Party of Burma, under whose leadership
"the armed struggle of the Burmese people has developed rapidly and
vigorously along the radiant road, as pointed out by Chairman Mao
Tse-tung that 'political power grows out of the barrel of a gunt, the
road of
establishing rural base areas, using the countryside to encircle the
cities and finally capturing the cities. The gunshots of the people's
forces are resounding all over Burns."
That is from the Peiping-based Voice of the People of Thailand, dated 28
March 1970. Here we have a typical Maoist "people's war" in sction.
threat to the independence of Burna cannot be underestimated.
I think that Radio Moscow, in its broadcast of 7 June 1970, has
succinctly sussed up the situation in South and South-East Asia, as
follow:
"Hao Tan-tung and his followers....... are busy trying to bring under
domination South and South-East Asia. This is done by fostering internal
conflicts and strife in that part of the world." Radio Moscow then went
on to list India, Bhutan, Sikkim, Nepal, Burns, the Philippines,
Malaysin and Indonesia as targets of Peiping's subversive activities.
With regard to Malaysia, may I be permitted to quote a few lines from a
message went on 29 April 1970 by the Central Committee of the Chinese
Communist Party to the Communist Party of Malays on its fortieth
anniversary:
"At present the revolutionary situation in South-East Asia and Malays
is excellent. The revolutionary armed struggle in Malaya is developing
victoriously. We believe the Communist Party of Malaya....... will
securedly persist la the correct road of using villages to encircle the
cities...
so as to attain victory in overthrowing the reactionary rule of British
and United States imperialian and their puppets, the Rahman-Rasak plique
and the Leo Kuan Yew clique, and in establishing the People's Republic
of Halaya."
In the light of what the Chinese Communist régine has been doing to
subvert
the established Governments in Burma, Malaysia and other South-East
Asian countries, can anyone seriously contend that Paiping is
"peace-loving"?
T
[
J
BG/6
A/PV.1902
23
(Mr. Wei, China
R2/6
A/PV.1902 24-25
(Mr. Wei, Chica)
+
The Moist cult of violence has its vetaries not merely among diarident
elements in South and South-East Asia. In cities of the Western world
there are youthful revolutionaries who carry out politically motivated
arson, bombing, murder and other terrorist activities designed to
overthrow the existing social and political order. Not all of them are
professed "Moista".
But it camot be denied that Mao Tse-tung has been a powerful sources of
stimulus to them. Mao's influence on the revolutionaries is bound to
grow should his régine be seated in the thited Nations.
That the Chinese Communist région is the greatest threat to world peace
and security, the greatest enemy to national independence and freedon,
there
can be no question. Yet there are those who continue to insist that
world
peace will be better served by having the Chinage Communists inside the
United Nations than by having then out. They contend that the United
Nations needs the presence of Paiping to solve such crucial problems as
disarmament and the control of nuclear weapons.
I, for one, question the validity of this argument. It betrays a woeful
lack of understanding of the nature of Chinese Communian. They
exaggerate the role Peiping can or is willing to play in helping resolve
the avesome
problems that face the United Nations. It is difficult to understand how
a régime dedicated to reshaping the world by force of arms and the
preaching of the inevitability and even the desirability of war can
motribute to the cause
of world peace. Peiping's interest in the United Nations stems primarily
from a desire to transform the Organization into its own instrument of
policy.
It could wreck the United Nations just na it has undermined the
much-vaunted
monolithic unity of the international Communist movement.
I am of course aware that weariness with recurrent conflict and fear of
nuclear holocaust have engendered in the sinds of men a yearning for
normality and a craving for final and formal settlements. But peace does
not come by
marely wishing it. Lasting peace can be built only on the basis of the
Charter
principles of law and justice, while peace at any price can lead only to
disastrous consequences, Lat it be praambered that it was in the name of
pesce that Britain and France signed the Munich Agreement with Hitler in
1939.
Neville Chamberlain told his countrymen on his return to England that he
had brought "peace with honour", What he had in fact brought was not
peace, still less honour, but prologue to war. At a terrible price he
had demonstrated the futility of appeasement.
AP/te
A/PV.1902
26
(!r, Wei, China)
As for the control of muclear weapons I know that Peiping heaped insult
on the partial test-ban Treaty, the Treaty on the non-proliferation of
nuclear weapons, as well as the Treaty barming the launching of muclear
arms in outer space. It has now taken a hostile attitude towards any
agreement on questions concerning the limitation of strategic arme. It
looks upon this as a vain attempt on the part of the United States and
the Soviet Union to "maintain their superiority of nuclear pover by
placing restrictions on others.' (New China News Agency, 5 November
1969)
H
Since Feiping's first muclear blast in 1964, it has from time to time
advanced the Ides of a world conference to prohibit and destroy muclear
weapons, But there is no evidence that that is anything wore than a
propaganda move. The development of nuclear weapons has greatly
increased the régime's ability for political blackmail, although its
muclear capability is still a limited one. In these circumstances, it is
unrealistic to think that it will give up or even limit that which is
its chief claia to being an important factor in world politics.
Moreover, the partial nuclear test ban and the non-proliferation Treaty
were negotiated, and the SALT talks are being conducted, outside the
immediate orbit of the United Nations. On the other hand, France, e
Hember of the United Nations and a permanent member of the Security
Council, has not joined the United States and the Soviet Union in
nuclear disarmament. It is all too obvious that membership in the United
Nations has no discoverable relationship with the problem of muclear
weapons control.
At any rate, the possession of nuclear arme is no ticket to ad-lesion.
Mor are aggression and the threat of aggression a basis for aligibility
for membership. To allow Piping to blast its vay into the United Nations
would be to negate thi Principles and Purposes of the Charter, to reject
the ideals of peace and progress towards which the world comunity has
been striving, to undermine the rule of law in international relations,
and to undercut whatever clain the United Nations may have to being a
moral force in the world of today. And I may add that most of the issues
on the agenda of the General Asambly racias, human rights, colonialien,
self-determination, etc. -- are essentially moral issues, With the
erosion of the
AP/Te
A/PV,1902
27
(Mr. Wei, China)
concept of collective security since the Korean var, the influence of
the United
Nations is in a position to exert is for the most part a moral one, If
you take
away what has remained of its moral authority, you leave the United
Nations with
no legs to stand on.
If I may say 30, It
I come now to the so-called principle of universality. is more a slogan
than an argument, and yet has been tossed about as an all-purpose
argument for the seating of Peiging. My delegation has no quarrel with
the
principle of universality as such. But we do not believe it is relevant
to the
question of the Chinese représentation. In our view, the United Nations
is alrendy universal, in smbership. We cannot accept the view that just
because the Chinese Communist régime is not admitted to membership, the
700 million Chinese people are deprived of their representation in the
world comunity. hay I be permitted
to quote what I said last year:
"The Chinese people and the Chinese Communist région, far from being one
and the said,
are in fact" two "distinct and mutually hostile entities, The
interests of the Chinese people and those of the Communist régine are
different and contradictory. The" Chinese "Communist régime cannot,
therefore, represent the Chinese people; it represents only a tiny
minority the
Chinese Communist Party, vhone total ambership does not exceed 2 per
cent
of the population of China, Now even that tiny minority is town by power
strugglas. The large-scale purges of the past three years have failed to
enable Mao Tse-tung to consolidate his authority over his rivals, whose
latent influence is still a factor to reckon with, Swali wonder that the
official Communist Press is filled with unabashed appeals for unity and
vigliance in the face of "internal enemies'. That can be explained only
by an acute sense of insecurity. (1798th meeting, p. 43-45}
"
What I said last year still holds true today. The assumption that the
Communist régine is in effective control of the mainland and that it can
legitimately speak for the 700 million Chinese people is not supported
by facts. Four and a half years after the launching of the so-called
Great Proletarien
Cultural Revolution and twenty months after the Ninth Party Congress,
order has not
yet been restored. The Party apparatus is still in disarmy, and its
local
AW/ab
A/FY.3902
31
AP/TC
A/FV.1902 28-30
(Mr. Hei, China)
organizations remain to be built. Directives issued by Peiping are no
longer being carried out in the provinces. That in itself is a sure sign
of the breakdown
of the lines of authority, Popular unrest has been deepening.
Restivanean is
Idespread among students, vorkers and peasants. Anti-liao and
anti-Communist
organizations exist in all parts of the country. Like other totalitarian
régimes,
it snemu Invincible until it is overth
The Government of the Republic of China, which I have the honour to
represent, is the legally constituted Goverment of China, And as such,
it commands the
allegiance of all Chinese people, including those on the mainland and
elsewhere, This is the only Government that can give expression to the
authentic aspirations
of the Chinesa people, speak in their name as vell as in their interest,
and
bring to bear their peace-loving traditions on world affaire.
It is true that the mainland of China has for two decades been under
Communist
occupation. But that done not give the Communists my right to represent
the
Chinese people et international forums, This simply means that the civil
var in
China has not yet come to an end.
It is,
The Government of the Republic of China is not an exile Government, my
delegation hạa time and again reminded the Assembly, a Chinese
Government on Chinese sofl. Its struggle with the Chinese Communist
régime is purely an internal
tter which can be resolved only by the Chinese people.
The Republic of China is a founding limber of the United Nations and is
specified by the Charter as a permanent member of the Security Council.
The Government of the Republic of China that participated in the San
Francisco Conference in 1945 is the ame Government of China on those
behalf I am speaking
today. Indeed, I was syself privileged to serve as a delegate to that
historie
institution Conference. There has been no break in the continuity of
leadership, and policy. Its legal status has not changed. The fact that
Communist rebels
are in occupation of the mainland does not affect that legal status. The
Republic of China continues to exist and functions as a sovereign State,
+
(Mr. Wei, China)
The right to determine who should represent China in the United Nations,
as my delegation has repeatedly called to the Assembly's attention,
belongs to the Chinese people alone and to no one else. The Chinese
people have certainly not asked Albenia or anyone else to speak for them
and call into question my Government's rightful position in the United
Nations. The
Chinese people categorically reject such affrontery.
The Chinese Communist régine has been at war with the Chinese people for
a long time. The Chinese people have never ceased to struggle for the
recovery of their freedom. I have not the slightest doubt that they will
eventually succeed in overthrowing their oppressors.
I believe that the world community has a vital stake in the outcome of
this struggle.
There can be no doubt that the existence of a truly democratic, peaceful
and free China will immeasurably strengthen the cause of vorld peace. On
the other hand, if the Mao Tse-tung régine is allowed to continue its
oppression at home and pursue its course of aggression abroad, thers cạn
be no peace in Asia or security for the whole world.
The choice before the Assembly is thus clear enough. I trust the
Assembly in its wisdom vill once again reject all attempts to sent the
Chinese Communist régime.
Mr. RASHID (Pakistan): The General Assembly finds itself once again.
debating an issue which in all fairness should have required no further
discussion. The issue is the uncomplicated question of having a founding
It is in Member of this Organization represented by its own Government,
fact one of the misfortunes of this Organization that, since 1950, this
simple question has been subjected to so much confusion and denied its
correct
solution.
It was on 18 November 1949 that the Foreign Minister of the People's
Republic of China duly informed the President of the General Assembly
that the delegation which represented Chins until then had lost its
right to speak on behalf of China, and that, therefore, its credentials
vere no longer valid, Later, on 9 March 1950, the Secretary-General
circulated a memorandum (6/1466) which stated hat the decisive
consideration in solving the problem of representation in the United
Nations should be whether a
AW/ab
A/PV.1902 32
AW/ab
(Kr. Rashid, Fakistan)
A/FV.1902
33-35
ney goverznent exercises effective authority vithin the territory State.
F..
There never has bem a shadow of doubt that the Government of the
People's Republic of China exercises effective authority over Chinese
territory, Therefore, according to this criterion, which has never been
questioned, the representatives of that Government should have been
enabled to occupy China's seat in all the organe of the United Nations,
Since 1950, Pakistan has consistently urged that this be done and that
the lawful rights of the People's Republic of Chine be restored.
In the course of the statements during the many debates held on the
question, our delegation has dealt with the various arguments brought
forth year after your to make the question appear as different what it
is in reality.
..
My deletion fully stands by all the statements made on the subject on
behalf of Pakistan in the past, and I do not find it necessary on the
present occasion to recapitulate all those arguments over again, the
sore so vhen, during recent months, there has been velcome evidence of a
growing realization in the Western world that the policy pursued so far
is sterile and that it has only brought diminishing returns. Some of the
arguments advanced in support of that policy in previous years have now
been abandoned. I simll, therefore, address myself only to the argument
which, unfortunately, is still being brought forth in order to postpone
the only correct decision on this question.
It 18
This argument is based on what is called the concept of two Chinas.
contended that the seating of the representatives of the People's
Republic of Ching should not result in the expulsion of the
representative of Chiang Kai-shek from the United Nations. The course of
action suggested would lead either to the creation of two seats for
China at the United Nations,
or to the advission of Formosa as a new Hember State, The
unreasonablepene
of the former course is only too apparent. One has only to ponder the
latter course to come to the conclusion that it would be legally wrong,
politically disastrous and morally invalid.
As far as legal considerations are concerned, the two-Chinas concapt
makes a wholly unwrranted and invidious distinction between China and
other Hember States of the Organization. In the case of other States,
the
(Mr. Rashid, Pakistan)
representatives of many déposed régimes were expelled from the
Organization and no one ever thought that such expulsion was in any vay
a punitive mesBUTE taken by the United Nations. Despite the fact that,
in some cases, one or more Hember States vere in sympathy with the
ousted régisss, no requima Vas over sung- No complaint vas made that
representatives who had played a part in the life of this Organization
were being thrown into the wilderness. Why something that is a necessary
consequence of the seating of the representatives of a Member State
which has witnessed a change of governsent, should be accepted as normal
in the case of other States and abnormal in the case of China has never
been explained.
Secondly, according to international law, based on well-known
agreements, Formosa is a part of China, and not a separate State. What
would justify this law being set aside? The Cairo Declaration of 1943
and the Potadan
Declaration of 1945 pledged the restoration of Formosa to China. It is
incontestable that the Charter of the United Nations took into account
all
international sgressenta concluded by the Allied Powers of the Second
World Wer; in a sense, those agreements were a background of, and
supplementary to, the Charter. Until the time that Chiang Kai-shek's
régime vas in
effective control of mainland China, no countenance vas given to the
proposition that Formosa was a separate entity. The fact that his régine
has been ousted from China and, under foreign protection, has taken
refuge in Formosa, dose not warrant a new claim to independent
sovereignty for
Formosa being advanced. It is clear that the unity and the territorial
integrity of a State cannot thus be undermined for reasons which are not
only
extraneous to, but at variance with, the Charter of the United Nations,
יוי
Politically, the two-Chinas solution would be no solution at all. We
are certain that, far from working towards an accommodation, it would
make it impossible for the Government of the People's Republic of China
to take its rightful seat in the Organization. It would not redress, but
perpetuate
Let
■ grievance, It would not remove, but accentuate present friction.
us not forget that the People's Republic of China, representing as it
does the
largest single national segment of the human race, and the oldest
existing
civilization, yields to none in national pride and in the consistency
with
which it pursues the principles to which it adheres. My delegation can
speak vith
Bose knowledge on this subject.
I
DR/ch
A/PV.1902
36
(Mr. Rashid. Pakistan)
We are convinced that there is no prospect whatsoever of the leaders of
the People's Republle of China ever accepting the division of their
territorial Integrity and talerating the elevation of the people whom
they ousted to the status of a separate Member State.
In short, the "two-Chicas" concept seeks to impose a duality on a petion
not because any valid considerations warrant our doing so, but only
because the restoration of the Unuful rights of Chios in the United
Nations is sought to be postpoond. I need hardly paint out that such an
attitude does not indicate the recognition of realities without which
neither present tensions can be resolved nar the credit of the United
Nations ever restored.
In previous debates on the subject, our delegation has pleaded that the
question of the representation of a Member State has not been, and
cannot be, considered as "important" question within the meaning of
Article 13 of the Charter, requiring a two- thiede anjority for
decision. We have therefore pointed out tent the propoml, which is
contained in draft resolution A/L.599 is illegal. We would urge now once
again that the General Assembly should refuse to adopt it. With due
respect to its co-sponsors, 1t is but a device to delay the entry into
these balls of the representatives of nearly
700 million people. I urge the Assembly to adopt the draft resolution
contained in document A/1.605 which, along with seventeen other Mamber
States, Pakistan
has the honour to co-sponsor,
I mat in conclusión point out to those of our fellow Hesbars who have
had a direct dealings with the People's Republic of China that, in
co-sponsoring our draft resolution, Pakistan has been guided not only by
what it considers the right course for the United Nations, but also by
ita ova experience of how China. conducts its external affairs and
relations. It is this experience which has mada friendly relations with
Chine, In the words of President Mohammad Yahya, "the corner-stour of
our pɔlicy". We are certain that the People's Republic of China does not
let ideological differences become a barrier to the promotian o Criendly
relatiɔna among nations or inhibit the growth of cordiality between
peoples. Won-Interference in internal affairs is a major principle of
its foreign policy. It is also relevant to recall that, at the important
internacionet conferences in which it participated, the role played by
the People's Republic of China was positive and was not described as
otherwise
!
L
DR/ch
A/PV-1502
37
(Mr. Rashid, Pakistan)
by even its adversaries. We therefore appeal to those of our fellow
Members who are distant from China not to harbour the thought that the
People's Republic
of China would disrupt the United Nations if it ever come in. On the
contrary, its presence in this Organisation is Indispensable for peace
in Asia, for strengthening international security through muclear
disarmament and for the
solution of many other important questions before the United Nations.
Mr. CASTRO (Costa Rica) (interpretation from Spanish): My country,
together with a number of other Member States In the General Assembly,
has subscribed to the draft resolution appearing in document A/L.599 out
of conviction and principle and not as a matter of a mere postponement
of a problem.
Here we always talk about empires; from this rostrum we hear about
empires and imperialian- Costa Rica is not an empire because it is mall
in size, but we can assart before this sugust body of nations that we
constituta
an empire within the framework of our Constitution and our laws which
guarantee the right to human life and freedom, the right to education;
to the inviolability of correspondence; to alternation in the exercise
of public power; the impossibility of the existence of political exiles;
the right of asylum established in our Constitution; freedɔn of transit
and labour,
and a whole series of principles that are expressed in our Constitution
which appear alas in the United Nations Charter.
We consider that the admission of the People's Republic of China is an
important question in accordance with Article 19 of the Charter. The
Charter to which Chine subscribed mentions, inter alia, the principle of
the reaffirmation
of faith in fundamental human rights, in the diguity and worth of the
buzen
person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and
call, promoting social progress and raising the standard of living
within a wider concept of freedom. Article ↳ of the Charter states that
States may become
Hambers of the United Nations if they are peace-loving and accept the
obligations
І
DR/en
A/FV-1902 38-40
(Mr. Castro, Costa Rica)
contained in this Charter, and which, in the opinion of the
Organization, are able and willing to carry out there obligations. I
repeat the words "are....... willing to carry out these obligations". We
have no guarantee that the People's Republic of China is ready to comply
with these principles.
This attitude of opposition to the People's Republic of China by sy
Government is similar to the opposition of Costa Rica to all of those
issues that have been discussed, and are being discussed, in this
Organization which endanger or impair the dignity and freedom of the
human race because what is at atake here are those principles. For that
reason these principles are so dear to my people. Hy country believes
that we should reaffirm resolutions 396 (V), 1669 (XVI), 2025 (XX), 2159
(XXX), 2271 (XXXI), 2389 (XXIII) and 2500 (XXIV). When human dignity is
at stake, the dignity of man, there is no doubt that we bacona faced
with an important question which is clearly set out in Article 19 of the
Charter. Accordingly, we have taken our position
on this question.
:
+
RSH/j-sh
A/PV.1902
41
Mr. PHILLIPS (United States of America): We have before us for
consideration once again a proposal sponsored by Albanie, Algeria and
sixteen other States to expel the Republic of China from the United
Nations and to place in the same meat representatives from the People's
Republic of China. I use the words "once again" because this proposal,
and the draft resolution which seeks to effect it, differ not at all
from similar proposals and draft resolutions which we have considered -
and decisively rejected times in the past. Hy delegation hopes that it
will be rejected again
this year.
The position of the United States is well known. We have joined with the
Governments of seventeen other States, embracing representatives from
every continent, in co-sponsoring a procedural draft resolution which
affirms that any proposal to change the representation of China in the
United Nations is an important question and requires a two-thirds
majority for adoption. This is a long-established position of the
General Assembly, affimed and re-affimed by large majorities on many
occasions when there has been a substantive debate on the issue of
Chinese representation.
We would do well to look back into the matter and understand why the
"Important question" procedure has so consistently received overwhelming
support, particularly since we have already heard it attacked as nothing
more than a transparent device for withholding from the People's
Republic of China something which, it is claimed, is its owa, The fact
of the matter, however, is that far from being some sort of manoeuvre,
the "important question" procedure found in Article 18 of our Charter is
one of the most essential protections of all Members of the United
Nations, whether large or small, The plain language of Article 18 is
that decisions of the General Assembly on important questions shall be
made by a two-thirds majority of members present and voting. "Important
questions" are defined in that Article as recommendations with respect
to international peace and security, election to various offices within
our Organization, questions relating to the operation of the Trusteeship
System and the budget, the suspension of rights and privileges of
membership, the admission of new Members, and the expulsion of present
Hembers and that is precisely what
the draft resolution submitted by Albanig and others would have us do.
!
REB/J-th
A/PY.1902
42
(Mr. Phillips, United States)
To insist on the integrity of the tharter, to reaffirm the protections
which it provides, and to insist that these protections must be
available to all Members without distinction is not only a matter of
self-interest for all of us within this roan; it is also a matter of
simple equity and justice. It would set a most dangerous precedent to
expel a Nember of the United Nations - an act that has never been taken
in this Organization's quarter of a century of life by a simple majority
of those present and voting. Those who may be tempted to disregard the
Charter's safeguards because of their views on the present issue should
consider carefully whether at some future time on some future issue they
might find themselves in a position sinflar to that in vhich some have
sought to place the Republic of China. We should remain faithful to the
plain words of the Charter and ensure that
In thus reaffirming the these vords apply to all without distinction.
"important question" principle we will be taking an action that relates
to far more than just the question of Chinese representation.
It is for those reasons that my country has joined in co-sponsoring the
draft resolution set forth in document A/1.599. It is for those reasons
that I strongly urge all Members, regardless of their position on the
substantive question of Chinese representation, to vote to reaffirm this
vital procedure.
I turn now to the substantive draft resolution, contained in document
A/L.605. Heeborn are all wall avare of my Government'i firm opposition
to this draft resolution. Its proposal to expel the representatives of
the Republic of
China is both unwise and unjust.
Article 6 The expulsion of a Hembar State is a most serious business. of
the Charter reserves this action to cases in which a Member has
persistently violated the principles upon which our Organization was
founded, and it requires joint action by both the Security Council and
the General Assembly. There is not a single act of the Republic of China
that would justify these extreme mAGSUPER, Yat the draft resolution
before us has deliberately Joined the concept of admitting the People's
Republic of China to the call for expelling the Republic of China.
Indeed, they are so joined as to prevent the extrication of one from the
other,
ᅡ
+
A/PV.1602 43-45
(ür. Phillips, United States)
We have heard it sadd before, and doubtless it will be repeated during
the course of this debate, that the People's Republic of China is a
reality that cannot be ignored, Indeed thất is só, And I do not believe
that any of us here today, or any of the Governments that we represent,
ignore that reality. As far as the United States is concerned, as most
are aware, we have actively sought to move from an era of confrontation
to an era of negotiation. Representatives of my Government have met with
representatives of the" People's Republic of China twice this year and
we would have met more often had Peking been Willing to do so. And my
Government has taken a mmbar of concrete actions actions for which ve
neither proposed for anticipated
a quid pro quo to sase relations between us. The fact of the matter is
that the United States it as interested as any in this room to see the
People's Republic of China play a constructive role in the family of
nations.
All of us are mindful of the industry, talents and achievemen
of the great people who live in that ancient oradie of civilization,
But let us also remember that the Charter növhers confers upon States
the right to make their own conditions for membership in the United
Nations. Neither in the Charter nor in any resolution is it written that
a State may say "We vill join, but only if you expal Member X". What the
Charter does say is that membership shall be open to all peace-loving
States able and willing to carry out the obligations of membership, and
that Members may be expelled only if they have persistently violated the
principles of the
Charter.
AG/Ft
A/PV.1902
46
AG/rf
(Fr. Phillips, United States)
All of us must recall that many times during the period of general
debate earlier in this session, and in the speeches delivered during the
special commemorative week, we heard representatives, Foreign Ministers,
and even Heads of State warmly endorse the principle of universality of
membership of the United Nations. How curious It is that some of the
same delegationa which then urged universality of membership now, with
equal fervour, urge that ve expel one of our present Hasbere. Surely if
universality means wrything at all, it means that we add to our present
membership, not subtract from it. My Government fails to see how it is
possible for a delegation that favours universality of membership or for
any
delegation at all to vote to expel from our aidat a Government which
effectively govtena 14 million people, & population larger than that of
two-thirds of the limbers of this Assembly; which is recognized
diplomatically by more than sixty of the Hembers of this Organization;
which has been
-
a Hamber of the United Nations since the Organization's founding, which
has
worked faithfully and constructively for the good of the Organization;
which has contributed more than its share to the work of the specialized
agencies; and which has consistently sought to assist the process of
development throughout the world.
he sponsors of the draft resolution now before us, as they have done in
previous years, would have us ignore such considerations and, by
spurious sppeals to the principle of universality and misrepresentation
of fact, call on us to expal a l'ember which has faithfully abided by
the Charter of this Organisation. Such a demand clearly violates the
principles of equity and justice, It should be opposed by all those who
believe that
these principles should guide the actions of this Organization and who
sintain that the Charter must be upheld if this Organization itself is
to survive and be affective,
We believe that those ressons require that this Assembly reject this
proposal to expel the Republic of China from the United Nations.
Whatever views Members may hold on the question of Peking's
participation, ve
do not see how the purposes of this Organization can be served by
expelling any Hamber which has long and faithfully observed the
obligations set
forth in its Charter.
*
+
|
A/PV.1902
47
Phillips, United States)
It is on that bests that I urge the representatives in this Assembly to
reject decisively the draft resolution contained in document A/1.605.
THE PRESIDENT: That exhausts the list of speakers for this meeting, but
before we adjourn I should like to make two announcements. First,
it is my intention to propose that the list of speakers be closed on
Monday
morning. This is an important debate, but since everybody has known for
a long time that it vas coming there can be no hardship in asking
representatives who wish to take part in it to put down their names as
soon as possible so that the work can be planned efficiently.
Secondly, and to the same end, I shall also propose tomorrow a closing
date for the submission of further proposals and amendments on this
item,
The meeting rose at 12.15 p.m.
Des pan Ре
The
#th Apple
For Santen Pert fco
UNCLASSIFIED
FM OTT EXT OUN915 NOV17/70
TO STKHM
buer
23/11
WSHDC COPEN OSLO BONN PARIS TOKYO LDN VIENN BRU HAGUE CNBRA WLGIN
PERMISGENEV
DISTR GFE
REF OURTEL OUN899 NOV11
CHINESE REP IN THE UN
Me
FOLLOWING IS ENGLISH TEXT OF STATEMENT DELIVERED BY AMBASSADOR
BEAULNE IN PLENARY SESSION OF UNGA FRI NOV13.STATEMENT WAS
DELIVERED IN FRENCH.TEXT BEGINS.ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANI
DEVELOPMENTS IN CDN EXTER RELATIONS IN RECENT YEARS HAS BEEN OUR
AGREEMENT WITH THE PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA ON MUTUAL RECOGNITION
AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF DIPLO RELATIONS EFFECTIVE OCT 13/70.IT IS
NOW POSSIBLE FOR THE CDN GOVT TO STATE THAT THE GOVT OF THE PEOPLES
REPUBLIC SHOULD OCCUPY THE SEAT OF CHINA IN THE UN.WE LOOK FORWARD
ESPECIALLY TO THE DAY WHEN THE PEOPLES REPUBLIC WILL BE SEATED
IN THIS ASSEMBLY AND IN THE SECURITY COUNCIL.WE WILL ACCORDINGLY
VOTE IN FAVOUR OF THE DRAFT RESLN CONTAINED IN A/L 605.0VER THE
YEARS THAT THE QUESTION OF FILLING THE SEAT OF CHINA HAS BEEN
CONSIDERED IN THE ASSEMBLY,CDA HAS BOTED IN FAVOUR OF RESLNS
SIMILAR TO THAT CONTAINED IN A/L 599.THE QUESTION OF WHO SHALL SPEAK FOR
700 MILLION PEOPLE, INDEED THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THEY
ARE TO BE REPRESENTED AT ALL IN THE UN AND ITS PRINCIPAL ORGANS,
INCLUDING THE SECURITY COUNCIL,IS OBVIOUSLY OF THE UTMOST IMPORT-
ANCE.THE EXCLUSION OF THE REPS OF THE PEOPLES REPUBLIC HAS HAMPERED
...2
13th
PAGE TWO OUN915
THE UN IN FULFILLING ITS ROLE AS A CENTRE FOR HARMONIZING THE ACTION
OF NATIONS.FROM STATEMENTS MADE OVER THE YEARS, IT IS OBVIOUS THAT
THE GENERAL CONSENSUS OF THE MEMBERSHIP IS THAT THE QUESTION IS
AN IMPORTANT ONE.CDAS VOTE IN THE PAST HAS NOT/NOT BEEN A
PROCEDURAL TACTIC DESIGNED TO FRSUTRATE THE WILL OF THE MAJORITY
OF THE MEMBERSHIP.IN SUPPORTING THIS RESLN OUR PURPOSE HAS BEEN TO
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.