The man of goodwill who tries with an honest mind and a simple heart to follow the work of this distinguished Assembly must at times feel sorely perplexed. We ourselves, large as is the volume of additional information at our disposal, often have a very mixed impression, made up in unequal and indeed varying parts of disappointment and yet hope, of bewilderment and the resolve to succeed in spite of everything.
2. For those who desire to serve and to build there can be no hope of success unless they see clearly, and that is why, in spite of the time it takes, and of the customary contradictions and repetitions, a general discussion of this kind is still useful and even necessary. By good luck, the hospitable invitation extended by France has enabled us to meet in a spot where the mind of Descartes, the mind of Pascal, is still alive. Nowhere else is clear thinking so much at home as here in France. That is why I, in turn, shall attempt to take stock of the situation amid the opposing trends by which the world is shaken this way and that. I shall endeavour to express the opinion of a small country that has consistently throughout its history prized honesty and sincerity.
3. The essential task to which the United Nations has dedicated its organization is the preservation and maintenance of peace. This fundamental concept is embodied in our documents; it recurs in every speech delivered from this rostrum, whoever the speaker may be. Yet this unanimity in the expression of peaceful sentiments deceives no one. We are at present living under the threat of war, if not in a state of war itself. Since we cannot charge anyone with intent to deceive, we are forced back on the assumption that there is, in the methods envisaged, a conflict which, whether intentional or not, is yet sufficient by its mere existence to pave the way to disaster.
4. And therefore, despite a score of failures, let us take up the problem once again. I shall endeavour to sum up, under three heads, the points which I should like to make. Under the first I wish to speak of the balance, or the restoration of the balance, of the armed forces; secondly; I should like, in accordance with the suggestion of the United Kingdom representative, Mr. Eden, to analyse the disarmament proposal which was made to us by the three great Powers; and under the last heading I shall endeavour to analyse the efforts at integration of the free nations and particularly of the nations of Europe.
5. Here is the problem: two systems, two conceptions of the world and of life stand brutally confronting each other. They clash in act and in deed, in argument as in feeling.
6. We who are free believe passionately in the value of our principles. They are the justification of our existence. We prize them a hundred times more highly than our property, than our comfort, than life itself. We will defend them, if attacked, against all comers until victory has been won; and as we are convinced of their justice, we know in the bottom of our hearts that, even if we must fall, they will not perish. But because of the very grandeur and logic of our ideals, we can have no designs, and we have no designs for imposing them on others. They need a climate made up of mutual respect, of understanding, of peace and order. The peace and order we claim for ourselves, we desire no less whole — heartedly for all men, whatever their ideals or the system of government under which they live.
7. That the free world yearns for peace and prays for peace with all its heart, that it turns away from those who threaten peace, can be gainsaid only by those who are deliberately blind to the facts. We know full well that this is so. And yet the free world, which so thirsts for peace, is at this moment in the throes of a colossal and arduous effort to rearm. Do we want to make that effort? Are we making it with a light heart, or with any sort of enthusiasm? The answer of course is, no. We are making it only because we have realized that in such an effort lay our only chance of preserving in peace our own conception of life and human dignity. We do not shut our eyes to what it has already cost us or to what it will yet cost us in sacrifices, in the wastage of strength and precious material.
8. By whom has this effort been forced upon us? We do not intend to reopen here the interminable argument about responsibilities, but in the interests of objectivity it must be said that it was not we who began the armaments race. No one, I believe, will deny what happened after the war. While the western nations demobilized and disarmed rapidly, and almost completely, others kept their military forces and continued their efforts to expand them. It was because of this reversal of the balance of power, because of the threat it represented in itself, that we had finally to enter upon the road to rearmament in our turn. Paralysed by the abuse of the veto, the Security Council had ceased to offer us sufficient guarantees in the exercise of collective security. We had, at all costs, step by step, to seek new guarantees and we sought them in agreements for legitimate defence which we have explicitly concluded in conformity with the United Nations Charter and in the spirit of its principles.
9. The democratic nations were slow to recognize the danger to which they were exposed by the change in the balance of power. They were slow in making up their minds, for nothing — as you well know — was so repugnant to their wishes and to their dearest hopes as a new armaments race. But let there be no mistake. A decision taken in cold blood, in the full knowledge of what it will cost, is no less firm, no less unshakeable than one taken in a fit of enthusiasm or in the stress of a passing emotion.
10. That certainly does not mean that any of us regards a policy of competitive armaments as an ideal of international life, far from it. Among those who, in the face of implacable necessity, recognized that it was unfortunately necessary to enter upon this course, there are many — and I am one of them — who have never abandoned the hope of revival of the prospect of genuine disarmament, that is to say, a supervised, concerted, general and balanced disarmament. No manoeuvre, no pressure, will turn us from the goal we have set ourselves, but we mean at all times to keep an open mind. We are ready not only to welcome, but even to propose, any method which may, with a clear vision of the facts, bring us closer to lasting peace.
11. Let us now turn to those disarmament proposals which have been put before us [A/1943], We welcomed them gladly so far as we are concerned, because they open the door to a policy of multilateral disarmament. The proposals, I am aware, were from the first greeted by some with a scorn and even a sarcasm which, in our view, there is nothing to warrant. We Belgians may be too simple-minded, but we see nothing to laugh at in proposals which may ultimately lead towards peace and away from war, proposals which spell life or death for millions of human beings.
12. Briefly, what is the crux of the proposal? Very wisely, care has been taken not to put the cart before the horse; no ambitious scheme is suggested for an immediate reduction of armaments. The proposal begins at the beginning, with the suggestion for an evaluation of the various armed forces, for a complete census of them, of every class and kind. That is obviously the first condition if we genuinely wish to succeed. Such an objective and comprehensive inventory of existing arms and armaments, and of future programmes, would in itself do much to help us to see clearly. Would not knowledge of one another’s forces tend to dispel suspicion? Might it not eventually reveal the existence of a state of balance which would allow both sides to speak the same language without any hint of a threat?
13. Certainly Mr. Vyshinsky could not fear the publication of such data, for he said in his speech: “...the Soviet Union is utilizing its entire resources, not in order to expand its armed forces... but in order to expand to the full its civilian industry...”.
14. I ask you again, which of the two parties, if its statements are correct and its policy sincere, could find a single good reason for not informing the whole world of what is happening in its own country at the same time as in the territory of the other party; why should it not say, just as the other side would say, what its forces are and how, why and to what extent it is increasing them?
15. We, for our part, are delighted that the Western Powers, in making this proposal, have furnished proof of their goodwill and sincerity. It goes without saying, that to be useful, a census must command confidence. Exactitude is not enough; no one must be able to challenge its accuracy. It must therefore be subject to inspection, verification and certification, and this certification must be performed in open court with all the parties on the same footing. Here again those who have nothing to fear, those whose policy is honest and loyal, can do no other than welcome and develop such measures of inspection, subject to complete equality of treatment.
16. Needless to say, a proposal of this kind to catalogue and publish for all to read the strength of the opposing forces is not made with the intention of promoting or perpetuating a policy of competitive armaments. The object is to pave the way for a reciprocal change of attitude, or, even better, to make it possible to proceed to disarmament forthwith. Suppose for a moment that at a given point of time the opposing forces were found to be balanced, then surely neither side would have any advantage in continuing an effort that would obviously be neutralized by a parallel effort on the other side. Would not the folly of an armaments race be apparent to both? Would not a new chance thus be given to the world, and to peace?
17. There is, of course, nothing extraordinary about ideas like these; they are merely applied common sense. But common sense so applied amounts to an act of great wisdom. It was necessary that at this very moment the voice of reason and moderation should be heard in commendation of concrete proposals to be realized step by step.
18. Moreover, the present proposal is an advance on all the others, at least in one respect: it places all arms of whatever kind on the same footing; the atomic weapon is no longer excepted. For the first time someone has had the courage to propose that what has hitherto been a jealously guarded secret should be revealed. True, the ideal would be an embargo on all arms, atomic and all the rest, and a ban on recourse to violence. But we know full well that we must proceed by stages. We know that the only chance of succeeding is to ask that both sides accept the same rules, the same inspection, the same progressively applied commitments. I sincerely believe that at the present juncture a fairer proposal could not be made, with so many prospects of success.
19. Lastly, I believe that in its present form the proposal has this further advantage, that it can be applied immediately even in the present state of acute world tension in which we find ourselves today. There is no obstacle to rapid action. It would be possible at once, while assessing the opposing forces, to try to work out and develop by mutual agreement objective criteria which could be applied as soon as the basic data were known and determined. If only the preparatory work were begun with a minimum of mutual goodwill, the effect would soon be apparent on the state of men’s minds throughout the whole world. And it would be a very powerful effect, I feel sure.
20. The broad outlines of the free countries’ policy seem thus to stand out more and more clearly. The aim is and remains peace: peace for all, with order, and with respect for the rights of others. To ensure that, the balance of forces must be restored and maintained; hence the necessity for the Western World to make a mighty, an urgent effort to rearm. Yet, sure of the road they are taking, the free countries remain ready to talk., to resume discussions at any time on equitable conditions, equal for all and in the full light of day.
21. Thus the parallel lines of a long-term policy emerge: to secure the might required for the service of the right, and at the same time to keep alive the proposals for agreement, joint disarmament and international meetings.
22. To the first of these lines belong the Five-Power Pact, the North Atlantic Treaty and the efforts to organize defence throughout the world.
23. The second gives rise to the noble words, instinct with charity, pronounced by President Auriol; the new disarmament proposal put forward by the three great Powers, on which President Truman has so admirably commented; and countless gestures of goodwill, countless words of understanding that have testified time and again to the spirit of tolerance and charity which is still the lamp of our civilization.
24. But for such a policy to succeed it must be evenly balanced and the two pillars supporting it must be equally strong. To dare speak, as we do at this moment, of agreement, understanding and disarmament, we must be strong, we must feel ourselves strong. If the language of goodwill and charity is not to be misunderstood it must be based upon facts so patent that no one will be tempted to see in it a sign of weakness or indecision.
25. We are now creating those facts. As we approach balance of power, the fears of those on our own side will diminish and the chances of aggression from any quarter will subside; our voice will be heard more and more clearly and our intentions be better understood. That is why, with the same unflagging resolution, on the one hand, we must persevere in the offers of agreement and disarmament that have been made, in other words, unceasingly confirm the offers we have set down in the record of international relations; and on the other hand, we must pursue and achieve without delay, without losing a day , and by the most effective means, our plan for a balance of armaments.
26. There are, however, certain essential conditions which are vital to the success of the effort of the free nations. None of the free nations, no matter how powerful in the economic and military fields, is capable of defending itself single-handed. Even less can it assume responsibility for defending all the rest of the world. The effort of the free world must necessarily be a co-ordinated effort, one that engages the whole community. And that is why we are striving constantly to extend and render more effective the defence pacts in which the free Powers have joined together.
27. In the conditions governing contemporary life, any such endeavour inevitably reacts upon all factors of national and international existence; it has a direct bearing on the economic equilibrium and social standards of every country.
28. Two immediate consequences derive from these premises.
29. In the first place, the effort must be a co-ordinated, a harmonious effort, placing in a common pool the resources of all those concerned and taking into account the capacities and the weaknesses of each, in order to get the most out of the community as a whole.
30. Secondly, though this effort must be immediately developed to the greatest possible extent in view of the urgency of the danger, it is nevertheless restricted by limits beyond which it would wreck the economic equilibrium and disrupt the pattern of society and so tend to destroy itself and to weaken instead of strengthen the forces of freedom.
31. As we see it, the solution to the problem I have thus stated can be summed up in a single fundamental rule: the manifold efforts put forth by the free countries must be more and more closely integrated. There is nothing new in that conclusion. We have all understood and accepted it. The lesson of the last two wars has been clear enough, the lesson that taught us the abiding value of the notion of collective security.
32. It is in application of that same rule that the forces of the United Nations are waging a hard and heroic fight against aggression in Korea. A speedy end to the struggle there would be one of the finest achievements that this General Assembly of the United Nations could place to its credit.
33. The same need to join together in defence of our ideal of freedom has impelled us, as I have already said, to unite first in the Treaty of Brussels, and later in the North Atlantic Treaty. Watching closely and reacting to the situation as it develops, we are at this very moment reinforcing and extending those common bonds.
34. We are engaged in building up the Atlantic community within the framework of the United Nations and in accordance with its rules. We hope therein to find a common strength which will exceed the sum of the forces of its individual members in the defence of peace.
35. It was the same concept that gave birth to and must never cease to guide that splendid co-operative scheme set forth in the plans for technical assistance to the underdeveloped countries.
36. If this argument is generally speaking true, if it is true for all the free democracies, it applies a fortiori to Europe, to free Europe. Why “a fortiori”? If a catastrophe should befall, if an act of aggression were committed, the conflict would doubtless soon extend to the entire world. Foolish indeed would be the nation that hoped to remain neutral and escape the consequences of so gigantic a struggle between good and evil. Yet, it is certain that the first to be exposed, the first to be attacked and perhaps the most cruelly afflicted would be, as so often in the past, the countries of Europe. Fortunately, they have realized the danger in time. For years now Europe has been seeking to organize a single line of defence in order, with the assistance of friends in other continents, to safeguard its freedom and fulfil its high vocation.
37. Do not, I beg you, forget that Europe is among the most seriously disabled victims of the war. The body of Europe is still suffering from cruel mutilations; of the twenty-six nations of Europe only fourteen are now represented among us here in the United Nations.
38. Nevertheless, the countries of Europe, impelled by the strong current of public opinion, have made a magnificent recovery. The Council of Europe is in operation. It is far indeed from fulfilling the hopes of its founders or meeting the new needs of our time. But ideas evolve and take shape; in the orbit of the Council of Europe there is a chain of organizations at work. They are, I agree, as yet insufficiently co-ordinated, but they are at work defining problems, seeking and sometimes finding solutions, and, at all events, preparing the way for the future.
39. Two great experiments, the credit for initiating which belongs to France, are under way: the European coal and steel union (the Schuman Plan) and the European defence union (the Pleven Plan). Both are demonstrations of Europe’s resolve to restore its unity and to do so if necessary by new methods. Either, if it succeeds, is calculated to add greatly to the strength of the free world and also to remove the restrictions on the military, economic and social effort to which European States have set their hand to further by co-operation the common cause.
40. Is it not clear that in following these bold and rugged paths, the peoples of Europe are demanding tremendous exertions of themselves? Such undertakings require courage, great courage; in some countries they call for the sacrifice of legitimate individual interests to a lofty ideal of the common interest. No doubt in the long run such sacrifices will serve the greater interest of each and every one. Nations do not embark on such a course unless they can no longer achieve by other means, that is, in national isolation, the primary aims of every human society.
41. It is doubtless wise to go no further along the road to unification than is necessary to attain the ends in view. Yet, even with these reservations, even within these limits, public opinion in the European countries must show rare political maturity and weigh the needs of the moment with exceptional insight, if it is to be capable of the act of faith, the act of courage, which these new policies demand.
42. For my own part, without wishing to make rash prophecies, I should like to express one conviction: I believe that the countries of western Europe will have that courage and that wisdom. I believe that they will find a balanced formula which will enable them to create ere long both the European coal and steel union and the European defence union. In so doing they will display once more their desire to contribute, at the price of enlightened but none the less far-reaching sacrifices, to the free world’s mighty effort to defend itself. When the present turmoil is spent, a new Europe will arise, a united and harmonious Europe, able once more to devote all its venerable prestige to the greatest of all causes, the building of a better world.
43. If the Europeans follow that path, you will surely agree with me that they will have acquired a new right to the gratitude and respect of all those States which share with them the responsibility for western civilization or for, what is greater still, the dignity of man. Let more fortunate peoples not forget that many European countries have twice within the span of one generation known the ravages of battle and the exhausting rigours of enemy occupation.
44. That is why, having made and continuing to make its full contribution to the joint effort, Europe can without humiliation, demand of others that they should be generous in assessing their own share, so that the joint effort may be made in time and in such a way as to guarantee its success, that is to say, the peace.
45. I now come to my conclusion. Can we draw any conclusion from these general considerations? Perhaps, and perhaps even a conclusion of practical value, since it would amount to a rule of behaviour.
46. There is no doubt that we are living in a dangerous, bewildering age, an age of transition. The very foundations of life and happiness are being constantly called in question. We avoid one danger only to fall into another. And yet we feel that this tide, which sweeps us giddily onwards, may lead us afar — we know not where — but it may be to better, just as likely as to sorrier times.
47. It is for us to stand firm. As you entered the Palais de Chaillot, you will have read, inscribed in letters of gold on the façade, these admirable words of Paul Valéry: “Il dépend de celui qui passe que je sois tombe ou trésor”. We have a clear and direct policy. It is ready for any eventuality, good or bad. Let us keep faith in ourselves; let us remain calm and strong, wise and persevering. The future will be what we make it.