1. Mr. Alex Quaison-Sackey, the representative of the Republic of Ghana, has been elected President of the General Assembly by acclamation. He comes to this highly responsible office armed with vast political experience and with a personal culture which not only has distinguished itself in the study of the problems of our time but extends also to the world of Greek and Roman antiquity. In the face of the difficulties and the complex troubles which have arisen during this Assembly, Mr. Quaison-Sackey’s personal qualities seem to us to guarantee that the methods followed will be skilful and the results effective.
2. His predecessor, the representative of Venezuela, our eminent friend Mr. Carlos Sosa Rodriguez, leaves behind him an indelible imprint of his service as President and an object lesson in good sense, intelligence, vigorous decisiveness, courtesy and dignity.
3. We should like to extend our respectful and cordial greetings to both the retiring and the incoming Presidents.
4. We should also like to welcome the three new countries which have joined our ranks as sovereign and independent States: Malta, Zambia and Malawi.
5. At the inaugural meeting of this Assembly, reference was made to Seneca, "Seneca morale", as the great Florentine described him centuries ago; one of the greatest moralists of all time; amoral philosopher and an eternal example of spiritual calm, of clarity and of serene will. I particularly welcomed your reference to that illustrious figure. From that moment, I realized that not only was the Assembly to be directed by someone whose personal qualities are well known to us all, but that we were to include among our sources of inspiration one of the most venerable teachers in all history. We can expect nothing but virtue and goodness from a man who takes Lucius Annaeus Seneca as a mentor and who entrusts himself to such a guide.
6. As the President, a good Latinist, is well aware, Seneca was a Spaniard, the son of Seneca the Elder, both of them born in Córdoba, the patrician city of Andalusia which was the cradle and the seat of Roman, Arab, Hebrew and Christian learning.
7. It will do no harm if, in these critical days, the President of the General Assembly of the United Nations remembers that philosopher who, burdened with the sufferings of his fellow men, dreamed of a wide brotherhood of men, all equal in spiritual needs and in the requirements of moral integrity, brothers in suffering, and for that reason called upon to help each other and to serve each other. In one of his letters to Lucullus, Seneca said that "our existence means living together, and we must live for our fellow men, if we wish to live for ourselves". May we all be inspired by the memory of that eminent moralist and let us be careful not to bring to this rostrum passion without dignity, malice charged with resentment, or words which are untrue; for one of the dangers which faces our Organization is that it may be converted into an arena for political dissension and a stage for mutual insults.
8. If one of the main objectives of the United Nations is to create conditions in which justice and respect for the obligations which derive from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and if, to bring this about, all people must unite in the service of peace, spurning abuse and aggression, and seeking negotiation, mediation, arbitration, legal settlement, conciliation, everything except the frenzy of war, this forum must always be kept free from unbridled passions. Everything which, in the name of any specific policy, tends to offend or defame the national characteristics of any of the Member States, by means of judgements or resolutions of a discriminatory nature, whether within the Assembly itself or in any of the specialized agencies, will create serious hazards whose consequences would necessarily affect the very foundations of the United Nations.
9. We cannot spend our lives extolling the merits of peaceful coexistence and yet allow ourselves in this very place, in the body formed to organize and preserve that coexistence, to deride and devour each other, in the service of personal or party interests and in the name of the various fanaticisms which are at present rife in the world.
10. With words that ring out like a call to arms, the Secretary-General has just declared that the United Nations has to face a crisis of confidence in its growth, usefulness and effectiveness and that changes will have to be made in the way it functions; but that changes must take place, first of all, in the minds of men, and that the spirit of tolerance, the desire to conciliate, the will to harmonize, which are the basic tenets of the Charter, must be constantly invoked.
11. Never has such a statement been more appropriate to the circumstances. The United Nations has experienced, or rather is experiencing, a crisis of confidence in itself. At the moment, this Assembly seems rather like a meeting of invalids. The basic machinery of our debates has stopped functioning, like the limbs of someone who is paralysed. Speaking in strictly legal terms we might say that some important provisions of the Charter are in suspension. We know and we wish to believe that this paralysis is fortunately a passing phase. In the interim, however, the laws of parliamentary democracy, proclaimed as the life and soul of the Assembly, are not being applied: it might be said that they have become impotent. This is certainly not the first time that a conflict of this nature has arisen between the possibilities of strictly parliamentary democracy and the essential political, social or economic reality of the world in which we live.
12. The United Nations Charter and the rules of procedure of the General Assembly grant us two essential rights: the right to discuss and the right to vote; for some time now, we have neither discussed nor voted, we have just talked. The procession of eloquent orators — to whom I must pay an admiring tribute — to this rostrum is given the name of "general debate" but we all share the secret that there is no such debate. It is almost touching to see the care which we all take not to disturb in any way the secret dialogue in which certain matters, theoretically the province of the Assembly but which in practice have been removed from our consideration at this time, are apparently being clarified and I hope settled. If it were advisable for the welfare of the United Nations that the principles and procedures of its democratic constitution should be suspended, I should Welcome suspension. It would, however, be well to ponder the peculiar fact that a body which was conceived and designed constitutionally as an Assembly to debate, argue, reason, examine and judge cannot, in a particular crisis, debate, argue, reason, or examine, still less pass judgement. It seems as if it has been frightened by itself. It has lacked the necessary confidence in its own strength. The muse of fear has always been a very bad counsellor.
13. Let us not deceive ourselves. This shirking of our duty, and our evident inability to carry out our basic functions, these are things which always result in a loss of prestige and authority; and if this occurs once only, if this is only the result of chance misfortune, the blow will not be mortal; but crises would be inevitable if we were to allow such things to be repeated.
14. The present crisis is the result of financial problems. Disputes about money are said to be particularly destructive when they occur in families which do not agree. It might be thought, and even feared, that within this Organization composed of peoples of such different religious, political, social, cultural and economic backgrounds, stormy arguments would be caused by dramatic conflicts of ideals. But it is money which has been the main cause of contention among us, to such an extent that it has made it almost impossible for us to coexist in this universal body, although, as Mr. Velázquez, the representative of Uruguay, said in his excellent statement, behind the present situation there is also a crisis of development and growth related to the different ways of viewing and serving the cause of peace.
15. The Spanish delegation trusts and sincerely hopes that, in those meetings where some light is being found to disperse the shadows, the way to salvation may soon be found. We shall all welcome it with heart and soul. Thus willy nilly, surmounting all obstacles, we shall dispose of an uncertain past; but if we should do only that, we should be doing nothing more than making sure of bread today and hunger tomorrow. We must therefore face the whole problem of future financing and find a system which will not be subject to the myriad complications and disputes which burden us today. Some eminent representatives have suggested possible courses of action. I should like to refer, as an example, to the structural modification of the Charter which was suggested some days ago by the Foreign Minister of Brazil [1289th meeting]. Whether his suggestion is adopted, or whether some more suitable solution is found, let us decide once and for all what the health of the Organization requires, for it would be intolerable if, after a period of time, this type of trouble were once again to divide us and to threaten us with disintegration.
16. My delegation accepts the principle of mandatory contributions to defray the cost of peace-keeping operations, but we do not deny that the idea of voluntary contributions, supported by some distinguished delegations, seems worthy of consideration and analysis. Nevertheless, together with the principle of mandatory contributions, we affirm and register the fact that there is a fundamental discrepancy in regard to the criteria at present governing the distribution of expenditure. The present system seems to us unfair. The existence of privileged countries within the United Nations is accepted as a factor of special importance; and we feel that in every case privileges should carry with them special economic obligations, as the counterpart of the particularly advantageous position which those countries have established for themselves.
17. We also share the idea, which has been outlined on more than one occasion by various representatives, that at the centre, and even on the periphery, of any conflict threatening international peace and security there are countries directly and particularly concerned which have, in one way or another, special responsibility and which, in the last analysis, receive direct benefit from United Nations intervention. In other words, certain countries, quite apart from the general benefits of peace which accrue to them to the same degree as to all the other Member States, gain certain benefits of a very special nature from the settlement of a conflict. Would it not be fair to impose on them some special contribution?
18. I do not want to illustrate these general considerations by specific examples. I would. venture, however, to suggest to all the delegations which, like the Spanish delegation, consider the present way of conducting these matters to be unfair that when the present episode is settled, or at the time of its settlement, we should start to study new methods for special financing, in conformity with principles of more equitable distribution.
19. Everything I have just been saying has been prompted by the best spirit of service to the United Nations. The foreign policy of Spain and all its international activities, based on principles and traditions which have successfully stood the test of centuries, are in complete accord with the ideals of fair coexistence among peoples. We feel ourselves to be active members of that international community whose legal and historical background has been described in masterly fashion by the representative of Uruguay in the statement [1302nd meeting] to which I have already referred. The Spanish people have always striven towards the universal and the ecumenical, and we therefore find no difficulty in interpreting and serving loyally the purposes of this Organization, which was established as a point of reference, a haven of refuge and a guiding light for the hopes of mankind.
20. The territory of Spain is situated in a part of our planet where vital geographical and historical routes meet and cross. It will not be inappropriate to recall, in this connexion, that for a long time it was said, with the idea of insulting us, that Africa begins in the Pyrenees. Although this is not so, I must say that we never regarded our identification with Africa as a humiliation. Speaking from this rostrum last year, Mr. Castiella, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, said: "Spain is a deeply European, country, and because it is so and because it feels that it is the spiritual forerunner of the continent, it is inspired at the same time with a universal mission." [1213thmeeting, para. 46.]
21. We are, indeed, European from the very roots of our basic concepts of man and of society. In the speech I have just quoted, Mr. Castiella also stated: "It is this Europe, loyal to itself, that we Spaniards want to serve without political prejudices, without dogmatic or restrictive definitions, and without transforming our idea of what Europe is into something. like a club reserving arbitrarily the right of admission, for we know that the political formulae of our times are in constant evolution, that no one has the monopoly of Europe and that what really and truly remains standing is the solidarity in various fundamental beliefs and in a spiritual inheritance of which Spain feels it is as legitimate an heir as any other European nation." [Ibid., para. 49.]
22. This European heritage of Spain was immensely enriched through two developments of unsurpassed magnitude. One was the discovery and colonization of this American continent, an event or a succession of events in which the name of Spain acquired immortal fame. From that great enterprise, notwithstanding all the weaknesses and errors to which mankind is subject, our people emerged with a new and imperishable individuality in the sight of all men of all times, present and future.
23. The other development consisted of eight centuries of Spanish coexistence with Arabs of the Middle East and with Africans, present and aggressive as they were on our very soil; those 800 years present an impressive story of construction, heroism, triumph and suffering, philosophies, marvels of art and poetry, scientific progress and social coexistence. That past engenders and encourages one of the enduring features of our foreign policy: the friendship, more durable than bronze or gold, between the Arab peoples and Spain.
24. As Europeans, we believe in a splendid future for our old and great continent, in which new generations are laying the foundations for future achievements. We are today witnessing a revivification of the lands of the men of Europe, a revival destined to serve the world of the future just as the golden ages of Greece, Italy, England, France, Portugal, Spain, the Nordic peoples, the imperial Germanic dynasty and the powerful Slavonic culture served man’s destiny in the past. For that mission to be fully accomplished, there must be a redeemed Germany, completely reunited and incorporated without dismemberment into the great community of European nations.
25. Spain wishes to be always in the forefront of this Europe, an advanced nation with its arms stretched out towards America, first and foremost, with friendship and love for a race and for nations whose every enterprise we would wish to share and whose every effort we would wish to support. We should like there to be no single plot of land in the whole of Latin America deprived of the benefits of freedom or overshadowed by colonialism, no home without its due measure of happiness, and none of its peoples for whom the dream of greatness fails to be a reality.
26. In a Europe conceived as I have described, Spain aspires also to be a link with the peoples of Africa. From the mountains to the south of the city where Seneca was born, if we stand on tiptoe we can descry African territory, but above all we can interpret clearly the messages that the wind carries from the open spaces beyond the great Atlas mountains.
27. Spain has never sought material profit in Africa. We were never attracted there by the slightest ambition for economic gain; on the contrary, we can point to a history of sacrifices, which at times have demanded considerable efforts. In the cities and villages which we founded in Africa or whose growth and development we helped, we have always shown sincere feelings of brotherhood towards the indigenous people. There is no sphere of life, from the hospitality of the home to the education of the children, in which the desires of the protectors and the protected, the administrators and the administered, Spaniards and Africans, were not constantly linked. This has been so at all times and it is so today. Whether with monarchies or with republics, we have never failed to observe this golden rule of coexistence; thus when we state that the ideals cherished in those parts of Africa where Spain is present will be realized without the slightest doubt or deception, we are not uttering empty words or trying to find loopholes; we are simply stating what we are, what we feel and how we understand our relationship with the African peoples. Any malicious and offensive accusation which tries to present us as contriving some kind of fraud will meet with our most forceful rejection. Spain is incapable of deceit; throughout all the centuries it has never learned the art of deception. In the intricate labyrinth of world politics, our lack of hypocrisy has caused us more than a few setbacks, because men often impose on the sincerity and honesty of others. But that is how we are, and we think it is worthwhile to be so.
28. Having reached this point in my statement, in which I am speaking of our sense of belonging to Europe, I cannot help referring in particular to a country to which we feel bound by ties of brotherhood. That country is Portugal. Everyone knows the general lines and the basic structure of Spain’s foreign policy. I need not stress the importance which the bilateral agreements signed by Spain have in maintaining peace in a critical part of the world. Without, however, detracting from the importance of any of the others, but rather in a spirit of appreciation of their scope, I am pleased to draw attention, however briefly, to the links uniting us with Portugal.
29. In the south-west of Europe, Portugal and Spain, each of them a free and sovereign nation, remain true to their past and to the duties that their past imposes on them. By virtue of a pact of honour for the defence of Christian civilization in these peninsular lands of south-western Europe, the two countries are the guardians of the West between the Mediterranean and Atlantic. The injustices perpetrated against Portugal cause us as much pain as if they were directed against ourselves. It seems incredible to us that a nation such as the Portuguese, with such a glorious past, more African in its historic destiny than any other nation, anti-racist by tradition and, more important, multiracial by conviction and in its social conventions, a master in the field of discovery, should not be accorded the treatment to which these outstanding qualities entitle it. In politics, error is usually more serious than even injustice itself; and in our opinion it is an error not to have tried to find, either within or outside the United Nations, better ways of dealing with the point of view and the spirit of the Portuguese, who are given by nature to discussion and negotiation. I have here placed on record our loyal feelings, as neighbours and brothers, towards one of the most remarkable peoples in the history of civilization.
30. To the peoples who have recently become independent, we express our good wishes for the peaceful consolidation of their free institutions and the orderly development of their potentialities. I stress the words "orderly development". I have in mind the fruitful order and the creative peace in which the political, social and economic development of Equatorial Guinea is being brought about. Although I hope to be able to deal at greater length with the policy of Spain in the sphere of decolonization at a later stage of this session, I should like to take this opportunity of making a few preliminary observations.
31. The inhabitants of Fernando Póo and Río Muni are masters of their own future; the principle of self-determination applies to them and it is a source of legitimate pride to us that they are showing distinct signs of capacity for self-government. These peoples are advancing from stage to stage on their appointed course, without at any time losing touch with reality, without endangering their well-established position of increasing well-being, and without risking through useless violence either the peaceful progress of their domestic life or the orderly exploitation of the country’s natural resources, whose products are reaching the homes of the indigenous people, in increasing quantities. We have heard the Foreign Minister of Gabon [1301st meeting] tell us the truth about the present position in Equatorial Guinea. His testimony is that of a neighbouring country which, from across the frontier, sees, analyses and passes judgement. The delegation of Spain publicly expresses its gratitude to him. I can assure the General Assembly that Spain will be very careful, in Equatorial Guinea and in any other place where it has responsibilities, not to provide any reason or any occasion for bloodthirsty battles or cruel slaughter. Our African brothers will reach their goals by peaceful means. Decolonization and its demands do not worry us, but destructive anarchy, disorders and outrages which give rise to unrestrained demagogy certainly do. Some words spoken here a few days ago by the representative of Somalia are fresh in our memory. He said: "We are advocating a rational, practical principle, not anarchy." [1290th meeting, para. 78.] We also endorse wholeheartedly the sound judgement of the representative of Dahomey: "The abandonment of generally accepted moral principles will be fatal to peace among men." [1290th meeting, para. 108.]
32. On 16 October the Special Committee entrusted with the study of problems of decolonization adopted some resolutions relating to our Territories of Guinea, Ifni and the Sahara, My Government has taken careful note of those resolutions.
33. Within the Committee of Twenty-Four, as in the other forums of the United Nations, our ideas are well known and no one should doubt our intentions. We have no wish — and I am anxious that my words should be noted by all those countries with which we have, or may have in the future, problems to discuss and resolve — to add to the work of this Organization and to bring before it, time after time, disputes for which adequate solutions can be found elsewhere always, of course in accordance with the principles of the Charter. The Committee’s resolutions to which I have referred are receiving and will receive the full attention of the Government of Spain. We are working, quietly but unremittingly, towards the establishment of those conditions which the nature of things demands as the minimum for the achievement of satisfactory results. The Committee and the Assembly will be notified of these matters in due course.
34. Faithful to the letter and the spirit of the Charter of the United Nations, Spain will pursue its political course, and in the determination of that course the decisive element will be the aspirations expressed by the inhabitants of the territories in question. Loyal friendship with neighbouring countries is an unchanging principle of our policy. This governs our conduct in Europe and it will always guide us in our relations with our African neighbours.
35. Representatives are aware — and it would be a serious contradiction and an even greater injustice to forget it — that Spain is the only European country which suffers from the presence on its metropolitan territory of a foreign colony: that colony is named Gibraltar. As a British Crown Colony it has been the subject of study by the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, which considered the question of Gibraltar at its 208th to 215th meetings, from 11 to 20 September 1963, and at its 280th to 291st meetings from 22 September to 16 October 1964. The study of Gibraltar was completed at this last meeting and the Special Committee arrived at a decision which is reflected in the following consensus: "The Special Committee, after considering the situation in the Non-Self-Governing Territory of Gibraltar and hearing statements by the representative of the administering Power and the representative of Spain and by petitioners, affirms that the provisions of the Declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples are fully applicable to the Territory of Gibraltar. "In its consideration of these statements, the Special Committee noted that there was a disagreement, or even a dispute, between the United Kingdom and Spain regarding the status and situation of the Territory of Gibraltar. In the circumstances, the Special Committee invites the United Kingdom and Spain to begin talks without delay, in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter, in order to reach a negotiated solution in conformity with the provisions of resolution 1514 (XV), giving due account to the opinions expressed by the members of the Committee and bearing in mind the interests of the people of the Territory. "Under its terms of reference laid down in resolution 1654 (XVI), the Special Committee requests the United Kingdom and Spain to inform the Special Committee and the General Assembly of the outcome of their negotiations." [A/AC.109/SR.291.J
36. In a letter dated 22 October 1964, Mr. Sori Coulibaly, the Chairman of the Special Committee, communicated this consensus to me, for the information of my Government, and drew my attention to the need to inform the Special Committee and the General Assembly of the outcome of the Spanish-United Kingdom negotiations recommended in the consensus.
37. The Spanish Government, which naturally welcomed these United Nations recommendations, informed the Government of Her Britannic Majesty that it was prepared to start negotiations as soon as possible. This communication from my Government was made in a note dated 18 November 1964, which I shall read out: "His Excellency Sir George Labouchere, K.C.M.G. Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Her Britannic Majesty, Madrid. "Sir, "Mr. Sori Coulibaly, the Chairman of the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, has transmitted to the Spanish Government, through the Permanent Representative of Spain to the United Nations, a letter in which he communicated the consensus on Gibraltar adopted by that Committee at its 291st meeting, on 16 October 1964. I am enclosing copies of these documents. "According to the terms of this consensus, the aforementioned Committee, after noting that 'there was a disagreement, or even a dispute, between the United Kingdom and Spain regarding the status and situation of the Territory of Gibraltar', considered that it should be settled without delay by means of negotiations between the Governments of Spain and of Her Britannic Majesty. "The Spanish Government is prepared to open with Her Britannic Majesty's Government the negotiations referred to in the said consensus, which should start as soon as possible in order that the outcome may be reported to the nineteenth session of the General Assembly, as also by reason of the special delicacy of the problem of Gibraltar, which has been made more acute by certain measures adopted unilaterally by the Government of Her Britannic Majesty, in respect of which Spain has formulated due reservations. "In the interest of the maintenance and strengthening of firm and promising relations between our two countries, of which the Government of Her Britannic Majesty has in recent years shown itself to be in favour, the Government of Spain has so far refrained from adopting the appropriate countermeasures. In so doing it has considered that the problem of Gibraltar could and should be resolved bilaterally in a friendly fashion, whereby it should be possible to find a solution satisfactory to both parties. "Failing this negotiated solution, which is recommended by the consensus of the 'Special Committee', the Spanish Government, having no other alternative, would find itself compelled, in defence of its interests, to revise its policy in regard to Gibraltar. "Accept, Sir, with my best personal wishes, the assurance of my highest and most distinguished consideration. (Signed) "Fernando Ma. Castiella"
38. As I have just said, my country is under an obligation, as pointed out by the Chairman of the Committee of Twenty-Four, to inform the nineteenth session of the General Assembly of the outcome of the negotiations called for in the consensus I have mentioned.
39. In normal conditions I might perhaps have left part of what I am going to read out for a later occasion, when this matter could be discussed in the appropriate Committee or in the plenary meeting of the Assembly, but the present situation is far from normal and we all run the risk of finding one day that we have decided, by acclamation, to postpone our meetings indefinitely or until doomsday. In order not to expose myself to this risk I shall ask the indulgence of representatives and shall proceed to read out the following.
40. In fulfilment of the duty imposed upon us by the consensus of the Committee of Twenty-Four, of which I was reminded by Mr. Coulibaly, Chairman of the Committee, I think it is of interest to read out the full text of the "note verbale" which the British Embassy in Madrid sent to the Spanish Minister for Foreign Affairs on 11 January 1965. This note reads as follows: "Her Britannic Majesty’s Embassy present their compliments to the Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and have the honour to invite the attention of the Ministry to the serious situation obtaining on the frontier between Spain and Gilbraltar. "The delays and restrictions on transit of the frontier in both directions began on 17 October 1964 and were first brought to the attention of the Ministry on 6 November. On 9 November Her Majesty's Ambassador was assured that the Customs delays imposed at La Linea were not the results of any deliberate policy on the part of the Spanish Government. The restrictions on the frontier have nevertheless since been continued and intensified and further requests for their withdrawal were made by Her Majesty’s Ambassador in Madrid during November and December. "Despite these representations there has been no improvement in the situation. The Spanish authorities at the frontier have imposed deliberate, unnecessary and discourteous delays in dealing with vehicles crossing the frontier which have in some cases resulted in certain vehicles having to wait anything up to ten hours before being cleared. The delays caused in this manner to tourist buses have resulted in serious inconveniences to travellers of various nationalities and have imposed consequential delays on the departure from Gibraltar of scheduled airline services. The decision, announced without any previous consultation, that as from 23 November the frontier at La Linea would be closed Earlier than was formerly the practice, has caused substantial inconvenience. The consequences of all these measures have been to impose hardship on large numbers of residents of Gibraltar and persons in transit. "During their conversation on 10 December, His Excellency the Spanish Minister for Foreign Affairs indicated to Her Majesty's Ambassador that the restrictions were designed to deal with alleged smuggling across the frontier. But Her Majesty's Government cannot accept that the control of smuggling necessitates the delays and inconveniences which have been imposed and have in any case always expressed their willingness to co-operate with the Spanish authorities in controlling any smuggling which might be taking place. If the Spanish Government regarded any legitimate Spanish interests as likely to be prejudiced by circumstances arising from the situation in Gibraltar, Her Majesty's Government would have expected these matters to be specified and taken up with them through diplomatic channels in accordance with normal international practice. No such approach has been made and instead the Spanish authorities have seen fit to adopt the measures described above. Her Majesty's Government regret that procedures should have been imposed on the frontier with Gibraltar which are altogether different from those in force in Spain's other international frontiers as well as from the normal standards of international practice and which are directly contrary to the present trend throughout Europe of reducing frontier restrictions and formalities to a minimum. "On instructions received from Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, the Embassy has the honour to protest against the restrictions which have been imposed by the Spanish authorities at La Linea and to request that the Spanish Government will cause them to be lifted forthwith. "At the same time the Embassy are under instructions to inform the Ministry, with reference to the consensus of the United Nations Committee of Twenty-Four on 16 October 1964 regarding Gibraltar, that, whilst Her Majesty's Government cannot regard the question of sovereignty as a matter for negotiation, they would normally have been willing to consider proposals by the Spanish Government for discussions of ways in which good relations can be maintained and any causes of friction eliminated. They cannot, however, entertain any proposals for such conversations so long as the present abnormal situation on the frontier continues."
41. I leave representatives free to analyse the British reply. The first thought that occurs to me when I read it is that the London Government is now offering Spain things which a few years ago, when it refused them, might perhaps have been worthy of consideration, but which have now become inadequate. Indeed, after the consensus of the Committee of Twenty-Four of 16 October 1964 the problem of Gibraltar is posed in quite different terms. It would truly be an insult to this Organization, which Spain will not and cannot commit, if, after the lengthy debates on this problem in the decolonization Committee — where the difficulties created for Spain by smuggling and by the unilateral British measures were fully examined — my country and the United Kingdom, were now to start negotiations designed exclusively, for example, to determine how many cars pass each day through the gate in the iron railing, the first wall erected in Europe, which the English built in 1906 to separate Gibraltar physically from the rest of Spain.
42. Aware of the significance of the mandate given in the consensus of the Committee of Twenty-Four, Spain replied to the British note in the following terms: "The Ministry of Foreign Affairs presents its compliments to the Embassy of Her Britannic Majesty in Madrid and, in reply to its "note verbale" No. 5 of 11 January 1965 regarding the alleged restrictions imposed at the police and control post at La Linea de la Concepci6n, has the honour to inform it that the Spanish Government, following its constructive policy of friendship with the United Kingdom, considers, with regard to Gibraltar, that after the consensus of the Committee on Twenty-Four of 16 October 1964, any partial consideration of the problems arising out of the existence of a British military base in Spain is pointless; it therefore repeats to Her Britannic Majesty's Government the contents of the note of 18 November 1964 from the Spanish Minister for Foreign Affairs to the Ambassador of Her Britannic Majesty in Madrid, in which it was stated: “The Government of Spain is prepared to open with Her Britannic Majesty's Government the negotiations referred to in the said consensus, which should start as soon as possible in order that the outcome may be reported to the nineteenth session of the General Assembly, as also by reason of the special delicacy of the problem of Gibraltar, which has been made more acute by certain measures adopted unilaterally by the Government of Her Britannic Majesty, in respect of which Spain has formulated due reservations.” "While awaiting a reply to its note of 18 November 1964, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs extends to Her Britannic Majesty’s Embassy the assurances of its highest consideration. Madrid, 15 January 1965".
43. We wish to negotiate with Great Britain on the subject of Gibraltar strictly in accordance with the consensus of the Committee of Twenty-Four, bearing very much in mind the interests of the inhabitants of the Rock.
44. We are confident that Great Britain will finally understand that our position is not only the correct position, in conformity with the spirit of the Charter and the process of decolonization, but also the most beneficial in the long run for England, for Spain and for the inhabitants of Gibraltar.
45. Since 16 October 1964, when the Committee of Twenty-Four adopted its decision on Gibraltar, only one thing has disturbed and worried us. We are not afraid that the United Kingdom may delay its reply or advance various pretexts for refusing to negotiate at the behest of the United Nations. What does disturb us is that in the meantime it is quite clear that the policy of the fait accompli, which brought the problem of Gibraltar before this Organization, has not been abandoned; that the political institutions of Gibraltar are being maintained and even strengthened; that the United Kingdom Secretary of State for the Colonies speaks of a "Chief Minister" of the "Government of Gibraltar", thus taking it for granted that the people emcamped round a military base on foreign soil have the right to dispose of the piece of territory occupied by the base. Before the consensus of 16 October, this policy was an offence to Spain. Since that consensus, it has become an offence to the United Nations, whose recommendations it disregards. Here and nowhere else lies the root of the conflict and of any future disturbance.
46. In view of all the considerations that I have placed before you, you will understand how eager we are that the United Nations should remain strong and independent and should have the means to complete the task which the entire world wishes it to carry out.
47. This Organization cannot be a battle-field of the cold war. No one here can agree to be a passive spectator of a contest between two gigantic Powers, and far less accept the miserable position of a mere "super" on the world stage. Even the decisions on the vast problem of disarmament are not left entirely to the countries which possess arsenals of nuclear weapons.
48. Giving our imagination free rein, let us assume that the day will come — perhaps sooner than we now think — when thanks to technological advances and scientific discoveries it will be possible to produce nuclear weapons so cheaply that they will be within the reach of countries for which they are at present out of the question. But even if this does not happen and the possession of such monstrous weapons continues to be the terrible privilege of a very few, the activities connected with their use, preparation, disposal, deployment, emplacement and servicing must necessarily extend into the fields, mountains, beaches and plateaux inhabited by peoples with distinctive personalities and a determination to survive at all costs. I think it would be an illusion for a nuclear Power to try to dominate another nuclear Power by itself, without the co-operation or alliance of large areas of the world which have no atom bombs but are inhabited and defended by the decisive factor in any battle—men. For this reason, it is neither vain nor presumptuous for the countries without atomic weapons to participate in the debates on disarmament. The very fact that they have no nuclear or thermonuclear weapons, which means that they are well prepared for the supreme task of saving mankind, gives them great moral force. We may do anything in this direction, except sit with our arms crossed, with sad looks and heavy hearts, watching the atomic contest of the great Powers. Everything will be forgiven us except fatalistic resignation and unconditional capitulation in the face of the challenge now before us. But if the non-nuclear countries are to have something to say and to say it effectively, they must stand united, shoulder to shoulder; and until they are united, each country will seize whatever means it thinks best to defend itself and its vital interests; it will form any alliances and join any military groups that give it some hope of survival. No one can be expected to sit paralysed and defenceless, full of naive illusions, awaiting the hour of slaughter. The same might be said about disarmament as about decolonization: let it come soon, but on condition that it is for everyone, that there is no trickery or mockery of the good faith of any country, and that we all know what to expect.
49. If we do not want the prospects of the United Nations to grow dim, and if we work together honestly to ensure that our present opportunities are not lost, we can be sure of a peaceful future for mankind.
50. What my delegation feels about the role of the non-nuclear Powers in the problem of disarmament applies even more strongly to everything connected with the economic advancement of peoples.
51. My Government has been following with deep, interest the problems discussed at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, held in Geneva from March to June 1964. Spain itself is not yet sufficiently industrialized. We are on the way to development. For that reason, we fully associated ourselves with the concern expressed at the Conference regarding the need to open up new prospects for international trade and to raise the level of living throughout the world.
52. In recent years, my country has made substantial progress in its economic development and has achieved notable increases in income and taken a larger part in international trade.
53. Consequently, on the one hand we have vital experience of the problems which the under-developed countries have to solve, and, on the other, we are beginning to make real and vigorous progress.
54. The special position in which Spain finds itself enables my delegation to assess realistically and with a very open mind the problems of peoples which are still at the state at which we stood a few years ago — and where we still stand in various sectors of our economic and commercial development. In the most co-operative spirit we shall make our contribution to the solution of the problems which the Second Committee of the General Assembly will study in due course. The fact that Spain has been chosen as one of the members of the Trade and Development Board for the Western countries, as an under-developed country within the geographical area of Europe though with special relationships with other areas, makes us think that we can be of use in the dialogue that will shortly begin in this Organization. The developing countries can count on us to the full.
55. I now come to the end of my statement. Once again, I apologize for its length. I fear that I have abused your patience.
56. In a statement which was remarkable for many reasons, Mr. Rapachi, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of Poland, told us the following a few days ago: "Today, peace and progress are indissolubly linked. ... "The final elimination of all forms of colonial dependence, respect for the sovereignty of peoples and for their right to choose the form of development and way of life which suit them best, equitable division of labour and of the fruits of labour among nations, co-operation and peaceful competition in keeping with those principles, the settlement of international disputes by negotiation, disarmament, lasting peace — this is the approach which not only can protect us all from nuclear disaster, but will also place at the service of mankind the most progressive ideas and the mightiest resources of modern science and technology. "Peaceful coexistence, thus understood, constitutes one of the basic principles of Poland’s foreign policy." [1301st meeting, paras. 38, 39 and 40.]
57. I have no hesitation in saying that Spain's foreign policy, too, is guided by these principles. It would seem that with such a concurrence of views it should be possible to produce far more effective and fruitful United Nations action in the world. The reality, however, is quite different. As the Secretary-General tells us, a great deal of thinking has to be changed and the spirit of tolerance and the will to harmony must be far better served.
58. Ortega y Gasset, the Spanish thinker who is well known to you all, wrote: "The enormous effort which is war can be avoided only if there is an understanding that peace involves an even greater effort, a whole system of most complicated efforts." And he added: "Peace is not simply there, at hand, ready without further ado for man to enjoy. Peace is not the natural fruit of any tree ... The word ‘pacifism’ must cease to signify only a good intention; it must represent an entire system of new ways and means for men to consort with each other." Or, to repeat the words of Seneca which I quoted earlier, the cause of peace must have as its basis "a common way of life, living for others if we wish to live for ourselves".