish him a speedy and full recovery.
4. It is usual on these occasions to survey the field of international affairs from the point of view of each country. It is also important, in our view, to make some reference to, and to give some picture, however brief and however incomplete, of the important items of progress or of difficulty in our own countries. Therefore I hope that my fellow representatives will pardon me if I refer to the conditions that obtain in my own land where, as usual each year, some great natural calamity afflicts our people.
5. During the last few months, a great part of India and of Pakistan has suffered from floods of dimensions unprecedented in recent history. In all the natural calamities which have been visited upon us since 1871, there has been nothing like this. Tens of thousands of villages have disappeared? 15 to 20 million people in India, and a larger number in Pakistan, have been rendered homeless. The amount of property destroyed and the damage to our crops has not been calculated. Our Air Force and our Army and the whole of our administration in those areas are concentrated on the work of relief. Yet we have not been able to assess the damage to more than 25 per cent of the area. Several thousands of square miles are still under water. But our people are of good heart, and I think that it is right for me to express here the sympathy of our Government and people to our neighbours and friends in Pakistan, whose suffering is even greater than ours.
6. But all calamities have their good side, and we are happy to feel that the fortitude and endurance of our people have resulted in there being no panic and there being ordered evacuations and a proper functioning of relief organizations. We are also happy that from many countries, too numerous to mention, sympathy and assistance have come which, though they will not come up to the enormous dimensions of the requirements, express the concern of the peoples of the world for the suffering that has been visited upon our people. The International Red Cross and the Governments of countries have come to our aid, and I am happy to say that for the first time it is not merely in the way of aid, but in the way of flood control, that international cooperation has occurred. The Government of China for the first time is co-operating with the Government of India through its administration in Tibet in assessing the rise of water in the great river Brahmaputra, and this close co-operation is expected to assist in the control of the annual floods.
7. My delegation wishes to express the hope that the United Nations will, at the opportune moment and without much delay, undertake the study of floods in the world and their proper control. We can no longer regard these as calamities, but as part of the processes of nature, which the wisdom of our people, our hard thinking and our organization and scientific development must seek to control. It is impossible to do this on a national basis alone, and we hope that, among the many activities that we are Undertaking in this world for the relief of human suffering and for raising standards of living and bringing about stability in communities, the study of floods, which afflict not one continent but many, will be undertaken.
8. This is but one aspect. In India we have made progress in many ways which are of interest to this Organization, Here we have a part of the world recently emerged into national independence, where the political tasks of democracy are being tried out very thoroughly, where there is an area of so-called under-development, which has always been below the margin of subsistence, where the efforts of the people by voluntary organization and under democratic systems have to meet these great tasks.
9. I am happy to say that, while in 1947, in the year of Indian independence, our country, was short by 7 million tons of food, and we had either to tighten our belts or spend the greater part of our foreign earnings in buying food abroad, last year India for the first time in its recent history passed the starvation or below- subsistence level. We have not only bridged this gap of 7 million tons, but we have also found additional food for the 30 million more people who have been born in India in the past eight years. Therefore it is not merely that we are happier because our people are less hungry, or not hungry, but we are also happy to be able to communicate to the world that the organized efforts of communities, the confidence of people in their governments, and the increasing realization that hungry people in any part of any country are a source of disaster for the whole country — it is these three things, that this development proclaims, that are of international importance.
10. There are only two other items of internal development to which I shall refer, because we believe they are of international significance. One is the great and revolutionary development in India of what are called community projects.
11. Ours is a country of 600,000 villages. Eighty per cent of our population lives in villages. To these 600,000 villages, political democracy has come in the sense that any man or woman above the age of twenty-one is qualified to exercise the franchise. But our people have been early to realize that no democracy has any significance unless it has some meaning for the stomachs, for the leisure, for the education, for the sanitation and for the self-expression of people. As the majority of our people live in these villages, many of which are not only far away from a railway station but even from a road- head, one of the first efforts made by our own central and state governments and our organizations and public opinion was to introduce the system of community projects.
12. I am happy to say that today in India, between the community projects and what are called the national extension blocs — the first stage of this development — we have covered 120,000 villages, which is nearly one- fifth of the number of villages in India. At the end of the second five-year plan, all India will be covered by this scheme, which means there will be an administrative system drawn from the villages, there will be an organization democratically controlled for economic, judicial and administrative purposes. What is more, the whole of this will be based on the life of the community.
13. This experiment, as it was at one time, but which is now part of our national planning and which absorbs a considerable part of our resources, has become the centre of attention in great parts of South-East Asia. We are happy to say that our administrators in this region have been in demand in other countries, and only recently we were able to send the head of our project organization to Indonesia, where a study was being made of this particular system. I mention this because it is all very well to talk about democracy and the emergence of people to independence, but when a country has large populations, as we have, who have political power, and when that political power cannot be harnessed and channelled in such a way that the people concerned can express themselves and their aspirations can be satisfied, and when the democratic processes are not real in terms of the individual, then there is a danger that a situation may arise such as has arisen in many other parts of the world. So far as we are concerned, we intend to keep the liberty we have attained and to cultivate the fraternities we have established.
14. Secondly, in this particular field, India enters this year on what is called the second five-year plan. I am happy to say that in doing so it is taking into account its position and its obligations to the international community. No country in the world today can, from the point of view of its international obligations, afford to neglect its economy, because it then becomes the weak I link in the chain of economic progress in the world. We are making our contribution. Our heavy industry plays a primary part in this, and so do the industries in our villages.
15. So far, it is our good fortune that no target set in our planning has been unattained. We have set modest targets, it is true, but we have attained them. At the end of the next five-year period, we will bring into employment 12 million people. It is true that our population will rise, but our national income will have increased by 25 per cent, at a very conservative estimate. This standard, compared to European or American standards, is very low. But then, standards are comparative,
16. The main features of this economic planning are that it is based upon democratic conceptions, upon the enthusiasms of the people, and very largely upon our own resources. We are people who believe that we are a wealthy country. We are wealthy because we have nearly 400 million people. They are our wealth and we are not afraid of our population.
17. I hope you will forgive me for the intrusion of what may be called domestic affairs into this international gathering. I have done so only for the reasons that I set out at the beginning, and I leave it at that.
18. We are now meeting in this Assembly in New York. We meet as a General Assembly for the second time this year. Our first meeting was in San Francisco. I think I am showing no disrespect to anyone, nor committing any inroad on the integrity of any fact, when I say that when, at the beginning, the idea of San Francisco was mooted, it must have been in the minds of large numbers of people that it would be largely in the way of a ceremonial celebration to mark the tenth anniversary of this Organization, so that at least we might whistle to keep up our courage, and equally that San Francisco, instead of being a celebration, might turn itself into an inquest. It became neither of these. Much to our good fortune, instead of being either an inquest or merely a formal meeting, it heralded a new era.
19. The great Powers of the world, whether we approve of this position or not, are really the great factors which can make for prosperity, for peace and for war. In them are vested the great economic, military, political and other resources of the world. Happily, in each of these countries today, there are statesmen at the head of governments and of States who realize their great responsibilities. While at times, and perhaps too often, they may express their differing points of view with a degree of acrimony which, though it is being reduced, is not desirable, there is no doubt that today we have a situation where there is an attempt at a common exploration of the path towards coexistence and world co-operation. The keynote at Geneva was to attempt to find ways and means of resolving difficulties.
20. San Francisco did one thing if it did not do anything else: that was to proclaim to the world that behind the four statesmen, the heads of the four great countries, who were to meet at Geneva shortly thereafter, was the goodwill of the nations of the world and the expectation of these nations that the statesmen, in spite of all the difficulties that faced them, would make a beginning and open a road towards co-operation. It was also the hope of San Francisco that in that other, and perhaps more proximate, centre of difficulty in the Far East, a similar road would be opened. We proclaimed these hopes at San Francisco. I am happy to think that we are still on that course. And while the pace of our travels may not be satisfactory to some, it is a matter of congratulation that there are no roadblocks on the way yet.
21. I how come to the report that has been submitted to this Assembly by the Secretary-General [A/2911]. I think it is only fit and proper that my delegation should address itself in the general debate to the report made by the Secretary-General, who is not the chief officer of this Assembly but the head of one of the main organs set up by the Charter. I am happy to say that the Secretary-General, in the introduction to his report, has submitted a survey of world affairs which covers some of the more far-reaching and important issues that must engage our attention and our minds. I will not now deal with each of the items to which he has referred, because that will come in the course of the observations I am going to make.
22. The Secretary-General quite rightly is concerned, as many of us are concerned, about the inadequate amplitude of our Organization. If one must put it in plainer terms, he appears to express concern here, as he has expressed it elsewhere, that so many things which ought to be done within the United Nations have perforce to be done outside the United Nations.
23. My delegation shares part of this regret. But, at the same time, we should like to say that the ambit of the United Nations is not merely the Organization, but the, limits and the purposes of the Charter. So that if within the limits and the purposes of the Charter, and for its promotion, there are other meetings which are conducted in a spirit of co-operation, with the necessary care to maintain contacts, or in such a way that the course of their proceedings and the development of thought, ideas and decisions does not contravene the Charter, then, if in present circumstances nothing more is possible, this is a great .advance.
24. It appears to us inevitable, given the objective situation that exists in the world, that the great problems of the world today — and I make no apology for saying this — should be the problems that centre around the division of the world, the crucial points of which are in Germany and the Far East. It is wrong to say that Germany is divided. It is the world that is divided, and the expression of this division happens to lie in that unfortunate and unhappy country. Similarly, in the Far East, there is a point of potential explosion, to which I shall refer later on.
25. These great problems are outside the Assembly, partly because of the conditions and the contacts created by the war, partly because peace has not been concluded, and partly because of the absence of many people who should be here among us. Naturally, these problems which concern them can only be discussed with them. The peace treaties make certain provisions and contain certain prohibitions in this matter.
26. Over and above that are what may be called the internal feuds in our Organization. The representative of Syria referred [532nd meeting] to the presence of too many blocs and too many groups. That is to say, we are still engaged in this game of trial and error in an effort to find, out how far we can move towards our goal of universality. Our dreams lead us in that direction. Our fears and our schemes lead us — as indeed did those of the Tsar Alexander I in his day — in the direction of the balance of power and of trying to organise our forces for particular and specific ends. As in the nineteenth century, we are still in the grip of this conflict between the idea of universality — the idea of a human community — and the idea of the balance of power. Therefore these problems, which are the Objective factors of the world, do to a certain extent bedevil the United Nations and introduce an element of viciousness.
27. Therefore I hope the Secretary-General will pardon me if I say that we have to bear this with patience and, by our endeavours, see if we cannot, without too much organizational insistence, try to bridge this gulf — that today is less than it was two years ago — between the endeavours to attain the purposes of the Charter and the place of the Organization itself within it.
28. It now falls to me to pay the tribute, of our Government and our delegation to the various agencies and organs of the United Nations for the work which they have been doing during the past year. I shall not take the time of the Assembly by covering the ground already covered by representatives who have spoken before me from this rostrum, but I should like to pay our special tribute to the Secretary-General and his organization. More particularly, we should, at these moments when the General Assembly meets in New York, think of those men and women who are out in the periphery of this Organization; some of them in the field, some of them in the various sectors of the Organization, many of them engaged in activities that are not nearly so colourful as some others, but that are certainly ameliorating the conditions of mankind, whether it be the spraying of DDT or the promotion of the anti-tuberculosis campaign, or in the various activities of the International Labour Organisation; I do not want to mention any more for fear of leaving some out. So to the Secretary-General, and to his colleagues, my delegation wishes to pay its tribute and to say that we feel that they are engaged in tasks in the common service of our world and humanity.
29. I should also like to take this opportunity of saying that perhaps the greatest feature of the United Nations, as possibly distinct from its predecessor, is the great psychological impact which it makes upon the masses of the people. There is not a country in the world, so far as we know, where the ideals of the United Nations, its existence, its organization and its work are not regarded by the masses of people — wherever there is expression of opinion — as part of their own life and their own obligations. It is not as though its contributions were something of a forced levy, on the Governments, or as if it were something exclusively concerned with government departments, blue books, files and papers; for the first time, we have the beginnings of what might be a world public opinion behind a great world organization.
30. There is one specific matter to which I should like to refer. My delegation, along with the delegation of Uruguay, last year sponsored in the Third Committee a draft resolution to establish a Universal Children’s Day. I am happy to say that the draft resolution passed the Committee unanimously, and was subsequently adopted by the General Assembly [resolution 836 (IX)]. While the progress made upon it has not been as fast or as productive of results as we had hoped it would be, it has made progress. Some twenty-two Governments have already responded, and we hope that this year the Committee will take this further, so that that part of the Charter may be realized which focuses our attention on the “succeeding generations”, and so that the citizens of tomorrow, who are brought up in the ideals of the United Nations, may be more peace-minded, more world-minded, more tolerant and, what is more, live in accordance with the ideals of the Charter.
31. There are a number of problems facing this Assembly and, as usual, we have the regular crop of items on our agenda. But, of course, each year, while the titles or the agenda may be the same, their importance varies and, if I may say so, the importance of each item may vary even in relation to each delegation and to each part of the world. That is probably the reason why we do not vote unanimously on every issue — as we voted on the President’s election. Since most of the items are covered by the agenda, I do not propose to go into great detail about it, but there are some of these which are of importance on which my Government desires me to express its views. The first of these is the review of the Charter.
32. May I say here, with great respect, since this question seems to have loomed large in our discussions, that the idea of a review of the Charter has not come into our consciousness, and been placed on our agenda, because in this particular year any developments, either in the Organization or in the Charter, or in the inadequacy of the Charter, have called for it. If there are inadequacies, they have been there all these years. It has arisen because in Chapter XVIII there are two articles which refer to the review of the Charter and, if I may say so, there appears to be considerable misunderstanding in this matter. All the Charter says, in paragraph 1 of Article 109, is that “a general conference of the Members of the United Nations for the purpose of reviewing the present Charter may be held at a date and place to be fixed by a two-thirds vote...” under certain conditions, one of which being the agreement of seven members of the Security Council. Then it goes on to say, in paragraph 3 of the same Article, that “if such a conference has not been held before the tenth annual session of the General Assembly, the proposal to call such a conference shall be placed on the agenda of that session…”. So there is nothing in this Charter which need give us any concern that this matter, if it is not attended to today, will go somewhere else. This, however, is clearly the more superficial aspect of the matter.
33. The position of my Government was stated by me in San Francisco. We think that the Charter can be reviewed only if there is unanimity, and if there is unanimity the main reasons for amending the Charter will disappear. In other words, without unanimity we cannot revise the Charter, and if there is unanimity the reasons for revising it will be very small.
34. Further, my Government is of the opinion that, in any changes which we make in the Charter, we should pay more attention to Article 108 than to Article 109. That is to say, we should take a pragmatic view of this and seek to make such alteration as is made in the case of all written constitutions, by amendments from time to time. We do not subscribe to the view that it is a healthy process periodically, at the end of every ten years, to throw the whole of the basis of our Organization into the melting pot and to convene what may be something like another San Francisco Conference in the present conditions of the world.
35. In any case, our view is that this is not the appropriate time; there are more pressing matters and, without being cynical, one could say that it is not the Charter that is wrong, it is we ourselves, and therefore we could very well devote our endeavours in the coming year to improving our loyalties in regard to the spirit and the purposes of the Charter.
36. We shall therefore support any move that does not seek to throw out the baby with the bath water, that does not seek to raise unnecessary controversy, that does not add more difficulty to the many difficulties which we have to solve. We have no objection to subscribing to any move that arises as a matter of general agreement and compromise, but my Government is definitely opposed to the establishment of any elaborate machinery or to the taking of any overt step which demands from us a full-scale review of the Charter.
37. The next problem that faces us is that of the admission of new Members. This, again, has been called a hardy annual. If it is a hardy annual, it reflects the situation in the world, and here my Government desires me to stress its deep concern about the fact that, after ten years of the Organization’s existence, nearly one-third of the world is kept out of it.
38. I think that it is important for us sometimes to throw our minds back to the time when the United Nations was conceived and its foundations laid; to the United Nations Declaration signed in Washington on 1 January 1942; to the Moscow Declaration of 30 October 1943; or even earlier, to the Atlantic Charter, signed on 14 August 1941; and to the various meetings that took place in the year 1944. It was never the idea of the founders of the United Nations or the Governments which participated that we should, in any form, become an exclusive club or a Holy Alliance. Our ideas in this matter at that time could easily have been less liberal than they were because, after all, those were the war years. The United Nations was conceived before the enemy coalition had been defeated, but even at that time there was no idea that it should be a league of victors or a league of select people, or anything of that kind.
39. Thus the idea of universality has been at the basis of our Organization from the beginning. In principle, my country and my Government support the principle of universality, and the inclusion of any State that is a State — and we say “that is a State” because it is a question not of whether we like it but of the fact that it exists and is capable of performing its obligations under the Charter. If we were to include in this Organization only those States of which we approved, and if admission were to require the approval of each of the Governments represented here, most of us would not be here at all. Therefore it is a question not of approval or disapproval, but of securing as broad a basis as possible. In other words, the United Nations ought to represent the world as it is, and try to make the world what it ought to be. If we are to make the world what it ought to be, then it is necessary for us to take into account the world as it is.
40. In this particular connexion, there are large numbers of countries which have made application for membership over long periods, and I should like to draw the attention of the main participants to the reaching of a decision on this matter — namely, the members of the Security Council — the fact that in the course of the eight or ten years during which this matter has been before us each of the countries concerned has voted on different occasions for each of these applicants against whom objection is now raised. If we were to make a list and to say that if any country had voted for an applicant at any one time the application in question should be considered as approved, then we would probably find that practically all these applications were covered.
41. Our own view in this matter is rather coloured by the fact that it is necessary to secure agreement in the Security Council, and afterwards in the General Assembly, and the Indian delegation, therefore, would support any move that would speed up the process of the admission of the largest number of applicants. And we shall be prepared to approach this matter on a practical basis and to support any proposition that will assist in the admission of the largest number of new Members.
42. In this connexion, we have an obligation — not only a pleasant obligation, but also a compelling one to draw attention particularly to the exclusion from this Organization of our near neighbours, and we should like to refer more especially to the case of Ceylon.
43. Ceylon became independent at the same time as we did. Its independence has the same quality as the independence of India, Pakistan and other countries of South-East Asia. Ceylon is an important peace factor in international affairs in our area of the world. It may be remembered that at Colombo, in Ceylon, was born the Colombo Plan, thanks to the original initiative of the Australian Government. It was in Ceylon, again, that the Colombo Conference met and took some initiative in setting in motion the processes of settlement and peace in Indo-China. It was in Colombo, also, that the five countries of South-East Asia met again, on the initiative of the Ceylon Government, for the pursuit of those purposes. Ceylon, despite its not being a Member of the United Nations, has been consistently an adherent of the principles which are basic to the Charter, and its exclusion from this Organization is a matter of great pain and concern to us. We hope that before this session of the Assembly ends, it will be possible to convey to the people of Ceylon the fact that a change has taken place and that Ceylon will soon take its place among us.
44. There are other countries, and we do not desire to make any invidious distinctions; but, after all, even where the law is the same in regard to all, affiliations can vary in their intensity. Another of our nearest neighbours is Nepal, again a country which is independent — and it has been independent not only since 1947, but always. In fact, most of these applicants are members of the United Nations system. They are members of various organizations in the United Nations orbit. They have been admitted to them by votes, and I think, therefore, that we should try to make some progress in this direction at the present session.
45. We are heartened by the fact that delegations representing different points of view have come forward in this Assembly and have supported the idea of the admission of a larger and larger number of new Members. Of course, the countries that, are divided are in a different category. But the fact that there is the question of what is a State does not make it necessary for us to introduce another element of complexity into this matter. The main thing is that we ought to make a beginning.
46. Both last year, and the year before, my delegation drew the attention of this Assembly to Article 28, paragraph 2, of the Charter, and suggested that the Foreign Ministers of the countries which were members of the Security Council should seek to carry out the provisions of that article in private discussions. We felt that the diplomatic approach, the conference approach, might produce some results, but we regret that during the year that has elapsed since the last, session no such meeting has taken place. We express the hope that, either at the meeting in Geneva or later, here, it may be possible for the Foreign Ministers of those countries which are represented on the Security Council to take into account the feelings not only of this Assembly but of the overwhelming majority of the peoples of the world. It does no credit to the United Nations, and the Governments concerned feel very embarrassed at the idea, that, for reasons which have no relation to the principles and purposes of the Charter, large numbers of applicants are kept out.
47. At the same time, we are heartened by the knowledge that there is a general desire to find a way out, and we welcome particularly the approach that has been made by the Government of Canada. We hope that, in view of all the discussions that have gone on in the past, the work of the Committee of Good Offices — which labours continuously in this direction, although its results may not always be obvious — will lead to some success.
48. The next point — to which I wish to refer only briefly, since my delegation will be dealing with it in the Fifth Committee — is the Secretariat and its organization.
49. The first problem we have in mind is the representative character of the Secretariat. My Government makes no secret of the fact that if there were an international civil service in the world which had no national attachments at all — that is to say, not in theory but in practice — then the question of quotas and representation would not arise. But we are far away from a one-world system. We are still, in this Assembly, a gathering of sovereign Governments, each jealous of its sovereignty.
50. Therefore, taking these facts as they are, and while we move towards this internationalization, it is necessary that in this principal organ of the United Nations, as established by the Charter, there should be the impact of every part of the world proportionately. I do not say that there should be, necessarily, precise mathematical proportions, but there should be the healthy and equitable impact of the various parts of the world. What is more, I should like to remind this Assembly that most of us have national parliaments to which we are responsible. We have to answer for the position that obtains in this Organization to our national legislatures and to public opinion. I do not want to belabour the Assembly with figures and facts, as I did last year in the Fifth Committee [459th meeting], but I wish to draw the attention of the Secretary-General and the Assembly, which has to deal with it in the Fifth Committee, to this matter of the organization of the Secretariat in such a way as to enable it to penetrate the whole body of public opinion which lies behind the United Nations.
51. Equally, we are concerned with other problems, affecting the security, the status and the dignity of personnel, and also the responsibilities that should rest in representatives in the Secretariat from various parts of the world. As I have said, however, it is unhealthy to discuss this matter in any great detail in the General Assembly. Much progress has been made in this connexion, and we are grateful to the Secretary-General. It is our duty to press this matter further.
52. In connexion with the next point, my delegation would like, first of all, to compliment the Secretary-General on the part of the introduction to his report which deals with economic matters. I think that I am not far wrong in saying that this is the first time that the Secretary-General’s report has given so much space and paid so much attention to precise detail, and to what may be called the strong meat of economic issues. Without glossing over the situation with sentiment about under-developed countries and One World, he has dealt with a large number of fiscal, economic and technical problems of very great importance.
53. Just as I said in the case of our community projects, we cannot build up a world community based upon tolerance, understanding and equality until we have paid adequate attention to economic matters and seen to it that economic equilibrium and economic equity are established. Here again, the appropriate committee of the Organization will deal with these matters in detail, and therefore I do not propose to refer to them in that way. But I would like to pay our tribute and to compliment the Secretary-General for giving so much space to the matter in his introduction. By dealing with it in a way which is not superficial, and by dealing with many problems, some of which are controversial, he has drawn the attention of the Assembly to its importance.
54. It is necessary at this stage to make some reference to the part played by the United Nations, and in our case by our country, in this aspect of United Nations activity.
55. In the field of technical assistance, there has been much expansion, and I am happy to say that the quota of the contribution of my own Government has gone up by 33 per cent and the contribution of countries like the United States has gone up very much. During the year ending 1954, India supplied 191 experts in the field of technical assistance. We are not saying this in order to render an account of our contribution, but because my country strongly believes that the only kind of rehabilitation is the rehabilitation in which people can take part with self-respect; that is to say, reconstruction in any country must come, even if aid is received from other places, on the basis of co-operation and mutual respect. In other words, poor as we are, either in resources or talent or opportunity, we ought to be willing to give amply and generously even out of our poverty. Therefore we have contributed 191 experts during this period.
56. Another of the organizations for economic development is the one established under the Colombo Flan. Starting from small beginnings, here is the accomplishment of an endeavour which has spread further out in area and amplitude, and also in the volume of its work. The main feature of this Colombo Plan is that it is a co-operative organization. As far as my country is concerned, we contribute very considerably to the Colombo Plan in the way of technical assistance. It deals with our part of the world, and although originally it was confined to the States of the Commonwealth, today others have come in because the problem that it deals with, the area it deals with, makes it competent to include them, and necessary that it should. We are glad to welcome the countries of South-East Asia: Indonesia, Burma, Japan and others, which have come in. The United States has given its aid. My country would particularly like to express its gratitude to Australia, to Canada, to New Zealand and to the United Kingdom for the great sacrifices they have made in the promotion of the work of the Colombo Plan,
57. There are two other items under this heading to which I would like to refer. Reference to both of them has been made by the Secretary-General in his report. One is the Special United Nations Fund for Economic Development for under-developed countries. The position of my delegation and my Government has been very clear on this from the beginning. We think such a fund necessary and desirable, and believe that it will go a long way towards making the United Nations what it should be, bringing it home to the peoples of the world that, in addition, and' without regard to mutual, bilateral, and other aid that takes place in parts of the world, there should be co-operative aid through the United Nations. That is why we have supported this plan for a special fund. We are happy to note that it has been adopted by the Economic and Social Council [resolution 583 A (XX)], and we hope that some further progress will be made.
58. It has been said that this fund could not be started unless there were economies from disarmament. I am not going to say that that looks like blood money, but it is time to face this question a little more realistically. Are there any savings from disarmament? All Governments raise special money for the arms they want. It is not as though there was a pool of money somewhere, part of which went to arms. Arms are regarded as necessary, and therefore money is raised. It is quite true that if that strain were released, that raising of money could be done for some other purposes. But, having said that, I would like to say that we ought to congratulate ourselves that although disarmament is not accomplished, there are signs, in fact there are evidences, there are actual accomplishments, in -the way of the cutting down of military expenditure in certain areas.
59. In any case, is it not right to think that the fact that contributions have been made for economic development may be an incentive to spending less money on arms? Whichever way you look at it, we hope that the great countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, France, the Soviet Union and others, will enable this fund to get on its feet, because it is one of those organizations where the small countries, the poorer countries, the less-developed countries, can also make their contribution. What is more, it is not economic development that takes place here; it is the development of self-respect, of self-reliance, of the carrying of the message of the United Nations, on the basis and spirit of the Charter, to various parts of the world.
60. Therefore we would like to avail ourselves of this opportunity, at this forum, to express, very strongly, our support for the immediate establishment of this fund, and to appeal to those countries that have reservations about it to take the risk of making a contribution to co-operation. I feel sure that this appeal which we are making will not fall on deaf ears.
61. Reference has also been made to the International Finance Corporation. Here we seem to have made some progress. My Government fully supports this organization, and we hope that, particularly in that sector of economic development which is not State-controlled and State-owned, the International Finance Corporation will bring about not only economic development, but also a greater degree of contact and collaboration between industrial elements in different countries. In the case of the International Finance Corporation, we appear to be making a beginning, and we hope that the tenth session of the General Assembly will find ways and means of making a beginning in regard to the fund.
62. I should now like to refer to the position of Asia in regard to economic development. Much has been said at this meeting and at San Francisco in praise, in support and in appreciation of the Asian-African Conference that met in Indonesia at Bandung. But very little attention has been paid to the considerable work that was done at that Conference and the considerable amount of thinking and constructive results that have ensued in the economic and cultural fields. I will refer to some of these points in regard to the economic field so that at least they might go on record.
63. First of all, the Asian-African, Conference recommended the early establishment of the Special United Nations Fund for Economic Development and the early establishment of the international Finance Corporation. So that here is a recommendation, a request, from twenty-nine countries, most of which are Members of the United Nations. They represent two-thirds of the world’s population. With respect to other matters, just to show the amount of concern there is about economic questions, not in a sentimental and uninformed sense, but in a sense which relates to the specific problems that confront us, they went on to say: “The Asian-African Conference recognized the vital need to stabilize commodity trade in the region.” They then went on to say that the participating countries would co-operate to stabilize international prices.
64. Now this has a relation to our past history. We have been in the past hewers of wood and drawers of water, and we have supplied the raw materials to the world and provided the markets for the absorption of manufactured goods. Therefore, on account of the lack of economic parity and the disequilibrium in economic conditions, our commodity prices have been at the mercy of the more powerful countries. For that reason, we want to make a co-operative effort to stabilize these prices and also to make some attempt, as the Conference resolution states, to bring part of the endeavour that goes into manufacture into our own countries, by processing our raw materials.
65. There is another aspect of the Asian-African Conference decisions to which I should like to draw attention, because it has to do with the question of equilibrium in the world. That is that a more equitable approach should be made to the problem of world shipping. The Asian-African Conference attached considerable importance to shipping and expressed concern that shipping lines from time to time reviewed their freight rates, often to the detriment of the participating countries. Here again, we are at the mercy of the impact of this invisible trade. It is a very heavy burden on our countries and it is one of the levies on an under-developed area which has to depend on the import of capital goods and a considerable amount of consumer goods, in which , it pays not only for the goods, but also for the service. These services of the ships and of the banks and the insurance companies, which are now concentrated to a very great extent in one part of the world, are a very heavy economic burden which is calculated further to upset the equilibrium between the developed and the under-developed countries.
66. The Asian-African Conference also made arrangements concerning the machinery of international cooperation and the exchange of information.
67. The next point I should like to deal with is that of the peaceful uses of atomic energy. Here again, since this item will come before the First Committee, it is not my intention at the present moment to make any proposals or to go into any great detail. We have first of all to express our congratulations and thanks to the Secretary-General, who took up this idea that was first mooted in the General Assembly by the genius of the President of the United States, and afterwards developed it into something very much bigger. The Secretary-General paid a great deal of attention to this problem and a conference was arranged in which seventy-three Governments participated and in which 1,428 delegates and 1,334 observers took part. It was therefore the largest conference of its kind that had ever taken place, and although we have a long way to travel before we arrive at the establishment of an Atomic Energy Agency or the fulfilment of the other purposes for which it was intended, it was a beginning, the dimensions of the impact of which we not only cannot ignore, but on which we must congratulate ourselves.
68. India is particularly appreciative of the fact that our distinguished scientist, Dr. Bhabha, was invited to preside over this Conference, and I am instructed, on behalf of my Government, to express my gratitude to all those concerned and to the members of this Conference who are present here today and to assure them that such services as India can render in this matter are always at their disposal.
69. There are two or three aspects of this Conference which have a significance far beyond the Conference itself. We are told that one of the important developments at this Conference was the removal of the veil of secrecy, that is to say, the publication of material which, on the previous day, would have been an act of treason, became an act of international service. Though these great secrets were published, the world did not come to an end. No country was invaded as a result, so that it appears that all this fuss in other fields may perhaps resolve itself if a bold approach is made. I should like the great Powers concerned, in the quietness of their minds, not in public debate, to address themselves to this fact. Here were secrets which were closely guarded. The publication or communication of these secrets would have been an act of treason, visited by the death penalty in some cases. They were secrets which were regarded as not accessible to anybody else.
70. Two things happened. First of all, as I have said, the world did not come to an end. I do not even know how many people read them. But over and above all that, it was found that after all they were not secrets, everybody knew them. At least, one side or the other admitted they were known. Therefore this lifting of the veil of secrecy has been something in the way of a show-down, and it helps us in other matters. It shows that perhaps if we cut Gordian knots somewhere, if we did not go round and round in vicious circles, we could make progress.
71. The second point to which I should like to refer is that very soon the General Assembly and the Governments concerned will have to consider the question of the International Atomic Energy Agency. We are in support of an international organization to promote the peaceful uses of atomic energy. India is devoted to this endeavour, and, what is more, the whole of our attention in regard to atomic energy development is in the direction of its peaceful uses. We do not make, nor do we desire to make, any weapons of destruction.
72. There are certain factors in this matter, however, upon which I am directed by my Government to lay stress. It is our bounden duty and our obligation, and in our own interest, to see to it that this agency is not based upon any circumstances which would lead to colonial exploitation. In the industrial revolution of the nineteenth century, as I have said before, we were the hewers of wood and the drawers of water. We produced the cotton, the jute, and the minerals. These were processed and manufactured in other parts of the world and then dumped upon our countries where, out of the small returns for the hard work done by the people, there were markets which, on account of the vast populations, were large. Now we are vigilant in this matter and we should not make any secret of this.
73. From the industrial revolution represented by the great epoch which is now just ending, we are entering upon another revolution, an atomic revolution. In that atomic revolution, those of us who have emerged from colonial status have to take care that we do not permit this new agency to be of such a character that the resources for this development are utilized in the context of colonial exploitation. I am not saying that anyone is viciously considering this, but we want to be very careful about it. We have to take care that they are not utilized in the context of manufacturing countries on one side and consumer countries on the other, so that once again there is a disequilibrium in economy and in economic status and, consequently, in political status.
74. I referred a while ago to shipping and to the invisible services. We would not want the invisible services in this new atomic age to be confined to one part of the world. In fact, the International Atomic Energy Agency, representing a new civilization, has to take account of the fact that there are no longer any people in the world who are willing to accept — although they may have to acquiesce in it — a colonial position.
75. It is the view of my country, as we stated in the First Committee at the ninth session [720th meeting], that this agency should not become an exclusive club, the rules of which are laid down in secret and to which other people have to adhere. Owing to the primary position and the overwhelmingly advanced position of certain countries, this may be possible, but it would not be in the interests of atomic development and international co-operation to have caste distinctions in this matter in the beginning. I would be less than frank if I did not say that it is the view of India that the status of atomic development in India is such that India would have to come in at the early and formative stages, on a basis of equality and of self-respect. In India today the Atomic Agency Commission seeks to employ 800 scientists. There are already 400 of these in position, and there are nearly 200 other research scientists in the Institute of Fundamental Research. In our colleges and universities, no subject is more popular than physics, and therefore we have the technical assistance that is required.
76. We are the largest thorium-producing country in the world. Our plants process thorium. What is more, while it was thought two years ago that we had no uranium deposits, we are now in the happy position of having discovered such deposits.
77. Therefore, whether it is a question of resources or of scientific ability, whether it is a question of the desire to use atomic energy for peaceful purposes only or of the contribution that India has made in regard to the idea and the developments hitherto of the peaceful uses of atomic energy, this General Assembly will feel that the views I have put forward have to be seriously taken into account.
78. I am happy to say that both the United States representative and the United Kingdom representative gave an undertaking in the First Committee at the ninth session [717th and 718th meetings] that we would not be faced with what they called a fait accompli as regards this agency. I have no doubt that the undertaking was seriously given and will be kept.
79. There is only one other aspect of this matter to which I should like to refer, that is, the agency’s relationship to the United Nations. It is my Government’s view that the atomic. energy agency should have an integral relationship with the United Nations; that is to say, the agency should not be a foster child. We do not at the moment wish to go into the question of competence, and so forth. We do, however, think that this agency, which represents a central factor in the new civilization, in the atomic era, should be very closely related to the United Nations — I do not want to use the word “allied”, because of its particular significance. I have no doubt that the discussions in the First Committee and all the conversations that will take place outside the Committee will enable us to arrive at some arrangements in this respect.
80. I should like to say that my Government will cooperate in every way in this matter. We approach the entire problem from the point of view of a constructive endeavour, rather than from the point of view of staking claims.
81. I now turn to the more controversial, and the more political, questions on the Assembly’s agenda. The first of these is disarmament
82. As my delegation sees it, the position is this. There was a stalemate till 1952. Then, in 1953, the Assembly accepted [resolution 715 (VIII)] an amendment submitted by my delegation suggesting the appointment of a sub-committee of the Disarmament Commission. Since that time, progress has been made in many directions. In this respect, my delegation could not say very much more than what was said by the representative of Canada: “We are more hopeful than at any time in the past ten years” [523rd meeting, para. 13]. We heartily subscribe to that statement. We are happy to feel that in the two years of the Sub-Committee’s existence there has been a great deal of co-operation, many ideas have been put forward and none of these ideas are mutually exclusive. Mr. Martin said: "In the course of our Sub-Committee's meetings, progress has been made towards an agreed position on this most important question of the time-table, or schedule, of reductions and prohibitions” [ibid., para. 16]. He went on to state that many proposals had been made — by the Prime Minister of France, Mr. Faure, by the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Sir Anthony Eden, by the Prime Minister of the Soviet Union, Mr. Bulganin, and by the President of the United States, Mr. Eisenhower. He added: “We think that the President’s plan, as well as the other proposals made at Geneva, are not necessarily inconsistent with the proposals which have already been advanced in the Sub-Committee and on which, after long and difficult negotiations, some degree of general agreement may be in sight. None of these proposals, in our view, need be mutually exclusive. There is no reason why they might not all — modified perhaps — become steps along the road to disarmament” [ibid., para. 23].
83. I submit, with great respect, that there could be no greater proclamation of the advance of international co-operation than that expressed in those sentences. But we equally agree with Mr. Martin that the longer these matters are delayed, the more difficult the problems become.
84. In speaking of the International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy, I should have referred to the extracts from a statement made by Sir John Cockcroft, Director of the Atomic Energy Research Establishment in the United Kingdom, contained in the all too brief but very lucid report on the Conference submitted by the Secretary-General [A/2967]. In that statement, Sir John Cockcroft dealt with the problem of making use of the breeding principle. He concluded by saying that the final goal would be to produce by fusion reactions in the light elements an inexhaustible power source for the world. This means that, although at present the secrets of nuclear power are confined to a few countries, the time will soon come when, as a result of developments in the field of atomic energy — particularly in connexion with the peaceful uses — the manufacture of nuclear weapons on a large scale and in many parts of the world will become a possibility, or even a probability. Hence, the more we delay, the greater the number of problems that will arise. We are happy to feel that progress has been made in this field.
85. It is my delegation’s view that, having regard to the meeting of the Foreign Ministers which is to take place in Geneva, we should say very little that will create any difficulties for the main parties concerned. For, after all, it is the atomic Powers, the great Powers, which have the arms and the men. It is those Powers which must take the lead in this matter. That does not mean that disarmament and the establishment of the conditions for world peace are their exclusive concern or their exclusive responsibility, but, as things are in the world today, they are the Powers which can play a decisive part in the question. My Government wishes them every success in the attempts that they will make in Geneva in the course of their talks. We hope that they will take into account what Mr. Martin has said; namely, that all the proposals that have been submitted could become steps along the road to disarmament.
86. Reference has been made to the proposal submitted by President Eisenhower at Geneva for the exchange of military blueprints and mutual aerial inspection [DC/71, annex 17]. I think that it must be a matter of relief to all of us that the most important other party concerned — namely, the Soviet Union — has also expressed, through its Prime Minister, the view that there is no objection in principle to President Eisenhower’s proposal, but that the question is how it should be implemented. Here, again, Mr. Martin provides the answer. He says: “My Government has expressed its great interest in this plan, a plan put forward by the President of the United States for the exchange of military blueprints and for mutual aerial inspection. To us, that plan is a gesture of faith and of imagination typical of a great man and of his country” [523rd meeting, para. 19]. Of course, Mr. Martin’s lack of objections to the proposal for aerial inspection can apply only to inspection over Canada, because obviously his objections can only apply to his own country.
87. Thus we seem to have made a considerable advance in the matter of disarmament. This is, however, a serious question, and I think it would be improper for me not to refer to some of our concerns.
88. We wish to state here and now that the Sub- Committee of the Disarmament Commission is not an autonomous body; it is a working committee. The Sub- Committee’s terms of reference are contained in General Assembly resolution 808 A (IX). I should like to quote from that resolution as follows: “The General Assembly … “1. Concludes that a further effort should be made to reach agreement on comprehensive and coordinated proposals” — the Assembly will remember that, both in private and in public, we spent a great deal of time in finding the words “comprehensive and co-ordinated” — “to be embodied in a draft international disarmament convention providing for: “(a) The regulation, limitation and major reduction of all armed forces and all conventional armaments; “(b) The total prohibition of the use and manufacture of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction of every type, together with the conversion of existing stocks of nuclear weapons for peaceful purposes; “(c) The establishment of effective international control, through a control organ with rights, powers and functions adequate to guarantee the effective observance of the agreed reductions of all armaments and armed forces and the prohibition of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction...” Those are the marching orders, the terms of reference, of the Sub-Committee.
89. I think it is necessary to state that, so far as my Government is concerned, we stand fully committed — as a Government and as a people — to the total prohibition of atomic weapons, and we shall continue to press for that in this Assembly. We do not believe in the idea of using atomic weapons as a deterrent to war, or in the idea that they should be used in the case of so-called aggression to establish peace in the world. There must be effective control, otherwise prohibition becomes valueless. But I believe that it is not a practical approach to let this matter run in a vicious circle. We stand fully committed on this question and we do not change from this position. So far as we are concerned, atomic weapons must stand totally prohibited.
90. I would submit that the Disarmament Commission is bound by the existing resolution unless and until it is changed. So far there is nothing in the official records to show that there is anything to suggest that the principles laid down in this resolution are not those which guide the Commission. However, there have been many public statements from diverse quarters which cause some concern.
91. Without meaning any offence, I would say — representing a country that is not an atomic Power, that does not believe in the balance-of-power doctrine, that does not believe that preparation for war creates peace or that war creates peace — that even if the Soviet Union and the United States were to agree that they should have atomic weapons, we would not think that that would be good for the world.
92. We do not believe that there is more safety in two hydrogen bombs than there is in one. Therefore there is only one thing to do with the atomic weapon, and that is to throw it away.
93. I shall now deal with what are called colonial questions. Here again, the Secretary-General to a considerable extent comes to our rescue. I am very happy to read the following statement from the Secretary-General’s report: “The peoples of Asia today, of Africa, tomorrow, are moving towards a new relationship with what history calls the West. The world Organization is the place where this emerging new relationship in world affairs can most creatively be forged” [A/2911, page xi]. It is because we believe that the peoples of Asia and Africa are awake, that we believe that many of them can stand on their own feet as free nations, that we believe that these problems can best be resolved in the United Nations, that we bring these problems here.
94. This gives me the opportunity of expressing my very deep regret that our colleagues from France are not present at this Assembly. Since they are not present here, my voice will not reach them here. However, I hope that it will reach them indirectly.
95. I want to assure them that, so far as my Government is concerned, the bringing of these questions here, one question or the other — to us all of them are in the same category — is not in the least degree intended as a slight to the French Government. Furthermore, as I stated in speaking on the Algerians item [530th meeting], my Government and people have the highest respect for the traditions and for the great humanism which France can claim. We deeply regret the absence here of the French delegation. We understand the conditions which bring this about, and we hope that it will be possible for the French Government to review its position and to let us have the benefit of its co-operation.
96. I want to repeat that it has never been the purpose of my Government and that it is not the purpose of my Government — what is more, we would not agree to any other view — to support any position which requires the intervention of the United Nations in the domestic affairs of other people. Our contention is that Consideration for the purpose of reconciliation does not constitute intervention. I am sure that, so far as we are concerned, the Government of France will appreciate the fact that during the past three or four years our relations with it, particularly in these matters, have been concerned with finding ways and means of settling difficulties rather than of creating them.
97. I have taken this opportunity of making a further explanation in this connexion in the hope that it will reach the French Government. I feel sure that I speak for a great many of my colleagues when I say that we are sincerely sorry that a decision of this Assembly — not one taken by Africans and Asians only but one taken by a majority of the Assembly — should have had this result. We hope that, with the assurances of our friendship, of our great admiration for the French people and for their noble traditions, the French Government will find it possible to take its place with us very soon.
98. In connexion with the colonial problem, there is one part of the world to which I should like to draw particular attention. With the fall of Constantinople in 1453, the European nations marched eastward. They started to look for lands whose whereabouts they did not know — by way of the Pacific, the Atlantic or the Indian Ocean. Some of them came to our part of the world. A gentleman named Vasco de Gama landed in my home-town in 1498, and, with the hospitality characteristic of our people at that time and now, the rulers and the people of Calicut entertained him. He repaid them by capturing some of the population and taking them to Portugal, certainly not for altruistic purposes.
99. A period followed in which European countries established their empires in India: the Portuguese, the Dutch, the French and the English. Thanks to the rivalries of the various empires of the time, they established themselves in one way or another for certain periods, but finally the British established themselves, not necessarily by conquest alone but by various other forms of development, as the major ruling Power in India.
100. There were, however, small parts of India which remained in the hands of others — survivals — almost like the appendix in the human system. One of these territories is a place called Goa, in the west of India. This place plays an important role in the public opinion of India today.
101. I am not raising this question before the General Assembly. However, since it is a matter of international concern, I want to point out that it would be a great pity if the members of the international community were to disregard our restraint and fortitude in this matter. Our Government, in the face of strong public feeling, has disavowed and prohibited by its authority all acts of violence and intrusion. We are behaving in this matter with extraordinary restraint and with a desire at all times to bring about a settlement by peaceful means. It would be a great pity if, merely because one party was willing to act in that particular manner, no attention were paid to it by those who are in a position to do so.
102. It would be fantastic to think that a free and independent people like the people of India, who have come to an agreement with the British Government to establish their freedom, would permit another foreign Power to occupy a part of their territory as a colonial Power.
103. Therefore, while I have no desire to go into the merits of this question here, I should like people to take account of the fact that it would be a great mistake not to recognize our adherence to the principles of the Charter, especially when it is exercised by our Government under conditions of extreme difficulties.
104. There are two other parts of the world to which I shall refer. One is Cyprus.
105. Our position with regards to Cyprus is that the Cypriot nation is entitled to its independence in the same way as we are. Independence in the Commonwealth system — which is usually referred to as the Statute of Westminster — means that it is for the independent nation to exercise its discretion as regards its future. We have no doubt that the position which we adopted in the Assembly [521st meeting] is the correct one, because it enables the parties concerned, namely, the representatives of the Cypriot nation and of the British Government; to enter into negotiations so that the independence of these people might be established.
106. But in this case, as in others, we hope and firmly believe that it will be possible to bring this about without violence on either side. Violence only creates more problems than it solves. The future of Cyprus, to us, is a concern, on the one hand; of the ruling authority, which has divested itself of power in the context of co-operation, and of an independent Cypriot nation.
107. Looking back on the history of the past fifty or sixty years and looking at what is happening in Africa where British dominion prevails, I have little doubt that, with restraint and wisdom, a solution along these lines will be found.
108. Those who have come from former colonial countries in Asia and Africa have been charged with not having a correct appreciation of the advances which have been made in regard to colonial rule. The Secretary-General referred to Africa. Africa is an area of 30 million square kilometres, out of which it appears that the French have 10 million square kilometres, the British have somewhat over 4 million square kilometres, and the Portuguese have about 2 million square kilometres, the conditions of which are such that even colonialism would be ashamed of them. Belgium has 2,343,000, and the Union of South Africa just over 800,000 square kilometres. That makes very nearly 20 million square kilometres, leaving only the countries of Egypt, Libya, Ethiopia, Liberia and perhaps, in ten years’ time, part of Somaliland, to be called African or independent.
109. The conditions in all these territories are not the same; they vary. But when we talk about the peoples of Asia and Africa, we have to think of the peoples who are there and the present facts and the present trend of the world. I hope that the influence of the more liberal elements in all the countries, the impact of modern civilization and the desire to establish reconciliation and a solution of problems by peaceful methods, will lead to progress in these areas. We hope that the example set by some and the progress of Trust Territories as in Samoa, on the one hand and, I hope, in British Togoland in the future, will be of some assistance to colonial Powers in recognizing that the best way of establishing and maintaining a relationship is by the recognition of the rights and liberties of people and by establishing co-operation.
110. In this connexion, I should like to say that great progress has been made in certain parts of Africa, as ‘ in the Gold Coast and Nigeria, where, probably, in a matter of a few months or years, these countries, totally African, will become independent territories. We were happy to read, only two days ago, that in Zanzibar, a small protectorate, similar advance was being made. We are, however, apprehensive about the developments in Central Africa. I prefer to say little more about this because the people concerned are not represented here; we must meet these troubles as they arise.
111. And I think it is appropriate, especially for a person like myself and for my delegation, to pay a tribute to the large numbers of administrators, French, British and Belgian, who have remained in Africa and who, irrespective of the systems and purposes and politics, have spent a great part of their lives — I am speaking now of administrators, missionaries and other workers — in the service of the people. I should like particularly to mention in this connexion the name of Sir Edward Twining, the Governor of Tanganyika, who stands out as a great apostle of the working out of the principles of the Charter in establishing a multiracial community in his own territory, and for implementing the purposes of the Trusteeship Agreement. I wish to mention Sir Charles Arden Clarke, who is the Governor of the Gold Coast and who has assisted the territory towards self-government as against other forces that may be operating. I should also like to refer to two friends of mine — Sir Alexander Grantham, of Hong Kong, who, I understand, will soon visit China and perhaps make a contribution in some way, and Sir Andrew Cohen, of Uganda. It may come as a surprise to the Assembly that I mention these names, but I do so because there is no other place in which they are spoken of and because these are the men who, in difficult conditions, are seeking to implement the purposes we talk about.
112. My delegation has secured the inclusion in the agenda of two items which are related specifically to South Africa, and we shall deal with them when we come to them.
113. The two main centres of difficulty in international affairs are Europe and Asia. With regard to Europe, I impose upon myself the injunction that we should not say anything here which would not assist in the progress likely to be made in Geneva when the Foreign Ministers meet. But the view and the position the Government of India takes in this matter has to be stated.
114. First of all, I want to state before this Assembly that security and peace and the solution of problems in Europe is as much an Asian concern as the solution of problems in Asia is a European concern. We can no longer take the position that these European or Asian problems are not world problems. What is more, as I said, in Europe it is not Germany that is divided; it is the division of the world that is proclaimed by the line in Germany. Therefore, if a solution of this problem is desired, we have to look at the larger problem, and it is that point of view that we should like to express.
115. We should also like to say that, so far as the German people themselves are concerned, this is not their first attempt at establishing unity. Germany was established as a united country by a series of attempts from 1830 onwards. We express our hope that perhaps the German people may have a greater say in this matter. It is not a question of one side or the other recognizing one government or one authority or the other. These authorities are factually there, and since they both belong to the same country — they are both composed of Germans — then, without any derogation of the responsibilities the great Powers may carry in this matter, we hope it may be possible to pay greater attention to efforts to bring the two parties together so that they may themselves erase some of the distinctions and demarcations that have been made.
116. References have been made to the problem of security. This security concerns us because two world wars have arisen from the lack of security in this area. They were not European wars; they were world wars. We all paid the price for them and continue to pay it by their economic, social and other impacts, and therefore the problem of European security is a problem of Indian, Asian and world security. We should therefore like to say that in this problem of security there is only one form of security that is secure, and that is where the people secured are part of the security system. It is not possible to offer security from the outside; this cannot establish security. I am happy to say that this position seems to have been taken up by everybody concerned here, and we therefore wish the Foreign Ministers who will meet in Geneva every success, and we hope that in the spirit this Assembly has functioned so far, they will be able to take this problem a little further. What is more, we hope that no slogan will be established which may prevent its solution.
117. I now come nearer to my own part of the world. We Would have made no reference at this meeting, because it was not particularly necessary, to what is called the South-East Asia Collective Defence Treaty Organization, but since statements have been made here our failure to do so might be misunderstood. It is not our desire to raise a controversy around them, but I think it is necessary for the purpose of the record to restate our position. The South-East Asia Collective Defence Treaty Organization takes into protection areas which include our own country. It is not an overt infringement of our sovereignty yet. The organization consists of eight Powers, three of which are Asian. We are happy that its ramifications and activities are somewhat limited. We do not see it as making a great contribution towards stability in the area; stability is more likely to be achieved by the growth of neighbourliness, by a sense of non-interference and by world co-operation through the instrumentality of the United Nations. As I said, I regret to have to introduce this topic into the discussion, but inasmuch as it has been mentioned, my obligation in this matter is to state our view for the purpose of the record, clarity and precision.
118. One of the other problems is the problem of Korea. My delegation has introduced an agenda item on this matter, and here I should like to express our gratitude to the representative of Brazil, from whom I heard for the first time in this Assembly [518th meeting] that his Government, subject to certain conditions, was prepared to come to our rescue and assist us in solving this problem. This item will therefore remain on the agenda and we will watch the developments because, after all, conditions, even if they are technical, have to be met; otherwise, the problem will not be resolved. We are entitled to bring this matter before the United Nations, which has paid little attention to it apart from the Secretary-General’s frequent correspondence, in which he has said that it is a matter on which the United Nations must make a decision. The Government of India has cared for these people, who incidentally are not prisoners of war but ex-prisoners of war, and we therefore should leave this item on the agenda at the present time and see how matters develop. That does not diminish our appreciation of the repeated efforts of various parties, of the Secretary-General and foreign Governments, and now of the Government of Brazil, for making the offer which it has made.
119. In regard to the larger problem of Korea, again we would like to wait till the discussion in the First Committee, to ascertain the attitude of all the parties concerned. But allow me to say that, so far as my Government is concerned, we think the accomplishment of the primary objective of the United! Nations in Korea, namely, unification, is possible. We believe that it is possible only by the Korean people. We are happy to say that on both sides — the United States, for example, has withdrawn the greater part of its forces, with only two divisions there, and the Chinese Government only last week withdrew a further six divisions — the great apparatus of war gathered from outside is gradually being moved away. Under these conditions, the two sides ought to be encouraged to enter upon talks; while no sudden and spectacular results will take place, solutions are possible.
120. It is our considered view and our informed judgement — and I stress the words “informed judgement” — that there are no insurmountable objections in principle to organizing elections under international control in Korea. If we were to approach this problem without undue haste, but also without undue delay, it would be possible to get those objections removed. It is a great mistake to think that Korea is just a problem which is not giving too much trouble and therefore should be left alone. It is part of the running sore in Asia. It is part of the difficulties that exist. I hope, therefore, that, both in committee and outside, we shall approach this problem in a spirit of moderation and of constructive endeavour.
121. The next spot in the Far East in which my country is concerned is Indo-China. As a result of the Geneva agreement of the summer of 1954, Canada, Poland and India were requested to become members of an international commission, of which India is chairman. I should like to take this opportunity of expressing the gratitude of our Government to the Governments of Canada and Poland and their respective personnel in Indo-China for the extraordinary amount of co-operation and co-ordination that has existed in this commission. It has been truly an exercise in international service. Whilst there have been differences now and then, there have been very rare occasions when the Commission has been forced to vote on issues.
122. I should not wish to say very much about Indo- China, because there are problems there which are of a delicate character and for which solutions are being sought. I should like, however, to say that the future of peace in this area depends upon the adherence to and the implementation, both in the letter and in the spirit, of the Geneva agreement. The Geneva agreement is a complex document, but its basis is non-interference in these territories, the respect of their sovereignty, the establishment of a political settlement on a democratic basis and the termination of the functions of the Commission as a result of that political settlement.
123. As the Secretary-General says with regret, this matter does not come directly within the competence of the United Nations, but it is an international problem the untoward development of which can lead to difficulties. There are difficulties in this area, but we hope that, with the devotion which the two presidents of the conference, Mr. Macmillan and Mr. Molotov, give to this, with the amount of support that has been forthcoming within the commission from Canada and Poland and from us, and, what is more, the co-operation that the Government of France has given in the implementation of these agreements, it will be possible to reap the rewards of patient effort.
124. In this connexion, I should like to express my gratitude to the Foreign Minister of France, who said: “My country, with its unfailing respect for treaties, intends to carry out all its obligations to the letter; this naturally applies to the obligations which it undertook last year at Geneva, at the time of the Conference on Indo-China [528th meeting, para. 108]. I have no doubt that is so.
125. We are also concerned that the negotiations now going on between the Soviet Government and Japan should come to an early conclusion, so that Japan will take its rightful place in the world and in the Asian community. We have every reason to think that this will be the case, and our good wishes go with those who are now struggling with these problems. So far as we understand the position, though there have been delays, the conclusion of a peace treaty with Japan would make possible greater co-operation in Asia and lend greater strength to the United Nations, and better relations with other countries — our relations with Japan are very good — would be advanced.
126. Now we come to the last, and most important, part of Asia in tile present conflict, that is, China. When we say “China”, I hope I shall not be misunderstood when I say that the real problem in regard to China is one that concerns two great countries, that is, China and the United States.
127. It is both the endeavour and the desire of my Government to do what it can to assist in a rapprochement and understanding between these two countries. I want to say at once that India offers no mediation in this matter. We are not mediators, and mediation between two great countries/ sovereign nations with great power — economic, political and military — behind them, is not appropriate. But we are in the happy position that neither the United States nor, China suspects our motives. Our relations with them are not merely diplomatically correct, but of a friendly character. We do not say we understand either of these countries fully, or that they understand us fully, but it has been possible in the last two years to. make some progress, beginning with the conference in the summer of 1954 in Geneva, when Mr. Chou En-lai, the Prime Minister of China, spent a considerable time at Geneva.
128. This is again an example of the fact that the most complex political problems become more amenable to treatment if there are contacts of this character. Now this progress has been maintained somewhat, and there have been conversations between the Government of India and the Chinese in New Delhi, in Bandung and in Peking. There have been, equally, contacts between the United States and Chinese representatives, and I want to make it quite clear that we speak for neither of them. On the whole, the result of this has been, as from the beginning of this year, that we moved to the position that direct talks between the two Governments became accepted as a possibility. That was in January 1955.
129. I think I should say here that the initiative of the United States Government in offering facilities for the return home of a number of Chinese students in this country, which was announced in the early part of this year, was of considerable assistance. It broke the ice. This was followed by the public proclamation by Mr. Chou En-lai in Bandung that he was prepared to engage in direct talks. Then followed the conversations in Peking. While these conversations were not concerned directly with the problem of American fliers, they were concerned with the relaxation of tension, and this problem was involved in such relaxation of tension. It would not be appropriate for me to go into very great detail about private conversations between the respective Governments, but it may be said here that both the United States and China have made their contributions to the relaxation of tension.
130. On 19 May 1955, in Peking, it was decided that, as an earnest of their desire to contribute to the relaxation of tension, the Chinese would release four of these men. It was announced simultaneously in Peking and New Delhi on 30 May. We also knew and understood at that time that other releases would follow with the increasing relaxion of the tensions between the, two countries. In all, this, the talks between the Government of India and the representatives of other Governments in Washington, Ottawa, Moscow and London, have been of very great assistance.
131. Direct talks have now been started, but I think it would be wrong to think that the dragging out of things was a solution in itself. The very fact that the two Ambassadors of the United States and China have been sitting in Geneva for several months now and are gradually making progress is of some importance.
132. This problem of prisoners is both a political and a psychological one. It is not something that has begun just now. May I say here that since the establishment of what is called the People’s Republic of China in Peking, 1,500 United States citizens have returned to this country. But during the last two or three years tension mounted. There was a freezing of the position. Now, in the last few days, numbers of them have been released. For what it is worth, I should like to express my view that there is no reason to think that all the releases will not be effected. But that will be only a part of the problem.
133. If this can be pursued and developed on the lines that one hopes, it should have the effect of relaxation of restrictions in trade and more particularly in the very complex and grave problem of the coastal areas of China. Then I think it will be possible to bring about the reconciliation of these two countries by their own volition and initiative on the basis of a peaceful approach and settlement.
134. It is the view of my Government that the Chinese Government is willing and anxious that the problem of Formosa should be settled by peaceful methods. Peking has proclaimed its desire to approach it in this way and, what is more, to embark on negotiations to this end.
135. I would be failing in my duty if I did not say that the position in that area is, in all conscience, potentially grave. We must hope that the present conversations that are going on in Geneva will lead to direct meetings at a different level so that some, of these outstanding problems may be looked at and faced.
136. There is, we found, in Peking, just as we found in Washington, behind all the difficulties the desire to establish peaceful settlements. We found that there was not in China what might be called an anti-American feeling. There is a desire to belong to the world community. At Bandung, the Chinese were the foremost to express their adherence to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. They made a distinction, as I said on a previous occasion, between the decisions of the United Nations and the principles of the Charter.
137. I should like to leave these matters at this stage in this way because they are very largely matters of diplomatic negotiation, and I have said enough to indicate, I think, that during the last twelve to fifteen months much activity has taken place. We hope that the visits to China by the nationals of other countries, by those who recognize China and even by those who do not recognize China, will assist China to understand the world and the world to understand China.
138. Whether we like it or not, here we have a country of 600 million people. Without them, our Organization would not be complete. I think it is part of our world interest to seek areas of agreement in this matter and to find a solution.
139. At Bandung, the main political decisions were -taken on what is called world co-operation. But before I deal with the Bandung decisions, I should like to devote a few moments to India’s own position in international affairs.
140. India does not belong to the great Power blocs. We are referred to sometimes as “neutralists”, “neutrals”, “uncommitted areas”, and this and that and the other. I think it is necessary in this international gathering for us to state our position. We stand pledged to carry out the principles and purposes of the Charter. We think it is in our interests and in the interests of the world. We believe the policies that we follow — namely, respecting the sovereignty and integrity of other countries, not being predetermined in our relations and, what is more, pursuing what may be called the path of collective peace and not relying on armed groupings — is consistent with the purposes of the United Nations and calculated to advance them.
141. It is in pursuit of this end that, during the last two years, the visits of various statesmen and heads of Government to New Delhi, the visit of my Prime Minister to the Soviet Union and other countries, and very close contacts between the United States and ourselves, were made. These, and our position in the Commonwealth, have all assisted us in promoting the objective of what is now called by the comparatively ugly word “coexistence”. In any municipal or civil community, we call this “toleration”.
142. Here may I repeat what has been said before, that toleration is but the first step to understanding. We have found that the promotion of neighbourliness, agreements on non-aggression and mutual respect are ways of promoting co-operation. It may be asked: is your system likely to succeed? Can you rely on it? With great respect, we are entitled to ask: have the other systems succeeded? Can anybody turn round to us and say that the doctrine of the balance of power is more likely to help us, or to succeed — that doctrine which is the legacy of Mettemich, of Castlereagh and of Talleyrand, which wrecked the principle of universalism and culminated in the war of 1914, and which to this day is making its incursions into international affairs? I am reminded of the statement of a great Frenchman, Rousseau, who said that the strongest is never strong enough to be always master unless he transfers strength into right and obedience into duty.
143. The policy of our country is to extend these areas of friendship. We are told that we are able to do this because of the shield of protection extended by the armed Powers. That may or may not be so. But we are patiently following this path. I beg to submit that it is not only not inconsistent with and not contrary to the purposes of the Charter of the United Nations, but calculated to further them.
144. We are happy that there is greater appreciation of this approach, which is not intended to be an exclusive approach. It is not our intention to be a part of a peace area, or a third bloc, or to tell the world how to establish peace. In our circumstances, in the light of our history and in the great traditions of the man who made our national independence possible, we think it is always necessary to talk to one’s opponent and to seek the basis of reconciliation and negotiation. Even after conflict, negotiation becomes necessary. We have been greatly heartened in the last two years by the advance made in these directions. We have found that the responses to them in many parts of the world among the common peoples are great. We hope that the success of this basic principle at Bandung will make some impression on this Assembly.
145. Since there have been so many statements about the Bandung Conference in this place, I should like to point out that perhaps its greatest importance is that it was not based upon any racial principle. We deeply regret that the Federation of Central Africa, which was invited to the Conference, did not attend. The Asian- African Conference was not cast in the mould of agitation. It was merely an endeavour on the part of a certain group of countries to ensure that their problems and their approach to world problems might be better 9 understood.
146. I shall now read out the principles to which we pledged ourselves at Bandung and which, I submit, are based upon the Charter of the United Nations: “Free from mistrust and fear, and with confidence and goodwill towards one another, nations should practise tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours and develop friendly cooperation on the basis of the following principles: “1. Respect for fundamental human rights and for the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. “2. Respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all nations. “3. Recognition of the equality of all races and of the equality of all nations, large and small. “4. Abstention from intervention or interference in the internal affairs of other countries. “5. Respect for the right of each nation to defend itself, singly or collectively, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations.” (And here I want to interpose and say that the words “in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations” are vitally important, because they refer to Article 51, where collective organization comes in in case of attack.) “6. (a) Abstention from the use of arrangements of collective defence to serve the particular interests of any of the big Powers. “(b) Abstention by any country from exerting pressure on other countries. “7. Refraining from acts or threats of aggression or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any country. “8. Settlement of all international disputes by peaceful means, such as negotiation, conciliation, arbitration or judicial settlement, as well as other peaceful means of the parties’ own choice, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations. “9. Promotion of mutual interests and cooperation. “10. Respect for justice and international obligations.”
147. These were the principles of world co-operation that twenty-nine nations agreed to; twenty-nine nations not all belonging to one political persuasion, not all having the same economic organization at home; nations which included members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which included the People’s Government of China, and also the countries of South-East Asia, such as ours, Burma, Indonesia, Pakistan and Ceylon.
148. I have referred briefly to the various topics on our agenda and also to our own policy at home in regard to world affairs. I should like to conclude by saying that we can congratulate ourselves that, on the whole, we seem not only to be set on the road towards a solution of our problems, but also to have been able to establish an attitude and an approach that makes the solution of these problems possible. I do not say it so that it should be misunderstood in any sense, but I do say that even I the language which we have heard in the General Assembly this year has been of a character which warrants the hope that peace reigns more in the hearts of men today than it did before. On 28 September 1953 [448th meeting], my delegation posed this question to I the General Assembly: would it be possible for us in debates to abandon the luxury of epithets and superlatives? Could we, for example, give up using such j words as “imperialist”, “war-monger”, “satellite”, in describing anyone else? Could we not generally introduce an atmosphere of parliamentary discussion? Would it be possible to create in this Assembly a degree of human relationship where private discussions are possible, or more than they are here and now?
149. Now, we have gained very much in this way. We, as a country, have also gained in our modest efforts to advance understanding among our neighbours and among other countries far and wide. Various representatives, in New Delhi, of great nations, have made contributions towards this. I should have said a while ago that I should like to express our appreciation of the references made [529th meeting] by the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to India in regard to China. I think that this is also an appropriate occasion — since no other occasion may arise — to say how much the representative of the United States in New Delhi, an old colleague of ours, Mr, John Sherman Cooper, has assisted, behind the scenes and very silently, in fostering all the new alignments — I shall not say alignments, but new approaches, the new atmosphere — that have been made possible.
150. I have referred to disarmament. We have stated our position in regard to atomic weapons. Disarmament is necessary, it slows down the pace towards war, but it will -take time, even with the best of efforts. Therefore we should like this Assembly to consider — which we have already done and have seen no results from it — the two suggestions made by the Government of India to the Disarmament Commission.
151. One is that, pending the establishment of disarmament agreements, there should be a halt in the armaments race, some kind of truce on whatever basis, whether it be on the basis suggested by the Prime Minister of France [DC/71, annex 16] or on some other basis. The delegation of India submitted a draft resolution to this effect at the ninth session [A/C.1/ L.100/Rev.l]. The General Assembly unanimously resolved to refer it to the Disarmament Commission [resolution 808 B (IX)]. We have seen the resolution printed as part of the documents of the United Nations. We have no knowledge what consideration was given to it. We may hope that perhaps the suggestion made by Mr. Pinay has some, relation to it, but whatever it is, this is one of the suggestions which we should like to have considered.
152. Secondly, we should like the Powers concerned to take into serious consideration the suspension of the explosions of atomic and hydrogen bombs. We shall refer in the First Committee to such information as we have on the effects of these explosions, and also to the items which request the dissemination of information about them. However, since the Geneva Conference has lifted the veil of secrecy, since it is known to humanity that the Powers concerned are now possessed of instruments sufficiently destructive to bring about all the terror they can — that is to say, if the policy is one, as Sir Winston Churchill said, of “peace by mutual terror” — is it not possible to call a halt as a contribution towards peace, as a contribution towards disarmament, as some assurance to the peoples of the world that those who have the power are prepared to take the risks of peace as they are to take the risks of war, to call a halt to these experiments pending the establishment of a disarmament agreement?
153. As we said at San Francisco, our people and our Government believe in disarmament only as a means to an end. It is a means that shares the character of the end, as all means should do. But in the next decade disarmament alone will not be enough. I shall read out a statement of Sir John Cockcroft: “Advance in the atomic age will be of such a character that any disarmament or any ban by itself of instruments would not be sufficient because it would be possible very easily to convert the peacetime developments to war-time purposes.”
154. Therefore — we ought to address ourselves in the next decade to our main purpose, and — if we have said it once we are prepared to say it one hundred times if necessary — there is only one way before the world, and that is for nations to renounce war as an instrument of policy. This Organization now has to address itself — as a longer-term project — to the idea of renouncing war as an instrument of national policy. Disarmament or limitation of armaments is a good thing; it is an advance on present conditions; but it is not the establishment of peace. We can establish peace only when the nations have decided to abandon war. This will be possible — when these weapons of mass destruction and of terror are removed — once confidence is established and once it is possible for us, in this Assembly, for example, to say, in the words of Thomas Jefferson, that error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it. If we are able to trust to reason and not to passion, it will be possible to do this.
155. So, finally, let us realize that, in the face of these great problems, it is our business to listen to the voice of destiny. History is replete with examples of the truth that the solution of problems by means that are contrary to ends always results in tragedy. That was the fate of the Congress of Vienna, That was the fate of the League of Nations. One cannot reconcile dreams with schemes. If we must have schemes, we will be schemers. If we are going in pursuit of an ideal, then we should not be obsessed by the thought of the poet who, in the mid-war years, reflected the temper of that period of great despondency and cynicism when he said: “In this great hour of destiny they stand each with disputes, jealousies and sorrows.” But instead should we say, like the bard who belonged to the age of the Renaissance and of constructive endeavour, that “we must take the current when it serves, or lose our ventures”.
156. And our ventures — the venture of peace, the venture of world community — we may not lose. This is our charge and our obligation.