37. Although repetitions beget monotony and may end in tedium, I hope you will allow the Belgian delegation to join previous speakers in expressing its gratification that you have been elected to preside over our debates. For you combine an extensive knowledge of political questions and a wide experience of international assemblies with the charm of a mind interested in everything.
38. We should also like to express our gratitude to the Secretary-General for his unwearying efforts since the last session to increase the efficiency of our Organization and help it to achieve at least part of its essential purpose of settling disputes and maintaining world peace.
39. The present session opened at a historic moment. The general debate held in this hall has not prevented us from devoting attention to the repercussions caused in the outside world by the meeting of the representatives of the two most powerful States in the world.
40. The Belgian Government from the beginning welcomed the exchange of visits between Mr. Eisenhower and Mr. Khrushchev. We did not cherish the illusion that a mere meeting would be sufficient to dispel the all too real disputes which divide the two groups and which the Foreign Ministries have been unable to settle despite many years of effort. As we never hoped for as much as that, we could not be disappointed. But we do think that the chief object, which is that they should get to know each other better, has been achieved.
41. Hitherto the iron curtain had been so thick that it was becoming impossible to hear the other party, still less to understand it. Whether it was a matter of democracy, freedom, security, coexistence, control or confidence, the words no longer had the same meaning. Even if the facts were known it was impossible to grasp the exact significance attributed to them on the other side. Even when a proposal was under consideration, it was studied in terms of the philosophy and from the point of view of one side and its exact implications were not understood. A dialogue, still more, an agreement, had become a psychological impossibility. That is the advantage of a direct exchange of views without intermediaries. It is not surprising that at the outset such contact should produce friction. But if misunderstandings are to be progressively dispelled, it should be continued. It is the necessary preliminary to any possible agreement.
42. This session is dominated by the meetings of the two men who personify the two greatest Powers of our time. We realize that nothing of importance can be done without their joint agreement. But-we ought also to realize that nothing great can be successfully achieved without the support of all nations and in particular of the small nations which constitute the majority of this Assembly. At the thirteenth session of the General Assembly I emphasized their influence and their responsibility. Is it not our duly to encourage the great Powers, to guide their efforts by telling them exactly what is expected, what will be supported and what the public opinion which we represent can render successful?
43. The speeches of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs who succeed each other on this platform would be monotonous if they did not become pitiful through sheer repetition. We are all harassed by the same anxiety and inspired by the same hope. We know that the same war would engulf us with our civilizations and that in time of peace the prosperity of a few privileged nations can only be firm and lasting if it is rapidly extended to the hosts of beings who are now the victims of hunger, poverty and ignorance. That is the common conviction which in different words is repeated until it becomes almost obsessive.
44. On this platform a few days ago Mr. Khrushchev proposed [799th meeting] complete and controlled disarmament within four years. Complete and controlled disarmament is an ideal which enjoys unqualified acceptance and should be realized as soon as possible. We, the small nations, feel more than others the burden of armaments. While we are incapable of being aggressors we are afraid of being the victims of aggression and cannot forget the fact. If we are prosperous we know, without need for explanation, that we could have still more schools, hospitals, theatres and museums, that we could, without indulging in vain luxury, have a higher level of living. If we are insufficiently developed economically, we think regretfully of all the factories which could be built if we could obtain a loan equivalent to the cost of one armoured division or one naval squadron.
45. But this disarmament must be really general, that is to say, it must be extended to both camps. If it was unilateral, the anxiety of the small nations would be increased by the removal of the precarious balance of power which at present constitutes their protection. That is why we must insist on control, which will assure us that disarmament is not merely a propaganda device or even an aggressive manoeuvre.
46. Much has been said about control and confidence. The West regards confidence as a consequence of control whereas the Soviet bloc consider rather that confidence is a prerequisite of control. Paradoxically, confidence alone, if achieved, would obviate the need for control and even for disarmament. The word given by either side would provide sufficient reassurance and would not need to be checked. The existence of dangerous stockpiles would be no cause for disquiet because everyone would know, for instance, that rockets are intended for trips to the moon and not for the annihilation of cities. But where there is no confidence at all, control by a potential aggressor is unacceptable. The first step must be conciliation.
47. It is a well-known adage, worth thinking about, that the first reaction of a man threatened by a thief is certainly not to hand over the key to his house. It may be added, however that if the thief claims to have thrown his weapon into the fitter the man will certainly not take his word for it but will want to go through his pockets. Hence, control is essential. But, of course, the owner of the house will not allow himself to be searched. That is why confidence is needed. This difficulty is that each side, convinced of its own peaceful intentions, acts like the peaceful owner of the house and considers the other side a potential aggressor.
48. The conclusion is that confidence and control go hand in hand. That is why disarmament can only be achieved in stages. At a time when the two great Powers are discussing the question, when a Ten-Power Committee has just been set up in liaison with the United Nations, it would, of course, be premature to offer suggestions. However, the smaller nations must state emphatically that they are anxiously following these negotiations, will endorse even a proposal for partial, disarmament if it is likely to reduce tension and increase confidence, but will not give moral support to any propaganda manoeuvre or unwarranted obstruction.
49. I have one final observation to make on this subject. Is it right to set as the final objective a total disarmament which would leave States with only a police force? We know, of course, that man did not wait for the bomb before he began to fight. Men have fought with spears, with clubs and with their fists. The larger States may constitute a threat by the Sheer weight of their population and economy. Moreover, we live in a turbulent world. We cannot be certain that everyone will be wise and peaceful. Within a country all the citizens are disarmed except the police and in a world that is disarmed but in a constant state of unrest because of conflicting interests provision must he made for at least an international United Nations police force.
50. Total disarmament implies total control and I wonder whether the two parties will ever agree to inspection sufficiently close to permit not only a detection and cessation of the manufacture of atomic bombs but also the detection and destruction of existing stocks of bombs. If we really wish to succeed, we must state clearly both the extent of the problem and the limits within which solutions are possible.
51. Peace can be consolidated not only in a negative way, through disarmament measures, but also by positive steps. I should like to mention two in the second part of my statement,
52. One is a better exchange of information. In earlier days the foreigner was looked upon as an odd, savage and dangerous creature. Today’s tourist usually returns home with love for his own country but with a better understanding of other lands. One does not relish shooting at those whose language one has heard, to whose ideas one has listened, and whose home one has visited. Should we not increase this mutual understanding? Have we not together drafted the Universal Declaration of Human Eights in which freedom of thought and the right to information are enshrined? The time seems to me to be particularly ripe for a new effort to be made, now that Mr. Khrushchev is in the United States and will later be host to Mr. Eisenhower in Moscow, now that two exhibitions have aroused burning curiosity and tourists are passing in increasing numbers under a half-lifted iron curtain.
53. Belgium proposed on a previous occasion that the world’s peoples should receive more information about the horrors of an atomic war. The proposal still stands. But it cannot remain isolated lest the peoples, fearful of what may happen, arm themselves more feverishly in order to avert such horrors. The peoples must also be told what those on the other side are thinking and doing. The desire for peace is universal and every country has great peaceful achievements to its credit. Let the people meet one another and compare their achievements. They will no longer think of fighting.
54. I was struck by the remark of the Secretary of State of the United States, [797th meeting] Mr. Herter, that the debates in this' Assembly should be heard everywhere, by our own efforts if necessary. If we really wish to establish peace on a basis of conciliation of ideas and interests instead of the brutal hegemony of a single Power, what every one of us has to Say Should be heard.
55. Should we not seize upon this intellectual easing of tension and this increase in contacts as an opportunity to congratulate the statesmen who have taken the initiative in this and to see to it that the movement is accelerated? A commission is studying disarmament; should we not also, establish a commission to consider the possibility of a greater exchange of ideas? UNESCO is dealing with this from the intellectual standpoint but the political responsibility lies with the United Nations and it is from the political point of view that I raise this problem.
56. Certain precautions will, of course, have to be taken. Protection against untruthful or simply tactless propaganda may be desirable. Some visitors are not welcome, some exchanges of views are dangerous. Contacts that have not been properly prepared may do harm. In short, those who object to indiscriminate application of the principle of information may have sound, honourable reasons for their reservations. It would seem therefore, that a commission which would lay down rules, establish precedents, ensure gradual progress and iron out difficulties, might render immense services. It need not have any rights, authority or obligations which would not be acceptable. We must have confidence in its growing moral influence.
57. So much for my first suggestion for positive action in favour of peace. My second concerns commercial and financial exchanges. Trade is a good antidote to war. If one is reluctant to fire at a man one knows, one is equally reluctant to shoot someone who has become one’s customer.
58. On this point are we not all open to criticism? Sometimes trade is reduced for strategic reasons, sometimes it is increased for political reasons. Trade between East and West presents difficult problems because, on the one side, there are State enterprises which are not directly affected by the pressure of costs and, on the other side, there are private companies which cannot sell their goods at a loss. If dumping and quotas are to be avoided, the two worlds must find common rules of fair competition which work to the advantage of both sides.
59. In connexion with the question of trade, I think particularly of the under-developed countries and countries in the process of development. They certainly need technical and financial aid, and by reducing the burden of armaments, we could increase our support substantially. But even before seeking our assistance, these nations are appealing to us to let them earn their livelihood quietly by selling us the raw materials which they produce at a reasonable price. Unfortunately, market prices fluctuate so much that, during bad years, the producing countries can lose much more than we lend or give them. And in the face of such fluctuations and instability of earnings, how can they be expected to work out long-term economic development plans with any degree of certainty?
60. Obviously stabilisation of the prices of raw materials or, more accurately, stabilization of the foreign earnings of such countries can only be achieved through the co-operation of all producers and consumers throughout the world. Moreover — and this too is primarily of interest to countries in the process of development — the goods they import and the commodities they export must be able to use the world’s shipping routes freely, without discrimination or hindrance to this peaceful trade by third parties. Is this not an excellent and necessary field for co-operation between East and West?
61. Belgium, together with five other countries, is a member of the Six-Power European Common Market. Together these countries are the largest importing and exporting power in the world. We have always believed that we should not isolate ourselves; our history, geography, our overseas responsibilities, our economic and trade interests compelled us to maintain increasingly close relations not only with the twelve nations of Western and Southern Europe, but with the British Commonwealth, Latin America, North America, the African States and with our customers and suppliers in Asia. The creation of this new, great economic power is not of advantage to the European Common Market countries alone; it will make it possible to buy more and sell more and to lend on a larger scale. It is in that light that we should view its development. In particular, we are conscious of our obligations towards the under-developed countries, but we are also aware that we can only fulfil them in co-operation with the other great industrial powers of America, the British Commonwealth and the USSR.
62. I am attempting, Mr. President, to explain the philosophy underlying our initiative. We are living in an era when, for the first time, as a result mainly of technological advances, human dignity is not merely something to be proclaimed by religious leaders and philosophers but must be the concern of politicians and business leaders. Today we feel that man, that every man, not only has a theoretical right to develop intellectually and materially, but can reasonably look forward to a decent standard of living and a better life. We are aware that a nation — every nation — if it makes an effort, can and must become the master of its own destiny.
63. In this connexion, I wish to welcome President de Gaulle’s statement (16 September 1959) on Algeria. It was conceived with vision and it offers that community self-determination and the opportunity to continue to benefit by the economic, financial, technical and scientific aid which France so generously extends to those associated with her.
64. I also wish to welcome the young African States as well as the Cameroons, Togoland, Nigeria and Somaliland, which will attain independence in 1960. The activity of their delegations here will be the proof of their political maturity and the best tribute they can pay to the beneficent work accomplished by the former Administering Powers.
65. In this connexion, I cannot refrain from reminding the Assembly, although these are strictly internal matters, that Belgium has always been guided by the same ideal in Africa. In 1958, a parliamentary commission, after an extensive survey in the Congo, put forward principles of democratization which were endorsed without modification in the declarations by the Government and the Crown early this year.
66. Those declarations explicitly state that: "Belgium intends to organize a democracy in the Congo which will be capable of exercising the prerogatives of sovereignty and of deciding upon its independence." And in order to give substance to the solemn restatement of that pledge and at the same time prepare the people for the exercise of political rights, specific measures of major importance are being carried out this year: general elections by free and secret ballot and with universal suffrage, the organization at all levels of representative and executive organs, the vesting of real powers in these organs, while Africanization of the civil service continues. Further steps are to be taken in 1960. The Africans recognize that in seventy-five years we have developed their country materially and intellectually and transformed it into what I believe to be a country with a fair name in the world. With the same devotion and the same realism, we are now organizing political democracy. Naturally all these institutions cannot be established overnight, but the Africans know that the rate of progress depends only on their good will and their ability. We, for our part, are continuing to help them in every possible way: philosophically, scientifically, technically and financially.
67. Another parliamentary commission has drawn up similar reforms for the Trust Territories of Ruanda and Urundi and they will soon be officially announced by my Government.
68. Thus, we are living in a world where all countries may look forward to receiving the material and intellectual benefits which are still the privilege of a few. It would be unthinkable that so much good will, so many opportunities should be wasted in blunders, rivalry, conflicts and apocalyptic wars. We, the small nations, are aware of this and we urgently appeal to the great Powers of this world to forsake ideological quarrels and to rise above conflicts of interest at a time when their honest co-operation can bring peace, well-being and happiness for all.