"ROAD TO WORLD PEACE"

Evening Post, Volume CXL, Issue 21, 25 July 1945, Page 5

"ROAD TO WORLD PEACE"

UNITED NATIONS CHARTER

REVIEW BY PRIME MINISTER

"The road has been laid towards world peace. The road has been laid towards better standards of living and full employment; towards proper, humane, and responsible treatment of the subject races of the earth; towards the enlightenment of backward peoples; and, above all, the road has been laid to,complete good will and understanding and friendship among the nations of the earth. That road is based on freedom—freedom from fear and freedom from want. The road is there. It is for the nations to say whether they will take it. I hope that we will take the first step along that road by adopting the motion I have moved. "

In these words the Prime Minister (Mr. Fraser) concluded his hour and a half review in the House of Representatives last evening of t|ie deliberations of the United Nations Conference on International Organisation* at San Francisco, from which sprang the United Nations Charter. He had moved that the House ratify the Charter and the constitution of the Court of International Justice.

The debate was adjourned at 10.30 p.m. and will be resumed at 7.30 this 'evening.

The Prime Minister said the Charter embodied the decisions of 50 united nations, many of whom nad taken their part in the fight for freedom against Nazi and Fascist tyranny. "I do not know whether there has ever been in the history of mankind a more important document than the Charter of the United Nations," he said. "It is important, not only because it is a production of 50 nations, but because it marks a great opportunity, perhaps the last opportunity that the nations of the earth will have of forming an organisation to maintain peace, to prevent aggression, and make impossible in the future the sort of attacks that were indulged in by Nazi and Fascist lands. It can succeed only if the nations decide to implement its principles and provisions honestly, determinedly, with singleness of purpose and purity of heart." NO "GANGING-TJP." Mr. Fraser emphasised that there was no attempt to form a British Dominions bloc, or to "gang up" against the other nations. The only bloc was that of the sponsoring Powers at San Francisco. They had come to certain agreements, and adhered to them. No difference of opinion on the wording, of the Charter could in any way lessen the tie between the Dominions and the Mother Country. The Dominions' representatives felt they could speak and vote as they pleased, and that the bonds of unity of the British Dominions were in no way lessened, but rather were strengthened. The League of Nations did not have the military force and power which the new organisation would possess, and it failed because many of the members of the League did not carry out their obligations. The New Zealand delegation at San Francisco moved an amendment regarding the voting power which represented the mind of the majority of the nations represented, but that vyas not agreed to by the sponsoring Powers. We had not yet reached a stage where the great nations of the world fully trustee each other. But in spite of that he had the greatest hopes of the success of the Charter. "I feel that we must have an organisation to promote discipline as well as peace and good will amongst the nations," declared Mr. Fraser. It was only at the end of the conference that Russia finally agreed to a wide limit for the discussions in the Assembly, said Mr. Fraser. The New Zealand delegation felt that the Assembly, which ought to be the Parliament of mankind, should have even greater powers than were provided. As for the Security Council, which he described as the cutting edge of the Charter, it wielded very great power indeed. If the Charter were ratified, he hoped unanimously, New Zealand would be under certain obligations to the Security Council regarding the provision of armed forces that must be honoured. THE POWER OF VETO. The Prime Minister outlined the reasons for New Zealand's strong stand against the use of. what became knovyn as the veto by one Power. One large nation, if it cared to flout the conscience of the world, could conceivably stand against 49 other nations, and on the Security Council could stand against ten other Powers to prevent action. "We thought that was wrong and undemocratic, and we did all we could to prevent it, but finally it was seen that the veto rule of unanimity among the five permanent Powers on the Security Council was just immovable and a condition of the Charter," said Mr. Fraser. "The Charter either had to be accepted with that provision or there would be no Charter at all. We could have prevented the majority that was necessary being reached but would have had oii our shoulders the very grave responsibility of preventing a Charter of any kind being arrived at." Some form of international organisation with whatever defects was better than no organisation, which would have meant the loss of all hope by the people of the world. It seemed to him that it was a case of that organisation of mankind or the complete destruction of civilisation.

entailed in respect to man-power, standing armies, and air forces, at least the attempt should be made. Mr. T. C. Webb (National, Kaipara) said the Prime Minister had played an influential part in the proceedings of the conference and maintained the reputation which New Zealand enjoyed at the council tables of the nations. He would like by way of mild criticism to suggest that a unique opportunity was lost of obtaining the views of the House before the Prime Minister went to San Francisco.

An Opposition member: They were not wanted.

THE INTERNATIONAL COURT,

Mr. Webb added that the Dumbarton Oaks proposals were tabled last session, and formed the basis of the discussion at the Security Conference. A discussion on that report would have given an indication of opinion.

Praising the work of the Chief Justice (Sir Michael Myers), the speaker suggested that it was by no means beyond the bounds of possibility that New Zealand would be offered a seat on the Permanent Court of International 'Justice, and it would be a fitting climax to the great career of New Zealand's Chief Justice if he were offered that position.

TRUSTEESHIP QUESTION.

On the question of the Trusteeship Committee, of which he was chairman, Mr. Fraser said that now and again strong racial feelings made themselves felt and there were several mandates which could have become a vortex of most acrimonious discussion. Luckily, the committee avoided those, or no arrangement would ever have been reached. The Trusteeship Committee would never have materialised but for the keen interest of the late President Roosevelt, who felt that mandated territories and colonies should be looked upon as a sacred trust, to be administered for the benefit of the peoples of those territories. He (Mr. Fraser) was convinced that the small British colonies were administered for the benefit of the people and that the predatory instincts of some of the big companies were restrained so that the people would not be exploited. The principle underlying the whole question of trusteeship was to help the economic, educational, and social development of the various peoples so that ultimately they could come to selfexpression and self-government and so, in the course of time, to what was known as independence. The emphasis laid on independence was, so far as the British Dominions were concerned, somewhat out of focus. The argument was put forward about selfgovernment not being independence. The reply was that the Dominions were completely independent, but that they also realised something more important in the modern world—interdependence, first with the other nations of the British Commonwealth and then the necessity for the interdependence of all nations and the recognition that all were members of a world-wide company. The mandate authorities would be asked to report each year, there would be the right to visit territories, and generally the supervision would be more efficient than could have been exercised by the mandates provision of the League of Nations.

"We failed in many of our ma jot efforts and succeeded in some," said Mr. Fraser in reference to the attitude adopted by the New Zealand delegation. The members of the delegation acted in the wide, generous, progressive, and democratic spirit of New Zealand. They fought, so far as they could, to make the Charter as democratic and progressive as possible.

SPIRIT OF NEW HOPE

The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Roberts) said those members of the House who had seen two world wars with all their devastation and ruin both in human life and in property were glad to turn towards a spirit of new hope as represented by a new charter for the world. It was necessary to arouse energy for the peace which would have to be worked for Just as victory had to be worked for. Whatever New Zealand's obligations might be and whatever sacrifices they