D

UNITED SA

HE AMERICA

Following are statements made in plenary by Ambassador Adlai E. Stevenson, U.S. Representative to the General Assembly, on the question of the representation of China in the United Nations, together with texts of a resolution adopted on December 15 and a Soviet draft resolution which was rejected.

STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 1

U.S. delegation press release 3872

The question confronting the Assembly of the representation of China in the United Nations is of worldwide importance.

We live in an age when the ever-expanding family of nations is striving anew to realize the vision of the United Nations Charter: a world community, freed from the overhanging menace of war, acting together in equal dignity and mutual tolerance to create a better life for humanity. This very Assembly, in its majestic diversity, is both the physical symbol and the practical embodiment-however imperfect-of that transcendent vision.

In striving toward that vision, what we decide about the representation of China will have momentous consequences. For more is at stake than the status of certain delegations. More is at stake than the registering or reflecting of existing facts of power. Indeed, the underlying question is how the great people of China, who by a tragedy of history have been forcibly cut off from their own traditions and even led into war against the community of nations, can be enabled to achieve their own desires to live with themselves and with the rest of the world in peace and tolerance.

This question has a long history. For 12 years past, ever since the Communist armies conquered the Chinese mainland and the Republic of China relocated its Government in Taipei, the community of nations has been confronted with a whole

set of profoundly vexing problems. Most of them have arisen from aggressive military actions by the Chinese Communists-against Korea, against the Government of the Republic of China on its island refuge, against Tibet, and against south and southeast Asia.

The problem before us today, in its simplest terms, is this: The authorities who have carried out those aggressive actions, who have for 12 years been in continuous and violent defiance of the principles of the United Nations and of the resolutions of the General Assembly, and deaf to the restraining pleas of law-abiding members, these same warlike authorities claim the right to occupy the seat of China here and demand that we eject from the United Nations the representatives of the Republic of China.

The gravity of this problem is heightened in its worldwide political and moral significance by the fact that the Republic of China's place in the United Nations, since its founding in 1945, has been filled by its representatives with distinctionfilled by representatives of a law-abiding government which, under most difficult circumstances, has done its duty well and faithfully in the United Nations and against which there is no ground for serious complaint, let alone expulsion.

The United States believes, as we have believed. from the beginning, that the United Nations would make a tragic and perhaps irreparable mistake if it yielded to the claim of an aggressive and unregenerate "People's Republic of China" to replace the Republic of China in the United Nations. I realize that we have sometimes been charged with "unrealism"-and even with "ignoring the existence of 600 million people."

That is a strange charge. My country's soldiers fought with other soldiers of the United Nations in Korea for nearly 3 years against a huge invading army from the mainland of China. My country's negotiators have done their best, for nearly 10

years, at Panmunjom, at Geneva, at Warsaw, to negotiate with the emissaries of Peiping.

No country is more aware of their existence. I think it could be said with more justice that it would be dangerously unrealistic if this Assembly were to bow to the demands of Peiping to expel and replace the Republic of China in the United Nations; it would be ignoring the warlike character and aggressive behavior of the rulers who dominate 600 million people and who talk of the inevitability of war as an article of faith and refuse to renounce the use of force.

An Era of Revolutionary Changes

To consider this subject in its proper light, Mr. President, we must see it against the background of the era in which we live. It is an era of sweeping revolutionary changes. We cannot clearly see the end. With dramatic swiftness the classic age of empire is drawing to a close. More than onethird of the member states of the United Nations have won their independence since the United Nations itself was founded. Today, together with all other free and aspiring nations, they are working to perfect their independence by developing their economies and training their peoples. Already they play a vital part in the community of nations and in the work of this Organization.

Thus, for the first time in history on this grand scale, we have seen an imperial system end, not in violent convulsions and the succession of still another empire but in the largely peaceful rise of new independent states-equal members of a worldwide community.

So diverse is that community in traditions and attitudes, so small and closely knit together is our modern world, so much do we have need of one another and so frightful are the consequences of war-that all of us whose representatives gather in this General Assembly hall must more than ever be determined, as the charter says, "to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbors." For there can be no independence any more except in a community, and there can be no community without tolerance.

Such is one of the great revolutionary changes of our time: a spectacular revolution of emancipation and hope. But this century has also bred more sinister revolutions born out of reaction to old injustices and out of the chaos of world war. These movements have brought into being a plague

of warrior states-the scourge of our age. These regimes have been characterized not by democracy but by dictatorship; they have been concerned not with people but with power, not with the consent of the people but with control of the people, not with tolerance and conciliation but with hatred, falsehood, and permanent struggle. They have varied in their names and their ideologies, but that has been their essential character.

Nowhere have these qualities been carried to a greater extreme, or on a grander scale, than on the mainland of China under Communist rule. The regime has attempted through intimidation, hunger, and ceaseless agitation-and through a so-called "commune" system which even allied Communist states view with distaste-to reduce a brilliant and spirited civilization to a culture of military uniformity and iron discipline. Day and night, by poster and loudspeaker and public harangue, the people are reminded of their duty to hate the foreign enemy.

International Activities of Chinese Communists

Into the international sphere the Chinese Communists have carried the same qualities of arrogance, regimentation, and aggression. Many people hoped, after their invasion of Korea ended, that they would thereupon give up the idea of foreign conquest. Instead they sponsored and supplied the communizing of North Viet-Nam; they resumed their warlike threats against Taiwan; they launched a campaign of armed conquest to end the autonomy of Tibet; and all along their southern borders they have pressed forward into new territory. To this day, in a fashion recalling the early authoritarian emperors of China, they pursue all these policies and in addition seek to use the millions of Chinese residing abroad as agents of their political designs.

In fact these modern Chinese imperialists have gone further than their imperial ancestors ever dreamed of going. There are at this time, in Communist China training centers for guerrilla warfare, young men from Asia, Africa, and Latin America being trained in sabotage and guerrilla tactics for eventual use in their own countries. Thus the strategy of Mao Tse-tung, of "protracted revolutionary war in the rural areas," has become one of the principal world exports-and no longer an "invisible export"-of Communist China.