NUCLEAR TESTS BY INDIA, PAKISTAN UNDERMINED NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION REGIME, JAPAN TELLS DISARMAMENT COMMITTEE

13 October 1998

Press Release
GA/DIS/3109

NUCLEAR TESTS BY INDIA, PAKISTAN UNDERMINED NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION REGIME, JAPAN TELLS DISARMAMENT COMMITTEE

19981013 Australia Acknowledges Threat of Testing, but Highlights Recent Disarmament Achievements, As General Debate Continues

The nuclear testing by India and Pakistan shook the world and directly countered international disarmament and non-proliferation efforts, the representative of Japan told the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) this morning, as it continued its general debate.

He said the nuclear tests posed a "bold challenge" to the international community and threatened to undermine the very foundation of the nuclear non-proliferation regime, as defined by the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Indeed, that Treaty was the basic framework of global nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation.

The representative of Australia said, however, that his country did not share such "apocalyptic visions". Although the developments in South Asia had indeed challenged the non-proliferation regime, they had not minimized the disarmament achievements of recent decades.

He said the task ahead was to preserve the right of self-defence of all nations at the lowest possible level of conventional armaments and without recourse to weapons of mass destruction. The alternative -- a world in which every State could claim the right to arm itself with whatever weapons it deemed necessary for its national security -- was one from which the international community had rightly recoiled for the last 50 years.

The representative of the Republic of Korea said that missile delivery systems posed additional security threats. The launching of a multiple-stage rocket last August by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea had renewed international concern over the dangers of missile proliferation in northeast Asia. His Government called on the international community to prevail on the Democratic People's Republic to stop the development, testing, deployment and export of those missiles.

First Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/DIS/3109 4th Meeting (AM) 13 October 1998

The representative of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that the satellite launch was a matter of sovereignty, with which no country had the right to interfere. Who could dare say that his country had no right to launch a satellite? he asked. Since Japan had several times launched satellites without notifying his country in advance, the Democratic People's Republic was not obliged to make such a notification.

Statements were also made by the representatives of Brazil, Algeria and Indonesia, as well as by the observer of Switzerland.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. Wednesday, 14 October, to continue its general debate.

Committee Work Programme

The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met this morning to continue its general debate, including consideration of a number of international disarmament agreements. Those include the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention), which entered into force on 29 April 1997, triggering a complex verification mechanism that will be implemented by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).

The Committee will also consider the verification measures of another treaty governing weapons of mass destruction -- the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction (Biological Weapons Convention). Efforts have intensified to forge a consensus behind a protocol that would establish effective verification and compliance.

The effectiveness of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which opened for signature in 1996, will also be considered. It was hoped the Treaty would motivate the implementation of the principles and objectives of nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament that were adopted at the 1995 Review and Extension Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The underground nuclear tests conducted last spring by India and Pakistan, however, has raised serious concerns about the future of those two treaties. The CTBT requires ratification by 44 States listed in its annex, including India, Israel and Pakistan.

The Committee is also expected to focus on the establishment of nuclear- weapon-free zones. The zones already in existence are governed by 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 (Treaty of Bangkok) and the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (Treaty of Pelindaba). Committee drafts are anticipated for the establishment of such zones in the Middle East, Central Europe and South Asia.

Discussion will continue on the subject of landmines, in the context of the two instruments to ban or limit their use. The first was Protocol II of the Convention on the Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons), a partial ban negotiated in the Conference on Disarmament. The Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti- Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction (Ottawa Convention), a total ban that was agreed to as part of the so-called "Ottawa process" and which will enter into force on 1 March 1999 provides for a total landmines ban.

First Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/DIS/3109 4th Meeting (AM) 13 October 1998

Other matters to be discussed include the proliferation of small arms and light weapons, as well as regional transparency and confidence-building measures, such as the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms. The role of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will be discussed in the context of the international non-proliferation regime. The Committee is also likely to consider such bilateral agreements as the Treaty on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (START). (For detailed background, see Press Release GA/DIS/3106 issued 9 October.)

Statements

CESLO L.N. AMORIM (Brazil) said that significant progress had been made in the area of conventional weapons through the fulfilment, on 17 September, of the conditions for the entry into force of the Ottawa Convention. Brazil had been among the 120 countries that signed the Convention in December 1997. He hoped that those States that still found themselves unable to join the Convention would do so in the near future.

The multilateral action being pursued in the field of small arms was another important activity, he said. The process of small-arms control was greatly enhanced with the adoption of the Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing and Trafficking in Fire Arms, Ammunition, Explosives and Other Related Materials. Reference should also be made to the initiatives undertaken by various African countries, led by Mali, South Africa and Mozambique, and the agreements in that field reached by subregional organizations. His Government favoured the convening of an international conference on the illicit trade of small arms.

In the dreadful area of weapons of mass destruction, the OPCW had made good progress in implementing the Chemical Weapons Convention, he said. The number of States that had joined that instrument had increased from 87 to 117. His Government had participated with fellow Latin American and Caribbean countries in establishing a national authority, which oversaw more than 8,000 industrial establishments. Hopefully, the Chemical Weapons Convention would soon reach universality. Similarly, strengthening the Biological Weapons Convention was particularly important, and his country would continue to participate in the ad hoc group of States parties established in 1994 to develop a protocol on verification.

He said that the nuclear tests conducted in South Asia had reminded the world of the danger of nuclear war. His Government condemned all nuclear tests and urged the nuclear-capable States to join the CTBT. Having renounced the nuclear option, his country persisted in efforts to prohibit those weapons. As an interim measure, it also strove to limit the geographical scope of the nuclear menace through the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones. Once again, a group of like-minded countries would table a draft resolution in the Committee on a nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent areas.

First Committee - 4 - Press Release GA/DIS/3109 4th Meeting (AM) 13 October 1998

Brazil's National Congress approved its accession to the NPT, thereby mandating the Government to pursue the objective of nuclear disarmament, he said. His Government had also participated in the joint declaration of foreign ministers of 9 June, which launched the quest for a new agenda in the area of nuclear disarmament. The declaration pointed towards a nuclear- weapon-free world and reaffirmed the belief that just limiting the spread of nuclear weapons was not enough. The goal of the NPT would not be reached until all existing nuclear weapons were eliminated.

ABDALLAH BAALI (Algeria) said that, although the end of the cold war tensions had allowed important strides in disarmament, many objectives must be reached before general and complete disarmament could be attained. The NPT regime, for example, still had serious shortcomings that must be corrected to avoid such developments as the recent events in South Asia. The argument that nuclear disarmament was the sole domain of bilateral negotiations had shown its limitations. Indeed, recent reality had confirmed that the only appropriate framework through which to negotiate nuclear disarmament was offered by multilateral negotiating forums.

He said that in order to remain in step with world evolution, such as the process of globalization, it was no longer sensible to undertake any actions that would foster further stability and insecurity. Moreover, the causes of competition between the nuclear-weapon States and the so-called "threshold States" should be avoided. The laboratory simulations to upgrade nuclear weapons should cease. Furthermore, all States should commit themselves to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice and pursue nuclear disarmament negotiations in good faith leading to verifiable international measures.

Nuclear non-proliferation could only be promoted if it guaranteed, simultaneously, the promotion of nuclear disarmament, he said. Those two regimes were inextricably linked. The nuclear-weapon States, therefore, should adopt measures that reflected an abiding commitment to the principles and objectives of those two regimes. Priority must be given to nuclear disarmament. The Organization must give the issue its absolute priority and sustained attention.

He said that only negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament could lead to the elimination, once and for all, of apocalyptic weapons. In order to give that body new impetus, his country had created a special committee aimed at banning the production of fissile material for weapons purposes. That initiative had allowed for further reflection and the emergence of new proposals. The creation by the Conference of an ad hoc committee to negotiate a fissile material cut-off treaty should also serve to facilitate the examination of other nuclear disarmament issues.

The establishment in the Conference of an ad hoc committee to consider negative security assurances to non-nuclear-weapon States was also welcome, he

First Committee - 5 - Press Release GA/DIS/3109 4th Meeting (AM) 13 October 1998

said. Recent international developments should prompt the Committee to look seriously into that question, which should be reviewed globally through an international convention drawn up by the Conference. Moreover, security assurances should contain unconditional and strict guarantees.

Concerning other nuclear-related measures, the establishment and consolidation of nuclear-weapon-free zones should be encouraged by the international community, he said. His country was the third African State to ratify the Pelindaba Treaty. Yet, it was still profoundly concerned about the proximity and density of links between Africa and the Middle East and the absence of progress regarding the establishment of such a zone in the Middle East. All Arab countries were party to the NPT, an instrument to which Israel was refusing to accede. Israel had also refused to place its nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards.

He said there were some positive signs, including the expanding areas covered by nuclear-weapon-free zones, which now covered more than 100 countries. He was also encouraged by the decision by India and Pakistan to observe a moratorium on nuclear testing and to indicate, finally, their intention to sign the CTBT. In that same context, Algeria had joined the NPT and CTBT. While the convening of a fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament had been the subject of careful study, there had been no tangible progress to that end, despite last year's consensus resolution on the question. His country, for its part, wished to transcend "narrow national interests" and reach agreement on the convening of that much needed session.

ARIZAL EFFENDI (Indonesia) said that despite great advances in science and technology, the problem of poverty persisted in many parts of the world. There were enough nuclear weapons and massive stockpiles of conventional weapons to destroy the earth, while people still suffered from deprivation and poverty. Although many ideas and action programmes had been explored on how to deal with that situation, actually resolving it had not been considered of primary importance.

He said the end of the cold war had reduced the need for nuclear weapons and raised hopes about the eventual reduction and elimination of those weapons. The idea of nuclear-weapon-free zones was propitious in that respect and the CTBT was also a significant development. However, the ultimate guarantee against nuclear holocaust was a total elimination of nuclear weapons. After the conclusion of the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Nuclear Missiles (INF Treaty), the reduction in nuclear forces had halted. Instead, pre-existing stockpiles were being upgraded and made more sophisticated. Furthermore, the new tests by India and Pakistan had heightened the need for progress with nuclear disarmament.

First Committee - 6 - Press Release GA/DIS/3109 4th Meeting (AM) 13 October 1998

The proposals for a ban on fissile materials were discriminatory, he said. It was not fair to ban the production of those materials, while allowing the existence of current stockpiles. That approach would only serve to preserve the status quo and, thus, would not contribute anything to international efforts on nuclear disarmament. The indefinite extension of the NPT was regarded as a significant nuclear disarmament development. Unfortunately, it appeared that the extension was a goal in itself, rather than a means for progress with nuclear disarmament. The confidence of non-nuclear-weapon States had been eroded by the failure of the nuclear-weapon States to keep their obligations under the terms of the Treaty.

He noted that it had been 10 years since the First Special Session of the General Assembly Devoted to Disarmament. Still, the Conference on Disarmament had made no progress on nuclear disarmament and related issues. The disarmament agenda of the United Nations should be reassessed. His country -- and other non-aligned countries -- had offered a viable framework on how to make progress in this respect. A fourth special session of the Assembly devoted to disarmament would further the cause of disarmament and focus the attention of the international community. In that context, he would endorse an agenda that gave guidelines for the irreversible elimination of nuclear weapons.

AKIRA HAYASHI (Japan) said that, since the end of the cold war, the international community had faced the difficult task of establishing a new world order of international peace and security. While not entirely successful, it had undertaken honest and strenuous efforts that had borne some fruit, such as the Chemical Weapons Convention, the CTBT and the Ottawa Convention. While concluding treaty negotiations were important, of equal importance was the achievement of universality and full and effective implementation. Thus, the world community should not be complacent and should not settle for anything less.

He said that following genuine achievements in the disarmament field, India and Pakistan shook the world by conducting nuclear tests, thereby directly countering international disarmament and non-proliferation efforts. That recent nuclear testing was extremely serious, because it had posed a challenge to the NPT that could undermine its very foundation. Indeed, the NPT was the basic framework of global nuclear disarmament and non- proliferation. Against that background, the recent testing by India and Pakistan was a "bold challenge" to the international community. Neither of those States were parties to the NPT.

The NPT was not a framework under which nuclear-weapon States could perpetually possess nuclear weapons, while the possession of those weapons was prohibited to other countries. Indeed, the NPT had gained the largest membership of any treaty in the world. His Government did not support the view that it must accept the testing as a fait accompli and act accordingly. Rather, it attached great importance to Security Council resolution 1172

First Committee - 7 - Press Release GA/DIS/3109 4th Meeting (AM) 13 October 1998

(1998), which deplored those tests and urged the two countries to adhere to the NPT and the CTBT.

He said his country had proposed the urgent establishment of an international forum to call on India and Pakistan to renounce their nuclear weapons programmes. The forum would also consider ways and means to promote nuclear disarmament. The Tokyo Forum on nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament held its first meeting in August. Its expert participants were expected to submit a report containing concrete and constructive recommendations, which would serve as guidelines for future non-proliferation and disarmament efforts.

His Government, for its part, would introduce a draft resolution on nuclear disarmament at the current Committee session, he said. It had submitted a nuclear disarmament draft for the first time in 1994 to demonstrate the clear commitment on the part of the majority of Member States to eliminate nuclear weapons and to prepare favourable ground for the 1995 Review and Extension Conference of the NPT. Since then, successive resolutions had been supported by an overwhelming majority of States, including, last year, by the nuclear-weapon States. His Government would table a new resolution at the current session with the view to gaining a global commitment to rid the world of nuclear weapons.

He said that the next step following the CTBT should be a cut-off treaty on the production of fissile material, which would be a significant measure for both nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. One of the most contentious issues was how to deal with existing stockpiles. While intensive deliberations would be required, that question was too important to set aside. In an effort to advance negotiations, his Government had organized a seminar in Geneva last May to evaluate the technical aspects of such a treaty. While such a treaty was undoubtedly the next multilateral step, it certainly was not the final one.

Nuclear disarmament was the responsibility of the entire world, although, undeniably, the nuclear-weapon States must assume the major responsibility, he said. In that respect, the nuclear weapons reductions by the Russian Federation and the United States were most important. Japan now called for the entry into force of START II and the commencement of negotiations on START III. He also appreciated the nuclear disarmament measures carried out unilaterally by Member States, such as by the United Kingdom, as such action provided a conducive environment to further nuclear disarmament by others.

A ban on landmines was an international priority, he said. In that regard, Japan welcomed both instruments to curtail their use, namely the Ottawa Convention and Protocol II of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. All countries that had not yet done so should join those two international instruments as soon as possible. The complete ban, in

First Committee - 8 - Press Release GA/DIS/3109 4th Meeting (AM) 13 October 1998

accordance with the Ottawa Convention, must be the ultimate goal. Yet, many countries had so far found it difficult, at present, to accept a complete ban. The conclusion of a treaty prohibiting the transfer of landmines, therefore, would be a realistic measure.

He said he was gravely concerned by the tragic loss of life caused by small arms and light weapons in numerous domestic and regional conflicts worldwide. His Government had first proposed the establishment of a United Nations Panel of Governmental Experts on Small Arms and it had hosted, this year, the Tokyo Workshop on Small Arms. Although there were agreed rules on weapons of mass destruction, no such framework for preventing the excessive and destabilizing accumulation of small arms and light weapons had been elaborated. It was time for the world to come together to establish an international norm.

He said that while the international community strove to maintain and ensure peace and security, it was regrettable that an action contrary to those efforts had been taken in Asia. The recent missile launch by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea -- whether or not it was an attempt to launch a satellite into orbit -- had not only caused serious concern for the security of northeast Asia, but had also renewed his country's concern over the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery vehicles.

ERWIN H. HOFER, observer for Switzerland, said progress had been made in matters of transparency, verification and elimination of certain arms categories. That should not, however, prompt complacency. Thus, the Committee should proceed to evaluate those developments in depth in order to establish the priorities for the coming year, within the context of general and complete disarmament. It was a positive development that the Conference on Disarmament adopted a working programme underlining the importance of nuclear disarmament and set up a special committee to prepare a treaty banning the production of fissile materials for military purposes.

Although those actions by the Conference constituted political progress, no actual arms reduction had resulted, he noted. Therefore, the Conference should pursue its negotiations with determination. The expansion of the composition of the Conference remained subject to debate. He welcomed efforts towards universality and would like to see negotiations on the issue culminate in the admission of five new members in 1999.

He said his country would also like to see progress made with the verification protocol of the Biological Weapons Convention. His Government was pleased that the Ottawa Convention was scheduled to enter into force on 1 March 1999 and would support the participation of developing countries at the first conference of the States parties, expected to be held in Mozambique. The full effectiveness of the Convention would depend on its implementation on an international scale. The United Nations should be able to play a pivotal role in the process. It was in that spirit that his Government decided to establish an International Centre for Humanitarian Demining in Geneva.

First Committee - 9 - Press Release GA/DIS/3109 4th Meeting (AM) 13 October 1998

An important aspect of the international campaign against anti-personnel landmines was assistance for concerned victims, he said. In cooperation with the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and the World Health Organization (WHO), his Government had taken the initiative to develop a concept for helping mine victims. His country was also concerned about the proliferation of small arms, which did not easily lend itself to the kind of solution embodied by the Ottawa Convention. It was, therefore, necessary for the international community to look for new solutions. A coherent multidisciplinary concept was needed for tackling the problem.

His Government reiterated its conviction that the universal abolition of nuclear arms was necessary, he said. Unfortunately, START II had not been ratified by the Russian Federation. Further, the second session of the Preparatory Committee of the 2000 Review Conference of the NPT had not yielded any specific results. The parties to the Treaty must emit a clear and unequivocal political signal regarding the principles of the Treaty, especially with regard to "the disquieting events that occurred in South Asia in May". The tests carried out by India and Pakistan were unjustifiable. Every effort must be made to end the tension in the region and to settle the conflict between both countries peacefully.

JOHN CAMPBELL (Australia) said there were those who would have the world believe that the nuclear tests conducted by India and Pakistan in May had changed the parameters of nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament fundamentally -- pointing the world away from arms control and disarmament and towards arms races and the risk of nuclear war. To add weight to their argument, they cited the increase in ballistic missile development in South Asia and by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Iran, as well as to the challenges posed by Iraq to inspection and verification agreements.

He said his country did not share such "apocalyptic visions". For one, it did not minimize the remarkable achievements of recent decades, which had resulted in the conclusion of many bilateral, regional and international arms control agreements. For another, it strongly believed that remarkable progress could be made on both non-proliferation and disarmament, despite existing tensions. Moreover, "this is not a zero-sum game", as non-proliferation and disarmament shared a symbiotic relationship. The aim should be to avoid quarrels over which aspect might be "winning" at any point in time and, instead, ensure the productivity of that relationship.

The task was to work with determination towards a situation where the right to self-defence of all nations was assured at the lowest possible level of conventional armaments and without recourse to weapons of mass destruction, he continued. Whatever the inequalities and inadequacies of the current regime, the alternative -- a world in which each and every State could claim the right to arm itself with whatever weapons it deemed necessary for its national security -- was one from which the international community had rightly recoiled for the past 50 or more years.

First Committee - 10 - Press Release GA/DIS/3109 4th Meeting (AM) 13 October 1998

In the face of periodic setbacks, it was vitally important that the international community "stay the course" on arms control and disarmament, he said. Undoubtedly, the developments in South Asia had posed a challenge to the non-proliferation regime and to the NPT. His country did not accept the spurious argument that the tests could be justified by the alleged lack of progress by the nuclear-weapon States in meeting their commitments under the NPT. Furthermore, he did not believe that nuclear testing was the right response to India and Pakistan's security concerns. Indeed, the national security outlook of both countries, their regional neighbours and the global community had suffered greatly as a result of those tests.

The international community must now examine the ways in which to contribute to the peace and security needs of South Asia, he said. The approach should help those countries dispel the view that they needed a nuclear deterrent. The global community had to repair the damage done to the international non-proliferation regime, to which the majority of the Assembly subscribed. He welcomed the recent statements by India and Pakistan that they were moving towards adherence to the CTBT. Their ratification of the Treaty would be a critical step towards its entry into force.

He said that the third meeting next April of the Preparatory Committee of the next NPT Review Conference would be a critical step towards enabling the non-proliferation regime to address the most challenging period in its 30-year history. Those challenges had resulted from India's and Pakistan's nuclear tests, as well as from Iraq's attempts to undermine the authority of the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) set up under Security Council resolution 687 (1991) to monitor disposal of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. In addition, recent actions by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea had jeopardized the 1994 agreed framework it signed with the United States.

Concerning efforts to elaborate a verification protocol to the Biological Weapons Convention, he said remaining differences should be managed by forward- looking solutions, rather than backward or stale approaches. His country emphasized a strong verification machinery, including an appropriate system of visits to facilities. It was important to build into the regime international confidence and transparency.

Given the large number of producers and users of anti-personnel landmines that remained outside the Ottawa Convention, the Conference on Disarmament should negotiate a ban on the transfer of those weapons, he said. It should, thereby, complement the Ottawa Convention and contribute to its fundamental aim. At least, that would bring the Ottawa Convention "non-signatories" some way towards the norm established by that Convention, rather than run the risk of their remaining permanently outside it.

LEE SEE-YOUNG (Republic of Korea) said that, while the cold war had ended, the world remained volatile. Conflicts, fed by ethnic hatred, had erupted in

First Committee - 11 - Press Release GA/DIS/3109 4th Meeting (AM) 13 October 1998

many parts of the world and military spending among nations had been increasing. Nothing was more urgent than achieving a secure environment, so that people could spend resources on economic development. Therefore, a fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament should be convened to address questions of world peace and security.

He said the nuclear tests conducted by India and Pakistan were a blow to international efforts for a nuclear-free world. The tests took place in the wake of the progress made with the NPT extension and the CTBT. In that context, the international community should make serious efforts to maintain the non-proliferation regime. It was important for the NPT to achieve universality and for the CTBT to be strengthened. India and Pakistan should accede to both treaties. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea should be urged to follow suit and sign the CTBT. In his country, domestic procedures had already begun that should result in ratification of the CTBT next year.

He welcomed the initiative of the Conference on Disarmament in establishing an ad hoc committee on the question of a fissile material cut-off treaty. He hoped it would achieve an effective and verifiable treaty. All nuclear-capable States should participate in the regime. His Government also welcomed the decision of the United Kingdom to reduce its nuclear arsenal and the progress made by the United States and Russia in nuclear disarmament. More substantial efforts were, however, needed and the START process should be given new impetus.

He said the expansion of nuclear-weapon-free zones and the consolidation of pre-existing ones would contribute to the cause of nuclear non-proliferation. In that context, his Government looked forward to the early implementation of the 1992 joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. Much international effort had been spent to bring North Korea to comply with the agreements of the IAEA. As a party to the NPT, it should comply fully and faithfully. His delegation joined others in urging North Korea to promptly respond to the call for full compliance with its treaty obligations and to cooperate fully with the IAEA.

The proliferation and use of chemical weapons was a source of grave and urgent concern, he said. His delegation urged the full compliance of all States parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention. On the domestic level, each State should enact implementing legislation to strictly enforce the Convention. In particular, his country urged the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to join the Convention promptly in order to free the Korean peninsula from those weapons. His Government was also a staunch supporter of international efforts to prepare a protocol to the Biological Weapons Convention.

He said that missile delivery systems posed as serious a threat to peace and security as the weapons themselves. The time had come for the international community to address that problem with a legal instrument. North Korea's launching of a multiple-stage rocket last August had renewed international

First Committee - 12 - Press Release GA/DIS/3109 4th Meeting (AM) 13 October 1998

concern over the dangers of missile proliferation in north-east Asia. His Government called on the international community to prevail on North Korea to stop the development, testing, deployment and export of those missiles.

He said his country fully shared the international community's concern regarding the problem of indiscriminate use of landmines. For that reason, it declared an indefinite moratorium on their export. It had also made significant contributions to the United Nations Mine Action Programme. Unfortunately, due to the situation in the Korean peninsula, his country could not yet forego the use of anti-personnel mines, which had been a major defensive weapon in the limited area of the demilitarized zone.

The proliferation of small arms posed a serious obstacle to post-conflict peace-building, he said. The world should address the problem urgently and effectively. Transparency in international arms transfers was essential. His Government supported convening an international conference on the issue. Despite the end of the cold war, a lot of uncertainty remained in Asia, which made initiation of a security dialogue in the Asia-Pacific region very important. "War begins in the minds of men and it is in the minds of men that peace must be constructed", he concluded.

Right of Reply

The representative of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that some had argued that his country should fully comply with the safeguards of the IAEA. That argument was a clear contradiction of the agreed framework signed between his country and the United States, by which the People's Republic was supposed to come into full compliance with those safeguards once a significant portion of the light water reactor project was completed. At present, even construction of the basement, led by the United States, had not yet begun, although four years had passed since conclusion of the agreement.

Considering all of those facts, why did some now insist that his country should come into full compliance, in contradiction to the agreed framework? he asked. Were they ignorant of the substance of that agreement? Did they want to see that framework collapse? Or, did they prefer to join in slandering the People's Republic without proper reason? They should be urged to act with discretion and impartiality.

Denuclearization of the Korean peninsula could not be realized so long as there was a nuclear threat against the North and a nuclear umbrella for the South, he said. The South Korean authorities should now stop begging for nuclear protection and the United States should refrain from providing a nuclear umbrella to South Korea and give legally binding assurances not to use nuclear weapons against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea if they really wanted to denuclearize the Korean peninsula.

He said that the satellite launch was a matter of sovereignty of the People's Republic, with which no country had the right to interfere. Who could dare say that his country had no right to launch a satellite? he asked.

First Committee - 13 - Press Release GA/DIS/3109 4th Meeting (AM) 13 October 1998

Since Japan had several times launched satellites without notifying his country in advance, the People's Republic was not obliged to do so.

The Japanese allegation proved that they had not discarded the ambition of reinvading Korea, otherwise they would not have regarded his country's satellite launch as threatening. Japan had invaded Korea many times, but Korea had not invaded Japan. The Japanese should know that the louder they cried about the satellite launch, the more they revealed about their true intention of invading Korea. Further, if some developed countries continued to blame the People's Republic for its satellite launch, taking the side of Japan, perhaps they did not want the small developing countries to possess high technology.

As for the disarmament and security issues regarding the Korean peninsula, the political and military threat against the People's Republic should be removed first. At the international level, the cold war came to an end, but on the Korean peninsula cold war structures still existed. Competition and confrontation between North and South were still prompted by attempts to reunify the divided peninsula on the basis of one system that was backed by certain countries. The military situation reflected the political confrontation, with the United States, Japan and South Korea forming a three-way military alliance against the People's Republic.

To cope with that military build-up against it, he said his country could not but intensify its defence capacity. That tense situation of cold war confrontation had prevented the People's Republic from more actively participating in various disarmament and international security debates at the United Nations. Therefore, priority should be given to dismantling the cold war structure on the Korean peninsula. The international community should not deny the fact that the People's Republic was threatened by the military build-up of hostile forces. It should demand that both countries discontinue their political and military threat against his country and withdraw United States troops from South Korea.

The representative of Japan, speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said he wished to draw attention to the fact that the Democratic People's Republic of Korea fired a missile without prior notification through one of the most densely travelled air spaces used for civil aviation between North America and the Far East, falling in water heavily used for maritime traffic and fishing activities. That missile constituted a security threat to the entire region, specifically for Japan. In the past, when Japan launched satellites, it had notified all of its neighbours, in accordance with the relevant conventions, in the event of a launch failure. His country could not, therefore, accept the criticism by the representative of the People's Republic that it had not given notice of its satellite launchings.

The representative of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea reiterated his position that since Japan had launched its satellites many times without prior notice to the People's Republic, the Government of the People's Republic felt it had no reason to inform the Japanese in advance, either. * *** *