We all feel deeply that this session of the General-Assembly faces a responsibility of the gravest and most far-reaching kind. At the same time it faces an opportunity which rarely comes to the representatives of the nations of the world. We stand at the crossroads of a possible return to international dissensions and clashes of interest, or the realization of the dreams and aspirations of common men and women everywhere. These dreams and aspirations are today centred in our Organization. A war-weary and perhaps partly disillusioned, but still hopeful, world expects of us that we make fully effective the safeguards already adopted against a repetition of the awful tragedy of war. It looks to us to create a world of reason and human brotherhood.
In the course of our deliberations, we shall have placed before us a considerable number of urgent problems, of complex matters of policy and procedure, about which there will be sharp and honest differences of opinion. We shall, I confidently hope, succeed in reaching agreement, if we keep constantly in mind those fundamental human values for which we fought in common: the ideals which found their expression in the Atlantic Charter and subsequent documents, as well as in the Preamble and in the first Chapter of the San Francisco Charter. To the realization of those ideals we are pledged each and all, as Members of this Organization.
Those ideals should also inspire the efforts to reach a just and equitable peace settlement. It is important, however, as President Truman so rightly stressed in his speech at our opening meeting, that world public opinion should be clearly aware of the fact that the actual working out of the peace settlements is not the responsibility of our Organization as such. The main burden of that task rests upon those great Powers which, through their combined war effort, secured our common victory. Their success, in consultation with all the other nations which took an active part in the struggle, in laying the foundations of a lasting peace will be of primary importance for the future of the world and the chances of success of the United Nations.
It is elementary truth that our Organization will only be able fully to function when the peace settlements have been worked out. In the meantime it is our responsibility, as Members of the Organization, to create and develop the administrative machinery through which we shall translate into living reality the noble intentions of those who planned and worked persistently and faithfully at Dumbarton Oaks, San Francisco and London.
The reports submitted to us by the Secretary- General prove that the United Nations today is a living, organization, which has successfully tackled a wide range of problems at a time when its administrative machinery was still far from completed and under the additional difficulties created by successive changes of the seat of the Secretariat. It is no wonder if, under these circumstances, perfection has not yet been achieved. The real wonder is that it has been possible to do so much in such a short time.
This achievement should in itself be sufficient to create among the peoples of the world, faith and enthusiasm. If, as our President so justly said at our opening ceremony, that enthusiasm is not apparent, the reason must be sought, not in the possible imperfection of the work of the Secretariat, but rather in the fact that the Security Council has, not succeeded in working out the solution of problems felt by everyone to be vital: that of the relations of the United Nations with the Franco regime in Spain, and that of the control of atomic energy. The Norwegian delegation feels that no effort should be spared to secure further progress in the work of the Atomic Energy Commission.
We also feel the urgent need for this Assembly to give — in the words of our Secretary-General — comprehensive guidance to the organs and the Member States of the United Nations regarding their relationship with the Franco regime. To this end, the Norwegian delegation ventures to suggest that it would be useful if the Spanish question could be considered by this Assembly in all its aspects. The problem of the relations between Spain and the United Nations will come up under a number of the items of the agenda. It is probable, however, that in each individual case it will give rise to considerations of the same kind and concerning the same main political issues. We feel, therefore, that it might be useful if this problem were discussed as a separate item on the agenda of this session, and we hope that agreement may be reached on a proposal to this effect.
The Norwegian people, who have passed through the terrible experience of totalitarian occupation, are deeply concerned at the fact that the Spanish people are still languishing under the rule of a regime created with the military help of the defeated Axis Powers. We feel that ways and means must be found, through common action of the United Nations, to make every effort to assist the democratic forces of Spain in their struggle to regain, without the horrors of another civil war, freedom and constitutional government. The establishment of such a government in Spain would mean the elimination of a stronghold of fascism and of a constant source of international friction, and would permit the great Spanish nation to take its rightful place in the family of democratic and freedom-loving United Nations.
There is no denying that at times the proceedings of the Security Council have had a depressing effect on world public opinion. As a result, the question of the abolition of the vet(j> power has been widely discussed. It is the evident task of the United Nations so to strengthen friendly and intimate collaboration between its Members, that at a future date we could abolish the veto power altogether. In its comments on the Dumbarton Oaks proposals previous to the San Francisco Conference, the Norwegian Government, while expressing the view that serious objections might be raised against the veto power, considered that its acceptance was a political necessity in the existing international situation. It should not be overlooked that this problem is much more than a question of voting procedure.
The veto power is only the technical expression of the fact that this Organization is based upon co-operation and agreement between the permanent members of the Security Council. We still feel that the time is not ripe to revise the provisions of the Charter on this point. I am certain, however, to voice the opinion, not only of many delegations here present, but of the peoples themselves, if I -venture to ask the permanent members of the Security Council to be aware that it is their duty and responsibility to do everything possible to reach agreement among themselves and to exercise the veto as what it was intended to be: a safeguard to be used only in the last resort. The veto power must not become an obstacle to the effective carrying out of the functions of the Security Council. The best approach to the problem is perhaps for this Assembly to ask the Security Council to reconsider its method of work, and to appeal to the Council to make every effort to reach agreement before voting. If we keep constantly in mind that agreement among the permanent members of the Security Council is the very' basis of the United Nations, the veto question itself loses much of its importance.
The painful experience of nazi occupation taught us all afresh the essential value of the four freedoms. There are potent reasons why one of those freedoms, freedom from want, is looked upon by common men and women as the great goal to be achieved in our century. Declarations of freedom and peace will remain as just so many words, as long as human beings lack food, clothing and shelter, and are thus deprived of the elementary pre-requisites of human existence. Here is the crucial test. If we can produce in common and distribute equitably the necessities of daily life, we have proved that we can really live together.
This extensive economic co-operation which, under other circumstances, was rightly considered utopian, was realized during the war, not only inside each of the Allied nations, but among them. This was achieved largely as a result of the noble initiative and untiring action of this great nation: the United States of America.
What proved possible in war, should not be impossible in peace. That is why so many of the common men and women of our world look to the Economic and Social Council as one of the most promising agencies for building peace among nations. That is also why so many of us are eager to see that, when the great humanitarian effort undertaken through UNRRA comes to an end, we should have some assurance that suffering caused by common war should still be met in common. With this end in view, Norway, through recent decisions of its Government and Parliament, has given goods, money and personnel to the common pool. We have also declared our readiness to take our due and reasonable share of those unhappy refugees and displaced persons who cannot well be settled otherwise. We join with other delegations in the hope to see the International Refugee Organization created as speedily as possible.
Peace, however, is not only a matter of security and economic and social welfare. We must also, as President Truman stressed in his speech, lay the foundations of peace in the minds of men and women. That is why the Norwegian delegation attaches great importance to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, which is about to start its work in Paris next month. By organizing international, intellectual co-operation and exchange of ideas, we are taking a most important step to create a new atmosphere of mutual understanding and friendship among nations. Education for peace is one of the essential tasks of our world organization.
Experience since the cessation of hostilities has proved that co-operation to overcome pressing problems of elementary human suffering and to further social well-being, is possible and full of promise for the development of understanding among nations. The Secretary-General, however, in his oral supplementary report, called our attention to some of the difficulties with which we are faced, owing to the rapid growth of specialized agencies. The Norwegian delegation to the Economic and Social Council has repeatedly touched upon this problem and stressed the necessity of a thoughtful policy with a view to preventing the dangers inherent in the too rapid growth and multiplication of the number of specialized agencies, as well as the dangers of excessive increase in the financial burdens involved.
In this field we may risk a reaction among the public and the Governments, a reaction which might jeopardize the stable and progressive development of our entire world organization. There is, therefore, urgent need for careful planning, co-ordination and clear definition of the relations between the specialized agencies and the main organs of the United Nations. For these reasons the Norwegian delegation finds itself in essential agreement with the ideas formulated in the draft resolution put forward by the French delegation relating to this problem.
The question of establishing new specialized agencies and new international machinery for any good purpose should therefore be thoroughly scrutinized. More particularly, it should be investigated whether the tasks cannot be adequately taken care of by the various divisions and departments of the General Secretariat, by the permanent commissions or by already existing specialized agencies or their organs.
The annual contributions of Governments to the many international organizations of which they are members, have reached comparatively important amounts payable in hard currency. Nations are entitled to demand that these sums be spent rationally and with the maximum practical effect. Co-ordination of functions and budgetary control by the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly should therefore be made effective for the specialized agencies.
This can probably only be achieved by establishing a consolidated or general budget for the United Nations and all its specialized agencies, that is, the voting of all budgets by the General Assembly, which would thus determine the aggregate amount of obligatory contributions from Member Governments. The Assembly might also provide for common fiscal services to be performed by the General Secretariat, particularly the collection of contributions from Member Governments.
The Norwegian delegation fully realizes the practical difficulties involved and the considerable time required for agreeing upon and setting up such a system. We feel, however, that it should be firmly aimed at right now. A first step in this direction would be to have all the proposed 1947 budgets of the specialized agencies before us when discussing and voting here the budget of the United Nations.
It is with the greatest interest that my delegation has taken note of the remarks made by the Secretary-General in his report on the subject of human rights, personal freedom and justice.
Those of the United Nations which, during the war suffered nazi occupation and saw all human values trampled under foot, have, I am sure, developed a deep feeling of the essential worth of freedom and of human rights. We feel today, as never before, that freedom is the very breath of life; as one of our poets said “Freedom and life are one.” We know from bitter experience the horror, the deadly oppressive silence, that falls on a people when freedom departs. We feel that the goal of long centuries of the pilgrimage of nations has been the attainment of what that great leader of men, Franklin D. Roosevelt, called the four freedoms.
For the establishment of these freedoms, the United Nations must work and fight untiringly. In this field we will accept no compromise. We must always remember that these freedoms were what men and women fought for, what peoples suffered for and what the nations of the world expect this Organization and everyone of its Members never to forget.