I move:—
That a sum not exceeding £286,290 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1957, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for External Affairs and of certain services administered by that Office (No. 16 of 1924) including a Grant-in-Aid.
I propose, with the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, to take the Estimate for External Affairs Vote 58 and the Estimate for International Co-operation Vote 59 together, as has been the practice in previous years.
The Estimate for 1956-57 at £457,240 shows a net increase of £60,990 on the figure for 1955-56. This increase is attributable in the main to (1) the extra provision required arising from our membership of the United Nations Organisation, (2) provision for additional allowances for officers serving abroad and (3) additional remuneration of staff arising from the revision of Civil Service pay.
The headquarters salary sub-head shows an increase of £1,200 due to the revision of Civil Service pay. Headquarters Telegrams and Telephones A (4) shows an increase of £500 owing to increased charges likely to arise under these heads. A new sub-head— A (5)—has been opened to provide for subscriptions to inter-governmental legal bodies. The total provision for the current year under this heading is £790—£700 to the Hague Conference on Private International Law and £90 to the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law. In previous years, such subscriptions were charged to sub-head A (3)— Incidental Expenses—but to meet correct accounting procedure, a new sub-head has been included in the current Estimate.
The salary sub-head—B (1)—for representatives abroad is increased by £50,770, due chiefly to, (1) a new provision of £20,000 for representation—staff, additional assistance and exchange compensation—at the United Nations; (2) an extra provision of £15,000 for additional allowances of representatives abroad; (3) an additional £4,410 to cover increases in remuneration arising from the revision of Civil Service pay; and (4) an extra £3,000 required to meet the salary, office, assistance and exchange compensation of the permanent representative to the Council of Europe at Strasbourg. Provision under this heading was made in the Estimate for 1955-56 for only part of the year.
The provision for travelling expenses of representatives abroad—sub-head B (2)—is increased by £5,000. This increase is justified having regard to the level of expenditure necessarily incurred in previous years, and an increase of £1,800 on sub-head B (3)— postage, stationery, telegrams and telephones for representatives abroad —is due to anticipated increased activity under these headings by missions abroad in the current year.
The amounts provided under the miscellaneous sub-heads—Cultural Relations with other Countries, the Irish News Agency, Information Material and Official Entertainment—are unchanged.
The Vote for International Co-operation shows a net increase of £65,800, due entirely to new expenditure arising from membership of the United Nations Organisation. The new expenditure is made up as follows:—
Sub-head C (1)—Contribution to the United Nations in respect of part of 1955 and all of 1956, and in respect of the working capital fund, £55,000; Sub-head C (2)—Expenditure on travelling and subsistence allowances, £10,000; Sub-head C (3)—Incidental expenses, £3,000.
I will refer to the matter of the United Nations later in more detail. I feel I should, at the outset, refer to the celebrations for the seventeenth anniversary of the coronation and eightieth birthday of the Holy Father which coincided this year in Rome. In all, 51 countries sent special delegations or missions to convey to His Holiness the deep-felt congratulations of their Governments and peoples on this great occasion. As the House is aware, Ireland joined in this expression of devotion to the Holy See.
Looking at the present world position, we have seen in the past year an apparent change in the outlook of Soviet Russia in so far as the principal Soviet leaders have denounced the policies and activities of Stalin. In this connection, one must ask oneself what this apparent change really means. The only acid test in a matter of this kind is what is done, not what is said. As far as I see it, it is essentially a change to a more intelligent leadership with the same aim, namely that of Communist world domination.
The basic Soviet objective remains the same, to divide as far as possible the free countries of Western Europe and to divorce them from the influence and assistance of the U.S.A. The primary object of present Soviet policy is to weaken the vigilance of the free countries and so to weaken their desire and ability for self-defence. Thus we hear speech after speech, supported by all the elements of propaganda, smiles and handshakes advocating disarmament, a neutralised Germany and, above all, that the new type of collective dictatorship is more friendly, more peace-loving and more co-operative than the personal dictatorship of Stalin. Here we must be eternally vigilant and have no illusions, if we are successfully to defend and maintain our Christian civilisation and our way of life.
There are other sources of serious conflict, notably in North Africa and in the Middle East, which must cause grave concern to all free countries. I do not wish, at this stage, to do more than to advert to these problems and to assure the House that they are, at all times, the subject of the detailed examination of my Department and, that, in the various international organisations to which we now belong they will receive from the delegations concerned the most serious consideration from every angle.
We have continued to play our part in the field of international organisations. I would like to mention first the O.E.E.C. In its early years, the organisation's most important work was the examination of programmes submitted by member countries and recommendations based thereon to the American Government as to how American aid should be divided between them. With the diminution of American economic assistance, the O.E.E.C. has devoted increasing attention to broad economic and financial questions. One of its major achievements has been the progressive raising of the percentage of trade liberalisation amongst its members.
In September last, this country notified the organisation of its agreement to comply with the current requirement that 90 per cent. of all private trading between member countries should be free from quantitative restrictions. Other activities of the organisation in which we are fully participating are the European Productivity Agency which was set up to promote research and productivity amongst the member countries, in particular through the medium of technical assistance programmes. More recently, we have joined with the organisation in formulating proposals for the co-operative development of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
Last month, an official visit to Ireland was made by the secretary-general of the organisation, who was accompanied by the head of the Information Section of O.E.E.C. and the deputy-head of the County Study Section dealing with Ireland. The visit was one of a series of visits being undertaken by the secretary-general to member countries to inform himself direct about conditions there, to make contact with Ministers and officials concerned with O.E.E.C. matters, and also to publicise the aims and activities of the organisation.
In the period since June, 1955, of which I propose to give a brief review, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe has met three times, in July and December, 1955, and in April, 1956. The Consultative Assembly likewise has met on three occasions.
Between sessions of the Committee of Ministers, the work of the committee is carried on by the Committee of Ministers' Deputies and that of the Consultative Assembly by the various Assembly committees and sub-committees. In the period under review the Committee of Ministers' Deputies has met nine times. In that time, 24 meetings of Assembly committees and subcommittees have been held. We were represented at all of these.
It is not proposed to review the debates and conclusions of the sessions of the Consultative Assembly, as my Department—apart from providing expenses and travel facilities—can claim no credit for what is the result of the independent initiative of the Assembly representatives. Whilst recording my appreciation of the work done in the Consultative Assembly by members of both Houses of the Oireachtas, of all Parties, I would like to mention that at the recent first part of the Eighth Assembly Session, an Irish representative (Senator James Crosbie) was unanimously elected one of the seven vice-presidents of the Consultative Assembly.
In April last, the membership of the Council of Europe was increased by the admission of Austria to full membership and we associate ourselves with the remaining member countries in welcoming Austria as a full member of the council.
The best measure of the achievements of the council is, perhaps, found in the conventions and agreements between member states drawn up under the auspices of the council. One of the most important of these instruments is the European Convention on Human Rights. In July, 1955, the number of declarations by member Governments recognising the right of individual application under the convention was raised to six. Since that date, therefore, the European Commission of Human Rights is competent to accept applications from individuals in respect of those countries, of which Ireland is one, which recognise the right of individual application. In addition, in the course of the last year, the number of declarations by contracting parties recognising the compulsory jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights was increased to five and the first election of members of the court will take place when eight such declarations have been made.
The first formal reference to the European Commission of Human Rights by one contracting party against another was recently made when the Greek Government alleged the breach by the British Government of human rights and fundamental freedoms in Cyprus. At the conclusion of its deliberations at the beginning of June, 1956, the commission which holds its meetings in camera, announced that it had ruled that the petition of the Greek Government was admissible.
The next stage in the procedure laid down by the convention is the constitution of a sub-commission of seven which will undertake an investigation of the petition. If this sub-commission does not succeed in effecting settlement by conciliation, the plenary commission will submit a report to the Committee of Ministers who may decide, by a two—thirds majority, whether there has been a violation of the convention. The actual subject matter of the petition is therefore still sub judice.
The elaboration of two further instruments under the auspices of the Council of Europe was completed during the year. On 13th December, 1955, we signed, without reservation as to ratification, the Council of Europe Agreement on the Exchange of War Cripples between member countries for medical treatment. A Convention on Establishment, which provides common rules for the treatment accorded to nationals of each member state in the territory of the others, was opened for signature by Council of Europe members on the same date. For technical reasons connected with a reservation which Ireland wished to make to the convention, it was not possible for this country to sign on that date.
In addition to those completed during the year, a number of further conventions and agreements under the auspices of the council are in various stages of completion. In the legal field, a European Convention on the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes, now in draft form is at present being examined by the Committee of Ministers' Deputies and a Draft European Convention on Extradition will come up for examination at a forthcoming meeting. In addition, a preliminary meeting of experts has been held with a view to drafting a European Convention on the Treatment of Legal Persons.
In the social field, the council has undertaken the drafting of a European Social Charter of a type similiar in that field to the European Convention on Human Rights. In the more restricted field of social security a committee composed of governmental experts from member states has completed a draft of a European Code of Social Security which will endeavour to lay down minimum standards of social security for members of the council.
The work of the council is not, of course, restricted to the elaboration of conventions and agreements, as its activities also embrace common action in economic, social, cultural, scientific, legal and administrative matters. Among the economic matters I would mention the proposals of the Consultative Assembly for the economic development of Southern Europe. The proposals in this field, which are now due for examination by the Committee of Ministers, are largely the work of one of our delegates to the assembly—Deputy MacBride—who was invited by the Assembly Committee on Economic Questions to undertake a study of this problem in Southern Italy.
During the year, the usual consular services continued to be provided, such as the issue, renewal and endorsement of passports, the grant of visas, the repatriation of destitute Irish citizens abroad, the provision of assistance on behalf of interested Irish citizens in connection with foreign estates, and advising and assisting members of the public on citizenship questions, problems arising out of military conscription in other countries, compensation claims against foreign authorities, locating the whereabouts of persons in other countries, and other miscellaneous services.
Visa abolition agreements were concluded between Portugal, Greece and Turkey. The position in this regard is that we now have total or partial visa abolition agreement with all nonCommunist European countries, except Spain which, it is understood, is not prepared at present to enter into any visa agreements with other countries. It will be appreciated that these agreements are of great assistance in enabling our citizens to travel freely in the free countries of Western Europe.
The Government recently gave its approval for Ireland's accession to the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, which was drawn up at a conference convened by the United Nations at Geneva in July, 1951. Our instrument of accession will shortly be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and 90 days thereafter the convention will enter into force for this country.
The convention is a comprehensive charter of the rights of refugees and represents an important advance in international co-operation for the improvement of the status of refugees. It is the outcome of efforts extending over the previous 30 years to put a humanitarian concern for refugees into international law. The convention establishes a broad base of rights of refugees, including the right to be accorded at least the same treatment as aliens generally. Our accession to the convention will not alter in any important respect this country's existing treatment of refugees. Accession to the Convention will not entail any charge on public funds other than, initially, a small printing charge for travel documents for refugees which, however, would be covered by the fees to be charged for the issue of these documents.
Twenty other Governments, including those of all the Council of Europe Member Countries, have signed, ratified or acceded to the convention.
Our external trade figures for 1955 are already before the House. I do not propose, on this Estimate, to give a detailed breakdown and analysis of these figures, but rather to devote myself to the main functions of my Department in the development of foreign trade. It plays its part in the work of the Interdepartmental Foreign Trade Committee and is represented on delegations for the negotiation of trade agreements. Officers of the Department's missions abroad, besides participating in negotiations for the conclusion of new, or the renewal of existing trade agreements, are actively engaged in promoting Irish exports.
Apart from the trade agreements of 1938 and 1948 with Great Britain, trade agreements are in operation with 12 countries, viz.: Austria, Ceylon, France, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland. The conclusion of these trade agreements is intended to facilitate the development of actual or potential markets for Irish exports. Some of the agreements are of a continuing and general nature, each Government undertaking to grant all reasonable facilities for the import of products from the other, whilst others provide for specific import quotas for Irish goods. Agreements of the latter kind are re-negotiated annually with a view to securing adequate quotas for non-liberalised Irish goods. In this connection, negotiations were concluded during the year with France, Finland and Germany. An agreement with Belgium, under which that country purchases Irish cattle for serum purposes, was also renewed last year.
My Department, in collaboration with the other Departments concerned, has also been active in schemes for the utilisation of Grant Counterpart Funds under the Economic Co-operation Agreement of 1948 between this country and the U.S.A. Last year, two sub-agreements were negotiated, one providing for additional laboratories and equipment for the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards and the other for grants to Muintir na Tíre, Macra na Feirme and the Irish Countrywomen's Association.
Last year, I emphasised two points which we must recognise as permanent realities in our approach to the question of Partition: firstly, that it is a problem for which there is no quick and easy solution; secondly, that the first step towards unity lies in more neighbourly relations between the two sections of the Irish people. It is a matter for regret that the actions of the advocates of the illusory quick solution by violence have impeded progress in the development of more neighbourly relations.
Despite this, there has been some positive advance. I am glad to say that I am informed that the Irish association, to which I referred last year, has continued to develop and expand in both Dublin and Belfast, and it has had informative discussions and debates on a number of topics relating to Partition, in which both sides were able to present their cases without venom or vituperation. A more important development which is, by its nature, an implicit recognition on the economic and social planes of the fundamental unity of our country and of the artificiality of its political division, was the decision to unify trade union congresses on a 32-county basis.
The climate in which violence flourishes, which is the inevitable result of loss of faith in constitutional methods, is nothing more or less than a predictable reaction to the abuse of constitutional processes whereby the most elementary democratic rights have been denied to the Nationalist minority in the Six Counties by gerrymander, discrimination in housing and employment, and even open provocation by the para-military force usually called the B-Specials. In the past month, we have seen attempts, fortunately abortive, to introduce discrimination into the fields of children's allowances and education. It is in the continuation of repressive and discriminatory actions that we have the soil in which the seeds of violence flourish, and I need hardly say that these measures, apart from their results, make the task of developing neighbourly relations difficult, but, despite these difficulties, the Government will continue to strive for better relations between both sections of the Irish people.
I wish to assure the House that we will continue to expose repressive or discriminatory practices against our fellow-countrymen and use every means appropriate to bring international public opinion to bear on such cases.
In the United Nations of which we are now members, we are, as has already been announced, determined to miss no opportunity of seeking to undo the unnatural division of our country. We do not, however, propose to raise the issue on inappropriate occasions or to give to the world the impression that we have no interest in any matter of international policy save that of Partition alone.
Before coming to a general review of our position as a member of the United Nations, I should like to mention our military and financial obligations under the charter. I feel that I should dispel any misunderstanding that may exist concerning the question of military commitments under the Charter of the United Nations. Article 43 of the charter reads as follows:—
"I. All members of the United Nations, in order to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security, undertake to make available to the Security Council, on its call and in accordance with a special agreement or agreements, armed forces, assistance, and facilities, including rights of passage, necessary for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security.
2. Such agreement or agreements shall govern the numbers and types of forces, their degree of readiness and general location, and the nature of the facilities and assistance to be provided.
3. The agreement or agreements shall be negotiated as soon as possible on the initiative of the Security Council. They shall be concluded between the Security Council and members, or between the Security Council and groups of members and shall be subject to ratification by the signatory States in accordance with their respective constitutional processes."
From this Article it is clear that the contribution which any State member can be called on to make to the maintenance of international peace and security depends on the special agreement or agreements which that State has made. There is, consequently, no form of commitment that follows automatically on acceptance of membership.
Our financial obligations to the United Nations are fixed by the General Assembly on recommendations of the Committee on Contributions. Following the admission of the 16 new members, the committee has recommended a revised scale of contributions under which Ireland's share would be 0.19 per cent. of the total budget. This contribution cannot be definitely fixed until considered and accepted by the 11th General Assembly towards the end of the present year. In arriving at the provision of £55,000 under sub-head C (1) of the International Co-operation Estimate, my Department worked on the basis of our contribution being at the rate of approximately 0.21 per cent. which had already been fixed in respect of our participation in certain U.N. activities.
This is the first opportunity that the Dáil has had of discussing foreign affairs since we were elected to membership of the United Nations. I know the House will be interested to hear something from me as to how the Government views this new development and to have some information about the general lines of our policy as a member of the United Nations Organisation.
I may say, then, at the outset that the Government welcomes the admission of Ireland to the United Nations as a proper and necessary consequence of our national sovereignty and our membership of the family of free and independent States. I am sure that that attitude will be shared by all thinking people in the country.
The United Nations is essentially the organisation, and the principal meeting place of the independent States of the world. It is almost universal in its membership—certainly more universal than the former League of Nations ever was. For us to turn our backs on such an organisation, to abstain from membership and cut ourselves off from the great centre of international activity which the United Nations has come to represent, would be tantamount to committing ourselves deliberately to a position of isolationism and insignificance in world affairs. I do not believe that that is a position which is likely to commend itself to many people as a national objective. It would be contrary to the ideals of those who worked and struggled to achieve our national freedom and independence; it would be contrary to the principles on which our foreign policies have been based since the foundation of the State, and, in my belief, it would be contrary to our national interests.
We are dealing here, of course, with a very important decision of national policy. What is involved is nothing less than the basic principle on which our policy towards the outside world and its problems is to be based. We must not only decide clearly what that principle is going to be; we must also be clear in our own minds as to the reasons for our decision. The reasons, as I said just now, are to be found in our national traditions, in the external policies we have followed since this State was founded and in a proper appreciation of our own national interests. The men whose ideas inspired the movement which achieved the measure of national freedom we at present enjoy never conceived the Ireland of the future simply as a province with Home Rule, occupying itself exclusively with its own domestic concerns.
They had a broader vision and a higher ideal than that. They wanted to see Ireland take her place among the nations of the world. They believed in a frank co-operation between the nations as the best means of bringing about a world in which freedom and justice would be accepted as the fundamental principles of international relations. They hoped that, with our distinctive culture, our Christian social order and our traditional love of freedom, Ireland might have something to contribute towards bringing such a world about and that, by so doing, this ancient nation would gain esteem and renown among the nations of the earth.
The foreign policies we have followed here since the State was founded have been entirely in line with these ideals and aspirations. We became a member of the League of Nations at the first possible opportunity, and I think it can be fairly said that we played a worthy and a useful part in the work of that organisation as long as it lasted.
After the war, the Government of the day applied for membership of the United Nations with the unanimous consent of the Dáil. It was not our fault that our application was not accepted at the time. We took an active part, however, in the setting-up of the O.E.E.C. and the Council of Europe and we have participated fully, and I think usefully, in the work of both those bodies since their establishment. We have followed a similar line of policy as regards the various international organisations concerned with technical matters.
We have, of course, been a member of the International Labour Organisation since the twenties, and since the war we have become members of the organisations set up to promote international co-operation in regard to food and agriculture, civil aviation, health and various other matters. These various activities, taken together, combine to form a coherent and logical picture, because they are all expressions of the same basic policy which we have followed fairly consistently ever since we had control of our own affairs. Briefly, that policy may be said to be that, wherever we have been offered opportunities of international co-operation in keeping with our own national policies and interests, we have always taken advantage of them and done our best to contribute towards the attainment of the objects in view as a responsible member of international society. Our acceptance of membership of the United Nations is a logical extension of that policy. Not to accept membership of the United Nations would be a sudden and illogical departure from it. It would leave us in the position of acting as a responsible member of international society in regard to the various organisations to which I have referred while at the same time choosing the path of isolationism in regard to the most important international organisation of all.
There is another consideration which it is worth bearing in mind, because in this matter we have to consider not only our duties as a member of the family of nations, but our rights and interests as well. History warns us, and we ourselves know only too well from practical experience, that although wars and international crises may be brought about by the actions and rivalries of a mere handful of powerful states, their consequences in terms of hardship and suffering are felt in greater or lesser degree by all States without distinction and no country is so strong or self-contained as to be able to insulate itself against them. International society is still fundamentally undemocratic in that way. A handful of powerful States— even a single powerful State—can embark on policies which may involve the destinies of all. The best hope of remedying that situation lies in international organisation. In the creation of a forum in which the ardent desire for peace of the smaller countries of the world, which have nothing whatever to gain from wars, can find expression and in which a climate of opinion can be built up, and if necessary measures of concerted action taken, strong enough to constitute a decisive deterrent to any State contemplating aggression. We may still be a long way from that position; but from the point of view of this country, and other small countries like ours, it is definitely a target to be aimed at; because, as I say, it is only through international organisations like the United Nations that we can hope to have any real say or to exert any real influence on events which may vitally affect our whole national destinies.
These, then, are the reasons why, in our view, our admission to the United Nations is something not only to be accepted, but indeed welcomed. I turn now to another and no less important question, namely, what policy we should pursue at the United Nations and on what general principles our action as a member of the organisation should be based. This, of course, is not a matter which we can discuss in relation to specific problems because there is no means of knowing in advance what particular situations and questions are likely to arise from time to time. There are, however, certain broad principles of policy which we will do well to have always in mind in determining our attitude on specific issues; and, as I intend that these should form the basis of our policy at the United Nations, it is proper, I think, that I should take this opportunity of explaining to the Dáil what they are.
In the first place, it should be our aim, not only to observe the terms of the charter scrupulously ourselves, but to insist as strongly as we can on the integral application of its provisions in any situation to which it is intended to apply. As a member of the League of Nations, we invariably supported the strict application of the provisions of the covenant. We should follow a similar policy as regards the United Nations Charter. There is a fatal tendency in international organisations to shrink from the decisions required by their charters when they seem likely to give offence to powerful States and to get rid of problems which have become too ticklish or delicate by leaving them to conferences or meetings convened outside the scope of the organisation itself.
So far as the United Nations is concerned, I think our policy should be to lean against such tendencies. They can only result in weakening the organisation and destroying confidence in its value and efficacy. I believe that the more sincere and single-minded we are in upholding the principles of the charter, the more respect and influence we will come to enjoy as a member of the organisation. The better also will our own interests be served, because, whatever interest we have in United Nations which is strong enough to safeguard peace and ensure the security and the national rights of its members, we can have no interest in an organisation which is so weak as to be unable to exert any real influence on events.
In the second place—but closely connected with what I have just said— I believe that as a member of the United Nations we should try to maintain a position of independence, judging the various questions on which we have to adopt an attitude or cast our vote strictly on their merits in a just and disinterested way. As Deputies may know, there is a tendency in some international organisations for the members to form themselves into geographical or other blocs or groups, which act together for the purposes of elections to committees and offices and hold meetings with a view to concerting their action and policies on specific issues. The practice seems to be followed fairly widely at the United Nations. To a certain extent, that may be inevitable; so far as we are concerned, however, our aim should be, I think, to avoid becoming associated with particular blocs or groups so far as possible.
It is true that that may put us at a certain disadvantage when it comes to elections to committees and so on. We need not be over-anxious about appointments of that kind. My belief is that, on a long-term view we will better serve our interests, and gain more respect and influence for ourselves if by maintaining our independence we leave our hands free to pursue what may come to be generally recognised as a fair, helpful and constructive rôle.
The attitudes we adopt and the courses we follow in virtue of the independence I have described must, of course, always reflect our own national traditions and objectives and the ideas and beliefs which we in this country hold to be fundamental. We must be guided, not by considerations of expediency or temporary advantage, but the moral concepts which our history has taught us to honour and which lie at the root of our culture and national tradition and outlook.
This brings me to the third of the principles which, in my view, must form the basis of our policy at the United Nations. It must be our constant concern—indeed it is our moral responsibility—to do whatever we can as a member of the United Nations to preserve the Christian civilisation of which we are a part and with that end in view to support wherever possible those powers principally responsible for the defence of the free world in their resistance to the spread of Communist power and influence. This, it seems to me, must be a principle not simply of our policy at the United Nations but of our foreign policy as a whole.
In the great ideological conflict which divides the world to-day, our attitude is clear, by geographical position, culture, tradition and national interest. We belong to the great community of states made up of the United States of America, Canada and Western Europe. Our national destinies are indissolubly bound up with theirs. It is in our national interest that this group of states should remain strong and united, and that being so, it should be part of our policy as I conceive it to do what we can, consistently with our own views and policies and with our duty as a loyal and independent member of the organisation, to strengthen the influence of this group, to resist efforts aiming at its disintegration and to lend support and co-operation wherever possible to its individual members.
The pursuit of this policy may not always prove easy and straightforward in practice. Let me take just one example. As Deputies are aware, the United Nations is at present faced with several specific questions resulting from a development which is widespread nowadays in Asia, Africa and other parts of the world—namely, the growing desire for self-determination on the part of subject peoples and the rise of national feeling in opposition to systems of imperialistic domination surviving from the past. It is impossible for us, with our history, to regard this general development otherwise than with sympathy. Many of these national movements have drawn encouragement and inspiration from the story of our own national struggle, and the ideals of freedom and self-determination which they proclaim— ideals which are recognised and endorsed to-day in the Charter of the United Nations. These are the same ideals as animated the Irish people in their struggle for independence.
One of the most urgent and insistent needs of the world to-day is a formula of action which will enable the undeniable claims of national feeling and the just and reasonable interests of European powers which have a major rôle to play in the defence of the free world, to be reconciled in such a way as to avoid resort to those measures of oppression which, in our view, must inevitably fail and to prevent those legacies of bitterness and resentment which can only impair the strength of civilisation's defences against the spread of Communism.
It must be one of our aims in the United Nations to help in the search for pacific formulas of that kind, and in doing so we shall have to bear in mind, not only the sympathy we naturally feel for other nations justly struggling to be free, but the danger of conflicts of the kind I have described being exploited for the purpose of disrupting the unity and weakening the cohesion of the powers principally responsible for the defence of the free world. As I say, the judgments it will be necessary to make in specific cases may not always be easy. All we can do is to make them fairly and conscientiously with due regard both to the moral principles and the wider issues of world policy involved.
I believe that, if we play our part on the principles which have guided our policies since the State was established and on the lines which I have just stated, this country can make some contribution, as a member of the United Nations, to the cause of peace on earth among men of goodwill.
