Pakistan, 1969

141. Before I begin, I

must congratulate the President, Miss Angie Brooks, on her

election. This is not a mere ritual. My delegation is

particularly happy to see her preside over this Assembly

because she comes from Africa and she is only the second

woman to adorn this high office with her personal charm

and grace. Her great ability and long experience at the

United Nations is undoubtedly a guarantee of her success.

142. Let me pay a respectful tribute to her predecessor,

the late Mr.Emilio Arenales. The courage which he

displayed when stricken with a fatal disease was unforgettable.

I once again convey Pakistan's sincere sympathies to

the delegation of Guatemala at his untimely death.

143. In the General Assembly today I consider it my duty

to comment on the issues which affect Pakistan’s daily life,

its existence, its outlook and its international relationships.

144. Let me first take the economic questions.

145. Some years ago, the decade of the sixties was

designated as the First United Nations Development Decade.

Who can fail to regret that this Decade has not met its

proclaimed goal? Two thirds of the earth’s inhabitants still

live in poverty. The announced objective of transferring one

per cent of the national income of industrially advanced

nations to the developing countries still remains unrealized.

While incomes of the richer countries are growing apace,

the net flow of financial resources from them to the poorer

ones continues to decline. Recent figures illustrate that the

ratio of total net transfers to the gross national product has

receded another fraction downwards from the 1967 average

of 0.65 per cent. What is particularly deplorable is that this

should happen at the historic moment when assistance

efforts were beginning to yield results and when the

so-called absorptive capacity of the developing countries

was no longer an obstacle to such efforts.

146. This is not merely a matter of how the economics of

international assistance now operate. There is cause for

gloom in the new psychological attitude pervading the

public mind in the main aid-giving countries. No longer do

we find there the same consciousness of the necessity of

international assistance which was a stimulus to earlier

efforts. Were such a consciousness to prevail, the developing

countries would elicit a better understanding of the

crippling burden on them of debt-servicing. There would be

then greater appreciation of the fact that the servicing of

debts leaves these countries little more than half of what

was gained in the first instance.

147. One of the few initiatives of the second session of the

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development was

a plan for the developed countries to give trade preferences

to developing countries on manufactured and semi-manufactured

goods and thus help to release them from their

dependence on food and raw material exports. But this plan

is still far from execution. As a result, the gulf dividing the

rich from the poor is widening all the time.

148. The war against poverty cannot be won without a

global alliance. The time for forging that alliance is

shortening. The preparation and planning of the strategy

for the Second United Nations Development Decade will

test the possibility of such a partnership coming into being.

This strategy will call for a sustained drive on the part of

the developing countries. It will also call for political will

on the part of the developed countries to render substantial

assistance. If this will is not lacking, there should be

definite commitments of aid on a defined time scale. There

should be a new perception of the relationship between the

donor and the recipient of aid. The relationship should be

seen as based, not on charity, but on the facts of economic

interdependence and enlightened self-interest.

149. The unhappiness of the developing countries with

regard to their economic progress is aggravated by the sense

of insecurity which is assailing those of them that are

smaller and less mighty than their neighbours. Pakistan is

one of these countries.

150. Pakistan pursues an independent policy and is one of

the few countries that have established and maintain

friendly bilateral relations with the Soviet Union, the

United States and China at the same time. Had Pakistan

been aligned to any one of them, this would not have been

possible.

151. This policy of bilateralism fully conforms to the

principles of non-alignment. We oppose interference in the

internal affairs of other States, and we believe in peaceful

coexistence, respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity and

independence of all countries. We have always upheld the

right of peoples to self-determination. We have always been

ready to have recourse to procedures for pacific settlement

of disputes and for strengthening the Charter of the United

Nations.

152. Pakistan’s loyalty to the Organization is not merely

verbal. We have given tangible demonstration of it at two

crucial moments in our history and with regard to an issue

which has a direct impact on our life, our national integrity

and our destiny. In that issue — I am referring to the

India-Pakistan question — we have wholeheartedly accepted

the resolutions of the Security Council. By doing so, we

have subordinated our claims to the decisions of the world

community. We have put our trust in the strength of the

United Nations. We suffer when that trust proves to have

been entirely misplaced. We have, therefore, a stake in the

United Nations as large as that of any other Member, far

larger than that of some. Our attitude can be fully shared

only by those other Member States which are the aggrieved

parties in international disputes, seek nothing but justice,

pursue nothing but peace, but which will not suffer a

people’s right to be suppressed merely because they

themselves are relatively weak or small. It is these nations

that are acutely sensitive to the fortunes of this Organization.

They feel fortified when this Organization proves to

be resourceful. They feel betrayed when it falters and fails.

153. This brings me to the political factors which have

shaken public confidence in the United Nations. I cannot

hope, on the present occasion, to attempt an exhaustive

analysis of these factors. Suffice it to refer to those which

are interlinked and outstanding among them.

154. The first of these factors is the divergence between

the resolutions of the United Nations and the policies of

the great Powers. As a result, many a well-conceived

resolution adopted here, or in the Security Council, has

become an emblem of inaction. It is often forgotten that

the United Nations can act, rot by adopting resolutions but

by implementing them. Why do some important resolutions

remain unimplemented?

155. The answer is not only that the great powers are

divided and unable to make use of the provisions laid down

in the United Nations Charter for enforcing compliance

with the decisions of the Security Council. The answer is

also that they are reluctant to assimilate these decisions in

their own policies. Were they to make these resolutions the

cardinal principles of their policies towards the countries

concerned, their combined resources of pressure and

persuasion would not fail to ensure the fulfilment of the

decisions of the United Nations. The experience of the Suez

crisis in 1956 is an example in point. No sanctions were

applied; yet, by the combined efforts of the United States

and the Soviet Union, the Israeli forces were made to

withdraw from the territory they had overrun.

156. The second outstanding factor is that the United

Nations has failed to reflect the universality which was

inherent in its conception. That the people of China, 700

million strong, the largest single national segment of

humanity, the inheritors of one of the oldest and most

stable civilizations of the world, should remain unrepresented

in this Organization is not so much a loss to them as

it is a disability for this Organization itself. Their exclusion

from its counsels has widened the gulf between this

Organization and political realities.

157. The third factor is symbolized by the unchecked

arms race. The progress that has been achieved in the field

of disarmament has been at best fitful and sporadic. Arms

control is not only a question of the ratio between the

armouries of the great Powers. It is an issue of the security

of all nations, great or small. Many among these nations feel

a gnawing insecurity. The insecurity is not lessened when,

in an individual case, the adversary disposes of only

conventional weapons. Let us not forget that in both the

Middle East and Viet-Nam only conventional weapons have

been used. Therefore, the reduction of conventional armaments

is no less imperative than measures of nuclear arms

control and nuclear disarmament if the security of all

nations, and not only of a few, is to be strengthened.

158. Pakistan now participates in the Conference of the

Committee on Disarmament. We are thankful for our

inclusion and we pledge our sincere co-operation in all

efforts to achieve its aims.

159. The record of more than 20 years of disarmament

negotiations cannot be regarded as impressive. While certain

treaties in the nature of “non-armament” measures, and

most recently the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of

Nuclear Weapons [resolution 2373 (XXII)], have been

concluded, there has been no agreement in the field of true

disarmament. The goal of general and complete disarmament

remains as distant as ever, and agreement even on

collateral measures of disarmament is not in sight. We face

an impasse in the negotiations on a comprehensive test-ban

treaty, to which the General Assembly has attached the

greatest urgency, primarily because of a lack of political

will on the part of the super-Powers to cease nuclear-weapon

tests. In fact, such testing has been intensified in

scale and frequency in order to check out nuclear warheads

for weapons of strategic offensive and defensive warfare.

The question of cessation of underground nuclear-weapon

tests has thus become linked to that of limitation of

strategic nuclear armaments.

160. The Secretary-General’s warning in his introduction

to his annual report [A/7601/Add.1, para. 29], that the

present situation of relative stability in the nuclear strategic

balance of power between the United States and the Soviet

Union could disappear if new generations of nuclear-weapon

systems were developed and deployed, has come

not a moment too soon. We join in his appeal to the two

super-Powers to begin immediately their bilateral talks to

limit and reduce offensive and defensive strategic nuclear

weapons. We hope that these talks will lead to negotiations

in good faith among all the nuclear-weapon Powers with a

view to the cessation of the nuclear arms, race, as urged by

the Conference of Non-Nuclear-Weapon States held last

year.

161. The nuclear-weapon Powers are pledged in Article VI

of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons

[resolution. 2373 (XXII)] to pursue negotiations in good

faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the

nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament.

The commencement of strategic arms limitation

talks, together with a complete cessation of underground

nuclear-weapon tests would, in our view, constitute an

earnest of their good faith. We fully appreciate the almost

incredible complexity of the decisions they are called upon

to make, but we fear that further loss of time may well

result in the loss of ability to fulfil this treaty obligation.

162. At this session we are called upon to carry further

the implementation of the recommendations of the Conference

of Non-Nuclear-Weapon States in the field of

peaceful uses of nuclear energy, with particular regard to

the special needs and interests of the developing countries.

One aspect of this question is the establishment of an

international régime for peaceful nuclear explosions within

the framework of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

While this régime should undoubtedly provide for access to

the technology of peaceful nuclear explosions, it is imperative

at the same time to ensure that States deriving such

benefit are prevented from utilizing the knowledge of

technology for the manufacture or acquisition otherwise of

nuclear weapons. It seems to us that a renunciation of

nuclear weapons and acceptance of the safeguards system

of the International Atomic Energy Agency under a binding

multilateral instrument should be considered a sine qua non

for access to the technology of peaceful nuclear explosions.

163. It was concern for their security in the nuclear era

that brought together the non-nuclear-weapon States in the

Conference held last year. Until existing arrangements can

be strengthened to inspire real confidence, Member States

must perforce rely on themselves. Speaking for Pakistan, let

me say that, in view of its situation, the geopolitical

compulsion is a factor which cannot be ignored in shaping

its outlook on security. An arms balance in our region,

maintained through a stable equilibrium of great Power

relationships, is of the greatest importance to peace in Asia

and the world.

164. I have mentioned three basic factors: the non-implementation

of United Nations resolutions, the lack of

universality in the Organization and the lack of substantial

progress in arms control, which, in the view of the Pakistan

delegation, have reduced the effectiveness of the United

Nations and generated a crisis of confidence. Let me now

turn to some of the burning questions which undermine

security and have destroyed peace in parts of the Asian-African world.

165. Pakistan is both in South-East Asia and to the east of

the Middle East. When a fire rages in the Middle East, we

feel the heat. When an earthquake occurs in South-East

Asia, we feel the shock. A general survey of these issues,

whether originating in southern Africa, in Viet-Nam, in the

Middle East or in our own subcontinent, reveals a characteristic

common to them all. This is that the root of the

disease in all cases is the denial to a people of their right of

self-determination. Wherever a people’s self-determination

is thwarted, conflict inevitably follows.

166. I take the case of southern Africa first. If colonialism

is still entrenched in its “white fortress” in that region; if,

as we fear, fuel is accumulating there for the fires of armed

racial conflict, it is because self-determination is being

denied to the peoples of Zimbabwe, Namibia and the

Territories at present under Portuguese control. That this

denial entails the assertion of the superiority of race no

doubt adds to the malignancy of the situation; but, even

with a less shameful plea, colonialism would still have been

equally odious and the cause of the subjugated peoples no

less just. Though apartheid and racial arrogance have been

condemned, time and again, by the United Nations, the

strife and suffering in that vital region have not been

reduced.

167. Pakistan is dismayed at the virtual failure of the

sanctions employed against the Ian Smith régime. This

involves the credibility of the Security Council. We urge the

permanent members of the Council to take note of the

implications of this failure for the United Nations. We

expect the legal administering Power, the United Kingdom

to discharge its responsibility and take more forceful

measures to rid Zimbabwe of the scourge of a racist régime.

168. We are perturbed that not sufficient action has been

taken to compel the Pretoria régime to remove its authority

from Namibia. The deadline for that withdrawal is two days

from now. Those Powers that are maintaining vital trade

relations with South Africa explain to us the manifold

difficulties of effective action against that country. But

they have to face a decision. They cannot shirk it

indefinitely. They have to ask themselves the question:

what is a greater danger for world peace and therefore for

their own long-range interests — a rupture of economic

relations with South Africa at present or a racial war in the

future? The question is a test not only of their moral

values, their compassion and their belief in the worth and

dignity of the human person; it is also a test of their

prudence and their sense of responsibility as world Powers.

169. The situation is South-East Asia continues to be

dominated by the devastating war in Viet-Nam. Here again

it is the self-determination of a people, a gifted and heroic

people, which is the prime issue. Ever since this conflict

took its most fearful turn, impartial opinion pleaded that

the problem of Viet-Nam did not admit of a military

solution. By repetition, the statement became a cliché. Yet

every development up to date testifies to its validity. The

people of Viet-Nam have gone through horror of a unique

kind. We earnestly hope that they will soon be enabled to

decide their future without any interference from outside.

170. The Middle East, the cradle of civilization, continues

to be a theatre of conflict. Its origin also lies in the historic

injustice done to the peoples of Palestine who are a nation

no less than any other and whose right to national existence

in their own homeland is inferior to that of none. It is

neither justice nor realism to consider the forced diaspora

of the Palestinians as extinguishing all their rights. Pakistan

believes that no approach to a solution of the Arab-Israeli

conflict will be creative unless it recognizes the right of

self-determination of the people of Palestine.

171. The problem of Palestine is the basic stratum of the

Middle East question. Superimposed on it is the other

problem which has been created by the invasion of the

territories of Jordan, Syria and the United Arab Republic

by Israel in 1967. This involves the territorial integrity of

three Member States of the United Nations. Though the

conflict is local, the issues that it raises are universal in their

scope. The issues are the following. First, can a Member

State resort to force and can such a resort be condoned and

considered to have strengthened its claim? Second, should

a Member State have the right to refuse to withdraw its

forces from the territory of another State or States until it

imposes peace terms according to its own will? Third, can

the acquisition of territory by military conquest be admissible?

172. It is those questions which have to be answered if a

just and lasting solution is to be achieved to the Middle East

conflict. The only answer to them must be an emphatic

negative, if the Charter of the United Nations has any meaning.

173. The situation in Jerusalem is one aspect of the

Middle East conflict which causes universal concern. We are

grateful to all Members of the United Nations, except Israel

of course, for their appreciation of the fact that the

problem of Jerusalem transcends the rights and claims of

the parties to the Arab-Israel conflict. Both the General

Assembly and the Security Council have called upon Israel

not to tamper with the status of the Holy City. Israel has

treated all relevant resolutions with contempt. The gravity

of this situation was underlined by the horrifying occurrence

of arson in the Holy Al Aqsa Masque on 21 August

1969. This event, which would have been unthinkable in

the civilized world, caused an emotional upheaval among

the followers of Islam, which is unexampled in the modern

age. Pakistan was overwhelmed by sorrow and seethed with

indignation.

174. The Security Council, we are gratified to say, reacted

to this event by determining solemnly that the abominable

act of arson in the Holy Al Aqsa Mosque “emphasizes the

immediate necessity of Israel desisting from acting in

violation of the previous resolutions and rescinding forthwith

all measures and actions taken by it designed to alter

the status of Jerusalem” [resolution 271 (1967)]. We will

naturally await Israel’s response. Should that response be

negative, the Security Council is committed to taking the

measures necessary for bringing about the deannexation by

Israel of the Holy City and the withdrawal of the Israeli

forces.

175. Whatever the measures the Council will take or fail to

take, one thing should be clear to all concerned. It is that

the Muslim countries, containing a population of more than

half a billion people, extending from Morocco to Indonesia,

will: not countenance any solution of the Middle East

conflict which contemplates the transfer of the Holy City

to Israeli sovereignty. Any such proposal will sow the seeds

of a permanent hostility focusing on Jerusalem. Any doubt

on this score should be dispelled by the declaration of the

Islamic Summit Conference at Rabat.? We cannot conceive

that the great Powers will fail to take into account the deep

attachment of the followers of Islam to Jerusalem and the

resolve of the Governments participating in that Conference

to strive for its liberation.

176. Our own region, the South Asian subcontinent,

continues to be denied the peace and stability which is both

its natural right and its desperate need. The root cause of

this instability and the lack of normalcy in the relations

between India and Pakistan, is the continuance of the

dispute concerning the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The

fact that this dispute has received less international attention

recently does not mean that it has become any less

grave.

177. India and Pakistan are parties to a solemn international

agreement to enable the people of Jammu and

Kashmir to decide whether to accede to India or to

Pakistan according to their own free will. This agreement

has been endorsed time and again by the Security Council.

We seek nothing from India except that this agreement be

honoured in spirit and in substance. Until it is fulfilled and

until the two countries faithfully carry out their pledge, the

expectations of the nearly 600 million peoples of India and

Pakistan that freedom would bring them security will

continue to be belied. That is the basic reality of the

situation in the India-Pakistan subcontinent. We have

repeatedly invited India to face this reality. We do so again

today.

178. How can this reality be faced? The first step would

be for the two countries to agree to enter into serious

negotiations for the settlement of the Jammu and Kashmir

dispute. It is to be deplored that India refuses to take this

first step. India says that it is prepared to have talks with

Pakistan without any pre-condition. What India suggests is

that we try to establish a friendly atmosphere but leave

untouched the primary cause why that atmosphere is

constantly vitiated. It is like inviting a patient to pretend to

be healthy while he is suffering from a grievous malady. We

invite India to a joint and serious effort to cure the disease.

India suggests that we remove a few minor symptoms.

179. Pakistan sincerely believes that once our major

disputes are settled, our nearness to each other and the

similarity of our economic and social problems will assert

themselves and establish a good neighbourly relationship

between us. The attitude of reconciliation will replace that

of distrust and antagonism. A climate of conciliation would

permit a solution of the differences that arise between neighbours.

180. India not only refuses to appreciate this consideration,

it acts in such a manner as to prevent any productive

negotiations on Kashmir. It has been continuously extending

the application of its own laws to the State of Jammu

and Kashmir. The people of Jammu and Kashmir have not

accepted India’s sovereignty. They were given a pledge by

the United Nations that they would be able to determine

their own future. They call upon Pakistan, and also upon

every other Member State, to honour that pledge. At

present, in the India-occupied area, they are being ruthlessly

suppressed. Despite the repression, their constant

agitation is a reminder to the world that they are longing to

exercise their right of freedom and self-determination. Can

we turn our eyes from this reality, and even if we did so,

would we serve the ends of peace?

181. This is what Pakistan has throughout tried to impress

on India. In July, President Muhammad Yahya Khan wrote

to the Prime Minister of India that the removal of minor

problems and side issues could not bring about a durable

friendship. Amity and understanding would continue to

elude both countries if they attempted the solution of such

issues only and refused to face the reality of major

problems. We profoundly regret that up to now, India’s

response has not been positive.

182. Yet another matter of grave concern to Pakistan is

the construction of the Farakka Barrage by India on the

international river, the Ganges. It is an outstanding example

of India’s refusal to recognize Pakistan’s rights. The barrage,

which is scheduled to be completed by 1970, that is, next

year, will lower the water level in the river to such an

extent as to turn hundreds of thousands of acres in East

Pakistan to waste land, and seriously disrupt its economy.

We have invited India to settle this dispute. India agrees to

meet us at the technical level but refuses to recognize that

the differences between experts can be intractable if they

are not resolved by a political understanding and agreement.

While the political talks are still to be held, India is

proceeding with the work of completing the barrage. It

wants to present us with a fait accompli. Its position on this

issue amounts to the assertion that the lower riparian has

no say in the use of the waters of an international river. We

invoke nothing but the recognized rules of international law

regarding the equitable sharing of the waters of international

rivers between upper and lower riparians.

183. I now turn to another tragic aspect of the Indian

scene. This is the heart-rending plight of the Muslim

minority of nearly 60 million people. Recurrent riots in

India take a heavy toll of Muslim life. Only two weeks ago,

we were aghast when we learned of the carnage in

Ahmedabad, where over a thousand Muslims, men, women

and children, are reported to have been slaughtered, and

thousands rendered homeless. Such a massacre of its own

citizens, merely because they belong to a helpless minority,

would be a disgrace to any country. Considering India’s

size, the sweep of its history, the variety of its culture, the

nature of its aspirations, the event is so shocking as to be

incredible, all the more so since it has taken place in the

birthplace of Gandhiji, whose centenary is being celebrated

today.

184. I am putting the truth plainly. I am not saying this in

a spirit of acrimony. It is not a matter of polemics. I have

no doubt that the Government of India must have been

grieved by the holocaust in Ahmedabad. But the very fact

that it did take place points to the failure of the machinery

of law and order to control the organized religious

fanaticism that is unleashed against the Muslims in India.

The Liaqat-Nehru Pact of 1950 made it a joint responsibility

for India and Pakistan to safeguard the life and

property of the minority communities in the two countries,

the Muslims in India and the Hindus in Pakistan. It is cause

for the profoundest regret that, since the signing of that

Pact, there have occurred nearly a thousand riots in India

resulting in the death of about 2,600 persons and in injuries

to nearly 8,000, not counting the dead and wounded in

Ahmedabad and Baroda just now. We appeal to the

Government of India to check this brutality. It alone is in a

position to do so. We appeal to the international community

to extend, in consultation with the Government of

India, such humanitarian assistance to the victims as it can

muster. Statesmanship requires that India and Pakistan so

concert their efforts as to assure that the minority

communities in their respective countries are protected and

not persecuted. We invite India to a joint endeavour in that

direction.

185. I have brought to the notice of the Assembly the

grave issues which affect Pakistan and imperil the peace in

important regions of the world. I have no illusion that those

issues will be resolved during this session of the Assembly.

Their solution entails a rededication on the part of all of us

to the principles of peace. But if our discussions during this

session should contribute even slightly to the necessary

alteration of outlook on the broadening of thoughts, then

the feeling will be justified that the session has not been

empty of results.

186. This session is being held in a historic year, the year

when man first set foot on the moon. That, indeed, was a

triumph of both technology and human daring. It was the

culmination of a vast, sustained effort and it showed what

man can achieve if he bends all his energies to the task. Yes,

we all feel proud of that almost unbelievable achievement.

Yet, how much more would we feel a glow of pride if, in

this same year, we were to devote the same energy to a

different task—the task of lightening man’s burden during

his life on this battered but beautiful earth.