The international climate of the late summer and autumn of 1957 was not too favourable for constructive endeavour at the Twelfth Session of the General Assembly. One of the main factors was the weakness and indecision of Western leadership. Even before the opening of the Assembly the Soviet Union had announced the successful launching of an intercontinental ballistic missile and this considerable achievement was dramatically enhanced by the launching during the session of two earth satellites. The failure, until quite recently, by the United States to demonstrate its ability in the field of rocketry and the accompanying emotional reaction in the United States undoubtedly helped to lower the prestige of the United States and consequently of the Western Powers at the Twelfth Session. Nevertheless, the very noticeable faltering of Western leadership could be attributed to deeper causes than to the Soviet Union's spectacular but possibly temporary gains in the science of rockets.

2. The deterioration of the Western position in the Middle East was a contributing factor of no mean importance. The Assembly opened in the threatening atmosphere of a new crisis along the Syrian-Turkish frontier and the United States bore the brunt of sharp criticism for its part in what was regarded as interference in the domestic affairs of the Arab states. This was a further development in the adverse Arab reaction to the Eisenhower doctrine and to the United States efforts to strengthen its position in the Arab world by exploiting rifts between the Arab governments. This policy which the United States followed during the spring and summer of 1957 had a two-fold reaction against United States interests. It served to dissipate considerable goodwill which the United States had gained from its part during the Middle East crisis of late 1956 and it helped the Soviet Union to strengthen its foothold in the area. The strength of the Arab reaction against those United States policies was sharply illustrated during the general debate at the Twelfth Session and particularly in the response to Mr.Dulles's suggestion that the United Nations should examine the events which had been occurring in Syria and possibly take action to counteract them. Some of the Arab friends of the West were much more outspokenly critical than their neutralist colleagues, in particular Dr.Fawzi, whose remarks about Great Power manoeuvring in the Middle East had a double edge.

3. The Western Powers also suffered disabilities resulting from the Anglo-French armed intervention in the Middle East in 1956. During the Twelfth Session there was remarkably little criticism of either the United Kingdom or France, from the Arabs or from any other quarter than the Soviet bloc, but the Delegations of France and the United Kingdom seemed inhibited by the events which had dominated the Eleventh Session and therefore shrank from taking initiatives at the Twelfth. In addition, the French were almost exclusively preoccupied with the Algerian question and the United Kingdom Delegation, although at first not too concerned about Cyprus, seemed paralyzed by their anxiety about possible items concerning Oman, Aden and other situations with a colonial tinge. The net result was that none of the Great Powers of the West were confidently disposed to take a strong lead at the Twelfth Session, but particularly in the political committees. However, the United States Delegates (Congressman Judd) in the Second Committee and the United Kingdom Delegate (Sir Andrew Cohen) in the Fourth Committee turned in creditable performances.

4. The Soviet Union, on the other hand, was in a strong position to dominate the Assembly. The potentialities of sputnik diplomacy were considerable and at first the Soviet Delegation showed every sign of exploiting them skilfully. Mr.Gromyko's statement in the general debate was generally regarded as one of the best ever made in the Assembly by a Soviet spokesman. It reflected wisdom, moderation and confidence. However, in the discussion of what were perhaps the two most important political items disarmament and the Syrian situation the Soviet Delegation resorted to a brand of toughness which was quite out of keeping with Soviet policies at the Assembly during the past four years. While there was some nervousness on the part of some delegates like those from Poland, Yugoslavia and Indonesia, the main reaction of important neutralists, like the Indians and Egyptians, was to deplore Soviet attempts to bully the Assembly. This reaction against the Soviet Union, and particularly during the consideration of the Syrian item, came to be shared by almost all segments of opinion in the Assembly. This was followed by a noticeable softening, or perhaps indifference, in the Soviet line. Soviet criticism of Western Powers during the discussion of such items as the financing of UNEF, Algeria and Cyprus was almost perfunctory in comparison with earlier sessions. The turning point in the Soviet attitude seemed to coincide with the ousting of Marshal Zhukov. Viewed from New York, however, the softening in the Soviet attitude was an apparent result from the realization that the policy of harshness had served to reduce the benefit reaped by the Soviet Union from its scientific achievements.

5. A by-product of the Soviet attitude was that the satellite delegations tended to assume the initiative for the Soviet bloc. This was particularly noticeable in the Special Committee and in the Second and Third Committees, where the Delegations of Czechoslovakia, Poland and Romania were active. Moreover, the Polish position in the principal political bodies, the Plenary Session and the First Committee, continued to show variation from the main Soviet theme. There were signs, but particularly after the reaction against the bullying tactics of the Soviet Union, that the satellite delegations had stepped up their efforts to communicate with and influence uncommitted countries not only from Africa and Asia but including less dependable Latin American allies of the West like El Salvador, Guatemala and Haiti. So it developed at the Twelfth Session that many of the initiatives by the Soviet Union were in the hands of the satellites just as on the Western side important initiatives were developed by smaller powers.

6. Some observers have tended to regard this as an inevitable development in an eighty-two-member assembly, which is mainly composed of small powers. The possibility should not be ruled out, however, that the Soviet Union at some future session, perhaps as early as the Thirteenth, might firmly seize the initiative and with the help of the satellite delegations, whose recent experience would be invaluable in those circumstances, try to reassert great power leadership in the Assembly, but, of course, from the communist side of the house. Given the enhanced position in the uncommitted world of the Soviet Union and the apathy and indecision which the Western great powers have recently shown, there could be a marked shift in developments at future assemblies and to the decided disadvantage of the West.

7. On the encouraging side a more subtle influence began to make its appearance at the Twelfth Session and frequently with the most promising results. There was a clear demonstration that the fear, which for the past two years has haunted some of the Western delegations, about a blocking third consisting of the combined African-Asian and Soviet groups, was more apparent than real. There was increasing evidence at the Twelfth Session that important members of the African-Asian group were reluctant to become bound by group decisions, usually reached under the sway of the more extremist opinion within the group. This was most strikingly demonstrated during the consideration of the Syrian item, when Dr.Fawzi proved to be the strongest influence for moderation. There were other demonstrations, but particularly behind the scenes, during the debates on Algeria, Cyprus, the financing of UNEF and of the Suez Canal clearance. During the consultations about the major colonial items the Delegations of Ceylon, Iran and Japan rendered effective assistance in combating extremist elements in the African-Asian group. Concerning the Middle East questions, and including some difficult negotiations about the resolution on UNRWA, the Egyptians were the champions of moderation and proved much more helpful to the West than some of its Arab allies. The Indian Delegation provided a moderating influence as well but the Indian position within the African-Asian group was considerably weakened because of a strong reaction against Mr.Krishna Menon. (Toward the end of the session he did not attend group meetings). There was evidence of an increase in Japan's influence within the group and of a growing rivalry between Japan and India. The Indians continued to be active, however, in the Fourth Committee. It can be broadly concluded that the African-Asians are not unresponsive to reasonable appeals for moderation and indeed at the Twelfth Session they seemed more than willing to seek a middle ground. The possibilities of compromise with this group seemed promising, as long as the interested Western powers maintained some flexibility in their own approach.

8. Also apparent at the Twelfth Session was the desire of the Arab states, but particularly Egypt and Syria, to repair their lines of communication with the Western powers. The emphasis on Arab nationalism, independence and neutralism during the general debate was most pronounced. There was concrete evidence behind the scenes that the Egyptians in particular wished to restore the balance in their international relations, as between the Soviet bloc and the Western powers. Perhaps the best illustration was given during the Syrian debate but the Egyptian position in this regard was consistent throughout the Twelfth Session. It clearly reflected Dr.Fawzi's desire to clean up the mess of last year and to explore possibilities for improving the overall situation in the Middle East. The response of the Western Great Powers to this shift in Egyptian policy was sluggish, and particularly by the United States, presumably because of domestic political difficulties and a desire not to irritate the United Kingdom and France. The impression was, however, that the Egyptians were reasonably encouraged by the Western reaction, particularly on the part of Canada and Norway, to continue their efforts at reconciliation.

9. This process was largely facilitated through United Nations machinery. The successes of the UNEF experiment and of the Canal-clearing operation have greatly strengthened United Nations influence in the Middle East, and especially in Cairo and Damascus. The confidence which existed between the Secretary-General and Dr.Fawzi not only helped to solve difficult problems like the financing of UNEF and the recovery of the costs of clearing the Canal but paved the way for future developments, like an agreement on compensation for the Universal Suez Canal Company and possibly on a comprehensive programme, linked loosely to the United Nations, for the economic development of the area. This strengthening of United Nations influence in what is perhaps the area of greatest tension in the world today helps to offset the deadlocks and disappointments in such important fields as disarmament and East-West relations in general. It is perhaps the modest beginning of a trend toward greater diplomatic activity on the part of the United Nations Secretariat under the very able guidance of Mr.Hammarskjöld.

10. A further development which gained emphasis at the Twelfth Session was the effort on the part of a few Western delegations, The Economist of December 28th has dubbed them the greater Scandinavian group, to modify extremist positions and to work energetically for compromise resolutions which while not entirely acceptable to opposing sides would meet with the approval of the substantial majority in the Assembly. This group of Delegations, which included from time to time, and in various circumstances: Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Denmark, Iran, Ireland, Japan, Norway, Sweden and Thailand kept in fairly close touch throughout the Assembly and tried to bridge gaps between sharply opposed delegations or groups of delegations. The nucleus of the Western section of this fire brigade was provided by the Delegations of Canada and Norway. They participated prominently in the consultation and negotiation concerning the main political issues but particularly disarmament, the Syrian situation, Algeria, Cyprus and the Middle East items. By working closely with the United States Delegation and with the Secretary-General, the Canadian and Norwegian Delegations managed not only to keep well abreast of developments in the Assembly but on many occasions to be somewhat in advance of them.

11. It was clear that the United States Delegation favoured the fire brigade technique. They preferred to have Western initiatives taken by delegations from small powers, although United States officials expected to be kept fully informed about and to assist in promoting these initiatives. The effort on the part of the Delegations of Canada, Ireland and Norway to amend the African-Asian draft resolution on Algeria was perhaps the most striking example of the cooperation between the fire brigade and the United States. This technique proved to be reasonably effective in many of the holding operations which were almost characteristic of the Twelfth Session but it is seriously open to question whether this approach would be as effective at future sessions, when the Assembly would almost certainly be required to do more than adopt watery compromises if it is to survive as an effective international instrument. In an atmosphere in which the Assembly would be expected to take firm and forward steps, the Western delegations which might be called upon to take the initiative would require much more support not only from the United States but from the United Kingdom and France, and this would be particularly true of the latter two when their own interests were directly involved.

12. Perhaps what is most urgently required of the Western Great Powers is that they approach the annual sessions of the General Assembly with fixed policy objectives in mind rather than with the impromptu expedients designed mainly to head off unpalatable proposals. A growing number of states members of the United Nations are treating the annual Assembly as a serious exercise of diplomacy in which a considerable effort is made to bring about some reconciliation of the various national view-points. This matching up of foreign policies is not too apparent in the innocuous resolutions and often dismal compromises, which the Assembly frequently adopts, but in the negotiations behind the scenes more often than not there is a realistic and useful exposition of national policies. Perhaps, if nothing else were to happen each autumn, this earnest exchange of views would be enough to make the Assembly worthwhile. However, this process of consultation, negotiations and frequently reconciliation behind the scenes is insufficient if it leads nowhere; and obviously it can lead nowhere if some of those who participate in this activity are working only for postponement, window-dressing or a two-thirds majority in lieu of solid policy objectives. In this regard the recent performances of France, the United Kingdom and the United States have tended to be less impressive than that of the Soviet Union which, for all its ineptness, does give the appearance of taking the Assembly seriously and of seeking solid objectives there. There seems little doubt that this earnestness of purpose, whatever its motivation, has an appeal for many United Nations members, and particularly among the African-Asians, who have looked in vain to the West for decisive leadership.

13. Perhaps this point can be illustrated by reference to some of the main items on the agenda of the Twelfth Session:

    1. Disarmament. Even before the Twelfth Session began it was generally accepted by United Nations members that the deadlock which had developed in the Sub-Committee late in the summer of 1957 was not going to be resolved by the Assembly without a substantial shift in the positions of one side or the other, or both. With two sputniks in outer space the Soviet Union was unlikely to shift its position and indeed the Yugoslavs and others cautioned against any effort at serious negotiations with the Soviet Union during this period of triumph. There was nevertheless widespread disappointment that the only response which the West could muster at a time of extreme anxiety was to seek Assembly endorsement of the Four-Power position of August 29th. This smacked too much of business as usual on disarmament and produced a widely held conclusion that the Assembly had failed miserably in its consideration of disarmament, notwithstanding the impressive majority which supported the West for a variety of reasons. In this atmosphere delegations, representing most shades of opinion, worked hard to evolve a compromise on the enlargement of the Disarmament Commission. The aim was to salvage the machinery even if the issues of substance were deadlocked. Although the Western Great Powers were more or less pushed into accepting the twenty-five-member Commission, it was the Soviet Union which bore the main brunt of the Assembly's disappointment about the failure of that compromise. Nevertheless, it should not be assumed that uncommitted countries like Egypt, India and Yugoslavia would seek to embarrass the Soviet Union by agreeing to convene the enlarged Commission, because those countries and others have considerable sympathy for the Soviet complaint that it has always been unfairly outnumbered during the long course of United Nations discussion of the Disarmament question.

    2. Colonial Items. In the consideration of the three main items, Algeria, Cyprus and West New Guinea, only the debate on the Algerian question showed any semblance of progress. This was possible because of the tireless efforts of negotiators behind the scenes and because the French Foreign Minister showed some flexibility in his position, a flexibility which the Arab side recognized and reciprocated in some degree. The opposite was true of the proceedings on Cyprus and on West NewGuinea. Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom clung to positions on Cyprus which were patently irreconcilable and which will have to be adjusted if this most damaging of NATO family quarrels is to be resolved. At least some means should be found to remove it from United Nations forum. As for West New Guinea, Australia and The Netherlands, confident that they could hold their blocking third, gave no thought to any means for ameliorating their differences with Indonesia, which was no less unbending. Of these three issues only the Algerian question shows the slightest possibility of a United Nations solution and this can be accomplished only if France, and the friends of France, reach some understanding about policy objectives which they should pursue at the Assembly. The time for postponements and palliatives has passed.

    3. South African Items. At the Twelfth Session there seemed to be renewed interest in these items, probably because of the gradually swelling voice of the African nations. Spokesmen for Ghana, in particular, showed impatience and distrust when it was suggested that a breathing spell might be more beneficial than the perennial debate in the Assembly. The likelihood is that South Africa will be more persuaded than ever by the performance at the Twelfth Session to keep out of these discussions, which in South Africa's absence can only be sterile. As well, however, they can be increasingly embarrassing to the European members of the Commonwealth, who will be under constant pressure to take positive steps to induce South Africa to change its ways.

    4. Middle East Items. Perhaps the main political progress of the Twelfth Session was made on these items: the Syrian complaint; the future and financing of UNEF; the recovery of the costs of Suez Canal clearance; the perennial problem of Palestine refugees. Owing mainly to the energetic and determined efforts of a few delegations (Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Egypt, Norway, Sweden aided by the Secretary-General and the United States), whose stake in restoring and continuing tranquillity in the Middle East was high, these items were debated in the Assembly in the most favourable atmosphere. Through intensive negotiation and consultation, during the course of which solid and consistent policy objectives were pursued, the way was systematically paved for a smooth passage of the necessary resolutions, with the exception of the Syrian complaint which was allowed to subside without formal decision. The activity behind the scenes amply demonstrated the value of a serious consultation and negotiation at the United Nations; and undoubtedly as a result relations between the countries closely concerned were strengthened. A useful precedent for the future might have been established. At best, however, these achievements at the Twelfth Session amounted to a little more than a continuing of the repair work so necessary in the Middle East after the crisis of 1956.

    5. Peaceful Co-Existence. The efforts made by India, Sweden and Yugoslavia to have the Assembly adopt their resolution on international cooperation reflected in the closing hours of the Assembly, when the propaganda debate on this item continued long into the night, the anxiety and frustration, which a great many delegations shared, about the poor political showing at the Twelfth Session. Undoubtedly the Indians and Yugoslavs were influenced in part by the knowledge that the Heads of NATO governments would shortly meet in Paris. Officials of the uncommitted countries seemed fearful that this meeting would produce a hardening of the Western attitude in response to a Soviet sputnik diplomacy. The large vote in favour of the three-power resolution did little to dispel the pessimism but at least one more item on the Assembly agenda was brought to a tidy conclusion.

14. As suggested in the foregoing balance sheet, which is admittedly roughly drawn and only concerned with political issues, the Twelfth Session was no model of United Nations achievement. Perhaps this result was inevitable in a year when the previous session, which had been so spectacular, was only a few months cold. There was a noticeable weariness among the experienced hands in the active delegations. There was even a lack of enthusiasm for, or even impatience with, the dreary debates on principles and abstractions which have consumed so much time at past sessions. Perhaps what was needed was a breathing spell in which all but essential measures (like the financing of UNEF) could be left more or less in abeyance. Perhaps this lull was usefully occupied in acclimatizing the 22 new members to their first normal Assembly. Perhaps in this year when man stepped into the threshold of outer space it was advisable not to try to reach solutions to questions which had been first raised long ago in very different circumstances. Perhaps the continued exploration behind the scenes of national policies, on a slightly wider scale than at earlier sessions, was still the best that could be hoped for at any annual session.

15. These are all handy and perhaps not altogether implausible excuses for the shortcomings of the Twelfth Session. They are valid just so long as they do not become too much of a pattern for assessing the annual Assembly. It can hardly be, however, that the Thirteenth and following sessions can be a succession of holding operations or breathing spells. Either the Assembly must go forward or decline as an influence in international life. At the beginning of 1958 there seems to be a considerable possibility that the Soviet Union will attempt to inject new life in the Assembly by attempting to seize the leadership which the Western Great Powers have allowed to slip from their hands. Certainly with its enhanced prestige the Soviet Union has every opportunity to do this but it is by no means inevitable that this should happen. Combined, the Western Powers still have a monopoly of knowledge, skill and experience which should enable them to maintain the initiative in the General Assembly. All that is needed is bold, sensible and firm leadership. If a strong challenge should come from the Soviet Union at the Thirteenth Session, the Western Powers should be prepared to meet it squarely and their leadership must come from the United States. Because of this real possibility it seems clear even now that serious preparations for the Thirteenth Session should begin in a very few months and should be developed through the most careful consultation among the principal Western powers. To be most effective these consultations should take place mainly in NewYork where the processes of the United Nations are best understood and where the links between Delegations are strongest.

¹⁴ Ce document est tiré du Rapport final sur la 12^e Assemblée générale des Nations Unies, compilé oar les fonctionnaires du Ministère à Ottawa sur la foi des rapports soumis par les membres de la Mission permanente à New York. L'évaluation générale originale non révisée de cette Assemblée générale, qui avait été envoyer de New York, n'a pas été retrouvée.
This document is taken from the Final Report on the Twelfth United Nations General Assembly compiled by departmental officials in Ottawa based on reports submitted by members of the Permanent Mission in NewYork. The original unedited general assessment of the 12 General Assembly sent from New York was not located.