Mr. WANG Shih-chieh began by expressing his delegation’s gratitude to France for its hospitality. It would have been difficult to find a more suitable place than Paris for the Assembly’s deliberations. France had played an important part in human progress and the world was still in need of all the help which the national genius of France had to offer.
In his capacity as representative of an Asiatic nation, Mr. Wang Shih-chieh conceded that the United Nations Organization had improved on the former League of Nations both with regard to the representation of the nations of Asia and the Far East, and also with regard to the active interest it had shown towards the problems of those vast areas. Asia and the Far East were still, however, insufficiently represented on the Security Council and on the Economic and Social Council. In those two organs China’s was the only voice coming from the areas east of Suez.
The representative of China was pleased to note that, in the course of the past year, the problems of that part of the world had received attention from the organs of the United Nations; he mentioned, in particular, the question of the independence of Korea, the dispute between Indonesia and the Netherlands, and the work of the Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East. China, was satisfied with the work accomplished.
As the Commission which was to help settle the dispute between India and Pakistan was only just beginning its important work, nothing could yet be said on that subject. India and Pakistan, both important Members of the United Nations, were friends and neighbours of China, who hoped to see their difficulties resolved with the help of the Organization, in a conciliatory spirit and in such a way as to strengthen their mutual friendship.
The problem of Korean independence deserved the continued attention of the General Assembly. The Temporary Commission on Korea had performed an arduous task. That task had been made more difficult by non-co-operation of the USSR army of occupation in Northern Korea. Nevertheless, in spite of that lack of co-operation, the Commission had been able to contribute towards the success of free democratic elections in Southern Korea.
The former Japanese colonial administration had done nothing to prepare Korea for independence and democracy. The general elections held last spring in Southern Korea had given the Korean people its first opportunity to express its wishes with regard to the country’s future. The Korean population had shown unmistakable eagerness for an independent government. More than 90 per cent of the registered electors had gone to the polls on 10 May 1948. In his report to the General Assembly, the Secretary-General had concluded the chapter dealing with Korea by the following paragraph:
«On 25 June 1948, the Commission resolved to record as its opinion that the results of the ballot of 10 May 1948 were a valid expression of the free will of the electorate in those parts of Korea accessible to the Commission, parts in which the inhabitants constituted approximately two-thirds of the population of all Korea.'»
After the elections of 10 May, the Korean people had constituted its provisional Government. The Chinese Government had considered it right to grant that Government de facto recognition. The speaker was glad that the United States Government and the Government of the Philippines had done the same.
The work of the Temporary Commission on Korea had not, however, been completed. Northern Korea had not been allowed to benefit from the efforts of the Commission, which had not been able to send observers north of the 38th parallel. Korea remained cut in two.
The future of Korea was linked with the peace and prosperity of the Far East and of the whole world. The Korean people, hard-working and peace-loving and with a legacy of ancient culture, deserved a recognition of its independence and unity which would enable it to contribute to the stability of the Far East. Mr. Wang Shih-chieh asked the General Assembly not to relax its efforts with regard to the Korean problem, so that Korea might be enabled to achieve full unity and total independence. The Chinese Government was doing its best to co-operate with other Member States to that end. It had no designs whatever on Korea. The more Korea became independent and prosperous, the better it was for China.
So far as Indonesia was concerned, the Security Council and its Committee of Good Offices deserved the thanks of the United Nations. War had been stopped and a truce had been maintained without any serious incidents. The way had thus been cleared for a settlement between the Netherlands Government and the Government of the Indonesian Republic. Both parties were agreed that there should be a United States of Indonesia and that the Netherlands and Indonesia should negotiate on an equal basis and be associated. Both parties wert to be congratulated for having conformed to those worthy principles.
Serious difficulties had arisen in the implementation of the «Renville» Agreement, principally in connexion with procedural questions, and those difficulties had been more aggravated because the Committee of Good Offices had bound itself with non-elastic rules. Without minimising the difficulties ahead it was not permissible for the leaders of the two parties to let questions of procedure Mock the way towards the establishment of peace and democracy.
In that connexion, Mr. Wang Shih-chieh pointed out that, a year ago, Her Majesty Queen Wilhelmina had proclaimed to the world that colonialism was dead. That statement was a perfect expression of the spirit of the age, and he would like to recall the essence of it. National aspirations towards freedom must be recognized by all. While it should be acknowledged that all peoples had the right of self-determination, it was to be hoped that nationalism would not take abnormal, exaggerated or anti-international aspects.
He added that China was glad that Indonesia was about to achieve political freedom,, It was to be hoped that that freedom would be followed by orderly progress, actuated by a spirit of co-operation with Indonesia’s close neighbours as well as with distant friends, and especially with the Netherlands, to which it would inevitably remain attached by many common bonds.
The Economic and Social Council’s Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East had an unique place among the numerous subsidiary organs of the United Nations, for to it was entrusted the task of promoting the economic progress of the peoples of Asia and the Far East, numbering one half of the human race. China and her neighbours were crying for the benefits of modern science and technology. Indonesia and the Far East poverty was the primary problem. If there was one war that was worth fighting by the entire world, it was the war against want.
The main responsibility for economic advancement in Asia and the Far East naturally lay with the peoples and Governments of that region, but the industrially more advanced countries could do much to help.
While hoping that the economic development of Asia would be hastened by international cooperation, Mr. Wang Shih-chieh thought that other countries should not interfere with the social and economic systems, which the peoples themselves wished to adopt and develop. There was nowhere a ready-made social system suitable for export to Asia, which deserved and would struggle to maintain the right to develop a social system in accordance with its own needs and its own ideas of justice.
The Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East had held three sessions. Its chief task seemed to be to promote economic development. It would have to begin by collecting information but it was to be hoped that its activities would not become purely academic in character. Though it had to hold conferences and adopt resolutions, those resolutions ought not to remain a dead letter.
At its last session in India, the Commission had recommended the establishment of a Bureau of Flood Control and that recommendation had been approved by the Economic and Social Council. The problem affected the lives of millions of human beings living in the basin of the great rivers in Asia and the Far East, and it was greatly to be hoped that the work would be started as soon as possible and would show what could be done by( constructive co-operation under the auspices of the United Nations.
In its manifold activities the Economic and Social Council had made bold efforts in two fields: in the removal of trade barriers and the promotion of freedom of information. That work had resulted in agreements or draft conventions. China had given its heartfelt support to those constructive efforts of the United Nations. The Chinese delegation thought that, in order to promote the work of the Economic and Social Council, Member States ought always to be ready, so far as possible, to subordinate national interests to the needs of international co-operation.
The report submitted by the Interim Committee, which had been asked by the previous session of the General Assembly to study the question of the veto showed that conscientious work had been done.
The Interim Committee’s recommendations on that subject deserved the Assembly’s attention. The Committee had singled out a number of possible Security Council decisions which it considered to be procedural in character and therefore not subject to the veto. It had also mentioned certain decisions which, in its opinion, were less likely to involve political considerations and might therefore be taken without applying the unanimity rule. It had also suggested rules for the exercise of the veto, rules which it considered the permanent members of the Security Council ought normally to have followed. It seemed that the adoption of some of the Interim Committee’s recommendations would help to eliminate some abuses.
In the opinion of the Chinese Government, the right of veto had been laid down in the Charter in order to ensure that important decisions taken by the Security Council should have the maximum authority. That was to have raised, not lowered, the prestige of the United Nations. Nevertheless the abuse of that right would reduce the most important organ of the United Nations to a state of paralysis. The permanent members should therefore exercise restraint in its use and respect any limitations on its application which a rational interpretation of the terms of the Charter might impose.
The maintenance of peace could not be achieved by one single effort or one single organization. The problem was as old as history and had been greatly influenced by politics, economics and strategy.
In the course of three thousand years of its history, China had known the problems of war and peace in all their aspects. Sometimes victorious, at other times conquered, China had never committed the crime of attempting to impose an ideology. China had always left other peoples free to practice their own religion and to follow economic and political systems of their own choice. The problem of peace today was a problem of ideological conflict. With the possible exception of the period of the Thirty Years War, relations between States had never been so seriously complicated by ideological considerations as they were at the present time. The conflict arose from the false assumption that the peoples of the world must choose between communism and capitalism. There were, in fact, other possibilities. China, for example, believed in a principle called by the founder of the Chinese Republic the principle of the people’s livelihood; and that principle could not be identified with either communism or capitalism.
The imposition of any ideology, on any people, by whatever means, was both impossible and dangerous. People would have to learn again, in the middle of the twentieth century, what the European peoples had learned in the middle of the seventeenth century: tolerance. Differences between churches naturally continued to exist and there were real differences of opinion which peoples could evaluate according to their own lights. But civilized society had learned that it was possible to worship God in different ways, and, just as it was everybody’s duty to respect the religious practices of others, so also should it be possible to admit different economic and social systems.
That did not mean that the world should have no common faith. All the Members should indeed subscribe to the fundamental ideas of the United Nations Charter, in which all should have faith, but the Charter also laid down that tolerance ought to be practiced. If world peace was to be preserved, the present ideological warfare would have to give way to tolerance and every effort would have to be made to strengthen the authority of the United Nations, whose Charter had been solemnly accepted and signed by all. If any Member State, and particularly a permanent member of the Security Council, were content with a weak United Nations, that State could not be sincere in declaring its desire for world peace.
Mr. Wang Shih-chieh recalled that he had already pointed out, during the second session of the Assembly, that the United Nations had reached a point where its existence hung in the balance. The events of the past twelve months had done little to allay anxiety. The situation seemed in fact even more serious than a year ago. The Assembly was meeting in circumstances no better than those of 1939 and the Organization’s responsibility in the matter of universal peace was therefore heavier and of greater urgency.
In conclusion, Mr. Wang Shih-chieh said: « It is only through greater tolerance towards each other and a fuller awareness of responsibilities under the Charter, that there can be hope for the dawn of the day of true unity among the nations. China will dedicate Herself to that noble task with a determination second to none. »