ELIMINATION OF MIDDLE EAST'S WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION STRESSED IN DISARMAMENT COMMITTEE DEBATE

20 October 1998

Press Release
GA/DIS/3116

ELIMINATION OF MIDDLE EAST'S WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION STRESSED IN DISARMAMENT COMMITTEE DEBATE

19981020 Several Speakers Cite Israel's Failure to Join NPT, IAEA Regime, Say Treatment Reveals 'Double Standard' in Addressing Nuclear Threat

As the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) continued its general debate, several speakers this afternoon intensified their calls for the elimination of all weapons of mass destruction from the Middle East and denounced the exclusion of Israel from international efforts to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

The representative of Libya said that "the indifference of many in the West", to Israel's refusal to join the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and to submit its nuclear facilities to the safeguards regime of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) constituted a "double standard" that defied efforts by others in the region. The representative of Saudi Arabia also objected to the international community's "double standards" in addressing that grave threat to regional security and stability.

The representative of Bahrain argued that Israel's position had compelled other countries to develop those weapons, thereby generating a perilous arms race, while the representative of Jordan warned that Israel's reluctance to cooperate with the nuclear non-proliferation regime had imperiled its credibility.

The representative of Iraq warned of a serious imbalance in the Middle East, resulting largely from Israel's "expansionist policy", for which it depended on a huge arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. He also cited that country's reluctance to accede to the NPT, as well as its refusal to implement the Security Council resolution of 1981 which called on it to place its nuclear installations under comprehensive IAEA safeguards. That situation had exposed the double-standard policy of the United States with regard to the implementation of United Nations resolutions, he said.

First Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

Speaking in exercise of the right of reply, the representative of Israel said he had listened with a certain degree of incredulity at Iraqi calls for complete and total disarmament, in particular, to its calls to Israel. He hoped the delegations appreciated why, in the realm of arms control, his country treated Iraqi recommendations and intentions in the same way that "porcupines make love -- that is, very, very carefully". Furthermore, peace in the Middle East was a prerequisite to negotiating those difficult and dangerous issues.

Statements were also made by the representatives of Malta, Jamaica (on behalf of the Caribbean Community), Lao People's Democratic Republic and the Philippines. The representatives of Iran, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Eritrea, Republic of Korea and Ethiopia spoke in exercise of the right of reply.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. Wednesday, 21 October, to conclude its general debate.

Committee Work Programme

The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met this afternoon to continue its general exchange of views on a wide range of disarmament initiatives and a number of international disarmament agreements.

The Committee is also expected to take up the role of the Conference on Disarmament, which is the sole multilateral disarmament negotiating forum. Discussion is likely to focus on the recent establishment in the Conference of two ad hoc committees on: security assurances to non-nuclear weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons; and banning the production of fissile material for weapons purposes.

Among the nuclear disarmament issues under review is the adoption in 1996 of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). Although the Treaty was negotiated in the Conference, consensus was not achieved. The Treaty subsequently adopted by the General Assembly was identical to the version negotiated in the Conference. The CTBT requires ratification by 44 States listed in its annex, including India, Israel and Pakistan.

Other treaties negotiated in the Disarmament Conference 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. Its complex verification mechanism will be implemented by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). The Conference also concluded negotiations on the instrument governing biological weapons, namely the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction (Biological Weapons Convention).

The Committee is also expected to review 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 have raised serious concerns about the future of the Treaty and the non-proliferation regime overall.

The establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones will be another focus of the debate. 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.

First Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

Bilateral agreements negotiated between the United States and the Russian Federation aimed at nuclear disarmament will also be considered, including the Treaty on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (START). While reductions of nuclear weapons were proceeding under START I, the entry into force of START II had been delayed pending ratification by the Russian Federation. The Committee is also expected to review agreements between those two countries on the demarcation between strategic and non-strategic anti-ballistic missile systems, which sought to strengthen the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and provide new opportunities to work together to reduce their nuclear weapons stocks.

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, was agreed to in Oslo as part of the so-called "Ottawa process" and will enter into force on 1 March 1999.

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.

(For detailed background, see Press Release GA/DIS/3106 issued 9 October.)

Statements

GEORGE SALIBA (Malta) said that confidence and trust between two former adversaries had replaced the hostility and animosity that had dominated global politics for nearly half a century. Their continuing efforts to foster cooperation in the realm of international and regional security was most welcome. However, he joined others in urgently calling on the Russian Federation to ratify START II as soon as possible, to enable the commencement of negotiations for START III.

He said that the indefinite extension of the NPT, as well as the adoption and signing of the CTBT, were other important steps forward in the establishment of a credible non-proliferation regime. Similarly, the consolidation of existing nuclear-weapon-free zones and the recent initiative to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia were important strides. Also encouraging was agreement in the Conference on Disarmament to

First Committee - 4 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

begin negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty. Equally reassuring was the establishment of an ad hoc committee to discuss negative security assurances.

In sharp contrast to those developments were the nuclear tests recently conducted by two non-signatories to the NPT and the CTBT, he said. Such disturbing actions fuelled insecurity and mistrust and seriously hampered progress in the non-proliferation and disarmament spheres. Like others, his country welcomed the declared intent of those two countries to adhere to the CTBT, and it joined others in urging that those declarations be matched by unconditional and concrete action. They should refrain from more nuclear tests and from the development or deployment of nuclear weapons and nuclear- capable missiles. All countries that had not yet done so should take the bold step of signing and ratifying the CTBT and the NPT as soon as possible.

He said that while more States were renouncing the development and use of chemical and biological weapons, the dangers of their clandestine development was ever present. That was particularly so given that the technology for the acquisition and use of those weapons was relatively easy to develop. All States should refrain from developing such weapons of mass destruction and to destroy those already in existence. Universal adherence to the relevant Conventions must become a reality.

Moreover, the nuclear disarmament agenda must be kept on track and nuclear non-proliferation not taken for granted, he said. Nuclear export controls, in particular the control of dual-use technology, were an integral part of the non-proliferation regime. No effort, however small, could be spared to ensure universal adherent and compliance to the relevant treaties covering all weapons of mass destruction. In that connection, the Conference had a continued and important role to play. It was disappointing that certain outstanding issues had not yet been settled, including the question of its expansion.

Furthermore, he said, nobody could close their eyes to the suffering and devastation caused by the use of conventional weapons, including light weapons and small arms. The unspeakable atrocities that were being committed daily in various conflicts around the world must trigger international action. The root causes of conflict had to be eliminated, but the weapons themselves precipitated and prolonged conflicts. The sale and spread of all types of conventional weapons must be brought under tight control.

He said the urgency was even more apparent in light of the intricate link between the sale and supply of arms with the disruption and destabilization of international crime, drug trafficking and terrorism. Moreover, international criminal networks were strengthened through the misuse of information technology. No government could afford to be complacent in finding global solutions to those global problems.

First Committee - 5 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

He supported the convening of a United Nations conference on all aspects of the illicit arms trade in the near future and also supported efforts to further develop the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms. Other measures were also welcome, including the European Union code of conduct on arms exports and the Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Munitions and Other Related Materials. His country had been among the first to sign the Ottawa Convention and was now working on its ratification.

ALI AL-JARBOU (Saudi Arabia), said the Committee was meeting at a time when international and regional efforts had been intensified towards the goal of complete and general disarmament, to ensure the final elimination of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. The end of the cold war had reduced the risk of the possible use of nuclear weapons, based on competing military alliances. His country was following with interest efforts aimed at the elimination of weapons of mass destruction from the Middle East, including the Arabian Gulf.

He said his country supported the efforts of the League of Arab States to make the region a zone free from all weapons of mass destruction -- nuclear, chemical and biological. In that regard, he was concerned about Israel's refusal to join the NPT and to subject its nuclear programme to international control. That constituted a grave threat to the security and stability of the region. His country completely objected to the "double standards practised by the international community", which excluded Israel from efforts to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons. That encouraged the arms race, he said.

His country was also concerned about the nuclear tests in South Asia, which represented a threat to the peace and security of the region, he said. His government believed in strengthening the effectiveness of the non- proliferation regime. It also believed that regulations should be established to speed progress in all aspects of disarmament. It therefore, urged all countries that had not yet done so to join the NPT and to subject their nuclear facilities to international control.

His Government supported transparency in armaments as a means of consolidating international peace and security, he said. For transparency to succeed in that regard, however, it had to follow definite and clear principles that were balanced and non-discriminatory. The United Nations Register of conventional Arms represented the first attempt by the international community to deal with the issue of transparency.

Continuing, he said the register had some problems, the most notable of which was that more than half of the Member States of the United Nations had continuously declined to offer information. It was necessary to deal with the fears of those States, in order to make participation in the Register more

First Committee - 6 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

international. His country reaffirmed the position of the League of Arab States that the scope of the Register be enlarged to include other categories of weapons.

ABDUL RAHMAN HASHEM (Bahrain) said his country had favoured the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East. That region should also be free from weapons of mass destruction. The Israeli position, namely its refusal to subscribe to the NPT and its rejection of the safeguards and regulations of the IAEA, had compelled other countries to develop those weapons, thereby generating a perilous arms race. His country, therefore, called on the international community to exert pressure on Israel to accede to the NPT.

He said his country also supported negotiations for a ban on the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons. Weapons of mass destruction, it must be emphasized, prevented the enjoyment of security on equal footing by all countries. Moreover, those weapons were used to exert pressure and to blackmail countries that did not have them. In an appeal against terrorism, his country had specifically called for a convention that would prohibit nuclear terrorism. It also had supported the convening of the fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament, in order to assess the global disarmament agenda and mark the way forward.

As a supporter of the landmines ban, he said his country had endorsed the Ottawa Convention. Landmines threatened the lives of millions of people worldwide. The feasibility of a convention to prohibit the illicit flow of small arms and light weapons should also be explored, in an effort to mitigate their destabilizing effects.

PATRICIA DURRANT (Jamaica), speaking on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), said there had been in recent years significant growth in both the legal trade and illicit trafficking in small arms and light weapons. There were an estimated 100 million such weapons in circulation throughout the world and there existed an inestimable capacity for their continued production. Their ready availability was an important factor in the escalation of regional and internal conflicts and in the undermining of peacekeeping activities.

She said the threat posed by the increase in the illegal traffic of small arms was particularly troubling to nations of the Caribbean. The effects of the dangerous combination of criminal activity with illicit guns and drugs had been devastating. The security and stability of those small, vulnerable, open societies had been undermined. The proliferation of small arms had played a part not only in the undermining of regional and international peace and security, but had also contributed directly to the erosion of national security and the destabilization of civil society.

First Committee - 7 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

The time had come to address the problem urgently, aggressively and comprehensively, she said. Stronger measures should be used against illegal exporters and importers. The problem was truly multinational, involving both the arms-producing and arms-purchasing nations. Without a coordinated approach, little could be achieved. The CARICOM attached substantial importance to the Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacture of and Traffic in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives and Other Related Materials, adopted by the Organization of American States (OAS) in December 1997.

She said that the environmental risk inherent in the movement of nuclear waste was an issue of primary concern to CARICOM. The threat of contamination during the shipment of radioactive material was very real and had profound and lasting implications for the viability of the fragile marine and island ecosystems that characterized those States. The continued use of Caribbean waters as a route for the trans-shipment of irradiated reactor fuel remained a matter of grave concern to CARICOM.

The CARICOM recognized the important role that nuclear-weapon-free zones could play in enhancing both global and regional security and non- proliferation, she said. The Community reaffirmed its commitment to the Treaty of Tlalelolco, which promoted nuclear weapons control in Latin America and the Caribbean, and called on Member States to recognize and respect the non-proliferation regimes established under the other treaties establishing nuclear-weapon-free zones -- Pelindaba, Bangkok and Rarotonga.

She said that for more than 10 years following the 1987 Conference on the Relationship Between Disarmament and Development, the international community had paid lip service to the notion of investing the resources diverted from arms proliferation in human development. The disarmament for development initiative had achieved little over the years, because insufficient attention had been given to the dividend in peace and stability gained through development. The time had come to breathe new life into the initiative.

ALOUNKEO KITTIKHOUN (Lao People's Democratic Republic) said that despite its imperfection, the CTBT, if sincerely and strictly implemented, would help prevent the non-nuclear-weapon States from acquiring those weapons of mass destruction. More importantly, it would prevent the nuclear-weapon States from improving their nuclear stockpiles. In that way, gradual nuclear disarmament could be attained. It was important that the Committee reaffirm its unequivocal commitment to the CTBT. Also, the trend towards establishing nuclear-weapon-free zones deserved strong encouragement and support.

The future of the NPT might be at stake, he said. Confidence in the Treaty might also be eroding. Regarding the upcoming review conference of the NPT, scheduled for the year 2000, it was urgent that the non-nuclear-weapon States and especially the nuclear-weapon States exert further efforts and

First Committee - 8 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

fulfil sincerely and strictly their obligations under the relevant provisions of the Treaty.

His country was in favour of strengthening the Biological Weapons Convention, he said. In principle, it had no objection to discussing issues pertaining to the establishment of a verification regime for the Convention. However, any verification regime to be introduced had to be considered while taking into account the security and economic interests of developing countries, particularly those party to the Convention. Concerning landmines, he believed that any arrangements or negotiations to ban landmines had to take into account the legitimate national security concerns of States and their legitimate right to use appropriate measures for self-defence, as provided for in the United Nations Charter.

While examining the issue of peace and disarmament, it was important to recognize the role the United Nations Regional Centres for Peace and Disarmament could play, he said. They continued to help promote arms control and build confidence and trust among the countries in their respective regions. In light of that fact, his country supported the programmes provided by the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific, known as "the Kathmandu process" for disarmament and regional stability.

Finally, he said, pending the elimination of all nuclear weapons, the nuclear-weapon States should agree on a legally binding international instrument to provide unconditional assurances to all non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons. A legally binding international convention prohibiting the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons under any circumstances should also be agreed upon. Such conditions were essential to protect humankind from nuclear holocaust.

BLAS F. OPLE (Philippines) said almost a decade had passed since the end of the cold war, yet the promise of a new era of enduring peace remained largely unrealized. The Committee had been mandated to move the cause of disarmament forward and establish a global order of peace, harmony and justice. The clear victor at the end of the cold war was the free market.

The free market idea, he continued, was anathema to an ideology that many then embraced. Today, that ideology was no longer the leading threat to the free market. The success of market-driven globalization was proving to be its own nemesis. One third of the world's economies were in recession -- from Asia to Russia and Latin America. Nonetheless, his country continued to believe in liberalized trade and refused to succumb to the temptation of reverting to closed markets.

The international community continued to be burdened by old animosities and long-standing differences, he said. The end of the cold war and the

First Committee - 9 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

prosperity brought on by globalization had not ended bitter rivalries and ethnic and religious strife. Elections had just been completed in Cambodia and his country hoped that it would lead to a stable civilian government that would provide for the needs of its people. In the South China Sea, there were conflicting claims, but his Government had not allowed that to stand in the way of stronger economic and political cooperation.

He said the continued maintenance of nuclear arsenals by some countries jeopardized the existence of mankind. The fear and uncertainty those weapons generated were enough to shatter the fragile confidence with which economic and investment risks were taken. Indeed, nuclear weapons continued to represent the singular most serious threat facing the world. The task of eliminating them had been made more difficult, as "two nations in my region and fellow members of the Non-Aligned Movement made the decision to succumb to the lure of the nuclear siren". The international community must continue to engage both countries and make it clear that the acquisition of nuclear weapons was not acceptable.

The Ottawa Convention, which established a total ban on anti-personnel landmines, was a major victory, he said. His country welcomed the fortieth ratification of the Convention and looked forward to its entry into force. Not only should the world ensure effective implementation of the Treaty, it should also continue to locate and clear every minefield in existence. Further, the easy movement of finances, as well as the advances in the efficient movement of goods across oceans and borders, had ensured the continued and unfettered illicit traffic in small arms. The international community must continue to seek ways of containing that problem.

Terrorists and international criminal syndicates had also benefitted from the process of globalization, he said. Taking advantage of modern means of transport and communications, terrorists had established sophisticated means of managing their people and resources. It would take a new understanding of the globalized world and concerted international effort to eradicate that scourge. The international community must make the world too small for terrorists.

He said his country supported the work being done to improve the verification protocol of the Biological Weapons Convention. It also favoured the decision of the Conference on Disarmament to start considering a fissile material cut-off treaty and hoped that the Conference would soon take on the actual task of nuclear disarmament. To aid its task, the Philippines urged the Conference to expand its membership.

ROKAN HAMA AL-ANBUGE (Iraq) said that the 1978 final document of the tenth special session of the General Assembly and the first devoted to disarmament, had remained the international community's cornerstone of disarmament. Through it, Member States had unanimously and clearly defined

First Committee - 10 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

the disarmament priorities. They also stated that nuclear weapons posed the gravest danger to humankind and to the existence of civilization. The nuclear arms race, in all its aspects, should be halted and reversed, with elimination their ultimate goal, it said -- in order to avert the outbreak of a war in which those weapons might be used.

He said that the extremely destructive character of nuclear weapons should compel nations towards their total and complete elimination. The effects of the first-use of nuclear weapons in Hiroshima and Nagasaki more than half a century ago were still vivid. Complete generations of Japanese still suffered, as well as the conscience of humanity. The claim that those weapons were not for use, but for deterrence, was untenable. Their very existence posed a serious risk to international peace and security.

In order to eliminate nuclear weapons, he enumerated the following practical regional and global steps: the nuclear-weapon States should implement their commitments in accordance with article VI of the NPT, and agree on a time frame for the elimination of nuclear weapons; those States should provide legally binding assurances to non-nuclear-weapon States not to use or threaten to use such weapons against them; and all States, without exception, should adhere to the NPT. Further, the role of the Conference on Disarmament to negotiate legally binding disarmament instruments should be enhanced.

The Middle East was a witness to a serious imbalance, he said. Israel persisted in its policy of expansion, occupying the Palestinian territory, as well as that of two Arab States. For its expansionist policy, it had depended on a tremendous arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, as well as the other missiles. Moreover, it was the only party in the region that had not yet acceded to the NPT. In addition, it had refused to implement Security Council resolution 487 (1981), which called on Israel by name to place its nuclear installations under comprehensive IAEA safeguards.

The situation had exposed the double-standard policy of the United States with regard to the implementation of the relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions. The United States had gone to excess in interpreting the requirements of Security Council resolution 687 (1991), especially part C concerning Iraq. It had been oblivious to the fact that section C of that text, which had been adopted under Chapter VII, had referred to the disarmament measures undertaken by Iraq to create a zone free of weapons of mass destruction and of their delivery systems. In an honest appraisal, the Council would have to consider Iraq's implementation of that paragraph.

Indeed, he said his country had cooperated with the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) on the disposal of Iraq's weapons of mass

First Committee - 11 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

destruction as well as with the IAEA for seven and one-half years, and it had fulfilled the requirements of resolution 687 in the three weapons areas, namely chemical, biological and missiles. Some believed that the biological aspect needed further explanation, but that stemmed from a misunderstanding owing to the unprofessional approach of UNSCOM in "mixing the main elements with the marginal elements" and the requirements of disarmament with other requirements.

Continuing, he said his Government had asked UNSCOM more than once to present any evidence that Iraq had kept certain weapons that were prohibited by that resolution, or to prove that there were such weapons-related factories or equipment or devices that had not been destroyed. Mr. Butler had so far not answered that question. As for the nuclear aspect, the IAEA in its report had stated that if Iraq resumed is full cooperation with the Agency, it would resume its continuous control, verification and monitoring.

He said that, in addition to focusing on nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, the international community should strive to control the proliferation of conventional weapons and reduce military budgets. The exporting countries, namely the United States, should reduce its export of weapons. The substantive link between disarmament and development and the proliferation of civil wars and regional and international conflicts could not be linked to only small weapons, especially after one Power had singled itself out as a world leader.

RAJAB SUKAYRI (Jordan) said that the Committee was meeting at a time of both remarkable achievements and serious challenges in the field of international security and disarmament. Some noteworthy achievements included the signing by 130 countries of the Ottawa Convention and the recent decision by the Conference on Disarmament to commence negotiations on a fissile material cut-off treaty. Among the challenges were the recent nuclear tests in South Asia, the ongoing reluctance of Israel to adhere to the NPT and to place its nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards, and the reluctance of nuclear-weapon States to meet their obligations under the NPT.

He said his country had always advocated a peaceful settlement to the conflict in the Middle East, leading to a just, comprehensive and durable peace. Towards that goal, positive steps aimed at building confidence between the parties should be taken. At the top of the list was freeing the region from all weapons of mass destruction. Since the last Assembly session, Jordan had adhered to the Chemical Weapons Convention, ratified the CTBT, signed the Ottawa Convention and signed with the IAEA an additional safeguards protocol. In so doing, it had adhered to all international instruments that provided for nuclear non-proliferation and the prohibition of other weapons of mass destruction.

First Committee - 12 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

In that context, the Assembly, over the last two decades, had called upon all States in the Middle East, particularly the only State in the region with considerable nuclear-weapon capability, to adhere without delay to the NPT and to place its nuclear facilities under full IAEA safeguards. All States in the Middle East, except Israel, were now party to the NPT. Since 1974, the Assembly had also called for the establishment of a Middle East nuclear-weapon-free zone. Similarly, the 1995 Review and Extension Conference of the NPT had called upon the States of the Middle East to establish a zone free of all weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems, and to refrain from taking any measures that ran counter to that objective.

He said that the chance for a comprehensive, just and durable peace in the Middle East "looks too gloomy" in the absence of confidence-building between the parties involved. Such confidence, however, could not be attained alongside the existence of weapons of mass destruction. It was also regrettable that the second Preparatory Committee meeting for the next NPT review conference had not achieved tangible results. All participants should work diligently to strengthen the review process and develop consensus recommendations.

Regarding the CTBT, all countries that had not yet done so should sign and ratify it, particularly those 44 States whose ratification was required for its entry into force, he said. The commencement of negotiations aimed at concluding a convention to ban the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons was encouraging. Another important step forward was the decision by the Conference to re-establish an ad hoc committee on negative security assurances for non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.

He said his country had staunchly supported the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms. The Register was an indispensable mechanism for achieving transparency in armaments leading to confidence-building, especially in such conflict-prone regions as the Middle East. That instrument would not be effective, however, unless its scope also included military holdings and procurement through national production, as well as information concerning weapons of mass destruction. Regrettably, the Panel of Governmental Experts on Small Arms had failed to deal with that problem at its last session.

He said the time had come to reaffirm the commitment to eliminate the most excessively injurious and inhumane weapons -- landmines. Queen Noor of Jordan had participated in the worldwide campaign to rid the world of landmines. All Member States, in particular those with the financial and technological resources, should join both demining and victim assistance efforts.

First Committee - 13 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

IBRAHIM AL-BESBAS (Libya), said the Committee was meeting in the midst of discouraging circumstances, relative to the objective of disarmament, especially nuclear disarmament. The international community had witnessed the nuclear tests in South Asia and the proliferation of nuclear weapons was continuing. That suggested that there must be shortcomings in the non- proliferation regime.

The South Asia tests, he continued, expressed the imbalance in the nuclear non-proliferation regime. There were two categories of States -- the nuclear-weapon States and the non-nuclear-weapon States. While one category was authorized to continue to pursue the development of nuclear weapons, the other was prevented from doing so. That policy was obsolete.

Another explanation for the tests was the indifference of the nuclear- weapon States regarding their obligations under the NPT, he said. Another factor was the double standard, which made it possible for some States categorized as non-nuclear to get away with the acquisition of nuclear weapons, while others attempting the same thing were condemned. In effect, some States had the freedom to do what they wished, while others did not.

He said the ideal solution to the threat of nuclear proliferation was a global strategy, based on the principle of the elimination of nuclear weapons. The non-proliferation regime alone was not sufficient. Those South Asia tests demonstrated the inefficiency of the NPT and CTBT. The two countries concerned refused to join those two non-proliferation Treaties, due to their weaknesses.

The international community should aspire towards real universality in the field of nuclear disarmament, he said. There were, however, obstacles to be addressed. The nuclear capacity of Israel was not under any international control and that constituted a real danger to regional security in the Middle East. Israel's persistent refusal to adhere to IAEA safeguards and the indifference of many in the west on that issue was unfortunate. "We cannot be silent over that", he added.

That kind of double standard should be avoided in the work of the Committee, he continued. The League of Arab States favoured the establishment of a Middle East nuclear-weapon-free zone that would also exclude all weapons of mass destruction. The major obstacle to that ideal had been Israel's refusal to cooperate. That was unacceptable, because it forced others to seek ways of enhancing their national security in a manner that would increase regional tension.

He said the decision of the Conference on Disarmament to establish ad hoc committees to consider a fissile material cut-off treaty and credible negative security assurances to non-nuclear-weapon States were positive developments. His Government hoped that any resulting conventions would

First Committee - 14 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

contribute positively to nuclear non-proliferation. His Government regretted that it was not possible for the Conference to reach a consensus regarding the agenda of a fourth special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament. The convening of such a session was essential.

He said his country was one of those suffering seriously from the scourge of anti-personnel landmines -- the consequences of war. There were millions of landmines buried in Libya, causing much human suffering and a financial drain on the country's economy. The Ottawa Convention was a significant step, yet it had many notable shortcomings. The implementation of the instrument should be global and should also address the question of demining. Many countries, such as Libya, required technical assistance for demining efforts. He hoped the Conference on Disarmament would be able to address that issue.

Rights of Reply

The representative of Egypt, speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that the Israeli representative who had spoken at the morning meeting had been part of the Middle East negotiations for a long time and knew better than to say what he had said today.

After citing long security arguments in an attempt to justify why it had not joined the NPT and placed its nuclear arsenals under IAEA safeguards, the Israeli representative chose to note that Egypt was one of the Arab States that had not signed the Chemical Weapons Convention. It was as if he was saying that it was only Israel's right to keep ambiguous nuclear policies to protect its security and all other Arab countries, in particular Egypt, should forego their security concerns and ratify the chemical and biological weapons Conventions. Such a statement was unacceptable and would not lead anywhere.

He said his country had repeatedly underlined its readiness to ratify those two Conventions as part of a package requiring Israel to ratify the NPT and submit its nuclear facilities to full IAEA safeguards. The initiative by President Hosni Mubarak to declare the Middle East a zone free of weapons of mass destruction had been met with no positive sign by Israel. At the same time, if Israel was really concerned about the Chemical Weapons Convention, it should clarify some of the ambiguities surrounding its activities in the chemical weapons field.

For instance, Israel should explain why an armed flight that crashed over the Netherlands a few years ago was carrying chemical agents to Israel and it should clarify the fate of the lost 30 metric tons of cargo on board that plane. Israel must realize that security was not the security of Israel alone, but of all the States in the Middle East. That was an integrated issue that could not be dealt with in bits and pieces.

First Committee - 15 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

The representative of Iran, speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that a reference had been made to the military capability of Iran. In that connection, he wished to reiterate the position commonly shared among all States in the Middle East that the sole threat to the security and stability of the region stemmed from Israeli nuclear capabilities and its access to advanced missile technology. That position was not just a political notion, but a deep concern based on facts.

He said that Iran, like others in the region, could not remain idle against the threat posed by Israel's mass destruction capabilities. Iran was a party to all Conventions concerning weapons of mass destruction, without exception, and it considered its missile technology to be a legitimate conventional means of defence. Moreover, its missile technology served the sole purpose of self-defence. It did constitute a threat to any country and was not set for first-use.

The representative of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that the Israeli delegation this morning had referred to what it called a "crisis". The crisis, in fact, concerned Israel. There was a real crisis in the Middle East peace process due to Israel's continued defiance of the principle of land for peace. Its continued occupation of Arab land constituted a crisis and a threat to regional peace.

He said his country would further advise Israel not to blindly follow the United States in addressing the situation in the Korean peninsula. In earlier remarks, the United States had accused his country of provocation concerning its satellite launch. That was nonsense. It was time for the peaceful utilization of the universe, to which every nation had a right. However, continued accusations by the United States against his country's satellite launch only served to reveal its aggressive intents in the Korean peninsula.

The United States should cease such accusations against his country and it should stop using the satellite launch for its own political purposes, in an attempt to stifle his country, he said. Moreover, the international community should correctly understand the motives of some countries concerning the unjustified accusations about the satellite launch.

The representative of Eritrea, speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that the Committee this morning was subjected to more lies about the situation between his country and Ethiopia. Luckily for Eritrea, the world was seeing through those lies, which were being peddled in a vain attempt to cover Ethiopia's expansionist policy, which it had already soundly condemned.

First Committee - 16 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

The representative of Ethiopia had accused the Eritrean Government of the irresponsible and indiscriminate use of anti-personnel landmines. It was Ethiopia who should stand accused of that matter and there were third party reports to verify that fact. Eritrea's baseless charge would be dismissed as bankrupt diplomacy, were it not for the seriousness of the matter. Indeed, Eritrea had been accused of aggression, a charge that had been addressed in the current Assembly session, as well as in other forums.

Third party verification would confirm that it was Ethiopia that had crossed into Eritrea's territory in July 1997 and again in June 1998 after Ethiopia had declared war on Eritrea, he said. It was Ethiopia that had announced a blockade and it was Ethiopia that had bombarded the airport. And no amount of diplomatic subterfuge could dispel those facts. He not only flatly rejected Ethiopia's version of events, but invited everyone to check which side of the border had been mined and to ascertain which of the two governments had committed an aggression by crossing into the borders of another country. He would ask the Ethiopian delegation to extend a similar invitation.

The representative of Israel, speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that indeed he and the representative from Egypt had spent many hours trying to improve the situation in the Middle East. Although they did not always agree, he was a great admirer of the Egyptian's ability and good humour. His words had reflected the need for peaceful existence between the States in the area, in order to enable them to negotiate the issues being discussed. Once at peace, the very difficult and dangerous issues to which the representative had referred could be negotiated. Indeed, those needed to be negotiated, but between States that recognized each other and were at peace with each other.

He said he had listened with a certain degree of incredulity at the Iraqi calls for complete and total disarmament, in particular to its calls and recommendations about how Israel should behave. He hoped the delegations appreciated why, in the realm of arms control, Israel treated Iraqi recommendations and intentions in the same manner as "porcupines make love -- that is, very very carefully".

The representative of the Republic of Korea, speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that last Friday, the representative of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea had spoken extensively about the issue of peace and security on the Korean peninsula. Although his basic concerns were understood in light of critical importance his own country attached to issue, his statement was misleading and somewhat distorted.

He said that the statement by the Democratic People's Republic failed to adequately address one of the most pressing questions on the Korean peninsula, namely that of disarmament and weapons of mass destruction. While the

First Committee - 17 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

representative had referred to the need to remove the cold war structure of confrontation and establish durable peace on the Korean peninsula, it had not heeded the international community's call for a Korean peninsula free from nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.

If the Democratic People's Republic truly sought peace and security on the Korean peninsula, he said it should take concrete actions to eliminate the lingering horror of weapons of mass destruction from the region and it should join international efforts to strengthen global non-proliferation of those weapons. It should cooperate in fully implementing the NPT and its safeguard agreement, as well as adhering judiciously to the Chemical Weapons Convention and the CTBT.

In that connection, he added the Democratic People's Republic was under full legal obligations, as a party to the NPT and its IAEA safeguards agreement, which had been reaffirmed by the international community on several occasions, including through a statement by the Security Council President in November 1994, following the signing of the agreed framework with the United States.

He said he shared the view that unification was one of the most important calls for all Koreans. However, differences persisted on how to achieve that long-cherished goal. Unfortunately, the North claimed to stand for unification based on its own unilateral formula, while defying meaningful dialogue aimed at achieving general reconciliation with the South. That approach was akin to putting the cart before the horse. How could two entities that had taken totally different paths for nearly 50 years come together today in unification without a reconciliation process, essential to meaningful progress in that regard?

It was a harsh reality that mistrust lingered over relations between the two Koreas, he said. Attempts at nurturing a peaceful co-existence had been hampered by the lack of genuine political will on the part of the other party. There could be no quantum leap to the peaceful unification of divided nations, which would evolve through a gradual process and through practical and realistic steps, not through the proposals and words of propaganda. Both Koreas had entered into a reconciliation agreement in 1992, which had presented a detailed roadmap toward national reconciliation and reunification. The faithful implementation of that instrument was now most urgently needed.

In addition, the ongoing four-party talks would provide an effective path towards replacing the current armistice regime, he said. His Government considered the third round of talks in Geneva this week to be a momentous occasion, through which substantial progress would hopefully be achieved.

The representative of Ethiopia, speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that Eritrea's statement should not come as a surprise to anyone

First Committee - 18 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

familiar with that Government, which had consistently tried to confuse the international community. Its aggression on 12 May against Ethiopia had represented a serious challenge to peace and stability in the Horn of Africa. As for Eritrea's assertion that Ethiopia should stand accused of the irresponsible and indiscriminate use of landmines, he could only respond that the list of illegal and irresponsible actions by the Eritrean Government was too long to name.

He said the war that had been unleashed included, on 5 June, an aerial attack using cluster and napalm bombs on an elementary school in broad daylight, during which 55 schoolchildren were slaughtered and 146 others were wounded. The truth could not be hidden. Eritrea had then made statements, at the highest political level, to justify the cold-blooded murder of innocent schoolchildren. They claimed that war has no rules. This Committee had always said, however, that war had rules, as it strove to eliminate the causes and means of war.

The representative of Iraq, speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said he did not want to engage in such polemics with an entity that had its origin in expansionist goals. His charge that Iraq's statement this afternoon was null and void and untenable and was an attempt to throw a smokescreen over his own position concerning disarmament.

The representative of Eritrea said that concerning the question of the air attack on the international airport, his own Prime Minister in radio interviews in July had admitted to attacking first, as a pre-emptive measure. Nevertheless, his country had been accused of trying to confuse and confound people, but third-party verification would clarify all that. The Eritrean people had expressed public sorrow about the civilian casualties and they had extended condolences to the bereaved families.

The Organization of African Unity (OAU) was still seized with the matter and every African delegate knew it, he continued. The OAU's mission had been postponed until mid-November. Whatever the Ethiopian representative could say, Eritrea had not crossed its borders and had not invaded Ethiopia. They had yet to produce a map or describe which territory had been invaded and occupied by Eritrea, while his country had presented the necessary evidence.

The representative of Ethiopia said the question was not about maps. Aggression could not be conducted on a map and the representative of Eritrea had drawn the Committee's attention to the Assembly's definition of aggression -- which had not mentioned any maps.

To a number of other points raised by the representative of Eritrea, he said that while the Eritrean people had expressed sorrow, their Government had not expressed it. Rather, they said that war had no rules. For its part, his Government would accept the generous offer of third party verification.

First Committee - 19 - Press Release GA/DIS/3116 11th Meeting (PM) 20 October 1998

It had already verified that Eritrea was on Ethiopia's territory. To what third parties did he refer? The OAU was an independent third party. It was very clear, he added, who was aggressor and who was aggressed, who had the truth and who did not.

* *** *