A surprising current tendency is to crystallize the most complex problems in the simplest terms, in slogans. That is practical; it saves time, a commodity of which there is a world-wide shortage. Among the slogans familiar to this Assembly there is one of more recent coinage: “peaceful coexistence”, It is an extremely important formula, because “ peaceful ” and “ coexistence ” are words which we all have greatly at heart. In my country they are taken to mean the hope of a real comity of the peoples for which hundreds of millions of people throughout the world are longing, a comity which can endure only if it is based upon mutual tolerance and respect. Five or six years ago we believed that this could be achieved soon. Millions, who had drawn the strength necessary to wage the struggle from his ideal of tolerance and respect for the dignity of the human person, fell in the last war. That same ideal is still our inspiration.
23. That is why we must look closely into the very substance of this appeal which today comes to us from Moscow. I am prepared to do so with the utmost attention, or I cannot and will not assume that such words as “peaceful coexistence ” can be lightly spoken. To trifle with ideas which incarnate the deepest aspirations of mankind would be worse than a lie, little better than a crime. We shall have ample opportunity to undertake the examination I contemplate during the session which has just opened.
24. The United Nations does not exist merely to maintain peace, but above all, as the Secretary-General has so aptly remarked, to create it. Despite all our differences of opinion at this time, we have an Organization able to gather the representatives of sixty countries around a table. We owe this to the wisdom of those who, although at the cost of certain compromises, established the almost total representation of the world by laying down the basic principles of the Charter. Let us endeavour, so far as we can, to draw from that wisdom the lessons inherent in it.
25. I myself am ready to join those who are trying to achieve a real “peaceful coexistence”. I am also prepared to take part in any discussion likely to lead us-towards that end. But in any discussion there must at least be general agreement as to the meaning of the words used, for words, like currencies, are subject to devaluation. Is coexistence intended as an aim, a modus vivendi or a fleeting tactic? The word is not new. Twenty-five years ago a statesman said that the coexistence of two opposing systems was conceivable. But he had stated previously: “War is inevitable; but it can be postponed until the proletarian revolution is ripe in Europe”. That kind of coexistence is that of the jungle, in which wild beasts share their hunting grounds out of mutual respect for tooth and claw.
26. Let the past not become an impediment to present action, however! The idea of peaceful coexistence has evolved. It has been embodied in the United Nations since 1945 and any of us who speaks from this rostrum about peaceful coexistence is referring to the kind of coexistence envisaged in the Charter. That is the only ground upon which I can stand and on that ground any kind of discussion can take place. I am eager to play my part and I shall try to be clear. Clarity and a sense of reality, particularly the latter, are the salt which should season, our discussions.
27. Coexistence, as implied in the Charter, is our aim. But what is coexistence today? It means a situation in which my country is compelled to set aside one-third of its budget for armaments. Why? Because there is, between the Erne and Heartbreak Ridge in Korea, a powerful bloc, with which we would of course be ready to talk about coexistence, but which, dominated as it is by a totalitarian conception, maintains a very large army and has built up an immense arsenal. As against the totalitarian idea we confidently maintain the concept of democratic freedoms. But arms and armies represent force to which we can oppose only force. The United Nations Charter recognizes this necessity. It states that we are “determined… to practise tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours” and adds that we are determined “ to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security
28. The North Atlantic Treaty is just such a union of strength on a regional basis, finding its justification solely in the fact that it is based upon the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter; it is the inevitable result of the meaning today attributed to “coexistence”. It is an instrument of the Charter ; that means that it will never be an instrument for aggression. Until the basic principle of the Charter, collective security, has become reality through the efforts of all, the North Atlantic Treaty, as a regional organization, is, for lack of something better, the means of carrying out what was intended at San Francisco, But “ for lack of something better ” can never be our last word on the subject. We shall not fail to embrace a more satisfactory idea of “coexistence” as soon as circumstances permit. I have not given up the hope that we may one day be able to reach a better mutual understanding with regard to this concept.
29. Does that mean that the United Nations has no meaning at this time as a universal organization ? I do not believe that. Besides its many worthy activities in the social, economic and cultural fields, there are enough things to prove that the United Nations is effectively helping to foster coexistence, the road leading to a genuine spirit of good neighbourliness. Coexistence is maintained because the United Nations does not hesitate to cope with disputes likely to degenerate into war. It deals with them — indeed, it must deal with them — by the slow and cumbrous means at its disposal and sometimes the result is impatience and weariness. But a disadvantage may turn into an advantage. It deals with such disputes curbing its hasty passions, ponderously slowed down by procedural wrangles, legalistic caution, decisions taken only after lengthy discussion, and the endless production of documents. It deals with them, finally and most importantly, with the authority which is none the less accorded to it, an authority which no other body but the United Nations possesses, as it is the sole political organization embracing the whole world.
30. This is precisely where we are on the road that should lead us to make a reality of our ideals of peace and security. Our confidence in the moral force of the Charter gives us the necessary courage to continue on our way. When the final goal, tolerance among men and among the peoples, is attained mutual respect and the dignity of the human person will prevail. This tolerance, this respect we must achieve and defend.
31. We should therefore feel that we were failing in our duty as a Member of the United Nations and as the heir, with others, of a great Christian and European tradition, if we did not make a further appeal from this Assembly to the rulers of States which, though Members of our Organization, must in our opinion be regarded as totalitarian. We do not say they have not the right to hold political views different from our own, but we shall never be able to live without fear so long as there are totalitarian systems. We earnestly appeal to them to give the principle of human dignity the place it merits. Such a policy pursued in a truly liberal spirit in their own country would at once considerably decrease the differences, if not entirely do away with them, and make real coexistence possible.
32. For our own part it is our firm, our unshakable resolve to defend human dignity and tolerance. Far from being mutually exclusive, tolerance and a firm resolve to defend it are essential complements to one another.
33. The road is long and many difficulties have yet to be encountered. It is true that the legacy of the last war is disappearing; Italy and Japan are about to take their place once more among the free and peace-loving nations. It is with regret therefore that my Government observes Italy, in spite of the views expressed by the large majority of Members of this Organization, still being obliged to wait for admission to the United Nations. Then there is the important problem of the future of Germany. A satisfactory settlement of the German problem would provide a cornerstone for the coexistence of the great Powers, and thus more than anything else provide the basis for lasting peace for us all. The General Assembly of the United Nations can only play a limited part in achieving such a settlement. Problems of such a far-reaching character must in the first instance be resolved by the great Powers among themselves.
34. I nevertheless venture to hope that this Assembly may help to ease the general tension. The present session will be judged by its concrete achievements. Our function is above all to help, so far as possible, to promote a settlement of various political questions, and to forward by every means in our power the constructive work already undertaken by the United Nations. The agenda includes a number of political questions the mere statement of which describes, as it were, the symptoms of the ailments of the present world. What can we do to cure them?
35. It seems to me a good sign that we meet at a moment when reports of the possibility of peace are reaching us from Korea. The world hopes that during the present session of the Assembly we shall be able to announce that the first military action of the United Nations, taken in the name of collective security, has been brought to a conclusion and that the conclusion is the fruit of co-operation between all the parties. It is with mixed feelings that we survey what the United Nations has so far achieved in Korea. The condition of the Korean people fills us with sorrow. But we must also remember with admiring gratitude the courage and the sacrifices of the United Nations forces. We still view the failure to achieve a unified Korea with concern. Unification of Korea in accordance with the agreements between the great Powers concluded during the Second World War has been for a number of years, and still is, the avowed purpose of this Assembly. Uppermost in our minds, however, is the thought that we have no cause to regret that last year the United Nations took up the challenge to world peace and international law thrown down by aggression, and made a stand to defend them in the conviction of the justice of its cause. The opening of negotiations in Korea a few months ago at the same time inspired us with fresh hope, particularly since they were facilitated by a favourable reply by a Soviet Union spokesman to the repeated appeals made by the United Nations.
36. The expression “peaceful coexistence”, to which I referred at the beginning of my statement, applies not only to the world in general, but in no less a degree to crises of a regional character.
37. Such, for example, are the difficulties still remaining unresolved between the Arab States and the State of Israel. The United Nations has, on a number of occasions, given them attention, and it has an undoubted responsibility at the present juncture. We have still not received the report of the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine, which has made such vigorous efforts to obtain a settlement. My Government hopes that the Commission will be able to indicate practical ways and means of easing the situation, so that the development of the Near East may make fresh progress.
38. My Government observes, further, that the United Nations is faced with a series of problems ranging geographically from Teheran in the east to the Atlantic coast of Africa. Tracing the line on the map we find a number of names that occur on our agenda or on that of the Security Council, which indicates; the tension existing in those areas.
39. What does coexistence mean there ? I shall confine myself to a very general answer. We believe in the first place that it means that each nation must, within the framework of the United Nations, learn and accept the fact that supranational interests have a validity of their own and that different principles must be applied to them from those which individual nations would like to apply. The satisfaction of all national aspirations cannot result in peace; peace and international security can only result from mutual concessions in which national, regional and world interests have to be given equal weight. Coexistence here also means consideration being given to the aspirations of peoples.
40. I now come to technical assistance, one of the most successful spheres of United Nations activity in recent years. Such co-operation between countries at different stages of development opens the door to mutual understanding and creates a world-wide network of relationships. Within the limits of its resources, my country has contributed to this worthy cause. My Government is certain that the United Nations is on the right track there and believes that the experiment of exchanging experts and exchanging fellows should be vigorously followed up. The supply of knowledge and technical experience and the demand for them are badly distributed in this world, and I am sure that we could help one another in this respect. We hope shortly to be able to open in the Netherlands an international academic institution, at a university level, to give courses on development problems in countries requiring technical assistance. We confidently hope thus to be able to make a contribution to the study of the technical problems which arise in many under-developed countries. Admittedly, the present technical assistance programme is as yet only in its infancy. In a sense we are still at the pioneer stage, drawing up a systematic programme for development. The programme will require, not only manpower which, in most cases, is already available, not only experts who are now being recruited and will soon be available in sufficient numbers, but also funds which for the moment are lacking. That is why it is important that the United Nations should take stock now of the full magnitude of the problem of financing economic development. It is not an easy problem and there can be no ready-made solution. It is therefore imperative that preparatory measures should be taken without delay.
4L Another question facing the sixth session of the General Assembly is that of the refugees. It is desirable, even essential, to lay the foundations for practical results in the course of the present session. The fact that these millions of unfortunates are forced to live without hope for the future not only constitutes a threat to the political security of some parts of the world; it also, as the letter recently addressed by Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands to the President of the United States of America so eloquently puts it, represents a challenge to the conscience of the world. The International Refugee Organization, which, under able leadership, has achieved such magnificent results during the last few years giving more than a million people a new start in life, has come to an end. This does not mean that the problem has been solved; merely that a certain category of displaced persons, those who at the outset stood in greatest need, have received assistance thanks to an international effort. But other categories remain a heavy burden on the political and economic life of several countries. It is the opinion of my Government that, in order to ease the situation, intensive work will have to continue for several years to come. Before this Assembly rises, this matter will have to be thrashed out. A frank discussion will help, but we must be chary of uniform solutions. Groups of refugees are not all alike. Moreover local conditions differ widely, sometimes even within the same country. Methods will have to be varied. We must also remember that the financial resources of Member States of the United Nations differ greatly and that some of them are able to make only a small contribution to international humanitarian work. None the less, within the limits of our capacities, all of us must shoulder our responsibility.
42. I now pass to the question of the evolution of international law which does not always receive the attention it deserves. But the work must be pursued at a pace consonant with the nature of the problem and regardless of political upheavals. The evolution of international law may be compared to the flow of currents which, being slow-moving, or sometimes even subterranean, remain undetected by the human eye. There is nothing sensational about this work, and yet it is gradually introducing into the community of nations a new conception of the principles governing international relations, relations of such vital importance for peaceful coexistence between the peoples. It is for this reason that my Government follows the work of the International Law Commission with such keen interest and appreciates the Commission’s conclusion that one session a year is inadequate for its work. The Nurenberg and Tokyo trials did indeed constitute an innovation in the field of international law, and my Government endorses the words of the former Secretary of State of the United States, Mr. Stimson, who called it a “landmark of law”. I am convinced that the conception of rights held by the peoples of the world should continue to develop along the lines laid down by these two historic trials.
43. In conclusion, I should like to say a word about the site of this year’s Assembly. My delegation last year was opposed to the Assembly meeting away from New York on the ground that sound management would not allow a meeting far from United Nations headquarters. Our financial misgivings are still not entirely allayed, but our heart goes out in sympathy to the country whose guests we now are, the country which has invited us to meet again in its gracious and lovely capital. It was in France, in Paris itself, that an idea which may well become a vital element in the building of peace was born. I am pleased to say that, a week ago, the Upper Chamber of the Netherlands Parliament accepted by a large majority, the plan which will always be associated with the name of my distinguished colleague, Mr. Robert Schuman, thus being the first of the European parliaments to do so. My delegation looks forward to working, during the weeks to come, as the guests of a Government which has proved constructively that it is working for peace.
44. May the work of this the sixth session of the General Assembly be influenced by the essentially French virtues of imagination and realism. May our work here, we humbly implore, be blessed by the Divine Spirit ruling over the fate of peoples and nations.