May I at the outset add the thanks of the South African delegation to those already expressed by previous speakers to the Government of France for the kind and warm welcome which has been accorded us, as well as for the magnificent arrangements which have been made for the present session of the General Assembly.
49. There are many good reasons why we should henceforth meet at our permanent headquarters in New York when once it is completed, and we should, therefore, make the most of our present opportunity of assembling in this great city which enshrines within itself so much of the glory and achievement of our world civilization. Certainly in no capital of the modern world is there greater evidence of the triumphs of the human spirit, or a more moving reminder of the constructive achievements of peace and of what we stand, to lose by the ravages of war.
50. Peace is what matters to the United Nations; and none of our achievements, significant as they are in limited fields, will be remembered for long — nor will we be — unless we are successful in our primary obligation of securing the peace of the world. Even as we meet at this moment, our thoughts cannot be far away from the tragic battlefields of Korea where, at grievous cost, the forces of the United Nations are engaged in vindicating in a practical and solemn manner the principles of collective security. We are mindful of their heroism and their sacrifices. We pay homage to the memory of the men from many nations who have made the supreme sacrifice in this great cause, and we acknowledge with gratitude and admiration the special burdens assumed by the United States in the leadership of our common effort.
51. As the representatives know, South Africa has always maintained that it cannot assume military commitments in the Far East, as its own position on the African continent would render such commitments unrealistic. However, my Government decided, in the case of the Korean conflict, to give more than moral support to the principles of collective security. We realized that if the United Nations were to be enabled to present a united front to the aggressor, on the occasion of this first challenge to the system of collective security, it would be necessary for us all to make such contributions as our respective circumstances permitted. The Union of South Africa, therefore, has at this moment a fighter squadron operating in Korea, a squadron which has borne its share of loss and which, we believe, has taken a not unworthy part in our collective military effort.
52. The United Nations forces have already a great achievement to their credit. The forces of aggression have been beaten back and are now held firmly at bay. The principle of collective military action has been decisively vindicated by this Organization. The ultimate objectives in Korea have been defined and are known to everyone. Before these can be secured, however, the fighting must be brought decisively to an end, and the observance of a cease-fire properly secured. We therefore watch with anxious concern the progress of the cease-fire talks at Panmunjom and pray that the United Nations forces will not have to endure a second winter campaign in Korea. We express our sympathy with the terrible sufferings of the Korean people, whose country was made a battlefield by the aggressors from the north.
53. While on the subject of the Far East, I should like to say that my Government welcomes the conclusion of the Treaty of Peace with Japan, which it regards as an essential step towards the establishment of stability and security in the Pacific. My Government, therefore, wishes once again to record its full appreciation of this significant contribution towards the establishment of a peaceful world system, and, to those who worked with such devotion to bring the treaty into being, I would, from this rostrum, express our gratitude.
54. There is another area of vital significance to the whole of the democratic world, and of special interest to States like the Union of South Africa which are concerned with the defence of the African continent. I refer to the Middle East. Here, as little as anywhere, can the democratic world with safety allow the existence of a power vacuum, for here, at the bridge between East and West, there also stands the only land approach to Africa. The South African Government has followed with the deepest interest the projects which have lately been developing for the maintenance of security in the Middle East. It has undertaken specific commitments for the defence of that area and, of course, of the African continent; and it has declared its willingness to participate in the establishment of the new Middle East Command, along with the four sponsoring Powers and Australia and New Zealand.
55. On 10 November a declaration was issued by the Governments of the United Kingdom, the United States, France and Turkey setting out the principles which guide them in the formation of the Command, and making it clear that they would welcome the adherence of Middle East States which are willing to join in the co-operative defence of the area. The South African Government was fully consulted in advance about that declaration and, as one of the participants in the Middle East Command, would wish to make it clear that the South African Government agrees with the terms of that declaration and gives it its full support.
56. The Middle East Command is merely a logical extension of the idea involved in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. It is as little opposed to the principles of the Charter as is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Both are regional defence arrangements in full accord with the principles of Article 51 of the Charter. In neither case do these defence arrangements in any way infringe the national independence or sovereignty of the participating countries. Nor do either of them threaten any one except the potential aggressor. Their whole purpose is defence against a possible attack from outside: the securing of peace through strength. It is sincerely to be hoped that in a region where the peace and security of so many nations are at stake, each will make its full contribution to the common effort symbolized in the Middle East Command.
57. It is sometimes argued that the establishment of these regional pacts is inconsistent with the universality of collective security. The authors of the Charter thought otherwise and wisely realized that, particularly in the field of defence, the formation of regional pacts was a necessary concession to realism, and an indispensable aid to an effective system of collective security for the whole world. Our experience in Korea has shown that the responsibility of all often becomes the responsibility of only a few.
58. It is, of course, obvious that if these regional pacts are to have their full effect in the over-all pattern of world security, they should have the support of each of the countries directly concerned in the proposed areas. It is my Government’s urgent hope, that, setting aside all minor differences, the logical partners in the Middle East Command will join in this common effort.
59. In regard to the African continent itself, the South African Government has clearly a prime interest in promoting the well-being and security of all its peoples. In the field of security I can inform the Assembly that in August the South African Government, in conjunction with the United Kingdom Government, convened an African defence facilities conference at Nairobi with the object of facilitating the movement of troops and supplies in time of war or emergency. To this conference all Powers with African interest were invited. I am happy to say that the conference proved an unqualified success and that its results will, we hope, contribute greatly to the security of the continent and, therefore, of the whole democratic world. In the technical field, too, South Africa has continued to play its full part in the orderly development of the African continent and in promoting the physical welfare of the African peoples. In this respect we believe that we have made material progress among the less developed people in our country. This progress has been largely possible because of our unique experience over many decades with the African problem.
60. I should now like to express a few thoughts which are much in the mind of my Government about the United Nations itself. Six years have elapsed since those assembled at San Francisco completed the blueprint for our Organization. That design was conceived in an atmosphere of hope — an atmosphere in which it was believed that peace would be the sincere desire and the goal of all nations — that war would not again in our time become an instrument to further national or imperialist ambition. It was hoped by all those at that conference that the nations of the world would be ensured the climate of peace and security which would permit of fruitful international co-operation and the achievement of better and healthier conditions of life. No one could believe that the destruction and suffering which had attended the war, a war which our civilization had only just survived, would have failed to persuade the most doubting nations represented of the complete futility and folly of reverting to relations and actions which so often in the past made armed conflict inevitable.
61. Since the San Francisco Conference we have sought to build according to the plan and specifications of the Charter. We have endeavoured to develop this Organization as an instrument of peace, an instrument for the promotion of human welfare and happiness. Unfortunately, however, we have allowed certain defects to creep into our construction, defects which, unless removed, must necessarily render our Organization weak and incapable of achieving its high purpose. South African spokesmen have often drawn attention to this fact, and have consistently warned against departing from the clear provisions of the Charter. Our warnings have not always been heeded and, I fear, have sometimes been resented. May I point out that we in South Africa stand as much to gain by the healthy growth and proper functioning of our Organization as any other nation belonging to it, and that we also stand to lose should the Organization ultimately collapse and international order, peace and security give way to international anarchy. Our criticism is, therefore, not intended as destructive but rather constructive, and it is in this light that I would wish representatives to receive my further comments.
62. In accepting the Charter, Member States agreed to certain far-reaching commitments which might entail a surrender of sovereignty. This is, of course, not uncommon, as such sacrifices have often to be made in consequence of international arrangements. However, in the case of the Charter, the scope and extent of the possible surrender of sovereignty was broader than had ever before been conceived in bilateral or multilateral arrangements or in international organizations such as the old League of Nations. The need for this broader scope was born out of the realization that aggression often had its roots in economic conditions and ambitions and in ideological imperialism. The choice at San Francisco thus lay between this broader base and, on the other side, the proved ineffectiveness of trying to isolate and restrict the threats to peace within a narrow compass. On the other hand, the Member States were not prepared to barter away their sovereignty, unconditionally and absolutely. They required, rightly required, and obtained a guarantee against unwarranted encroachments on their authority and against meddlesome incursions into matters which fall essentially within their domestic jurisdiction. The Charter, therefore, provided, and provides, a specific and over-riding safeguard in this respect. I make bold to say that no State, certainly no small State which has not the veto power, would have been able to accept the far-reaching provisions of the Charter without this fundamental safeguard.
63. I go further and state my firm conviction that, without this specific safeguard, the Organization would have exposed itself to disintegration in the course of time. Because this safeguard removes the temptation to interfere in the internal organization of a State, it eliminates the possibility of exploiting conditions in any country for selfish and ulterior motives, and it removes the threat to peace which such gratuitous meddlesomeness must inevitably constitute. In other words, this safeguard was inserted not because of any exaggerated regard for national sovereignty, but to obtain the adherence of smaller nations to provisions which might otherwise have worked an injustice to them; and, even more particularly, it was inserted to ensure the continued existence of the Organization itself and to avoid the dissipation of its energies away from its primary object of international co-operation, the preservation of peace and the outlawing of aggression.
64. As the Assembly is aware, South Africa has unfortunately been the first victim of arbitrary action beyond the explicit terms of the Charter, and we are therefore perhaps better able to appreciate the dangers which will attend this unhappy course if persisted in. When I speak of “the terms of the Charter” I do so advisedly, and I refer to the interpretation given to those terms by the architects of the Charter at San Francisco, and not to any political gloss which some of their successors have from time to time sought to place on those terms for their own purposes and in conformity with opportunistic canons of construction which would probably make the authors of the Charter turn in their graves.
65. But if South Africa was the first victim of such an arbitrary interpretation of the Charter, it is gradually beginning to dawn on other Member States that South Africa may not be the last victim. Somewhat belatedly, but still not too late, other countries have been forced to visualize the possibility of their being hanged on the gallows designed by some countries for South Africa, unless timely action is taken. We trust that this growing apprehension, which is no longer imaginary, may serve to rally those who do not wish to unmake the work of our predecessors at San Francisco, and so place the future of our Organization in jeopardy.
66. There are other tendencies which in the view of my Government could usefully be checked, and I should like to refer to a few of them,
67. When building up an organization like that of the United Nations during a period of international tension, such as that through which we are now passing, it is wise to concentrate on the urgent and over-riding problems. Energy and time expended on secondary issues may be wasteful and defeat the larger objective. These are days which make enormous demands on governments and on individual statesmen and, if the United Nations is not to wane in prestige, it is clearly desirable that its sessions should be attended throughout by representatives with Cabinet responsibility, not because they are necessarily wiser or more experienced than others but because in their respective countries they are responsible for policy, they are the formulators of policy. The overloading of our agenda, year by year, with questions of secondary and even doubtful importance where they are not definitely harmful to peace, has led to the prolongation of our meetings beyond all reasonable limits. Representatives are now expected to be absent from their countries for as much as three months on end. Even then their time is taken up so much with matters of lesser moment that questions of vital concern to the whole world are sometimes considered only perfunctorily or in an atmosphere of physical exhaustion.
68. There are surely many matters of lesser significance that might usefully disappear from our agenda altogether, or that could be dealt with appropriately by the Interim Committee, meeting when the Assembly is not in session. I was particularly impressed by Mr. Eden’s admonition to us to “grasp definite: and limited problems and work for their practical solution”. It seems to me necessary that we should apply the pruning shears to our agendas, and cut away items which clutter up the agendas without providing any prospect of finality or even progress. It seems to me further that it would be desirable to introduce some system of priorities with regard to the items that remain so as to ensure, firstly, that the Assembly is not called upon to meet for more than six weeks in the year and, secondly, that the Assembly is enabled to devote the greater part of its time to the dominating issues, to working for the practical solution of definite and limited problems. I fear that unless some attempt along these or other lines is made to ensure a more frugal and fruitful use of a more limited time, the Assembly will have to face the prospect in the future of a deterioration in the calibre of its delegates. Already the more important formulators of policy find themselves obliged to hurry away from our discussions after perhaps a fortnight, during which period the Assembly has scarcely yet settled down to its work.
69. Another tendency which, unless curbed, is likely to be most damaging to the prestige of the United Nations, and which in addition has proved most wasteful of time, is the tendency to indulge in the vituperation and vilification of fellow delegates and Member States. Let us have criticism by all means, informed and constructive criticism of each other’s view points; after all, out of the clash of ideas and views, truth may be born. But is it really conducive to the dignity and prestige of this Organization, or to the furtherance of their own case, for representatives to stoop to the language that is sometimes heard in this august Assembly? The calling of names and the use of sneers cannot, after all, take the place of argument; yet in the United Nations armoury of some representatives these are the chief weapons, in addition to the sowing of suspicion, the ascribing of motives and the employment of threats. It may be, of course, that the temptation which a world forum offers is partly to blame for this state of affairs, but our aims should surely be to use this forum in the constructive cause of world peace and the promotion of a better feeling between countries, rather than to exploit it for our petty bickerings, our national vendettas and mutual recriminations. Such abuse of this forum may gain cheap applause and fleeting fame, but what does it do to build bridges between nations and to promote understanding?
70. I am bound to observe that the parliaments of many Member States are growing increasingly uneasy at the scale of expenditure on international agencies. Members will be only too well aware that in the last three years the cost of maintaining the United Nations and its specialized agencies has risen from a yearly total of $72.5 million to $81 million, a sum which excludes the large sums voluntarily paid towards various forms of international relief. The problem which we must now face is to be solved only by drastic cuts in the over-all budget of the United Nations and particularly by a rationalization of United Nations activities. Here I must emphasize that my Government does not contemplate any measures which might have the effect of reducing the high state of efficiency of the various United Nations services. The intention rather is that we should employ our present not inconsiderable resources in a manner which would produce the maximum result. We must consider such problems as whether the United Nations itself is the most suitable body to undertake a particular task or whether, for example, some other organization already operating in that field would not be better fitted to do so. I think that if we are to employ our resources most usefully, we must all realize that the United Nations is not a universal provider, and that the very act of referring a problem to the United Nations does not in itself bring with it a final solution. Perhaps here again it is a question of priorities.
71. While on the subject of expense I wish to express the appreciation of my Government of the consistently good work and judicious comment of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions. Certainly its activities are in the interests of individual Member States, but they are in the best interests also of the United Nations Organization, for economy frequently goes hand in hand with efficiency.
72. If I have been rather outspoken in my comments on the functioning of our Organization, I can only say that there are occasions when the candid friend is the best friend. It is to me a healthy sign that many of the speeches to which I had the privilege of listening last Monday, the first occasion on which I attended the Assembly, showed the same concern for the future of our Organization which I feel; the introspective bent of such speeches and the obvious desire of the speakers to be helpful and constructive, while being honest, has emboldened me to follow the same course. We speak of this debate as our annual stocktaking, but balance sheets based on inaccurate inventories are as dangerous as faked balance sheets, for they may disclose non-existent assets and ignore hidden liabilities. The ills from which we are suffering are, in my opinion, more functional than organic, and the beginning of the cure lies in honest and fearless self-searching.
73. I shall now conclude. I do so by expressing the fervent hope that this session will bring us all closer to our main goal, namely, a real and lasting peace. We cannot continue on this present course without the danger, the very real danger, of once again bringing destruction and suffering upon a world which, although the Second World War was concluded more than six years ago, is still struggling to emerge from the chaos left in the wake of that last gigantic struggle. It is imperative that the dread of war be removed and I would add my voice to those from this rostrum that the men responsible for this fear, this suspicion, this hostility which surround us, should endeavour to align their policies with the policies of the democratic world, the democratic world which wishes to threaten no one, but is fiercely determined not to be subjected to foreign oppression or to foreign ideologies, which is determined to maintain its own way of life and me institutions which constitute its heritage and its hope.