138. I, too, would like to congratulate you, Mr. President, on the highly deserved confidence which the General Assembly has placed in you. This compliment, which is no less sincere for having been paid you by many of the speakers who have preceded me, would have been still further enhanced if it had been addressed to you in the setting of the splendid Brussels International Exhibition. We would have seen the wonderful pavilions, representing the majority of nations gathered here, peacefully coexisting side by side, and we would have been able to imagine the fairyland — no longer the mere setting of a temporary exhibition, but an everyday reality — which we could create if the United Nations, successful in its vital task of maintaining peace and creating confidence, enabled this peaceful competition in the arts and sciences to exert its full beneficial effects.
139. This general debate, which is customarily an occasion for an examination of conscience, fills us with a feeling of remorse. Even if we go back further than the past year, so fraught with conflict, and survey the whole period of our existence, the general conclusion will still be disappointing.
140. The United Nations has not even partially accomplished its mission, which, as set out in Article 1 of the Charter, is the maintenance of international peace and security. We can certainly be proud of the record of the specialized agencies which, as provided in the same Article, are achieving international cooperation of an economic, Social, intellectual and humanitarian character, but our satisfaction on this score should not be allowed to delude us. If we had ensured peace, the resources made available through disarmament would have been so great that even such secondary activities could have been developed in a manner that today is inconceivable.
141. What is the basic reason for this failure? The founders of our Organization believed they were improving upon the Covenant of the League of Nations by giving the great Powers a decisive role in the Security Council. These hopes have been dashed because the great Powers have not been able to agree on even a small number of political principles. If some of the illusions had been cleared away, perhaps it could have been foreseen that States maintaining large armies with continually improved equipment would be more inclined to intransigence born of the conviction of being in the right and strengthened by the sureness of force, than to forms of compromise based on mutual concession.
142. In face of a record of failure, of which the immoderate use of the veto is symptomatic, the smaller nations must become more aware of their role and importance. This is the main theme that I would like to develop today. In this Assembly, the smaller nations are in the overwhelming majority, and their presence here can be said to constitute a democracy of States. They represent world public opinion in all its diversity. We have here a means of action which is worth more than entire armies, provided we know how to use it and how to discipline ourselves in order to do so.
143. Our opinions must not be based on emotion, prejudice or even on sentimental attachment. The sober, calm and reassuring voice of reason is sought for by all, and the smaller nations, if they speak in unison, can make this voice universally heard.
144. The smaller nations are not, of course, free from commitments and cannot claim the complete impartiality of a judge or an arbiter. We do not live on another planet, and we know that unless a miracle happens, the next war will affect the whole world. Even though Belgium has never had any territorial ambitions, nor been coveted by any country, it has been invaded twice in the first half of this century, and I, myself, have spent ten years of my life under foreign occupation. These are experiences which are not easily forgotten. We are convinced that there are moments when honour, attachment to a way of life and the mere concern for existence make it necessary to take up arms and that this distressing eventuality must be prepared for even in time of peace. However, being smaller nations well aware of their weakness, we also know and we realize more than the others that war, even if defensive, is only a decision taken in despair and that we must look for a peaceful solution without losing hope. It is in this spirit that the new Belgian Government in a recent official statement defining its traditional foreign policy stressed two points: firstly, its implicit faith in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization which, in this divided world, is a necessary factor of equilibrium and our greatest protection in the event of a catastrophe, and, secondly, its desire to consider without bias any reasonable proposal for peace, from whatever camp it may originate.
145. Let us speak first of disarmament. Belgium has always adhered to two principles that make good sense. The first is that disarmament, even partial disarmament, cannot be unilateral. It is pointless to ask your adversary to lay down his arms because he is frightening you and to keep your own because you know in your own mind that your intentions are peaceful.
146. The second is that disarmament must be controlled. It would be naive to imagine that the other party will be reassured by your mere declaration and that his concern will not be made worse by your refusal of any kind of inspection.
147. These principles have not been applied so far because of the complete lack of confidence among the great Powers. Each time a proposal is made by one of them, the other is less concerned with understanding what has been said than with looking for what might be hidden. Might not partial disarmament disturb the balance of forces and might not mutual inspection conceal intentions of espionage and subversion?
148. It is here that we, as smaller Powers, could play a more active part. Every suggestion that is made by either side should be subjected by us to an initial judgement which, if unanimous or supported by a majority, should exert a great moral and even political influence. We would strongly reject any proposals obviously aimed at weakening the other camp and would make it clear that propaganda of that nature is not only ineffectual with regard to others but also detrimental to the prestige of those originating it. On the other hand, we should support constructive proposals and should recommend, and if necessary employ the weight of our numbers to insist, that they be studied objectively.
149. Politicians undoubtedly have more responsibility than they have technical knowledge and therefore cannot be reproached for not understanding at once all the' implications of an invariably complicated disarmament plan. When in doubt, the obvious course is to abstain; but rather than hide behind inaction, might we not resort more widely to a procedure that has recently been tried and found to have merit? If politicians are reluctant to engage, even conditionally, in perilous negotiations of uncertain outcome, let them at least entrust to experts the technical aspects of the problem. In negotiations of this kind the judgement of scientists must be relied on, for these men are vouched for not only by their scientific reputation but also by their intellectual integrity.
150. In this spirit the Belgian delegation supports a number of recent proposals. Although general disarmament programmes may at present be too ambitious, the more modest projects, which at least have the merit of accustoming the great Powers to negotiation and co-operation, should not be ignored. In the beginning, only limited risks would be involved, but if success was forthcoming, there would arise a feeling of trust, of that trust which is so sadly lacking, and bolder types of action could gradually be taken.
151. The first proposal relates to the cessation of nuclear tests. The events at the Geneva Conference have just shown that in the event of agreement unlawful explosions would be detected by a small-sized international organization. The Belgian delegation realizes full well that this would not even be partial disarmament as long as States remained free to manufacture and stockpile bombs, but at least it would have the effect of reassuring the peoples who fear for their health even in peacetime, and it would show that our Organization is capable of results. If certain nations felt that the discontinuance of such tests might be detrimental to them, either by imposing upon them a unilateral military disadvantage or by preventing them from obtaining information necessary for the peaceful use of atomic energy, they should give a clear account of their complaints and make their agreement subject to temporary reservations.
152. A further proposal concerns cosmic space. It is high time to ask the experts whether and how it will be possible to prevent its utilization for military purposes. At one time a proposal to demilitarize the polar regions was put forward and scornfully rejected, but only a few months later the ocean depths beneath the ice-fields were found to have military importance. Let us not repeat the same mistakes and the same delays.
153. The Soviet delegation links the problem of cosmic space with that of foreign military bases, by a process of reasoning which is not quite clear to the Belgian delegation. Launching sites for atomic missiles could doubtless be established at these bases, but the Soviet Government, which is justifiably proud of its sputniks and the inter-continental missiles which are their dangerous offspring, has stated officially and repeatedly that these terrible weapons could be launched from the USSR itself and could reach any town in any continent. This raises the whole problem of nuclear disarmament, the solution of which will take time. Why should the scientific examination of the use of cosmic space have to await that solution?
154. The third proposal deals with the prevention of surprise attacks. This proposal concerns the small Powers, since although with guided missiles the entire world would be in the combat zone from the outset, States having small territories in strategic areas could be occupied and even annihilated at a stroke; For them there would be no tomorrow, no possibility of retaliation. For the great Powers, too, armaments are heavier and more costly if they have to be available from the first moment and if too much reliance cannot be placed on conversion of the machinery of peaceful production. Sudden attacks likewise diminish the effectiveness of our Organization because it needs time to act and is practically powerless when faced with a fait accompli. For all these reasons, between the threat of war and war itself there should be a period of grace which would enable calm to be restored and goodwill to be brought into play. The Belgian delegation does not know whether it is possible to distinguish between a sudden attack and an ordinary attack or, if so, whether the former could be effectively prevented by appropriate controls, but it is convinced that, quite apart from the substance of the question, there is an urgent need for placing the technical aspects of the question before the experts.
155. Until disarmament has become a reality, our planet will remain divided between two worlds separated by different ideologies and interests. There will continue to be a series of dramatic events all along the frontier. Well-meaning people each time urge one, side or the other to abandon a disputed point in order to ensure lasting peace at a modest price. That is a simple and even credulous point of view. How can anyone believe that the mere shifting of .the line of demarcation will suffice to abolish the tension between two worlds which face each other in a spirit of active rivalry, at the mercy of a mistake or a misunderstanding?
156. Unfortunately, at least for the time being, we can hope for nothing more than to prevent these conflicts from spreading. In each case, however, the small nations, most of which, because of their number and their geographic dispersal, are not directly concerned, can and should support solutions which are dictated- neither by passion, nor by prejudice, nor even by reasons of prestige.
157. In the Middle East the situation became so acute that we were obliged a few weeks ago to meet in emergency special session. We had at least the consolation of adopting unanimously a proposal drawn up by the Arab States themselves [resolution 1237 (ES-III)]. Can the general principles it embodied be translated into political reality? In this regard, we expect that the Secretary-General’s report [A/3934/Rev.1] will provide much valuable material. It has only just been distributed, and it should be studied with care. The Belgian delegation has the desire to render a delicate negotiation even more difficult by premature remarks. It will, however, make two observations which concern that part of the world, where Belgium has nothing but friends, but which have also a much more general scope,
158. The first observation is that Belgium, which is anxious to respect the wishes of every State to organize itself as it desires, will not confine itself to respecting the status quo. In view of the fact that the political organization of certain regions is unstable, if wishes to reaffirm the principle of non-intervention. Similar discretion should, be practised by all countries. Progress should be peaceful and should correspond to the true wishes of the peoples concerned. We denounce not only armed intervention and internal subversion, but also propaganda, which can be lethal. My Government noted with interest that part of the resolution of the Arab countries which calls upon all Member States to ensure that their conduct by word and deed conforms to the principles of non-aggression and noninterference.
159. The second observation is that the Middle East, like many other regions, can achieve peace only through prosperity. This, however, implies immense investments. Where is the capital to be found? Gifts can be obtained in the name of world solidarity, but they can never be sufficient and must be supplemented by investments, Technical progress is now so rapid that the capital exporting countries are afraid to interrupt the continuous modernization of their basic equipment. They are not likely to be encouraged by the addition of political risk to economic speculation. The new countries, in their own interests, should respect the legitimate interests of those who have contributed and will contribute in future to their development. That would be the surest way for them to obtain the benefits of a prosperous economy and thus to Reinforce their political independence.
160. The crisis in the Middle East is not yet settled, and now in the Far East the voice of cannon is heard — and not only in diplomatic notes. We all know of the conflict between the two Governments which dispute the right to exercise sovereignty over China. We know that an ancient empire has undergone a civil war and is today divided. We are familiar with the geographical, historical, political and legal arguments advanced by either side in connexion with the islands of Quemoy and Matsu. But how does the Peiping Government confirm its claims by firing over a hundred thousand shells on to these islands, which are inhabited also by civilian populations? That Government should remember that when dealing with the United Nations it should be careful to follow the rules if it wants some unfortunate precedents to be forgotten.
161. Certain details have, of course, been given to this Assembly. We have been told that rather less than four shells per inhabitant have landed on the islands and that the civilian victims were less numerous than was at first thought. Even if this information is accurate, is it capable of reassuring us? Should not a single shell, burst and a few dead be sufficient to arouse us? We have also been told that these attacks were merely a retaliation for the blockade of the ports and the raids on the mainland carried out by Nationalist troops. The logical conclusion of such an argument would be that we should blame both sides equally.
162. Undoubtedly China is torn apart by civil war, but this must not develop into a world war. That would be unthinkable, especially as these small islands are not strategically necessary to either of the belligerents; their garrisons do not threaten the continent of China, nor would the withdrawal of these troops make the military defence of Formosa any more difficult. The solution which should have the moral support of the small Powers is clear enough; while reserving the political and legal claims of both parties to these minute islands, we should arrange for their demilitarization and protection against, forcible seizure under the aegis of the United Nations. No one would lose face, since each party would maintain its position, its claims and its hopes, but, at least for the time being, the peace of the world would cease to be troubled by a cannonade which is capable of awakening dangerous echoes.
163. Yet another sensitive spot is in Europe, where Germany is divided by the Iron Curtain. It is strange that the States which advance historical and geographical arguments to support the unification of China under the authority of Peiping can at the same time reconcile themselves to the existence of two German Governments. Yet for the past hundred years the Reich has possessed apolitical, linguistic, cultural and racial unity that has not existed between continental China and Formosa. When discussing the political organization of a country, it is idle to look to the past; the people themselves should decide what regime they prefer. For the United Nations, the only valid indication of a just solution would dome through free general elections.
164. Lastly, I should like to touch in a few words on the problem of Icelandic territorial waters which the Reykjavik Government, by a unilateral decision, ie attempting to extend from three to twelve miles. Belgium cannot recognize such forcible legal action; it is directly concerned, since its fishing fleet is the fourth in size of those which traditionally exploit these fish-laden waters.
165. Three views have been put forward. The Icelandic Minister of Foreign Affairs has pleaded with great conviction [759th meeting] the cause of his courageous people, which possesses neither agricultural land, nor forests, nor mineral resources and whose entire livelihood depends on fish. These are strong arguments, but do they justify the decision that Iceland has taken? What is the use of the United Nation, if on the ground of necessity an arbitrary blow can be struck against liberties sanctioned by international custom as demonstrated by the practice of States? As was recognized by the International Court of Justice in its judgement of 18 December 1951: "The delimitation of sea areas has always an international aspect; it cannot be dependent merely upon the will of the coastal State as expressed in its municipal law. "
166. The Danish delegation has not contested the law in force but has suggested that it should be changed and has made definite proposals to that end.
167. The position taken by the United Kingdom appears, however, to the Belgian delegation to be the best. Without going into the substance of the matter, the United Kingdom proposes a peaceful procedure for the settlement of the dispute as called for in Article 1 of the Charter. If the law in force is to be discussed by referring, as Iceland has done, to long-past precedents, then the dispute should be submitted to the International Court of Justice. If the object is, in the name of fairness, to make special arrangements taking account of Iceland's particular economic situation, a formula of compromise should be found by way of negotiation. Lastly, if international law itself is to be modified, there must be a further United Nations conference on the law of the sea. That is the threefold proposal which has the support of the Belgian delegation.
168. Peace is a continuous creation. It cannot be guaranteed by the automatic application of a few clear principles laid down in the Charter. In each separate case, in connexion with each conflict, a solution must be based on authority.
169. We realize how difficult it is for the great Powers, because of the very magnitude of their responsibilities, to reach understanding. The purpose of this statement has been to prove that that authority can be effectively exercised in our Organization by the small nations. Their relative weakness which causes them to cherish justice, their geographical distribution which guarantees their impartiality, their number which lends moral force to their views, all enable them, if they are worthy of such a role, to render the' United Nations truly effective.