N.Z. Minister Speaks In U.N. Assembly

Press, Volume XCIV, Issue 28133, 23 November 1956, Page 21

N.Z. Minister Speaks In U.N. Assembly

(N.Z. Press Association —Copyright)

(Rec. 9 p.m.) NEW YORK, Nov. 22. From the outset New Zealand had had full confidence in the intentions underlying the action taken by Britain and France in the Middle East, the New Zealand Minister of External Affairs, Mr T. L. Macdonald, told the United Nations General Assembly tonight. “There have been other times.’’ Mr Macdonald said, “when the United Kingdom, virtually alone, has acted in the world interest against odds even heavier than the weight of adverse opinion.

“Time will show, we believe, that, in this case too. action was taken in the general interest rather than in the pursuit of narrow ends.

“And we are not without hope that, high as the immediate costs may have been, the long-range results both for this organisation and for the world peace may yet prove salutary.’’ Mr Macdonald said the extent of the Soviet penetration in the Middle East should have been unmistakably exposed. If any country now chose to assist the entry into the Middle East of Soviet imperialism, then it would do so with full knowledge of the risks to which it exposed itself and the world.

It was a gain, he said, that the situation had provided the stimulus forthe creation of a United Nations force.

“And it is a gain that it should have at last been brought home that it is time —perhaps the last opportunity—for this organisation to stop backing away from the hard realities and difficulties of the Middle East.

It was true, Mr Macdonald said, that the responsibility for a lasting settlement of Middle East problems depended, in the long run, on the countries in the area, but there was much that the United Nations could do and might have done, he said.

The'e had been no disinclination on the part of the majority of the Security Council or the Assembly to deal with the situation created by the Israeli attack on Egypt and the British and French intervention. Nevertheless, he said, there seemed to be a reluctance in some quarters to extend the Assembly’s work from the study of effects to the study of causes, and to accept the responsibility “from which we have retreated in recent years.’’

It was the view of the New Zealand Government. Mr Macdonald said, that the General Assembly should now frame recommendations on the Palestine problem, and should at the same time decide what obligations it was prepared to assume in order to give them meaning. New Zealand had always taken the view that by its decision in favour of the creation of Israel, the Assembly assumed obligations in regard to the future development of the relations between Israel and her Arab neighbours. “Duty to Preserve Peace’’ It was the primary duty of the United Nations to see that peace—-a just peace—was preserved, he said. “It is not enough for this purpose to hold the ring, to examine and discuss recurring abuses of armistice agreements. This organisation must

be resolute and determined in its search for a permanent solution. “We favour a serious and immediate effort by the Assembly to formulate proposals on the basis of which a lasting reconciliation might be achieved.’’

Mr Macdonald said the United Nations must not mistake anarchy for progress, any more than confuse progress with the “hollow misrepresentation of fundamental democratic principles.” Colonel Nasser’s nationalisation of the Suez Canal, he said, was a significant example of such confusion. The special significance of this action was that it rejected the concept of the interdependent world.

Referring to the Hungarian situation. Mr Macdonald said that free people everywhere now knew that the facade of Soviet unity was fragile and could be maintained only by secret police and Soviet arms. “The struggle to cast off this new colonialism may not yet have fully succeeded, but it has set in motion forces which tyranny cannot quell,” he said. The Assembly had condemned this latest act of Soviet imperialism, he said, and in due course would deny the claim of the Soviet Union to parade as the champion of freedom. Mr Macdonald welcomed the new members who had been admitted, but said that New Zealand’s satisfaction was tempered by the exclusion of Japan through Soviet opposition. He reaffirmed his Government’s view that Japan was fully to be a member of the United Nations and that its qualifications should be recognised in a favourable recommendation by the Security Council. Referring to trusteeship questions, Mr Macdonald said New Zealand had taken a special interest in the recent evolution of the trust territory of British Togoland, which was soon to receive its independence. His delegation would support the adoption by the Assembly of a resolution which would mark the end of Britain’s, responsibilities under the trusteeship agreement.