WEAPONS DO NOT CAUSE WAR, BUT EXCESS OF ARMS BREEDS MISTRUST, HEIGHTENS TENSIONS AND LEADS TO CONFLICT, SECRETARY-GENERAL TELLS DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE

29 January 1997

Press Release
SG/SM/6151
DCF/284

WEAPONS DO NOT CAUSE WAR, BUT EXCESS OF ARMS BREEDS MISTRUST, HEIGHTENS TENSIONS AND LEADS TO CONFLICT, SECRETARY-GENERAL TELLS DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE

19970129 CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY No Institution Is Better Qualified To Translate Quest for Peace into Practical Measures, Kofi Annan Says

This is the text of the statement to be delivered by Secretary-General Kofi Annan to the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, tomorrow, 30 January:

I am honoured and delighted to be able to address this vital forum, so early in my term as Secretary-General.

The world no longer lives under the shadow of the cold war. But today, the nations and peoples of the world are looking to this Conference to press ahead with the global disarmament agenda. They hope that this Conference can bring the twin threats of weapons of mass destruction and the world's growing stockpile of conventional weapons under control.

They expect this Conference to advance one of the fundamental objectives of the United Nations: the maintenance of international peace and security.

Ten years ago, even the most optimistic supporters of disarmament could not have expected the cold war to end so abruptly. Nor could we have imagined that its end would lead so rapidly to so much positive cooperation at the unilateral, bilateral, regional and global levels.

Today, we have all been jolted out of established strategic concepts born of the cold war and the constant threat of nuclear confrontation. As Secretary-General, I welcome the positive efforts made to advance international cooperation in the three vital areas of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.

A variety of successful unilateral measures and mutual agreements on the downsizing of nuclear stockpiles have been put in place.

And the nuclear Powers continue to cooperate in seeking safer ways of dismantling weapons and of handling and storing fissile material.

The Treaties of Bangkok and Pelindaba, and further consolidation of the Treaties of Tlatelolco and Rarotonga, provide an ever stronger foundation for further advances in the field of nuclear non-proliferation. These Treaties have enhanced the security of the States which are parties to them.

Within a few months of its approval by the General Assembly in September 1996, the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) had already been signed by 140 States. These include all five nuclear-weapon States, and more than two thirds of the Member States of our Organization.

We shall soon witness the entry into force of the Chemical Weapons Convention and the inauguration of its implementing organization.

I urge all those States that have not yet ratified the Convention, and in particular, declared possessors of chemical weapons such as the Russian Federation and the United States, to do so before it enters into force. I welcome the commitment of their Governments to achieving that important goal.

The States parties to the Biological Weapons Convention met last year. They agreed to continue seeking ways of reinforcing its international authority through the negotiation of a verification regime. I strongly support these efforts.

All of these developments add up to a new and positive climate in the international security arena.

We know, however, that uncertainties and serious challenges remain. We must do more, all of us, to develop and enhance new international structures, and to redefine the mechanics of international relationships in the post-cold- war era.

A new international security agenda must be agreed, which takes account of our rapidly changing world.

This Conference, therefore, faces a new and serious challenge. Its mandate makes it the sole international body with responsibility for negotiating agreements on arms regulation and disarmament. That is a heavy responsibility. How can your Conference best discharge it, and help to define a new disarmament agenda for the closing years of this millennium?

Further decisive progress towards nuclear disarmament has become an expectation of the new era. I add my voice to those who have expressed strong support for the urgent need to continue with the process of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. The possibility of nuclear accidents, illicit trafficking in nuclear materials and the threat of nuclear terrorism all underline the need to maintain progress in this area.

- 3 - Press Release SG/SM/6151 DCF/284 29 January 1997

Nuclear disarmament must remain a priority for the international community. In this respect, your Conference has a unique opportunity to build on the successful work of the 1995 Review and Extension Conference of the Parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Although the Treaty has not yet achieved universality, it embraces almost the entire membership of the United Nations. Its decisions could, therefore, constitute a broad guideline for further steps in this field.

One such step should be a convention banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. I am aware that this issue poses enormous technical and political difficulties. But I would also remind the Conference that we can never move forward, unless we are prepared to start talking.

In my view, the mandate of the ad hoc committee established by the 1995 Conference is inclusive of the positions of all States. I urge the Conference to find a way to build on this positive start and to begin negotiations as soon as possible.

The implementation of the international community's commitment to the irreversible process of nuclear disarmament represents one of the overarching challenges of our time. The specific character of your Conference -- a forum of high-standing and broad representation -- makes it eminently qualified to lend its support to efforts aimed at furthering this noble objective. I hope that the Conference will be able to avoid a situation which could jeopardize this shared goal.

In addition, your Conference has long been concerned over the related issue of security assurances to non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons. This issue could be usefully re-examined to determine how such assurances can be strengthened further.

The traditional concerns of this Conference have been weapons of mass destruction.

But the increase in local and regional conflicts since the end of the cold war have made the issue of conventional weapons an urgent and important one. These are the weapons which are actually killing combatants and civilians in their tens of thousands every year. We know just how helpless the international community can be when massive amounts of conventional arms are allowed to accumulate, legally or illegally within States.

Of course, weapons in themselves, do not cause war. But an excess of arms breeds the suspicion and mistrust that can heighten tensions and lead to violent conflict.

- 4 - Press Release SG/SM/6151 DCF/284 29 January 1997

Our challenge today is to build on our hope and optimism at the end of the cold war, and not allow real progress in international security to be undermined by new conventional arms races at the regional and subregional levels.

On a personal level, I owe a huge debt of gratitude to the courage and devotion of United Nations peace-keepers and to other international personnel.

They face the daily threat posed by millions of indiscriminately laid anti-personnel land-mines. These weapons have become weapons of terror.

That is why I urge all States to ensure that amended Protocol II of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons enters into force as soon as possible and to comply fully with its provisions. I welcome the growing movement in favour of national measures to curb the transfer and use of these weapons and the commitment of more and more States to negotiate an effective legally binding total ban on them.

While it is for the international community to decide the best venue for the negotiating process, it would seem logical for the Conference on Disarmament to play a role.

The security challenges facing the international community can appear daunting. But they are far from being insurmountable. There are solid grounds for optimism. The Conference has the vision and the tools needed for success. An increased membership gives greater scope for new ideas, suggestions and proposals. Any further expansion of membership must ensure that the effectiveness of the Conference is preserved, while maintaining its important geographical and political balance.

One of the strongest instruments the Conference has, at its disposal, is a consensus approach to problem solving. Without consensus, the solid foundations needed for further disarmament agreements and concerted international action cannot be built.

Consensus protects the interests of each State, big or small, and ensures that negotiated treaties and conventions command the widest possible support.

The Conference has a proud record of endeavour and of lasting achievement.

In short, there is no institution on earth better qualified than your Conference to translate the world's constant yearning for peace into practical, negotiated measures for enhancing international understanding and the security of all nations.

I pledge my full cooperation, and that of the United Nations, for your essential work. I wish you all a productive and successful session in 1997.

* *** *