50 years of Italy at the United Nations

Home
 

 
Giuseppe Pella, Minister of Foreign Affairs
Statement in 12th GA session, 681st meeting
September 20, 1957

I, too, would like to congratulate Sir Leslie Munro on his election to the high office of President of this Assembly and on the outstanding qualities which determined his colleagues' choice. This tribute is an expression of the Italian delegation's deep respect for the President personally and of its attitude towards the Assembly, which has elected him and which unites the representatives of peoples who are relying on us to defend their rights through the search for understanding and co-operation. That search is our duty. We begin our week in the keen hope that it will be crowned with success.

 

We were happy to welcome among us in the past few days a new Member State, the Federation of Malaya. It is pleasure for me to associate myself, on behalf of the Italian Government, with the words of congratulation which the President and other speakers have addressed to the representative of this State. The establishment of the Federation of Malaya is a significant example of the orderly and peaceful development of a Non-Self-Governing Territory towards independence. This successful development is a result of the constructive co-operation between the Government of the United Kingdom and the democratic institutions of the Federation of Malaya. We congratulate both parties on the wisdom and statesmanship which brought about this historic event.

 

The report of our Secretary-General [A/3594] reveals the scope of his activities and endeavours and bears witness to his devotion to our Organization. I should like to stress this point before going any further and to offer Mr. Hammarskjold our very sincere thanks and an assurance of our appreciation.

 

The report is reassuring and vindicates our confidence, for it shows us the progress we have made despite difficulties which have often been harrowing. It also demonstrates the extent of our responsibility, since the future depends on the moral authority of our Organization and on its approach to the search for the necessary solutions. We bring our problems here in order to discuss them before public opinion, before mankind, which is observing us and which will judge our Organization by what we do.

 

The spirit of freedom reigns over our debates. It is in the very atmosphere of this hall. It pervades this noble country, in which the United Nations decided to establish its headquarters, because it was born of freedom and lives by freedom. Freedom, that pure aspiration towards which mankind has striven throughout its history, leaves us a choice between success and failure, hope and despair, international law and chaos. But this choice implies a responsibility.

 

When the General Assembly met last year, the international situation had some extremely threatening aspects. Thanks to the efforts of the United Nations, to its appeals, to which some countries, conscious of their responsibilities and faithful to the Principles of the Charter, responded, the immediate crisis was contained.

 

The Assembly meets this time under the shadow of other dangers, originating in an area close to the One with which we were concerned last year. A new of disorder and danger has been introduced by the interference of a foreign Power in the Near East - and this at a time when international order has not yet been restored in Europe, and when the power has dealt a heavy blow to the prestige and authority of the United Nations. Strong only in its might, a Member State, which likes to pose as the champion of the weak and the oppressed, and which has been found guilty in this Assembly of an armed attack on the population of another Member State, in violation of our fundamental law, has refused to bow to the common will so that justice may be restored.

 

Moreover, a Government imposed and maintained from abroad continues to take, within a Member State, measures which constitute a continuous patent and flagrant violation of human rights. In our eyes, this is a very serious matter.

 

On whom, then, shall we rely to defend our prestige, if we cannot do so ourselves? What has become of respect for our Charter? What will become of our peoples' confidence in the United Nations if a State, by virtue of its greater strength, can refuse to recognize the rights of another Member State when its own interests and ambitions are at stake? The report of the Special Committee on the Problem of Hungary [A/3592] is unequivocal. The Assembly has rightly recognized its value, and has voted by an overwhelming majority [677th meeting] to endorse a condemnation which the facts themselves enjoin.

 

But the events in Hungary do not concern us solely as the bitter and tragic ordeal of a people; they have also raised doubt and apprehension in the minds of all those who believe that international relations should be governed by law and that respect for the obligations to which we have subscribed here in the United Nations i s the only form of force on which any of us, great or small, have the right to rely.

 

Public opinion and our own consciences forbid us to lose hope. For it would be a disaster for the peaceful future of the world - and a crime - if it were to be proved possible to stifle in blood once and for all the plea for independence which we all heard, almost literally, resounding through this hall and throughout the world. If the law is to endure, it must be respected by all. Although compliance with the law by certain States, which were conscious of their obligations, represented a victory for the United Nations, the danger remains grave because others have not thought it necessary to do likewise.

 

We, for our part,, stand ready to applaud any step taken by the Hungarian Government and the Soviet Government, in accordance with the decisions taken by this Assembly, for the purpose of alleviating the present tragic plight of the Hungarian people, whose political, legal and human rights are being violated.

 

Our responsibility towards all the Members of our Organization is clear. Only the future can tell whether there is room for hope and the prophets are mistaken.

 

This brings me to another problem on which the world's attention and fears are focused and on which its very survival depends: the problem customarily referred to as "disarmament", on which we heard some very interesting statements yesterday, particularly from the United States Secretary of State, Mr. Dulles [680th meeting].

 

It seems to us that to refer only to disarmament is to state the problem incorrectly. Our aim is to establish conditions which will ensure the maintenance of peace. Disarmament is only one aspect of the problem of maintaining peace. To believe that wars will cease simply because the nations have disarmed is tantamount to believing that fires can be prevented simply by destroying the means of putting them out.

 

Public opinion in our countries has followed the work of the Sub-committee of the Disarmament Commission in London very closely. It knows that the West's desire to avoid a conflict is sincere. But it also knows that no agreement can be reached unless all parties are provided with reliable safeguards, both material and moral, against outside attack.

 

We must agree to disarmament, and we will certainly gladly do so when the time comes. But disarmament must bring with it a guarantee of security, and all parties must have an assurance that it does in fact diminish rather than increase the dangers to which they are exposed. It would indeed be extremely dangerous to allow a state of affairs in which the apparent weakness of some States aroused the cupidity of others. A country which disarmed without being sure that a similar process was taking place in the countries confronting it would be impairing, not serving peace.

 

If a valid solution is to be found, all the elements of the problem must be taken into consideration and none must be neglected. Peace is the result of a balance of feelings and forces; that balance is very delicate and any change requires the closest study by the Governments concerned.

 

In my opinion, there are three main factors in this balance; first, the reduction of armaments, secondly, the guarantee of control, and thirdly, the solution of political problems. These three factors are interdependent and inseparable.

 

It has been said - and our Charter reasserts it - that wars are born in the minds of men. They are, of course, due to material causes, but psychological and moral factors are also involved, and the three cannot be separated. No one could fail to desire the reduction of armaments and the halting of that race which fills the future with horror. Unproductive expenditures weigh heavily on our national economies.

 

We, in Italy, certainly set far greater store by our reconstruction effort than by any armaments. But we wish to live in peace and in security.

 

But since mutual trust is not, and unfortunately cannot be complete, only control can ensure security. My country would be quite prepared to permit the inspection of its territory, on condition that the same control was accepted by other countries. Moreover, a State which intends to honour the commitments it has undertaken has no grounds for fear. How could a State claim the right to supervise others without submitting to the same supervision itself? These are truisms, of course, but there seems to be a desire to disregard them or to use them for propaganda purposes, for leveling charges which are as baseless as they are inconsistent, and which we have the right and the duty to refute.

 

As regards the solution of political problems, we must recognize that disarmament cannot be used to perpetuate injustices, which smoulder like embers in the ashes. Failure to deal with the causes which might lead directly to conflict between countries and peoples would be dangerous and would impede the restoration of confidence. And, without confidence, peace is always in danger. It is hardly necessary to say that I am referring particularly to the German situation, to the need to end the arbitrary partition imposed on a people and to recognize their right freely to determine their future through the exercise of a choice which is their moral, political and legal due.

 

As to the material and technical aspects if disarmament, we consider that, in certain circumstances, the armaments customarily described as conventional may be no less dangerous to the independence and freedom of countries than those described as atomic. If progress is to be made towards disarmament, the reductions agreed on for conventional and atomic armaments must be proportionate, so that a reduction in one means of defense does not increase the possibility of aggression by another means.

 

As regards thermonuclear tests, no one believe, would seek. to deny the apprehensions arouse. They are a source of concern to us all and we all appreciate the risks involved. But a proposal has been made that such tests should be Suspended and, on the other hand, that the production and stock piling of nuclear weapons should be halted. We are told that this proposal has little merit. However, the connection between the two requirements is quite obvious. How can it be claimed at this stage that the danger lies in the technical and theoretical development of the weapons and not in the accumulation of stock piles?

 

Once again we are faced with a maneuver which casts doubt on the real intentions of some of the ties concerned. We cannot but regard it as an attempt at propaganda, whereas we on our side are making an honest and sincere effort towards progress. But perhaps their aim differs, too, and they are seeking to halt the defense effort of other States in order to be able to arm more freely in the meantime. But if so, where does the real danger lie? Who really threatens peace - the party which offers or the party which refuses? The answer is obvious. These are grave questions, for the very fate of the world hinges on issue of peace.

 

There is another problem which should be raised in this connection: that of freedom of information. It is included in our agenda. We recently had the pleasure of welcoming to Rome a conference of non-governmental organizations on United Nations information. A solution to this problem must ultimately be found through the action of Member States. Information is one of the cornerstones of the structure we have built. It is one of mankind's fundamental freedoms.

 

I would therefore like to ask our Secretary-General if we have, for example, figures from our information offices regarding the dissemination among the peoples of Hungary and the neighboring countries of the Special Committee's report. This question, I assure you, is put without malice. The Italian delegation wonders whether all Member States should not be required to permit the free dissemination within their countries of information on important issues - disarmament and others - put out by the United Nations. I know that they have at least a moral obligation to do so. But it is not fully complied with, and the information services of the United Nations should be in a position to undertake the direct dissemination of documents and news emanating from the Assembly. There would thus be a control of all by all; this would promote the dissemination of accurate information and show up cases where such information was being withheld.

 

We are all convinced that our planet is evolving politically; new sovereign States are being born – like the Federation of Malaya - new nations, proud of their rights and aspirations, and anxious to develop along the lines dictated by spiritual and historical needs.

 

In this sphere, my country has a modest claim to distinction. Our work in Somaliland, for example, has attracted attention and has been commended by the United Nations. We have been gratified by its endorsement of our policy and its appreciation of the scope of our efforts. The sacrifices which we have made in the interests of human solidarity, which is or should be the guiding principle of the United Nations, will, I am certain, bear fruit. The United Nations has helped us in the fulfillment of this task; in this connexion, I should like to thank all those whose co-operation has made this possible. Each passing brings us closer to the date when the country will attain complete independence, and the responsibilities of government have already largely been transferred from the Italian administration to the Somali Government. In saying this, I would like to offer the people of Somaliland our very sincere wishes for success in their advance towards peace and prosperity.

 

But new needs are making themselves felt within the United Nations itself. I would like to say in passing that the Italian delegation considers that changes might be made in the Charter and that the organs through which it is carried into effect might be adapted to meet these new needs. We are in favour of a revision of the Charter along these lines. But we regard it as a very delicate matter, involving a balance of responsibilities, and one which requires thorough study. It would he a mistake to proceed too hastily in laying down new conditions for our work here.

 

However, such caution should not prevent acceptance of the principle of change, which the Italian delegation considers just and valid. It further believes that the Security Council and the Economic and Social Council should be enlarged, in order to make room in our collective activities for the peoples who have recently acquired national independence and who have the right and duty to express their needs here and to find help in solving their political and economic problems - although variations in responsibility should continue to be taken into account.

 

In our opinion, these are not such generous views as it might at first appear. Each one of us needs all the others and there must be more give and take in all from the political to the economic and cultural.

 

I do not think that my statement would be complete if I did not refer, even very briefly, to some economic problems which, I think, are of paramount importance in the world of today. In this connexion, I should like once again to pay a tribute to the work the Secretariat of the United Nations and the regional economic commissions - addressing it, as usual to the Secretariat's chief officer, that is, the Secretary-General. We should also like to express our appreciation of the quality and the high standard of the debates which have been held for many years in the Economic aid Social Council, its functional commissions, the specialized agencies and the Committees of the General Assembly, where all Member States introduce and discuss questions, needs and aspirations connected with economic and social progress.

 

I think that the noble ideal of freedom would lose much of its value for a people living in destitution. There can be no social peace without real economic progress. That is why I believe it is not going too far to say that social peace is the result of political and economic peace.

 

An eminent Italian, one of the great architects of Italian unity, Count Cavour, said about a century ago that the science of political economy was the science of love of one's country. That remains quite true to this day, particularly in the sense in which Cavour envisaged all his economic work; he laboured and struggled to make political frontiers less and less of an economic barrier, so that his country might progress towards prosperity, not at the expense of other countries but by sharing with all other countries the benefits of civilization, increased wellbeing and progress in freedom.

 

This ideal, which Italy still upholds - and I wish to place this formally on record - should inspire us to strive for free and voluntary co-operation so as to achieve a peaceful and just solution not only of the world's economic problems but also of its political problems.

 

I should now like to say a few words about a recent achievement in which my country has had a share and which will shortly be playing a major role in the political and economic life of six European countries. I am referring to the treaty signed at Rome on 25 march 1957 setting up the European Economic Community. Although the procedure for ratification has not yet been completed by all the signatory States, I want to say a few words about this treaty because I h o w that some misgivings about European economic integration do exist and have been voiced in various United Nations organs and committees. These misgivings mainly relate to the possibility of an integrated Europe adopting a policy of protectionism and discrimination against the rest of the world.

 

Nothing is further from the thoughts and intentions of the Italian Government; it considers that the legitimate interests of countries which are not parties to the treaty not only are safeguarded by the provisions of the treaty itself, but may also find additional safeguards in supplementary agreements designed to harmonize those interests. The community is therefore open to the whole world and will remain so. We may expect that, through the steady development and balanced expansion of its economy, the integration of Europe, far from restricting trade and the movement of capital, will result in the creation of a market with a larger purchasing power, which would mean both a larger demand for the goods of other countries and a larger supply of goods, services and capital for the rest of the world.

 

I sincerely believe that we should be very shortsighted if we thought that, in the modern world, it was possible to improve the well-being of small groups only, while dooming the rest of the world for all time to an obscure and wretched life of stagnation and poverty. Like peace and reality, human well-being is one and indivisible. And I think this principle applies not only to relations within a given country but also to relations on the international plane, within the community of States and nations.

 

I think we should all be grateful to the United Nations for having focused world attention for so many years on the political and economic importance of the problem of accelerating the economic development of backward countries. In his introduction to his annual report [A/3594/Add.l], the Secretary-General says once again that the need for more rapid economic growth and social advancement in the less developed regions of the world is a major challenge. He does not say to whom it is a challenge, but I do not think I am wrong in saying that it is a challenge to the good will and imagination - to the esprit de finesse, to quote Pascal - of those who have clear vision and a sense of justice.

 

I entirely agree with the Secretary-General, particularly because, although my country has achieved a considerable degree of economic development and industrialization – we shall never forget the American people's assistance in this respect - it still has its own urgent development problems in the economically backward areas of the south. We have therefore learned by experience how necessary and urgent and also how difficult it is to break the vicious circle of stagnation and poverty in order to raise living standards and improve the lot of mankind.

 

197. That is why we have great sympathy with all those Governments and peoples which have the same problem to solve, in a larger scale and under even more urgent pressure. And by "sympathy" I am not merely expressing good intentions; I am stating the guiding principle of a foreign economic policy to which my country is committed. Italy has in fact undertaken and is now carrying out a vast programme to solve the problems of the economically backward areas, not on the basis of national self-sufficiency, but of a coherent policy of increased co-operation with all countries. One of the aims of our economic development programme is, for instance, to increase our foreign trade with the under-developed countries which are now in process of industrialization.

 

But, though we recognize the full implications and force of the demand for social betterment and for increased participation in the community which exists in many parts of the world, I think it is essential that we should never lose sight of the fact that, unless economic progress and increased industrialization go hand in hand with the maintenance or increased enjoyment of human rights, we shall have made a fool's bargain, which would involve far too heavy burden of expenditure, and even unbearable sacrifices, for generations enslaved on the pretext of a better lot for future generations.

 

All recent experience proves, without exception, that political systems which deny freedom and justify dictatorship in the name of economic progress not only make the workers and the international community pay dearly for it, both directly and indirectly, but also set a pattern for future generations in which a small privileged governing class keeps itself in power only by force and by the economy of forced labour.

 

We should, I believe, constantly bear in mind the fact that the industrial revolution which transformed the civilization of Western Europe was accompanied by steady - progress towards freedom, while increased production went hand in hand with increasing equitable distribution. The chief aim of those countries which wish to carry out a similar revolution must be in my opinion, to combine the greatest possible degree, of economic and social advancement with the greatest possible measure of freedom. The achievement of this ideal may be rendered less difficult by international economic co-operation, and my Government is convinced that this is the direction which our efforts should take, within both national communities and the international community, whose needs and aspirations are expressed in the United Nations.

 

But there is still one last problem to which I should like to draw attention, although I know that already being studied by the secretariat of the Economic and Social Council - I should like to thank those who proposed that this should be done. I mean the old problem of the difficulties which arise when the desire for rapid economic development must be reconciled with the need to maintain internal and external financial stability. The crux of the problem is the possibility of an inflation which cannot be controlled by normal monetary measures alone, because it would be due to a rise in costs of production unaccompanied by an increase in productivity, more than to certain bottle-necks in basic industries or - particularly in the under-developed countries - to the difficulty of adapting the new production patterns to the increased demand resulting investment.

 

The danger of inflation is a problem which must be studied and faced without delay, because it is still the worst and the most inequitable method of taxation and, above all, because it inevitably dries up savings which are, the world over, the primary and indispensable source of all economic development.

 

The problems to which I have alluded are certainly not easy to solve. They are closely linked with the peace, life, liberty and well-being of nations and individuals. Nevertheless, my Government places great hopes in international co-operation in the sea for satisfactory solutions. The reconstruction of Europe was an international undertaking, carried out by means of international co-operation. We must work shoulder to shoulder for the same ideals, bearing in  mind that the essence, the very core of human wisdom - as Faust learned after long experience - is that we are entitled to life and liberty - and for my part I would add peace - only if we are capable of the patient and unremitting effort by which they can be won.

 

For our part, we have shown our willingness to help solve these problems within the limits of our economic possibilities. Conscious of the sometimes dramatic urgency of the needs of some countries now undergoing development, we are determined to continue our efforts. Some of these countries, incidentally, are right on our own doorstep, on the shores of the Mediterranean, the cradle from which we have all sprung.

 

The transition from one period to another, the building of a new political order in place of the old, are sometimes so rapid that problems of readjustment, often of a serious character, arise not only on the economic level but also, and particularly, on the political and psychological level. But it is essential for everyone to realize that, if such development is not contained, by means of reasonable agreements, within limits will safeguard the fundamental needs of the different countries, there is a danger of its becoming a destructive force which would jeopardize for an indefinite period all peaceful progress towards a solution of Mediterranean problems.

 

The statesmen of our time, particularly those who are called upon to lead the nations which are seeking means to promote their development, should always bear in mind that nothing can replace free co-operation among peoples, based on a common will for and on economic stability, i.e., on confidence.

 

For such a climate to be established, the Governments concerned must not stint their constructive efforts and must frankly face the problems from which rivalries and discord stem.

 

But unfortunately we are still faced with problems in the Middle East which have opened a deep gulf. This gulf threatens to become deeper and deeper and to cause suffering to hundreds of thousands of refugees. Such conflicts place a heavy burden on mutual understanding in the world, are a constant threat to peace and are easily exploited by the enemies of the principles on which our Organization is based.

 

That is why my country is bound, by virtue of its geographical position and its traditional links of friendship in these areas, to assist in any effort towards a settlement in the spirit of the Charter. We hope that the United Nations will undertake a further examination of the situation, with the determination to eliminate all causes of distrust and to disregard passion and ill-judged advice.

 

We are also concerned with another part of the Mediterranean. My country, which is a sincere friend of France and cherishes its traditional friendship with the Moslem world, is fully aware of the difficulties of the Algerian problem. I should like once more to express the hope that the wishes expressed by the United Nations may soon be translated into action in the interests of the Algerian people and of France, as well as in the interests of peace and prosperity in the Mediterranean.

 

Italy, a country which is deeply imbued with Latin civilization, has strong and sincere links of interest and sympathy with that part of the American continent where Latin civilization is flourishing under new but characteristically Latin forms. It has found its security in Atlantic solidarity and it remains strongly attached to the North Atlantic alliance, which binds the free world together and is essential to the maintenance of peace and the safeguarding of our liberties.

 

Italy also feels deeply that its destiny is bound up with that of Europe; it believes in the "need for Europe" within the traditional framework of the Old World, in which so much of our history, thought and civilization has its roots.

 

Proud of its contribution to the peaceful development of the continent to which it belongs, Italy's geographical position in Europe places it in the centre of the Mediterranean, at a crossroads where old and new meet. It cannot and certainly does not wish to refuse any form of co-operation which lies within its power. As much as any other country, perhaps more, we should like to see peace and tranquility restored in the Mediterranean, and the Mediterranean countries turning their efforts towards bettering the lot of their peoples instead of destroying them.

 

The problems still to he solved in the Mediterranean are important, and their solution will not be easy. However, we should be able to accomplish it, if we take our common interest as a basis and make a joint effort towards constructive understanding. Violence must be brought to an end and men must live for the promotion of their own well-being and that of others.

 

The Italian delegation intends to devote all its efforts at this Assembly to this task.


 

 


 

 


See disclaimer
Last update 19.05.06
© 2006 Stefano Baldi

 

Privacy policy