United States. Dept. of State. Office of Public Co.

Department of State bulletin (Volume v. 46, Jan- Mar 1962) online

. (page 28 of 101)
Online LibraryUnited States. Dept. of State. Office of Public CoDepartment of State bulletin (Volume v. 46, Jan- Mar 1962) → online text (page 28 of 101)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


The notion of expelling the Republic of China
is thus absurd and imthinkable. But what are we
to say of the other condition sought by Peiping —
that the United Nations stand aside and let them
conquer Taiwan and the 11 million people who live
there? In effect Peiping is asking the United Na-
tions to set its seal of approval in advance upon
what would be as massive a resort to arms as the
world has witnessed since the end of World War
II. Of course the United Nations will never stul-
tify itself in such a way.

Issue Facing the United Nations

The issue we face is, among other things, tliis
question — whether it is right for the United Na-
tions to drive the Republic of China fi-om this



Organization in order to make room for a regime
whose appetite seems to be insatiable. It is
whether we intend to abandon the charter require-
ment that all United Nations members must be
peace-loving and to give our implicit blessing to
an aggressive and bloody war against those Chi-
nese who are still free in Taiwan. Wliat an invita-
tion to aggression the Soviet proposal ^ would be —
and what a grievous blow to the good name of the
United Nations !

In these circumstances the United States ear-
nestly believes that it is impossible to speak seri-
ously today of "bringing Communist China into
the United Nations." No basis exists on which
such a step could be taken. We believe that we
must first do just the opposite: We must instead
find a way to bring the United Nations — its law
and its spirit — back into the whole territory of
China.

The root of the problem lies, as it has lain from
the beginning, in the hostile, callous, and seem-
ingly intractable minds of the Chinese Communist
rulers. Let those members who advocate Peiping's
admission seek to exert upon its rulers wliatever
benign influence they can, in the hope of persuad-
ing them to accept the standards of the commimity
of nations. Let those rulers respond to these ap-
peals ; let them give up trying to impose their de-
mands on this Organization; let them cease their
aggression, direct and indirect, and their threats
of aggression ; let them show respect for the rights
of others ; let tliem recognize and accept the inde-
pendence and diversity of culture and institutions
among their neighbors.

Therefore, Mr. President, let the Assembly de-
clare the transcendent importance of this question
of the representation of China. Let us reaffirm
the position which the General Assembly took 10
years ago, that such a question as this "sliould be
considered in the light of the Purposes and Princi-
ples of the Charter. . . ."

The issue on which peace and the future of Asia
so greatly depend is not simply whether delegates
from Peiping should take a place in the General
Assembly. More profoundly still, it is whether
the United Nations, with its universal purjioses of
peace and tolerance, shall be permitted to take its
rightful place in the minds of the people of all of
China.



' U.N. doc. A/L. ."iOO.



112



Deparfmenf of Sfofe BulleHn



Today tlie rulers in Peiping still repeat the iron
maxim of Mao Tse-tmig: "All political power
grows out of the barrel of a gim." If that maxim
had been followed the United Nations would never
have been cresited and this world would long since
have been covered with radioactive ashes. It is an
obsolete maxim, and the sooner it is abandoned, the
sooner the people of all of China are allowed to re-
sume their traditionally peaceful policies, the bet-
ter for the world.

The United States will vote against the Soviet
draft resolution and give its full support to the
continued participation of the representatives of
the Government of the Eepublic of China in the
United Nations.

No issue remaining before the United Nations
this year has such fateful consequences for the
future of this Organization. The vital signifi-
cance which would be attached to any alteration
of the current situation needs no explanation.
The United States has therefore joined today with
the delegations of Australia, Colombia, Italy, and
Japan in presenting a resolution ^ imder wliich the
Assembly would determine that any proposal to
change the representation of China would be con-
sidered an important question in accordance with
the charter. Indeed, it would be hard to consider
such a proposal in any other light, and we trust it
will be solidly endorsed by the Assembly.

STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 14

D.S. delegation press release 3891

At this session of the General Assembly the
United States favored full and free debate on the
question of the representation of China in the
United Nations. We have been having just such
a debate for 2 weeks, and we have heard from no
less than 50 speakers.

At several points we have heard again some old
ideological tirades. History has been turned up-
side down by such statements that it was South
Korea which attacked North Korea on that
infamous Sunday morning in June 1950. And a
few of the speeches have been seasoned with
captious, capricious, and irrelevant inaccuracies.
I shall resist the temptation to contradict them in
detail.



' U.N. doc. A/L. 372.
January 75, 1962



Mr. President, I must however reply briefly to
a suggestion by several speakers — that the real
reason for United States opposition to a change in
Chinese representation is that we resent the "social
system" of the Peiping regime. This, of course,
is a red herring. It is well known that we main-
tain normal relations with a number of Commu-
nist states. We did not oppose the recent entry
of another such coimtry into this body. In recent
weeks the President of the United States said
quite clearly that we have no objection to a Com-
miuiist regime if that is what the people of a
certain country want for themselves.

No, Mr. President, that is not the problem. Nor
is it the problem that we are confusing 1962 with
1945 or 1949 ; indeed, we believe in the redemption
of sin — and letting bygones be bygones.

No amount of good will, of tolerance, of gen-
erosity, or of wishful thinking can obscure the
reality of 1961 — that we are asked to offer mem-
bership in this body to a regime which believes in
the rule of the gun, not the rule of reason or of
negotiation or of cooperative action, but the rule
of the gun!

And no amoimt of sentiment can obscure the
fact that the draft resolution of the Soviet Union
would give a license for the Peiping regime to use
armed force against a member who sits in this
Assembly. One can hardly accuse Ambassador
[Valerian A.] Zorin of equivocation on this point.
In his opening statement in this debate he was
explicit about the alleged "right" of Peiping to
"liquidate through the use of force" the Eepublic
of China on Taiwan. "That," he said, "is within
its exclusive right and nobody else's."

Mr. President, this body has devoted many
anguished hours to its duty and resolve to prevent
the use of force. Now we are faced with this
stupefying request to sanction the use of force.

And some would have us believe, Mr. President,
that this really is not an important question for
the United Nations — just a routine procedural
point for casual decision.

Mr. President, article IS of the charter, which
deals with the important-question issue, is not a
narrow, legalistic concept. In the wisdom of the
founders it is left to the Assembly to determine,
on general political grounds, what is and is not an
important question. And this is precisely what
the Assembly has done on one occasion after

113



another. There is nothing unusual about the pro-
cedure involved. For example, as recently as
October 27 this year, the Assembly decided by
vote that a resolution dealing with the report of
the Scientific Committee on Effects of Atomic
Radiation was of sufficient importance to require
for passage a two-thirds majority of all members
present and voting. This was fully in accordance
with the rules of procedure and article 18 of the
charter.

There has also been an effort to confuse this de-
bate by contending that a precedent was set for the
question before us when the Assembly accepted the
credentials of the representatives of the Republic
of the Congo (Leopoldville) in November I960.'
The statement has even been made that the resolu-
tion was passed by a simple majority.

In point of fact the resolution was passed by
better than a two-thirds majority. But that is not
the main point. The main point is that there is no
analogy between the presentation of credentials by
the unchallenged chief of state of a new nation
which has just achieved membership and the pres-
ent proposal to throw out a founding member and
replace it with representatives of another regime.
I hope no further effort will be made to confuse the
issue on this score.

Mr. President, I submit with all sincerity that
the proposal to expel a member which supports the
charter to make room for a regime which defies the
charter and to arm that regime with a United
Nations license to make war across the Formosa
Strait is wrong from the viewpoint of this Organ-
ization — is morally wrong — is legally wrong — is
unrealistic in the light of the relevant realities of
1961. And, whatever else may be said, it is in-
dubitably an important question — one of the most
important questions ever likely to come before us.

A recurrent theme running through the argu-
ments put forth by those who favor immediate ad-
mission of Red China is a plea for realism. Let
us face the fact, these speakers say, that the main-
land of China has been imder the control of the
Chinese Communist Party for, lo, tliese 12 years
past. Let us, they say, face the fact — repeated
from this rostrum scores of times during the past
10 days — that there are 650 or 700 million Chinese
people under the control of that regime. And,

" For background, see Buixetin of Dec. 12, 19G0, p. 904.
114



they say finally, let us face the fact that this is
1961, not 1945.

The idea behind this theme seems to be that
other delegations are guilty of a lack of realism
because they are not bowled over by the big reality,
which seems to be that Communist control of
mainland China is Communist control of main-
land China. But no one has disputed this obvious
fact. As I heard it repeated over and over, I
thought of the aphorism about the woodpecker:
"Thou sayest such undisputed things in such a
solemn way."

But these repeated facts only help to define the
problem ; they do not help to solve it.

Six "Realities" Bearing on Communist Regime

To act wisely on the matter before us, we must ■
look at all the relevant and current realities bear-
ing upon the Communist regime in Peiping and
the Organization it aspires to join. I suggest that
there are six such realities of major consequence
to the decision we are soon to make.

The -first reality is that the regime in Peiping
does not in any meaningful way represent those
700 million people of whom we have heard so often
these past 2 weeks: the mass executions, the iron
controls, the total suppression of all personal free-
dom and civil liberties, the 2 million Chinese refu-
gees in Hong Kong — these are proof enough.

The second reality is that the Conmninist Chi-
nese regime has already made a record of aggres-
sion and hostility toward its neighbors in Korea,
in Tibet, in India, and in soutlieast Asia.

The third reality is that the Chinese Commu-
nists are dedicated today — and as a matter of high
policy — to war and violent revolution in other
countries.

The fourth reality is that the Republic of China
is a founding member of the United Nations, that
the Government of the Republic of China exists,
and so do 11 million people on Taiwan, that its
delegation which sits here now has performed hon-
orable service to the United Nations and its
charter.

The fifth reality is the charter of the United
Nations, which sets forth explicitly the require-
ments for membership and the terms for expulsion.

The sixth reality is the proposal which is put to
us in the Soviet draft resolution, which is this:
that by our own deliberate action we are first to

Department of State Bulletin



thi'ow out a founding member wlio is guilty of
nothing in order to empty a seat in this hall; we
are then to invite another delegation to enter tliis
body on its own terms, to fill that empty seat ; and
we are to present that new delegation with a spe-
cial license to commit armed aggression against
the member we have just ejected illegally.

This is the reality of the proposal before us: to
violate our own charter to make room for a regime
whose creed and actions are diametrically opposed
to the letter and spirit of the U.N. Charter.

These are realities. These are facts. And it
is precisely these hard, cold, and current realities
of 100)1 which persuade my delegation that what
we are asked to do is not realistic but mirealistic.

And it is these realities which have been over-
looked or conveniently ignored by some who have
spoken on this subject in recent days.

World View of Peiping Regime

Mr. President, to be tolerant we do not have to
be naive ; to be generous we do not have to be fool-
hardy ; and to be realistic most certainly we do not
have to be carried away by wishful dreams.

I have in naind especially the suggestion made
by several speakers that once the Peiping regime
has been admitted to this Organization, it would
forthwith change its spots — and join cooperatively
with other nations to help keep the peace and
otherwise engage in constructive international
enterprise.

This is a most tempting thought which all of us
would like to share. But I still look for evidence
that there is any substance to it. All the evidence
points tlie other way. And it would be exceeding-
ly dangerous to substitute our hopes for the hard
evidence about the intentions of the Peiping regime
which is furnished to us by that regime itself.

This evidence is not of our manufacture. It is
not the product of ill will on our side. It is the
official evidence offered by the Peiping regime
itself — in its own words and in its own actions.
We would ignore it at our common peril because it
bears directly upon the work and the future of
this Organization. And it shows clearly just how
harmoniously the Peiping regime would fit into
the deliberations of this body — just how construc-
tive a contribution we could expect from this new
voice in the United Nations.

Let me remind the delegates of the basic world
view of the Peiping regime. It was put quite



clearly by Red Flag, the theoretical journal of the
central committee of the Chinese Commimist
Party, in April 1960.

"Everyone knows," says Red Flag, that there
are "principally two types of countries with social
systems fundamentally different in nature. One
type belongs to the world socialist system, the
other to the world capitalist system." This state-
ment means that in the eyes of Peiping every
member of this Assembly which does not belong
to the world Commimist system belongs by defini-
tion to what Peiping calls the "capitalist-imperial-
ist system" — for there are only two types of
countries.

And Red Flag goes on to announce "the capital-
ist-imperialist system absolutely will not crumble
by itself. It will be pushed over by the proletarian
revolution within the imperialist country con-
cerned, and the national revolution in the colonial
and semicolonial countries. Revolution means the
use of revolutionary violence by the oppressed
class, it means revolutionary war."

This concept is further borne out by a statement
from a senior official of the Chinese Communist
government, Tung Pi-wu, who declared on October
9, 1961, at a public meeting in Peiping, "in the
present epoch, only under the leadership of the
proletariat, and by obtaining the help of the So-
cialist coimtries, will it be possible for any coim-
try to win complete victory in its national and
democratic revolution." In other words a Com-
munist revolution, aided by external support from
Communist countries, must still be fostered in the
newly independent countries of the world.

Proof that these are not mere words was heard
in this Assembly only the other day, when the dis-
tinguished delegate of one new African nation
poignantly described Peiping's incessant cam-
paign to destroy his government through subver-
sion and guerrilla warfare.

Peiping's Views of Urgent World Problems

This is the world view of the Peiping regime,
and it should be warning enough to all of us. But
what does Peiping think more precisely about our
most urgent world problems — about the kind of
problem we attempt to deal with in these United
Nations ? I shall mention two — disarmament and
the U.N. operations in the Congo.



January 15, 1962



115



On disarmament we also find the evidence in
the same Red Flag article. Remember, if you
please, the premise that all nations wliich are not
members of the world Communist system are con-
sidered to be "imperialist". Red Flag says :

It ia . . . inconceivable that imperialism will accept a
proposal for general and complete disarmament. . . . only
when the Socialist revolution is victorious throughout
the world can there be a world free from war. . . .

Tliat takes care of our search for general dis-
armament. According to Peiping it is a hopeless
illusion until all governments have been over-
thrown by violent Commimist revolution. In the
meantime Peijiing's policy on the recent rupture
of the moratorium on nuclear testing is the fol-
lowing — in their own words, of course : "The Sovi-
et Government's decision to conduct experimental
explosions of nuclear weapons is in accord with the
interests of world peace and those of the people
of all countries."

As for the United Nations Operation in the
Congo, Peiping's policy is set forth as recently as
December 6 m the People's Daily ^ the official news-
paper of the Chinese Communist Party. Our
peacekeeping effort in the Congo, in which troops
of a score of members are involved, is described in
People's Daily as nothing but imperialism imder
United Nations cover. "As long as the Congo re-
mains occupied by the United Nations force," ac-
cording to Peopleh Daily, "the Congolese issue
will remain unsolvable and the freedom of other
African coimtries insecure." The article demands
an immediate stop to the United Nations Opera-
tion in the Congo.

That, of course, is a prescription for tribal strife,
chaos, and slaughter in the Congo — which, no
doubt, is what Peiping desires.

Finally, Mr. President, at the very moment
when some members of this Assembly were plead-
ing the qualifications of the Peiping regime for
membership in the United Nations, the PeopWs
Daily of December 10, 1961— just 4 days ago —
said:

All revolutionary people can never abandon the truth
that "all political power grows out of the barrel of a
gun. . . ."

The revolutionary theories, strategy and tactics,
summed up by the Chinese people in revolutionary practice
and expressed in a nutshell in Comrade Mao Tse-tung's
writings, are carrying more and more weight with the
people of various countries. . . .

To put it frankly, all ojiprossed nations and peoples will



sooner or later rise in revolution, and this is precisely why
revolutionary experiences and theories will naturally gain
currency among these nations and peoples. This is why
pamphlets introducing guerrilla warfare in China have
such wide circulation in Africa, Latin America and
Asia. . . .

Nowhere in this extraordinary dociunent do the
Chinese Communists deny that their actions have
been as I described them. Indeed, they boast-
fully announce their intention to continue spread-
ing violence and dissension abroad.

Note carefully, also, if you will, that none of
these official statements has anything to do with
membership or nonmembership in the United
Nations. Peiping does not say that it favors
atomic testing now but would feel differently if
admitted to the United Nations. Peiping does not
say that it wants the United Nations to abandon
the Congo now but would feel differently if
admitted to the United Nations. Peiping does
not say that, although it is now training guerrillas
for revolution in other countries, it would act
differently if admitted to the United Nations.

We have no other choice but to believe that
these policies would be pursued and advocated
in this very Assembly by Chinese Communist rep-
resentatives who believe that all political power
grows out of the barrel of a gim.

IVliat else can we assimie — and be realistic?
Wliat else can we expect — confronted with the
evidence ?

Responsibilities to People of the World

It seems to me, IMr. President, that the mem-
bers will be well advised to think careful!}' about
our obligations and responsibilities to the people
of the world, who want the United Nations to
continue as a going concern — and go on to new
strengths and new triumphs. They would do well
to consider the already-delicate deliberations of
this body — and the already-difficult operations on
wliich we are embarked. They would do well to
think long and hard about these things, and then
ask themselves whether the worlv of this body
would be helped or hindered by the presence here
of a delegation from Peiping.

One of the members, in the course of debate,
lamented at length on the sad plight of the people
on mainlaiul China. My delegation yields to no
otlier in its concern for the people of China. But
the delegate in question went on to suggest that



116



Department of Sfafe Bulletin



if Peiping were in the United Nations the Food
and Agriculture Organization "could have been
of assistance" to the hungry people of China.

Perhaps he does not know that Peiping rejected
an offer of help extended to the Cliinese Conunu-
nist Red Cross Society by the League of Red
Cross Societies — of which Communist China is
a member. "VVliile we know of it from the press,
the people on tlie Chinese mainland never were
told tliat sucli an offer of international assistance
had been extended.

Would Peiping, which refused help for its own
people from one humanitarian international or-
ganization to wliich it belongs, accept help from
another international organization ?

In the meantime, Mr. President, it is not my
delegation which presumes to pass judgment on
others. We are not, as several have implied,
inventing some subtle moral criterion to dexiide
who is good and who is bad, who is correct and
■who incorrect, who is respectable and not respect-
able.

On the contrary, the principles to which mem-
bers of the United Nations are bound are stated
quite explicitly in the charter in terms which we
would be the last to want to refine. And the evi-
dence of Peiping's disdain for these principles is
written with equal clarity. We ask only that each
member compare the official charter and the official
record.

Mr. President, the Soviet proposal and the
amendment ^ to it submitted by three delegations
not only call for the expulsion of a loyal member
of the United Nations but implicitly would encour-
age the Chinese Communists to use force to achieve
their objectives.

For these reasons we believe that the Soviet
proposal to unseat the Government of the Republic
of China and replace it with, a delegation from
Peiping should be emphatically rejected, and we
will vote against it.

Tlie amendment to that proposal submitted by
the delegations of Cambodia, Ceylon, and Indo-
nesia, while set forth with greater sophistication



* U.N. doc. A/L. 375. The amendment called for dele-
tion of the operative paragraphs of the Soviet draft resolu-
tion and substitution of the following paragraph : "De-
cides in accordance with the above declaration that the
representatives of the Government of the People's Repub-
lic of China be seated in the United Nations and all its
organs."



than the Soviet proposal, clearly would have the
same effect. We believe it shoidd be likewise re-
jected and will accordingly vote against it, also.

And for all these reasons I am equally confident
that the members will confirm the plain fact that
any proposal to alter the representation of Cliina
in the United Nations would be a vitally impor-
tant question under the charter.

TEXTS OF RESOLUTIONS

Important-Question Resolution '

The General Assembly,

Holing that a serious divergence of views exists among
Members concerning the representation of a founder Mem-
ber who is named in the Charter of the United Nations,



Online LibraryUnited States. Dept. of State. Office of Public CoDepartment of State bulletin (Volume v. 46, Jan- Mar 1962) → online text (page 28 of 101)