62. Madam President, the delegation
of Barbados is happy to join those who have spoken
before in paying a tribute to you on the occasion of your
election to the high office of President of the twenty-fourth
session of the General Assembly. We see you as a
representative, not only of Liberia but of all Africa, and I
do not think I need stress the strong attachment which my
country has both to Liberia and to the great continent of
Africa. Speaking of this, on the last day of the general
debate, not only can I congratulate you on your election to
the presidency, but I can bear witness to the wisdom which
you have brought to your tenure of office.
63. I should also like to pay tribute to your distinguished
predecessor, Mr. Emilio Arenales, whose passing has been a
severe blow to the Americas and to the entire international
community. My delegation would also like to take this
opportunity to thank all those members of the Organization
who demonstrated their confidence in my country by
voting to elect Barbados to one of the Vice-Presidencies of
the twenty-fourth session of the General Assembly.
64. Madam President, in your inaugural address you spoke
very forthrightly of the “gradual decline of the United
Nations in the eyes of public opinion” [1753rd meeting,
para. 47]. It is a theme which has been echoed by other
contributors to the general debate. It is right and natural
that we should concern ourselves with the basic question of
the effectiveness of the Organization to which we belong
and in which we place so many hopes. Indeed, it seems to
us that the essential purpose of these annual gatherings is
precisely to cast a cold eye on the previous year’s
performance and to offer our own views on how to improve
its business in the coming year. Where my delegation parts
company with some of the perennial critics of the United
Nations is at the point where it is suggested that the
Organization has, in some quite mysterious way, failed the
peoples of the world.
65. It seems to us that this kind of criticism is based on
either ignorance or ill will. The ignorance involved is
usually of the utopian kind, with its assumption that the
United Nations is some sort of omnipotent and unreliable
giant who withholds the use of his magic wand whenever he
is in a bad mood. On the other hand, my delegation can see
nothing but ill will in the criticisms which are based on the
assumption that the Organization’s usefulness declines in
direct proportion to its universality; we cannot accept the
old-boy theory of international organization.
66. We categorically reject both interpretations of the role
of our international Organization. We also reject the
spurious analyses that flow from these interpretations. I am
confident that we in Barbados have no illusions about what
this Organization can do and what it cannot do. It is certain
that in the major areas of international politics no
organization can do what its members resolutely prevent it
from doing. The United Nations cannot take a major role in
the solution of the Viet-Nam conflict, because the Powers
which are directly and indirectly involved have, more or less
bluntly, told the Organization “hands off”. The United
Nations has declared Namibia an international territory, but
it cannot enforce this declaration until Great Britain and
the United States are prepared to exert their considerable
power, in any one of the many ways open to them, to turn
the arrogant racists in Pretoria away from their squalid policies.
67. There is a certain irony in recalling that in the debate
on Namibia held in this hall a little over two years ago, it
was the representative of the United States who called on
the international community to take concrete, effective and
practical measures in order to implement the Assembly’s
resolution on what was then called South West Africa. The
unwary must be asking indignantly why the United Nations
has never responded to that eloquent call. No doubt, as a
result, the Organization has declined one more notch in the
public opinion of which you spoke, Madam President. Of
course, the true answer is that the United States and Great
Britain are not presently disposed to take concrete,
effective and practical steps to dispossess South Africa,
even though they are fully aware that such steps would
have the moral backing of virtually the entire international
community. But somehow, that is never the answer which
“public opinion” receives.
68. That is not to say that my delegation considers that it
is the exclusive business of the so-called great Powers, or
the medium Powers, or any other group of Powers, to look
after the security and advancement of the world. That is
the business of the entire international community. We
must not deny the very special responsibilities of the more
powerful countries in nearly every matter that goes to the
heart of the world’s peace and prosperity. Although
sometimes the smaller countries may be justifiably criticized
for what has been called “posturing”, it is very rare to
hear of occasions in which their posturing has caused
widespread devastation of human lives and property or
systematic deprivation of human rights.
69. Now that the publicists are tiring of the miniskirt, the
mini-State has taken over the limelight. Speaking as the
representative of an unabashed mini-State, I am not certain
whether to be frightened or pleased by this sudden
prominence. It is frightening, in terms of our hopes for a
world of increasing interdependence, when we think of
some of the implications of this new fashion. For example,
what will happen to some of the very small and scarcely
viable territories when the mini-State debate is over? Will
they be left, isolated from the mainstream of international
concern, to be swallowed up by larger, more powerful
neighbours who will then answer every inquiry about their
fate with a bland reference to Article 2, paragraph 7? Will a
new doctrine evolve for an international concept, by which
any group of people with a population smaller than
X thousand, inhabiting an area of less than Y square miles,
and with a per capita income of less than Z dollars, would
automatically fall below the horizon of international concern?
70. On the other hand, it is tempting to imagine that the
new limelight will perhaps help to illuminate some of the
less-known aspects of the Charter, such as Article 1,
paragraph 2, which I take the precaution of quoting
verbatim: “To develop friendly relations among nations
based on respect for the principle of equal rights and
self-determination of peoples...” If the debate on mini-
States can help in strengthening international concern for
the self-determination of peoples, my delegation will be
among the first to welcome it. It has certainly not escaped
the attention of my Government that the “mini-State”
question has arisen in the very year in which no newly
independent countries are seeking admission to this Organization.
Some great Powers apparently want to close the Ark
even before every species of animal is safely in. My
delegation cannot support the doctrine of limited sovereignty,
which is now becoming so fashionable, since we
believe that this Organization has within it resources
enough to accommodate all those sovereign States whose
Governments express their desire to be guided by our Charter.
71. Those who feel that the little State has no place in a
world assembly of equals, are doing harm to a sound
democratic principle. In my own country and among my
own people, our whole philosophy of government rests on
the principle that the ordinary man, the little man, is
entitled to all the opportunities for development which the
Constitution and the economy of our country provide. We
have no second class citizens and we take particular care to
see that all our citizens have free access to the highest
courts in our country. We even provide for their defence in
criminal cases, if necessary. Each citizen has access to the
best education and the best medical care we can provide,
72. Since our foreign policy is an accurate reflection of
our domestic system, it would not be possible for us to
accept an arbitrary distinction between sovereign States, a
distinction at variance both with the Charter and with the
principles of our own Constitution. We feel that the people
of the Seychelles or of Nauru have as much right to exercise
their sovereignty in this Organization as any other Member
State, and we also feel that it is incumbent upon all of us to
devise the appropriate machinery to enable this to be done
without placing onerous burdens on these States. My
delegation also believes that even if such States choose not
to join this Organization, they should still be entitled to full
enjoyment of its services and resources.
73. In short, we must look forward to a world assembly of
equals. It is perfectly true that the great Powers do not
relish this, but that is only because each of them has its
own reservations about the usefulness of this Organization.
Each of them can resort to the veto when this device is
judged to be convenient. The middle and small Powers
enjoy no such luxury, but must contain their impotent fury
at the use of this strange mechanism which makes some
States more equal than others. My delegation is perverse
enough to believe that world peace and security are better
guaranteed by the accession of new States, however small,
than by the unconscionable use of a device by which the
great Powers protect their special interests.
74. There is a basic distinction to be made between
self-determination of peoples and membership in the
United Nations, and too many of the arguments which have
been advanced in favour of a caste-system of States seem to
ignore this. In our view, the Organization must be very
careful that its consideration of the genuine problem posed
by the emergence of very small States does not slow down
the urgent process of decolonization.
75. In the Caribbean, we are only too familiar with this
question. Every single territory in that area which is waiting
on the threshold for full self-determination is an eloquent
argument for creative and imaginative action by this
Organization. We would suggest that the time has come to
put an end to the rather rigid and doctrinaire approach to
decolonization in which the United Nations now seems to
be deadlocked. We do not think it enough to demand of the
administering Powers for the traditional accounting of their
stewardship. As we see it, the Organization is sufficiently
experienced, and the Secretary-General’s authority and
prestige sufficiently strong, to permit the Secretariat to
play a more active role in the psychological decolonization
of the peoples for whom the Organization has a clear moral
responsibility.
76. For example, my delegation would like to see this
Organization make a start on long-range economic and
social planning for such territories, even if only by way of
blueprints. This would serve to show up the deficiencies of
the administering Powers in this respect and help to focus
international attention on the real needs of the peoples. We
hope that the administering Powers will eagerly co-operate
in such a project. If they do not, and if they content
themselves with the Pavlovian reaction regarding intervention
in matters of domestic jurisdiction, then the
international community will be able to draw the obvious conclusions.
77. The whole world applauded the scarcely believable
achievement of the United States in landing a man on the
surface of the moon. It was an event full of significance for
all humanity, and it demonstrated, in the most dramatic
way possible, the tremendous progress which mankind has
made towards mastering his environment. It was also a
dramatic demonstration of the distance that separates some
nations from others; the distance that has been described as
the “technological gap”. It is a fact of life that the world is
divided into the rich and the poor. It is our understanding
that it is one of the major concerns of this Organization to
find the means of harmonizing these discrepancies so that
all may live in peace, independence and prosperity together.
What seems to us to be happening, year after year, is that
not only the “gaps” are growing, but totally new gaps are
being created.
78. The small and under-developed countries need a
greater and more imaginative effort by the Organization to
help close the gaps. We wonder, for example, how many
technicians from the under-developed areas of the world
contributed to the success of the American moon shot, and
to many of the other brilliant achievements of science in
other developed countries. I do not know the figures and
we do not grudge the developed countries the use of these
talents. I make the reference merely to point to one of the
underlying and perhaps insoluble difficulties inherent in
under-development, which was first highlighted by a leading,
if somewhat unorthodox, economist many centuries
ago: “Unto every one that hath it shall be given, and he
shall have abundance. But from him that hath not shall be
taken even that which he hath.”
79. Not only are the rich becoming richer, but they are
acquiring an astonishing variety of keys by which to unlock
even further riches. Unless this process is rationalized, the
day may soon come when poor nations will be permanently
consigned to the role of helots. The Consensus of Viña del Mar,
to which my Government was a signatory, sets out
this danger very clearly in the fields of trade and aid. It is a
danger that takes other forms as well, and my Government
is especially proud that it was the initiative of a mini-State,
Malta, which led this Organization to undertake, for the
first time, a study of the uses of the sea-bed and the ocean floor.
80. This is, of course, a matter of prime importance for an
island-State like Barbados, and we look to the United
Nations as the sole forum in which the matter can be
debated and discussed with a view to removing this
important resource from the catch-as-catch-can arena of
power politics. It would be disastrous if the juridical
anarchy over marine rights, which prevailed in the seven-teenth
century, were to be allowed to prevail in this
century in the areas under the sea. We know that it is only a
question of time before large-scale exploitation of the
sea-bed begins, and the technologically advanced countries
are obviously the best equipped to glean the rich prizes
which are waiting to be gathered from the ocean floor. It
seems to us that there is literally no time to be lost in
asserting a claim to these vast potential riches on behalf of
all mankind and we hope that this Organization, acting as
the conscience of the international community, will be able
to offer a constructive substitute for marine imperialism
and oppose those who would wish to fish in troubled
waters. For these reasons my Government firmly supports
the internationalization of the sea-bed and the ocean floor
beyond the limits of national jurisdiction. My delegation
will also lend its support to any convention which prohibits
and outlaws the improper use of the seas and oceans for
military experimentation.
81. My Government has consistently deplored the fact
that the world’s wealth is so inequitably distributed. Far
from proving a satisfactory solution to this pressing
problem, the performance of the 1960s, so often referred
to as the decade of development, has been for many
developing countries a decade of disillusionment. We are
persuaded that the forthcoming decade of development will
be no less a disappointment and that the intentions of
Article 55 of the Charter will be no nearer fulfilment,
unless there is sufficient political willingness on the part of
those countries whose dynamism, power and resources are
greater, to come together and rescue the hundreds of
millions of humans in Asia, Africa and Latin America from
their long torment.
82. We know that ingenuity is not lacking in devising new
methods for going forward together, and we know that
resources and technology are available. Their effective
application will be best achieved through the knowledge
that the safety of each is dependent on the safety of all,
and by the exercise of good faith which is more valuable
than the most binding treaties, especially treaties in which, in
the words of Thucydides: ”The strong do what they can
and the weak suffer what they must.”
83. We should not delude ourselves that the resources
needed for development can be effectively mobilized,
unless existing conflicts which threaten world peace can be
speedily terminated and potential conflicts smothered
before they develop. If we cannot do this, the resources
which we wish to command will continue to be dissipated
in military adventures, which in themselves increase the
chances for a third world war. My delegation, therefore,
earnestly appeals to all our brothers in Nigeria to lay down
their arms and hasten to the conference table. We also urge
the contending nations in the Middle East to seek, in a
spirit of compromise, an early settlement to a dispute
which has for so long impoverished their countries and
permitted the great Powers to keep these countries in pawn
and, at the same time, to fight their own wars by proxy.
84. You yourself, Madam President, have given this
Assembly an inspiration to continue the search for peace.
In placing your indefatigable service at the disposal of both
sides in the Nigerian conflict, you have taken an initiative
which deserves the whole-hearted support of the General
Assembly. My Government welcomes your timely gesture
and offers to you all its resources for the undertaking of
this urgent business of bringing peace to an African
country. My delegation, further, invites all States to give
public support to your efforts, with the same unanimity
which summoned you to preside over the destinies of this
Assembly with such grace and distinction.