Mr. Castro stated that the election of General Romulo, head of the Philippine delegation, as President of the General Assembly pointed to an advance of that democratic tendency which the Assembly wished to instill in the organs of the United Nations in order that that society of free States might ultimately become universal and representative of all humanity.
101. It was an undeniable fact that the General Assembly had elected its President because he was universally liked and because his ability inspired confidence, irrespective of the political, military or economic power of the Philippines.
102. It was the unavoidable duty of the General Assembly to meditate at the opening of its fourth session on the heavy responsibility resting on all representatives of free States who had met to work for peace and understanding among the nations of the world, to strengthen international order and to ensure to all peoples the security to which they were so fully entitled.
103. The United Nations should not, however, confine its meditations to that aspect alone. It should remember the mistakes it had made in the process of its development, mistakes often due to the fact that it was an agency of international peace, built up by human hands. In order to avoid a repetition of past mistakes, nations must consider future prospects, take stock of their strength and pray the Almighty to increase it, so as to reduce as much as possible the differences and suspicion which separated some States from others. They must do everything in their power to put an end to that so-called cold war which divided nations into hostile camps and which had prevented the strengthening of peace among the nations which had emerged victorious from the Second World War. Failure to sign peace treaties with the enemy nations had left the world in the shadow of war, in a painful period of transition from the Second World War to peace, a situation which made it impossible to say truthfully that the United Nations had, by a just and stable peace, contributed effectively to the strengthening of international order.
104. As, the head of the Syrian delegation had stated at the 222nd meeting, no agreement among nations could be regarded as stable unless it was based on justice. The General Assembly must therefore aim in its work to ensure justice among nations, irrespective of economic, military or political power.
105. It was one of the fundamental obligations of the Assembly as well as of the other organs of the United Nations to abide closely by the principles of the Charter in order to maintain real harmony among the Member States, since they had not renounced the whole of their sovereignty, but only a part of it under the provisions of the Charter. The United Nations was only an international agency for peace and its powers were limited by the mandate it had been given by the Member States. Consequently Mr. Castro did not share the opinion held by some representatives that all the Assembly’s resolutions, no matter what form they took, should be carried out. In his opinion, the General Assembly and the other organs of the United Nations had not been vested with arbitrary powers, since none of the Member States had envisaged turning the Organization into a super-state with unlimited powers. On the contrary, the Assembly’s authority was based entirely on the condition that its actions should be in conformity with the principles of the Charter. The only thing the Assembly was authorized to do under the Charter was to make recommendations — which by their very nature could not be mandatory — to the Member States. It was nevertheless essential to respect and carry out those recommendations as long as they were based on the principles of the Charter.
106. The representative of El Salvador said that the Assembly had unfortunately erred by departing from some of the basic principles of the Charter, namely, the principle that there should be no intervention in the internal affairs of States and the principle that all peoples should have the right of self-determination. Both those principles had been violated in recommendations which he would not specifically name, because he did not wish to reopen old controversies but rather to contribute to the spirit of harmony in which the' Assembly’s decisions should be made.
107. Since the United Nations had come into being at the San Francisco Conference of plenipotentiaries held in 1945, it could be regarded as having been created prior to the conclusion of the Second World War. At that time many statesmen had acclaimed that fact as a good omen for the speedy establishment of a just peace at the end of the war, but the results should now be considered carefully. It had to be admitted that, although four years had elapsed since the end of the armed conflict, some of the most important peace treaties had not been signed and there was no immediate hope of their being signed. World peace had not yet been organized. Some countries still had to be considered technically as enemy States and, what was worse, the differences between the victors and the vanquished were not as great as those between the victorious Powers themselves. The United Nations Charter, as opposed to the Covenant of the League of Nations and the charter of the Organization of American States, had a very serious basic defect in that it contained no provision guaranteeing the territorial integrity of States, not even that of the Member States. That grave omission had made it possible for the Governments — not the peoples — of some of the most powerful States to acquiesce in the fatal mistake of allowing Poland, the country in whose defence the war had been started, to lose almost half the territory it had owned at the time of the outbreak of hostilities. The mistake of omitting to include in the Charter any provision guaranteeing the territorial integrity of all the Member States, as well as their political sovereignty over such territory, had certainly not been made because of some momentary forgetfulness on the part of the statesmen who had been present at the meetings of Yalta and Dumbarton Oaks, nor because they had been unaware of the provisions of the League of Nations Covenant. It was obvious that each of the representatives of the great Powers at those meetings had weighed all the facts from his own point of view and in the light of existing conditions and had arrived at the conclusion that it would be necessary to make several territorial changes at the end of the Second World War, changes which would have been contrary to the United Nations Charter if it had contained a provision guaranteeing the territorial integrity of the Member States.
108. The facts, however, were incontrovertible; the appropriate conclusions should be drawn from them. The delegation of El Salvador therefore intended to request the Assembly, composed as it was of the representatives of fifty-nine free States, to give serious consideration to the need so to revise the Charter that it would adequately safeguard the territorial integrity of Member States and of all States which co-operated in the maintenance of international peace.
109. The Argentine delegation had again proposed (A/970) that the General Assembly should examine the desirability of convening a general conference of the Members of the United Nations to adopt whatever revisions of the Charter might seem advisable in the light of the experience acquired in the preceding four years. The inclusion in the Charter of a clause ensuring respect for the territorial integrity of States might be contemplated, in order that justice might prevail in international relations and that universal peace might be secured.
110. The. representative of El Salvador understood that one of the possible alterations in the Charter which the Argentine delegation intended to propose was the abolition of the requirement of unanimity on the part of the five permanent members in votes in the Security Council, a requirement which conferred on each of them the veto power and which had been used too frequently in the work of that Council.
111. The delegation of El Salvador associated itself with the Argentine delegation in its wish to see that change adopted, without, however, disregarding the obstacles in the way of obtaining the abolition or even the limitation of the veto power.
112. For such a revision of the Charter to enter into effect, it must be adopted formally by a General Conference of the Members of the United Nations, and the following two conditions required by the Charter must be fulfilled: first, the revision must be sanctioned by two-thirds of the Member States, and, secondly, that majority must include the five permanent members of the Security Council, namely, China, France, the USSR, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. If even one of those members refused to sanction the revision, it could never come into effect.
113. The representative of El Salvador therefore proposed that in the event that a general conference were convened, a large number of modifications should be submitted, so that some at least among them might be accepted.
114. One of the questions which contributed most to the uneasiness throughout the world and gave rise to serious conflicts within the General Assembly was the failure on the part of certain Member States to carry out their obligation under the Charter to respect fundamental human rights. Those conflicts had spread to States which were not Members of the United Nations but had recognized in international treaties their obligation to respect those rights. In its resolution 272 (III) of 30 April 1949, the General Assembly had made appropriate recommendations with regard to Bulgaria and Hungary, countries accused of such violations of human rights. Nevertheless, there had not been the slightest sign of any improvement in those countries. To them must be added other countries, such as Czechoslovakia, which the Press throughout the world had accused of similar violations of fundamental human rights.
115. In accordance with international law, human rights were not subject to the arbitrary jurisdiction of any State, and should be recognized universally.
116. The delegation of El Salvador, which had always been a fervent advocate of the principle of non-intervention, had carefully studied the argument advanced in the cases of Bulgaria and Hungary. That argument invoked the principle of non-intervention, according to which the General Assembly of the United Nations had no right to intervene in problems relating to the rights of individuals in those countries and in the administration of justice, since that was the domestic function of their Governments. Essential human rights, in Mr. Castro’s opinion, were outside the national or domestic jurisdiction of States. The General Assembly had initiated a basic activity of the United Nations in taking up the recognition and protection of fundamental human rights.
117. The delegation of El Salvador had given its closest attention to the problem of the final disposal of the. former Italian colonies and to the question of Indonesia. It was the opinion of El Salvador, first, that the principle of self-determination should be applied whenever the population of a colony was desirous of obtaining its independence and was, in addition, capable of self-government; secondly, that in such cases the partition of the territory of a colony was not to be recommended without taking into account the wishes of its inhabitants; and, thirdly, that only if the population of a colonial territory were not ready to exercise the functions of self-government or to assume full independence should it be subjected to trusteeship, the territory being placed under the temporary administration of an administering authority or of the United Nations according to the circumstances of the case. The trusteeship should continue only until the protected territory was ripe for full independence, under the authority of a Government of its own.
118. Mr. Castro recalled that the attitude of the delegation of El Salvador towards the question of Greece, which was still threatened by the constant, intervention of various neighbouring States, had already been clearly defined. The provisions adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations for the protection of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Greek State had been fully supported,
119, The same could be said in regard to Korea. Two representatives of El Salvador were serving with the United Nations Commission on Korea which had successfully co-operated, with its observations and advice, in the organization of a Government in south Korea. There was a hope of uniting the Korean people on the democratic bases on which that Government had been established.
120. In regard to the problem of Jerusalem and respect for the Holy Places, the delegation of El Salvador supported the principle of. internationalization. It had defended that principle and would continue to do so to the best of its ability in order to prevent General Assembly resolutions 181 (II) and 194 (III) from being stultified and rendered inoperative by internal conflicts in Jerusalem.
121. In conclusion, Mr. Castro explained that his statements reflected the sincere desire cherished by the Government and people of El Salvador to co-operate in the work for peace which had been entrusted to the United Nations.