9. Mr. Krishna MENON (India): My delegation wishes to add its voice, Mr. President, to the many that have been heard from this rostrum conveying to you their felicitations on your election to the high office of the presidency of the General Assembly. We should also like to take this occasion to recall the services rendered by your predecessor, Sir Leslie Munro.
10. The general debate is usually an occasion for surveying the events of the last year and dealing with the many problems which may strike a delegation as being particularly important. Some seventy-two speakers have preceded me, and they have taken about fifty hours of the Assembly's time. It is therefore not to be expected that I shall have very much new to say. My delegation has had the benefit of a survey of world affairs from the different points of view of different continents and different so-called ideologies and also of those who prefer to remain outside the conflict of ideologies. In all these speeches, in addition to the expression of great concern about the present state of the world, which is not unusual in expressions of opinion from this platform, there has been an emphasis on the outstanding importance of the problem of disarmament, concern about the exclusion of China from the United Nations, and an unusual but welcome stress on economic affairs.
11. It has been our privilege to benefit from these speeches that have preceded ours, and we would like to take this opportunity of echoing what has been said here by many delegations in the way of an affirmation of their loyalty to the United Nations and to the Charter and its principles and to the determination of our Government to implement those principles to the best of our ability and understanding.
12. It is usual on these occasions to refer to conditions prevailing in one's own country, and that is not done because of any national egoism. In the case of a country like ours, in part representing the new resurgent Asia, wo do so not in the sense of having any priority of representation over anyone else but merely by way of providing a fair example of that new Asia. Therefore, if I take the time of the Assembly on a few matters of detail, I feel sure that the Assembly will forgive me.
13. In this connexion, the statement made by our Prime Minister a few hours ago in New Delhi, at a meeting of delegates of the International Monetary Fund, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the International Finance Corporation, appears to us to be relevant, because in this Assembly, especially having regard to the incidents of the last two or three years, it would not be out of place at all to quote these words which, in our humble view, are an expression of the sentiments of the peoples of Asia. Our Prime Minister asked delegates to bear in mind the fact that millions in Asia and other underdeveloped countries- "are no longer going to keep quiet, and they want the better things of life". He went on to say: "Normally, you have in the past been surrounded by Europe or America. It is good, therefore, that for a change you should feel the environment of Asia and all other things that pertain to a part of Asia".
14. Mr. Nehru said that he did not mean to argue that Asia was one solid bloc. He said that there were differences; that there were problems of West Asia, that there was great tension and danger at present in the Far East of Asia, and that there were also the problems of South Asia. "They are different", he said, "but the main connecting link is that there is tremendous ferment in Asia, whether West, East or South. It is an important factor to remember."
15. He said that there was now a vast difference in living standards, and all that goes with it, between the highly industrialized countries and communities and the non-industrialized ones. He went on to say: "What is even more significant is that the gap is ever increasing — it is not being bridged but it is ever increasing. The pace of progress, through development of science and technology, is tremendous where they have been developed, while other countries, like India, struggled hard just to keep themselves going. For us" — for all Asia and for Africa in part- "it is a struggle for survival. It is a life and death struggle for the nation as a whole, for the 400 million people. I want you to feel this human element. We have to look upon it from the point of view of resources and money and all that. But even more important is the tremendous ferment going on in the minds of hundreds of millions of people in Asia. "For Asia is and will continue to be in an explosive state because the recent changes during the last few years have unleashed a giant, political changes and the like have unleashed a giant kept tied up for 150 years or more. It has been unleashed not entirely, but considerably, and naturally it does not propose to behave as if it were leashed either in apolitical domain or in an economic domain."
16. The Prime Ministers pointed out that, if the Conference had met in New Delhi 300 years ago, the terms of economic relations would have appeared different. The thoughts of that vast continent are rooted in the conditions of the people, and it is not easy for those who live outside or who do not have intimate contact with it to realize the reactions and responses to various appeals that are made here or to realize generally how we function in the context of newly- liberated areas.
17. Therefore, as I said a while ago, if one may refer briefly to conditions that exist, it is also because we represent in many ways the conflicts of ideas and ideologies that take place here. To us, it is not the conflict of ideologies that seems to be real; it is the conflict between the "haves" and the "have-nots". It is these economic divisions that tend to drive the world into conflict, even though the day of classic imperialism is proclaimed to have passed.
18. We live in conditions of a planned economy, and we make no apologies for it. Without that planning, it would not have been possible for us to bend our energies and our meagre resources and to keep our head above water in this world. In that economy, a degree of balance between the old country, with its hundreds and thousands of villages, and the needs of modern production, Including our defence, becomes important.
19. Also, we are attached to a way of thinking where we like to make experiments for ourselves and not take orders hereafter from any people, and to the method of trial and error even though often it becomes expensive. Added to that is the necessity of being able to keep pace with changes in the context of a parliamentary democracy and by ways of consent. All this added together makes in our country a set of circumstances which provides for the world a great deal of opportunity for study and observation.
20. Each year we have drawn attention to the vast changes that occur in the villages of India. There are some 600,000 of these, and today 272,000 of them have come under village self-government — under what called the Community Projects Scheme, which I am glad to think has attracted die attention of the technical side of the United Nations. By these smaller scale efforts of villages, somewhere about 2.72 million acres of land have been reclaimed and another 4.9 million acres brought under small irrigation schemes. These figures do not refer to the larger schemes at all. I mention this in particular because in countries like ours, however much one may read about great industrial advances and achievements, the bulk of our people lives in these villages and is dependent upon agriculture. Equally, in the conditions of planned economy, where we are trying to avoid the dangers and the diseases, of a scramble for property and power and at the same time of attempting to beat people all into the same pattern, there lies a co-operation that has become very important. Although we are rather late in the field in this particular matter, in the last few months and years some 60,000 co-operative societies — of which over a thousand are of the industrial type — have come into existence. Over and above that, it is' not possible in modern conditions, if we are to maintain stability in our country, to do without the maintenance of democracy to the lowest level.
21. A whole civil service has also come into existence — and I use this term advisedly — because without it policies cannot be implemented by adequate administration, The Government of India today has in training over 400,000 men and women who are functionaries in the villages, and they hope to reach the target of one million trained men and women at the end of next year.
22. These planned efforts have to a certain extent required a great deal of sacrifice from our people, and the main resources have come from our country itself. We could not keep the pace of our efforts without assistance from other countries. It would take us more time and necessitate other methods. Therefore, I would like to take this opportunity of expressing the appreciation of our country to countries large and small that have come to our assistance, either technically or with other resources. It is not necessary for me to go into the details because they are always published in the Press and are available,
23. There has been a considerable amount of talk to the effect that a country like ours, attempting to industrialize itself and to spread and implement democratic institutions on a large scale, may fall by the wayside owing to the pressure that these endeavours must impose on us. There have been expressions of opinion outside India that our Five-Year Plan should be cut down. The maintenance and success of our Plan, however, is of more than national concern, because if we, with our modest efforts, could not get there, it is unlikely that other people, similarly placed, could do so. Our targets have been modest. I am glad to be able to say that in the two and a half years of the Second Five-Year Plan, we have on an average reached 62 per cent of our targets, and there is no reason why we should not exceed them.
24. The Community Projects referred to the smaller and rural aspect of the Indian social and economic revolution. But, at the same time, it is not possible for, a country like ours to survive in this world without considerable industrial development, and this industrial development has gone on — although not as fast as we would like it to — and schemes on which the future of our country the production of food and our ability to survive depend, have also gone on apace. Since it is not possible to give a detailed account, I should like just to refer to one or two aspects.
25. One of the major items in this enterprise has been in relation to the harnessing of the water of our country. The greater part of rain-water flows into the sea, as may well be the case everywhere else. The famous Bhakra Dam, however, which is 740 feet high and provides for 650 miles of canals, is nearing completion and should produce for us nearly a million tons of food. In the arid desert of Rajasthan canal irrigation has new reached the position where this desert is going to be irrigated by nearly 200 miles of canals.
26. Now these facts are not submitted to the Assembly in any sense of national egotism, or even with any feeling of satisfaction much less complacency. But it is one of the main problems in this world whore large numbers of us, who but a few years ago were part of colonial empires, whore our economic and political processes have either been thwarted or stunted, or at any rate have not made their full development, have now come into other contexts. That development is not possible in any country in isolation from the rest of the world.
27. From there we come to the United Nations. It is our obligation on those occasions to look both forward and backward. While looking to what has happened In the past should be confined to seeking to avoid errors in the future and, if we have had any successes, to draw inspiration from them, looking in front of us we are faced with many difficulties and obstructions which seem to project themselves from the past. Broadly speaking, I think we can only say that the achievements of the last year in the big political matters are largely of a character where we could feel that it might have been worse. In other words, it would have been possible, as I shall point out later on, to avert what could have been a larger conflict by the operation of, not necessarily the machinery, but the expression of the will of, the United Nations.
28. My country is grateful to the many specialized agencies and organs of the United Nations which — either by propaganda, by the organization of public opinion or by actual aid — have been able to assist Asian, African, and other under-developed countries. In this connexion my Government desires to mention particularly the name of the United Nations Children's Fund as indeed it would like to mention the names of the great countries such as the United States, the Soviet Union, the Colombo Plan countries, Norway, Japan and the nations of eastern Europe which have all, either technically or otherwise, come to our assistance in the carrying out of this plan. Further than that, we are also happy to feel that the regional organizations of an economic character have gained strength in the last year, both in southeast Asia in the newer projects of the Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East and in the formation of the Economic Commission for Africa. It is our great pleasure to welcome this regional organization in Africa.
29. This year, as two years ago, the United Nations once again met the challenge of what we would, without any disrespect to our friends, call the aftermath of imperial power. The first of these occasions was two years ago when we were faced with the situation - now happily concluded — in the Middle East resulting from the entry of foreign troops into Egypt. We are happy to think that the situation has now been resolved, and if we refer to this today it is only for the purpose of pointing out that a great deal of this kind of thing seems to appear as the result of miscalculation and misinterpretation. All of us will remember that two years ago it seemed to be assumed as a truism that the Suez Canal could not function under any conditions, except under foreign auspices. Now what are the facts? First of all, the relations between the former Suez Canal Maritime Company and the present Company — created by the Government of Egypt but independent — seem to have been resolved in a way which at that time was a bone of contention. No question of expropriations seems to have arisen, and there appears to be a happy settlement. Equally, it was believed that it would not be possible for the Canal to function with the comparatively low engineering achievements of the Egyptian people. It is, therefore, interesting to look at reports on the Suez Canal since then. Instead of a decrease in traffic we find that — in spite of the fact that the number of warships going north or south is smaller today — there was a considerable increase of traffic In June 1958 as compared with the previous June. What is more, the Nasser project for improving the Canal will we are told, make it navigable for 200 ships in a day. Therefore, instead of being retarded in either a technical, an economic or apolitical sense, the new arrangements with regard to the Suez Canal - without any difficultly in connexion with the relations between the users and the others — seem to have settled down.
30. If it had been possible for all concerned to have appreciated this situation, the tragic developments of two years ago could have been avoided. My delegation does not say this in a manner of "We told you so", but it is necessary for us to draw some lessons from this without jumping to conclusions based on some newspaper reports, or ambassadorial reports, or some misreading regarding a revolutionary movement such as the one that took place in Iraq recently.
31. The position of my Government in regard to the recent entry of United Kingdom and United States troops into other areas of the Middle East has been communicated to the General Assembly [738th meeting] and has been expressed by the Prime Minister in Parliament as part of Government policy. It is that we do not accept that foreign troops should be used in any territory — and we say advisedly "in any territory", whether it be Europe, Asia, Africa or anywhere else. We are convinced that in the Middle East there can be no settlement and no return to normality until foreign troops have been removed. As my Prime Minister said: "The countries there should live their awn free, Independent lives without interference from outside, from wherever it may be. The foreign troops should be withdrawn. In our view, the United Nations should not send any kind of police or armed force to Lebanon or Jordan, as has been suggested in some places. If it is suggested that the United Nations Observation Group should continue to function for some time, or should be increased in numbers, we would be prepared to consider such a proposal favourably; but any such proposal must be a peace measure, and it can have a chance of success only if it is accepted by all countries". This, however, is now part of history.
32. Similarly, we are always faced with what is called "indirect aggression". My Prime Minister says: "Indirect aggression is inherently, essentially, inevitably a part of the cold war technique. In fact, there would be no indirect aggression at all if there was no cold war. Therefore, the way to resolve indirect aggression would be, on the one hand, to withdraw foreign interference from other places, and also not to approach world problems on this cold war basis."
33. We have before us a report submitted by the Secretary-General [A/3934/Rev.1] on the immediate position in the Middle East. My delegation does not intend to debate this at this moment, for two reasons. First of all, the Secretary-General seems to have said, or implied, that this report has the acquiescence, or the co-operation, or the consent, of the parties concerned. We have heard one or two statements from this rostrum from the parties concerned which, in the absence of any other evidence, we must for the time being accept with comfort. We hope that all these troops of foreign origin will be withdrawn from these territories and the people allowed to live their lives in their own way. But my delegation reserves the right to consider the report submitted to the United Nations should world conditions so demand. It is our view that a report of this kind should have been placed on the agenda as an item in the normal way. I shall come back to this aspect of dealing with United Nations matters in a short time; for the present, however, we do not intend to comment on the substance of this report except to express the hope that this sorry chapter of history will soon be closed.
34. There are some lessons, however, to be drawn from this: that neither in the Egyptian crisis of two years ago, nor in the Lebanese situation in the present, the policies that have been followed in these areas -either of a system of defensive pacts or of intrusion in other ways, or of reliance on the division between the Arab countries — have been of great use. On the other hand, the solution in regard to the Middle East was found through Arab unity; and we welcome this expression of unity and take the view that when the United Nations Observation Group was in Lebanon, the United Nations should have been able to rely on its presence and on the fact that what really happened was an internal affair which perhaps could have been settled in that way. At the same time, we are happy to think that no warlike action has taken place, no shots have been fired and no people have been killed; and what is more, it did not lead to a world crisis. For all this we are thankful, and we are thankful for the restraint exercised on all sides. But that does not alter the basic proposition that, in this area, the time has come for everyone to recognize that these lands are no longer anybody's to exploit; they are the homes of the people to whom they belong and, what is more, their wealth must be exploited in the interests of the populations themselves, with such co-operation as may be forthcoming without sacrifice of their independence.
35. This takes us to two matters which must, by association of ideas, be spoken of, although it is not exactly fitting here.
36. Many delegations have spoken one way or the other about the suggestions that have been discussed in the corridors of the United Nations and mentioned by representatives to one another about the establishment of a permanent United Nations emergency force. My country does not yield to any in its desire to make contributions to the maintenance of peace — indeed, our record will stand examination — but I am directed by my Government to say that we are irrevocably opposed to the conception of the creation of an international police force unless the world disarms. We are not prepared to subscribe to the idea that there should be a police force placed at the disposal of any organ over which there is no legal control. It has been mentioned to us by friendly delegations that it would ease the work of the administrators and make it easier to deal with a crisis if each country could allocate a certain number of officers or men for this purpose.
37. I should like to submit that it is an entirely impractical proposition. It is not possible for any country to put by a certain number of soldiers and officers and say: "You are there to go out when there is trouble in the world." First of all, what do they do when there is no trouble in the world — which, I hope, will be the longer period of time? Secondly, if they were so kept and did not participate in the general military organization of the country, they would be no longer competent to perform the task for which they were; sent out. Over and above that, which country is to be selected for this purpose? One country may be acceptable in one situation; the same country may not be acceptable in another situation. So, whether it is a permanent standing army of the United Nations, with some generalissimo here, or the farming of an international police force in other countries, my Government, as things are at present in the world, is irrevocably opposed. We could not consent to the taking of troops to the soil of other countries, even though they are United Nations troops — they are still foreign troops. It may be that some delegations may regard this as an excess of nationalism, but the experience of foreign troops on the soil of our land is too fresh for us to forget. The world must disarm; the world must establish world law; there must be some sovereign authority that must be obeyed; it must be possible to exercise sanctions. These are all conditions which may take years to come about. At that time, as in municipal communities, it may be possible for us to consider the establishment of police forces.
38. At the same time, there is no reason whatsoever why the experience gathered — whether by the peace army that went to Korea, or by the few officers of Canadian, Polish and Indian nationality who are now serving in Indo-China outside strict United Nations organization, or those in the Gaza Strip, or by the United Nations Observation Group in Lebanon — should not be studied and kept for future reference. We have no objection to a proposal of that character; but anything that creates a force on which responsible popular opinion cannot play and, what is more, whose authority and power of sanctions is questionable, is not only impractical, but is fraught with danger. Thus, whenever those propositions come forward, I hope that delegations will appreciate our position and will know that we shall in no sense support such proposals.
39. We need only look at the provisional agenda of the General Assembly to see the unresolved problems of the world. We note that about seventy-two items always appear. They have both a positive and a negative aspect. It is perhaps a good thing that they appear because it is far better to talk at each other than to shoot at each other. However, the fact remains that some of these problems should have been out of the way a long time ago. Korea is an outstanding example. I shall not go into the origins or the development of that quarrel, but that unhappy land remains divided instead of being represented here with us. My Government does not see any reason whatsoever why the problem of Korean unity should not be resolved if a degree of realism and, if I may say so, a tolerant attitude were adopted towards it. I firmly believe that, especially in view of the withdrawal of the Chinese personnel from Northern Korea, there should no longer be any objection to the supervision of elections by international authority instead of insisting that they should have a United Nations label. What is more important is that the elections should be fair and impartial and have the consent of everybody concerned, It is our understanding that the North Korean Government has repeatedly stated that it would be willing to participate in elections which were internationally supervised, but, as the United Nations had involved itself in the war, from their point of view, it would be rather difficult for them. My country would like to see Korea take its place in the United Nations and be able to add Its own contribution to our deliberations.
40. The same thing applies, to a certain extent, to Indo-China. There Is in Indo-China an international machinery which is outside the United Nations. It came about as a result of direct negotiations between the participants in the Geneva Conference on Indo-China in 1954 who asked Canada, Poland and India to assist in guarding the peace. There are no troops there, but there are large numbers of officers who have been there for three or four years.
41. In Cambodia, happily the situation has settled down except for incursions into the territory from South Viet-Nam whose people are challenging the authority of the Cambodian Government by infiltration. I have no doubt that the Government of Cambodia will be able to deal with this problem. However, the peace in that part of the World is threatened by this particular action.
42. The same thing applies to Laos, which is a member of our Organization and where elections have taken place, but where the complete carrying out of all the conditions under the Geneva agreements has not taken place. The main difficulty with regard to Indo-China is the presence of the partition line in Viet-Nam. In the old days it used to be said, "divide and rule". Now the maxim seems to be, "divide and leave". Even though this matter is not on the agenda of the General Assembly, I believe that world opinion should exercise its influence on both sides in Viet-Nam to come together as one country so that it may participate here and so that the danger of an eruption in that part of the world will become a thing of the past. The former French authorities have completely withdrawn from this area and there have been no attempts on the part of France to interfere.
43. We should also like to say that if all these countries, while sovereign nations, as the representative of Cambodia said the other day [756th meeting], have the right to ask for assistance, and indeed may do so, and the countries that come to their assistance should not be called aggressors for that reason, it is not in the interests of peace to entangle them in defensive alliances or to have them assist in the spread of large quantities of arms.
44. We hope that the problem of Indo-China will be resolved in the not too distant future. We have some special national interests in this matter because we would like to withdraw the personnel who have been there for a very long time. I feel sure that the Canadians and the Poles feel the same way, from what we know of it.
45. These are some of the unresolved problems which face us, which seem comparatively easy of solution, however, if we approach them from the point of view of realism and if we exercise a degree of tolerance in seeing the position of the other side.
46. Before leaving this aspect of matters, we should like to express our appreciation of the fact that in dealing with the problems in the Middle East, the Secretary-General and his staff have played a part which is historic. However, I should like to say — and I hope that, the observations I am going to make, which arise more or less from the developments of the last two or three years, will be accepted in a more or less philosophic sense — that it is all very well in an emergency to produce some sort of machinery and say "deliver the goods", but I think we must think hard and see that we do not get a situation where the United Nations, as at present composed, becomes a kind of superior authority, a kind of super-state with its representatives directing governments, which is not provided for in the Charter, and where the Secretary-General will be pushed away from his Charter functions into other matters. It may have been much to our advantage in these immediate situations, and it will therefore be for us to think out how we should face new situations that might arise. We have to see that we do not exceed the cautious balances that have been introduced into the Charter for the preservation of national sovereignty and for the preservation of small nations. If this rather superior power should be at the disposal of a snap vote of a two-thirds majority, the position of small States and of minorities would be far from, enviable.
47. I have great hesitation in dealing with this problem, because it is not possible to deal with it at great length from this rostrum, but, at the same time, it would be both cowardly and, I believe, a disservice to the Charter and to this Organization not to mention it.
48. I want now to address myself to the two or three problems which my Government feels should have the attention of the Assembly. There is nothing new about them, 'but they do concern us very much. First, the maintenance of forces in other parts of the world imposes very considerable burdens upon countries. We ourselves do not subscribe to the view that sovereign nations with self-respect would hire out their troops even to the United Nations and, therefore, to a certain extent, the countries contributing carry the burden of somebody else's misdeeds. The problem was put sharply by the question, "who will pay for the Suez Canal?". The Secretary-General, with a deftness that is characteristic of him, has passed it on to the shipping companies. But the shipping companies, so far as I know, are composed of people who want to make profits. They are not philanthropic institutions, and therefore I suppose ultimately the consumer will pay. It is quite true that the Indian shipping companies have declared that they will not pass on this burden to the consumer. But the poor consumers are so very many that they probably will not know when it is passed on. Therefore, I should like the question to be considered whether it is not possible for these great countries who incur very considerable expenditure for their own national defence, and, what is more, for what they consider to be the defence of liberty in the world, and who have the capacity, to make these contributions and to leave poor people like.us alone. We have today approximately 303 officers in Indo-China. At one time there were 961 officers, which is a Considerable number. The United Nations Emergency Force in Gaza has taken — there is no secrecy about this — a total of 1,166 personnel. Mr. Hammarskjold has recently annexed another 70 officers for Lebanon. We hope they will return as good Indian nationals. Consideration should be given to the problem of the vast burdens that are placed on countries by these actions.
49. I want to add that we regard this as a great opportunity and we do not in any way resent being called upon to serve in this way, because It Is a contribution to the cause of peace In the world. However, this other aspect remains. Those who have contributed in one way or another to the creation of the trouble must carry some more of the responsibility, especially since we are going around looking for aid and loans for reconstruction purposes.
50. At the same time, I am happy to say that in all these places, whether it be in Indo-China, in the Gaza strip or in Lebanon, the nationals who have gone there — and I believe the experience is common to others — have received both from the machinery of the United Nations and the local machinery, as well as otherwise from the Governments concerned, nothing but courtesy and co-operation. Perhaps if they were armed troops trying to assert their authority, the results might have been different.
51. That brings me to two other problems. One is the problem of colonialism, and there are two or three items with regard to colonies and Non-Self-Governing Territories on our agenda. We shall deal with these when we come to them. In 1945 when the United Nations was established, there were some seventy-two Non- Self-Governing Territories which were sending in reports on conditions in their areas. We are happy to think that their numbers are diminishing. This is a part of our agenda which we should like to see lightened. Now some ten countries have gone out of this group. They were former dependent territories of the United Kingdom, France, the United States, the Netherlands and Denmark. They have become independent countries or countries from which such information is no longer required, since they have control of all those matters on which the metropolitan countries were supposed to report.
52. Since we are critical of colonial rule, we are only too happy to pay our tribute to the metropolitan countries, which, for one reason or another, and not the least for liberal and humanitarian reasons, have contributed towards the liberation of those territories. But all the same, there are now sixty-two Non-Self- Governing Territories in the world, and in the case of two of these colonial countries, one transmits information but lacks the obligation to do so and the other refuses to transmit the information. We think that the obligation under Article 73 e of the Charter whether legally binding or not, Is morally obligatory. Those who accept human rights, those who accept the idea of self-government and the idea of the equality of races, those who want to see the world rid of the main causes of international disputes — namely, the scramble for colonial powers — those who are Members of the United Nations, should be willing voluntarily to transmit this information, and it stand to the credit of the traditional empires like those of the United Kingdom and France that they have had no hesitation at any time and that they have volunteered to do this over the years.
53. There are today twelve colonies with a population of 50 millions under the French rule. There are twelve colonies with a population of 63 million under United Kingdom rule. In each case, the populations are greater than those of the metropolitan countries. There is one colony, one hundred times the size of the metropolitan country under Belgian rule. There are three colonies with a population of 10 millions — twenty-one times the size of Portugal — under Portuguese rule. With regard to the Portuguese territories, the Portuguese Government has informed the United Nations that they are not colonial territories in the sense that they are part of Portugal and, therefore, no information is required. But, at any rate, it is a state of affairs which is totally inconsistent, both politically and morally, with the principles of the Charter. After all, this information is merely examined and there are no sanctionary powers attaching to the Article of the Charter. The information relates to non-political conditions and the metropolitan countries that have transmitted information in the past have not found the United Nations making bad use of that information. We hope that where this information has not been forthcoming in the past it will be forthcoming in the future.
54. We are happy, too, that great parts of former colonial empires are now independent countries and that they have added to the number of nations represented here. The most recent entrants have been Ghana and the Federation of Malaya and others, and if our Information is correct we shall soon have the opportunity of welcoming what was formerly French Guinea as a Member of the United Nations. I have no right to speak for the French Government, but one can read the news and one can see that 200,000 people, against 18,000 people have voted for their independence, and the very fact that the French Government asked for an opinion must be presupposed to mean that it would accept the verdict, and our very confident hope is that Guinea will come here as a Member of the United Nations In a very short time. That day will be a very proud one for the French Government.
55. We are also happy to note the progress made in the former colony of the Gold Coast, the new Independent country of Ghana, which, in the first year of its existence, has established a fine record of international co-operation, of the economic development of its own territory, of service in the form of leadership — I do not use that word in a bad way — to the peoples of Africa themselves.
56. We are happy to think that we can hope that the Italian Trust Territory of Somaliland will become a Member of the United Nations in 1960 and that the same thing will happen in the case of Togoland under French administration and I hope that my United Kingdom colleagues will not take it amiss if I say that with the attainment of independence by Togoland it will be very difficult for the British Cameroons not to go forward at the same time. Western Samoa is to have full cabinet government in 1960.
57. This Is the brighter part of the story and it is one of the triumphs of the United Nations. With the older system of empire, an individual breach was made by the mandates system and afterwards by the more voluntary Trusteeship System of trusteeship, for the establishment of so many independent countries which today as sovereign nations are making contributions to their own continents and to the world as a whole.
58. The picture is not nearly so good when we look at some other parts, and I would not like to mention any of them because one hopes that If there is not so much public discussion which may be misinterpreted, some of these problems may be solved. But my delegation cannot but say that whore there are conditions which are in total violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which are in total violation of the ethical principles that lie behind the Charter of the United Nations, where forced labour is normal, where human beings can be practically bought or sold and where they are treated as commodities in that way, then the United Nations at least ought to express its opinions very strongly. That brings me to the consideration of the position of the whole of the African continent.
69. The world has paid too little attention to this most ancient part of the world which has an area of 11,262,000 square miles of which 6.2 million square miles are under colonial occupation. Of the 193,000,000 people in Africa, 103,000,000 are colonial. There are 5 million Europeans in Africa and 600,000 Asians. One would not think there were only 600,000 with the noise they make, but that is all there are. This vast continent of Africa has less than 200,000,000 people, the majority of which are dependent. But that is not all. The continent of Africa has the largest proportion of all the mineral wealth of the world, whether as tapped resources or otherwise. It has 98 per cent of all the diamonds — not that we can eat them; it has 94 per cent of the columbite; 84 per cent of the cobalt, 55 per cent of the gold, 33 per cent of the manganese and 22 per cent of the copper. In these territories is now locked up the great mineral wealth pf the world, to which the indigenous populations have little access and from which they derive little benefit.
60. The problem that faces the world today is the future of this great African continent, and in this we must look to the liberated countries of Africa and, what is more, to those other sovereign States in Africa which are not strictly of African origin, that is to say, which have people who went to Africa three, four, live and ten thousand years ago. We must look to them in the main for the liberation of those territories and also to those who belong to the metropolitan countries whose liberalism, whose humanity and whose allegiance to the Charter would be even a surer and sounder weapon of liberation than anything else. If that does not happen, then we shall have a continual quarrel. As my Prime Minister said this morning, "It is not possible to still the voice of these resurgent people anywhere".
61. We have, as part of this chapter, some other items on our agenda, and none of them are items the discussion of which gives anyone any happiness. There is first of all the problem of Cyprus. My delegation, at that time without support either from the Greeks, the Turks or the British, has said from this rostrum that the only solution of the Cyprus problem is to regard it as a colonial question — which it is — and recognize that fact. Cyprus is a nation. If Iceland, with a population of £50,000, can be a sovereign country and take its place here, making its contribution, then so can Cyprus, with a population of half a million. There is a Cypriot nation which is entitled to its independence, and the only solution is national independence, not internationalized imperialism. Imperialism can no more be internationalized than apartheid can be internationalized:
62. Therefore, to avoid this question of conferring national independence on the Cypriots is to prolong this problem. In our view, it is for the Cypriots to decide — after the establishment of their independence and when there is no outside restraint — whether they should be allied to one part or the other, or, in the course of the establishment of their Independence, establish cordial relations with the United Kingdom, as that country has done with a great many others. I am sure this can be done. That would be our position in this Assembly on this issue.
63. We shall not subscribe to any solution which means the partition of Cyprus. As I said, the older idea was "divide and rule” now it is "divide and leave". We shall not subscribe to the doctrine which makes this part of the international scramble. But at the same time we shall not subscribe to any counsel which postpones the settlement or adds to violence in the area. There has been a large amount of violence. It is not for me to say how and why. But people die; they are killed; it leaves ill-will, and what is more, the position of Cyprus as a place of turmoil also makes it a place from which troops can easily take off for the Middle East.
64. For all these reasons, it is better for the Cyprus problem to be settled and for the Assembly to address, itself to that as a colonial question and recommend to those concerned the Independence of the Cypriot people. I have no doubt that if the problem were looked at in that way, our colleagues from Turkey and from Greece and from the United Kingdom would appreciate that they would have friends in this area far more than otherwise.
65. Then there is the ever-disturbing problem of Algeria. The representative of France, and all those who share his views on this matter, will bear with me when I say that we do not approach this problem with any malice or with any disregard of the practical. My delegation and my Government is the first to recognize that there has been liberation in the French Empire. As I said, we hope Togoland will become a Member of the United Nations very soon, and Guinea perhaps in a few weeks or months.
66. But in the case of Algeria there has been a very sanguinary war where — and it is not for me to say — a very large number of French troops has been tied down fighting a population that is, according to them, part of France. We cannot call it a civil war because there is no equality between the sides. There is nothing civil about this war; it is a war of colonial suppression. I cannot pretend to know what is the solution. But it appears to us that violence is not a solution. A solution of the Algerian problem, as in all other things, must lie in seeking not the ways where those on whom self-government must make its impact are sought to be divided, but those where encouragement is given to their unity and where compromises are sought on the basis of the recognition of the personality and independence of Algeria, where racial discrimination, whichever side it may come from, is sucked away, and it is recognized, as in the case of Cyprus, that nationalism is territorial, and that it is a territory that makes the nation.
67. We tell peoples of Indian origin who may be in the Federation of Malaya or in East Africa, or in South Africa for that matter, that they belong to that country. They are Indians by origin, but they are East Africans or Malayans, or whatever it may be. Similarly we may say of the Algerians, whether they be of French origin, of Arab origin or of African origin, that they are all Algerians, and we think that they qualify in every way for the status of nationhood. It is rather Incongruous to think that with the greater part of North Africa — Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt, the Sudan, Ghana — all these areas liberated, and now the other French territories being added — that this part would remain unreconciled. This is not to exclude any form of fraternal co-operation. But the solution of this by methods of violence would not be the way.
68. This year it has been recommended to us by the Economic and Social Council that we should especially celebrate the tenth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. My delegation welcomes this recommendation and will join in efforts to do so. But I think that the best celebration for human rights would be if the Assembly — especially those who abstain in voting, not to speak of those who vote against — would take a more definite attitude in regard to the violation of human rights, wherever they may take place, and not allow Article 2, paragraph 7 of the Charter to be pleaded in bar. If the Declaration is to have any meaning, it can only be — at least to those of us who believe in human rights — to express our belief in very tangible form,
69. No one says that we will wage war on those who violate human rights, because the remedy may be worse than the disease. When this session of the Assembly began, the Secretary of State of the United States, in his opening address [749th meeting]. referred to the problems in the Far East and spoke about China. Now it fell to my delegation, as in previous years, to bring forward this question, not of the admission of China, but of the discussion of the representation of China in the United Nations. It is common knowledge that the debate became prolonged, not acrimonious. Very few people spoke against my proposal [A/3851] and there was a considerable amount of support for the idea that the question should be discussed. Nevertheless, the discussion did not take place.
70. We pointed out at that time that here was a continent of 639 million people and that they were not represented in the United Nations. There was no question of the admission of China. At that time I imposed upon myself a self-denying ordinance saying that we would not go into the merits of the question. What is the position regarding the representation of China? It is that Formosa — with a million and a half of Chinese immigrants in Formosa calling it "the Republic of China" — takes in the United Nations the seat of China, a permanent member of the Security Council.
71. That is the basic problem, and neither an eruption of trouble in regard to Quemoy, or one speech or the other, is the main Chinese problem. My Government submits that unless China takes its rightful place in the United Nations, it would not be possible to obtain stable conditions in the Far East; it would not be possible for the Security Council to function with any effect. What is more, the Chinese people and their proper representatives will bring an impact to bear upon this Assembly which will be of a healthy character.
72. It has been argued that Taiwan is part of the Republic of China and that it is not part of the mainland and therefore the solution in some minds lies in the creation of "two Chinas". We do not submit these observations with the desire to add to any controversy, but as time goes on, it will be found that it is far better for us to look at these facts as they are. Taiwan was for many years under Japanese occupation. It was part of the imperial conquest of Japan and it became a Japanese colony, and like all colonial countries, passed through those phases of resistance and protest and what not. Then came the Second World War and Japan was defeated and former colonial territories of Japan were not placed this time under trusteeship as before. But Formosa and Manchuria were liberated; they were made part of China. A statement at that time was made by the President of the United States to Dr. T. V. Soong in regard to China. At that time the Government of China was the Republic of China. There was no other Government, But the issue is not which Government, but whether this territory is part of China or otherwise. If that is clear, the rest will become clear. In the course of this statement. President Truman said: "The United States is prepared to assist China in the development of armed forces of moderate size for the maintenance of internal peace and security" — and this is the important part — "and the assumption of adequate control over the liberated areas of China, including Manchuria and Formosa."
73. There was no doubt at any time that Taiwan was a part of China. The question arose when the Government of China became not acceptable to one side or the other, and then the situation changed. What is more, President Truman said at that time the following: "Having in mind statements by the Generalissimo that China's internal political difficulties will be settled by political methods, it should be clearly understood that military assistance furnished by the United States would not be diverted for use in fratricidal warfare or to support undemocratic administration..."
74. The undemocratic administration, or the administration that did not have the support of the people as the result of thirty years of civil war, left China. The émigrés went to Taiwan. I submit from the rostrum of this platform — and I do not do it in any partisan way — that the whole problem or the remainder of it is the unfinished part of the revolution. There will be no settlement of the Chinese problem, whatever is the Government of China, by the filching away of any of its territories. The problem can only be looked at from the point of view of the unity of China and not from that of an alleged conception or of the safety of other countries or of any other part of the world, because no part of the world's safety is challenged. We would therefore submit, as we have done before, that the Chinese people have a great genius for reaching agreement. In the last thirty years of Chinese history there have been many instances where often some opposing parties have entered into negotiation. The problem of Taiwan and the coastal islands and all these are really a problem for the Chinese people, in the same way that the problem of Lebanon is one for the Lebanese people. I think that we should not only not hinder but that we should encourage the Chinese parties, so-called, to talk to each other and come to a situation where their entire motherland would be liberated.
75. So far as international problems are concerned, the problem today concerns only the United States and Chinas and not anybody else — because Chiang Kai-shek is not an international entity except in a legal sense. Therefore, any international negotiations in this matter, as is indeed recognized by the Warsaw conversations, must take place between China and the United States for the purposes which they agree upon. It is not for us to say,
76. As a Government and people, we would like to see the solution of these problems take place speedily and peacefully. But I do not think we shall get anywhere by seeking to intervene or in any way trying to disregard or ignore the rightful claims of China to be united and to come here. So far as we are aware, China presents no menace to the internal stability of any country. We are their close neighbours. This is not a testimonial meeting, but we express the opinion that it presents no menace to the stability of any country any more than any of the eighty-one nations represented in this Assembly. There is no question of qualification under the Charter because China is a Member of the United Nations.
77. Then there is the problem that it was declared an aggressor in the Korean war. It is not for me to argue the legality of it one way or the other, but we will have to recognize that there is no war about Korea today. What is more, unless it can be proved to the contrary, the Chinese troops in Korea have been withdrawn and the unity of Korea, given a degree of reality, is possible.
78. The only restraint, as I said the other day [755th meeting], against untoward incidents in this area is the United States. It is the restraint exercised by the United States on Chiang Kai-shek that very often prevents the precipitation of a crisis. But in a situation of this character, especially when we hear reports of dreadful instruments of war going into this place and feelings naming so high, with public opinion worked up in different places, the security of the world demands that we terminate this set of events. And it is not beyond either the power or the imaginative quality of a great country like the United States to be able to seek ways whereby this can be settled.
79. The internal ideology of a country is not the concern of the United Nations. As I have said several times on this/ platform, if we could admit to this Organization only nations which are approved by the other countries, by one other nation or some other nations, then none of us would be here because there would always be someone who disapproved of somebody else. So that the problem of China has to be considered in this way.
80. So far as the immediate position is concerned, as I pointed out, the acts of aggression started in July of this year. This has aroused response and fighting, and a certain amount of shelling of the Quemoy Islands has been going on. But we cannot separate this problem from the whole question of the unity of China. Happily at the present moment, out of humanitarian considerations, the Government of China has ordered that the shelling cease for a week. There is no use trying to determine whether it is a formal cease-fire or otherwise. Whenever there is an opportunity for peace, it is the business of those who believe in United Nations ideas to take advantage of it. The whole world is convinced that the United States has no imperial ambitions in these areas, that there may be, as in the case of Lebanon, a misinterpretation of ideas, and there is also in the minds of many the fond feeling that there is a solution to this problem on a two- China basis.
81. The coming of China here would be an advantage to the United Nations. It would assist the forces of peace, it would speed the pace of disarmament, it would give strength and substance to the Security Council and to the security provisions of the United Nations, My Government therefore pleads not for any intervention by the United Nations because I do not see how that is possible. For one thing, the United Nations has tied its hands for a year by refusing to discuss, it. But over and above that, it is not an international problem.
82. So far as Taiwan is concerned, it is the question of two Chinese parties, one of them a small one with an émigré party. I have no doubt there are large numbers of people in the Kuomintang itself who have the common sense and ambition to realize that a greater China, unified and strengthened, is an asset to them as much as to anybody else. The eight million people of Formosa have no part in the Government of Taiwan and are by and large only members of local bodies. They do not enjoy the advantages of a government of their own. They would come into the larger State with all that goes with it. Then if we had to criticize China, it would be here and would criticize us too. This would be a more realistic position. That is all I wish to say about China, and I hope that advantage will be taken of the present situation in order to arrive at a more peaceful solution recognizing the realities, and also the constitutional position, the position conceded, the position established by the Declarations of Cairo (1943) and Potsdam (1945), by. the statements of the parties mainly concerned and by the willingness shown by the Chinese Government to negotiate at Warsaw — to negotiate not on the internal issues of China, but on issues that are of international concern.
83. The main problem that faces us in this Assembly is the problem of disarmament. The United Nations has been considering this problem for the last ten years without any appreciable results. Indeed at one time it was given up altogether and the Disarmament Commission reconstructed. Some four years ago my delegation initiated the idea of the establishment of a sub-committee, in the hope that discussions in an intimate body, without all the glare of publicity, would lead to some compromises. But, unfortunately, the Sub-Committee of the Disarmament Commission also became a very public body and when one solution appeared suitable to one side and was put forward, it was not suitable to the other side. The same solution is advanced the next year by the other side and is not suitable to this side. So it goes on in this way. No one imagines that the establishment of disarmament is possible by waving a magic wand. The problem has got to be approached realistically, and the United Nations knows that there has been no abandonment at any time of the fundamental objectives.
84. I should like to submit with great respect that the passing of resolutions, even by large majorities, has not taken us anywhere nearer disarmament. It is one of those problems where the parties consent, and therefore there can be no settlement without cooperation. Last year the delegation of India moved before the General Assembly [703rd meeting] that as a first step, not necessarily of disarmament but as a contribution toward disarmament, these explosions should be stopped and that the one alleged impediment in the way, the lack of capacity for detection, must be made the subject of technical investigation. For the last four years our Government has been pressing and has been repeatedly urging in the Assembly the cessation of these explosions, for reasons that we argued and reargued many times. At last we now have, a situation where the scientists of the world, though they have not categorically be stated, at least tell us that the effects of these explosions are harmful to humanity. Since it is a United Nations committee, one hopes that it will receive greater respect than it might otherwise do.
85. There has been some progress made in the meetings at Geneva, and further meetings will start on 31 October. My delegation has submitted a draft resolution [A/L.246] on this subject, which is before the Assembly, and concerns only the discontinuance of atomic and hydrogen weapons tests. It would not be appropriate for me to argue this draft resolution before you at present, but I hope that the Assembly will not reject this draft resolution this time as it did the last time. At the twelfth session in a draft resolution, we made this humble suggestion: if what is stopping the cessation of explosions is the fear that they will not be detected, why cannot this be looked into by technical people, with both sides, and those who did not take sides, joining in? We submitted this draft resolution because it appeared reasonable, and the arguments, even of those who were against us, were not that it was not reasonable but that it was not opportune.
86. We are glad to notice that after six months or so, owing to the initiative taken by the United States and the Soviet Union they have had direct talks on this matter, and some moves seem to have taken place. But, again, I do not presume to have understood the whole of the situation. If the idea is that the suspension of explosions can take place only if other things take place, then the whole problem will have to await the conclusion of a disarmament agreement, and it is meaningless because, if there is total disarmament with the banning of weapons, then it is not necessary to say that there should be no explosions.
87. Therefore, we submit that, pending the reaching of an agreement in Geneva, there should be a cessation of these explosions, that the testing of nuclear weapons should stop, as a preliminary to disarmament.
88. Last year, by a considerable majority, the United Nations voted for the reconstitution of the Disarmament Commission [resolution 1150 (XII)]. In the last twelve months, the Disarmament Commission has not met, that is to say, the whole machinery has not functioned apart from this ad hoc arrangement that was made and was successful. One of the main problems that will come before us is the reconstitution of the Disarmament Commission, and we should like to appeal to the Assembly to recognize the fact that no disarmament is possible except by agreement and, if there must be agreement, there must be give and take on either side, and minorities or majorities — with the uncommitted peoples — cannot be disregarded.
89. The latest reconstitution of the Disarmament Commission was a step forward, as far as the General Assembly recognized that some new move had to be made, but that move either did not go far enough or somehow went in the wrong direction. So, when from tomorrow onwards we consider this matter in the First Committee, I hope we shall be able to go far along the way of encouraging the Geneva conference to come to' agreement very quickly because, as time passes and more and more countries become capable of either manufacturing or using these weapons, all the dangers of nuclear radiation and of nuclear accidents exist in the world. The dangers arising from non disarmament are greater. But I beg to submit — and I hope this will not be regarded as a presumption — that we will not get very near disarmament unless there is a certain amount of disarming of ourselves in the Assembly, that is to say, in our approach to problems, if every boat that is put out is to weather the storm of suspicion and mistrust before it can reach the shore. Therefore, we need more than anything else a new approach to this problem, a degree of common exploration. Unless there is common exploration we shall not be able to deal with this great menace that threatens this world with annihilation. What is more, every small or large problem, every local problem, threatens at least for some time to present the world with the menace of atomic war.
90. The outstanding problem before us is this problem of disarmament. My delegation is one of those that thinks it ought to be discussed as soon as possible in order that those who meet in Geneva may have the backing — I would not use the word "pressure" — but may have the backing of such influence as Assembly opinion can exercise to make them come to agreement. At the same time, to link this question with other problems is to indulge in the exercise of endangering the peace of this globe. It has neither logic nor anything else to defend it, because, if there were disarmament, if there were an abandonment of other weapons, there would be no need to talk about the stopping of explosions. So by definition it is out of court. We want to lay stress on this fact: it is the most important problem before the Assembly.
91. Last year at the end of the session we adopted a resolution on peaceful and neighbourly relations among States [resolution 1236 (XII)]. This is one of those subjects regarded as extremely controversial, and it was controversial. But it may be said to the credit of the Assembly that it was passed as a unanimous resolution. That resolution expressed the urgency of "strengthening international peace and of developing peaceful and neighbourly relations among States irrespective of their divergences or the relative stages and nature of their political, economic and social development." If it was urgent then, it is even more urgent today. This is not a resolution that called for an executive action but certainly a resolution which ought to be furthered by implementation. There is nothing in the events of the last twelve months which gives us a great deal of encouragement in thinking that the adoption of this resolution has made a lot of difference. But my delegation welcomes the fact that in speech after speech in this Assembly, as we advanced in the general debate, representatives have spoken without being hamstrung by considerations of having to vote one way or another. There is a degree of freer speech in the general debate. This resolution that was passed unanimously calls for further consideration by the Assembly, and in the same spirit as prevailed last time, without trying to score a point one way or another. We think, finally, that the work of this Assembly will be much assisted and the United Nations, will progress more and more if such independence of opinion continues.
92. The representative of Cambodia referred [756th meeting] to the fact that there was such a rigidity of opinion as made it impossible for the uncommitted nations either to canvass their views or put them forward in any way. No one suggests that opinions strongly held by the nations that have really great responsibilities can be easily pushed aside. But if the United Nations is really to become a concert of free nations, if it is to contribute to the promotion of neighbourly relations, is it not possible, by the impact of opinions one upon the other, is it not possible by the adjustment of different views, to come to common conclusions? But, if every question is riddled by the arrows that, come from the "cold war", from either side, then it is not possible for us to make any progress, Therefore, we hope that the general progress of the Organization, our understanding of each other and the purposes and implications of the resolution we adopted last year with regard to peaceful and neighbourly relations, and the support that has been forthcoming from large numbers of representatives, speaking on this, who have referred to non-interference in other people's affairs, and things of that character — we hope that there will be more and more of all this.
93. There are two matters of a more or less domestic character to which I should like to refer. One is the problem of our neighbours in Indonesia. Indonesia has had a hard time, largely because of the geography of that land of the 3,000 islands, because of the burdens it has to carry since its liberation and because of the fact that its progress is very much held back by the problem of the continuance of colonial rule. The Netherlands is a well respected Member of the United Nations and has a great deal of experience of the Eastern world. We still hope that advantage will be taken of the fact that the Indonesians have not tried to heat up this problem by placing this item on the agenda, and we hope that in conformity with the principles of the Charter, and by means of agreements solemnly entered into, a solution will be found.
94. These islands, like other islands in other parts of the world, are not worth conflict between nations. West Irian is part of Indonesia by the Act of Cession. We hope that there will be no occasion for this matter to come up before us.
95. My colleague from Pakistan in his address [769th meeting] to this Assembly referred to the problem of Kashmir. I have some familiarity with this problem. I also have some familiarity with the procedures of the United Nations. While nothing, in fact can prevent any representative from speaking about anything, we sometimes have instances when the President adjourns the Assembly and delegates still talk because the speaker requires only the microphone. Therefore, no one can prevent anybody from speaking about anything, but it is usually understood that no problem can be before two organs of the United Nations at the same time. What is called "the question of Jammu and Kashmir" or "India-Pakistan issue" or something of that kind, is before the Security Council.
96. As I said a while ago, I have some familiarity with this problem. I believe the statements or the misstatements made before the Assembly are capable of being controverted. But the understanding of my delegation as to the functions and the use of this rostrum is that it is not for propaganda for home consumption. I have, therefore, no desire to enter into a controversy on this matter unless it is forced upon us; then, I think I am not non-controversial.
97. The State of Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India, half of which is under external occupation. The matter is before the United Nations, and if fellow-delegates are interested in it, there is a considerable volume of literature on this subject. It came here on the initiative of the Government of India, That in itself is sufficient evidence that we have nothing to hide in this matter. But taking the view that no issue of peace or of neighbourliness is promoted by this casual discussion in the Assembly or using the rostrum of this Assembly for any purpose, I shall not enter into discussion on the Kashmir issue.
98. Recently, as a result of conversations in New Delhi between the Prime Ministers of the two countries, we have tried without external interference to deal with problems — small ones — concerning our frontiers, our borders and difficulties created thereby; and to a small extent we have been successful. I believe it is part of the duty that rests upon one when one is forced into that position, not to be provoked, not to be drawn into discussion that has no particular purpose. This subject is not on the agenda; it is before the Security Council. I cannot object to it being mentioned because we are free to speak.
99. That is all I have to say. I do hope that I have not detained the Assembly too long.