URGENT STEPS TOWARD NUCLEAR-WEAPON-FREE ZONE IN MIDDLE EAST SOUGHT IN DRAFT APPROVED WITHOUT VOTE IN FIRST COMMITTEE
Press Release
GA/DIS/3038
URGENT STEPS TOWARD NUCLEAR-WEAPON-FREE ZONE IN MIDDLE EAST SOUGHT IN DRAFT APPROVED WITHOUT VOTE IN FIRST COMMITTEE
19951113 Israel Says Attempt To Lift Nuclear Issue Out of Context Would Detract From Peace Talks; Iraq Says Nuclear-Free-Zone Has To Precede Lasting PeaceThe General Assembly would urge all parties directly concerned to consider taking urgent steps to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, according to a draft resolution approved this afternoon without a vote by the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security). As a means to that end, the Assembly would invite them to adhere to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
Pending establishment of such a zone, the Assembly would call on all countries of the region to agree to place all their nuclear activities under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards. It would invite them not to develop, produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or permit their stationing on their territories.
Also without a vote, the Committee approved a draft decision by which the Assembly would ask the Chairman of the First Committee to continue consultations on further rationalizing the Committee's work. It would decide to defer the item on rationalization to the Assembly's next session.
Speaking on the Middle East draft, the representative of Israel said attempts to lift the nuclear issue out of its context would detract from the peace talks and could shake the delicate balance achieved through direct negotiation. The representative of Iraq said no lasting peace could be achieved while Israel's nuclear arsenal was exempted from non-proliferation measures. A nuclear-free zone could not follow lasting peace in the region; it had to precede it, he said.
Statements in explanation of position were also made by the representatives of Jordan, Libya, Iran and Egypt.
The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. tomorrow, 14 November, to continue taking action on disarmament-related draft texts.
Committee Work Programme
The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met this afternoon to take action on a draft resolution concerning establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, as well as on a draft decision concerning rationalization of the work of the Committee and reform of its agenda.
By the draft resolution submitted by Egypt on establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East (document A/C.1.50/L.10), the Assembly would urge all parties directly concerned to consider taking the urgent steps required to establish such a zone and, as a means to that end, would invite them to adhere to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).
Pending establishment of the zone, the Assembly would call on all countries of the region to agree to place all their nuclear activities under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards. It would invite them to declare their support for such a zone, to render assistance in its establishment, and to refrain from any action running counter to the letter and spirit of the current text. It would also invite them not to develop, produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or permit their stationing on their territories.
By other terms of the text, the Assembly would note the importance of the ongoing bilateral Middle East peace negotiations and the activities of the multilateral working group on arms control and regional security. It would invite all parties to consider appropriate means that would contribute towards the goal of general and complete disarmament and establishment of a zone free of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. It would ask the Secretary-General to continue consultations with States of the region and other concerned States and to seek their views on the matter.
By a draft decision proposed by the Chairman on rationalization and reform of the First Committee (document A/C.1/50/L.51), the Assembly would ask the Chairman to continue consultations on further rationalizing the work of the Committee with a view to further improvement of its effective functioning. It would decide to defer the related agenda item to its next session.
Additional Co-Sponsors
SOHRAB KHERADI, Committee Secretary, announced that the following countries had joined as co-sponsors of draft resolutions and decisions: on small arms (document A/C.1/50/L.7), Cape Verde, Italy, Malta and Portugal; on a comprehensive test-ban treaty (L.8), Belarus, Cape Verde and Latvia; on verification (L.12) and the role of science and technology (L.13), Kazakstan; on regional confidence-building measures (L.20/Rev.1), Cape Verde; on expanding the Conference on Disarmament (L.21/Rev.1), Austria, Belarus, Cape
First Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/DIS/3038 19th Meeting (PM) 13 November 1995
Verde, Chile, Colombia, Finland, Iraq, Israel, New Zealand, Norway, Senegal, Slovakia, Spain, Syria, Turkey, Ukraine, Viet Nam and Zimbabwe.
Other added cosponsors were: on bilateral nuclear arms negotiations and disarmament (L.35/Rev.1), Argentina, Australia, Belarus, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Spain and Turkey; on the illicit transfer and use of conventional arms (L.37/Rev.1), Bangladesh, Ecuador and Indonesia; on conventional arms control on the regional and subregional levels (L.40), Bangladesh.
Also: on compliance with disarmament agreements (L.42), Bangladesh and Israel; on good-neighbourly relations among Balkan States (L.43), Poland; on moratoriums on the export of anti-personnel land-mines (L.45), Latvia; on nuclear disarmament (L.46), Bangladesh, Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Ecuador; on the role of science and technology (L.48), Bangladesh, Cuba and Pakistan; and on the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Review and Extension Conference (L.49) and on contributions to nuclear disarmament (L.50), Bangladesh.
Action on Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone in Middle East
The representative of Jordan, speaking in explanation of position on the draft resolution on a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, said the existence of unsafeguarded nuclear facilities in the Middle East was a major threat to regional peace and security. The elimination of such a threat would enhance efforts of all regional parties towards maintaining peace and security, and would effectively contribute to the international nuclear non- proliferation regime.
In that regard, he recalled the decisions and resolutions adopted by the 1995 Review Conference of the NPT, which recognized, among other things, the contributions of the Middle East peace process towards such a zone. The Conference had also called upon all States to take steps towards the establishment of a verifiable zone. In the course of consultations last week on the current draft, he had wished to see the language of the NPT Conference reflected in the draft. Therefore, he had unofficially proposed an amendment to the draft. However, given the concern that the amendment could lead to a recorded vote -- and since the draft had enjoyed consensus since 1980 -- he decided not to pursue the proposed amendments. Nevertheless, he wished to confirm his full support of such a zone in the Middle East.
The Committee approved the draft resolution on a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East without a vote.
The representative of Israel said the nuclear issue, as well as all regional security problems, should be dealt with within the full context of the peace process. Practical measures and a step-by-step approach, beginning the process with confidence-building measures, needed to be undertaken.
First Committee - 4 - Press Release GA/DIS/3038 19th Meeting (PM) 13 November 1995
Unfortunately, several regional States were still in a state of war with Israel. Therefore, at this sensitive juncture of the peace process, restraint and caution still prevailed. Attempts by the United Nations to lift the nuclear issue out of its context would detract from the peace talks, and could shake the delicate balance achieved through direct negotiation. While Israel supported the establishment of such a zone, it had never supported the modalities of that resolution which it considered irrelevant. He hoped the consensus reached in the Committee would contribute to the good will and moderation so needed in the ongoing peace process.
The representative of Iraq said he had reservations on the language contained in paragraph 4. Citing specific Security Council resolutions, he said the role and resolutions of the Security Council on the matter had been ignored. It was not logical to pretend that the establishment of the zone could follow lasting peace in the region. No lasting peace could be achieved while Israel's nuclear arsenal was exempted from non-proliferation measures.
The representative of Libya said he joined the consensus on the draft, but that did not mean he recognized the "so-called Israel" and the "so-called peace process" in the Middle East. The ambitions of the draft, noble as they were, could not be achieved unless Israel's huge nuclear arsenal was destroyed or eliminated. Meanwhile, the Israelis must be compelled to place all facilities under the safeguards of the IAEA. Then, and only then, could the Middle East become a nuclear-weapon-free zone.
The representative of Iran said his country had been an original advocate of the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East and fully supported the draft resolution just approved. It would have liked to co-sponsor the text. However, due to an unnecessary reference to the peace negotiations in preambular paragraph 9, to which it had reservations, it could not do so. However, it wholeheartedly supported the contents of the draft resolution.
The representative of Egypt expressed appreciation for renewal of the current initiative, endorsed by consensus. Consensus was important and necessary to translate and implement its provisions -- to translate them into practical reality. A particular delegation had stated that it would not be bound by the text, that certain of its modalities were not binding. What were those modalities? That argument by Israel was dismaying, as work on the text had been carried out hand-in-hand with all the parties in the Middle East, including Israel.
Action on Rationalization of Committee Work
The Committee then turned to the draft decision on rationalization of the work of the First Committee and reform of its agenda, approving it without a vote.
* *** *