52. Last year the delegation of Ecuador pointed out the importance of the general debate at the beginning of General Assembly sessions; that debate serves to guide world opinion in regard to the great problems on the solution of which peace depends, and because it keeps alive men’s confidence in the United Nations as the only instrument we have been able to create in our desire to prevent war and achieve a true understanding between States. 53. Despite great difficulties; a relative order is to some extent being achieved in the world. In the last year there has been little evidence to justify great optimism regarding the immediate success of the great enterprise undertaken by the United Nations. The great Powers have the last word: it is they who are responsible for the course of political events. This explains the anxiety with which we wait to hear the views of the Secretary of State of the United States, of the representative of the Soviet Union, of the representatives of the United Kingdom, France, China and other Powers which, although they do not call themselves great, are so in fact. The first two have already spoken, and with their speeches have created the atmosphere in which the items on this session’s agenda will be discussed in the Assembly and in the various Committees, providing us with a basis on which to estimate the likelihood of the successful outcome of our work. 54. The speech of the Secretary of State of the United States [434th meeting], delivered in a tone of calm and moderation, has been generally well received. Mr. Dulles discussed clearly and frankly all the problems which demand immediate solution in Europe and in Asia; he dealt courteously with his great adversary, pointing out a number of roads that would lead to a broad and generous understanding, without falling back on undignified appeasement, and maintaining firmly and inflexibly the defence of the basic principles of our culture. An international policy in this form, which is maintained on this moral level, rules out every kind of error and may be turned to good account if peace is genuinely desired by the Powers to which the Charter has given the difficult and complex duty of saving mankind from another war which might be the final chapter in man’s history on earth. 55. We listened most attentively to the speech delivered before the Assembly on 21 September by Mr. Vyshinsky, the chairman of the delegation of the Soviet Union [438th meeting]. In spite of the dialectical resources with which he tried to adorn the arguments that have been so often repeated from this rostrum, Mr. Vyshinsky’s speech disappointed the desire of many of us to find, this time, some indications of that goodwill which is necessary if we are to reconcile divergent points of view and to create a favourable atmosphere for the kind of efforts which can lead to concrete and fruitful solutions. His language was harsh and there was no change in his position; he continued to demand that all his proposals should be accepted, and rejected in stubborn fashion the generous approach of those who sincerely desire to create an atmosphere in which all the nations may live in peace. The veil of obscurity which he tried for the sake of Confusion to draw over facts such as the North Korean aggression failed in its object. The historic responsibility for crimes against civilization cannot be avoided, whatever the ability and vigour of the defending advocate. Falsehood is always unmasked when a little time has elapsed, in the same way as light appears and moral sanction falls upon the guilty when we let common sense do its work. 56. So far we have not heard representatives of a large number of countries, but, judging by the statements we have already heard, it can be said that generally speaking there have already appeared within the United Nations three currents of opinion which group the Powers in opposing or neutral camps. This creates a new factor of confussion which impedes the proper functioning of this Organization; for the United Nations cannot tolerate such internal division without sacrificing its essential purpose, namely, the unity of all the countries which signed or acceded to the Charter, World public opinion is, however, already well informed after listening to the representatives who have so far spoken from this rostrum. It is already possible to see where the obstacles come from and which of the great Powers is responsible for the continuation of the international tension that increasingly endangers the still weak structure which is preserving peace. 57. The friendly words of the supporters of democracy, which were intended to create an atmosphere favourable to effective negotiation, are proving useless; at this stage of the debate, and after many years of using the same tactics, the same arguments — always in the same words — it is useless for the other side to feign a love of peace which they do not possess, to proclaim a solidarity they do not practise and to speak of a people’s democracy that is in reality a cruel autocracy of a totalitarian type. 58. Thus unfortunately we continue on our way on the edge of war, and, as events develop, we approach the tragic end of this ever-narrowing path to which we are confined by the clash of great interests and the far-off prospect of achieving a great ideal. 59. What part are we of the small nations to play in this debate between the great Powers? Why do we take part in it if we lack the military and economic resources which constitute strength and power, and which are frequently used for human destruction? What, then, is the purpose of our participation, if we are not able to effect the slightest alteration in the policies of the statesmen who are at the head of the great Powers? Shall we not perhaps be a dead weight at this time when all the material and immaterial factors which restrain the free play of instincts and passions, economies and philosophies, interests and ambitions are being thrown overboard? 60. I should like to make a modest attempt to answer these grave questions. The declaration of the Charter concerning the equality of all nations large and small does not in practice have the theoretical value which that instrument confers upon it. No one has been foolish enough to give the declaration an objective value greater than that assigned to it by reality. But it is sensible and true to say that small peoples such as my own have a cultural and human patrimony equal to that of the most powerful peoples of the world. Hence, when a matter of such grave importance as the maintenance of peace or the danger of war is being discussed, the small nations have the same rights as the great ones to voice their opinions in defence of those principles which constitute the cultural heritage of mankind. 61. At this time, every conflict has world dimensions and world repercussions. We are all, great and small, equally affected. The interdependence of politics and economics is characteristic of a world in which the countries have been brought closer together by the speeding up of communications, and in which the technical command of nature has placed at man’s disposal means of mass destruction that can reach every corner of the earth. Even the idea of neutrality has been modified by this technical progress, and all peoples, great and small, are faced by the frightening and tragic possibility of universal destruction. 62. We realize indeed that we cannot expect to be heard with the same anxious attention and interest as those whose words are backed by the tremendous powers of total destruction. But we have behind our words a set of moral values and principles that form the basis of human culture, which it is necessary to defend. 63. In the particular case of my own country, there is a further reason why we wish to be heard; our whole historical development has been determined by a fervent desire for peace, for the maintenance of the principles of law in international relations, and for justice based on law, liberty and respect for the dignity of the human person. In this debate we do not therefore aspire to the solution of great problems. We confine ourselves to defending legal and moral principles, to supporting resolutely and unflinchingly every measure for the maintenance of international order and security, without sacrificing justice, and to co-operating loyally in the development of measures to safeguard the dignity of man and to create a climate in which it is possible for men and women to live a decent life, free from fear and from want. 64. If, as a contemporary thinker has said, the word has a sacred mission, it is here that the purpose of that high and noble attribute of man should most appropriately be fulfilled. We small Powers have the satisfaction and the pride of using the word in order to contribute our grain of sand to the ideal edifice of universal peace. We can use it only to demonstrate that ideas are the attribute of all men and that in the intellectual field all have the same possibilities. If we can succeed in remaining in this field, and refrain from invading the field in which only the great may move, we shall be heard with respect, which is the most to which we who are backed exclusively by moral force can aspire. 65. My delegation has carefully examined the Secretary-General’s annual report on the work of the Organization [A/2404], It gives a commendably impartial account of our long labours, and succeeds in compressing in a short space the whole panorama of our discussions in committees and technical groups. Personnel policy, which was a matter of such concern to us last year, seems to have entered into a period of calm and effective collaboration. We look forward with interest to any suggestions that may be made to us concerning any new measures we should adopt. 66. The lessons of history have taught us that the chief cause of disturbances of the peace, whether national or international, is economic and social instability. The United Nations has sought to attack that cause vigorously, by co-ordinating international efforts to create economic and social stability. Before embarking on large-scale programmes for the solution of economic and social problems, the United Nations has sought to collect the fullest statistical data to provide a basis for preparatory analytical studies by experts. The economic development of under-developed areas has naturally had priority over other work, and it is desirable that it should continue to do so. Similarly, the progress attained in the solution of many technical problems in the fields of taxation, statistics, communications, transport and public finance is also worthy of note, as a triumph for modern methods of co-operation. 67. With the timely and understanding advice of the United Nations, my country has been able to enact an organic customs Act and a customs tariffs Act, completely remodelling our former system and enabling us to modernize services, the revenue from which represents a considerable proportion of our budget. The eminent statesman who heads the Government of my country is keenly interested in completely remodelling, again with the technical assistance of the United Nations, our taxation and public finance system; the work is proceeding smoothly and should be completed in 1954. I wish to take this opportunity to express my Government’s gratitude for the excellent co-operation afforded to it by all the experts sent by the United Nations and the specialized agencies in many departments of economic, social, health and educational work. We hope that such technical assistance to our country will continue and increase. 68. A serious symptom of the inequality between the incomes of the under-developed countries and those of the more developed countries is the growing social unrest which lends itself to exploitation by the Communists, with obvious danger to the public peace. There is an increasing tendency to emigrate from the countries of Latin America, especially to the United States, to obtain higher wages. 69. The efforts made in previous years to achieve some equality in the incomes of all the continents have been insufficient. The Assembly, like the Economic and Social Council, has given considerable attention to these problems, and to the problem of the relationship of prices in international trade. The Assembly should reinforce the decisions which it took on this subject at the last session, notably in resolution 623 (VII), recommending that governments should co-operate in establishing multilateral as well as bilateral international agreements or arrangements relating to individual primary commodities as well as to groups of primary commodities and manufactured goods, in order to ensure the stability of the prices of those commodities. In that connexion, we look forward with much interest to the report to be submitted by the committee of experts appointed by the Secretary-General, in accordance with that resolution, to advise on practical measures to ensure stable and equitable price relationships in international trade. 70. In its desire to have the proper agencies and adequate resources to finance economic development, the General Assembly asked the Economic and Social Council, on 21 December 1952 [resolution 622 A (VII) ], to submit to it a detailed plan for establishing a special fund for grants-in-aid and for low-interest, long-term loans to under-developed countries, to assist them to finance non-self-liquidating projects which are basic to their economic development. 71. Pursuant to this request, the Economic and Social Council set up a committee of experts [resolution 416 A (XIV)] which has just submitted to it a detailed report [E/2281] containing recommendations on the fundamental problems of the structure, management and administration of the fund, its resources, policy and principles. The Economic and Social Council has also received the report [E/2441] of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development on the proposal for setting up an international finance corporation to promote the financing of economically viable private enterprises. Both proposals, the proposal for setting up a United Nations special fund and the proposal for an international finance corporation, will be submitted to the Assembly for consideration in due course. My delegation considers that both are of vital importance to the development of our economies, and for that reason cannot fail to express its fears lest they might be rejected. 72. To defer action until such time as the international situation makes it possible to invite or advise the peoples of the more highly developed countries to invest their savings in such projects would not be very encouraging to the under-developed countries. We trust that procrastination of this kind will be replaced by concrete and practicable solutions. Co-operation on a world scale in the development of resources is an essential requisite of peace which cannot be postponed to so distant a date, and surely means will be sought out to fulfil in a more practical and immediate way the urgent needs of economic development. 73. The United Nations Charter is an international legal document which imperfectly expresses the desire of the peoples to live in peace by establishing a basis on which States can live together in security, in an atmosphere of respect for international law which precludes violence and injustice. 74. The majority of States accepted the terms of the Charter at San Francisco because of the urgency of the need for reaching a compromise which would reconcile differences of opinion which might have delayed the solution of particular problems. We are certain, however, that none of the countries that signed it or subsequently acceded to it did so with the intention of committing themselves irrevocably to immutable provisions, or regarded the Charter as untouchable and not susceptible of improvement. That view would have been contrary to the concept of law as a body of rules arising out of the conditions of social life which change in time and in space. Only reactionary thinkers could today maintain that the laws governing relations among States are immutable and eternal, as did the old school of natural law. Thus the Charter had to be accepted as a flexible document, adapted to the circumstances of the time, but admitting of amendment to adjust it to new aspirations and ideals. 75. President Roosevelt, with his statesman’s vision and genius, took advantage of the state of public opinion following the Second World War to carry forward the gigantic task of preparing the Charter of the United Nations and the Statute of the International Court of Justice, and to convene the conference which was to discuss and approve them. Despite his death, the work was carried on with the sense of urgency which his determination had imparted. Perhaps if more time had passed before its creation, it would not have been possible to build this international centre where peoples of all races, languages, religions, philosophies and customs are learning to live together. 76. The Charter was the last expression of agreement and loyal understanding between the democratic Powers and the Soviet Union. In the circumstances which subsequently arose and which have brought us to the present state of international tension, it would have been impossible to create the United Nations Organization. Yet precisely because the Charter, born of suffering and of hope, was a compromise necessitated by circumstances, it could not be considered unchangeable, and provisions were included in Chapter XVIII allowing for the possibility of its amendment when experience demonstrated its imperfections. 77. Those imperfections are obvious. Serious omissions, disturbing inequalities, obscurities that lend themselves to misinterpretation, had to be accepted for the sake of the great common good, the taking of the first step on the long road which the United Nations had to follow. The request made by some countries, including Ecuador, at the last session of the General Assembly, for the amendment of the Charter In the manner provided by the Charter, was motivated only by the laudable desire to perfect the Charter, to eliminate inequities and to adapt it to actual conditions in the modern world. 78. This being so, it is natural that we should prepare for the revision of the Charter by instructing a committee of experts to carry out a calm, detailed and scientific study of the matter, the results of which would be submitted to the governments of Member States for their comments and suggestions. The conference to amend the Charter which must be convened at the tenth session would thus have before it a scientifically prepared draft which would provide a basis for discussion. If any other method were used, proceedings would be complicated by the submission of a variety of drafts prepared without prior consultation with Member States and without their co-operation, which would impede the work of revision. 79. We cannot understand the position of the USSR representative, Mr. Vyshinsky, in violently condemning the timely proposal on this matter which appears in the agenda of this session. He said that the revision of the Charter was intended to destroy the United Nations, to endanger peace and to transform the Organization into an agency of one of the great Powers. There is no excuse for so frivolous and unjust a statement on the part of so eminent a lawyer, universally recognized in all branches of law, including that in which he won world fame as Public Prosecutor of the Soviet Union. There is no legal ground which could justify Mr. Vyshinsky’s passionate and offensive diatribe, in which he made the insulting insinuation that those who advocate revision of the Charter do so in order to destroy the United Nations, or, which is worse, to transform it into an appendage of the United States Department of State. 80. In this, as in all questions he dealt with in his statement during the general debate, Mr. Vyshinsky merely expressed his stubborn determination not to accept any solution other than that put forward by the Soviet Union and the so-called peoples’ democracies, which he also calls, with a regularity which borders on irony, “peace-loving peoples”. He showed a curiously conservative outlook in asserting that legal rules were eternal and immutable, and an imperialistic spirit in refusing to accept any point of view other than his own. 81. The tenacious and violent opposition of the Soviet Union cannot block our progress in this great undertaking, for no one knows what the future may hold. My Government pledges itself now to work zealously for the revision of the Charter, overcoming all obstacles to the improvement of this international instrument. It rejects the insulting charge that any attempt to revise the Charter tends to transform the United Nations into an agency of one of the great Powers. On the contrary, in favouring revision, it is our just and reasonable desire to destroy the anti-democratic device of the right of veto of the five great Powers, which is inconsistent with the equality of States in international law and has served merely to undermine the foundation and structure of the world organization. 82. The Soviet Union’s very unfriendly response to the friendly appeal made by the United States to strengthen peace, its violent opposition to efforts to find a formula to end the cold war, which is one of the great obstacles to the economic development of many peoples, the diatribe and insult with which it greets the invitations extended to it, must be interpreted as meaning that it is closing all doors to a reasonable understanding and that we are condemned to continue the armaments race, the cold war and the verbal battles which are weakening the fabric of peace and bringing us dangerously nearer to that tragic destiny which may destroy the patient work of centuries in a few hours. 83. We refuse to accept that tragic destiny as a solution of mankind’s problems, and, despite the allegations of those engaged in a struggle for world domination, we believe that truth must triumph if it is defended unequivocally and with the proper weapons. 84. Events seem to be proving that there can be no peaceful coexistence between a State of a totalitarian, materialistic and communistic type and a State of a democratic, idealistic and individualistic type. It is impossible because, theoretical statements to the contrary notwithstanding, the raison d’être of the first is the destruction of the other. Cold war, sabotage, guerrilla warfare and the disruptive activities of the communist parties within the democratic States are the preliminary steps for softening up, to use the military term, the terrain selected for the final attack. 85. The democracies can best defend themselves by making it impossible for the enemy to attain his objective within their frontiers. Democracy, as a system, has a weapon denied to totalitarianism: freedom. Through it, the democratic States can recognize their mistakes, correct them and make their social, economic and political systems better and more equitable. Consequently, democracy will strive ever harder to raise the standard of living of the peoples, to teach them to defend their freedom against the threat of a cruel and totalitarian communism, to help them to uphold their right to live, think and work as they wish, and to ensure respect for the human person, his honour and his religion. 86. It is natural that the democracies should wish to reduce armaments and to apply all their human and economic resources to social improvements. But while bearing in mind that ultimate objective, they cannot hand themselves over defenceless to the machinations of those who seek their destruction. Accordingly, they have to enable their peoples to combat those who offer them an illusory material happiness, which is worth nothing since it must be bought at the price of the horrible slavery which transforms the individual into a chattel of the State. 87. Just as technical discoveries and scientific advances necessitate a basic change in military tactics, so achievements in social and economic organization bring with them a need for a new pattern in politics. The emperors of ancient Rome offered the people bread and circuses; the rulers of the Middle Ages offered their serfs bread and eternal salvation; the French Revolution offered the new classes eager to exercise their rights liberty, equality and fraternity. But those times are past, and social needs require that statesmen should direct their policies towards the welfare. of the group as well as to the freedom of the individual. The social questions of housing, health, protection against unemployment, social security, education without discrimination, are the pressing problems of the day. 88. If the statesmen upon whose shoulders rests the burden of directing the destinies of the democratic States adopt the political concepts required by the times in which we live, they will find their arsenals strengthened with new weapons to protect democratic ideals; at the same time, they will find their leadership buttressed by the determination of healthy and civilized peoples convinced that the defence of their way of life defence of their own freedom, lives and wealth, and not the lives and wealth of people who remain in the rear after having exploited and sacrificed them. 89. If it is absurd to hope for an understanding, as the negative position of Mr. Vyshinsky seems to indicate, the democracies must prepare to defend themselves by strengthening themselves, not only militarily, but also by satisfying the moral and material needs of their peoples. The cold war will be won by those who succeed in winning the confidence and support of the people, by those who have greater faith, tenacity and strength m upholding their ideals as well as greater courage in defending them. If the democracies prove themselves equal to their historic task, if they become more and more convinced that only by co-operation and social service can they attain greater justice, if they become imbued with the people’s desire for freedom and succeed in eradicating old prejudices, the communist horde will have no target for its propaganda and the iron curtain will crumble, saving the world from the pagan barbarism which once again threatens it. 90. I do not wish to conclude without making a reference in passing — as the Cuban representative did this morning [441st meeting] — to the view expressed by the Prime Minister of India, Mr. Nehru, in his speech to Parliament on foreign affairs last week. If Press reports reflect his thinking accurately, it would appear that Mr. Nehru takes a sadly mistaken view of the Latin-American countries when he speaks of their negative position regarding India’s participation in the political conference on the unification of Korea. 91. With due respect to the Prime Minister of India, I wish to assure him that Ecuador - the only Latin-American country for which I am authorized to speak — is keenly interested in all world problems and tries to support what seems fair and reasonable, without obeying instructions from any Power. With respect to India’s participation in the political conference on Korea, my Government sincerely believed that, in the circumstances, it was preferable that the United Nations should be represented in the manner which Ecuador approved by its affirmative vote. The exclusion of India should in no way be interpreted as an unfriendly act or failure to appreciate the value of that country which my Government respects and which I personally particularly admire. 92. Mr. Nehru should not be surprised that some proposals are defeated or carried in the United Nations General Assembly by the votes of the Latin-American countries. The peoples of Latin America, with their similar cultural and historical background, the same language and political orientation, tend spontaneously, whether they consult each other or not, to have a spiritual unity — which explains the similarity in their conduct. I am sure that no Latin-American statesman would be surprised if a problem affecting America which was being considered by the General Assembly were settled as a result of the support of the Arab or Asian Powers. The linguistic, religious or cultural bonds among them, or at least the community of interests, would naturally lead them to favour the same resolutions, with or without prior consultation among themselves. I find it really incomprehensible in a statesman of the stature of Mr. Nehru that his feelings, perhaps provoked by his natural reaction to his country’s exclusion from such an important political meeting, should have made him express himself in a manner inconsistent with the traditional calm and tranquillity of the men of his race and culture to whom the mystery of the inner life has been revealed in all its sublimity. 93. My delegation was highly gratified by the election of Mrs. Pandit, chairman of the Indian delegation, as President of this Assembly. Her ability, intelligence and energy in conducting our debates — qualities which only confirm what we already knew about her — will vindicate her brilliant reputation and will enhance the prestige of woman in the world. Her successful diplomatic career is the reward for a life of abnegation and sacrifice in the cause of the freedom and greatness of India, for whose ancient culture and humanity we have the deepest admiration.