COUNTRIES MAKE LAST-MINUTE PLEAS FOR ACHIEVEMENT OF NUCLEAR TEST-BAN TREATY

Press Release
DCF/269

COUNTRIES MAKE LAST-MINUTE PLEAS FOR ACHIEVEMENT OF NUCLEAR TEST-BAN TREATY

GENEVA, 27 June (UN information Service) -- As negotiations on a comprehensive nuclear-test-ban treaty bore down on a 28 June deadline -- now just one day away -- four countries speaking before this morning's plenary of the Conference on Disarmament called for the latest draft text to put greater emphasis on the goals of nuclear non-proliferation nuclear disarmament.

Representatives of Viet Nam, Nigeria, Mexico, and Egypt said they were concerned that at such a late stage agreement still had not been reached on those issues, nor on such matters as the treaty's entry-into-force, its verification procedures, and membership on the executive council that would oversee the treaty's implementation.

France, meanwhile, announced that it was prepared to accept the latest draft text, on the understanding that some adjustments were still necessary, and that the formula for entry-into-force had to be adapted, as recent negotiations had illustrated. The alternative of no treaty at all could have great negative consequences, the country's representative said.

Cuba called for inclusion in the treaty of language acknowledging the relationship between nuclear tests and the environment.

The Conference's ad hoc committee on a nuclear test ban is expected to conclude negotiations, with or without agreement on a treaty, on Friday.

Representatives of Pakistan and the United States also spoke.

Before adjourning, the Conference decided to authorize the participation in its work, as a non-member, of Singapore.

- 2 - Press Release DCF/269 27 June 1996

Statements

JOELLE BOURGOIS (France) said that any test-ban treaty must prohibit completely and forever all nuclear test explosions, must have effective verification and must be universal. It must enter into force as soon as possible. Nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation were equally important and inseparable, and the preamble of any treaty must reflect those concepts. The treaty should put to an end the nuclear arms race by making it impossible to develop new types of weapons.

On-site inspection would be the heart of a verification system. It should be a matter of last resort, and rarely used. But national technical means should be allowed for deciding whether or not to conduct such inspections, as on-site inspections would be the most certain method of verification, and national means would augment the international monitoring system so that more and better information would be available.

Universality was important. France bore in mind the possibility that one nuclear or threshold State might not join the treaty and so keep the treaty from entering into force. The issue of entry into force had not been resolved, and France was determined to find an acceptable solution.

The latest revised text was, in general, acceptable. France would consider the treaty in the light of its national interest but also was ready to be flexible in the interests of meeting valid international goals. The substance of the draft was not perfect -- the emphasis in the preamble was placed more on disarmament than on nonproliferation. The on-site inspection regime would be difficult to trigger and pursue. The balance of protection of national security interests and the need for a certain level of intrusiveness -- which France was not happy with, but recognized as necessary -- seemed to France now to be out of balance.

But France had decided to announce now that it was prepared to adopt as it stood the draft treaty proposed last week by the chairman of the ad hoc committee, on the understanding that some adjustments were still necessary, and that the formula for entry into force had to be adapted, as recent negotiations had illustrated. The alternative of no treaty at all could have great negative consequences.

LE LUONG MINH (Viet Nam) said Viet Nam, in its new position as a full member of the group, was glad that the issue of expansion of membership of the Conference had been resolved, and was of the opinion that the Conference should continue to actively consider the issue so that all countries wishing to do so would soon be able to join it.

- 3 - Press Release DCF/269 27 June 1996

Viet Nam had actively joined the common efforts by the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) leading to the conclusion of the Treaty on the Establishment of a Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone in the region. The conclusion of a comprehensive test-ban treaty would be an important contribution to non-proliferation around the world, but Viet Nam felt it must emphasize at this point that non-proliferation was not the country's final objective.

Viet Nam completely shared the view already expressed by many delegations that the treaty must also serve as a basis for the pursuit of the objective of eliminating all nuclear weapons. Viet Nam therefore associated itself with the proposal advanced by the Group of 21 for establishment of an ad hoc committee on the subject of nuclear disarmament after the Conference had completed work on the comprehensive test-ban treaty.

EJOH ABUAH (Nigeria) said that it was difficult to agree that the draft was designed to achieve a test-ban treaty. The draft was limited in scope, as it did not cover a nuclear test ban. Similarly, it did not contribute effectively to nuclear non-proliferation and to the process of nuclear disarmament. Nigeria had at least expected that the preamble would be strong on nuclear disarmament and on non-proliferation in all its aspects, but this was not the case -- efforts to include in the preamble the shared objective of many non-nuclear-weapons States for a phased programme of nuclear disarmament with a time-bound framework had been fiercely resisted. That resistance defeated the objective of the Review and Extension Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) one year ago in which "nuclear weapons States reaffirmed their commitment... to pursue in good faith negotiations on effective measures relating to nuclear disarmament".

States parties to the test-ban treaty would have to make financial commitments not undertaken in any other treaty, despite the fact that most of them had never acquired nuclear weapons and did not intend to do so. That was why Nigeria felt that the financial obligations imposed by the treaty's monitoring system should be balanced with provisions in the preamble that were strong on both nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. Many countries would be paying for detecting the future tests of others without assurances that there would not be qualitative improvement in the weapons systems that existed today.

As regarded entry-into-force, Nigeria had long advocated a simple numerical formula based on the membership of the Conference on Disarmament. Nigeria was still concerned about the composition of the executive council. It had repeated its position many times -- Africa's representation in the Council should reflect the number of States in the region. In addition, Nigeria had objected to the creation of a sixth region which was a departure from the existing practice of five United Nations recognized regions.

- 4 - Press Release DCF/269 27 June 1996

There was still much ground to cover. What should succeed the treaty negotiations should be an ad hoc committee on nuclear disarmament, with an appropriate negotiating mandate.

ANTONIO DE ICAZA (Mexico) said the deadline for concluding the treaty negotiations was a little more than 24 hours away. Mexico could not conceal its deep concern that major matters still had to be resolved. Time was pressing, and Mexico was beginning to doubt that necessary political decisions would be taken in time. That would be serious, as it risked dashing major international hopes. In this time of détente it should at least be possible to prohibit the testing of nuclear weapons. If that couldn't be accomplished, what hopes were there for nuclear disarmament?

The treaty should be verifiable, have some chance of entering into effect within a reasonable time-frame, and be a step toward the ultimate goal of nuclear disarmament.

EUMELIO CABALLERO (Cuba) said that he hoped that within the next day the Conference would be able to say to the world that it had achieved agreement on a comprehensive test-ban treaty.

Cuba had sought a treaty banning all nuclear tests, but now it was deeply concerned over the progress of negotiations. Flexibility and compromise must be shown. All countries had reservations and concerns, but there was one subject which should not be controversial at all -- the noble and important relationship between nuclear testing and the environment. There already was widespread international agreement that nuclear tests should not harm the environment.

Some countries had put forward national interests, and there had been efforts to accommodate those interests. But Cuba's interest here was not a national one but a matter of international importance. Cuba was optimistic, and trusted that with the support of the Chairman of the ad hoc committee and other delegations, it would find some way of including in the treaty the recognition of that important subject of the environment. There should be a specific reference to the environment in the treaty.

MUNIR AKRAM (Pakistan) said his country wished to comment briefly on the letter addressed to the Conference on 17 June by the new members of the Conference. The contents of the letter were the undertaking of the States which had signed it. Pakistan did not associate itself with the contents. Pakistan could not accept any linkage between certain specifics of the United Nations Charter and membership by States in international bodies, which was their inalienable right. Pakistan could not accept any principle which interfered with sovereign States rights.

- 5 - Press Release DCF/269 27 June 1996

MUNIR ZAHRAN (Egypt) said the intensive consultations for the comprehensive test-ban treaty had fallen short of Egypt's expectations. A true treaty would ban all nuclear weapon tests in all environments and for all time, thus contributing to non-proliferation and disarmament. The treaty must also be an important step in an overall process leading to total elimination of all nuclear weapons. To Egypt's regret, recent deliberations in the ad hoc committee had shown that those objectives were not shared by all. There were those countries that did not wish to end all testing, and did not wish to halt qualitative improvement of their nuclear arsenals.

Several substantive measures in the draft treaty did not meet Egypt's expectations. It would take a miracle at this point to successfully conclude negotiations, but Egypt continued to hope.

A clear commitment was needed in the treaty to the aim of achieving complete nuclear disarmament. The scope did not reflect the needed comprehensiveness; it did not prohibit all nuclear tests but merely explosive tests. Provisions for on-site inspection should be of the sort that proceeded smoothly and quickly and could be halted only if it was demonstrated that allegations were baseless.

There should be no harassment of countries through the filing of frivolous accusations of nuclear tests. The use of national technical means as proposed would leave open the possibility for selectively and unfairness. The latest formula for entry-into-force was acceptable to Egypt, but should include all nuclear-capable States; otherwise the treaty would not be comprehensive and would lose credibility. Representation on the treaty's executive council should treat Africa in an equitable manner -- under the current proposal, Africa was under represented.

STEPHEN J. LEDOGAR (United States) said the country affirmed that the declaration made by the 23 new members in the letter sent to the Chairman of the Conference was considered to be integrally connected to the admission of those countries to the Conference.

* *** *