RUSSIAN FEDERATION, UNITED STATES ENCOURAGED IN NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT EFFORTS IN FIRST COMMITTEE DRAFT RESOLUTION

7 November 1996

Press Release
GA/DIS/3067

RUSSIAN FEDERATION, UNITED STATES ENCOURAGED IN NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT EFFORTS IN FIRST COMMITTEE DRAFT RESOLUTION

19961107 Points to 'Step-by-Step' Approach to Disarmament, Says United States; Middle East, Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones among Topics of Ten Texts Introduced

The General Assembly would encourage and support efforts by the Russian Federation and the United States to reduce their nuclear weapons and to give those efforts the highest priority in order to ultimately eliminate such weapons, under the provisions of one of 10 draft resolutions introduced this afternoon in the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security).

The draft resolution was introduced by United States Senator Clayborne Pell, who said that it pointed to a step-by-step approach to nuclear disarmament, which was multilateral when it had to be, regional when it had to be, bilateral, or even unilateral. Once the Treaty on Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (START II) was implemented, Russian and American strategic arms would be reduced to about one third their pre-START levels. Once START II was ratified, the respective Presidents of the two countries were committed to discussions on further reductions.

By the terms of a draft on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, the Assembly would urge all parties to consider the urgent steps required for its establishment. It would call upon all countries of the region to place their nuclear activities under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards, and would stress the importance of rapid progress in the Middle East peace negotiations.

Introducing that draft, the representative of Egypt said that it bore on the current state of affairs in the Middle East peace process by noting that the agreement should be comprehensive and should represent an appropriate framework for the peaceful settlement of contentious issues in the region. The draft was a broader initiative than in previous years, highlighting not only the nuclear factor, but the chemical and biological dimension as well.

The representative of Israel said that although his country had joined consensus on that draft for the last 10 years, the current one was, in effect,

First Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/DIS/3067 17th Meeting (PM) 7 November 1996

a new draft that called for a new position. It drastically diluted the importance of the peace process. Israel supported a mutually verifiable nuclear-weapon-free zone in due course -- "after peace is sealed", he said.

By another draft on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, the Assembly would call upon Israel, as the only State in the region not party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), to agree not to develop, produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons. It would call upon Israel to renounce possession of such weapons and place all unsafeguarded nuclear facilities under the safeguards of the IAEA.

The representative of Egypt, introducing that draft, said that Israel's non-adherence to the NPT had aggravated security concerns over the risk of proliferation in the region. Responding, the representative of Israel said that the draft should have been removed from the agenda long ago. Continued arraignment and name-calling directed at Israel in the draft did not serve the cause of peace and would no doubt have a detrimental effect on political developments in the Middle East.

By another draft resolution, introduced by the representative of Brazil, the Assembly would call upon the States parties and signatories to the treaties establishing nuclear-weapon-free zones in Latin America and the Caribbean, in the South Pacific, South-East Asia and Africa, by all regional States, to consolidate the status of the nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent areas.

The Committee also heard the introduction of draft texts on: the United Nations disarmament, fellowship, training and advisory programme; the dumping of nuclear or radioactive wastes; the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free-Zone Treaty; the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa; the Conference on Disarmament; and the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction.

The texts were introduced by the representative of Nigeria, South Africa, Togo and Poland.

Statements were made by the representatives of Qatar, Indonesia, New Zealand, Spain, Russian Federation, Mexico, Argentina and Syria.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. Monday, 11 November, to take action on disarmament drafts.

Committee Work Programme

The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met this afternoon to continue its consideration of draft resolutions and decisions on disarmament. It had before it three draft resolutions on nuclear-weapon-free zones, in the southern hemisphere, Africa, and the Middle East. It also had before it drafts on: the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East; bilateral nuclear arms negotiations and nuclear disarmament; prohibiting the dumping of radioactive wastes; the Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa; and the United Nations disarmament fellowship, training and advisory services.

A 53-Power draft resolution on the nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent areas (document A/C.1/51/L.4) would have the Assembly urge ratification of the treaties of establishing nuclear-weapon-free zones in Latin America and the Caribbean, in the South Pacific, South-East Asia and Africa, by all regional States, and adherence to their protocols by all relevant States that have not already done so. The Assembly would call upon all States to consider proposals to establish further nuclear-weapon-free zones, especially in areas such as the Middle East.

The draft would have the Assembly call upon the States parties and signatories to the Treaties of Tlatelolco, Rarotonga, Bangkok and Pelindaba to explore and implement further means of cooperation, including efforts to consolidate the status of the nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent areas.

[The treaties cited above are: the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean (Treaty of Tlatelolco); the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty (Treaty of Rarotonga); the South-East Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (Bangkok Treaty); and the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (Pelindaba Treaty).]

The draft resolution is sponsored by Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Bahamas, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cote d'Ivoire, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Jamaica, Lesotho, Malaysia, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Mongolia, Mozambique, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Samoa, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Uruguay, Venezuela and Viet Nam.

By a draft resolution on the Treaty of Pelindaba (document A/C.1/51/L.23), the Assembly would call upon African States to sign and ratify that Treaty as soon as possible, so it can enter into force without delay. It

First Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/DIS/3067 17th Meeting (PM) 7 November 1996

would call upon the States contemplated in its Protocol III to take all necessary measures to ensure the Treaty's speedy application to territories for which they are internationally responsible or which lie within the geographical zone established in the Treaty.

Further terms of the text would have the Assembly call on the African States parties to the Non-Proliferation Treaty of Nuclear Weapons which have not yet concluded comprehensive safeguards agreements with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to do so, thereby satisfying a requirement of the Pelindaba Treaty.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Burundi on behalf of the African Group of States.

Under a draft resolution on prohibiting the dumping of radioactive wastes (document A/C.1/51/L.24), the Assembly would call upon all States to take measures aimed at preventing any dumping of nuclear or radioactive wastes that would infringe upon the sovereignty of States. It would ask the Conference on Disarmament, in negotiations for a convention to prohibit radiological weapons, to take radioactive wastes into account within its scope. It would also ask the Conference to intensify its efforts towards early conclusion of such a convention.

The Assembly would express grave concern regarding any use of nuclear wastes that would constitute radiological warfare and have grave implications for the security of all States. It would express the hope that effective implementation of the IAEA Code of Practice on the International Transboundary Movement of Radioactive Waste will enhance protection of all States from dumping of radioactive wastes on their territories.

The draft would also have the Assembly welcome the current efforts of the IAEA in preparation of a draft convention on the safe management of radioactive wastes and the appropriate recommendations made by participants at the Moscow summit on nuclear safety and security. It would call on all States generating nuclear wastes with nuclear installations to participate actively in preparing that convention under IAEA auspices.

The draft is sponsored by Burundi (for the African Group), France and the Russian Federation.

A draft resolution submitted by Poland on the Report of the Conference on Disarmament (document A/C.1/51/L.25) sponsored by Poland, the Assembly would reaffirm that body's role as the international community's single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum, and welcome its 17 June decision to expand its membership with 23 new members. The Conference would be encouraged to further review its membership and further intensify the ongoing

First Committee - 4 - Press Release GA/DIS/3067 17th Meeting (PM) 7 November 1996

review of its agenda and methods of work. The Assembly would urge the Conference to make every effort to reach a consensus on its agenda and programme of work at the beginning of its 1997 session. The Conference would be encouraged to further review its membership, and further intensify the ongoing review of its agenda and methods of work.

The Assembly would also request the Secretary-General to continue to ensure adequate administrative, substantive and conference support services to the Conference. That body would be requested to submit a report on its work to the Assembly, and would include that report in the provisional agenda of the Assembly's fifty-second session.

A draft resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa (document A/C.1/51/L.26) would have the Assembly reaffirm its support for the further operation and strengthening of the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa. It would encourage the Centre's efforts to promote cooperation with regional and subregional organizations, as well as among African States, in order to help develop effective confidence-building, arms limitation and disarmament measures.

The Assembly would again appeal to Member States, mainly African countries, as well as to international and non-governmental organizations and foundations, to make regular voluntary contributions to the Centre. It would ask the Secretary-General to intensify efforts to find new means of funding and to continue supporting the Centre. It would ask him to ensure that its Director is locally based, as far as possible and within existing resources.

The draft is sponsored by Burundi on behalf of the African Group of States.

By a draft resolution on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East (document A/C.1/51/L.27), the Assembly would call upon Israel, the only State in the region that was not yet party to the Treaty on the Non- Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), to accede to it without further delay. It would also call on Israel not to develop, produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons, and to renounce possession of nuclear weapons.

The draft would have the Assembly call upon Israel to place all unsafeguarded nuclear facilities under full-scope IAEA safeguards, as an important confidence-building measure among all States of the region and as a step towards enhancing peace and security. The Assembly would also welcome Djibouti's accession to the NPT, as well as Oman's decision to accede to it.

The draft is sponsored by Egypt on behalf of Member States which are members of the League of Arab States.

First Committee - 5 - Press Release GA/DIS/3067 17th Meeting (PM) 7 November 1996

A draft resolution on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East (document A/C.1/51/L.28), sponsored by Egypt, would have the Assembly urge all parties directly concerned to consider taking the urgent steps needed to establish such a zone, and invite them to adhere to the NPT. Pending the establishment of the zone, it would call on all countries of the region that have not done so to agree to place all their nuclear activities under IAEA safeguards.

The Assembly would stress the importance of achieving rapid progress in the bilateral Middle East peace negotiations for the promotion of security in the region. It would invite all countries in the region to declare their support for establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone there. It would invite them not to develop, produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or permit the stationing on their territories, or territories under their control, of nuclear weapons.

In addition, the Assembly would invite all States to assist in establishment of the zone. It would also invite all parties to consider appropriate means that might contribute to the goal of general and complete disarmament in the Middle East. It would ask the Secretary-General to continue pursuing consultations with the States of the region and other concerned States in order to move towards establishment of a nuclear-weapon- free zone in the Middle East.

By a 22-Power draft resolution on United Nations disarmament fellowship, training and advisory services (document A/C.1/51/L.32), the Assembly would ask the Secretary-General to continue to implement annually the Geneva-based programme, within existing resources, commending him for the diligence with which it has continued to be carried out. It would also express appreciation to the Governments of Germany and Japan for inviting the 1996 fellows to study selected activities in the field of disarmament.

The draft resolution was sponsored by Algeria, Argentina, Brazil, Cote d'Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Egypt, Germany, Greece, Indonesia, Iran, Japan, Myanmar, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, South Africa, Togo, United Republic of Tanzania and Viet Nam.

By a 43-Power draft resolution on bilateral nuclear arms negotiations and nuclear disarmament (document A/C.1/51/L.45), the General Assembly would encourage the Russian Federation, the United States, Belarus, Kazakstan and Ukraine to continue their cooperative efforts aimed at eliminating nuclear weapons and strategic offensive arms on the basis of existing agreements. The Assembly would encourage and support the Russian Federation and the United States in their efforts to reduce their nuclear weapons and to continue to

First Committee - 6 - Press Release GA/DIS/3067 17th Meeting (PM) 7 November 1996

give those efforts the highest priority in order to contribute to the ultimate elimination of those weapons.

The draft is sponsored by Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kazakstan, Kyrgyzstan, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Marshall Islands, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Tajikistan, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, United Kingdom and the United States.

By a draft resolution on chemical weapons (document A/C.1/51/L.48) the General Assembly would call upon all States that had not yet done so to sign and/or ratify the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention) without delay.

The Assembly would welcome the fact that 65 instruments of ratification had been deposited and that the Convention will therefore enter into force in April 1997. The Assembly would also stress the importance to the Convention that all possessors of chemical weapons or their production or development facilities be among the original parties to the Convention, and in that context, the importance that the United States and the Russian Federation, as declared possessors of such weapons, be among the original States parties to the Convention.

The draft resolution is sponsored by Canada, India, Mexico and Poland.

Introduction of Draft Texts

CESLO AMORIM (Brazil), speaking in introduction of the draft resolution on a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere, announced the addition of Benin, Grenada, Guyana, Kenya, Liberia, Namibia, Sierra Leone, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, United Republic of Tanzania, Zaire and Zimbabwe as co-sponsors.

The draft aimed at achieving recognition by the General Assembly of the progressive emergence of a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent areas, he said. The draft did not create new legal obligations or contradict existing international laws applicable to ocean space, such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

M.O. LAOSE-AJAYI (Nigeria), introduced the draft resolution on United Nations disarmament fellowship, training and advisory services. She said that the varied objectives of the training programme had provided young diplomats with important negotiating skills.

First Committee - 7 - Press Release GA/DIS/3067 17th Meeting (PM) 7 November 1996

More than 300 diplomats, mostly from developing countries, had benefitted from the programme, she said. Many developed countries also found the training program appropriate for their young diplomats. In light of the programme's relevance, the draft appealed to Member States for continued support.

She then introduced the draft on prohibiting the dumping of radioactive wastes, on behalf of the Group of African States, France, Mongolia and the Russian Federation. Concerns over the accident at Chernobyl had led to international cooperation in addressing nuclear safety, including safe management of nuclear wastes. Despite the development of new legally binding instruments on nuclear safety, the draft continued to call for progress at the Conference on Disarmament on the item on radiological weapons. Such progress would put to rest the fears of developing countries being subjected to a subtle form of "radiological warfare" through exposure to the dumping of radioactive wastes.

NABIL ELARABY (Egypt) introduced the draft resolution on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, a region, he said, which had been the theatre of strife for over 40 years. The consensus which had developed in the Assembly in favour of the proposal was eloquent testimony to the viability of the concept. Establishment of the zone would be an important confidence-building measure indicative of the common desire of all States of the region to live in peace.

He said that in introducing the current draft he had exerted every possible effort to recognize two factors: the consensual dimension of the draft; and the inevitability of reflecting regional and extra-regional realities.

The draft, therefore, bore on the current state of affairs in the Middle East peace process, by noting that the agreement should be of a comprehensive nature and should represent an appropriate framework for the peaceful settlement of contentious issues in the region, he said. It also included a global level, by taking note of the decisions taken by the 1995 Review and Extension Conference of the Treaty for the NPT and its resolution on the Middle East. The draft was a broader initiative than in previous years, highlighting not only the nuclear factor, but adding as well the dimension of chemical and biological weapons. The time was now ripe to proceed towards the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East.

CLAYBORNE PELL (United States) introduced the draft resolution on bilateral nuclear arms negotiations and nuclear disarmament. He said his purpose in presenting that draft was to put on record recent positive developments in the reduction of his country's strategic nuclear weapons arsenals. The draft noted that the United States had ratified the Treaty on

First Committee - 8 - Press Release GA/DIS/3067 17th Meeting (PM) 7 November 1996

Further Limitation and Reduction of Strategic Offensive Arms (START II), and expressed the hope that the Russian Federation would do so soon. It also welcomed the removal of all nuclear weapons from Kazakstan and Ukraine, as well as the accession of Balarus, Ukraine and Kazakstan to the NPT as non- nuclear-weapon States.

But much work remained to be done, and the draft strongly urged Russia and the United States to give highest priority to further reduction of their nuclear arsenals, he said. The draft also provided further impetus to the nuclear-weapon States to continue meeting their obligations under Article VI of the NPT. Much had been achieved, however. An entire class of nuclear weapons had been abolished through the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty. The Treaty on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (START I) had entered into force, and reductions were two years ahead of schedule. The implementation of START II would lower Russian and United States strategic nuclear arms to about one-third of pre-START levels. Finally, once START II was ratified, the respective Presidents of the two countries were committed to discussions on further reductions.

The draft pointed to a practical way of achieving nuclear disarmament under current circumstances -- a step-by-step approach that included all involved parties, he said. Such an approach was multilateral when it had to be -- as with the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and, hopefully, the upcoming treaty for a cut-off of fissile-material production. It was regional when it had to be -- as with the recent creation of several nuclear- weapon-free zones. And it was bilateral, even unilateral, when it had to be -- as with the START agreements and other measures announced by the Russian Federation and the United States. He asked for full support for the draft.

ABDULLA AL-MASSAD (Qatar), speaking on the agenda item on the nuclear- weapon-free zone in the Middle East, said that the zone would strengthen nuclear non-proliferation in an area of tension. The zone was in keeping with the goals and principles of the NPT and with various resolutions, and reflected the responsibility of the States of the region.

Arab States, in particular, welcomed the establishment of such a zone, he said. Israel was the only State of the region that had failed to adhere to the developing nuclear-weapon-free regime. Nuclear activities, not used solely for peaceful purposes, still existed in the region. In light of the new government of Israel, a nuclear-weapon free zone was vital. A mutually and effectively verifiable measure would build confidence, further consolidate economic development and enhance regional stability.

SUDJADNAN PARNOHADININGRAT (Indonesia said that his country had decided to become a co-sponsor of the draft resolution on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent areas. The countries of

First Committee - 9 - Press Release GA/DIS/3067 17th Meeting (PM) 7 November 1996

Africa, the South Pacific, South-East Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean shared a commonality of interests and a firm determination to convert their large area of the earth's surface into a nuclear-weapon-free zone, encompassing the southern hemisphere and adjacent areas. The dream of a denuclearized world could only become a reality with the concurrence of the nuclear-weapon States. He hoped that, consistent with their responsibility, those States would work to facilitate the legitimate aspirations of the States of the region. The draft, he said, warranted the wholehearted support of the Committee.

PETER GOOSEN (South Africa), introducing a draft resolution on the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty, said that the Treaty reflected the combined ideal of African countries to see their continent free of nuclear weapons. It was an achievement of which all Africans could rightfully be proud. The Treaty would serve to strengthen the international non- proliferation regime and encourage the establishment of additional nuclear- weapon-free zones in other parts of the world. The African Group of States trusted that the First Committee would once again approve the draft by consensus.

He added that South Africa supported the draft resolution on an international agreement to ban anti-personnel land-mines (document A/C.1/51/L.46) of which it was a co-sponsor. Africa was one of the continents that had suffered the most as a result of those weapons. South Africa was fully committed to ensuring the earliest possible conclusion of a legally binding international instrument for their prohibition.

Mr. ELARABY (Egypt), speaking on behalf of members of the League of Arab States, introduced the draft resolution on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East.

The adoption last year of a resolution under the same agenda item did not take into account the present political environment in the Middle East, he said. Referring to the accession of Djibouti in August to the NPT, and the announcement by Oman that it would sign that Treaty as soon as possible, he said such developments underlined the fact that Israel was the only State in the region that had neither acceded to the NPT, nor declared its intention to do so in the foreseeable future.

Such a situation further aggravated serious security concerns over the risk of proliferation in the region, he said. The Arab strategic option of a just and comprehensive peace required a corresponding commitment by Israel, particularly to the principle of land for peace, and on agreements made in that framework. A revised draft that would faithfully reflect the current realities in the Middle East was forthcoming, he said.

First Committee - 10 - Press Release GA/DIS/3067 17th Meeting (PM) 7 November 1996

KOMI MENSAH AFETO (Togo) introduced the draft resolution on the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa. The Centre's mission, he said, was to supply States, on demand, with functional support for initiatives undertaken for peace, development, disarmament and arms control on the national and regional levels. With that in mind, the Centre had distributed information on those issues to governments, academicians, researchers and others interested in problems of disarmament and development.

As the report of the Secretary-General made clear, the Centre's programme of activities was ambitious and in line with the mandate conferred upon it by the General Assembly, he said. It also made clear that the Centre's financial situation remained precarious. The co-sponsors of the draft before the Committee were convinced that, at a time when their respective States were faced with the out-of-control proliferation and circulation of small arms, the Regional Centre had an all-important role to play in helping wipe out that scourge.

MICHAEL POWLES (New Zealand) spoke in support of the previously introduced draft on establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent regions. The proliferation of such zones across the hemisphere -- and across part of the northern hemisphere as well -- grouped very different regions and populations. But at the core of their thinking in establishing the zones had been a determination to free their regions of the threat of nuclear weapons, with the ultimate aim of eliminating those weapons entirely. New Zealand, a co-sponsor of the draft, had worked closely with Brazil in its formulation. The draft in no way altered international maritime law as it applied to nations using the waterways of the region.

YEHIEL YATIV (Israel), commenting on the draft resolution just introduced on a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, said that for the last decade his country had joined the consensus on that issue because it identified with the goal of establishing, in due course, such a zone. However, the current draft resolution represented a drastic departure from the consensus language on which Israel's support had been based. It was, in effect, a new draft that called for a new position. Israel's position had always been that the nuclear issue should be dealt with within the full context of the peace process, as well as within the context of all security problems, conventional and non-conventional.

The present draft would give the resolution another direction and drastically dilute the importance of the peace process, he said. Such changes would adversely affect regional peace-making efforts and upset the delicate balance on which consensus was based. Israel supported a mutually verifiable nuclear-weapon-free zone in due course "after peace is sealed". The text adopted last year should remain unchanged, if consensus was to be maintained.

First Committee - 11 - Press Release GA/DIS/3067 17th Meeting (PM) 7 November 1996

He said that the draft on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East should have been removed from the agenda long ago. The current text represented an upgraded version of a negative attitude. The continued arraignment and name-calling directed at Israel in the draft did not serve the cause of peace and would no doubt have a detrimental effect on political developments in the Middle East.

MIGUEL AGUIRRE DE CARCER (Spain) announced his country's intention to join the sponsors of the draft resolution on the prohibition of anti-personnel land-mines (document A/C.1/51/L.46). Spain had been working with the other members of the European Union towards an agreement with that goal in view. Without prejudice to negotiations carried out in other fora, Spain believed that the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva was the only forum which could reach an agreement with the requisite level of universality. The problems created by anti-personnel land-mines could only be tackled globally, an objective all governments and nations should share.

GRIGORY BERDENNIKOV (Russian Federation), commenting on the draft calling for a ban on anti-personnel land-mines, which his country had co- sponsored, said that Russia believed that to speak about concluding negotiations that had not yet started only complicated an already complex issue. While it shared feelings of solidarity with the innocent victims of those mines, it believed that such solidarity should be expressed through intensification of mine-clearance efforts and the maintenance of a ban on the export and import of anti-personnel mines. Proposals for an immediate and complete ban, however, raised a number of questions.

First, how much would the costs of guarding frontiers increase, particularly in areas where bandit formations regularly infiltrated, if the mines were banned without adequate substitution? he asked. Would such a ban serve criminal purposes? Would there be an enormous increase in the profitability of the underground mine business? How would such a ban be verified, and where and how would the line of demarcation be drawn?

The answers to those and other questions should be answered before negotiation and drafting of an agreement could begin, he said. Russia was open to use of the Conference on Disarmament as a suitable forum for negotiation. The other option under discussion -- a special meeting of concerned countries and approval of its results by the General Assembly -- could lead anywhere. Russia understood the arguments of India, France and Finland in support of the Conference on Disarmament and a phased solution of outstanding issues. Those arguments, however, had not been incorporated into the draft before the Committee, nor had amendments proposed by his country been taken into account. Thus, the Russian Federation would be unable to endorse the draft resolution.

First Committee - 12 - Press Release GA/DIS/3067 17th Meeting (PM) 7 November 1996

LUDWIK DEMBINSKI (Poland) introduced the draft on chemical weapons. The situation surrounding the draft was fundamentally changed, he said, with the ratification of the Chemical Weapons Convention, which would ban an entire category of weapons of mass destruction, and eliminate the risk to mankind of the renewed use of those horrendous, inhumane weapons. The implementation mechanism in The Hague must be ready and fully prepared to cope with its responsibilities. The draft's co-sponsors stressed the importance of increasing the number of original parties to the Convention.

He also introduced the draft on the Report of the Conference on Disarmament, speaking in his capacity as President of the Conference. Aimed at obtaining draft approval without a vote, he said the last preambular paragraph would be dropped from the draft.

ANTONIO DE ICAZA (Mexico) said that as a depositary country of a regional Treaty banning nuclear arms, Mexico was happy to co-sponsor the draft resolution on a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent areas. Mexico believed that a regular interchange of experiences would benefit the goal of all such treaties, a goal which, in the final analysis, could only be the elimination of nuclear weapons. He added that nothing in the draft affected international law as it applied to maritime use of the region.

DEIMUNDO ESCOBAL (Argentina) said that as a co-sponsor of the draft on a denuclearized southern hemisphere, his country hoped that the draft would be unanimously supported by the First Committee.

AHMAD AL-HARIRI (Syria), commenting on the draft on establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, said that proposals for such a zone were threatened by Israel's continued pursuit of a nuclear arsenal and its refusal to submit its nuclear facilities to the safeguards of the IAEA. Of equal concern to the international community was Israel's refusal to honour its commitments in the Middle East peace process and the impediments it placed in the way of a just and lasting peace in the region. Israel continued to distort reality. It continued to ignore the commitments it had made and the peace process was blocked because of Israeli practices. The draft before the Committee stressed realities that could not be ignored or denied. He hoped it would be approved by consensus.

MAHMOUD KAREM (Egypt) said that a few important conciliatory amendments had been made on the draft on the nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, which would be reflected in a revised draft. Given the ongoing consultations, it was not healthy to negotiate drafts from the floor.

He was puzzled by Israel's comment that Israel had supported the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone for the last decade. What Israel really meant, perhaps, was that it supported the draft, but dissociated itself

First Committee - 13 - Press Release GA/DIS/3067 17th Meeting (PM) 7 November 1996

from the modalities. He was also confused by Israel's comment that it would support such a zone "after peace is sealed". Could it be put in operational terms, or was that one more alibi or precondition for implementing the draft? he asked.

The parties had reached consensus agreement on the language of the draft since 1974, he said. What always remained to be done was to find the political will to put the draft into operation. Regarding the failure to make reference to the peace process in the draft on the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, previous language referred to recent encouraging, positive developments. In 1996, however, it was not possible to use the same language, because the situation did not warrant it. Would insertion of some mention of the peace process make Israel change its mind? he asked.

* *** *