87. The thirteenth session of the General Assembly is convened under the dismal clouds of increased tensions and crises. One wonders if human ingenuity and human wisdom will be able to cope with the increasingly involved problems confronting all of us. The general debate in this world forum of course provides all of us with an opportunity to present our respective views on the nature of these problems and what seems to us the most sensible means of resolving them.
88. At the outset let me, on behalf of my delegation, deal with a peculiar phenomenon of the day which is generally known as a "balance of terror". The military bases which are supposed to protect certain countries may have a usefulness in maintaining this so-called "balance of terror", but apart from other considerations there are already unmistakable signs that the feeling of the people of those countries which the bases are meant to protect is rising to a point of opposition to the bases despite some Small advantage to the economy of those countries by reason of their presence. The only conceivable value of the strenuous efforts, for military superiority in the cold war is as a deterrent. It is a commonplace that both the United States of America and the Soviet Union already have weapons of complete annihilation. If ever they should turn the cold war into real shooting war, sooner or later, by' design or by accident, some one will use the most dreadful weapons available. Such a war would mean the annihilation of all that the human race has built, besides the catastrophic end of millions of men, women and children. Such survivors as there might be would envy the dead.
89. A theory has been advanced that a balance of terror would be sufficient to keep nations from using the most terrible weapons of destruction. Leaders in many countries hold the view that this dense of fear will at least prevent the big Powers from putting an end to human history on this little planet. But this so-called balance of terror can at best produce a very uneasy and precarious peace. Fear generates all undesirable states of mind: suspicion, hatred, anger and the impulse to destroy. In every war, cold or hot, the first casualty is truth. All organs of mass communication will inevitably engage in a battle of untruth, slander and distortion just to serve the interest of the countries operating those organs. Moreover, no balance of terror can last indefinitely, since all through history men always have ultimately got what they prepared for. It is characteristic of tensions that sooner or later they break or explode. Therefore, the indefinite continuation of this highly-strung state of tension is bound to end in disaster.
90. It is often argued that certain types of political and economic systems are so ruthless, so fanatical and so vicious that an ultimate resort to nuclear war, may be necessary to obliterate them from the face of the earth. The proponents of this kind of thinking maintain that life is not worth living if fundamental freedoms are denied to human beings. In this connexion, let me present before this Assembly the attitude adopted by my country towards this problem. Burma is dedicated to parliamentary democracy and firmly believes in democratic Ideals and the dignity of man. Burma is thoroughly averse to dictatorship in any shape or form. Burma looks upon free institutions as not only the most desirable of political systems but also as those most congenial to the flowering of the human genius. But tills conviction in democracy and dedication to democratic ideals do not preclude Burma from the knowledge that there are millions of people, in this world who are equally convinced of other types of political and economic systems and who are equally dedicated to their own ideals. Many countries have chosen systems of government very different from our own. It is, however, not our business to pass judgement on the internal affairs of other countries. The recognition of this basic fact enabled us to subscribe to the principles of peaceful coexistence. We are convinced that no system of government can be crushed by a hydrogen war, and no political or economic system will just wither away by the massive accumulation of weapons of destruction by its opponents. This leads my delegation to the conclusion that an effective and drastic reduction of armaments is urgently called for, not only to ease tensions and restore an enduring peace, but also to divert the surplus resources to purely creative fields of human endeavour.
91. With these considerations in mind, the declarations by the representatives of both the United States of America and of the Soviet Union before this Assembly in relation to the economic development of underdeveloped countries deserve the warmest support of all of us. The Secretary of State of the United States, in effect, has proposed [749th meeting] that the United Nations undertake to mobilize the human and material resources of the United Nations in a world-wide war against the scourges of poverty and disease. He has proposed that the United Nations dedicate the year 1959 to this purpose. The proposal of the Foreign Minister of the Soviet Union [750th meeting] to aid Under-developed countries out of the savings from the proposed reduction of military budgets of the four great Powers also deserves our warmest support. My delegation does not see any reason why this proposal, like the United States’ proposal, should not receive universal acceptance. As I have stated earlier, a security system based on a massive balance of terror is not only precarious, but is also extremely wasteful of money, talent and energy. We cannot but deplore the vast expenditure of funds and effort for weapons that become outdated almost as soon as they are in production and that we hope will never be used. How much better it would be if we could utilize the resources for urgently needed schools, houses, hospitals, roads, libraries and economic aid to under-developed countries.
92. My delegation feels that no proposals deserve more enthusiastic support than the ones made by the United States and the Soviet Union. There are millions of people in the world who do not have enough to eat and enough to cover themselves with, and whose children cannot go even to the primary schools. It seems comic to talk to them about the virtues of democratic ideals and the dignity of man. Both proposals, therefore, deal with the crux of the present-day world problem.
93. My delegation has no doubt that the Members of the United Nations could, by co-operative endeavour, achieve very substantial results in the sphere of public welfare. The means to do it exist. The knowledge exists. The techniques exist. All that is required is a decision on our part to dedicate our energies to this most constructive and exciting venture of all time. It lies within our power within the coming decades to stamp out diseases which unnecessarily kill millions of humans each year. It lies within our power to open up the avenues to knowledge for hundreds of millions of people by making illiteracy a thing of the past. It lies within our power to harness our rivers, to improve our agriculture, to develop our industries, to house our peoples decently, and to raise the physical and social well-being of the almost subhuman two thirds of the human race.
94. Such a co-operative effort by the United Nations could capture the imagination of the whole world. It could provide an outlet for the fulfilment of man's longing to engage in creative works of peace and progress. And it may not be too much to hope that in co-operative, constructive Work above the clamour of political conflict, beyond the reach of clashing ideologies, the tensions which plague us today might recede and be forgotten in the joyous task of working together for the good of humanity.
95. The common stand taken by the United States of America and the Soviet Union in regard to the imperative need to help the under-developed countries is certainly a matter for universal gratification. My delegation considers that the most important problem facing the world today is how the rich and the poor nations are going to live together. This is a division of the world more lasting and potentially more explosive even than that between Communists and non- Communists. Yet the issue was hardly ever discussed until now. In giving aid to underdeveloped countries it is important to bear in mind that the purpose is not for the fulfilment of cold war objectives, but just to give the less fortunate people a more abundant life. On behalf of my delegation, let me say that more than two-thirds of the world's population are far more concerned with their attempt, by a twentieth century industrial revolution, to raise their extremely low standards of life. Unless the rich nations become involved in that great revolution, they are going to miss the real point of the second half of the twentieth century. The problem does not end with the drastic reduction of armaments and the offering of aid to less fortunate countries. The more essential factor is the question of relationship between the donors and the recipients. In this gigantic human endeavour, how to become partners instead of patrons is the key question for the donors.
96. Let me now deal with the most critical situation faced by the United Nations since the Korean War. f am referring to the extremely serious development in the Far East. Incredible though it seems, the world is on the brink of a major war over a couple of islands off China that can mean nothing to any country other than China.
97. On behalf of my delegation, I have dealt briefly, during the discussion on the adoption of the report of the General Committee [754th meeting]. with the imperative need for the United States to re-examine and reappraise its Far Eastern policy, and therefore, I shall not attempt to reiterate the arguments I had presented on that occasion. We know that the Government of the United States would regard an attack on the-off-shore islands as an attack on Formosa, and we also know that Moscow would regard an attack on the People's Republic of China as an attack on Soviet Russia. It is true that the diplomatic talks between the United States and the People's Republic of China are now going on in Warsaw, but there is very little indication that the talks will remove the roots of the antagonisms We are witnessing once again one of the turbulent confusions which have surrounded one crisis after another since the Korean War.
98. All the published statements and speeches emanating from several Interested sources appear to have ignored all the factors which have brought about the present crisis and which make any real solution so difficult. The facts are plain. The Central Government of the People's Republic of China controls the mainland of China more firmly than any other Chinese government has for the past hundreds of years. Many countries have consistently refused to recognize this Government and some of them are closely allied with the refugee Government in Formosa which has never concealed its ambition to reverse the result of the revolution and re-establish itself on the mainland. It is as plain as day light that this policy, if not revised, would inevitably lead to an open dash. Yet, it is at matter for regret that the United States allowed Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek not only to ding to the off-shore islands, which have no value for the defence of Formosa, but also to fortify them and to reinforce them until one-third of the Nationalist troops are now stationed there. Of course my delegation is distressed at the employment of force by the People's Republic of China to get rid of this menace dose to the mainland, but for the sake of objectivity it must be admitted that the provocation is there.
99. I do not propose to deal at length with this very serious crisis facing the world, but I should like to crave the Indulgence of this Assembly to go a little deeper into the roots of tensions in the Far East.
100. The function of the United Nations should clearly be to give judgement on a dispute. But to give judgement requires that the evidence of both parties be heard. It is certainly not the function of the judge to make any decision until the defendant as well as the plaintiff has been allowed to state his case.
101. My delegation will not support any measures whereby the United Nations assumes the functions of a co-belligerent on one side, in any armed conflict, without hearing both sides.
102. This principle should be applied with greater force to the present crisis in the Far East. The United States, for which we have the highest regard, for its valiant history, its noble traditions and its dedication to the principles of freedom, tolerance and democracy, has all along urged the virtues of negotiation while it is at the same time refusing to recognize the People's Republic of China. The great country of the United States has been praising the United Nations as the only hope for mankind and as the most effective instrument of international conciliation, while at the same time it is. keeping China out of the United Nations, and refuses to hear China's case in this world Organization. Without recognition, negotiations are impossible, and without negotiations the United Nations will stumble from crisis to crisis until we all stumble into war.
103. It shall be the constant endeavour of my delegation to help in averting such a catastrophe.