PRESS CONFERENCE BY AUSTRALIA

24 September 1996

Press Briefing

19960924 FOR INFORMATION OF UNITED NATIONS SECRETARIAT ONLY

The Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Alexander Downer, told correspondents at a Headquarter's press conference today that the signing of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) this morning by the five nuclear-weapon States -- China, France, Russian Federation, United Kingdom and the United States -- had put a definitive end to their nuclear testing. It was an historic day for the world.

The Australian Government, which was proud to have played a role in bringing the CTBT to the General Assembly, had not been as willing to let the Treaty die, he continued. Two and a half years of work went into negotiating the text. If it had not been brought to the Assembly, not only the Conference on Disarmament, but the United Nations system itself, would have been undermined, because the desires of millions of people around the world would have been unfulfilled. But the United Nations system had worked and the Treaty had been signed by 16 countries this morning. Some 65 others were willing to sign it in the immediate future and Australia and others would work to ensure more would do so.

A correspondent asked, what did Mr. Downer expect the next meaningful disarmament conference to be on? Would there be one on land-mines? Mr. Downer said that the current General Assembly would be an opportunity to take the disarmament debate forward and the environment within the international community was favourable for doing so. That was borne out in President Clinton's remarks this morning to the General Assembly and the atmosphere during the CTBT signing ceremony. He was sure there would be progress on the banning of the production of fissile material. He was delighted President Clinton referred in his address to possible future nuclear disarmament talks with the Russians. Land-mines was an issue on which Australia had taken a strong position and he would like to see it taken forward, although how and in what detail remained to be seen.

Did he support putting diplomatic pressure on India to sign the Treaty or would that be counterproductive? a correspondent asked. Mr. Downer replied that crude diplomatic pressure on India at this stage would be counterproductive. The political atmosphere in India was against the signing of the Treaty. Australia would like India to sign it and would be working to encourage that, but it was not the time for a heavy-handed initiative. It was important to get as many countries as possible to sign the Treaty, because then they would be under overwhelming moral and political pressure to adhere to its provisions. It would be unconscionable for a country to sign the Treaty and then not adhere to it on the grounds that it had not entered into force, in a technical sense, because India had not signed it.

If India did not sign the Treaty, was there a way that its provisions for verification could be adopted informally between the Powers? a correspondent asked. Would Australia play a role in that? Australia would examine that issue, Mr. Downer said. But countries were under overwhelming pressure to adhere to the Treaty's provisions once they had signed it.

A correspondent said the Treaty was really about an end to nuclear explosions, because testing could still continue in the laboratory with lasers and by other means. Mr. Downer replied that the argument had been used often, but everyone had tried to get a Treaty which was broadly acceptable and that involved compromises. No one got the ideal Treaty, but everyone got one that was good, if not perfect. Banning traditional nuclear testing made it almost impossible to develop nuclear weapons to the higher levels of devastation and inhibited substantially the weapons programmes of the nuclear-weapon States. It was an important non-proliferation measure as well. At the end of the day, the Treaty created, for the first time, an international environment to take such issues forward. People might quibble about the details, but the Treaty had changed the whole international environment and was an opportunity to push the whole disarmament agenda. There was now widespread support for further international action.

Given its opposition to French underground nuclear testing in the South Pacific, did Australia gain particular satisfaction in bringing the Treaty forward? a correspondent asked. Australia had a history of nuclear testing in its atmosphere unlike most countries -- although it had never itself tested nuclear weapons, Mr. Downer said. When he was a small child, there had been atmospheric tests in two Australian States and more recently the French tests at Mururoa atoll in the South Pacific. The Australian community had reacted to the resumption of French nuclear tests with "unexpected vigor". Australia had worked very hard to persuade France to reverse its decision or end its tests quickly. It had also worked hard to encourage China to end their nuclear tests. And both countries had now done so. It was, therefore, logical for Australia to be active in bringing about the Treaty. The Australian people expected their Government to be active on the issue, because of their strong feelings as a result of their history which, although not unique, was very unusual.

A correspondent asked for comment on the impact of the United Nations debt and the United States arrears. Mr. Downer said Australia always paid its assessments on time and was disappointed that the United States had slipped into arrears. He was delighted that President Clinton had addressed that issue in his speech to the Assembly. Obviously, the American Administration was determined to fix the problem and that was important for the financial viability of United Nations institutions. It was also important, in symbolic terms, for the world's only super-Power and the largest economy to pay its dues in the way other countries did.

Australia Press Conference - 3 - 24 September 1996

What impact did the arrears and the United States debt have on the way the United Nations and its agencies operated? the correspondent asked. Mr. Downer said the Organization was short of money and that, obviously, had an impact on its efficacy. The United Nations had to continue to improve its overall levels of administrative efficiency and there had been some progress. The United Nations as an institution was only as strong as its Members allowed it to be, he added.

Did he think the United Nations had gone a long way towards its reform goals and did he support another term for Secretary-General Boutros Boutros- Ghali? a correspondent asked. There had been some progress towards reform, Mr. Downer replied. His Government had not been heavily involved in the question of the Secretary-General's second term. But Australia would not stand in the way of Mr. Boutros-Ghali. It was an issue which obviously had to be worked through by the Member States.

A correspondent asked what the Australian Government was doing to try and implement the recommendations of the Canberra Commission report on nuclear weapons. Mr. Downer said a copy of the report had been distributed to governments around the world and he had raised the issue with the foreign ministers he had met. He would present the report to the Secretary-General next week and he would also distribute it in New York and refer to it in his address to the General Assembly. He would also take it to the Conference on Disarmament next January. Most of the Commission's recommendations relate to the nuclear-weapon States. It was obviously up to them to respond. One of its recommendations was to sign a test-ban treaty and that was one on the list. It was a practical and realistic report and his Government looked to the nuclear-weapon States to respond.

* *** *