Bulgaria

The agenda of the twelfth session of the General Assembly includes some extremely important items, items which are of crucial significance to mankind, but for which, despite all efforts, no satisfactory solution has as vet been found. Although some progress was made late last year and early in the present year towards the settlement of some particularly serious problems, the situation as a whole remains strained. It is therefore natural that the attention of the world's peoples should be focused on the work of the twelfth session of the General Assembly, on the formulation of the questions before it, on the decisions it adopts and on the recommendations it makes to ensure peaceful coexistence between peoples. In order to guarantee its success, our work should be guided by the purposes of the United Nations, as laid down in the Charter, and by respect for its principles. It is right and proper that we should keep the purposes of the Organization constantly before us and should consistently respect the principles on which it is based. The course of development of international relations and, more particularly, the experiences of the last few decades, have made the peaceful settlement of disputes indispensable. 2. The two world wars, which brought untold calamities and sorrow to mankind, have proved that the use of force and violence to settle international disputes does not yield lasting results. The peaceful settlement of international disputes is now no longer simply a moral issue; as a result of contemporary developments, it has also become a historical necessity. Having paid for their victory over fascism with rivers of blood, the world's peoples expressed, in the Charter of the United Nations, their firm determination to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war. That is why the Charter rules out the use of force in the settlement of disputes and imposes an obligation on all States Members of the United Nations to settle disputes by peaceful means and in such a manner that international peace and security are not endangered. 3. But the hopes placed in the United Nations do not rest solely on the fact that its purposes and principles as laid down in the Charter reflect the desires of ordinary men and women. The peoples of the world know from their own experience that, whenever they find suitable means of making their unanimous opinion heard within the Organization, real results can be achieved, existing tensions removed and peace maintained. 4. Still fresh are our memories of the tragic events in the Middle East, where the basic principles of the Charter were flagrantly ignored and an attempt was made by the use of force to impose a policy dictated by patently selfish interests on a Member State of the United Nations in violation of its sovereign rights. 5. The resolute action taken by the peace-loving States and the peoples themselves in defence of the victim thwarted the aggressors' plans. It became obvious at that time that when the peoples of the entire world unite against aggression and to preserve peace they become an irresistible force which, with the weight of the United Nations behind it, can make a decisive contribution to the maintenance of peace and can prevent conflicts from spreading. 6. The constructive part played last autumn by the United Nations In halting aggression and restoring peace in the Middle East should be emphasized in this connexion. The General Assembly resolutions on the cease-fire and the withdrawal of the aggressors' forces from Egypt, which reflected public opinion throughout the world, justified the hopes of the peoples and strengthened their confidence in the Organization's ability to maintain peace. There can be no doubt therefore that the United Nations is capable of playing a constructive part in the settlement of all the outstanding international issues on which the maintenance and consolidation of world peace and the security of the peoples depend. 7. The delegation of the People's Republic of Bulgaria hopes that, during the current session, the General Assembly will succeed in taking constructive decisions on the items on its agenda, thus contributing to the strengthening of peace and understanding between peoples and establishing a solid foundation for subsequent co-operation between nations. It can do so if the Members of the United Nations make the effort required for a practical settlement of the most urgent international issues. 8. The present course of events in the Middle East, in other words, in close proximity to our country, is being followed with keen interest and attention by the whole population of Bulgaria. The explanation is not hard to find. With the technical facilities of today, any important event, any disturbance in no matter what country has repercussions and effects on other countries, particularly on neighbouring ones. 9. As a result of developments during the past few decades and principally after the Second World War, the peoples of the Middle East have achieved their national independence. They are now making great efforts to maintain and strengthen it and also to promote the development of their national economies, which were retarded by foreign rule, and to raise the very low level of living in that part of the world. In view of their long history and their substantial contribution to the development of human knowledge and culture, these peoples are justified in asking to be left alone to manage their own affairs. However, certain financial circles interested in the exploitation of this area and its great natural wealth apparently have different ideas. They are not prepared to accept the fact that the peoples of this part of the world are firmly resolved to manage their own affairs, to undertake the exploitation of their national resources as they see fit and in accordance with their own interests. 10. The halting of the aggression against Egypt did not extinguish the aspirations of these circles, and especially those of the United States oil monopolies. It is a well known fact that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and its ramifications were set up to protect the specific interests of these monopolies in the area. Because of their close ties with British and French financial groups, the monopolies regard themselves as the rightful heirs and successors to these groups. In fact, as the prestige and influence of the United Kingdom and France in this region declined, the cupidity of these United States concerns increased. It was these monopolistic interests which evolved the theory that the end of British and French influence in the Middle East had created a power vacuum which the Arab peoples were incapable of filling themselves. To fill this imaginary vacuum a special doctrine, the Eisenhower doctrine was devised, which was backed by the influence and the armed forces of the United States. Of no avail were assertions by the Arab States and their peoples that there is no vacuum in the Middle East, and that even if there was, they would be capable of filling it. Special emissaries were sent to persuade the Arab peoples that a vacuum existed and that only the United States was in a position to fill it. After protracted efforts, in which the United States fleet stationed in the Mediterranean played a not inconsiderable part, some countries, principally those already belonging to the Baghdad Pact and NATO, were induced to accept the Eisenhower doctrine. 11. The formulation of this doctrine was essential to United States ruling circles in order to justify before world opinion - including Arab opinion - their blatant interference in the domestic affairs of the Middle East States. The reason given for the formulation of this dangerous doctrine, which jeopardizes peace and international co-operation, was alleged Soviet interference in the Middle East, which was in fact nonexistent. 12. In reality, whenever and wherever peoples rise to free themselves from colonial bondage or to safeguard the independence they have already won, the monopolies and their spokesmen invariably repeat the old, outworn lie about the communist threat, a lie which was responsible for Hitler's rise to power in Germany. 13. Only a few weeks ago, under similar pretexts, a fierce campaign was launched against Syria. Syria was accused of constituting a threat to its neighbours, even though some of them are larger and more powerful than itself. Special envoys were sent to study the situation on the spot, but not to Syria. An airlift of arms to Syria's neighbours was organized as a demonstration of strength. Warships belonging to certain Powers appeared off its shores. There was discussion as to whether or not there were grounds for putting the Eisenhower doctrine into effect. Arab statesmen from countries other than Syria, countries which the Americans believe are well-disposed to the United States, unanimously supported Syria, thus categorically refuting all these fabrications. All the turmoil and commotion over the Middle East have increased tension between States in this part of the world and have contributed to keeping international relations tense. 14. Yet the clear and unequivocal statements of the Arab leaders reveal the allegations that Syria threatened the security of its neighbours to be completely false. It is evident on the other hand that the present rulers of Syria are not liked in certain quarters because they are out of step with the tune called by Washington. But why should the rulers of any sovereign country keep in step with the tune called by Washington? 15. At the same time, under cover of the hue and cry over Syria, two other Arab States, Oman and Yemen, have become the victims of acts of aggression by the United Kingdom, the ally of the United States. 16. Demonstrations of strength such as the organization of airlifts of arms into one country in order to exert pressure on a neighbouring State — among the methods used to intimidate Syria — might well miscarry and precipitate a war which could not be localized. These attempts at intimidation, carried out in accordance with the Eisenhower doctrine, were condemned by a section of the United States Press itself because they were a failure. Is that not convincing proof of the real purpose cf this doctrine and of the harmful effects of its application? 17. It is time to put an end to the policy of intimidation and threats against the peoples of the Middle East, a policy pursued simply because these peoples refuse to allow the region to revert to domination by foreign interests. It is high time to put an end to attempts at interference in their domestic affairs. The Arab peoples must be left free to manage their own affairs, a task for which they are fitted by their long history and their recent experience. It is exclusively for the State concerned to decide such matters as the identity of its rulers, the composition of its Government and the nature of its political system. 18. The peoples want an end to foreign interference in the Middle East and consider that the countries of this region should be left free to manage their domestic affairs themselves. Men and women everywhere are anxious to safeguard and strengthen peace, to guarantee the normal development of all peoples and to ensure peaceful coexistence among States. 19. The desire and concern to ensure peace and the peaceful development of nations acquire increasing force and urgency as methods of waging war become more destructive. As a result of the invention and development of atomic and thermonuclear weapons of hitherto inconceivable destructive power, world war offers the sombre prospect of the annihilation of tens and hundreds of millions of human beings in different parts of the world and the infliction of appalling diseases on hundreds of millions of others. 20. The destructive power of atomic and thermonuclear weapons is so great and, with the development of inter-continental ballistic missiles and guided rockets, the means of delivering them have been so improved that no country in the world, regardless of its level of technical development and its defence system and no matter in what part of the world it is situated is immune from attack by these weapons. 21. In these circumstances, it is natural that the question of disarmament should have become one of the crucial issues of our time, for it is one of vital concern to world public opinion and the working masses throughout the world. That is why the work of the Disarmament Sub-Committee of the Disarmament Commission, which met in London for more than five months, was followed with unflagging interest by Governments as well as by the peoples which profoundly desire the conclusion of an agreement, if only of a partial character, which could provide a basis for the eventual solution of the disarmament problem. 22. Unfortunately, these expectations and hopes were disappointed. Despite the optimistic statements of the representatives of the United States and other Western countries in the Sub-Committee, no progress was made towards disarmament. In making such statements, the representatives in question were perhaps trying to allay the growing dismay and anxiety felt by the peoples of their own countries at the armaments race and the fearful prospect of another world war. 23. There must be a real desire to disarm, if progress is to be made towards disarmament. The peoples would find evidence of this desire in a resolute attempt to achieve immediate and practical results by first tackling questions on which, in the opinion of the parties concerned, the prerequisites for agreement have been fulfilled. 24. Do the proposals made by the Western countries in the Sub-Committee of the Disarmament Commission reflect such an attempt? Do they pave the way for agreement, at least on some of the questions under consideration? It is common knowledge that the joint proposals submitted by the representatives of the NATO countries during the concluding meetings of the Sub-Committee, linked together all the questions, both those on which agreement could be reached as well as those on which there are irreconcilable differences of opinion, in such a way as to prevent any progress towards disarmament. 25. The Soviet Union, on the other hand, made a number of efforts to meet some of the demands of the representatives of the NATO countries and to allay their fears, however unjustified, by making a series of concessions. Yet instead of evoking a similar desire to reconcile attitudes and positions, it seems to us that the concessions made by the Soviet Union merely aroused in the representatives of the Western countries a desire to perpetuate and, if possible, to widen divergencies of opinion. This is clearly indicated by their joint proposals. Surely we can only conclude they neither desire nor really intend to progress towards disarmament? 26. Everyone, including the representatives of the Western countries in the Sub-Committee, is prepared to acknowledge that the Soviet proposals are realistic and that they can provide a basis for the conclusion of an agreement. These proposals by the Soviet Union are supported by the great majority of the peoples of the world because they are unequivocal and accord with the desire of the peoples for specific measures towards effective disarmament. 27. In these circumstances what is there to prevent the States participating in the work of the Sub-Committee from reaching agreement on a reduction of armed forces? Was not agreement reached, after long discussion, on maximum levels of armed forces? What prevents these States from assuming a solemn obligation to renounce the use of atomic weapons and from agreeing to the dismantling of all military bases in foreign territory? 28. Yet because groundless objections were raised owing to the fact that control had become a fetish obstructing all efforts to achieve practical agreement on disarmament at an early date, the Soviet Union also submitted proposals on partial measures. It proposed that countries possessing atomic and thermonuclear weapons should assume a solemn obligation not to use these weapons for a period of five years and that tests of atomic and thermonuclear weapons should be discontinued for a period of two or three years. 29. No control is necessary for the discontinuance of tests of atomic and hydrogen weapons. Was it not generally admitted some time ago that modern scientific and technical devices can detect any test explosions in any part of the world? Nevertheless, in order to provide even greater security and to meet the demands of the Western countries, the Soviet Union proposed the establishment of control posts in all areas where such explosions could be set off. 30. Can anything be clearer or more practical than these proposals? In addition to constituting a realistic approach to the problems involved, these proposals for partial measures have the advantage of providing a basis for a lasting disarmament agreement. To be sure, there is no easy solution to the disarmament problem. We feel, however, that this urgent topical question is being artificially complicated and obscured by a host of technical and organizational questions which, it is contended, should be settled before disarmament takes place. 31. If an intention and desire to break the present deadlock in the disarmament negotiations really exists, agreement must be reached at least on certain urgent and fundamental issues. Useful progress in this direction would undoubtedly be made If States possessing atomic and hydrogen weapons agreed to assume a solemn obligation to renounce their use, at least for a certain period. An agreement of this kind would have an extremely favourable effect on the international situation and would help to restore people's confidence that great Powers possessing atomic and thermonuclear weapons genuinely intend to renounce their use. 32. If they really want to achieve agreement on disarmament, what prevents the Western Powers, and in particular the United States and the United Kingdom, from accepting the proposal for a temporary discontinuance of nuclear weapons tests, for a period of two or three years at least? Furthermore, this question can easily be singled out from the disarmament problem as a whole and speedily settled. It is a question which does not involve discussion of control or other complex technical and organizational matters despite the fact that, in this connexion too, the United Kingdom representative managed to raise a number of technical points which he claimed must be settled before disarmament could take place. The argument that the discontinuance of test explosions would create a false feeling of security and calm is groundless. What could be false about the sincere relief that peoples would feel at the news that tests of atomic weapons had been discontinued and that the dangerous increase in radioactivity had been stopped? Is it perhaps felt that the explosions on Bikini and other islands bring greater peace of mind to the inhabitants of Japan, Indonesia or Australia? Or that life is more peaceful and secure in the shadow of these mushroom-shaped clouds? 33. I would point out, in connexion with the refusal of the Western countries to accept proposals for the discontinuance of tests of atomic and thermonuclear weapons, that an attempt is being made in certain quarters to reassure us by producing "clean” atomic bombs - nuclear weapons with reduced radioactivity. This is strange consolation indeed. Would these weapons be any less destructive in the event of a third world war? Obviously not. How then do they help the average man upon whom their destructive force would be visited? Would it be any less painful to die of burns or wounds caused by "clean” atomic weapons than those caused by ordinary atomic weapons? Would these bombs destroy fewer cities or fewer monuments of human culture? Would they make the annihilation of the inhabitants of large towns and densely-populated areas any less horrible? In any event, what is to guarantee that, in a third world war, with passions running high, only "clean" atomic and hydrogen bombs and no others would be used? 34. There is a real danger that a world war would result in unparalleled destruction and slaughter as a result of the use of thermonuclear weapons. That is why the necessary steps must be taken here and now, while calm still prevails, to stop tests of thermonuclear weapons, to prohibit their use, and even to destroy existing stocks of these weapons. 35. The assertion that the Soviet Union would rely on the possibility of exerting moral and religious pressure on the Western Governments and of exploiting the repugnance of the masses to atomic and thermonuclear weapons obviously disregards the facts of history. It is common knowledge that no moral or religious considerations prevented the use of atomic bombs at Hiroshima or Nagasaki, where they killed tens of thousands of human beings outright and condemned hundreds of thousands of others to a slow and painful death. No moral or religious scruples prevented United States militarists and monopolists from developing atomic weapons at feverish speed before the Soviet Union was producing or was even planning to produce them. Why then, at that time, did United States ruling circles which try to give the impression of devotion to the cause of disarmament, fail to accept the Soviet proposal to prohibit production of atomic weapons? At that time they would have had the advantage of being able to institute complete control, since the USSR was producing neither atomic weapons nor fissionable materials. 36. This was obviously a lost opportunity. It is already part of history, but these historical facts can help us to understand present developments better and to form a clearer picture of the positions of various countries on the disarmament question and particularly on the discontinuance of tests of nuclear weapons. 37. Others have tried to prove that a third world war, waged with conventional weapons, would be no less destructive than a war waged with atomic and thermonuclear weapons. We agree that there should be no war at all. Yet we are surprised by an argument of this kind, because obviously its only purpose is to justify the production of atomic and nuclear weapons, to justify world war. 38. Clearly, no one could be convinced by any of the arguments presented by the representatives of the NATO countries in the Sub-Committee of the Disarmament Commission and in the present debate, arguments designed to prevent the early conclusion of a disarmament agreement, which the peoples of the entire world are anxiously awaiting. 39. The USSR proposals for total disarmament reflect the hopes and desires of all the peoples of the world, who in particular unanimously support the proposal for renouncing the use of atomic and hydrogen weapons and eliminating them from the armaments of States. That is why the proposals have the wholehearted support of the entire world. 40. The Government of the People’s Republic of Bulgaria has repeatedly affirmed, and once again reaffirms, its support for the USSR Government's proposals on disarmament, the prohibition of atomic and thermonuclear weapons, and on the discontinuance of tests of those atomic weapons, because those proposals are in keeping with the interests of the Bulgarian people and with the interests of peace and security throughout the world. 41. In one of the speeches made in this hall - that of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of the United Kingdom - the socialist countries represented in the United Nations were reproached for voting with one voice on all basic questions affecting international relations, including disarmament. We cannot but find that reproach surprising. The relations among the socialist countries and their complete unanimity on all major international problems at all times and in all places, including the United Nations, are perfectly natural and logical. That unanimity stems from the very nature of their policy, which is one of peace, economic, cultural and scientific co-operation, peaceful coexistence and closer relations among nations. 42. It would be strange if it were otherwise. It would be strange if these countries, which pursue similar policies of peace and peaceful coexistence, co-operation and close relations among nations, were not unanimous on major international issues. There are undoubtedly some who would like to see deviations from this unanimity, but such a desire is not realistic. It should be quite obvious that no socialist State will abandon its foreign policy, which reflects the interests and hopes of the masses of its people, and embark on a different policy solely to please certain circles which are interested in the maintenance of international tension. 43. In line with its policy of peace, peaceful coexistence among States, co-operation and friendship among peoples, which determines its position on all international problems, including those discussed in the United Nations, the Government of the People's Republic of Bulgaria has proposed a whole series of measures for improving its relations with its neighbours, and establishing close economic co-operation and cultural, scientific and technical exchanges with them. 44. In many cases, the goodwill and initiative shown by the Bulgarian Government have been reciprocated with understanding and goodwill, which has led to substantial progress in improving our relations with our Balkan neighbours and strengthening co-operation among them. 45. We appreciated and welcomed the initiative taken by the Government of the Romanian People’s Republic in calling a conference of the heads of Government of the Balkan countries with a view to discussing the strengthening of peace in the Balkans, non-aggression, the peaceful settlement of all disputes, and the development of economic and cultural relations. 46. Although there are some outstanding problems and certain differences of opinion on certain issues, the Bulgarian Government believes that direct contact between the heads of Government of the Balkan countries in an atmosphere of goodwill and understanding can pave the way to the conversion of that area of the world into an area of lasting peace and harmony. 47. However, certain great Powers are still trying to divert public attention in some Balkan countries from questions embarrassing to those Powers by stirring up old resentments and setting the peoples of the Balkans against each other. 48. However easy and convenient such methods may be, this system of playing politics at the expense of others must be brought to an end. We are convinced that the Balkan peoples will not allow the Balkans once again to become the powder keg of Europe. They will undoubtedly pursue the course of agreement, cooperation and peaceful coexistence so that they can devote all their energies, material resources and talents to economic and cultural progress. 49. Many speakers have emphasized during this debate that a climate of mutual trust and co-operation is essential to the solution of important international problems. Such a climate could easily be created by giving priority to certain questions, the solution of which presents no special difficulty, given goodwill on all sides. For example, instead of setting up artificial barriers to trade with certain countries, and more particularly with the socialist countries, Governments could co-operate actively in restoring traditional trade and economic relations among nations and in paving the way for their future expansion. That would largely resolve the difficulty many Western countries are experiencing in finding markets for some of their products and help them to make full use of the productive capacity of certain branches of their industry. It would also establish the necessary conations for better mutual understanding among peoples and consequently, for greater mutual confidence. For that reason, we should seriously consider the advantages offered by the Soviet proposal for convening a world economic conference to consider questions of economic co-operation among all countries. 50. Another question which deserves full and careful attention with a view to creating mutual understanding and an atmosphere of confidence among nations is that of strengthening cultural exchanges and relations among all peoples, particularly among those with different social and political systems. The study and knowledge of other peoples' cultural, scientific and artistic ideas, their outlook and way of life, and their philosophy and aspirations can do much to bring nations closer together. 51. The United Nations has an extremely important part to play in solving these and similar problems. It has the means at its disposal to promote firm progress towards economic and cultural co-operation among nations. 52. We hope that at this session the General Assembly will use these means and its authority to hasten the solution of these and all the other problems on its agenda, and particularly, the problem of disarmament. That solution will contribute to the achievement of a lasting peace and the peaceful coexistence of all the peoples of the world.